<- Click hereWhy hasn't it become balmy? They promised us BALMY! What are they? Balmy?
If Katrina and tsunamis were incontrovertible evidence that the planet was warning. What are three blizzards and a $465 December heating bill evidence of? Huh? It is all so confusing. Is it possible that Al Gore could be... um... wrong? How can anyone who's become so wealthy be... wrong?
On the other hand, there is a difference between weather and climate I guess. Odd though, even in October the weather forecasters couldn't predict the intensity of a season like this, I wonder how the climate forecasters can be so confident of their 100 year predictions?
Like I said, it is all so confusing... Sigh.
Seems to me that politicians fund scientific "experts" who legitimize their laws. Since only the "expert" can discuss those laws, the citizens have been turned into subjects of the scientific law-makers. Citizens participate in their government, subjects are commanded by it. Remember when some guy with a telescope was silenced by theological experts over his theories of planetary revolution?
Creepy the way that rulers use experts to dominate their subjects, huh?
How does it feel to be a subject instead of a citizen? From my place in Lancaster tonight as the wind howls around our home... it feels very, very.... COLD!
6 comments:
Hi Ted,
Just tried to click on you "How Creativity Happens" essay. Has this been removed. I got an error message. I want my money back !!!!!! :)
Ooops.... My business is in the process of reconstructing our website... Major work. And you know what it's like when you have the builders in and you're still trying to live in the house... Things get misplaced. I shall see what I can do this week re. restoring the article's accessibility. It may take until mid month though... there is so much going on behind the scenes. Thanks for the alert and Happy New Year.
No worries Ted Take your time.
Ush
Ted, that's propaganda and you know it. But let me dance the Pavlov for you anyway :)
Weather is almost impossible to predict. It's so complicated and so interdependent between so many factors, that we can call the whole system with good conscience random. It follows patterns though.
With absolute certainty we can assume that on the northern half of the earth, at a latitude of, say, Lancaster, PA, the average temperature in the three months of December, January and February will be considerably lower than the average from June, July and August. In the absence of major catastrophes (giant volcano, major asteroid impact, ...) this holds true for all years. I guess so far there is no doubt.
Although due to the randomness of daily change it does not make much sense to compare December 24 over the course of 10 consecutive years, comparing the December-February average over 100 years would be extremely significant. This is, because the three month average already takes away most of the randomness, and extending the scope to 100 years eliminates the remaining randomness almost completely.
THAT is what climate science talks about. That's what allows us to identify trends. This is well founded science, all the data (and in many places for a much longer duration) is there. The only problem is, it is not as easily graspable as anecdotal evidence.
Anecdotal evidence of the kind you provide, is scientifically worthless. It's about as scientific as having a point and claiming to have identified a trend. The only problem is, that it much better relates to human experience than any scientific method. That's why anecdotal evidence is so often abused. It works wonders as a smoke screen.
Nice try though :)
Ted and Andreas, both of you crack me up!
Ted, I do love that whopper-jawed building and your post processing that I wish I could emulate.
Did either of you realize that a non-Christian actually wrote a song titled "I'm Dreaming of a White Christmas"?
Now this has nothing to do with climate change, but to one's location. There was poor Irving Berlin stuck down in hot, dry New Mexico or Arizona - and he actually missed snowy New York!
Now he could have titled the song, using Hannukah (sp?) or ever just the month of December. So why did he choose Christmas? Well, he knows the value of certain name tags and how this song would probably net him a whole lot more green backs with the name Christmas in its title.
Just like the climate change folks - they too realize the value of properly packaging something to make it sell best. And so the Big Oil guys paid some "scientific types" to come up with some "research" to prove to all us oil guzzlers that we're the cause of climate change!
Now why would they do this? Simple - they know they'll be running out of petroleum and so how will they continue to make money at their customers' expense?
In case you haven't noticed, Big Oil is behind the switch to electricity and alternative fuels - they know they have to start well in advance to brainwash us consumers to make a major switch in our lifestyles - and so all the people-as-cause-of-climate-change hype.
But evidence is slowly coming to light that the planet would have heated up anyway, humans or no humans.
the only good that's come out of this pseudo-science for us consumers is that we're now convinced that we must clean up our environment - but convinced for the wrong reasons!
Our rules are not politicians - they are the Big Money folks who have the politicians in their pockets!
JMHO
Flo
Well, that's certainly an interesting twist, and probably one that no European would come up with :)
Post a Comment