Slowest start to Atlantic hurricane season…

[jakee 1,489]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

No

Ah good, I’m glad this exchange has helped you learn something since you very specifically claimed that it did.

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

but a month+ without one during peak season in a year predicted to be very active just might. Don’t you think?

I don’t know. Is it unusual?

[kallend 2,026]

23 hours ago, jakee said:

Ah good, I’m glad this exchange has helped you learn something since you very specifically claimed that it did.

I don’t know. Is it unusual?

Probably need a t-test to figure that out.

[tkhayes 348]

On 9/4/2024 at 9:26 AM, brenthutch said:

No but a month+ without one during peak season in a year predicted to be very active just might. Don’t you think?

What does that falsify?  Your words.... what is falsified?

[kallend 2,026]

Looking at the prediction from the other direction, there is a 15% chance that it won't be an above average season in activity.  If that seems too low even to be considered, who would make a skydive in which there is a mere 15% chance of not surviving the jump?

 

Tell your tandem students that 15 out of every 100 students will go home in a box, how would your business work out? 

Edited September 5, 2024 by kallend

[SkyDekker 1,465]

5 hours ago, kallend said:

Probably need a t-test to figure that out.

My testosterone is fine, thank you very much.

[winsor 236]

2 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

My testosterone is fine, thank you very much.

 

2 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

My testosterone is fine, thank you very much.

I think he meant a Student T test, but I assume you knew that.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

17 hours ago, winsor said:

I think he meant a Student T test, but I assume you knew that.

If he did it would be Student's t-test, but I assume you knew that.

It should be Gosset's t-test, but a certain beer brewery in Ireland got in the way of that.

Anyways it was clearly, or maybe not, a joke.

Edited September 6, 2024 by SkyDekker

[brenthutch 444]

NOAA National Weather Service forecasters at the Climate Prediction Center predict above-normal hurricane activity in the Atlantic basin this year. NOAA’s outlook for the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season, which spans from June 1 to November 30, predicts an 85% chance of an above-normal season, a 10% chance of a near-normal season and a 5% chance of a below-normal season.

NOAA is forecasting a range of 17 to 25 total named storms

 

Michael Mann and colleagues predict a record-breaking 33 named storms for the 2024 North Atlantic hurricane season. It is the highest count ever projected.

If they can’t predict six months out one has to be monumentally stupid to believe that they can predict anything decades from now.

[jakee 1,489]

42 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

If they can’t predict six months out one has to be monumentally stupid to believe that they can predict anything decades from now.

No one can predict the next roulette spin but we can certainly predict the house will come out on top in the end. Just like no one can predict the next blackjack hand but card counting still works until you're lying in an alley with your legs broke and no thumbs.

But how? This is unpossible, no?

[SkyDekker 1,465]

57 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

If they can’t predict six months out one has to be monumentally stupid to believe that they can predict anything decades from now.

That might be among the dumber things you have uttered and just shows a real lack of understanding. I see jakee has already hinted at why.

[olofscience 480]

3 hours ago, brenthutch said:

If they can’t predict six months out one has to be monumentally stupid to believe that they can predict anything decades from now.

As usual you're defining your own stupid goalpost.

Scientists explain the reasoning behind their predictions, show their calculations, AND also quantify the uncertainty of their predictions.

 

Then you laugh at them for being uncertain and make your own vague prediction ("2023 won't even hit the top 5 warmest years") without any of the reasoning and calculations, and you fall flat on your face.

Well, at least you're predictable...

 

[brenthutch 444]

54 minutes ago, olofscience said:

As usual you're defining your own stupid goalpost.

Scientists explain the reasoning behind their predictions, show their calculations, AND also quantify the uncertainty of their predictions.

 

 

Yes and they even gave a 5% chance of this year being below average. I suppose you could say that they did predict a below average year. A prediction that a coin flip would either land on heads off tails is a prediction of little value and certainly not one on which to base policy.

[jakee 1,489]

5 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Yes and they even gave a 5% chance of this year being below average. I suppose you could say that they did predict a below average year. A prediction that a coin flip would either land on heads off tails is a prediction of little value and certainly not one on which to base policy.

Great example. We absolutely cannot predict the result of the next coin flip, yet we can confidently predict the overall split of the next ten thousand coin flips to within fractions of a percent. How can this be?

[tkhayes 348]

10 hours ago, brenthutch said:

 

NOAA National Weather Service forecasters at the Climate Prediction Center predict above-normal hurricane activity in the Atlantic basin this year. NOAA’s outlook for the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season, which spans from June 1 to November 30, predicts an 85% chance of an above-normal season, a 10% chance of a near-normal season and a 5% chance of a below-normal season.

NOAA is forecasting a range of 17 to 25 total named storms

 

Michael Mann and colleagues predict a record-breaking 33 named storms for the 2024 North Atlantic hurricane season. It is the highest count ever projected.

If they can’t predict six months out one has to be monumentally stupid to believe that they can predict anything decades from now.

20 inches of rain in 24 hours was not predicted in NC either, by you nor anyone else in the NOAA agency.

