Yesterday evening as we were waiting for the full onslaught of the biggest blizzard ever to hit Connecticut, the Huffington Post published an article that claimed that the enormous storm was the result of global warming. That's right, higher world temperatures are now blamed by global warming enthusiasts for extra snow. Of course, five years ago, the accepted wisdom in global warming circles was that snow would soon be a thing of the past for the USA.
Of course, overnight we got no blizzard. At my house (which was predicted to get between two and three feet of snow at one time) it looks like about 5 inches of snow fell at most. I assume that by this afternoon we will see articles explaining that the reason why the storm was not as big as expected is...you guessed it...global warming.
The truth is that the weather forecasters can't get it right on the day before or even a few hours before the weather event. These forecasters rely on computer models that are extremely sophisticated and have many years of data upon which to be based. Do we really believe that the computer models that predict global warming -- which have already been shown to be in error -- can possible predict the climate of the next century?
Of course, overnight we got no blizzard. At my house (which was predicted to get between two and three feet of snow at one time) it looks like about 5 inches of snow fell at most. I assume that by this afternoon we will see articles explaining that the reason why the storm was not as big as expected is...you guessed it...global warming.
The truth is that the weather forecasters can't get it right on the day before or even a few hours before the weather event. These forecasters rely on computer models that are extremely sophisticated and have many years of data upon which to be based. Do we really believe that the computer models that predict global warming -- which have already been shown to be in error -- can possible predict the climate of the next century?
No comments:
Post a Comment