|
|
Post by scpg02 on Jan 21, 2011 0:23:20 GMT
I would agree with you Sig.
|
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Jan 21, 2011 2:31:21 GMT
Though AQUA Channel 5 currently being above the 2002-2010 average is causing me some second thoughts
In what way? I'm thinking the LT is getting a lot of reflected energy because of the snow cover, which may also explain wider areas of surface cooling. We'll know for sure in the next three months where things are headed. Bottom line: this isn't a typical ENSO when comparing to previous ones, for the last 30 years anyway. I really didn't expect such a quick change from El Nino. In fact, as this was a Modoki El Nino, previous Modoki's were not followed by La Nina let alone one of this magnitude. On top of that the SOI normally doesn't get as deep as it has or for so long even in 1998. As there is about a 6-7 month lag response to SOI, it will certainly be interesting what happens through June/July. Honestly, none of it is making much sense at this point and is why I'm satisfied with just sitting back and see how it unfolds. Actually, this is making sense and proving some theory's that AGW folks have discounted in the past. 1. Solar winds etc have an effect on climate. It is NOT only the TSI that has an effect. 2. UV and jet streams. Once again, effect. 3. Low sunspots seem to equate clouds. that means reflection of energy. I can't find the paper that I read some time ago about sunlight and diffusion of said sunlights effects on sea temperature. It was quit dramatic to say the least. The oceans have been cooling for some time. AGW folks don't like that and to be honest, I don't either as long term that means world wide cooling. On a regional basis, when we were cooling during the 1940's through the 70's, our weather sucked big time. It has sucked big time since 2004 as well. While the surface temps may have stabalized, other temps have fallen....ocean. And I still attribute that to the sun and what it is doing. The U.S. is cooling at an "alarming rate"  Here Piers Corbyn reveals some interesting details on his forecasting techniques. As many have said which solar deniers still can't seem to understand, it isn't all about TSI. That there are clear correlations to solar activity and hydrological processes should spark a few neural networks. For those who complain that Corbyn doesn't publish his work, well guess what, there's a reason why certain products are never patented. If you can figure out how it works, congratulations, it's yours to exploit. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 21, 2011 16:02:11 GMT
Though AQUA Channel 5 currently being above the 2002-2010 average is causing me some second thoughts
In what way? I'm thinking the LT is getting a lot of reflected energy because of the snow cover, which may also explain wider areas of surface cooling. We'll know for sure in the next three months where things are headed. Bottom line: this isn't a typical ENSO when comparing to previous ones, for the last 30 years anyway. I really didn't expect such a quick change from El Nino. In fact, as this was a Modoki El Nino, previous Modoki's were not followed by La Nina let alone one of this magnitude. On top of that the SOI normally doesn't get as deep as it has or for so long even in 1998. As there is about a 6-7 month lag response to SOI, it will certainly be interesting what happens through June/July. Honestly, none of it is making much sense at this point and is why I'm satisfied with just sitting back and see how it unfolds. Actually, this is making sense and proving some theory's that AGW folks have discounted in the past. 1. Solar winds etc have an effect on climate. It is NOT only the TSI that has an effect. 2. UV and jet streams. Once again, effect. 3. Low sunspots seem to equate clouds. that means reflection of energy. I can't find the paper that I read some time ago about sunlight and diffusion of said sunlights effects on sea temperature. It was quit dramatic to say the least. The oceans have been cooling for some time. AGW folks don't like that and to be honest, I don't either as long term that means world wide cooling. On a regional basis, when we were cooling during the 1940's through the 70's, our weather sucked big time. It has sucked big time since 2004 as well. While the surface temps may have stabalized, other temps have fallen....ocean. And I still attribute that to the sun and what it is doing. Well, there is astronomical order in everything as all our climate and resulting weather is regulated by celestial forces - that is the mechanism many miss, though it is right there, in front of their own eyes. The period from 1944 to 1980, in astrological terms, was called the Cycle of the Moon, and this was a period of cooling in the world. We are now in the Cycle of the Sun, which began in 1980, and this phase is one of global warming. We are about to enter a new phase, which is another cooling cycle, by 2017, so there is still time to prepare, though the AGW mania and corruption of climate science has wasted valuable decades to prepare for another round of climate change. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 21, 2011 16:10:45 GMT
