The WaPo editorial board admits the science is not settled and no government program will stop change hurricane activity. Key points highlighted. The rest is just frustrated gobbledygook. And although the editorial focuses on hurricanes, you can substitute any extreme weather event.
The excerpt from the WaPo’s editorial that is quoted here suggests that the WaPo’s editorial board continues to subscribe to the falsehood that runs of today’s climate models provide a public official with information about the conditional outcomes of the events of the future for Earth’s climate system. This falsehood is the product of an application of the Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness by the argument that is made by each of these models under which an “abstract” event is mistaken for a “concrete” event in making this argument. Though a “concrete” event has a location in space and time, an “abstract” event lacks such a location.
A collection of “concrete” events is an example of a statistical population but not a collection of “abstract” events. Consequently, though no statistical population supports the claims that are made by each of these models it seems to the WaPo’s editorial board that these claims are supported by a statistical these claims are supported by a statistical population though there is no such population.
That’s a pretty big concession, hidden in that article. This would all be a big joke, if it weren’t so pathetic.