Science Predicts an Eclipse. And More Global Warming. Believe Them.

August 19, 2017

New York Times:

When medicine delivered a wave of vaccines in the 20th century, doctors predicted that widespread use would cause childhood deaths from illnesses like whooping cough and diphtheria to fall. The public trusted the doctors, and those deaths plummeted.

So what predictions has climate science made, and have they come true?

The earliest, made by a Swede named Svante Arrhenius in 1897, was simply that the Earth would heat up in response to emissions. That has been proved: The global average temperature has risen more than 1 degree Celsius, or almost 2 degrees Fahrenheit, a substantial change for a whole planet.

By the 1960s and ’70s, climate scientists were making more detailed predictions. They said that as the surface of the Earth warmed, the temperature in the highest reaches of the atmosphere would fall. That is exactly what happened.

The scientists told us that the Arctic would warm especially fast. They told us to expect heavier rainstorms. They told us heat waves would soar. They told us that the oceans would rise. All of those things have come to pass.

Considering this most basic test of a scientific theory, the test of prediction, climate science has established its validity.

Advertisements

7 Responses to “Science Predicts an Eclipse. And More Global Warming. Believe Them.”

  1. dumboldguy Says:

    The Unhinged Orange Menace, Inhofe, Pruitt, et al, and all the so-called “skeptics”are not interested in “science” or “validity” or “truth”. They are ideologues and sellouts to the corporatocracy, plutocracy, and the fossil fuel interests. They deal in denial and lies,and the real disaster is that all too many of the WIFI’s suck up their BS and support them. Hard times ahead.

    • Tom Bates Says:

      You love to hate. Why not figure out a way to actually fix the world. Positive ideas from you could be very useful. Having been around this world a time or two and in a number of continents it is obvious , at least to me, the real problem is not climate, it is to many people who are using up the worlds resources at an increasing rate and trashing the place at the same time. India , for example, thinks that dumping the trash out the door in the street fixes the problem, Africa is the same. South America is the same. Picking up after yourself is a very limited cultural thing limited to some western cultures and a limited number of people in those cultures. Granted some others are getting the idea but it is going very slowly. Limiting population is unpopular all over the world even in China which thought up the one woman one child idea to save China from famine. Spending vast sums on climate which is changing makes you feel good but does not actually solve the pressing problems of pollution and world population.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Even the blind and retarded squirrel sometimes finds a nut. Yes, Tommy-Poo, too many humans trying to live at ever-increasing levels of consumption is a problem we are not dealing with adequately.

        BUT, if we allow CAGW to occur, that may solve the problem by killing off nearly all of us and most other living things on the planet. Throwing the trash out into the street is not the problem—burning fossil fuels is.

      • andrewfez Says:

        The cure to trash and cholera and other features of human waste are centrally planned social programs like a publicly built water and sewer system and housing codes (i.e. regulation) that require new construction to comply with certain standards.

        But your Cold-War, Powell Memorandum mentality – that of the older, conservative generation who thinks regulating industry leads down a slippery slope to communism – wouldn’t let these things happen would it? Best to just live in a libertarian paradise like Somalia than let the socialists take away the dysentery by taxing the oligarchs to build a sewer system.

  2. Tom Bates Says:

    You can say what you want about Trump and the rest. You cannot say what this headline suggests that lunar eclipse prediction and climate prediction are the same. Lunar eclipse prediction rest on actual data know to very high precision. Even than when you go out say 100,000 years the errors start to creep in and the prediction becomes less accurate.

    In contrast the climate model,are at best educated guesses based on very limited data over very limited time. None of the modes for example are able to predict future solar output changes so they assume constant solar input. None take into account past data of the last few thousand years, most have at most 100 years of data in the model. None take into account changes in earths orbit or tilt which per NASA are warming the world from what it was in the depths of the little ice age 400 years ago. None take into account research showing actual solar output has been increasing for at least 100 years. A whole lot use data less than 50 to 60 years old. Every single model over estimates actual warming.

    To add to the prediction uncertainties , the adjustments to the data is constant. That means the actual numbers keep changing put into the models.

    Since it is a free country you can put your life and that of your children in the hands of people who are essentially modern day witch doctors but I will not Instead I simply looked at the data itself and found the whole man is warming the planet to a significant degree to be nonsense.

    Feel free to google the data yourself, here is one sample https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/styles/large/public/2016-07/temperature-download1-2016.png
    You notice no significant change for 90 plus years than about a 0.5F tick upward which corresponds with two very strong El Ninos. You may also notice to make the post 1979 numbers look to the eye as higher they dumped the RSS and UAH data on top of the Giss data. You may also notice they left out the Star data which shows a decline. For the adjustment changes, they also used the RSS and UAH latest adjustment done by another study which removed the essentially no rise for the last 18 years, an adjustment not actually found at the RSS and UAH sites.

    • dumboldguy Says:

      JFC! Speak of the WIFI’s (Willfully Ignorant Functional Illiterates), and BATES makes his entry. Once again posting that “graft” of temperature ANOMALIES for ONLY the contiguous 48 states and trying to make something of it with relation to GLOBAL warming. He can’t be that stupid, can he?

      • Gingerbaker Says:

        Yes, yes… he can.

        He CAN be that stupid. Which makes sense because he WAS that stupid, despite dozens of comments trying to edify him. And he has stayed that stupid yea these many long years.

        Which suggests to us that he WILL be just as stupid in future. Which provides a small but comfortable pleasure.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: