Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by Shelby, Oct 2, 2007.
about the wimpy hurricane season.
Oh well, we can always look forward to next year.
I think he means Al Gore.
And I thought he meant Al Roker::laughing:
I don't get it. Neither of these guys named Al are meteorologist. What does the hurricane season have to do with them? I can see a forecaster being upset by a missed forecast, but these two???
Hurricanes and Global Warming - Q&A: The Pew Center on Global Climate Change
Our Schizophrenic 2007 Atlantic Hurricane Season
(two fairly objective takes on the subject for those who are able to be so inclined)
(and below, quite another view)
Study: Global warming may diminish Atlantic hurricane activity - USATODAY.com
The meteorologists shouldn't be upset. They know that this storm phenomenon is not predictable. Even when conditions are favorable for hurricane formation none may form.
This year we have been spared from those storms in N.P.:fingersx:
Some of them do get quite upset when they "bust" on a forecast. I have read too much on some of the weather forums that are on the net. Yes, it's very unpredictable, but they still can't stand to miss a big forecast. Many weather enthusiasts/forecasters are also disappointed when the hurricane season is not really active. Even with the death and destruction hurricanes bring they still can't do without the excitement.
I'm with you Shelby, even if I'm not sure some of the other comments were in line with your humor. I'm a native of Florida, and there are actually some of us that celebrate the start of hurricane season. But we're not the stupid ones that stick around. We respect the elements enough that when they say go, we go. I know of a lot of people that feel this way. It's a true force of nature to have a tropical storm, or a level one or two hurricane blowing outside. And if you respect it truly, it can be awsome.
I thought it was about Al Dente
The classic denialist's Straw Man. Here Shelby is setting up the straw man that if Global Warming were true, we would have more hurricanes each year. Since this year's season was not particularly notable, the implication is that Global Warming is a bogus theory.
The dishonesty in the approach is that Shelby knows that the correlation is far more complex than that, and the yearly variations of the chaotic system is enough to mask the longterm effects if viewed over the short interval of a year or two.
Shelby knows this, but he is preying on the fact that others are not paying close enough attention to the nuances. That way those people won't notice that while climatologists master their science, Shelby is mastering the cheap innuendo.
Shelby's strawman also invokes the classic "appeal to ignorance" argument which is another hallmark of the science denialist. That works by pointing out an area where the application of a theory has not yet been completely worked out. By doing this, the denialist conflates the theory with the incomplete application, confusing his prey into doubting the theory.
In this case the "appeal to ignorance" is basically, "If climatologists are unclear about the correlation between hurricane activity and global warming, then they must be unclear about global warming." This is equivalent to "If medical science cannot cure all forms of cancer right now, all medical science must be bogus."
Fortunately, real scientists don't use "appeal to ignorance" as a form of rhetoric.
Oh I missed one. Its early in the morning.
The other device Shelby is using is a kind of oblique "ad hominem". By making his point all about Al Gore, he reinforces the ridiculous idea that Global Warming is Al Gore's theory. Since there is already an undercurrent of public disdain for Al Gore personally, it distracts people from the fact that Al Gore is only bringing a message from the overall worldwide scientific community.
If you can laugh at the image of Al's disappointment, you can laugh at Global Warming.
Then can someone show me a link or publication where Al Gore made a specific 2007 Atlantic hurricane season forecast?
NOAA did and its forecast so far hasn't proven all that great for 2007.
I've been a professional meteorologist for 25 years. I do take missed forecasts seriously because they usually represent learning opportunities for getting it right next time. But don't confuse the difference between climate forecasts and weather forecasts. They're not the same thing.
I think its a shame when storm chasers and other severe weather enthusiasts express disappointment at lack of mayhem and destruction. Its amateurish to do so. I've published storm damage reports following severe thunderstorms and floods as well as severe forest fires (my own meteorological specialty) and I always made the utmost effort to remain professional, objective and respectful when interviewing victims.
"the planet has a fever"
What about the hundreds of top scientist who are specialist in this subject who disagree?
Any contention that takes place outside the professional community, and that does not go through the rigorous peer reviewed analysis process is by definition completely suspect.
Any scientist who takes their contention directly to the public is also suspect by definition. Failing to do that, they demonstrate that they are either personally or professionally dishonest.
We would be disappointed if he did not, wouldn't we? It's what he does best. You notice, he hasn't posted in the thread again (at least not yet) but you know he's peeking in to see what kind of ire and hysteria he can whip up against those detestable liberals.
Oh thats funny.......LoL:tongue:
Isn't that basically what your scientist have done?
The only thing I'm saying is,any disagreement on this subject is not tolerated.exactly the same at colleges when conservative speakers are shouted down and not allowed to speak.
The Polar caps on Mars are erroding,Too many SUV's up there?