NOTE: readers of this thread may be interested in this:
An ethical challenge for Greg Laden – put your money where your mouth is
================================================================
Here is the sort of headlines we had Friday, for example this one from Huffington Post where they got all excited about some early reports from Andrew Freedman:
Super Typhoon Haiyan — which is one of the strongest storms in world history based on maximum windspeed — is about to plow through the Central Philippines, producing a potentially deadly storm surge and dumping heavy rainfall that could cause widespread flooding. As of Thursday afternoon Eastern time, Haiyan, known in the Philippines as Super Typhoon Yolanda, had estimated maximum sustained winds of 195 mph with gusts above 220 mph, which puts the storm in extraordinarily rare territory.
UPDATE 5: from this NYT article:
Before the typhoon made landfall, some international forecasters were estimating wind speeds at 195 m.p.h., which would have meant the storm would hit with winds among the strongest recorded. But local forecasters later disputed those estimates. “Some of the reports of wind speeds were exaggerated,” Mr. Paciente said.
The Philippine weather agency measured winds on the eastern edge of the country at about 150 m.p.h., he said, with some tracking stations recording speeds as low as 100 m.p.h.
Ah those wind speed estimates, they don’t always meet up with reality later – Anthony
==============================================================
By Paul Homewood
Sadly it appears that at least 1000 1200 1774* lives have been lost in Typhoon Yolanda (or Haiyan), that has just hit the Philippines. There appear to have been many unsubstantiated claims about its size, though these now appear to start being replaced by accurate information.
Nevertheless the BBC are still reporting today
Typhoon Haiyan – one of the most powerful storms on record to make landfall …….The storm made landfall shortly before dawn on Friday, bringing gusts that reached 379km/h (235 mph).
Unfortunately we cannot always trust the BBC to give the facts these days, so let’s see what the Philippine Met Agency, PAGASA, have to say. Here are the surface wind reports:
http://www.pagasa.dost.gov.ph/wb/tcarchive_files.html
http://www.pagasa.dost.gov.ph/wb/wbfcst.html
So at landfall the sustained wind was 235 kmh or 147 mph, with gusts upto 275 kmh or 171 mph. This is 60 mph less than the BBC have quoted.
The maximum strength reached by the typhoon appears to have been around landfall, as the reported windspeeds three hours earlier were 225 kmh (140mph).
Terrible though this storm was, it only ranks as a Category 4 storm, and it is clear nonsense to suggest that it is “one of the most powerful storms on record to make landfall “
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saffir%E2%80%93Simpson_Hurricane_Scale
Given the geography of the Pacific, most typhoons stay out at sea, or only hit land once they have weakened. But in total terms, the busiest typhoon season in recent decades was 1964, whilst the following year logged the highest number of super typhoons (which equate to Cat 3 +). Of the eleven super typhoons that year, eight were Category 5’s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typhoon
So far this year, before Yolanda there have been just three Category 5’s, none of which hit land at that strength.
Personally I don’t like to comment on events such as these until long after the dust has settled. Unfortunately though, somebody has to set the record if we cannot rely on the BBC and others to get the basic facts right.
UPDATE
In case anyone thinks I am overreacting, take a look at the Daily Mail headlines.
Just looking at it again, is it possible the MSM are confusing mph with kmh? It seems a coincidence that PAGASA report 235 kmh.
UPDATE 2
I have just registered a complaint at the Press Complaints Commission against the Mail article. If anyone spots similar articles elsewhere, and I will add them to my complaint.
UPDATE 3
I seem to have been right about the kmh/mph confusion!
I’ve just scanned down the Mail article and seen this:
Unless they think “gusts” are less than “winds”, it looks like someone has boobed.
=============================================================
UPDATE4: Kent Noonan writes in with this addition –
CNN has had several articles stating the same numbers for wind speed as BBC and Mail. I saw these numbers first last night at 10PM Pacific time.
Today’s story: “Powered by 195-mph winds and gusts up to 235 mph, it then struck near Tacloban and Dulag on the island of Leyte, flooding the coastal communities.”
http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/09/world/asia/philippines-typhoon-haiyan/index.html?hpt=hp_inthenews
If these “news” agencies don’t issue a correction, we will be forever battling the new meme of “most powerful storm in world history”.
