Anton Ross
Weather Watcher
Reged:
Posts: 42
Loc: Downtown Beaufort Marina, SC
|
|
Just wanted to toss out my two cents from a journalist's (former) perspective on Achenbach's Global Warming "feature" Tempest.
He was really making a point about how there is no more intelligent discussion any more, and he hoped most readers would recognize that these skeptics (like Dr. Gray) are really nothing more than loopy misfits. I thought he made that point pretty clear.
I still don't like the fact that good science is being so politicized by any sides...science should be able to stand on its own.
OK - relevant content: Anyone on this list dealing with State Farm's insurance claims? It seems they are not your "good neighbor" and a Miss. Judge recently ruled that some State Farm policy exclusions are unenforceable. Expect to see repercussions throughout the SE and Texas because of this. We're still dealing with our own insurance issues from Hemione damage from 2 years ago. I hate insurance companies with a passion. We switched to USAA by the way.
--------------------
"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary.
-Albert Einstein
|
HanKFranK
User
Reged:
Posts: 1841
Loc: Graniteville, SC
|
|
i didn't take the achenbach piece the same way. he presented some of the ideas fronted by gray and his like as disheveled, or as sound bytes that don't stand up to scrutiny, or just as five cent answers to ten dollar questions. then again, the tack taken by opposing scientist and government entities that fund them, their contributions to the debate.. are just as shallow. what achenbach got to that rarely is presented are legitimate grievances with how the scientific community works--grant money=research=prescribed results. the results of climate change research are almost preordained. if they're less than stunning and groundbreaking (read: fodder for alarmism), then what is the point? when you take a method that is both highly proprietary, complex, and by nature erroneous as modeling the earth's climate system... and it gets sold as cause for massive economic and political changes, you're going to ruffle a few feathers. not that i'm quite as down on modelers. some sharp folks in that community.
of course, the results of the modeling are always different, just like modeling a few days worth of weather. but some scientists say it, the media likes alarming stories (and is usually quite cozy with the sociopolitical and economic agendas that go along with them)... so what's not to believe?
when you get down to it, track the money and political will on either side.. and you've got corporate interests on one side, and green socialism on the other. it wears down to a tiresome political debate; both sides have their minds concluded. nothing out of the ordinary.
i'm probably just as guilty. to me global warming is just something that is happening. human influence is inevitable, but i doubt we'll change the world more than it has changed in the past. and it is true.. a warmer world is a wetter world is a greener world. ice ages suck.
as for hurricanes getting stronger.. their strength and distribution may change some. but the historic record used in all that recent research is too short to mean squat. way too many biases and inconsistencies. just like climate models... too many missing/malfunctioning parts. pick a trend, pick a wiggle... extrapolate anything you want.
my mind is concluded thus far. nothing has been proven or disproven that can't be discredited. global warming is real, but is it something to wet yourself over? a lot of people may claim to know...
HF 0708z03june
|
Margie
Senior Storm Chaser
Reged:
Posts: 1191
Loc: Twin Cities
|
|
I think the science is going along pretty much like it would normally. I've seen this with medical science as well.
What happens is the media gets in the mix, and takes each intermediate research result and blows it up out of proportion ("There's a cure!" "No, more work to be done!") when it's clear that additional research needs to be done all along, and we're just not there yet. It's common along that process to have results that point to conclusions first in one direction, than another. But it really confuses the public.
What has happened here is that Gray has gotten more and more public and personal and hostile along the way, pulling everyone else along into the spotlight. Then, the 2005 hurricane season obliged with powerful landfalling storms, giving the media lots of headlines on the topic, and culminating with the Time magazine selection of Emanuel as one of it's Time 100. The rhetoric has really gotten out of hand, and if you go back and look at the past year, each time things were ramped up a bit, it can be traced back to personal insults Grey said in a media article or at a conference.
--------------------
Katrina's Surge: http://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/Katrinas_surge_contents.asp
|
poolwatcher
Verified CFHC User
Reged:
Posts: 13
|
|
I have State Farm. My home was destroyed in Hurricane Jeanne and State Farm was wonderful. All claims were paid in a speedy fashion, no red tape, no run around, ... I think success depends upon two things: Whether you buy the best policy, and whether you have a decent adjustor.
|
Psyber
Storm Tracker
Reged:
Posts: 237
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
|
The problem with Gray and some of the more "respected" people in his position is that their very word becomes people's bible that they read to every single person they talk to. They polarize people away from legitimate alternative possiblities and have a very nasty way of giving people tunnel vision.
To me, there are far too many people working on theories to prove that the current trends are all part of cycles when real science shows us places like Los Angeles and Beijing who are nothing more than mini versions of what the world could turn into if we continue unabated. Hell if you want to talk about insurance, doing things about global warming now might not be necessary(like that house insurance you bought last year before the summer in LA), but do you want to risk it?
A true epic of blindness is going on in china where the gobi desert moves 2 miles closer to Beijing every single year due to massive clearcutting and polution.
An article posted at Chinese Environmental Crisis really shows what can happen. Not just the crisis but how people can be shaped into thinking anything is beneficial with enough lobbying.
--------------------
The safest way to deal with a potential Hurricane hitting you...is to leave and just not be there at all.
|
Robert A
Verified CFHC User
Reged:
Posts: 12
Loc: Central Florida
|
|
I guess the biggest personal "problem" I have is that, whenever ANY place sets an "unexpected" record for a LOW temperature, the global warming advocates say, "See? This is SUPPOSED to happen!", while the non-advocates say, "See? We're seeing record LOWS, not record HIGHS!"
As if...ONE freaking day plays into billions of years!
Pretty simple, really:
1) We can't control it...unless, of course, we pay off the Japanese Mafia/Yakuza 
2) Whatever DOES happen, we have to roll with it
3) As the planet gets more and more populated, and as each country and continent and land mass does likewise...see #1
--------------------
Erin, Charley, Frances, Jeanne, plus several other TSs
|
HURRICANELONNY
Weather Guru
Reged:
Posts: 100
Loc: HOLLYWOOD,FL.
|
|
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_advisory/index.html
|
Robert A
Verified CFHC User
Reged:
Posts: 12
Loc: Central Florida
|
|
<<StILL NEUTRAL?>>
Yes. I can be sent to any number of links, sites and blogs, and I still come up with the same result: This planet is millions-to-billions of years old. A day here, a season there or an active hurricane season is hardly the "evidence" that would have me concluding that we can "control" global warming any more than we would be able to "control" global cooling...
--------------------
Erin, Charley, Frances, Jeanne, plus several other TSs
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
