[VRWCmember]

I have been in operational meteorology since 1978, and I know dozens and dozens of broadcast meteorologists all over the country. Our big job: look at a large volume of raw data and come up with a public weather forecast for the next seven days.

Given the wide diversity between what meterologists project for a seven day forecast from the raw data and what the weather actually does in those seven days, I find it laughable that some of these so-called "scientists" think they can even estimate with any degree of accuracy what the weather was like centuries ago and what it is going to do over the next several years.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

Given the wide diversity between what meterologists project for a seven day forecast from the raw data and what the weather actually does in those seven days, I find it laughable that some of these so-called "scientists" think they can even estimate with any degree of accuracy what the weather was like centuries ago and what it is going to do over the next several years.

Past climate can be estimated from forensic information (tree rings, pollen in soil layers, et cetera). So that's actually pretty solid.

Future climate is something of a mystery, as predicting it depends on assumptions that may be overriden by reality at any moment.

[Keith in Iowa]

>>>Given the wide diversity between what meterologists project for a seven day forecast from the raw data and what the weather actually does in those seven days, I find it laughable that some of these so-called "scientists" think they can even estimate with any degree of accuracy what the weather was like centuries ago and what it is going to do over the next several years.<<<

Bingo. Makes me want to go back to school for a meteorology degree - one job where you can be wrong a lot, and still keep your job. :)