Actually, this is making sense and proving some theory's that AGW folks have discounted in the past. 1. Solar winds etc have an effect on climate. It is NOT only the TSI that has an effect. 2. UV and jet streams. Once again, effect. 3. Low sunspots seem to equate clouds. that means reflection of energy. I can't find the paper that I read some time ago about sunlight and diffusion of said sunlights effects on sea temperature. It was quit dramatic to say the least. The oceans have been cooling for some time. AGW folks don't like that and to be honest, I don't either as long term that means world wide cooling. On a regional basis, when we were cooling during the 1940's through the 70's, our weather sucked big time. It has sucked big time since 2004 as well. While the surface temps may have stabalized, other temps have fallen....ocean. And I still attribute that to the sun and what it is doing. The U.S. is cooling at an "alarming rate" Here Piers Corbyn reveals some interesting details on his forecasting techniques. As many have said which solar deniers still can't seem to understand, it isn't all about TSI. That there are clear correlations to solar activity and hydrological processes should spark a few neural networks. For those who complain that Corbyn doesn't publish his work, well guess what, there's a reason why certain products are never patented. If you can figure out how it works, congratulations, it's yours to exploit. Exactly, a very good point Magellan. Piers is an astrometeorologist, and what he does is no different than what Kepler, Newton, and Franklin have done in long-range forecasting of the climate and weather. One of the major problems some have in searching for a mechanism to exploit is that they miss the obvious mechanisms right above their heads, that of the Sun, Moon, planets and outer space - the causes of all climate changes and weather. There is plenty of information on how to begin to forecast astronomically, but those who play with computer models and data are fueled by a false philosophy that denies them access to the truth of the matter. Entirely consumed by their own egos, and dismissive of anyone else who regularly out forecasts them, it is not a wonder that the major climate centers and meteorologists worldwide are unable to forecast accurately outside of two weeks. Astrometeorologists, like Piers, will continue high percentage advanced forecasting because they follow astrophysical and geophysical laws ~ these laws do not change for those pushing their computer-modeled "products" onto the general public. |
|
|
|
Post by boxman on Jan 21, 2011 19:46:21 GMT
AstroMetDo you know of any old videos or something where he actually forecasted something that ended up happening where and when he predicted it? I recall hearing that he predicted the russian heatwaves as well as cold winter, but after looking through countless of his forecast videos i found nothing that even mentioned any russian heatwave and those forecasts he made was often so vague it could fit for everything. Like for example "this winter will have flooding blah blah blah" but no mention of any exact location or timing which means it would be correct no matter what since some parts of world will pretty much on any given date have some form of such "extreme" weather. I am not saying solar/moon based forecasts are bull, but i sadly havent seen any evidence to convince me yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 21, 2011 20:53:10 GMT
