TODAY'S PENNINE WEATHER

[Stanley]

Morning Cathy..... We're looking at very similar weather to yours, perhaps a shade warmer today but there is a strong wind....

[Stanley]

I've had a walk to the Co-op for a couple of shelf fillers. It's a very pleasant morning out there, lots of sun and the wind isn't over chilling. Will it last all day? We shall have to wait and see....

[Stanley]

We still have full sun. The Met Office say it's heavily overcast and we will have 'heavy showers' inside the hour.... They have been wrong so far!

[Tripps]

They have been wrong so far!

I smile that with a horizon of a couple of days- they are proved on here to be wrong so often - yet people accept without question the "climate change " data whick looks forwards millenia.

Any excuse for some Bob Dylan - well off topic, but it's a short one, and worth a listen.
Just let it wash over you. We have tarried a while. He's 84 you know.

. . . "read books repeat quotations draw conclusions on the wall"

[Stanley]

But David, they are using data gathered over the last 200 years to fuel their assertions, not future predictions.
Yesterday afternoon we did get rain eventually but not as bad as predicted and we had a sunny end to the day. This morning it's breezy and overcast in spite of the met office saying it's raining. The glass is steady on 993mb and the forecast is for a windy day of sunny spells and showers. The brisk southerly winds will be constant and gust to 30 mph all day. We can expect a high of 17C and a low tonight of 10C with a wind chill of -3C for most of the day. The rest of the week is similar mixed and broken weather.

[Tripps]

I put both comments into AI (Chat GPT) and here's the result - back in milliseconds.

Edited version:

They can barely predict the weather a few days out – and they're often wrong – yet people unquestioningly accept climate change models that project thousands of years into the future. But those models are based on data from the last 200 years, not actual future observations.
A few thoughts on clarity:
"They" could be more specific. Are you referring to meteorologists? Climate scientists? The general scientific community? Clarifying that could make your point stronger. The smiley adds a bit of sarcasm, which is fine if that's your tone, but you might want to think about how it lands depending on your audience.
There’s a bit of a mix-up between weather forecasting (short-term, chaotic) and climate modeling (long-term, trend-based), which are quite different scientifically. That difference often gets lost in debates, but it's an important distinction.
Would you like help expanding or refining this argument for a specific context—like a social media post,

Make of it what you will. I think they have pointed out the flaw in my argument. Spoilsports. perhaps we should give up and put the robots in charge?

[Stanley]

I rest my case m'lud
Yesterday afternoon again developed into overcast and showers. At 07:00 it was raining as I went to bed. This morning we have a light breeze and it's overcast and cool. The glass is up a touch on 997mb and the forecast is for another day of sunny spells with the chance of showers early in the afternoon. The SSW wind will be a light breeze all day and we can expect a high of 19C and a low of 12C tonight. The wind chill will be -2C this morning but less for the rest of the day. The outlook is for a couple of days of showers and then dry and slightly warmer over the weekend.....

[Tripps]

I've had another think. You can onl;y use what intelligence you've got, and I try to. Just because AI says something, does not mean it is "ex cathedra". It works to an algorithm and is under the control of someone somewhere. I don't like how it says that a smiley is a sign of sarcasm - no it's not - it's a sign of amusement.

I've decided that this statement is not necessarily true. "There’s a bit of a mix-up between weather forecasting (short-term, chaotic) and climate modeling (long-term, trend-based)".
I think they are the same - just over a different timescale. The fact trhat AI wants me to believe something different is a bit sinister.

Sceptics of the world unite.

As an aside - I read from Professor Brian Cox (the Chadderton lad) that only 6,000 years ago the Sahara desert was as overgrown with jungle just like the Congo is today. I looked elsewhere and it seems it's true. That time interval is just a blink in the overall story., and CO2 levels were not mentioned. I wonder why that change took place.