Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Dunedan
Very true.
However, when someone says "This Event (X) is GOING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE OF FACTOR-1!"
And then Event X -doesn't- happen...
And that someone (or those someones) then say "This Event (Z) HAPPENED BECAUSE OF FACTOR-1!"...
...and Event X and Event Z are polar opposites...
...it does say a lot about the person/people making the predictions. It -says- that they are capable neither of admitting error nor explaining it, and it suggests rather strongly that they are snake-oil-selling charlatans.
|
One of the main effects of global climate change is the increasing variability and unpredictability in local weather conditions and patterns. Weather effects get more radical (ie. utterly unprecedented snowfall levels where you and I each are, unusual heat and drought in other places, etc), and our predictions of them get further and further from the mark.
So it's not that the different outcome from the prediction is being spun as being caused by the same thing. It's that the unpredictability that GAVE the variation from the forecast is a believed result of global climate change. This is a subtle point, perhaps, but it explains something that's otherwise just a complete head-scratcher, as you point out.
On a slightly different topic, anybody else think it's ABSURD that we're discussing this in Tilted Politics? There's something seriously wrong when science and politics are so thoroughly collapsed the way they are in the US. IMO the proper relationship of the two is that science should be done entirely apolitically, and should be used to inform policy decisions by those who are elected to set policy. This might be a whole other thread though.