In 2011, NOAA issued a series of forecasts for Hurricane Irene. Every state on the East Coast was targeted for landfall at some point. When she did finally make landfall in New York as a tropical storm, they declared victory – after betting on every horse in the race.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Grok 3 Trusts The Government
- NPR Climate Experts
- Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- “Siberia might stay livable”
- Deep Thinking From The Atlantic
- Making Up Fake Numbers At CBS News
- Your Tax Dollars At Work
- “experts warn”
- End Of Snow Update
- CBS News Defines Free Speech
- “Experts Warn”
- Consensus Science With Remarkable Precision
- Is New York About To Drown?
- “Anti-science conservatives must be stopped”
- Disappearing New York
- New York To Drown Soon
- “halt steadily increasing climate extremism”
- “LARGE PART OF NORTHERN CALIF ABLAZE”
- Climate Trends In The Congo
- “100% noncarbon energy mix by 2030”
- Understanding The US Government
- Cooling Australia’s Past
- Saving The World From Fossil Fuels
- Propaganda Based Forecasting
- “He Who Must Not Be Named”
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Grok 3 Trusts The Government
- arn on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- William on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- gordon vigurs on “Siberia might stay livable”
- conrad ziefle on NPR Climate Experts
- conrad ziefle on NPR Climate Experts
- conrad ziefle on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- conrad ziefle on “Siberia might stay livable”
- Timo, not that one! on “Siberia might stay livable”
- arn on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
Like covering every number on the roulette table. You will still lose.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they blame the unpredictability on “climate change”, despite their “success” rate not having changed much.
Back in the dim dark ages when humans had trouble understanding something they’d attribute it to the “gods”, or “witchcraft”. Now in the case of climate, they attribute everything to “evil” CO2 “caused” by humans; so pretty much aligning it with witchcraft.
Reblogged this on The Grey Enigma.
If your point in this post was weather models aren’t perfect, you are right. But when you do not give the forecast error probability distribution, you mislead and give ammo to,warmunists. please do not do that. For example, the Katrina forecast path was spot on. Do not complain about cherry picking when doing it oneself. Really weakens your credibility, as on the gridding thingy.
The problem for both ‘sides’ is that truth will out. Tip from a researched and published lukewarmer who thinks the conversation should be elsewhere than CAGW.
The forecast error probability distribution is right in the pictures. Lines with shaded area that increases in area the further out in time you go.
And these scientists can project climate 10, 20 or 50 years in the future?
Gee, they have my trust.
Rud, I thought the point was that they constantly changed the predicted path to match new observations. In other words they predicted hurricane force landing on every state on the eastern sea board. The declared victory, even though they got a tropical storm on the northern most target.
In climate science they would adjust the data to fit the most alarming prediction after the fact.
Your CAGW point is well taken.
They don’t bet the track, they bet the cone. Certainty is for people who say 2014 was the warmest year on record.