It has often been said that “Weather is not climate”, but ultimately it provides the only meaningful way to verify climate models. Did the climate models predict the cold, snowy weather which has been seen across much of the US?
According to NOAA, October was the third coldest on record in the US, with almost every state showing temperatures from one to ten degrees below normal. Some Parts of Colorado received record snowfall during October, starting the first week of the month.
Image from HPRCC – University of Nebraska at Lincoln
With a few days left, it appears that December is headed for a repeat, with temperatures ranging from one to fifteen degrees below normal. (Note that the color scale is different from October, now the greens show more negative departure, even South Texas is at -6F)
Image from HPRCC – University of Nebraska at Lincoln
Temperatures for the rest of the month are forecast by NCEP to be below normal for almost the entire country, so it is unlikely that the map will change much before New Years Day.
So let’s compare the complete Autumn temperatures vs. the forecasts from NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center. In August, CPC forecast that most of the US would have above normal temperatures from October through December, and perhaps more importantly did did not predict that any areas would have below normal temperatures.
As you can see below, their prediction was largely reversed from what has happened. Most of the country has seen below normal temperatures during the same period.
Image from HPRCC – University of Nebraska at Lincoln
So my question is – if the climate models can’t reliably predict the next three months, what basis do they have to claim their ability to forecast 100 years out? It is well known in the weather modeling community that beyond about three days, the models tend to break down due to chaos.
We have all heard lots of predictions of warmer winters, less snow, animal populations moving north, drought, dying ski resorts, etc. But did anyone in the climate modeling community forecast the cold, snowy start to winter which has occurred. If not, it would appear that their models are not mature enough to base policy decisions on.
On the other side of the pond, The Met Office forecast 2010 to be the warmest year ever, as they last did in 2007. On cue, the weather turned bitter cold immediately after the forecast and it appears that the unusally cold weather will continue at least through mid-January. As in 2007, the Met office 2010 forecast is not getting off to a good start:
http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp4.html
frankr (19:20:30) : “Al Gore impersonation:“The entire state of Florida is experiencing temperatures this December that are significantly above normal.”
The “normal” temps for my part of Florida this time of year (about 70 miles south of Tampa on the Gulf coast) range from lower 50’s to lower 80’s for daytime highs and from lower 40’s to upper 60’s for overnight lows. Haven’t experienced anything “significantly” outside that range for more that a day or two at a time in over 19 years. Methinks the climate has been pretty steady.
Yes. “Weather is not climate.”
But promoters of AGW are going to have a hard time selling the public that cold weather is evidence of global warming!
May the spotlight of public scrutiny melt the dirty Climategate iceberg and expose the other scientific frauds directed by NASA, DOE, NAS, etc.
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Apparently the Met office hasn’t yet gotten the prediction racket down pat. As any good shyster can tell you it’s important that a prediction concern events far enough into the future that no one will remember or care when they fail, but close enough in time to make people demand action. A perfect example is the Greenland ice sheet disappearlng by 2020. Or the Arctic summer ice sheet melting by 2018.
Pamela Gray (18:48:01) : Type two quick and I end up with to many errors…
Your wry humour in this entry is finally comprehended, m’am. Colour me slow; and humbled.
So the CPC outlook for my part of Montana was a 40 percent chance of above normal temperatures…a 34 percent chance of normal temperatures…and a 26 percent chance of below normal temperatures (Oct-Dec). Observed will be around 2 degrees below normal.
Was this outlook useful? Probably not. There are so many things that affect climate numbers for Montana over a three month period (AO, NAO, PNA, MJO, Sudden Stratospheric Warming, etc) most of which are not predicable beyond 14 days.
The CPC outlook was done in mid-September and those that put the outlook together know uncertainity of what they are doing. Hence, the 40%/34%/27% numbers.
“It is well known in the weather modeling community that beyond about three days, the models tend to break down due to chaos.”
Wow, that sure is an understatement. Yesterday, the NWS predicted Chicagoland would receive about 2-3 inches of fresh snow, but instead about a foot of snow covered us. It was beautiful, but the 24 hour weather prediction missed the target times two. Here is the map of snowfall 12/26/09:
http://weblogs.wgntv.com/chicago-weather/tom-skilling-blog/2009/12/snowfall-totals-from-yesterday.html
A few more comments gleamed from
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/03/15/if-you-cant-explain-it-you-cant-model-it/
What has become obvious is that there are strong natural variations that are not yet understood, nor adequately accounted for in the computer climate models. The current global computer models have over-estimated global warming. There has been lots of speculation about what is causing the present pattern – changes in solar activity, changes in ocean circulation, or changes in clouds and wind and dust patterns. Whatever it is, it is not adequately factored into any CO2 Global Warming computer models. One of the most fundamental rules of computer modeling is that: if you don’t understand something and you can’t explain it, you can’t model it. A computer model is a mathematical description of a physical process, written in a human readable programming language, which a compiler can translate to a computer readable language. If CO2 global warming theorists cannot fully describe the climate change process in words, then computer programmers certainly cannot describe it mathematically in computer languages. Antonio Zichichi, stated “…models used by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are incoherent and invalid from a scientific point of view” Who is Antonio Zichichi? President of the World Federation of Scientists, President of the Enrico Fermi Centre, discovery of Nuclear Antimatter.
