zaphod
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 210
|
Post by zaphod on Jan 10, 2013 15:41:07 GMT
Thought I would have a stab at starting a relevant thread. From the self-righteous side of the UK press: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2259942/The-crazy-climate-change-obsession-thats-Met-Office-menace.html"The crazy climate change obsession that's made the Met Office a menace The £200 million-a-year official weather forecaster often gets it wrong This week it has admitted there is no evidence that ‘global warming’ is happening The Met Office quietly readjusted its temperature projections on its website on Christmas Eve " The Daily Mail has very wide readership in the UK. These points have appeared on other threads but I thought it may be helpful to pull stuff about the Met Office together.
|
|
|
Post by cuttydyer on Jan 10, 2013 15:47:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by steve on Jan 10, 2013 19:57:47 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 10, 2013 20:26:03 GMT
Steve: We know the reason that some feel rainfall etc is going to be more extreme per event.
However, the last data I can find indicates that the amount of actual water in the atmosphere is flat with a negative bias presently.
From what you read etc, is the above statement correct? (concering rh/ water vapor/precipable h2o)
|
|
|
Post by steve on Jan 10, 2013 20:58:43 GMT
No, the amount of water in the atmosphere is going up.
Relative humidity may not be rising - but constant relative humidity with a warming atmosphere means rising absolute humidity. Is that where the confusion comes from?
|
|
|
Post by dontgetoutmuch on Jan 10, 2013 21:11:53 GMT
No, the amount of water in the atmosphere is going up. Relative humidity may not be rising - but constant relative humidity with a warming atmosphere means rising absolute humidity. Is that where the confusion comes from? Except for the fact that even the Met office now admits there is no warming. Ergo the amount of water (In the atmosphere) is NOT going up... This is consistent with Sigurdur's information that "The last data I can find indicates that the amount of actual water in the atmosphere is flat with a negative bias presently."
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 11, 2013 0:35:47 GMT
No, the amount of water in the atmosphere is going up. Relative humidity may not be rising - but constant relative humidity with a warming atmosphere means rising absolute humidity. Is that where the confusion comes from? Except for the fact that even the Met office now admits there is no warming. Ergo the amount of water (In the atmosphere) is NOT going up... This is consistent with Sigurdur's information that "The last data I can find indicates that the amount of actual water in the atmosphere is flat with a negative bias presently." Precisely dontgetoutmuch. That is why I stated the amount of actual water.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 11, 2013 0:38:51 GMT
Steve: Do you have data to prove what you stated? Not that I don't trust you, but I read a paper not long ago that indicated the trend was flat statistically. The trend, ignoring the statistical significance, was slightly negative. Hence the negative bias to the trend.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 11, 2013 2:39:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by flearider on Jan 11, 2013 3:02:44 GMT
would'nt this just be a case of more mosture comming from the equater as the earth cools ? hence higher wind patterns across the seas and lower temps pushing down across most lrg land masses ? so you have rain on most coastal lands and frezzing temps inland ??same with the other half of the world comming into summer ..but less moisture more risk of fires .. seems simple no ?
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Jan 11, 2013 4:46:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Jan 11, 2013 6:12:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by steve on Jan 11, 2013 7:00:21 GMT
nautonnier, should I believe a chief constable who has to deal with day-to-day issues caused by severe weather, or should I believe some ideological hack who is a strong advocate for homeopathy and states that it makes sense that water holds the "memory" of things it has been in contact with. Hmmm...Delinpole is just a loudmouth idiot on a range of subjects.
Clearly in this case, the focus of the discreditors is on the climate-type forecasts that the Met Office have regularly stated are probabilistic such that the central projection will be wrong (particularly for the UK's unreliable weather) often enough to find examples of it being wrong, whereas the focus of the Met Office defence is that the 5-day forecasts which are relied upon by the people at the cutting edge of providing public services, are generally far more accurate and well regarded.
If you look at the statements from just about any reputable climate institution, including the Met Office, the focus is on the long term trend, for example pointing out that the average temperature of the 2000-2010 was higher than 1990-2000. The current forecast is that 2010-2020 will be warmer than 2000-2010 average. Against this, measurements of rising absolute humidity are detectable on similar (perhaps longer) period and rising levels of "extreme rainfall" similarly.
So it is providing a constant and consistent picture. Attacks on the picture always rely on misquotes and misinterpretations it seems. Ho hum...
|
|
|
Post by steve on Jan 11, 2013 7:25:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 11, 2013 11:38:15 GMT
nautonnier, should I believe a chief constable who has to deal with day-to-day issues caused by severe weather, or should I believe some ideological hack who is a strong advocate for homeopathy and states that it makes sense that water holds the "memory" of things it has been in contact with. Hmmm...Delinpole is just a loudmouth idiot on a range of subjects. Clearly in this case, the focus of the discreditors is on the climate-type forecasts that the Met Office have regularly stated are probabilistic such that the central projection will be wrong (particularly for the UK's unreliable weather) often enough to find examples of it being wrong, whereas the focus of the Met Office defence is that the 5-day forecasts which are relied upon by the people at the cutting edge of providing public services, are generally far more accurate and well regarded. If you look at the statements from just about any reputable climate institution, including the Met Office, the focus is on the long term trend, for example pointing out that the average temperature of the 2000-2010 was higher than 1990-2000. The current forecast is that 2010-2020 will be warmer than 2000-2010 average. Against this, measurements of rising absolute humidity are detectable on similar (perhaps longer) period and rising levels of "extreme rainfall" similarly. So it is providing a constant and consistent picture. Attacks on the picture always rely on misquotes and misinterpretations it seems. Ho hum... Steve. The chief constable was talking about 5 day forecasts which were NOT the subject of the complaint about the Met Office - so that entire section was a strawman. I have worked closely with Met Office forecasters and they are excellent at the shorter range forecasts. However, the Met Office long range forecasts were so laughably poor that they stopped providing them to the public. The drought in early 2012 was a sign of the climate change they had warned about and it would continue -- I have a relative who works in the water industry assessing pollution incidents - he was extremely concerned about the drought and expected low rainfall. Well we got the total reverse - and (not) surprisingly the Chief Scientist at the Met Office tells us that this is what was expected all along and this is a sign of the climate change that they had warned about and it would continue. Then they use 'its a record' statements that are immediately parroted by the press, yet they are NOT records unless you cherry pick which set of years you are using. This is not the behaviour that you see from their professional forecasters who probably want to crawl away and hide when Exeter starts its weasel wording. So against that background we see a long range forecast that is substantially lowered. It is published on a day when people won't notice with no fanfare. It was found by someone on here and posted here and then picked up by Tallbloke ... and only then do we find the Met Office reluctantly agree that they have reduced their forecast extreme warming to more moderate warming. I expect this kind of readjustment of the model in line with reality to continue. I do not expect the 'computer forecasters' of the Met Office to make any apology in the way the forecasters do when they occasionally get it wrong. No the longer range people will just change the forecasts. And instead of the extreme noises - they will say that the long term will be warmer than the previous average... but you know those words already. Fact remains that their previous model run outputs were wrong and instead of saying sorry we got it wrong - floods not droughts. They say 'we expected floods all the time that's a sign of the same climate change we said would bring continued drought and its a record amount of rain' (when it wasn't). Ho Hum indeed
|
|