Now you're saying you CAN'T predict the future? Got it

aplcr0331

ConvenientHeuristic
Jan 3, 2011
563
81
78
Washington State
Scientists Worry over 'Bizarre' Trial for Failing to Predict Earthquake

Six Italian scientists and one government official are set to go to trial today in Italy (Sept. 20) on charges of manslaughter for not warning the public aggressively enough of an impending earthquake that killed more than 300 people in 2009.

While such a trial is unlikely on U.S. soil, experts say, American geologists and seismologists are watching closely, surprised at a legal system that would attempt to criminalize something as uncertain as earthquake prediction.

"Our ability to predict earthquake hazards is, frankly, lousy," said Seth Stein, a professor of Earth sciences at Northwestern University in Illinois. "Criminalizing something would only make sense if we really knew how to do this and someone did it wrong."

Henry Pollack, a professor of geology at the University of Michigan, echoed Stein's concerns.

"The whole thing seems bizarre to me," Pollack told LiveScience.


I'd like to see how adamant climate scientist are when their predictions are subject to lawsuit. Classic.
 
climate models are legitimate and useful tools. the problem lies in confusing computer projections with real data. or worse yet, believing the models over actual data.
 
We SHOULD be more like Europe... Interesting..

IanC:

I'm appalled every day at the models I use in my profession. I'm supposed to design stuff using "a tool" instead of honest spec sheets and parametric curves. The models HIDE the actual mechanics and physics and often assume a credibility status that they simply don't deserve. I don't want my designs based on "typicals". I have to know how all the parameters are actually distributed and what their dependencies actually are...
 
This is going to have HUGE implications in the scientific community. We're moving backwards here.....
 
We SHOULD be more like Europe... Interesting..

IanC:

I'm appalled every day at the models I use in my profession. I'm supposed to design stuff using "a tool" instead of honest spec sheets and parametric curves. The models HIDE the actual mechanics and physics and often assume a credibility status that they simply don't deserve. I don't want my designs based on "typicals". I have to know how all the parameters are actually distributed and what their dependencies actually are...

Feynman is my hero. I remember how he spanked NASA for their unrealistic modelling of risk. and his commencement address at (Caltech?) on how to be a good scientist. he would not have much good to say about the science and politics being presented by mainstream climate scientists today.
 
This is going to have HUGE implications in the scientific community. We're moving backwards here.....

I didnt actually read the link but it does seem insane to litigate against being able to predict earthquakes. on this side of the world people will compare that to trying to release Mann's emails.
 
Sure I can predict the future.
the economy will suck for the next decade.
Republicans will blame democrats and democrats will blame republicans.
Politicians will promise the moon to get elected and then renig.

And doomers will continue to predict that the end is near.
 
Last edited:
"Predicting the future" depends on what, specifically, one is trying to predict. I can predict that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow morning. I cannot predict whether, when I flip a coin, it will come up heads or tails.

And this thread is stupid, and so is the Italian government.
 
Sure I can predict the future.
the economy will suck for the next decade.
Republicans will blame democrats and democrats will blame republicans.
Politicians will promise the moon to get elected and then renig.

And doomers will continue to predict that the end is near.

I cant imagine any scenario where you could be less than 75 percent correct. hahaha.
 
anti-science bullshit? like NASA speculating that aliens might attack becaouse of rising concentrations of the trace gas CO2? hahaha. or that CAGW is 'consistent with' any change of anything at anytime?
 
then maybe you should stop spreading lies about climate sicence

Really? Provide us EVIDENCE that the predictions of the future made by warmers is even scientific? I mean they can not explain the fact that since 1998 there has been no warming of any perceivable amount. They can not explain what is causing what warming did occur and they have not provided a single repeatable test that explains any of their claims to date.
 

Forum List

Back
Top