Friday, August 03, 2007

I sense a great disturbance in your methodology.

Apparently, weather satellites measured a million zillion google times more tropical storms in the Atlantic in 2006 than they did in 1901.

*blink* *blink*

No kidding?
Posted by @
Labels: ,

6 comments:

theirritablearchitect said...

Don't we all.

Kinda like the whole cancer thing too. Detection has gone from near zero to being able to find it before it even has a chance to get established. 1 in 3 people will be diagnosed with cancer, according to current figures. I actually believe this. Was it the same 100, or even 1000 years ago? Who can say for sure, but my guess is that the rates were probably similar.

*shrug*

Stupidity seems to have lept into the "contagious" category as well.

10:08 AM, August 03, 2007
SpeakerTweaker said...

You know, I think the number of dumbasses in the world has increased exponentially in the last hundred years, too.

I wonder, did they have the same uber-hardcore holy crap detection equipment back then that we have now?

Is is even remotely possible that there were storms out in the middle of the *&!&# ocean/gulf that the Doppler Radar v.1905 radar just flat couldn't see?

Call me cynical...

10:20 AM, August 03, 2007
Mr. Fixit said...

Ah haaa haaa haaaa!

"Human induced global warming"

They lost me at that.

Mr FIxit

11:16 AM, August 03, 2007
Anonymous said...

I liked this part:

The increases coincided with rising sea surface temperature, largely the byproduct of human-induced climate warming, researchers Greg J. Holland and Peter J. Webster concluded.

If global warming is continuing unabated, then why is sea surface temperature decreasing? And, along with it, the number of storms observed in 2006, and the number of storms forecast for 2007? Sloppy science indeed.

Using global warming in grant proposals has been used to help secure funding for at least 15 years now, but if the CNN report is anything close to an honest reporting of the content of the paper, I'm surprised they got it published at all. It's more worthy of press release science than a peer reviewed journal. But, I don't know diddly about Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, it may not be peer reviewed.

dc

4:16 PM, August 03, 2007
Anonymous said...

Lions, tigers, and bears...oh no!

Mike

7:48 AM, August 05, 2007
RobC said...

And based on this I conclude that there were less flu virii in 1901 as well... I mean we could not see them either back then... :-)

4:38 PM, August 07, 2007

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)