"ScienceDaily (Oct. 11, 2007) — NOAA forecasters are calling for
above-average temperatures over most of the country and a continuation of
drier-than-average conditions across already drought-stricken parts of the
Southwest and Southeast in its winter outlook for the United States"
With all their degrees, taxpayer funded equipment and salaries, the NOAA was no more reliable than the Farmers Almanac.
Turns out both were hilariously wrong.
"The U.S. winter of 2007-08 — which meteorologists classify as the months of December, January and February — will go down as the coldest since the winter of 2000-01, with a national average temperature of 33.2 degrees, NOAA reported Thursday."
But we're going to rearrange the world's economy and reduce liberty based on 20-100 year predictions of a climate that has millions of variables that we can barely understand, much less forecast or control. This will go down as the most expensive and deadly hoax in human history.
What is also puzzling is that the modelers thought that modeling 'global warming' may be inaccurate, so they proposed 'climate change'. But the fat is that 'global warming' is modeling the first derivative , and 'climate change' is modeling second derivative. If 'global warming' is difficult to model, then 'climate change' should even be more difficult to model. The data support 'climate change' much less than 'global warming'. This is an indication of the kind of manipulation the political scientists want to make.
ReplyDelete