Climate M&Ms
History has shown irrational hysteria that has later been proven false many times. Many bloggers may not know that red m&ms were thought to cause cancer so they were eliminated in 1976 only to be brought back in 1987.
Please read the last line of the article linked in the title, a quote from David Bromwich, professor of professor of atmospheric sciences in the Department of Geography researcher with the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University:
"It isn't surprising that these models are not doing as well in these remote parts of the world. These are global models and shouldn't be expected to be equally exact for all locations," he said.
The same time you admit that our climate models don't work yet we are hearing there is a crisis? Which is it exactly? Where is our level of understanding?
I'll tell you where it is: we are at the discovery of penicillin stage of our understanding of weather. Do you think that Sir Fleming would have concieved of magnetic imaging technology? That medical miracle is used thousands of times a day in routine medical procedures. That's where our weather and climate experts are today: eighty years away from a ten-fold leap in understanding. Yet there is a panic running rampant from good intentioned but irresponsible flakes saying the earth is ending?
Another extremely problematic phrase:
"We're looking for a small signal that represents the impact of human activity and it is hard to find it at the moment," he said.
When it comes to intelligence on WMD's it is a criminal act to have looked for and assumed they were present. Yet the good professor here seems to admit to a predispostion to intepretation of data for the impact of "human causation" on weather. Why not just accept data as it is collected without trying to force a conclusion? Isn't that the root of the scientific method?
In all fairness I totally appreciate the good intentions of those who want to save us. However, until you prove your fear is accurate I'll keep eating the red m&m's while driving my SUV.
Please read the last line of the article linked in the title, a quote from David Bromwich, professor of professor of atmospheric sciences in the Department of Geography researcher with the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University:
"It isn't surprising that these models are not doing as well in these remote parts of the world. These are global models and shouldn't be expected to be equally exact for all locations," he said.
The same time you admit that our climate models don't work yet we are hearing there is a crisis? Which is it exactly? Where is our level of understanding?
I'll tell you where it is: we are at the discovery of penicillin stage of our understanding of weather. Do you think that Sir Fleming would have concieved of magnetic imaging technology? That medical miracle is used thousands of times a day in routine medical procedures. That's where our weather and climate experts are today: eighty years away from a ten-fold leap in understanding. Yet there is a panic running rampant from good intentioned but irresponsible flakes saying the earth is ending?
Another extremely problematic phrase:
"We're looking for a small signal that represents the impact of human activity and it is hard to find it at the moment," he said.
When it comes to intelligence on WMD's it is a criminal act to have looked for and assumed they were present. Yet the good professor here seems to admit to a predispostion to intepretation of data for the impact of "human causation" on weather. Why not just accept data as it is collected without trying to force a conclusion? Isn't that the root of the scientific method?
In all fairness I totally appreciate the good intentions of those who want to save us. However, until you prove your fear is accurate I'll keep eating the red m&m's while driving my SUV.
posted by Possum at 07:08
<< Home