Posted on 05/20/2020 9:56:15 AM PDT by grundle
Oh, heck yeah. Admittedly when I first learned FORTH I tried to recreate all sorts of familiar APL and Lisp idiom, lots of fun, but eventually I grokked the beauty of the scratchpad vernacular. In the early 80's I bought an original IBM PC and sprang for an LMI FORTH cross compiler. Between FORTH and the DOS disassembler (which would also assemble, heheh) I had a marvelous time discovering 8088 bugs.
To this day I kick myself for not taking that FORTH programming job at NRAO in '82...
Wow. What a touchy insecure little weatherman.
How does it feel to be wrong so much.? To intentionally panic people with hysteria?
Feels good that you can’t be fired for being wrong like the rest of us huh?
All your fancy equipment & you can’t tell me the weather for anywhere on the planet with accuracy after today can you?
No. You can’t. Your equipment’s guess is as good as mine, little weatherman.
And why is it called the Cone of UNCERTAINTY”? Aren’t you brainiacs cable of pinpointing exactly where when & extent of damage for hurricanes? No.
Can you predict the exact path of a tornado? No? Shame on you.
The precise next outbreak of wildfires? No.
Pretty useless.
Humans with agendas create computer models.
Goodbye Nelson.
Have fun in your world, where not a single fully trained meteorologist “scientist” can predict the weather accurately. They said it would rain here yesterday. It did not.
All that fancy expensive equipment wasted.
Blaming the miscalculation on Fortran is as specious as the claim that COVID-19 originated in the Wuhan wet market. This is another example of a MSM narrative that grows more unbelievable by the day.
FORTRAN is still used quite extensively for serious number-crunching. For instance,
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Linear_Algebra_Subprograms
LOL
Another stupid statement said in ignorance (that I would expect from someone in southern Louisiana). If, in the case of weather, the agenda was accurately trying to predict it - then - yeah - you got us.
Goodbye Karen.
Not all of them.
I'd say that most want to be able to figure out what the future may hold by looking at what the past has been like.
Just because the program results are not the same as what is evident right outside the window, it doesn't mean that any skullduggery was involved.
I would bet that most programmers say; "Ooops!" (or something more colorful) and then gets back to tweaking up the algorithms once more.
FORTRAN is the basis of most numerical electromagnetic design. Most of your antenna designs and some of the semiconductors were researched using it, and when the algorithms are ported to other platforms and languages the results are the same.
Only a few places do real modeling based on probability and conjecture. Many use one type of system because they have investments in a code base. Many also use FORTRAN because experienced, seasoned, professionals know it best. It also has a lot of things coded that worked in other problems.
Blaming FORTRAN is like saying the house was made of pine and not oak, and thats why it burned down.
If the model is terrible the language implementing it doesn’t matter.
This is a poor article.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.