L.A.'s Ironic Contribution to the Global Warming Debate
Here in Los Angeles, we’ve been battered by uncharacteristically heavy rain since the end of last week and the trend shows no signs of abating anytime soon. Though our rainfall totals are paltry when compared to other parts of the nation, they can be catastrophic because of the potential for mudslides, especially in areas that have recently been ravaged by wildfires (the entire state is basically the Universal Studios back lot tour).
What’s interesting about this development – particularly in light of the ongoing climate change debate – is how much it caught our meteorological establishment off-guard. As the Los Angeles Times reports:
For a region often ridiculed for the sameness of its weather, Los Angeles can point to 2010 as proof that it, too, deals with the extremes of Mother Nature.
It was substantially cooler than average this spring and summer. Then in late September, Los Angeles registered its hottest day ever recorded. Now, Southern California is in the throes of a rainstorm that could result in its wettest December on record.
The sharp changes have even veteran forecasters scratching their heads and searching for answers. Many forecasters had predicted the region would have a dryer than normal winter."Just when you think you have Mother Nature figured out, she sticks a finger in your eye," Bill Patzert, a climatologist for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
The irony – particularly given that so much of the modern environmental moment is based out of Southern California – couldn’t be richer.
I don’t pretend to possess a level of scientific acumen that makes me qualified to render judgment on the fundamentals of climate change. What I do possess, however, is an inherent skepticism of the human capacity to understand any complex system not of our own making. And when the predictions of our best scientists (the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, for crying out loud!) are upended by the empirical results, that skepticism is reaffirmed.
The broader global warming debate relies on a cascading series of supposedly sacrosanct assumptions. First, that the phenomenon is real. Second, that its effects will be calamitous. Third, that it is within the capacity of collective action to obviate, or at least ameliorate, those effects. And fourth, that government will be able to sufficiently carry out that charge. That’s an awful lot of epistemic freight to carry when we can’t figure out whether or not it is going to rain in Los Angeles.
- Comment (6)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments :
May '10
Re: L.A.'s Ironic Contribution to the Global Warming Debate
A "dryer than normal winter" turns into the wettest December on record. To be fair, they were only off by a few inches. Still, this omen of gathering gloom could only mean one thing: Global warming. (Cue ominous music.)
Be forewarned. This is only Day Three. Is it mere coincidence the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is commonly called “NOAA”? Breaking news. I've feverishly labored to complete a magnificent vessel, a seaworthy schooner measuring three hundred by fifty by thirty cubits. I'm rounding up two of every species (except poodles) - just in case. I've warned Al Gore to divest his real estate holdings of the Fisherman's Wharf property. And I've wagered my life savings on Carbon Credit Futures.
Yea, though I toil in vain, I fear thy anthropogenic global wrath which man hath wrought. And after the Great Flood, Part Deux, I dread the coming pestilence and plagues of locusts, boils, frogs, flies and especially liberal Congressmen who insist that manmade global warming is a serious threat to the world. Puleeease!
May '10
Re: L.A.'s Ironic Contribution to the Global Warming Debate
My father and I were discussing this today... Christmas is approaching, and here in the DC area they are predicting snow on Christmas day. I called him to ask what the most recent forecast was, and he said it was too soon to tell. He even pointed out that the people at NOAA (members of the AGW cabal) were saying that this storm could be rain, snow flurries or 6-12 inches of snow. They went as far as to say that any forecast more than three days before the event would not be accurate.
I began to wonder and I asked my father, "If they can't tell me how much snow to expect six days from now, how do they know what the temperature will be in 2100 and how high the sea level will be as a result?"
Of course I know the answer... They have no idea!
They are such pompous... The code of conduct prevents me from finishing.
Jun '10
Re: L.A.'s Ironic Contribution to the Global Warming Debate
John, John, John, surely you've heard the lib argument that climate and weather are unrelated. Despite the weather, the climate is the real problem. How silly you are.
Anyway, by definition, climate is "the average course or condition of the weather at a place usually over a period of years as exhibited by temperature, wind velocity, and precipitation." (courtesy Merriam-Webster), i.e. a trend or super-set of weather and thus a more complex entity.
Now, if weather is easier to predict, yet still difficult to forecast accurately, wouldn't climate or the trend of weather be even more difficult, statistically, to predict?
Regardless, the AGW people are still sticking with the climate thing and still sticking to their guns that, overall, the year was hotter than many other years. I don't suspect that their failure to predict weather will deter them.
Nov '10
Re: L.A.'s Ironic Contribution to the Global Warming Debate
Troy Senik ·What I do possess, however, is an inherent skepticism of the human capacity to understand any complex system not of our own making. And when the predictions of our best scientists (the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, for crying out loud!) are upended by the empirical results, that skepticism is reaffirmed.
The broader global warming debate relies on a cascading series of supposedly sacrosanct assumptions.
That is an brilliant statement of the position that EVERY sane person should take in this continuing episode of mass hysteria. It is amazing to me how far this Chicken Little business has penetrated into the public consciousness. Paul Josef Goebbels would be proud of the work Brother Al has done.
May '10
Re: L.A.'s Ironic Contribution to the Global Warming Debate
Well, Mr. Corbyn, who has the best forecasting record over in the UK promises us that we are into the newest little ice age.
Obviously, we need to burn a lot more coal to have a chance to stave this off.
Re: L.A.'s Ironic Contribution to the Global Warming Debate
Dear readers, it seems to me that the Democratic position on science is analogous to the (erstwhile?) Republican position on spending: there's nothing to worry about as long as our guys are in charge.
The next time that Barbara Boxer or one of her ilk trots out the "party of science, fact, and reason" trope, I'd like to see a GOP member read the following passage into the congressional record:
"In so far as a scientific statement speaks about reality, it must be falsifiable; and in so far as it is not falsifiable, it does not speak about reality." -- Karl Popper
Edited on Dec 21, 2010 at 8:54pm