Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Something might be happening in the Pacific Ocean. We don't know what it is or what it means or what caused it or what might happen -- but just to be safe let's panic and blame it on global warming   (breitbart.com) divider line
12
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

1224 clicks; posted to Fandom » on 04 May 2006 at 2:49 AM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



12 Comments     (+0 »)
 
gerf
2006-05-03 11:24:58 PM  
You know it's coming: How can we blame Bush?
-Submarine sonar testing?
-Secret nuke testing?
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2006-05-03 11:55:52 PM  
I love junk science like this:

...something that could alter climate...

... It's not clear what climate changes might arise (wait for it)

or possibly beyond...

...the long-term effect might resemble some aspects of an El Nino event...

...the slowdown might reduce populations of tiny plants and animals...

... The slowdown was detected in shipboard and land-based data going back to the mid-1800s (yeah--back when global warming was really a problem)...

...It matches an effect predicted by computer climate simulations (oooh! computer SIMULATIONS! oooh!)...

...simulations that consider only natural influences fail to produce the observed slowdown (translation: the data wasn't scary enough as is so we tweaked it)

...the result lends more credibility to computer models that trace global warming to greenhouse gases (yes--amazingly, when they plugged made-up data into their simulation, it confirmed the other simulation they pulled out of their butts last week!)

Yeesh.
 
strangeguitar
2006-05-04 12:03:21 AM  
With a purposeful grimace and a terrible sound
He pulls the spitting high tension wires down

Helpless people on a subway train
Scream bug-eyed as he looks in on them

He picks up a bus and he throws it back down
As he wades through the buildings toward the center of town

Oh no, they say he's got to go
Go go godzilla, yeah
Oh no, there goes tokyo
Go go godzilla, yeah!!!
 
jay_vee
2006-05-04 12:08:24 AM  
The CraneMeister:- You REALLY need to read up on computer modelling.
 
Sandrob57
2006-05-04 1:15:51 AM  
headline made me smile
 
Bundyman
2006-05-04 3:34:03 AM  
jay_vee:

When they can't tell me what the weather is going to be 5 days from now with more than about 50% accuracy then I have to agree with people like Crane.

/Garbage in, garbage out
 
captainktainer
2006-05-04 10:11:06 AM  
Bundyman: When they can't tell me what the weather is going to be 5 days from now with more than about 50% accuracy then I have to agree with people like Crane.

Long-term weather forecasting is more accurate than short term, as it is with most systems governed by chaos theory. You apply statistical trends; while at any given moment there might be a departure from the trend, as in over the next five days, over the long term you get better results. That's why they can tell you if it'll be an el Nino (pardon lack of tilde) year and other such things.
 
mongbiohazard
2006-05-04 12:31:10 PM  
captainktainer: That's why they can tell you if it'll be an el Nino (pardon lack of tilde) year and other such things.

Actually I thought that they could tell it was an El Nino year because El Nino is a cyclical pattern, and then observations are made to verify the cycle to cycle variations... Big climate patterns like that are fairly cyclical, so they know what to look for around certain times...

I have not yet heard anything that gives me any kind of faith in computer climate modelling. It seems to me that there are simply too many variables, too many minuteau and unknowns, for something like that to be accurate with our current level of technology.

Maybe I'm wrong... but maybe there are a lot of people's grants on the line who depend on the impression that what they are doing is usefull and accurate, whether or not it actually is. Just because the word "computer" is thrown in there doesn't mean that these methods are reliable... "GIGO" as they say...
 
Jon Snow
2006-05-04 1:10:03 PM  
The CraneMeister: The slowdown was detected in shipboard and land-based data going back to the mid-1800s (yeah--back when global warming was really a problem)...


The data goes back to the mid-1800s, not the slowdown itself- i.e. looking back on data from the present to the mid-1800s, you can see a slowdown.
 
jeremytodd
2006-05-04 2:42:49 PM  
Bundyman: When they can't tell me what the weather is going to be 5 days from now with more than about 50% accuracy then I have to agree with people like Crane.

Flip a coin a thousand times. I won't be able to tell you very accurately what the next flip will be, but i bet at the end there will be about 500 heads and 500 tails.
 
jake3988 [OhFark]
2006-05-04 7:18:40 PM  
Very good submitter. That's what I think everyday.
 
MacGabhain
2006-05-05 2:50:13 AM  
CraneMeister:
Care to give us your background in anything related to the hard sciences or computer simulations?
What's that? You remember hearing something about them from Rush and seem to recall it wasn't complimentary?

Thought so.
 
Displayed 12 of 12 comments


Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

Come check out what's behind the curtain.

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.