With the weather channel putting headlines like this on their website...?

Nope...

Weather Channel is part of the General Electric media empire which owns all the various NBC clone channels like MDLSD. General Electric makes windmills. GE has its head so far up Obama's behind it doesn't even have to pay income taxes. So the WC's credibility is pretty low.

I heard Dennis Prager on radio for many years. His credibility is very high.

There have indeed been weather disasters due to global warming. Remember, the last ice age has been melting off for about 13,000 years now. When sea levels rose enough to breach the straights of Gibraltar (Pillars of Hercules) the Atlantic ocean flooded what is now the Mediterranean Sea and then the Black Sea. That would have been the most fertile part of the world and highly evolved civilizations would have been living there, 8 or 10 thousand years ago. This probably is the origin of Noah's flood story and maybe even Atlantis.

But humans didn't cause that, it was the sun and possibly orbital perturbations.

The spoiled Leftists don't understand that one good volcano has more effect on earth's weather than all the history of humanity's emissions could ever do. And yes, in the last couple thousand years, periods of warming have greatly helped humanity. Primarily aiding agriculture and travel. Around 900AD the Vikings were able to settle Greenland and then by about 1100 global cooling made sea travel impossible that far north and they starved to death.

In the American Southwest the Anasazi Indians had a pilgrimage route from Central America all the way to New Mexico and Arizona and even a bit of Colorado. They thrived until by about 1100AD the hundreds years drought finally made them (it is theorized) move in with the Navajo or maybe the Hopi.

Climate change is nothing new. Look at the pictures of America's founding fathers. How many layers of clothing were they wearing? It was colder then than now. That's why Europe had such a taste for beavers in the early 1800s, leading to the mountain men trappers exploring America. But then it warmed up.

England is at the same latitude as Alaska. Were it not for the warm waters of the Gulf Stream, UK and Western Europe would look like Alaska.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=map+of+northern+hem...

If I could grow citrus trees in Ohio or if they could grow grapes in North Dakota, that would be a good thing. Admittedly, if sea levels raise by 3 feet, there would be a lot of problems but we can't prevent that. There are cities 600 feet below sea level, built back when a lot of water was locked up in the ice caps. Somehow humanity survived a 600 foot rise in sea levels. We can deal with a few more feet.

All this "global warming" or "climate change" is political. Sure, it may be happening but that's just nature and the sun doing their things.

The climate change is just a distraction from the left. If they wanted to fix the problem they would not be proposing taxes that have no chance of being passed during a recession. If they wanted to fix the problem they would not be pooring billions into the failed ethanol attempt. If they wanted to fix the problem they would not be financing wind mills, that they know have no chance at all of providing the base power that cities need.

Here is what they would be doing:

1.) Nuclear power. Unsafe some say? Fukishima some say? Fukishima is a more than 30 year old plant that had undergone the 5th largest earthquake on record, followed by a tsunami, and still hasn't seen a death and only had problems because of poor placement of back up systems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_and_r...

Care to talk about how many die in coal mining accidents?

If we actually worked at creating nuclear power plants off of the same design, and using nuclear power to replace coal power plants as they become unservicable, we could literally pay LESS for power.

2.) Electric cars. We had e-cars that are nearly as good as what we see now in the 70s. Plus, they were cheaper. There is a strangle hold on e-cars, patents held by oil companies that never intend on producing the cars from the patents and monopoly policies going on by big business that is stopping any progress. There are already law addressing this type of immoral action that need to be applied.

There is absolutely no reason why we should not have e-cars selling at $25K for the equivalent car of a $20K gas car. We can even approach the car companies in the same manner that was done to get seatbelts. Do this in 5 years and the market will take care of the rest.

3.) Solar power. Leave it alone. Don't subsidize silly crap to make it appear cost effective. Solar power is decreasing by 7% cost every year. In some states it is already cost effective to put solar panels on your house to supplement your energy bills. In 5-10 years, it will be cost effective to do this in most states.

Note that this plan does not raise taxes. It instead relies on the market to do what it is supposed to do without interference. The result is cheaper cleaner energy and the US literally cutting its production of CO2 to a quater in about 15-20 year. While getting the US off of foreign oil and eliminating the influence that terrorist states have over us.

If the environmentalists cared about the environment, this is the approach they would take. They would literally make friends out of the fiscally conservative people that they currently see as enemies.

Note that true environmentally sound methods are fiscally conservative. Here is an example. If you get a britta water filter and a water bottle. Using that water will save a ton of money, plus cut down the plastic waste and you will ahve a tasty water as the Evian people buy at the stores.

Note how use of less materials is both fiscally conservative AND environmentally-friendly? There is a reason for that. More materials cost more money.

The Weather channel plays the game of Anthropogenic global warming…because those folks throw money at them. In reality, most scientists are low level whores…they espouse the beliefs of whoever funds their research.

More of the Global Warming theorists propaganda from the Weather Channel

Why would we believe someone who majored in history and earns his living as a talk show host knows more about weather and Climate than the people on the weather channel.

The weather Channel is part of MSNBC so not a surprise.

No