Our ability to predict weather beyond three, four days is limited. In a certain sense, predicting climate is easier. It’s a matter of probability. On the other hand tomorrow’s temperature can be anywhere between minus 10 and 70 degrees depending on all of the variable occurrences between now and then.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
- Glaciers Vs. The Hockey Stick
- CNN : Unvaccinated Should Not Be Allowed To Leave Their Homes
- IPCC : Himalayan Glaciers Gone By 2035
- Deadly Cyclones And Arctic Sea Ice
- What About The Middle Part?
- “filled with racist remarks”
- Defacing Art Can Prevent Floods
- The Worst Disaster Year In History
- Harris Wins Pennsylvania
- “politicians & shills bankrolled by the fossil fuel industry”
- UN : CO2 Killing Babies
- Patriotic Clapper Misspoke
- New York Times Headlines
- Settled Science At The New York Times
- “Teasing Out” Junk Science
- Moving From 0% to 100% In Six Years
- “Only 3.4% of Journalists Are Republican”
- “Something we are doing is clearly not working”
- October 26, 1921
- Hillary To Defeat Trump By Double Digits
- Ivy league Provost Calls For Assassination
Recent Comments
- Gordon Vigurs on “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- Disillusioned on CNN : Unvaccinated Should Not Be Allowed To Leave Their Homes
- Disillusioned on “falsely labeling”
- Disillusioned on “falsely labeling”
- stewartpid on “falsely labeling”
- dm on Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- dm on CNN : Unvaccinated Should Not Be Allowed To Leave Their Homes
- D. Boss on IPCC : Himalayan Glaciers Gone By 2035
- Robertvd on Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- arn on “falsely labeling”
Predicting climate beyond a year or two is beyond the grasp of the human race at this point in time; even past climate is difficult to hindcast based on models being used now.
I expect as time goes on, people like Piers Corbyn or Joe Bastardi (or those that they pass their knowledge on to) might be able to forecast even further; certainly not today’s alarmist “climate scientists”. If they were truly concerned about making accurate forecasts, they’d be beating down Piers and Joe’s doors.
I predict that I will be the last comment on this page!
Although, there will be one or two variables that at some point in time will come into play whereby X over the letter 7 equals the percentage of the square root of 9 to the power of 0.5 where 7 equals .5 and 9 equals 3 over X.
I think you are off by 10% but that is neither here nor there as we are discussing future climate rather than time to maturity of Potbellied Pigs! đŸ˜‰
With reliable historical information over a long enough period it would be possible to do trend matching and be able to reasonably predict future events with somewhere in the 85% + accuracy range on regional scales. It is a matter of pattern recognition and associate cause to affect.
Two problems exist:
Lack of accurate historical data and believing in a promoted misdirection as to cause.
The existing evidence supports the failings of current research and the need for a different direction if climate is to ever to be studied in a worthwhile manner!
You climate deniers and flat Earth-errs are evil, you’re funded by big oil propaganda machines and just cant accept the scientific consensus that X over the letter 7 equals the percentage of the square root of 9 to the power of blue where 7 equals .5 and 9 equals 3 over X.
Maybe if You could see all those people dying every day, because of people like you who deny the cult.. err Facts, then maybe you’d get it through your thick uneducated skulls and understand how really close we are to a tipping point of 0.5 where x equals .7 squared over 3 percent of X dived by pi.
Just look at the accurate historical data!
The debate is over! the overwhelming scientific consensus says as predicted I will be the last comment on this page!