Mike Smith, founder of WeatherData, a leading private weather forecasting service, recently shared his views with me on global warming. He wasn’t convinced, he said, that the warming taking place was quantifiable enough to justify expensive remedies.
He said meteorologists are the “most skeptical” group among climate science professionals about the evidence for global warming. The problem, he says, is that future dire global warming predictions are “entirely based on computer models,” and working meteorologists who use computer modeling to make short-term forecasts know how often those models are wrong.
Still, for all their shortcomings, we use such computer-modeled forecasts to plan our days and activities, don’t we? Does it make sense to bet on global warming threats being wrong, or to take precautions?
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- writerdog on Health care reform would save state money
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/22
- george on Open thread 11/22
- DorisKing on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- george on Health care reform would save state money
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- Politico on So they said
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
15 Comments
Take precaution (this one is a no brainer). Even if global warming ends up being a total farce, the pollution reductions are still beneficial to everyone.
Global warming is occuring. Whether it will result in catastrophic global warming is another question and a likely outcome, but if you look at the data, the hottest average temperatures recorded in North America have all been in the last decade . . .
But as long as we have two Texas oil men in the White House, Bush and Cheney, our addiction to Middle East oil continues unabated.
Mike Smith is considered a smart person by the smart people I know and his questions on the forecasts are noteworthy to me. The questioning of computer simulation forecasts was the basis of the latest Crichton screed, “State of Fear” wherein he described data not supporting the global warming theory. If time series analysis forecasts worked in an error-free manner, I would not have to go to work and could instead earn my living by investing in the stock market. I am not expecting that this job change will happen any time soon.
As one of Crichton’s protagonists asked, even if fossil fuels don’t cause global warming, aren’t there compelling reasons to conserve this finite resource? I think there obviously are reasons for this course of action and it may also slow down a possible cause of global warming.
The best reason for curtailing our use of oil is that it funds terrorism.The second best reason is that it funds the rich oil men and women.But if one environmental group is always going to beat up on another environmental group whenever we attempt to find substitutes (as we see in the case of windmills, or with nuclear energy) the solutions are still a long way off.
I think there is sufficient evidence and certainly enough scientific credibility to warrant real concern about global warming. Too, as other posters have already stated, lowering our consumption of fossil fuels (the stated remedy for global warming ) with the creation of alternative and more environmentally friendly energy sources, we can also address the very real problems of pollution.What has not yet been posted is how reducing consumption of greenhouse gases (the assumed culprit of global warming) can also enhance national security; in that we will be less dependent on foreign oil.To those who dismiss global warming I offer this: The net benefits as stated above from removing our dependency on fossi fuels would be reason enough to take immediate and couragious action. But if that is not enough for you then consider this, if there is only the tiniest chance that global warming is a real threat, then should that threat not be adressed? We are talking about the future survivability of not only Americans but the human race and much of Earth’s biosphere. We have gone to war for far less
I think there is sufficient evidence and certainly enough scientific credibility to warrant real concern about global warming. Too, as other posters have already stated, lowering our consumption of fossil fuels (the stated remedy for global warming ) with the creation of alternative and more environmentally friendly energy sources, we can also address the very real problems of pollution.What has not yet been posted is how reducing consumption of greenhouse gases (the assumed culprit of global warming) can also enhance national security; in that we will be less dependent on foreign oil.To those who dismiss global warming I offer this: The net benefits as stated above from removing our dependency on fossi fuels would be reason enough to take immediate and couragious action. But if that is not enough for you then consider this, if there is only the tiniest chance that global warming is a real threat, then should that threat not be adressed? We are talking about the future survivability of not only Americans but the human race and much of Earth’s biosphere. We have gone to war for far less
Great points, JR, but we have 2 problems and they’re both sitting in the Whitehouse. Our president and vice-president are both oil men.Something else to consider. Evangelicals don’t care about what’s left for the future because they think “the Rapture” is coming soon.
Why should the current administration be good stewards of the environment when it’s so much more profitable to pillage and plunder it?
Hammer,
As an evangelical I will have to disagree with your mischaracterization of them.
JR,
There is the “tiniest chance” that a meteor could come and wipe out half of the earth and send us into an ice age…
Should we start wasting billions of dollars preparing for that too?
It is called Cost/Benefit analysis.
Right now, the analysis of Global warming does not indicate a waste of such a large amount of money or the sacrifice of a significant portion of our economy to stop global warming.
Well said, Nathan!
Nathan,My ex is an evangelical and she spends her time sitting on the patio waiting to be picked up.
Have you seen Hank lately?
Hi Cory! Join Nathan, whose posts I also ignore.
JR,Put Hank’s (”Henry”) name on your list. I think he left town after being proven a dishonorable coward.
Damn and I thought hank might yet be saved! Maybe he was raptured! I guess that would get rid of Nathan too.More and stronger hurricanes this year and earlier than ever on record. Global warming maybe?
My inaugural address at the Great White Throne Judgment of the Dead, after I have raptured out billions!
At: http://www.angelfire.com/crazy/spaceman/
Your jaw will drop!
eschatology,End Times,second coming,rapture,secret rapture,Second Resurrection,Great White Throne Judgment of the Dead,End of Days,Day of the Lord,Endtime,Judgment Day