Quote:
Originally Posted by Patton250
Yeah my proof as I’ve watched just about every single one of them from the time of their naming until they either made landfall or dissipated somewhere in the Atlantic. You know there are some really good apps with radar and satellite images to watch and track these things right?
I really don’t have the time to go back and look up every hurricane. Just goggle some of the big ones yourself and see how wrong they were as to where they were going to land. And when I say wrong I mean 500-1000 miles off. That didn’t stop them from bringing different sections of the economy in the southeast to a complete stop for one to three weeks while the news media went into complete panic mode and sensationalized it. Sound familiar?
|
I always see a cone of probability and not a x marks the spot projection.
Like everything, there are variables, and sometimes many variables, the variance in only one of which can cause the models to adjust over time. You seem to believe that there should be a much higher degree of exactitude which may never be completely possible in any scientific analysis whether it be COVID, hurricanes or anything.
Inescapable is that the models can generally predict x within a measure of variance. If people use that variance to support their belief that scientists do not know s*#@, then we set up ourselves for catastrophe.
The projection for Katrina was pretty damn accurate, yet people ignored the warnings with devastating results.
Fauci’s and others projections must constantly change to reflect changing variables, such as people’s level of adherence to social distancing, which can have a direct impact on the eventual final numbers.