AstroMetDo you know of any old videos or something where he actually forecasted something that ended up happening where and when he predicted it? I recall hearing that he predicted the russian heatwaves as well as cold winter, but after looking through countless of his forecast videos i found nothing that even mentioned any russian heatwave and those forecasts he made was often so vague it could fit for everything. Like for example "this winter will have flooding blah blah blah" but no mention of any exact location or timing which means it would be correct no matter what since some parts of world will pretty much on any given date have some form of such "extreme" weather. I am not saying solar/moon based forecasts are bull, but i sadly havent seen any evidence to convince me yet. Actually, Piers has been at it for quite some time. His long-range accuracy rate is the same as mine, at 85%. That's higher than all the climate centers and MET offices on the planet. Piers forecasts for Europe primarily, but also has done so for North America. He is one of about five astromets worldwide (including yours truly) who does this. He has been putting out his forecasts for years, but it was only this year with the advent of his 2009-2010 forecast versus the British MET Office that the news media has paid attention, since most times the attention span is that of a fly with most people. Regarding long-range seasonal forecasts: Try not to mistake these for the short-range "exact location" and "timing" types of forecasts, since seasonal climate forecasts have to cover large portions of the planet. All seasonal forecasts are written generally for a reason - because of the wide coverage of regions. Each particular region means more work and this cannot be done for free - it is costly, both in time and resources. And since many climate agencies and Met offices fail to forecast past two weeks accurately (with much more staff & resources at their disposal) you'd be better asking them why they can't get the "exact location" and "timing" down. For someone like Piers or me to forecast for each location means tons more effort, resources and time, and we do not work for free, yet publish our long-range forecasts for the public free of charge despite the mealy mouths who like to complain, but rarely complain about the failures of their own local METs and climatologists who spend tens of millions with accuracy rates below 5%. We can't cover the entire earth for each specific region due to the amount of time that must be invested. The best that can serve as a guide are seasonal forecasts. The Earth is a big planet and each region has its own micro-climate which demands more attention to detail - and this means many weeks of advanced work for each particular region. Like any profession, it costs, and we do not work for free. However, the evidence is there if you look. Astronomic forecasting is thousands of years old and has been relied on by many nations and performed very well. Astrometeorology is an advanced and a complex forecasting science that follows astrophysical principles that prove all causes of climate and weather are regulated by celestial forces. We monitor astronomic motions, the activity of the Sun, cosmic rays, and the modulation of the space around the Earth by the planets. Cosmic rays, for instance, have much more impact on our planet than Co2 ever could on climate change. This is not hard to understand if you remember the Earth is a planet that is part of a solar system. Educate yourself on astrometeorology as there is plenty of evidence out there of its accuracy. There are MET offices in these regions of the world consume the lion's share of resources but put out less accurate forecasts - while their seasonal forecasts are useless. Remember that conventional climatology and meteorology is still very young and they continue to lack the analog data and skills to forecast outside of two weeks, much less five days. One of the problems even students of climatology and meteorology have is that they are too enamored with computer models, lack education on what the causes of climate change and weather are and spend too much time on short-range weather. They see effects as causes. Nothing is learned this way. It all has to be unlearned in order to raise their pitiful accuracy rate which is well below 10 percent. We need more long-range forecasters, but until the AGW mania goes into the toilet as well as playing around with computer models - you will not see accurate forecasts coming out of the conventional centers and MET offices any time soon. |
|
|
|
Post by glc on Jan 22, 2011 13:11:28 GMT
Steve recently posted a couple of links in which Piers Corbyn predicted cold and snow throughout January in the UK.
The met office suggested it would be a mild January turning colder towards the end of the month.
Result so far: We (in central england) haven't seen so much as a snowflake since well before xmas. In the past couple of weeks we have had double figure temperatures which in some cases have continued overnight. The last few days have been cooler with night frosts.
Piers certainly hasn't outperformed the Met Office as far as January is concerned.
