Let it snow.

So there was the dire prediction of a massive, record breaking snowstorm for the east coast, one that would cripple the region from Philadelphia to Maine,  New York shut down the subway, curfews were ordered, and the entire region ran out of milk, bread, cigarettes, and beer.  No doubt cancellations drove people out of work.

And....oops....Philadelphia got 2 inches of the foot they thought they'd have, New York got 9 of the promised 27 inches.  And the weather service apologized for the error and explained how hard it is to predict such things.

Understood.

The models used to compute such things depend on complex calculations, analysis of historic patterns, and extension of what happened before into the future.  Computer wizards, engineers, meteorologists, geniuses of all stripes pour their magic into computers to calculate the future and, voila, each comes up with a different story, none of which happen.

Earth systems are huge, complex, chaotic, and random.  What appears as cause and effect is often not, what appears to be linear usually isn't.

And so, if all of the science with tangible, known, fact-based, observed events in certain history produces vastly differing predictions, most of which are wrong even though they are all based on the same observations, how in the world do we think we can look backwards and make accurate assumptions of what happened in the earth system thousands, or millions or years before the observable past?

We throw away as "fable" the only written record of contemporary observers from the origins of the world we know (the Bible) in favor of the "smarter" science that presumes to know, understand, and calculate facts...the same science and basis as those who can't tell you what is going to happen within hours of an earth system event, whether a snowstorm, a volcanic eruption, earthquake, or seasonally average temperature.  We throw the truth away and throw money at those who claim they can prove it wrong.

We put our faith in that which continues to prove itself wrong rather than that which has an unchanging history of accuracy.

How smart are we really?