Many of us in Wyoming joke that we do too have four seasons: Winter, Still winter, brief Summer (might snow anyway), and Almost winter. The last roughly corresponds to “Fall” in most of the rest of the northern hemisphere.
This week brought the first hard freeze and a nice dusting of snow to the NE corner of Wyoming. It’s earlier than usual, I think, but nothing surprising. The last few days have been windy and darn near warm, however. Yesterday’s high temperature outside was 75 degrees. Most call that “Indian Summer,” but we don’t get too comfortable with it… might freeze hard again tomorrow night.
The point is, of course, that the weather (and “climate” is merely an aggregation of local weather) changes constantly. Sometimes it is more or less predictable, but usually subject to at least some changes as the predicted time frame gets closer.
So, how in the world do you suppose these “scientists” can manage to predict minor and unsubstantiated changes in the climate of the future, let alone predict with any precision just what those changes might mean? And if you look at their own statements and predictions, you find the words “might” and “may” frequently… the weasel words that give the lie to their pronouncements. The lies and manipulation of questionable “statistics” goes even deeper into that, with all counter facts simply ignored or distorted to suit their agenda.
Tell me again why the temperature and rainfall for tomorrow can’t be accurately predicted, but the “climate” and its effects all over the globe can be known for the next 50 years. And we didn’t even touch on the “man made” part, or the idiotic idea that humans can change the climate by living without electricity.
I don’t think so.
Pingback: Rational Review News Digest, 10/17/16 - Iraq: Regime launches Mosul offensive to drive out Islamic State - Thomas L. Knapp - Liberty.me
We got people paid by the government to come up with stupid ideas and charts, grafts and other dren to keep us informed or like mushrooms: in the dark and up to our neck in shit. There was government agency that was set up in the 70’s to predict wind and tides
I just laugh at all of it. 🙂
To study beach erosion researchers injected a known quantity (+/- 2,300) of barium isotopes into the littoral current. Periodic checks were made over the forthcoming weeks to track the location of the radioactive isotopes. Initially, the location of a single isotope could be tracked. However, that tracking ability quickly dissolved into only a mass being reliably tracked.
The data allowed researchers to develop prediction modeling yet those predictions were inaccurate as shown by isotopes accreting in unexpected masses or being transported to unpredicted locations. This study was concluded when researchers were quite surprised that all the isotopes had disappeared well before their decay would have prohibited detection. Therefore, a synthesis of data from this and previous studies was used to predict isotope locations.
Of the many hypothesis thusly generated, only a handful were accurate and only for a given period of time. That is, any given hypothesis was reliably of a given time. Researchers were unable to predict which model would be accurate for which time.
From this one could gather a major event could be predicted easier than a single event. Yet, the conclusions are that while prediction is most accurate early on, it rapidly falls away even for a major event. Modeling is used to suggested when to prepare and for what to prepare. What is ignored – or kept behind the curtain by those with an agenda – is reliability of prediction modeling takes on a life of it’s own; that however reliable the raw data fed into the model, the model itself responds in surprising ways. This is not merely a software fault. (If that were to be believed, it would only feed into the arrogance of those who are always certain of their efforts, even when proven inaccurate.) The atmosphere is too complex to reliably predict even on short scale. Ok, so scientists may one day arrive to that place where they can make reliable predictions. But I am oh so tired of the unmitigated arrogance of them, especially so of them with their damned agendas.
(Any fool can say a hurricane is coming when a week out. But they will not be able to ascertain the track of that major event. Even if they could, they would not be able to predict the results of that storm.)
Indeed. 🙂 I get pretty much all the weather information I need from going outside. Fifty+ years of gardening, farming, and long distance driving have made my weather “sense” pretty darn accurate. For a general trend only, of course. I love the predictions on the national weather site… making such detailed predictions as how many inches of rain will fall. Pure speculation, I think. We now have an automated phone thing where the county Sheriff’s office calls everyone (everyone?) with warnings about severe thunderstorms, tornadoes and the like. So far they’re batting zero. LOL
The one call last summer left me laughing. A young man (some sort of felon… oh sure) walked away from the local “honor camp.” They didn’t say he was dangerous, for any reason, and just asked for anyone who saw him to call the cops. I was in town later, and talked with someone who works at the “camp” and he was laughing. Seems the poor kid just walked around for a while, and then came back. He didn’t have any money or friends here, and obviously no intentions to steal or harm anyone. My friend couldn’t tell me why this kid was incarcerated, but we agreed he’d probably been caught with some whacky weed. Maybe that’s what he went walking to find… don’t know. I do know that a great deal of stolen tax money is being spent keeping kids like this in jail or “camp” for no good reason. So now they want us to approve a tax increase? Ha.
RE: tax increase. Some years ago I bought a stack of trade journals from the 1960s. In comparison to now, what a wonderfully innocent time that was*. Just this morning I read some of the new fedgov items of 1964. The juxtaposition of two items seemed curious, one item detailed a phased closing of a fedgov research project which was expected to yield a savings of $2 million over two years. The second item detailed the opening of 18 new offices at a cost of $350 thousand each. Notably, it was pointed out that because these offices were modular there would be realized a significant savings compared to previous offices.
Two different divisions of the same gov…like rearranging the deck chairs.
*SSDD. Comparing then to now, we’re not only dealing with larger numbers but a faster pace although much is the same. It’s always about a ‘savings’. It’s like the world s a half-off dress sale; there is a ‘savings’ so better buy two, or 20, 0r 200 or whatever. Oh, and a logistics chain will need to be implemented. But it is a savings mind you. There more they take, the more you save.