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 22, 2011 14:14:02 GMT
Steve recently posted a couple of links in which Piers Corbyn predicted cold and snow throughout January in the UK. The met office suggested it would be a mild January turning colder towards the end of the month. Result so far: We (in central england) haven't seen so much as a snowflake since well before xmas. In the past couple of weeks we have had double figure temperatures which in some cases have continued overnight. The last few days have been cooler with night frosts. Piers certainly hasn't outperformed the Met Office as far as January is concerned. The conclusion is.......solar cycle 24 is different and they both make predictions that don't bear fruit. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 22, 2011 17:32:55 GMT
Steve recently posted a couple of links in which Piers Corbyn predicted cold and snow throughout January in the UK. The met office suggested it would be a mild January turning colder towards the end of the month. Result so far: We (in central england) haven't seen so much as a snowflake since well before xmas. In the past couple of weeks we have had double figure temperatures which in some cases have continued overnight. The last few days have been cooler with night frosts. Piers certainly hasn't outperformed the Met Office as far as January is concerned. Hey Glc, it must be nice sitting on your arse over there being critical of everything forecasted which doesn't fall into line with your AGW-everything-is-warmer religion, huh? If you can do better than Piers, than why are you not on the forecasting field of play knocking heads with the rest of us forecasters rather than sitting in the peanut gallery telling us pros on the field how very "wrong" they are all the time? Nearly every post from you is complain, complain and more complaining and with little knowledge of climate forecasting to boot - except to tell other forecasters how "wrong" they are? Geez. Forecasting, for your information, is not a ideology, it is not a philosophy and there is no "right" and "wrong" as you apply it to forecasting; especially astronomic forecasting. There are going to be hits and misses, which is common in forecasting. It ain't nothing new. Forecasters learn as much from their misses as they do their hits. Piers maintains a high percentage of accuracy that is tons better than the British MET has ever done. Why don't you give the guy his due instead of pissing on his head every opportunity you get? Is it so difficult for people like you to clap your hands now and then and say, "job well done." Or, do you find it easier to whip out your yank and take another leak on someone doing what you cannot do yourself? Why don't you learn how to read seasonal forecasts rather than going on yet another spiel about how "wrong" Piers, or any other forecaster is about their long-range forecasts? Also, would you please stop reading whatever you want in these forecasts which you then "cherry-pick" to yet complain (again) about how "wrong" it all is why don't you? It's all so very tired and old Glc. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Jan 23, 2011 15:03:21 GMT
I also went through Piers' forecasting archive last summer looking for any mention of Russian heatwaves, Pakistan flooding, Bolivian cold and found nothing. Piers appears to be quite good at prediction outrageous weather that usually never arrives. It seems to me that occasionally luck gives him a hit and then subsequently the publicity he needs.
His winter forecast has been way off since the week before Christmas. Should the weather go as the conventional forecasters see it then he will have used up his 15% of errors before the year has got going!
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 23, 2011 15:06:59 GMT
I also went through Piers' forecasting archive last summer looking for any mention of Russian heatwaves, Pakistan flooding, Bolivian cold and found nothing. Piers appears to be quite good at prediction outrageous weather that usually never arrives. It seems to me that occasionally luck gives him a hit and then subsequently the publicity he needs. His winter forecast has been way off since the week before Christmas. Should the weather go as the conventional forecasters see it then he will have used up his 15% of errors before the year has got going! Steve: Astrometeorology is actually quit good at predicting long range climatic trends. It is very poor at forcasting site specific weather. Anyone who says otherwise is blowing smoke. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 23, 2011 19:33:23 GMT
I also went through Piers' forecasting archive last summer looking for any mention of Russian heatwaves, Pakistan flooding, Bolivian cold and found nothing. Piers appears to be quite good at prediction outrageous weather that usually never arrives. It seems to me that occasionally luck gives him a hit and then subsequently the publicity he needs. His winter forecast has been way off since the week before Christmas. Should the weather go as the conventional forecasters see it then he will have used up his 15% of errors before the year has got going! Steve: Astrometeorology is actually quit good at predicting long range climatic trends. It is very poor at forcasting site specific weather. Anyone who says otherwise is blowing smoke. While, I'm going to blow some smoke then: the fact of the matter is that astrometeorology is good at forecasting short, medium and long-range events. The problem is with most people who