In an Associated Press article, a climate alarmist accused a female ABC meteorologist of being “more like a pornographer” than a weather forecaster – all because she didn’t tie weather events to climate change often enough for his liking. According to the article, discussing weather events without throwing in at least some climate change scaremongering is “weather porn.”

The Dec. 12, article, by AP Television Writer David Bauder, promoted this view held by “news consultant” and media analyst Andrew Tyndall. Tyndall called out ABC’s “Good Morning America” meteorologist Ginger Zee specifically, calling her “more like a pornographer.”

“’If Ginger Zee reported in the role of climatologist rather than meteorologist, I would praise ABC’s ‘World News Tonight’s' decision as a daring intervention into a crucial national and global debate,’ he said. ‘Instead, she is more like a pornographer.’” Bauder failed to include any criticism of this comparison.

The Washington Post’s Capital Weather Gang came to Zee’s defense after this attack. Not because the Post is skeptical about climate change, but because of the “needless and demeaning cheap shot at Good Morning America’s Ginger Zee, a highly successful and talented broadcast meteorologist.”

On top of decrying the sexist criticism of Zee, the Post also pointed out that “Tyndall’s argument that ABC News should present the weather through the lens of climate change is not compelling. It’s notoriously difficult to link certain weather extremes, like hurricanes and tornadoes, to climate change. Attempts to do so, when the established scientific connections are fuzzy and/or contentious, invite criticism from skeptics.”