[tkhayes 348]

10 hours ago, brenthutch said:

 

NOAA National Weather Service forecasters at the Climate Prediction Center predict above-normal hurricane activity in the Atlantic basin this year. NOAA’s outlook for the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season, which spans from June 1 to November 30, predicts an 85% chance of an above-normal season, a 10% chance of a near-normal season and a 5% chance of a below-normal season.

NOAA is forecasting a range of 17 to 25 total named storms

 

Michael Mann and colleagues predict a record-breaking 33 named storms for the 2024 North Atlantic hurricane season. It is the highest count ever projected.

If they can’t predict six months out one has to be monumentally stupid to believe that they can predict anything decades from now.

20 inches of rain in 24 hours was not predicted in NC either, by you nor anyone else in the NOAA agency.  yet it happened.  yesterday.  1000 year event, but I am sure you will call this 'normal and just another day'

Edited September 18, 2024 by tkhayes

[olofscience 480]

10 hours ago, brenthutch said:

A prediction that a coin flip would either land on heads off tails is a prediction of little value and certainly not one on which to base policy.

I mentioned THREE things, and here you are just focusing on one. Again.

 

If you were forced to play Russian Roulette with 1 bullet, I doubt that the shooter receiving a box with 2 more rounds and loading them will not affect your perception of the risk, even if the odds just become "like a coin flip" of "little value". But you do have a good point - at a certain threshold, you should accept risk rather than spend more money to drive that risk to zero. So how do you calculate risk? Easy:

risk = (probability of event) x (cost of consequences if event happens)

 

I doubt you can do that calculation though, but insurance companies do it all the time. Ever checked insurance premiums for flood coverage in Florida lately?

Edited September 18, 2024 by olofscience

[brenthutch 444]

14 minutes ago, olofscience said:

I mentioned THREE things, and here you are just focusing on one. Again.

 

If you were forced to play Russian Roulette with 1 bullet, I doubt that the shooter receiving a box with 2 more rounds and loading them will not affect your perception of the risk, even if the odds just become "like a coin flip" of "little value". But you do have a good point - at a certain threshold, you should accept risk rather than spend more money to drive that risk to zero. So how do you calculate risk? Easy:

risk = (probability of event) x (cost of consequences if event happens)

 

Try running the numbers for the cost benefit analysis of climate policy. I’ll pop some popcorn while I wait.

[olofscience 480]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

Try running the numbers for the cost benefit analysis of climate policy. I’ll pop some popcorn while I wait.

lol, go wait then 

[tkhayes 348]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

Try running the numbers for the cost benefit analysis of climate policy. I’ll pop some popcorn while I wait.

[s] Yeah that's why home owners insurance in Florida keeps getting cheaper every year, because the 'cost benefit' keeps improving.... [/s]

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

26 minutes ago, tkhayes said:

[s] Yeah that's why home owners insurance in Florida keeps getting cheaper every year, because the 'cost benefit' keeps improving.... [/s]

Well, the 'cost' is to homeowners. 
You know "little people".

And there's no benefit to the wealthy & powerful.

So yeah, why should they do anything to mitigate AGW?

[brenthutch 444]

19 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Well, the 'cost' is to homeowners. 
You know "little people".

And there's no benefit to the wealthy & powerful.

So yeah, why should they do anything to mitigate AGW?

Where is the mitigation?

[brenthutch 444]

1 hour ago, tkhayes said:

[s] Yeah that's why home owners insurance in Florida keeps getting cheaper every year, because the 'cost benefit' keeps improving.... [/s]

The cost of insurance is up everywhere because of the inflation caused by the Democrats. Actual storm damage has not increased, the cost of storm damage has.

[Phil1111 1,149]

Just now, brenthutch said:

The cost of insurance is up everywhere because of the inflation caused by the Democrats. Actual storm damage has not increased, the cost of storm damage has.

Do you have any concept about the damage that you do to your credibility by making statements like that?

Oh! forget it, I just noticed that Brent made the statement. Nevermind.

[Phil1111 1,149]

1 hour ago, tkhayes said:

[s] Yeah that's why home owners insurance in Florida keeps getting cheaper every year, because the 'cost benefit' keeps improving.... [/s]

If it continues Ron DeSantis will be the insurer for every single home in Florida. Wait a minute,

"Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has said that state-backed Citizens Property Insurance is “not solvent” and could be in trouble if a storm hits the state.

DeSantis’s comments come as the federal government conducts an investigation into whether the insurer has enough money on hand for a natural disaster.

Citizens Property Insurance, Florida’s ‘insurer of last resort’, was formed in 2002 to provide windstorm and property coverage to state residents who could not obtain insurance elsewhere." From Feb 29, 2024 story Insurance Business report.

[tkhayes 348]

5 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

The cost of insurance is up everywhere because of the inflation caused by the Democrats. Actual storm damage has not increased, the cost of storm damage has.

The cost of insurance has been climbing for decades - through Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump..... and so has the damage from hurricanes, and thus the insurance.

I cannot believe you said what you just said and I would call you out for it but I might get another warning from the moderators.

If one has no odea what one is talking about then it is sometimes best for one to keep away from the subject at hand