Do climate models predict extreme weather? • Hacker News Board

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#221

Post by nefitty » Mon, Jan 10, 2022, 11:12 PM UTC

LudwigNagasena wrote: post #213

nefitty wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The point of a democratic government is being ruled by demos , the people. You are describing a government run by benevolent elites. In such case of course the government may lie and deceive people, and even pretend that it is democratic, but it won’t be a democratic government. The naive commitment to truth is the most fundamental requirement for the most basic freedom, the freedom to reason. To lie, to deceive some…

That makes sense. I'm not sure why the right to reason didn't cross my mind. Maybe I presumed it in the scenario I pictured. I'm not convinced that governments should have mandates to pursue truth at all costs.

I think the true danger is when there is little tension between government and the fourth estate. Government actions need interpretation and presentation, and when those functions lapse or are neglected, is when individuals begin losing the right to reason. To be able to make decisions presupposes that non-elites are presented with the decision in the first place. This is the context within which the naive commitment for truth is a virtue.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#222

Post by naasking » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 1:39 PM UTC

kuhewa wrote: post #218

naasking wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Again, he didn't comment on the factual basis of the original mask guidance, only the reason why he made a proclamation one way or another. And those reasons contradict the earlier reasons he gave. How is this not a clear deception? Perhaps we should discuss the actual video evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLXttHlUgK8 Furthermore, if the factual basis of the original recommendations were not false, why we…

This is now going in circles but quickly: > why were masks mandated soon after shortages were no longer a concern? (and continue to be) ...because that is when the scientific evidence changed. Preprints from China were streaming in in March 2020 that were making a significant degree of presymptomatic transmission look increasingly likely.

That's not what he cited as the rationale though, is it? If he had we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

Why would he even bring up PPE shortages in response to a question about changing mask recommendations? You've invented a charitable narrative in an attempt to explain the changing recommendations, but this narrative doesn't actually explain the available evidence.

Like I've been saying all along, he either very clearly lied, or he's literally the worst science communicator I've ever seen.

Either way he should not be the face of public health.

Re: Do climate models predict extreme weather?

#223

Post by kwhitefoot » Sun, Jan 16, 2022, 7:13 PM UTC

pmarreck wrote: post #217

kwhitefoot wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Surgeons have used surgical masks for... 100 years? Are you sure there's no evidence to back that up?

Operating theatres and streets are radically different environments. The surgeon is leaning over the patient and breathing directly toward an open wound so of course it makes sense for a surgeon to wear a mask. That's not what happens in the street.