Look at today’s google search for “most powerful storm”
stories run by Independent, NBC, dailymail, NPR, Foxnews, CNBC, WND, Business Insider, PBS, BBC, CNN, FirstPost, Bloomberg
“All you need to know Typhoon Haiyan, world’s most powerful storm” by FP Staff Nov 8, 2013
Then they go on to correctly state gusts to 170mph !!
UPDATE 6: (update 5 is at the head of the post)
BBC now reporting reduced wind speeds that would make it a Cat4 storm:
Typhoon Haiyan – one of the most powerful storms on record to make landfall – swept through six central Philippine islands on Friday.
It brought sustained winds of 235km/h (147mph), with gusts of 275 km/h (170 mph), with waves as high as 15m (45ft), bringing up to 400mm (15.75 inches) of rain in places.
Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-24887337 (h/t David S)
UPDATE7: While hit and run haters like Greg laden deplore us pointing out the measurements of wind speeds, labeling us with all sorts of derogatory names, they conveniently ignore purposely created propaganda like this:
The juxtaposition in Tenney Naumer’s Twitter Feed says it all:
Rules for Radicals: “We are always moral and our enemies always immoral.” The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the immorality of the opposition,”
UPDATE 8: here is another number you are likely to see bandied about as supposed proof of this storm being historically unprecedented, courtesy Tenney Naumer who pointed it out in comments:
NOAA recorded Haiyan’s lowest central pressure at 858, quite possibly a record in the instrumental era:
http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/PS/TROP/DATA/2013/tdata/wpac/31W.html
Those aren’t measurements Tenney, they are ESTIMATES. Done from satellite. They are called DVORAK fixes.
And note, the estimates stay the same for several hours without any fluctuation, then repeat values in bracketing outside that period, a sure sign of a model doing rounding.
Here is the source page: http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/PS/TROP/storms/HAIYAN.html
The technique is new, and has issues and acknowledged biases, it is a work in progress. One of the issues is that verification has only been done for near US Atlantic Basin storms within the range of hurricane hunter aircraft.
Paper on the technique is here: http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2010WAF2222375.1 ]
UPDATE9: (h/t to WUWT reader StewGreen)
From the Government of the Philippines sitrep report, a screencap:
Click to access NDRRMC%20UP%20Sitrep%20No12%20re%20Effects%20of%20TY%20YOLANDA%20111113.pdf
UPDATE 10: Laden’s claims in his tirade aren’t supported by actual science and data, he writes:
But Watts and Homewood don’t want storms to be important for the simple reason that the best models strongly suggest that there will be more storms … especially in the Pacific, where Haiyan struck, over coming decades because of the changes to climate that humans are carrying out and that Anthony Watts and Paul Homewood deny to be real.
This paper shows the reality:
Kubota, H. and Chan, J.C.L. 2009. Interdecadal variability of tropical cyclone landfall in the Philippines from 1902 to 2005. Geophysical Research Letters 36: 10.1029/2009GL038108.
==================================================================
* Reports are varying wildly
The Red Cross in the Philipines says 1200 in this report: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/09/us-philippines-typhoon-idUSBRE9A603Q20131109
But now Reuters is claiming and estimate of 10,000 based on a late night meeting of officials at the Governors Office. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/10/philippines-typhoon-casualty-idUSL4N0IV00F20131110
About the same time as the Reuters 10K report, television News in the Philipines says the death toll is 151. http://anc.yahoo.com/video/ndrrmc-151-dead-due-yolanda-011610793.html
Early reports often vary widely, and it will be some time before accurate numbers are produced.
Our hearts and prayers go to the Philippine people. For those that wish to help, here is the website of the Philippine Red Cross: http://ushare.redcross.org.ph/
Monday in the WSJ:
Philippines Typhoon Death Count Rises to 1,774
Toll Exceeds Red Cross Estimates of 1,200; Likely to Rise Much Higher
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303914304579191821439194290?tesla=y
Source of the number: http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/334950/news/nation/ndrrmc-confirms-1-774-fatalities-most-are-from-eastern-visayas
UPDATE: 11/12 7AM Philippine president Aquino says to CNN: Typhoon Haiyan deaths likely 2,000 to 2,500 — not 10,000
==============================================================
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
…the stupid, it burns like a flare!