tend to opine on this subject is that they don't have the facts, much less any knowledge of astrometeorology, to even have an opinion, much less have the nerve to state one. But then again, we've seen this in the AGW mania, where everyone is suddenly an "expert" on the weather, climate and forecasting - but who know very little. This is what I mean by ideology: there are people, on this board as well, who would mix and match numbers to death but have not the slightest clue about the most basic principles of what causes and regulates their weather and climate. Yet, they come off as being somehow "expert" in their cynical musings. That is the problem with climatology and meteorology. We've got lots of "talkers" but few "walkers" who actually practice what they preach, or criticize. It's a crying shame because that is exactly what has caused bullshit to rein as king for nearly 30 years in climate science. So, before you go making pronouncements on astrometeorology - consult the experts who actually practice the science, rather than taking stock in your own uninformed opinions. Like accepting the fact that man-made global warming is a lie; this is also a hard truth to swallow for those with big egos and loud opinions - but the bigger the ego, the bigger the pill you must swallow. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 23, 2011 19:47:13 GMT
Steve: Astrometeorology is actually quit good at predicting long range climatic trends. It is very poor at forcasting site specific weather. Anyone who says otherwise is blowing smoke. While, I'm going to blow some smoke then: the fact of the matter is that astrometeorology is good at forecasting short, medium and long-range events. The problem is with most people who tend to opine on this subject is that they don't have the facts, much less any knowledge of astrometeorology, to even have an opinion, much less have the nerve to state one. But then again, we've seen this in the AGW mania, where everyone is suddenly an "expert" on the weather, climate and forecasting - but who know very little. This is what I mean by ideology: there are people, on this board as well, who would mix and match numbers to death but have not the slightest clue about the most basic principles of what causes and regulates their weather and climate. Yet, they come off as being somehow "expert" in their cynical musings. That is the problem with climatology and meteorology. We've got lots of "talkers" but few "walkers" who actually practice what they preach, or criticize. It's a crying shame because that is exactly what has caused bullshit to rein as king for nearly 30 years in climate science. So, before you go making pronouncements on astrometeorology - consult the experts who actually practice the science, rather than taking stock in your own uninformed opinions. Like accepting the fact that man-made global warming is a lie; this is also a hard truth to swallow for those with big egos and loud opinions - but the bigger the ego, the bigger the pill you must swallow. Theodore: You are a nice young feller. Myself, I am an old fart. Being I am a farmer, I have been observing weather forcasts for years and years with keen interest and also look at the reliability of said. My experience tells me that astrometeorology is quit good at long term climate forcasts. As far as regional, daily etc...it isn't worth a hoot. I would say it is right on par with forcasts by other methods that go out more than one day. Both are crap shoots. You are confident in your forcasts........that is fine with me. I have learned that forcasts projected over 2 days and longer are about worthless by any method of projection. That was my point earlier about micro verses macro forcasting. NO one has the micro down at all. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 23, 2011 21:44:00 GMT
While, I'm going to blow some smoke then: the fact of the matter is that astrometeorology is good at forecasting short, medium and long-range events. The problem is with most people who tend to opine on this subject is that they don't have the facts, much less any knowledge of astrometeorology, to even have an opinion, much less have the nerve to state one. But then again, we've seen this in the AGW mania, where everyone is suddenly an "expert" on the weather, climate and forecasting - but who know very little. This is what I mean by ideology: there are people, on this board as well, who would mix and match numbers to death but have not the slightest clue about the most basic principles of what causes and regulates their weather and climate. Yet, they come off as being somehow "expert" in their cynical musings. That is the problem with climatology and meteorology. We've got lots of "talkers" but few "walkers" who actually practice what they preach, or criticize. It's a crying shame because that is exactly what has caused bullshit to rein as king for nearly 30 years in climate science. So, before you go making pronouncements on astrometeorology - consult the experts who actually practice the science, rather than taking stock in your own uninformed opinions. Like accepting the fact that man-made global warming is a lie; this is also a hard truth to swallow for those with big egos and loud opinions - but the bigger the ego, the bigger the pill you must swallow. Theodore: You are a nice young feller. Myself, I am an old fart. Being I am a farmer, I have been observing weather forcasts for years and years with keen interest and also look at the reliability of said. My experience tells me that