Arctic ice is larger (in both area and extent) as compared with last year and with the 1979-2006 average. That didn't stop two National Science Foundation grantees from predicting that ice extent in September will be less than last year.
I couldn't venture my own prediction. But, as Steven Goddard shows, their forecast presumes a "far-fetched" volume of summer melting, and follows the same researchers' underestimated arctic ice minimums last year. It reminds me of the U.K.'s Met Office "seasonal" forecasts, which falsely predicted rising temps so often that they were scrapped.
Question: at what point does adherence to computer models trump reality? You can bet on the answer here.
(via Watts Up With That?)
5 comments:
The thickness of the ice doesn't seem to be addressed adequately in the the links.
at what point does adherence to computer models trump reality?
Always, when you're an economist or a bankster.
"Warming Will Get Worse 'Till It Doesn't"
--------------------
And each year, our "weather experts" forecast a really-Really-REALLY scary-bad hurricane season. It hasn't happened for at least the last three years, but of course it WILL at some point, because WEATHER IS VARIABLE from year-to-year.
Amazing that these experts can't forecast weather six months out, but they're ABSO-DAM-LUTELY CERTAIN they can predict changes to the world's weather patterns ("climate change") a decade or two, or maybe a century, into the future based on fudged data and undisclosed program code.
--------------------
Amazingly, the answer to the problem (no matter what the particular problem we're confronted with may be) is always Lots More Government Spending.
In the case of Climate Change (label changed from Global Warming because, oops, we're not warming any more) the solution is "Take Trillions From Rich Evil Capitalist Countries" and route {some of} it to poor third-world nations. (Understand that at least half of this WILL be siphoned off to the unelected global bureaucracy which demands this money as "just reparations" for sins of the Racist West against Poor Brown People in third-world countries.) Due to the zero-sum mindset of these Progressive Globalists, the material wealth of the West obviously means that we have cheated countries with abundant raw materials out of the wealth that "should be theirs". (In essence they believe we owe such countries full-finished-goods value for any materials that we extract, process, and incorporate into final products. They essentially deny that the skill and ingenuity which are necessary to produce, say, car bumpers from mined ores, have value; they assume that the price of the finished bumpers should be the price we pay for the ore; so of course the difference is the amount we've "stolen" and hence "owe".) Bah!
Marc:
Goddard says that, for the prediction to come true, ice "probably in excess of 10 feet thick . . . is going to melt by early August. That seems rather far fetched."
bobn:
I agree on economic/banking models, which is one reason I doubt the efficacy of increased regulation.
A_N_M:
Exactly--twice.
ANM: This is called "The Swartzberg Test"
The Swartzberg Test:
The validity of a science is its ability to predict.
AGW ain't science by a long shot.
Post a Comment