22 Comments
User's avatar
Benjamin W's avatar

It's amazing what happens when the GOAL is to prove that climate change is making storms worse. Or what happens with any scientific endeavor that is plagued with bias and the seeking of certain results. These clowns are "peeking at the double slit experiment" when it comes to climate science, and then giving us bogus conclusions about the nature of reality.

Expand full comment
Paul Cassidy's avatar

“A stochastic model built on 10,000 data points. That sounds statistically useful. Tell me more; where did you get your data points?”

“Er, well we only have limited historical data measurements so we simulated the data.”

“Simulated? So your model isn’t actually built on data?”

“Well, that’s a harsh way of putting it. We’ve built a very sophisticated model based on how we believe climate systems work to simulate what the actual historic data points would have been if they’d had the equipment to measure them at the time. All our modellers have PhDs and are super clever. So that’s all fine.”

“So what you’re saying is that you’ve built a stochastic model using respected statistical methodology but populated it with data constructed with your theory of how things work so that your stochastic model can make statistically informed predictions? Doesn’t that sound a bit statistically unsound?”

“Climate change denier!”

Expand full comment
Jaime Jessop's avatar

LOL. But very accurate probably.

Expand full comment
JAS's avatar

Brill Jaime. Thanks. You inspired some fascinating comments to boot.

Expand full comment
AYRE DAVID's avatar

You mustn't let the facts spoil a good story!!!

Expand full comment
Jaime Jessop's avatar

I'm all for ripping good yarns and enchanting fairy tales, even scary ones, but this is a rubbish story! The facts are much more interesting.

Expand full comment
Douglas Brodie's avatar

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis gave a great off-the-cuff put-down and hurricane history lesson to a reporter who tried to tie the Milton tornadoes to “climate change”: https://x.com/CurtisHouck/status/1844422985182060693.

Expand full comment
AYRE DAVID's avatar

Nice to hear someone talking sense.

Expand full comment
Gary Sharpe's avatar

High solar activity combined with a weakening Earth's electrical field due to a pole shift not only explains Milton better, it also predicted it. It is no co-incidence that we are seeing the Northern Lights at record low latitudes at the same time as we are seeing record breaking hurricanes. The science on this is very robust and the physics of the mechanisms well understood and predictive (feedback with the global electric circuit) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_e8KWnmARY. This physics is missing from all climate models.

Expand full comment
David Walker's avatar

Well, as I always say, if you can't dazzle 'em with science.baffle 'em with bullshit!

Expand full comment
CraigM350's avatar

42 years = 1982 so completely misses the previos decades when Florida was repeatedly smashed by hurricanes

"In the period between 1900 and 1949, 108 tropical cyclones affected the state, which collectively resulted in about $4.5 billion (2017 dollars) in damage. Additionally, tropical cyclones in Florida were directly responsible for about 3,500 fatalities during the period, most of which were from the 1928 Okeechobee hurricane. The 1947 season was the year with the most tropical cyclones affecting the state, with a total of six systems. The 1905, 1908, 1913, 1927, 1931, 1942, and 1943 seasons were the only years during the period in which a storm did not affect the state.

The strongest hurricane to hit the state during the period was the 1935 Labor Day hurricane, which is the strongest hurricane on record to strike the United States.[8] Several other major hurricanes struck the state during the period, including the 1926 Miami hurricane, the 1928 Okeechobee hurricane, and several Category 4 hurricanes in the period 1945–50." Wiki

As they seem to like models of dubious quality I asked Brave AI for the meaning of 'lying by omission'...

"Lying by Omission Meaning

Lying by omission refers to the act of deliberately withholding or omitting crucial information to misrepresent the truth. This type of deception involves failing to provide essential details, rather than directly stating a falsehood. The intention is to create a misleading impression or foster a misconception.

Verbal Cues

When people lie by omission, they may exhibit certain verbal cues, such as:

Avoiding certain topics or questions

Focusing on minor details while ignoring significant facts

Providing vague or incomplete information

Using ambiguous language to conceal the truth

Changing the subject or diverting attention away from important issues"

So, in other words, Dr. Fr.otto and your thieving WWA cohorts my single model shows that it is highly likely you are a lying sack of shit. Further, consulting the model of my own opinion shows that your entire existence is one big honking on the public teet. A high effluent scenario had you on Only Fans.

