Thank you. I prefer to think of it as a science-watching rather than opinions, since science in its purest form is what it is regardless of anyone's opinion. Accurate numbers don't care what we think; we can only react. In order to react correctly, we need the most accurate numbers.
You can find many meteorologists and weather reporters in the mainstream media offering tidbits of what's really going on. Here are three examples.
1. A couple months ago on the NBC TODAY show, the morning's top story was the ongoing severe weather in the midwest. Meredith Viera asked Al Roker something like, "So these thunderstorms being caused by all the warm air?" Roker responded no, they were triggered by cold fronts from Canada ramming into the warmer air ahead of them. Viera did not pursue it further and transitioned to the next story.
2. Some weather watchers, when making internet posts, have noted that The Weather Channel seems to have strayed from a 24-hour weather network to a 24-hour climate alarm network with breaks for weather forecasts. In their posts, the disgruntled viewers note that many of TWC's most respected on-camera meteorologists do not comment on global warming at all.
3. Last night, WBZ-TV 4's Ken Barlow gave the weather for Boston, and he predicted more thunderstorms for this week as the heat moves back into New England. But, he said, the storms will be triggered by unusually cold air over Canada that continues to make moves at us -- the reason we've had such an active severe weather season nationwide.
The science in the mainstream media is subtle, but it's there.
The concern about the volcano (Chaiten) is that if it erupts powerfully enough, it would create 2-3 years of cooling on top of the major climate indicators (solar cycle, Pacific Decadal Oscillation) that are pointing toward "cool" now. And everyone would be caught thinking, "I thought it was supposed to get warmer." As
Seablogger pointed out, cooler times call for more food and more fuel -- two things that are currently in crisis mode.