Do climate models predict extreme weather? • Hacker News Board

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#181

Post by naasking » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 1:54 PM UTC

kuhewa wrote: post #153

Breazy wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Stop wearing masks, they don't work."

Fauci's infamous quote was: “There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is." I not sure it can be considered a lie though. Wrong, but at the time the precedent was pandemic flus and SARS-1, and there isn'…

> I not sure it can be considered a lie though

Fauci later said that the reason they advised against masks was because of fears of a PPE shortage. So either Fauci admitted that his earlier position was a deception, or his later claim was itself deceptive.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#182

Post by naasking » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 1:56 PM UTC

labster wrote: post #118

Retric wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lies of omission are unavoidable when talking to a general audience about any deep scientific or technical issue. A physicist actually explaining Magnetism takes years. If a PHD gives you a short answer their simply lying to you. For example, no ferromagnetic materials aren’t simply all atoms arranged in a specific fashion that’s a monumental simplification.

This exactly. After a year of high school physics and a year of mechanics and electrodynamics, they finally get around to telling you: that was kind of all lies, here’s relativity. And then a month later they do it again for quantum, and finally admit they don’t know what is really going on. But Newtonian mechanics is useful!

Simplified models are not lies, they are true within a defined domain of discourse. That's not what you were describing.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#183

Post by nefitty » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 1:59 PM UTC

LudwigNagasena wrote: post #100

d--b wrote: post #91

The point is that warning about extreme weather events is the only narrative that got people to consider global warming a problem at all. A 2 degree change in average temperature doesn’t change how people live. A heat wave does. Now I don’t know if it’s actually true or not but it feels like the frequency of extreme weather event has increased. It’s difficult to say because that’s something our grandparents already s…

This attitude exemplifies the problem with the public discourse. The public discourse isn’t about finding out truth and forming actionable democratic consensus, it is about duping “stupid people” into supporting “good things”™.

By the time Machiavelli wrote The Prince, the very act of writing the book was a tracer round to rampant political cynicism. Once an attitude or ideology is the target of satire, it has already bcome interwoven into a society. I presume that to be even moreso in eras where publishing had high cost.

There's also this naive commitment to truth. Yes, we want our mental models to be more accurate and predictive. What if a model results in an increase of net suffering? What is the role of a democratic government, to provide services to a society to lessen individual offering, or to pursue truth and align legislation at all costs?

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#184

Post by kwhitefoot » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 2:13 PM UTC

Mikeb85 wrote: post #149

enkid wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give a specific example of what you are talking about? What noble lies were being told about COVID? I heard a lot of "we don't knows, but here is the best bet" which were not lies, but all of the lies I heard absolutely were not noble in that they were not for the public's best interest, but rather for the best interest of the individual saying them.

In Canada they said masks don't work and even make things worse, despite every Asian country using them at the time.

Asian countries already used them at the time, not because of COVID. Unfortunately it appears that no one had researched this phenomenon so there were no good statistics on whether, or not, they were effective.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#185

Post by ethanbond » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 2:16 PM UTC

Mikeb85 wrote: post #149

enkid wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give a specific example of what you are talking about? What noble lies were being told about COVID? I heard a lot of "we don't knows, but here is the best bet" which were not lies, but all of the lies I heard absolutely were not noble in that they were not for the public's best interest, but rather for the best interest of the individual saying them.

In Canada they said masks don't work and even make things worse, despite every Asian country using them at the time.

Can you find a source for an actual authority (ideally a health authority) saying that?

There’s a similar meme going around the US, but I’ve yet to find any (except one, noted below) health expert who actually said “masks don’t work” rather than “we don’t know that masks work.”

The one exception I’ve been able to find was the US Surgeon General Jerome Adams.

This seems like a clear example of health authorities sharing a nuanced true-at-the-time message that got stripped of that nuance and rounded out to the nearest (false) simplified interpretation.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#186

Post by kwhitefoot » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 2:20 PM UTC

avereveard wrote: post #177

roenxi wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the more likely issue is that they are assuming that the vaccine's efficacy is aligned with the strength of the efforts being put into mandating it. When they discover those efforts are excessive they get upset. A reasonable scenario that doesn't get bought up enough is that average people have a radically different risk tolerance than professionals working in the healthcare industry. 1 in 10,000 incidents me…

I was perfectly fine with the initial take - vaccine once or twice, side effects are rare. Now that it's becoming vaccinate every six months, the outlook of the cumulative probability of side effects doesn't look that good anymore. And, going trough an inflammatory process every six months doesn't seem good on its own, even if the vaccine wouldn't have side effect.

