Talk:John Coleman (meteorologist): Difference between revisions
OccultZone (talk | contribs) |
Leaving of AMS and why |
||
Line 99: | Line 99: | ||
:This information has been already removed a few times,[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Coleman_(news_weathercaster)&diff=616748098&oldid=615450985][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Coleman_(news_weathercaster)&diff=644913269&oldid=641280537][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Coleman_(news_weathercaster)&diff=637828961&oldid=634695641] by multiple editors because it has no relevance with this article. His views on global warming are important and they have been described. [[User:OccultZone|'''<span style="color:DarkBlue;">Occult</span><span style="color:blue;">Zone</span>''']] <small>([[User talk:OccultZone#Top|Talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/OccultZone|Contributions]] • [[Special:Log/OccultZone|Log]])</small> 06:06, 21 April 2015 (UTC) |
:This information has been already removed a few times,[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Coleman_(news_weathercaster)&diff=616748098&oldid=615450985][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Coleman_(news_weathercaster)&diff=644913269&oldid=641280537][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Coleman_(news_weathercaster)&diff=637828961&oldid=634695641] by multiple editors because it has no relevance with this article. His views on global warming are important and they have been described. [[User:OccultZone|'''<span style="color:DarkBlue;">Occult</span><span style="color:blue;">Zone</span>''']] <small>([[User talk:OccultZone#Top|Talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/OccultZone|Contributions]] • [[Special:Log/OccultZone|Log]])</small> 06:06, 21 April 2015 (UTC) |
||
::The info is just fine. He left the AMS because of Global Warming and the AMS confirmed it. The AMS is the premier meteorological association in the world. Most TV broadcaster don't belong to the AMS. Article also states he won the "Broadcast Meteorologist of the Year" from the AMS. Leaving the major society of your profession would be notable, especially when he won one of their top awards. [[User:Bgwhite|Bgwhite]] ([[User talk:Bgwhite|talk]]) 06:18, 21 April 2015 (UTC) |
::The info is just fine. He left the AMS because of Global Warming and the AMS confirmed it. The AMS is the premier meteorological association in the world. Most TV broadcaster don't belong to the AMS. Article also states he won the "Broadcast Meteorologist of the Year" from the AMS. Leaving the major society of your profession would be notable, especially when he won one of their top awards. [[User:Bgwhite|Bgwhite]] ([[User talk:Bgwhite|talk]]) 06:18, 21 April 2015 (UTC) |
||
::: I agree. Without that the pervious sentience makes you ask why or have to guess. A single line closing the why, let alone as mr Bgwhite said, he won awards with the AMS so leaving is pretty big thing and should be included. [[Special:Contributions/216.81.94.71|216.81.94.71]] ([[User talk:216.81.94.71|talk]]) 10:56, 21 April 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 10:56, 21 April 2015
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
news
- Weather Channel Founder: Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History’ --Striver - talk 12:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Degree
In what subject did Coleman receive his degree? I can't find anything. Raymond Arritt (talk) 05:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC) -Thank you! I was wondering the same thing. This article makes not mention of his education, does he even have any???
- This source [1] lists him as COM which I assume is commerce.JQ (talk) 21:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
- Communications. 91.15.125.100 (talk) 21:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Unsourced views
- However, he has expressed hope that Gore will be sued for fraud, because he has allegedly sold carbon credits which he knew to be worthless.[citation needed]
- Coleman is of the opinion that a debate on Global Warming should be pursued as his expertise as a meteorologist and scientist is in conflict with the assertions that Vice President Gore makes in his oscar-winning documentary "An Inconvenient Truth". Gore has turned down the challenge to debate Coleman claiming "The debate on Global Warming is over." Coleman claims that Gore's movie is based on junk-science and that "Global Warming Alarmism" is some ploy for purposes that are anything but science.[citation needed]
Unless there is a source for these they should be deleted. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 19:29, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- The user inserting this passage is a vandal who has expressed a wish for a permanent ban. Maybe an admin could oblige.JQ (talk) 20:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Inaccurate/incomplete biography of John Coleman -- Newscaster
As currently presented, this article is inaccurate, incomplete and misleading. The article needs to be modified to contain critical lacking information, more about which is said below. Mr. Coleman's principal claim to fame resides in the fact that he has been an extremely vocal and outspoken critic of anthropogenic global warming. He has appeared on numerous TV shows and written several articles on this topic, where he has stridently attacked the notion of anthropogenic global warming. His articles and media appearances have garnered much public attention and reaction, and have been used by many in support of the proposition that anthropogenic global warming is a "scam." What is missing from the article, however, is the important fact that Mr. Coleman has no scientific, technical or engineering training or education (he has a degree in journalism), and possesses no expertise in climatology other than having read meteorological forecasts on TV prepared by others. This is critical information of which the public should be aware when assessing the