Thanks, Anthony, I had a feeling that the strength of this storm, tragic though it may be, was messed with during reporting.
The quality of the staff at the Daily Mail leave a lot to be desired – factual errors apart there seems to be no proof reading and most certainly no-one with any science knowledge, let alone general knowledge…… then again, the DM are pretty typical of the British MSM (main stream media) as a whole.
Trying to correct (mistakes – SARC) after the MSM informs the public will make very little difference. The public’s perception is made by the first news articles. It is a very sad situation we are in. The deaths and trouble in the Philippines are sad, but this kind of thing happens each year in different places of the world. What the MSM does in creating false perceptions is worse, because the clowns the public elect based on the false perceptions are causing worse problems. The future is very grim. Good luck to one and all.
Thanks for the updates. Does anyone know the actual pressure? Not estimated.
When the comparison to Typhoon Tip was made, it caught my attention. There really was no real comparison in the end.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typhoon_Tip
Thanks for the information – I used your info to correct two newspapers in Canada – The National Post,m and the CBC – which of course wen crazy as usual with hopes of the Philippines themselves being wiped off the face of the earth as THE global warming event they all desperately needed to be that destructive. It never ceases to amaze me how excited the global warming ghouls are with something like this – they really cheer for death and destruction.
But what about the past? [H/t Steven Goddard]
more typhoons from the past in the Philippines.
The majority of the damage from this storm appear to be centred about the Tacloban area of Leyte Island, where landfall was first encountered. The configuration of the coastline apparently enhanced the severity of the resulting storm surge, which was at least a story high, creating a tsunami like condition. Much of the population were still in their homes at the time, resulting in major casualties. It is difficult to estimate the number since virtually all communications and infrastructure were compromised, but initial reports place the known death toll at about a hundred. There is some question as to why no comprehensive evacuations took place, despite the ample warning given.
=========================================================================
I can understand, and forgive, the “plebe” who typed that getting confused between a scale they are familiar with and one they are not. I don’t understand how it made past the editors.
You say potatos, I say potatoes. Miles, Kilos, it’s all the same if your error bars are large enough.
Very few anemometers survive sustained winds over 200kts, misreporting is common as the winds are typically measured in nautical miles per hour and converted to metric and Statue miles per hour. There are pretty substantial differences between the different standards, and it seems like most reporting agencies like to round up in favor higher wind speeds. The misrepresentation by the main stream media is commonplace and they rarely do retractions. kind of disheartening.
The “mistake” of the Mail seems apparent, but I wonder if it is their source of information that is to blame?
The BBC are well known for attempting to convert everything into metrics to make us “more European”.
Their “379 kmh” seems strangely exact. Have they also seen the “235” figure and assumed it is mph (just as the Mail did) and then decided to convert it to kmh to get to 379kmh?
Indeed, it suggests the original source, whatever it may be, is where the original error crept in.
I’ve sent a msg via the form at the end of the BBC page prompting them to check the 235 figure’s units.
You can also use the following feedback forms.
General feedback on news – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/21937779
Error corrections about news – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/21012132
I don’t understand why PAGASA actually bothered to measure wind speed. Surely the number of typhoon photos uploaded to Flickr is a better indicator?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/05/move-over-millibars-flickr-is-the-new-atmospheric-metric-for-hurricane-central-pressure/
As always this disaster is based on the poverty of the area. Populations living in areas that are inadequately prepared for whatever natural events that may occur where they live because they do not have adequate financial resources to do so (or like Katrina) where the resources are misapplied.
Is it just me, or is Yolanda looking a bit ragged as she makes a jog to the north?
http://www.jma.go.jp/en/gms/largec.html?area=6&element=0&time=201311092300
Gary Hladik @ur momisugly 3:25…..hilarious !!