astrometeorology is quit good at long term climate forcasts. As far as regional, daily etc...it isn't worth a hoot. I would say it is right on par with forcasts by other methods that go out more than one day. Both are crap shoots. You are confident in your forcasts........that is fine with me. I have learned that forcasts projected over 2 days and longer are about worthless by any method of projection. That was my point earlier about micro verses macro forcasting. NO one has the micro down at all. I've never met an astronomic forecaster who ever participated in crap shots in forecasting. Any expert forecaster must be confident. The business of forecasting is not a game, it is not for the weak of mind, nor for those who lack confidence. Confidence is born out of experience and application of one's expertise. It is not a thing to be despised or looked down upon: for where you find a person either over-confident or under-confident, there you will find the amateur - but not a professional. In my early years of training, one of the people who used astrometeorology was a Pennsylvanian farmer my family knew. A very wise farmer who was not only stubborn but had a mind like a steel trap. He was an old fart too. He taught me that nature is a good teacher and that nature included the skies, the heavens above, from where all the fruit harvested by soil fully depended. He practiced the mantra "as above, so below," and for very good reasons, since he was a farmer. It was his business to know what was to come in the climate. His family depended on it. He also knew something of physics and I liked that too. He taught me many things as did my other tutors - and they never gambled. Either they knew or did not know. They never guessed. They never "threw craps." And neither do I. Regarding macro & micro - There was a recent piece written on how people who see numbers often misread what they are seeing and don't make account for things such as Parallax, which astrologers regularly have to account for in their many calculations on the variable motions of the planets. This is called - Metrology, or the science of measurement. There was a good post on this at Watts Up With That ~ "This post is actually about the poor quality and processing of historical climatic temperature records rather than Metrology.
My main points are that in climatology many important factors that are accounted for in other areas of science and engineering are completely ignored by many scientists:
1. Human Errors in accuracy and resolution of historical data are ignored.
2. Mechanical thermometer resolution is ignored.
3. Electronic gauge calibration is ignored.
4. Mechanical and Electronic temperature gauge accuracy is ignored.
5. Hysteresis in modern data acquisition is ignored.
6. Conversion from Degrees F to Degrees C introduces false resolution into data."For more, see -> wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/22/the-metrology-of-thermometers/This is why, when people often throw out a lot of "micro" numbers on the climate, I cringe a bit. There are good reasons to believe that the numbers are wrong, or, at best, being read incorrectly, with many assumptions piled on ad nauseous about why the climate and weather is doing this, or doing that. We astrometeorologists are fully capable of forecasting advanced climate and weather with a minimum 85% accuracy. This means we are nearly there. That's a good thing. People who go on about not being "perfect" are usually the ignorant: they see things as either zero on the scale or 100% on the scale. They like to leech off the skilled, and are critical and demeaning because of ego: they feel as if "they" cannot do the forecasting - then no one can. That's the height of ignorance. These are the boneheads who haven't a clue as to what they speak, but whom love and love to pontificate via their opinions and criticisms - but never on actual experience from expertise - that's because they don't have any. It is my contention that there is nothing beyond the capacity of the human mind. Nothing. Those who would claim otherwise not only lack any confidence at all, but always like to give humanity the short stick. In my experience, people who are like that - who claim that Man is unable to know more - are using less than 10% of their own brainpower. So their opinion ain't worth a tooting, as we like to say in the U.S. There are people out there who have already solved some of the most pressing problems in forecasting science - with solutions. The reasons why many haven't clued in is because of all the static noise which has blocked out this knowledge. Once the junk cars are cleared off the highway, and the static tuned out, then people will be better able to enjoy and learn on their journey on the highway of knowledge. Astrometeorology has lasted for thousands of years for very good reasons: "If it ain't broke, then don't fix it." I learned that from my gentleman tutor farmer too. He was a very wise fellow. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Jan 24, 2011 10:49:22 GMT
Anyone who *confidently* tells you what the weather is going to be in 3 months time is blowing (or sucking) *a lot* of smoke.
It's all very well to inspire confidence in ones ability. But that is also a mark of a good confidence trickster. Some things though are not certain in life. Expressing that lack of certainty in a useful way and is an important skill that few have. Eg. "Odds on for a barbeque summer" was supposed to express a lack of certainty in a useful way and failed miserably!
|
|