Expand full comment
browntsunami's avatar

Interesting that IRIS is the brain child of Imperial College London. I wonder if there was significant cross contamination from the people who did such a stellar job predicting the Covid results early during the plandemic? I wonder if they realize the great harm to the reputation of statistical inference and modelling they are achieving. However, I surmise, they probably are only interested in stroking the bias of the day of their mega donors.

Expand full comment
Douglas Brodie's avatar

Re. climate change and wind power in general rather than hurricanes, I note that Miliband has just appointed eight “clean power commissioners” to help accelerate grid decarbonisation by 2030: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/energy-experts-appointed-to-deliver-clean-power-2030-mission.

One of the names which stood out for me was Professor Robert Gross of Imperial College London!

He featured in an article I wrote about 20 years ago (unfortunately the links in it no longer work) where he peddled the now-discredited mantra that “the wind in always blowing somewhere”. I noted at the time that he had research funding from the British Wind Energy Association, the Carbon Trust and Greenpeace.

To repeat my line (actually Yogi Berra’s line) “it’s déjà vu all over again”, Miliband is recycling all the mad climate change ideas and propagandists we thought we had shot down in flames 20 years ago.

Expand full comment
Jaime Jessop's avatar

They've packed the jury.

Expand full comment
Lapun Ozymandias's avatar

Yes, my thoughts also, browntsunami. The moment I saw that the operatives of Imperial College had their fingers in the stinking pie of falsehood that is continuously spewed out by the protagonists of the Anthropogenic Climate Change doom cult (and their money-grubbing, rent-seeking, ‘renewables’ investors), it became obvious that whatever Peter Bergen had to say in his transparently ridiculous CNN article, it would be a farrago of fabrication and fakery that contradicted the inconvenient facts of real empirical science.

The clique that runs Imperial College London has considerable form in fear mongering – on a grand scale. They and their predictive epidemiological ‘models’ of catastrophe have got things wrong in a big way, time-and-time again. It was they who provided the cooked-up $cientific basis for the Covid fear campaign to justify the British Government’s catastrophic Covid policies in 2020 to carry out the mass inoculation of the U.K. population with the hastily developed novel mRNA genetic injectables. All the evidence points to the fact that it was these mRNA injectables that triggered the surge in the rate of excess death and injury following their administration. The people who run Imperial College need to be investigated – if not for corruption, then at least for gross incompetence.

It is worth reading the article on this subject published in the British Spectator magazine on the 16 April 2020. It touches on the history of incompetence and opacity of Imperial College over many years in ‘modelling’ health related crises. This article is just the tip of the iceberg of scientific criticism of Imperial College. Its link is:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/six-questions-that-neil-ferguson-should-be-asked/

Expand full comment
browntsunami's avatar

Thanks. I will read the article. I am not sure that they are incompetent, I think that they have accurately read the times we live in and are capitalizing on the lucrative job of providing the slogans for our respective ministries of truth. Being purveyors of Orwellian double speak is their true genius. These are not scientists, they are opportunists using the facade of science to gain extra table scraps from their elitist masters. The sad thing is , they will bring down the real falsifiable science with their brand of voodoo, and, bring in another dark age of scientism.

Expand full comment
Jaime Jessop's avatar

Yes, Chinese funded Imperial does seem to be very active in promoting decidedly dodgy pandemic modelling as well as dodgy climate and weather modelling.

Expand full comment
Sifu Dai's avatar

OMG, she dares to speak the quiet part out loud ;)

So on top of it, never a dull moment when checking in...

Expand full comment
CraigM350's avatar

*inserts astronaut "Always has been" meme*

Expand full comment
Mystic William's avatar

My friend’s house was destroyed by Milton. No rain. Very little at any rate. All wind.

Expand full comment
Jaime Jessop's avatar

Sorry to hear that. I'm sure it's of little consolation to them to learn that it was weather which was responsible, not their SUV or gas furnace.

Expand full comment
Mystic William's avatar

I will run that past them.

Expand full comment