The Jaw-Dropping Stats from Hurricane Irma

[oldschoolto]

Yes, Warmer water adds to the storms size and power... As do other things.. So why are there years without big storms if it's only the Warmer water from AGW..

When I heat a piece of steel to a temperature , it acts the same way every time... When I set a fuel / air mixture it makes the same power every time..

It looks like the AGW only works sometimes... Just like the storms before all the man made CO2...

Jim...

 

[oldschoolto]

Did you ever get the bad taste of saying "The earth is flat!" out of your mouth? Science postulates, the deniers deny, and a century later they accept facts as just that. In the meantime, science has postulated more stuff that violates their religious or political agendas and they deny that too. It's a vicious circle, but science doesn't care if you believe it or not. It just wants to figure things out.

Science is facts that are repeatable.. AGW can't get it right ... They just keep changing the data and the name..

Jim..

 

[The Chairman]

So why are there years without big storms

So, you understand that warmer water means bigger storms, but you want to oversimplify things. Warmer water isn't the only vector to affect a storm and no scientist has claimed as such. Many factors can mitigate a storm's ferocity. That doesn't mean that warmer waters aren't a concern.

Science can be incredibly messy. Weather prediction is probably the messiest science can get. It used to be that meteorologists were right only half the time. However, their powers of prediction have improved tremendously because they keep studying. When they tell me that the climate (not just the weather) is changing and getting hotter, I have no reason not to believe them. Meteorologists aren't running for office. They aren't trying help big oil/coal/whatever in their assessment. Their agenda is knowledge and understanding. Trying to ascribe nefarious intent to these scientists tells us more about the accuser than the scientists.

Science is facts that are repeatable

Another oversimplification. We can't recreate T-Rex, so does that invalidate paleontology? We can't fire off Vesuvius again, so does that invalidate vulcanology?

 

[Skeptic14]

Science has its flaws, sure. But science is inherently self-correcting, and scientists respect data and evidence above everything.

The scientific process is why we have the technology and understanding of the world that we do, it isn't flawed, people are.

Most of the time it is true, that scientist respect the data, but not always. Sometimes people fight the data because of bias and sometimes it is just wrong or not really data, like cherry picking a singular event and drawing erroneous conclusions, of course sometimes it isn't scientist producing the misrepresentations.

The link @kelemvor provided in the other running climate change thread is a great example of what you are referring; scientist noticing a major issue with calculations on carbon budgeting and modeling and wanting to investigate what is driving such a large discrepancy.

 

[KenGordon]

The link @kelemvor provided in the other running climate change thread is a great example of what you are referring; scientist noticing a major issue with calculations on carbon budgeting and modeling and wanting to investigate what is driving such a large discrepancy.

But he quotes the link selectively to support his preconceptions.

 

[Joneill]

We can't fire off Vesuvius again, so does that invalidate vulcanology?

I guess you'd need to check with Mr. Spock on that one..
Edit - my bad. Your alternate spelling is actually accurate. I learned something new .

 

[Skeptic14]

@KenGordon I didn't see it that way since he provided the original link.

What I took from the article was

1) climatologist recognizing a discrepancy and wanting to understand it and not ignore it.
2) a demonstration of how climate modeling is difficult and how using the same data could produce vastly different results.

 

[The Chairman]

I guess you'd need to check with Mr. Spock on that one..
Edit - my bad. Your alternate spelling is actually accurate. I learned something new .

It's OK, my mother was an English teacher... I mean an English, English teacher. There's a lot of British in my vocabulary, and I often spell things "their" way.

 

[chrisch]

...We can't recreate T-Rex, so does that invalidate paleontology? ...

Now now. You know that dinosaurs are not Kosher. All those fossil records come from Noah's flood.

 

[oldschoolto]

Now now. You know that dinosaurs are not Kosher. All those fossil records come from Noah's flood.

It's crap like this that shows your lack of a real response... Belittle the people that are questioning your "science".. All people like me are saying is "The science" of AGW is not fact but a guess at best... They wouldn't be needing to keep changing the subject line if it was settled..

Please, Just say that you don't have a big enough set of data points and the weather is way to complex to put a handle on..

Jim...