Hey, there! Log in / Register
Harvey on Harvey
By adamg on Fri, 08/25/2017 - 3:27pm
Yea, it is true that I am harmless, but my namesake of a hurricane is posing an enormous problem for Texas...major story unfolding
— Harvey Leonard (@HarveyWCVB) August 25, 2017
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
If a hurricane is forecast anywhere
I'd much rather have Harvey Leonard show up to cover it. If Jim Cantore arrives, you know you're in for a direct hit.
True professional. He doesn't
True professional. He doesn't take the bait for a low-hanging fruit joke, and is dead serious about the weather.
Harvey Leonard
Harvey Leonard is the best. Also note that he agrees with the vast majority of climate scientists when it comes to climate change, unlike many Boston-area TV meteorologists. He is extremely knowledgeable about climate change (also Mike Wankum, his Channel 5 colleague). What a shame that so many TV weather people are climate change deniers.
Do tell
Which local forecasters do you think are climate change deniers?
More importantly
Why does it matter?
As long as they can give me an accurate idea of the weather up to 3 days out, I don't care what they believe about anything else.
Meteorology and climate science are 2 distinct things looking at 2 different data sets.
You want Woke Scientists
That's why it matters.
Understanding the underlying shift in patterns will actually be very important for future predictions. The variability induced by climate change is already making weather hard to predict - you cannot rely on "past normal" but need to factor in "new normal".
Climate deniers are not good scientists and will not be able to keep up with the changes.
Do you understand specialization in science?
Or do you just assume chemists, physicists, and engineers are the same thing?
Some can be good at predicting short term weather patterns for a given area without needing to ponder the history of the earth's temperature and humanity's contribution thereto. Conversely, I would not go to the climate scientists at East Anglia University and ask them what Hurricane Harvey will be like and where come Tuesday.
Mansplaining
Thanks for the vacuous mansplaining. You know, I have these letters that go with my name ... Sc. stands for SCIENCE and D. stands for Dr. I have probably forgotten more science than you ever understood. Just because your high school separated disciplines doesn't make that how the world actually works.
What you are talking about isn't what specialization means. You need to know the fundamentals in order to specialize. A materials scientist has to know the basics of chemistry. A computer scientist needs to understand the basics of mathematics. A public health scientist needs to understand physiology, chemistry, statistics, etc.
And a weather forecaster needs to know the fundamentals of climate and climate change, as climate change is currently happening. That change is the new normal - the baseline assumptions are shifting - and a failure understand the fundamentals of that change will lead to poor prognostication.
And you'd think you'd know better
But somehow you don't.
But heck, humor me by pointing out why computer scientists need to know chemistry?
I would go out on a limb and say that meteorologists tend not to be deniers but skeptics. The way they approach the data gives pause when they hear or read the claims of either actual climate scientists or those who treat it as an article of faith. David Epstein is a classic example of this. I'm too lazy to look it up now, but a few years back he a critique. He never says he denies, just points out issues with some of the theories.
And yes, I am familiar with your background. You should be the one noting that not everyone who is a "scientist" can speak with authority on your speciality. I just want a person who can accurately give me a weather forecast. Whatever they do beyond that shouldn't matter.