The Daily Mail science dept is responsible for this little gem which says that Virgin Galactic can be pulled to Australia by gravity (orange box at bottom of page)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2467356/London-Sydney-TWO-hours-Virgin-Galactic-space-flight-technology-used-build-new-generation-super-jets-replace-Concorde.html
It’s almost quaint except that the 2 million plus DM readers are in dire need of an education already.
http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/show.html
Jeff Masters
“Haiyan’s place in history
Haiyan hit Guiuan, on the Philippine island of Samar, at 4:40 am local time (20:40 UTC) November 8, 2013. Three hours before landfall, the Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC) assessed Haiyan’s sustained winds at 195 mph, gusting to 235 mph, making it the 4th strongest tropical cyclone in world history. Satellite loops show that Haiyan weakened only slightly, if at all, in the two hours after JTWC’s advisory, so the super typhoon likely made landfall with winds near 195 mph. The next JTWC intensity estimate, for 00Z UTC November 8, about three hours after landfall, put the top winds at 185 mph. Averaging together these estimates gives a strength of 190 mph an hour after landfall. Thus, Haiyan had winds of 190 – 195 mph at landfall, making it the strongest tropical cyclone on record to make landfall in world history. The previous record was held by the Atlantic’s Hurricane Camille of 1969, which made landfall in Mississippi with 190 mph winds.”
CBC radio in Vancouver this morning also converted the 235 mph back to Km/hr and breathlessly reported “wind speeds up to 379 Kph”.
Wishful thinking? I am reminded of the reasoning behind the despondent posts over the failure of the Arctic summer melt at Arctic Sea Ice Blog:
“Thus it is only logical for an alarmist to hope that the sea ice extent keeps diminishing. In fact, an ice-free Arctic might be the perfect wake-up call for the whole world to seriously start discussing what to do about AGW. It might perhaps even point people toward the underlying root problem that threatens human society in more ways than just Global Warming. So, melt, baby, melt, yeah! Show those (pseudo-)skeptics who’s been right all along!”
http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2010/06/the-alarmists-paradox.html
One “ratty” new report I heard said something about a new eye wall.
I don’t have time to check better sources, but “eye wall replacement cycles” are an important feature of major hurricanes as they mature. In general, the smaller the eye the higher the winds, but also it’s harder for the wind to reach the center. A new eyewall forms further out and the old eye starves and dissipates. Over time the new eyewall may shrink and the wind increases again. Or the storm stays weaker, especially if the storm runs into challenges like land. Major hurricanes are remarkably delicate works of nature, many effects have to come together just right to keep them running well and fairly minor events can knock them down a notch or two.
Or so I recall, it’s been years since there’s been a najor Atlantic hurricane worth paying much attention to!
MPH, KPH, what, at this point in time, difference does it make?
Math is hard.
Last time I looked at it through the USN portal it was in the South China Sea and forecast to roll over Hanoi as a TD. Worst typhoon I can recall hit Guam around 1965 and pretty much leveled Anderson AFB. Don’t know how accurate it was but I heard of winds gusting at 200 knots. In any case, when Anderson was rebuilt it was all in reinforced concrete.
The satellite presentation was basically perfect at landfall. There is little doubt this was the strongest possible storm given the physical limits of storms that size. Typhoon Tip in 1979 was much larger but did not have such good symmetry. Tip only brushed land and many similarly strong storms never hit land or weakened before landfall.
The point that will be lost on the alarmists is that the near-perfect symmetry of Haiyan is only possible with nearly perfect weather conditions surrounding the storm. If anything isn’t perfect then the storm becomes asymmetric and can’t achieve top strength. That kind of weather will have no correlation to warning. Furthermore the (theoretical) decrease in the lapse rate will work against any increase in SST’s The SST’s provide better evaporation but the lapse rate provides the condensation which releases latent heat and causes the convection.
http://www.jma.go.jp/en/gms/largec.html?area=6&element=0&time=201311092300
New eye wall or utter collapse of the old one?
Oh, and the BBC have a track record in mixing up their km and miles. I had to correct them on this article in which they had multiplied square mile areas by the linear multiplier (1.61instead of 2.59).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23634801
The article is now ‘corrected’ but there’s more: they were talking about 61.8 ‘square km’ and converting them (inaccurately) to square miles. I suggested that they probably meant a square measuring 61.8 km on a side because this was about the hunting ranges of megafauna and 61.8 sq km meant a very small square for large animals. But when they corrected the multiple they just dispensed with the idea of squares of any kind and just left it as a distance, 61.8 km. What’s that, a radius? A narrow corridor they run up and down?
I think they just lost all confidence over basic school maths and realised they didn’t have a clue what square km were.
I wonder if the Typhoon article was by the same author?