Everyone wants to know the future. This interminable discovery that is the present requires constant vigilance and adaptation. How easy life would be with reliable foreshadowing! But, hmmnnn, in whom do we place our trust?
The best job—ever. Weather forecaster. You can be consistently wrong, and no one will hold you accountable. The reason? You put out another forecast while someone evaluates the veracity of your last forecast. And the disgruntled who have to put up umbrellas at picnics and Little League games have their immediate weather to consider. No one can keep up because everyone is immersed in the next forecast or the current weather. Everyone rides the promise of the forecast into a future of surprise that stimulates elation or resignation. Everyone wants to know the future.
An Admission
Prestigious institutes like the one that bears the name of 1918 Nobel Laureate Max Planck, to whom we owe thanks for quantum theory, house brilliant and respected researchers. Over the years, the Planck Institute has branched into sciences other than theoretical physics. Count “climate science” among them. Yes, the Institute’s researchers have joined Greta Thunberg, Al Gore, and John Kerry in tackling the “existential threat” of global warming. And why not? Haven’t they entered the ranks of the unaccountable, the protected realm of TV weather forecasters?
But these guys are scientists; and these guys seem to have some integrity cemented in the tradition of scientific doubt. Science is not science if it is not constantly questioned. And that doubt appears online at Max Planck-Gesellschaft. * In an admission you would likely never hear from Greta Thunberg, Al Gore, and John Kerry, the researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology admit:
“To date, all climate models still suffer from one thing: they are not good at taking into account how global warming affects clouds and, conversely, how changes in different types of clouds inhibit or contribute to the observed warming.” *
Yep, those puffy white aggregations of water droplets and ice crystals that harbor shifting shapes our mind’s eye imagines as we look up from our blanket on the grass have an unknown effect like a feedback loop on climate parameters. Add to the effect of clouds other unknowns, such as the change in albedo that comes with reforestation— a popular geo-engineering proposal—and you get a complexity that exceeds the potential of models to predict anything beyond a probable scenario for a region.
Give Them an “A” for Effort
Participation trophies aren’t just limited to American children’s sports teams. The climate guys get them, also, as all those annual COP meetings show. Anyway, here’s one of those forecasts that earns a participation trophy:
'Scientists have calculated how the water balance in Germany will change as the temperature rises. According to their predictions, it will rain more in winter, and there will be more droughts in summer.” **
Question: But will the winter rains offset the summer droughts? What will the evapotranspiration ledger reveal if this predicted scenario prevails for a few decades?
Partial answer: “Hamburg climate researchers [are motivated] to make the threat of global warming more tangible for people today. They are working on models that provide reliable predictions for the coming decades. Such medium-term forecasts are hindered by the fact that the climate is generally subject to relatively large statistical fluctuations. It is therefore difficult to reliably identify clear trends in the near future.” ***
Spend $Trillions
So, what are climate alarmists going to do? Well, Joe Biden and company plan to spend billions to trillions of dollars on every conceivable plan to geo-engineer the planet with little more predictability than your local weather forecaster’s warning that there’s a 50% chance rain will fall on your picnic.
*https://www.mpg.de/11863295/climate-and-transformation
**Ibid.
***Ibid.
The best job—ever. Weather forecaster. You can be consistently wrong, and no one will hold you accountable. The reason? You put out another forecast while someone evaluates the veracity of your last forecast. And the disgruntled who have to put up umbrellas at picnics and Little League games have their immediate weather to consider. No one can keep up because everyone is immersed in the next forecast or the current weather. Everyone rides the promise of the forecast into a future of surprise that stimulates elation or resignation. Everyone wants to know the future.
An Admission
Prestigious institutes like the one that bears the name of 1918 Nobel Laureate Max Planck, to whom we owe thanks for quantum theory, house brilliant and respected researchers. Over the years, the Planck Institute has branched into sciences other than theoretical physics. Count “climate science” among them. Yes, the Institute’s researchers have joined Greta Thunberg, Al Gore, and John Kerry in tackling the “existential threat” of global warming. And why not? Haven’t they entered the ranks of the unaccountable, the protected realm of TV weather forecasters?
But these guys are scientists; and these guys seem to have some integrity cemented in the tradition of scientific doubt. Science is not science if it is not constantly questioned. And that doubt appears online at Max Planck-Gesellschaft. * In an admission you would likely never hear from Greta Thunberg, Al Gore, and John Kerry, the researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology admit:
“To date, all climate models still suffer from one thing: they are not good at taking into account how global warming affects clouds and, conversely, how changes in different types of clouds inhibit or contribute to the observed warming.” *
Yep, those puffy white aggregations of water droplets and ice crystals that harbor shifting shapes our mind’s eye imagines as we look up from our blanket on the grass have an unknown effect like a feedback loop on climate parameters. Add to the effect of clouds other unknowns, such as the change in albedo that comes with reforestation— a popular geo-engineering proposal—and you get a complexity that exceeds the potential of models to predict anything beyond a probable scenario for a region.
Give Them an “A” for Effort
Participation trophies aren’t just limited to American children’s sports teams. The climate guys get them, also, as all those annual COP meetings show. Anyway, here’s one of those forecasts that earns a participation trophy:
'Scientists have calculated how the water balance in Germany will change as the temperature rises. According to their predictions, it will rain more in winter, and there will be more droughts in summer.” **
Question: But will the winter rains offset the summer droughts? What will the evapotranspiration ledger reveal if this predicted scenario prevails for a few decades?
Partial answer: “Hamburg climate researchers [are motivated] to make the threat of global warming more tangible for people today. They are working on models that provide reliable predictions for the coming decades. Such medium-term forecasts are hindered by the fact that the climate is generally subject to relatively large statistical fluctuations. It is therefore difficult to reliably identify clear trends in the near future.” ***
Spend $Trillions
So, what are climate alarmists going to do? Well, Joe Biden and company plan to spend billions to trillions of dollars on every conceivable plan to geo-engineer the planet with little more predictability than your local weather forecaster’s warning that there’s a 50% chance rain will fall on your picnic.
*https://www.mpg.de/11863295/climate-and-transformation
**Ibid.
***Ibid.
RSS Feed