efficacy and accuracy of Mr. Coleman's strong claims, who essentially holds himself out to the pubic as an "expert" on meteorology and climatology despite the fact that he is neither. In fact, Mr. Coleman's technical and scientific background is so weak that he could not today obtain certification by the American Meterology Society (AMS) as a Certified Broadcast Meteorologist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tundraline (talk • contribs) 14:16, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- So are there verifiable, reliable sources that he has no science training? That should be easy to find from a reliable source if it's the case. (Not some blog or something — we're talking about meeting WP:BLP standards here.) The claim that he wouldn't pass AMS certification would be especially hard to establish WP:verifiability for unless it is sourced from a truly well-established expert who has said so and himself has the credibility to be critiquing other people. --Closeapple (talk) 06:55, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
It is well established that Mr. Coleman earned a degree in journalism. I am unaware, and there is no public record, of Mr. Coleman possessing any academic certifications or qualifications in addition to his journalism degree. Moreover, I am unaware of any journalism program anywhere in the USA that requires students to take courses in science, engineering or even mathematics. A degree in journalism is a liberal arts degree, and confers no technical knowledge or training. Being that the preceding is by all appearances, and according to publicly available information, the case, Mr. Coleman could not today even sit for the AMS broadcaster's certification exam, which requires a certain minimum number of semester hours of coursework in meteorology or related disciplines. If Mr. Coleman nevertheless possesses technical training or a technical background of some sort that has somehow escaped the public eye, he should post it here on the page devoted to his biography so that we the public can be better informed about his background and perhaps arrive at the presently unfounded conclusion that Mr. Coleman is qualified to present a credible opinion about anthropogenic global warming.
- I'm sorry to be the messenger of reality but John Coleman's claim to fame is a fifty two year career of putting his public credibility on the line every day with a reasonably correct weather forecast. Not, as you would imply, some sudden jumping on a bandwagon that challenges an ideological belief that is reaching fascist levels of reinforcement in the face of mounting doubt and evidence that this so called scientific process is inherently rigged. Coleman's interest in this is surely similar to mine- saving the planet from people who are pushing this at rush speed along with Kyoto and Cap and Trade schemes that have so far only accelerated the industrialization of third world nations with corrupt governments like China and India- the result? MORE conventional pollution, MORE GG emissions, and MORE people living industrialized lifestyles than before Kyoto was implemented. The jig is up and whatever the motivation was, cashing in on grants from companies like Siemens as the CRU pursued, or just sheer ignorance following the Green mantra they were selling as they cashed in, those of us who know the score are not going to be silent any longer.
- I wish I could find print documentation of it, but I'm pretty sure I heard Coleman say, on the air circa year 2000, that San Diego has the worst TV weather forecasters in the US, but that they could get away with it because to forecast the next day's weather in San Diego you need only give today's weather conditions and nail it most of the time.Tomligon (talk) 14:25, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
- The planet is being ruined alright. Humans in fear of living and those pointing fingers all have ulterior motives. As for Coleman lacking postgraduate degrees I guess you forgot there is a saying that "those who can't do, teach". All those decades he was out getting his hands dirty in his field, not in the protective environment of a University exchanging emails with colleagues conspiring to expel anyone who opposed them. If Coleman didn't know climate he'd not have a show and I would bet he hasn't taken the test for that certificate on his wall because he doesn't need to buy the window dressing of professional society credentials- as often as not located in a strip mall or PO box. Go to Coleman's Corner as linked in the article and see his historical account of Roger Revelle and Al Gore if you want to impeach someone's credibility. Do you care about Gore's bio?Batvette (talk) 05:10, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Most TV weathermen are merely personable people who read weather forecasts prepared by others. They have no expertise in climate science. Coleman's major claim to fame is his declarations that Global Climate Change is a hoax. His talks on that have been called illogical and uninformed with comical errors and have been rebutted. Smears on Al Gore may find support with a certain segment of the American public but are not factual debate. Some mention of the controversial nature of his claims should be made. Elemming (talk) 14:35, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Large following
The article claims his views have found a 'large following' but see my hidden comment for why I fact tagged the sentence [2] Nil Einne (talk) 09:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
- I think the more accurate analysis might be John Coleman is joining and possibly leading a LARGE MOVEMENT. Those of us with the audacity to think with our heads, not our hearts. Batvette (talk) 05:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Poorly referenced claims
This claim "Coleman has no education in the field of climate change. Coleman sees himself as an expert on weather (albeit a journalism degree), not on climate or climate change.[7][8]" - links to blog posts.
