Sunday, March 16, 2014

Baxter Black: Record snowfalls mock global warming forecast

“We can expect to see extreme cold with increasing frequency as global warming continues.” President Barack Obama’s science and technology adviser, Jan. 11.

I cringe at how ludicrous global warming climatologists must feel these last two winters. Nature is pooping in their nest. Did he mean “extreme heat” instead of cold? Can they have it both ways? However, they shouldn’t be making excuses. They should be elated that winter seems to be coming back with a vengeance.

But what if it continues? It puts them in the position of hoping for bad news. It’s called schadenfreude.

I make the distinction between accredited climatologists and the teleclimatite believers who worship at the feet of Al Gore. The same people who continue to think that cows flatulate methane and fossil fuels should be banned as a source of energy. They have the credibility of a left-handed duck doing surgery on your prostate.

To the credit of the science of climatology, it has come a long way in predicting weather patterns. It is common of them to predict the weather one to two weeks in advance with some accuracy. But the further into the future their predictions, the less accurate they become. It is at that point they start trusting “computer models,” until it becomes a guessing game. Their predictions lose statistical significance.

How far ahead did they predict Hurricane Sandy? Frozen Atlanta? New York’s power outage? Iced-over Dallas? A week? Two weeks? At 30 days you might as well have been looking at the Farmer’s Almanac.

As a medical person, I can empathize with their position. Vets and doctors are forced to give a prognosis on the future of illnesses, surgeries or procedures. We apply our expertise, experience, history and judgment, as in “a 50 percent chance of pulling through.” Sometimes we are right, and sometimes we are wrong.



1 comment:

Dan Pangburn said...

Discover the cause of the warming, the end of it, why temperatures are headed down and what to expect.

There are only two primary drivers of average global temperature change. They very accurately explain the reported up and down measurements since before 1900 with R2>0.9 (correlation coefficient = 0.95) and provide credible estimates back to the low temperatures of the Little Ice Age (1610).

CO2 change is NOT one of the drivers.

The drivers are given at

http://agwunveiled.blogspot.com/