Climate change supercomputer a top U.K. polluter
It always happens when you try to do some good, doesn't it?
You try to help an old lady cross the road, and she looks at you harshly and says, "So I look old to you?" You tell that special someone that you love her, and she tells you that she's actually enjoying the company of your best friend.
Such is the painful, ironic circumstance at the United Kingdom's Met Office. ("Met" is short for "meteorological.")
You see, according to the Daily Mail, the agency's large weather brains decided to invest in an even larger IBM brain in order to accurately predict gaseous happenings of climate change.
I have no reason to believe these miserable wet people are from the Department of Communities and Local Government.
(Credit: CC Stevie-B/Flickr)This metal mastermind can make a quadrillion calculations in the time in takes you to utter a consonant. In the technical world, this is "petaflop" performance. But it might as well have been a Fosbury Flop to some buzz killers.
For along came some bureaucrats from the Department of Communities and Local Government, declaring that the incredibly intelligent hulk is one of the worst polluters in the United Kingdom. For some reason, they were looking at the emissions in all of the nation's public edifices.
All right, so the climate-calculating colossus produces about 75 percent of its own carbon footprint. I fancy that there are several members of Parliament who may do the same. And the supercomputer really can see into the future, whereas some members may not be able to see much beyond lunch.
The beautifully named Barry Grommett from the Met Office told the Mail: "We would be throwing ourselves back into the Dark Ages of weather forecasting, if we withdrew our reliance on supercomputing. It's as simple as that."
Quite. The U.K. bureaucrats have done so much in their attempt to return to the Dark Ages (before climate change?) that the weather men must make a stand.
Chris Matyszczyk is an award-winning creative director who advises major corporations on content creation and marketing. He brings an irreverent, sarcastic, and sometimes ironic voice to the tech world. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. 
Wake me just before the culminating event of the climate change apocalypse. I want to see if the world ends in a bang or a whimper. But don't bother me about it in the meantime--no one can do anything to change it.
Also, speaking of supercomputer modeling and such, has anyone noticed that since their debut the weather is now accurately forecast as much as three days in advance? Hey, wait a minute! They were doing that in the 1940's, before the advent of digital computers of any kind! So, if we can't predict the weather more than three days in advance, why do we put so much stock in predicting the climate decades or centuries in the future, based on computer models? Is mankind stupid, or what?
Forget your fact based, common sense explanation of what is going on. The carbon footprint, climate change thing was never about climate change or carbon footprints - its about socialism and controlling other people's behavior.
This situation is very similar the old 55 mile per hour speed limit. It wasn't feasible, drove people crazy and accomplished nothing but various parties were emotionally tied into it - just as socialists, and eco-alarmists, and other groups that have a need for control over other peoples. And then there are those that, deep down, want to be controlled.
Oddly, though it was without merit what so ever, the 55 mph speed limit died a slow death just as we are seeing with the "global warming," no, wait, "climate change" hoax.
Seeing as you obviously know so much.
Wouldn't anything that produces a carbon footprint, be responsible for producing 100% of its own carbon footprint? How could any part of something's carbon footprint, be produced by anything else? A carbon footprint produced by something else, would by definition be produced by that something else.
Sorry to be so didactic, but you know.
Carbon footprint indeed . . .
Carbon Credits anyone?
Who are these people that believe this? Are you kidding? Has Asimov's Foundation Trilogy come true? Um, actually, that's not science, that would be SCIENCE FICTION. Here's a question. What has computer modeling been used longer for, predicting global climate, or sports outcomes? And we're supposed to believe anyone can see 20, 50, 100 years into the future? Seriously, think for 2 seconds - do you believe we can see into the future? Really?
Who are these people that believe this? Are you kidding? Has Asimov's Foundation Trilogy come true? Um, actually, that's not science, that would be SCIENCE FICTION. Here's a question. What has computer modeling been used longer for, predicting global climate, or sports outcomes? And we're supposed to believe anyone can see 20, 50, 100 years into the future? Seriously, think for 2 seconds - do you believe we can see into the future? Really?
- by akuenn September 2, 2009 7:37 AM PDT
- Umm, love the whole concept of it being so bad...
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(25 Comments)Just use freaking wind energy. Problem solved. No, it's not perfect, but wind, solar, or geothermal would solve a LARGE portion of the problem.