Surely random blog posts shouldn't be the basis of a such a bold claim about his education and academic suitability for making statements about climate change.
Additionally "Coleman has no education in the field of climate change" is more of an opinion that a statement. Are there any widly recognised bachelors degrees, or post grads in climate change? Sure there are plenty of researchers working on climate change, and it would be fair to say that My Coleman has not published papers on climate change. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.145.234 (talk) 10:01, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
- More important than the fact that he has not published any academic works regarding any topic on the climate or weather is the fact that there is no verifiable record of him undertaking a formal education, to any extent, in climate science or any related field, or a verifiable record of him exhibiting expertise in any atmospheric science.216.96.229.110 (talk) 13:28, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Education and Expertise
I added back the line about his education and expertise. Both of which are based on his own words and have proper REFs. His education is in journalism and he himself has stated that he is a "mere TV weatherman" who has "read dozens of scientific papers", "talked with numerous scientists", and "studied" this issue. He is not an expert but the other paragraphs before seem to imply he is by his reports and followers. This is improper and NPOV based on previous editors. This line tries to makes the full section more neutral and not biased toward this field or implied expertise. --Sallynice (talk) 14:34, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
- I've removed it again because I see it as a violation of WP:BLP where we must default to leaving material out.
Like I said in the edit summary, one reference went to a Wikipedia mirror, and one to a political blog that can in no way be considered a reliable source. The remaining references may support the basic facts from that paragraph, however putting them together in that way to reduce his credibility with regards to his views on climate change is clear original research.
If there is a reliable source making that exact point, that he has no education/expertise in the field of climate change and for that reason his opinion is not useful then we can add it. But we mustn't attempt to draw this conclusion ourselves. Amalthea 14:42, 3 February 2012 (UTC)- I added another REF that is HIS paper and he admits he is not a Exp and also still adds more backup to his ED. And it is not a violation of WP:BLP as it is REF and makes the sectio Net --Sallynice (talk) 14:45, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
- Quote to me where this new ref says that his credibility is reduced because he is not an expert on climate change. Amalthea 14:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
- Quote to me where in the Wiki page it says he has no credibility? The line simple makes that section neutral. His claim to fame is how outspoken he is in Global warming but he admits that is not his expertise. He says he bases it on layman’s research. --Sallynice (talk) 14:54, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
- WP:BLP/N#John Coleman (news weathercaster). And FWIW, removal of poorly sourced contentious material that violates WP:BLP is exempt from WP:3RR. Amalthea 15:00, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
- Quote to me where in the Wiki page it says he has no credibility? The line simple makes that section neutral. His claim to fame is how outspoken he is in Global warming but he admits that is not his expertise. He says he bases it on layman’s research. --Sallynice (talk) 14:54, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
- Quote to me where this new ref says that his credibility is reduced because he is not an expert on climate change. Amalthea 14:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
- I added another REF that is HIS paper and he admits he is not a Exp and also still adds more backup to his ED. And it is not a violation of WP:BLP as it is REF and makes the sectio Net --Sallynice (talk) 14:45, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Sallynice, I agree with Amalthea 100% that the following text is inappropriate for a BLP, as it speaks in Wikipedia's voice and is really just synthesis/original research:
Coleman has no education in the field of climate change. Coleman sees himself as an expert on weather (albeit a journalism degree in 1957 from the University of Illinois), not on climate or climate change.
However, it may be reasonable to add a brief mention to that subsection that there are critics who take issue with Coleman in that regard. For example, perhaps something like this:
Critics of Coleman's views such as ThinkProgress and the Centrist Party have questioned Coleman's lack of academic credentials and charge that he has not conducted actual research in the area of climate change.[1][2]
In such fashion, we only inform the reader that others have criticized Coleman in that regard, and leave it to the reader to follow those references if they want to know more. Just a suggestion... I'd recommend getting Amalthea's input on that before actually inserting it. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 16:48, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
- Something like that could be fine. I have never been against changing or update just the removal of the entire piece. When Coleman himself tried scrubbing the whole section I made mention I wanted him to come back and help edit it. I still wish he would as Wiki has little to no info on how he was removed from “The Weather Channel” and that was the whole reason I was drawn to his page in the first place. I think the whole GW section needs work, and would love to expand on the Weather Channel part as well, but do not like to make sweeping changes without consent of others.--Sallynice (talk) 19:33, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
- Looks like Almathea is going on a short wikibreak and will probably be back in a few days. I also noticed that this article has been placed on lockdown for three days (6 FEB 2012). Perhaps it would be best to make your proposed changes here on the Talk Page in the interim, giving others a chance to comment and edit. Then when the lockdown expires, there may be consensus to implement them. AzureCitizen (talk) 21:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Reporting ThinkProgress blog post
I recently edited the "Views on global warming" section to improve the <ref>s. I also noticed major problems with this paragraph:
- Critics of Colman’s have questioned his lack of academic credentials, journalism degree, and charge that he has not conducted actual research in the area of climate change.