> going trough an inflammatory process every six months

Are you claiming this as a universal truth? Or your specific experience?

My experience and that of two of my three adult children is that it was like a slight bruise at the injection site for about 24 hours. The other child felt slightly under the weather for a couple of days, similar severity to having a cold. We all had Pfizer.

My impression is that my experience is the more common one, but it is not the one that grabs anyone's attention.

The more serious side effects seem to be vanishingly rare.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#187

Post by magicalist » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 2:33 PM UTC

naasking wrote: post #181

kuhewa wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fauci's infamous quote was: “There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is." I not sure it can be considered a lie though. Wrong, but at the time the precedent was pandemic flus and SARS-1, and there isn'…

> I not sure it can be considered a lie though Fauci later said that the reason they advised against masks was because of fears of a PPE shortage. So either Fauci admitted that his earlier position was a deception, or his later claim was itself deceptive.

> Fauci later said

GP gave an actual quote, can you provide one for this as well?

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#188

Post by ako » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 2:33 PM UTC

avereveard wrote: post #177

roenxi wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the more likely issue is that they are assuming that the vaccine's efficacy is aligned with the strength of the efforts being put into mandating it. When they discover those efforts are excessive they get upset. A reasonable scenario that doesn't get bought up enough is that average people have a radically different risk tolerance than professionals working in the healthcare industry. 1 in 10,000 incidents me…

I was perfectly fine with the initial take - vaccine once or twice, side effects are rare. Now that it's becoming vaccinate every six months, the outlook of the cumulative probability of side effects doesn't look that good anymore. And, going trough an inflammatory process every six months doesn't seem good on its own, even if the vaccine wouldn't have side effect.

There was an interesting overview yesterday in the dutch newsite nu.nl that listed the frequency for regular vaccinations for children: https://www.nu.nl/coronavaccins/6177160/weer-een-coronaprik-...

It's actually quite common that vaccinations need to be done multiple times (up to 5 times for DPT) and to have boosters for these when traveling to certain countries.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#189

Post by magicalist » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 2:35 PM UTC

Breazy wrote: post #112

leetcrew wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Maybe editorialized a bit, though I didn't attribute the quote to Fauci particularly because the fib wasn't coming from only him. A lot of people were saying similar things. And the context, of course, is fear of mask shortages for people who needed them most. But what really gets my goat, much more than that white lie, is when grown adults feign ignorance and pretend they never heard the lie, that the lie was never…

> Maybe editorialized a bit

In a conversation about accuracy of statements and not making misstatements just to improve rhetoric, this seems like a weird choice. "No one actually said this, but it captures the zeitgeist (just trust me)".

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#190

Post by Breazy » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 2:37 PM UTC

magicalist wrote: post #189

Breazy wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe editorialized a bit, though I didn't attribute the quote to Fauci particularly because the fib wasn't coming from only him. A lot of people were saying similar things. And the context, of course, is fear of mask shortages for people who needed them most. But what really gets my goat, much more than that white lie, is when grown adults feign ignorance and pretend they never heard the lie, that the lie was never…

> Maybe editorialized a bit In a conversation about accuracy of statements and not making misstatements just to improve rhetoric, this seems like a weird choice. "No one actually said this, but it captures the zeitgeist (just trust me)".

I specifically did not quote Fauci, so I did not misquote Fauci. I did not quote Fauci because similar sentiments were being expressed by numerous people, including:

> “Seriously people — STOP BUYING MASKS!” the surgeon general, Jerome M. Adams, said in a tweet on Saturday morning. “They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if health care providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk!”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/29/health/coronavirus-n95-fa...

If your intent here is to cast aspersions on claims that comments like this were made, then you are gaslighting. Anybody without serious brain damage remembers the medical technocrats and their media lackeys were signaling against masks early in the pandemic. The above article contains quotes from numerous officials, each worded in different ways but getting at the same message that I wrote above, that masks don't work for proles but do for doctors. Trying to make people question their memory of this is gaslighting.