Since the beginning of recorded history there have been end of the world predictions. In recent years we have had radio preachers, politicians and scientists declare with certainty that the world would soon end, either because of our decadent lifestyle, or because of "global warming," now known as "climate change."



As Hurricane Harvey battered the coast of Texas over the weekend, it was estimated that the storm could cost as much, if not more, than $40 billion worth of damages, with at least one death being attributed to the storm. But there was a touching moment after Harvey’s landfall on Saturday as Paul Goodloe, a meteorologist for The Weather Channel, discovered a downed American flag outside a school in Rockport, Texas. “I can't let Old Glory just sit here like that,” Goodloe tells his camera man.



Opening Weather.com to find my hometown’s weather report this past Friday came as an unpleasant surprise. Several apocalyptic articles attempting to scare readers (or, more appropriately, weather-report-seekers) of the dangers of pulling out of the Paris accord cluttered the website. Apparently, it is no longer possible to search the web for rain predictions without being force-fed politically charged opinions.


Politico's Darren Goode surprisingly highlighted the skepticism of many on-air meteorologists in a Monday item about President Obama's interviews with "some of television's most popular celebrities — weather forecasters — to ratchet up the volume on the administration's latest scientific assessment of climate change." Goode pointed out that "not all broadcast meteorologists have been conducive to the climate science message."

The writer cited Weather Channel founder John Coleman, who labeled global warming "the greatest scam in history" back in 2007. He also outlined the reason for many of the weather personalities' skepticism:



If the founder of The Weather Channel spoke out strongly against the manmade global warming myth, might media members notice?

We're going to find out the answer to that question soon, for John Coleman wrote an article published at ICECAP Wednesday that should certainly garner attention from press members -- assuming journalism hasn't been completely replaced by propagandist activism, that is.

Coleman marvelously began (emphasis added, h/t NB reader coffee250):