According to %26quot;expert%26quot; predictions, %26quot;scientific%26quot; forecasts, etc., etc., etc., the Earth is warming at an ALARMING rate, and it is PREDICTED that major climate changes over the next 10, 20, 100, etc., years are gong to drastically change our planet, quite possibly so drastically that all life as we know it will be irrevocably altered, possibly even destroyed, by this change. Predictions of more frequent, more violent hurricanes and tornadoes, heavy rain/drought (depending on who you ask), hotter summers and milder winters, depletion of the ozone, shifting regional climates, etc., etc., are constantly being pushed out to the public as Gospel truth, paired with the admonition that if we don%26#039;t change our ways, we are doomed. This of course has resulted in the resurgence of the green people, who blame humans (Americans in particular) for all of the Earth%26#039;s woes.
HOWEVER, a recent article about the disparities between the forecasts of the Farmer%26#039;s Almanac (which claims an 80-85% accuracy rate for its predictions) and the National Weather Service has produced an interesting assertion from Ed O%26#039;Lenic, the Chief of Opertaions for the NOAA%26#039;s Climate Prediction Center. According to Mr. O%26#039;Lenic, it is %26quot;impossible%26quot; to forecast weather more than a week ahead of time (this is in response to the Almanac%26#039;s %26quot;predictions%26quot; being prepared up to 2 years in advance of publication). He goes on to say that %26quot;Of course it%26#039;s possible to prepare a forecast with any lead time you like. Whether or nor that forecast has any accuracy or usable skill is another question.%26quot;
Now, I%26#039;m not one to advocate excessive overuse of natural and finite resources, and surely don%26#039;t support widespread pollution at the cost of our planet, but if this is true, and Mr. O%26#039;Lenic is a respected and authoritative member of the climate prediction crowd, how is it possible for anyone to tell us, with ANY accuracy whatsoever, what the weather will be like in 100 years if they can%26#039;t tell us with any surety what the weather will be like next Thursday??
Just trying to figure out the discrepancy here. Those of you %26quot;in the know%26quot; please help me out here...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080824/ap_o...
Additional Details
1 week ago
Edit: Phred - %26quot;The further out in time the less accurate the prediction is just like weather forecasting%26quot;. My point exactly. However, rest assured, big changes are coming?? that%26#039;s a blanket statement with no sustainable backing. Akin to Bill Gates assuring the world in the early 80%26#039;s that there is no reason for a computer to EVER need more than 640k of memory to be effective. Or like looking at a particular intersection and saying, %26quot;mark my words, there%26#039;s going to be an accident here if things don%26#039;t change%26quot;. The law of averages dictates that. Global warming %26quot;scientists%26quot; are promulgating their predictions as infallible and absolute. This is impossible given the methods of forecasting, AND historical data.1 week ago
Edit: Rob B - not buying that one. Watch the local weather forecast; they use computer %26quot;modeling%26quot; to give forecasts up to 8-9 days in advance, and even THOSE forecasts change from the 5 o%26#039;clock news to the 10 o%26#039;clock news. I don%26#039;t doubt for one SECOND that the weather will change in some way over the next few centuries, but to put out computer estimates as irrefutable fact is irresponsible in my opinion.1 week ago
edit: Hola - what I find interesting is that the %26quot;alarming%26quot; rise in global temperatures began occuring AFTER data from some of the coldest weather monitoring points on earth were no longer being considered. Drop the lower numbers from the equation, and mathmatically the ONLY result is a higher average temperature.1 week ago
Edit: Adam C - Predict - foretell on the basis of observation, experience, or scientific reason.Forecast - to calculate or predict (some future event or condition) usually as a result of study and analysis of available pertinent data.
Hmmm...%26quot;predict%26quot; and %26quot;forecast%26quot; have different letters, and are therefore differetn words, but amazingly, they sound INCREDIBLY similar in definition (also known an synonymous, since you want to play the symantics game). The contradiction, Adam, is that global warming alarmists are simultaneously forecasting what the weather will be like as a result of the climate change, and they are using flawed data to do so. Incomplete data, shortened or cherry-picked historical trends, flawed or modifiable computer modeling, etc., all are being used to tell us what the cliamte AND weather are going to be like in 100 years.
1 week ago
For the most part, pretty good answers with no name calling. Keep %26#039;em coming; tell your friends!!!1 week ago
EDIT: Stinky Badger - I would guess that one of the ppeople you might be reffering to would be Al gore, noted climatologist...no, wait, didn%26#039;t he win a Nobel Prize? Or was he a politician?? Hmm, well, he%26#039;s kind of hard to categorize, isn%26#039;t he? Kind of like the predictions of global warming/climate change are hard to solidify, huh? MOST everyone else has offered an answer that pertains to the question. Too bad you missed the boat on that one...13% 1 Vote 0% 0 Votes
If the models cannot predict what is already known they are completely useless for predicting climate at any time in the future. 13% 1 Vote 0% 0 Votes
-
Answer hidden due to its low rating
Well to be truthful the Farmers Almanac was predicting climate for its constituents to plant their crops by while the climate scientists of their day were dancing around fires in jeweled garments throwing iron dust in the fire and shaking gourd rattles to bring the rain and rid the tribes of evil spirits. 0% 0 Votes