After writing my jeremiad about the shamanism that goes by the name "meteorological science," I deleted the Accuweather app from my phone and resolved never to look at another long-term weather forecast again, except, maybe, the Chicago Weather Center Blog's. I would only rely on weather forecasts for the immediate future: 24 hours, maybe 48.
Consistent with my resolve, I checked the Saturday forecast yesterday morning at around 9:00 and saw that the weather folk were forecasting 35 and sunny on Saturday.
I then woke up this morning to two inches of snow.
The shamans couldn't tell "heavy snow" from "sun," just 18 hours ahead of time.
Frauds, the lot of them.
Are we relying on "meteorological science" to give us reliable information, and forecasting, about global warming? If so, consider me no longer agnostic about global warming, but rather a hard core atheist. Largely ignorant about the issues, granted, but still atheist on the fundamental grounds that the science on which it rests is patently unreliable.
I'm ignorant about the weather, but at least I admit it. The shamans not only think they understand it, they think they can forecast it . . . and not just ten days, but fifty years, into the future. Well, they can't even reliably forecast 18 hours into the future, so pardon me if I scoff at their 50-year forecasts.
Of course, if there are scientific disciplines involved in the global warming debate that aren't part of the meteorological shamanism, you can again paint me agnostic.