- There is only one critic: singular, not plural.
- That critics is a blogger at a deeply hostile website. Hostile blogs in a WP:BLP?
- The blog post does not mention "journalism".
- Nor does it mention "academic credentials".
- "Research"? Not there either.
- The post (dated 11-Nov-2007) is reacting to Coleman's ‘Greatest Scam in History’ essay, discussed in the first para of the section.
So I moved the mention of the ThinkProgress blog item to the first para, and changed it to
- A blogger writing for the liberal website, ThinkProgress, responded by questioning his lack of academic credentials in "climate change science".
Subsequently, 72.196.235.207 (talk · contribs) restored the previous wording in the previous place (along with 3 irrelevant refs). I've now undone that edit. I believe my version is neutral and factual, while the previous version was inaccurate and POV. In fact, I suspect using the ThinkProgress blog post is a BLP violation, even when we accurately summarize it.
Any comments? CWC 18:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Material added by Sagredo
Last May, User:Sagredo added a paragraph to the "Views on global warming" section noting the mainstream view on the subject and explaining the difference between a TV weatherman and a climatologist. This was appropriate, and brought the page into line with core Wikipedia policy, which says that coverage of conspiracy theories like Coleman's should include a prominent description of the mainstream reception of those conspiracy theories. Recent edits by an IP editor and User:Collect have removed most or all of this material, leaving three short paragraphs uncritically reporting Coleman's views and one sentence (or nothing) pointing the reader to more mainstream views. It would be better to delete the article than leave such a flagrant violation of WP:WEIGHT in place. - Cal Engime (talk) 20:20, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
- Such stuff belongs in the articles on that topic and not inserted into BLPs where the material is gratuitous and of dubious relevance. Additionally, the material about "real people have degrees in meteorology and he has one in journalism" is UNDUE - we do not know what other courses he took, nor that he is unfamiliar with science, which is the obvious implication being made. Material in BLPs is supposed to be a dispassionate biography which is why they are called "biographies" and not "essays on how good or evil a person is." If you wish to have this material in this BLP, then start an RfC for it and state why it is relevant to the BLP. Cheers. Collect (talk) 20:35, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
- Desmogblog is not RS for statements of academic credentials, and the rest of the material is not actually about the person who is the topic of the article. Cheers. Collect (talk) 14:19, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Leaving of AMS and why
I put back the reason for his leaving. That should be included for explanation of his leaving. Not sure of the reason for removal? 216.81.94.72 (talk) 14:08, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- This information has been already removed a few times,[3][4][5] by multiple editors because it has no relevance with this article. His views on global warming are important and they have been described. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:06, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- The info is just fine. He left the AMS because of Global Warming and the AMS confirmed it. The AMS is the premier meteorological association in the world. Most TV broadcaster don't belong to the AMS. Article also states he won the "Broadcast Meteorologist of the Year" from the AMS. Leaving the major society of your profession would be notable, especially when he won one of their top awards. Bgwhite (talk) 06:18, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- I agree. Without that the pervious sentience makes you ask why or have to guess. A single line closing the why, let alone as mr Bgwhite said, he won awards with the AMS so leaving is pretty big thing and should be included. 216.81.94.71 (talk) 10:56, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- The info is just fine. He left the AMS because of Global Warming and the AMS confirmed it. The AMS is the premier meteorological association in the world. Most TV broadcaster don't belong to the AMS. Article also states he won the "Broadcast Meteorologist of the Year" from the AMS. Leaving the major society of your profession would be notable, especially when he won one of their top awards. Bgwhite (talk) 06:18, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- Biography articles of living people
- Stub-Class WikiProject Illinois articles
- Low-importance WikiProject Illinois articles
- Stub-Class Chicago articles
- Unknown-importance Chicago articles
- WikiProject Chicago articles
- Stub-Class biography articles
- Stub-Class biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Unknown-importance biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Arts and entertainment work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- Unassessed Journalism articles
- Unknown-importance Journalism articles
- WikiProject Journalism articles