Study: Megadroughts A Future Reality For Much Of Western United States. Allowing for a situation in which expert predictions are as correct as usual we can only suggest that you prepare for rain.
Study: Megadroughts A Future Reality For Much Of Western United States. Allowing for a situation in which expert predictions are as correct as usual we can only suggest that you prepare for rain.
This website uses cookies.
View Comments (15)
**** i believe this article, as well as many others since, ran after this periodical published their latest "findings" - http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/u-s-droughts-will-be-the-worst-in-1-000-years/
i saw the original article when it popped up on google news, which i happened to let sit live on one of my open browsers all day long. from that point on, various local papers picked up the story and changed it ever so (or not so) slightly, embellishing it with stuff that isn't even in the first article.
anyway, i love the part in the SA article where they claim that (among "other evidence") tree-ring readings indicate this coming drought will be much worse than the last major drought, having happened in the 12th or 13th centuries, per these readings. yep, tree-ring readings from the 12th or 13th centuries, my fellow IHTM peepsters. LOL. good thing those trees made it through that drought and lived all this time. luckily, they knew where to find these trees, too, in order to cut them down and read 'em.
"soil ring readings" might've been a wee bit more believable... but hey, sloppy journalism is all over the place these days.
From the article:
"The study is based on current increasing rate of rising emissions of carbon dioxide and complex simulations run by 17 different computer models, which generally agreed on the outcome, Cook said"
Translation, for those who may not understand Leftese"
"We will assume that the present rates will continue indefinitely into the future, despite all the evidence that rates of change of anything and everything have never remained unchanged at any time in recorded history,
"... and complex simulations ..." [Love that one. That's real sound science, isn't it? In other words, "we're really really smart, you're too stupid to understand anything, so just accept what we tell you"]
then we will make models based entirely on our personal biases, and throw out any possibilities that may prevent us from getting the result we already decided we want to get, enter the same data with minor insignificant alterations into 17 computer runs in order to get a 'consensus', and present the data as scientific fact to the scientifically illiterate news media who will parrot the headlines we wrote for them, regardless of whether the headlines remotely reflect the uncertainty levels of our 'studies' or not>"
"It's like, hey, at least we're not assuming that change will grow exponentially, every month, for the next 30,000 years."
All they care about is making you believe what their moneymaking agenda is all about, without you knowing it's all BS.
Another thought:
According to the linked article, there is better than an 80% chance of things drying out.
As I posted above, they can come up with anything they want if they select the input that will provide them with the desired answers. There will probably not be any peer review, except maybe by like-minded political hacks.
There is another step in the development of statistical probabilities. That is the development of a margin for error of your probability. If you have weak data on the input, or variable data, you can come up with an 80% probability, give or take 20%, or 40, or 60 (yes, that margin for error can take your answer above 100 or below 0%).
The problem with these characters' calculations is that they are taking events that do not have a reliable statistical history. The first thing that is missing altogether from history is a man-made increase in CO2. Secondly, if you go back in history to find a previous increase in CO2, it's not like a) you find dozens of them, or b) the data about them, or their existence at all is all that certain. So any result from such calculations is weak at best.
This is also known as the "Leftist logic circlejerk".
The southwest has been drying out for thousands of years. That's why the Anasazi were gone by the time Europeans arrived: you can't live in a cliff anymore when your water source is gone. Duh. This has nothing to do with Global Warming and CBS-Sacramento should be ashamed of itself.
"This has nothing to do with Global Warming and CBS-Sacramento should be ashamed of itself."
AGW/CC caused them to lose their scruples.
It is the CBS affiliate, and it is in Sacramento...self explanatory..This is the libturd capital of Kalifornia and the media is state run.
Down in the story it says there were megadroughts in the Southwest 1,000 years ago, but they were due to natural climate cycles, and thus were not as 'bad' as those coming up, which of course will be due to Global Warming. It does not explain how a drought caused by GW is worse than one which isn't.
Weather liar, weather liar, thermometer is on fire....You can go to one of those Fortune Tellers/Palm Readers on the corner that charge 20 bucks and get a more accurate weather forecast and the winning lotto numbers.
This is a guarantor of two things:
1) Anyone west of the Mississippi River should stock up on umbrellas, galoshes, and slickers.
2) The increase precipitation across the western U.S. will be blamed on anthropogenic global warming/climate change.
It's dry... AGW/CC! It's wet... AGW/CC! My neighbor's tree is blocking my view of the mountains... AGW/CC! My kid's autistic... AGW/CC! Apple stock dropped .25%... AGW/CC! Illegal aliens flocking across the border... AGW/CC!
It's dark at night… AGW/CC! It's sunny in the day… AGW/CC! It's cloudy… AGW/CC! It's cold in Winter… AGW/CC! It's warm in Summer… AGW/CC! I had a car accident… AGW/CC!
Anything happens anywhere, ever… AGW/CC!
Nailed it!
My dog did his business in the yard!! It's AGW/CC, I tells ya!