At any rate, that’s what the Weather Network thinks, for Ottawa and much of Canada. But how can it be? Isn’t global warming, well, warming us up? Wasn’t 2019 the hottest year ever? If we are all in the soup, who expected Vichyssoise? Mind you Ottawa just broke a 78-day run of temperatures over 20 degrees on Sept. 8 that’s in 7th place, behind 2018’s 85 days (June 15-Sept. 7). Proof of warming, right? Um except tied for fifth are 1910 and 1874. OK, throw that stuff out the window. What about the top 3? Wanna bet it’s 2015, 2016 and 2017? If so, pay up because the correct answers are 1908 in 3rd, 1876 2nd and 1st, at 104 days, 1921. Which at least isn’t more than a century ago.
As we’ve mentioned before, the essence of science is predictions verified by data. Not simulations verified by other simulations or even the same ones. And so it is pertinent to note that the alarmist models’ predictions are not verified by data.
What about the Weather Network’s? We’re always grateful when someone makes a prediction we can test rather than some loopy claim about an apocalypse we can’t wait for before acting, or some brazenly false statement about the present. And so we’ll keep an eye on developments going forward and see whether we do, indeed, see a slightly warmer than typical fall in the west and parts of the east coast, combined with average precipitation, then a mild winter in the west and a cold one from there pretty much to the east coast.
If we do, it will surely be fair to praise their forecasting while questioning their default climate alarmism since those conditions do not amount to runaway warming. And it will surely be fair to question other people’s alarmism since their predictions of unprecedented climate changes, or in some cases claims that they are already here, don’t fit with a kind of normal but somewhat chilly winter.
If indeed those were predictions. And if not, they’re not doing science.