What about those IPCC computer models gloom and doom global temperature predictions? They may allow for taxation of CO2 emissions while
the IPCC leadership rakes in billions of personal wealth. Sounds like conflict of interest? We get the snowjob, and they get the dough!
MORE STORMS DUE?
He’s predicting some significant storms for the next 2-3 days.
http://www.weatheraction.com/docs/WANews09No103.pdf
They are even freezing in Calcutta, India.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1091228/jsp/calcutta/story_11915674.jsp
I am living in North Central Florida and I have worn a thick jacket for all of Dec 1-2 days here and there I switched to a light coat. Very cold this year..Brrr
Here is a better picture of the last 30 days before they start playing with the color bar , it is funny they play with the color bar to make it look like it really isnt as cold as it really is look at this picture for the last 30 days . http://www.hprcc.unl.edu/maps/current/index.php?action=update_daterange&daterange=30d
Roger Carr (19:56:21) Thank you for making that clear, at first glance, I thought a red beverage may have been involved.
Hold up. I noticed something important.
Pennsylvania, see the lower-left spot of warming, stands right out. Where are they getting their readings?
See map of Pennsylvania. It looks like the spot is at Altoona, not much else around. What could be causing warming at Altoona?
What is at Altoona? Penn State Altoona. That’s right, Michael Mann’s Penn State, Altoona campus.
What do they offer there? A B.A. in Environmental Studies. (Go ahead and click, enjoy the picture.)
Example of the faculty for the program:
Marieta Staneva
Senior Lecturer in Geography
Specialist on the impact of global warming
…
[kirk]
MANNNNN!!!!
[/kirk]
I kept 3 monthly forecasts for Oct-Jan at the beginning of Oct. All showed continual above avg. temps for the winter in the US, especially along the northern plains states. Here is what was posted 10/09 for Jan-Mar of 2010: http://i38.tinypic.com/359jy2v.jpg
Anthony:
I noticed that your forecast was dated August 2009. NOAA produces long range climate forecasts every month – check out their prediction for Nov-Dec-Jan 2009-10 from September 17:
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/archives/long_lead/gifs/2009/200909temp.gif
In addition to having above normal temperatures for the central-western US, they actually were predicting ** below normal ** temperatures for the southeast! Is it chilly in Florida?
Can we call global warmists….global cooling deniers now?
Following up on my previous post, you can also get plots of NOAA’s predictions for US temperatures for the period Oct-Dec 2009 from forecasts made in:
Jan 2009:
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/archives/long_lead/gifs/2009/200901temp.gif
Feb 2009:
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/archives/long_lead/gifs/2009/200902temp.gif
Mar 2009:
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/archives/long_lead/gifs/2009/200902temp.gif
Apr 2009:
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/archives/long_lead/gifs/2009/200904temp.gif
May 2009:
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/archives/long_lead/gifs/2009/200905temp.gif
Jun 2009:
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/archives/long_lead/gifs/2009/200906temp.gif
—
Notice that all of these forecasts were predicting average to above normal temperatures for the central-western US – nothing below normal!
Clearly, climate forecasts with “short” lead times of 3 – 12 months are really not skillful at the present time. Which is too bad – these forecasts would really be useful if they had any predictive ability. Sadly, it appears that the major of climate funding is going towards the AGW-oriented junk science projects (like the IPCC TAR 5) rather than trying to improve long range temperature and precipitation forecasts…
Pamela Gray (18:48:01) : errors ???
Oh no! Everyone enjoys finding errors in other’s writing, especially students finding such in the teacher’s work. So by putting them therein you provide enjoyment for others. Don’t phret.
Jeff L (19:45:02) : “This is a very unusual pattern…”
Just a guess but see if you have had winds out of the east and upslope.
I think it’s safe to assume that if the AGW crowd instituted cap-n-trade (or something worse), the revelation of below running-average temperatures in the near future would be taken as proof they were right and cap-n-trade was the right prescription.
“It has often been said that “Weather is not climate”, but ultimately it provides the only meaningful way to verify climate models.”
Huh?
Frank K,
It is true that CPC shows Florida cold in their Nov-Jan forecast, but it will be another five weeks before that forecast can be evaluated. August was the most recent Oct-Dec forecast.
maxx (20:43:26) :
Can we call global warmists….global cooling deniers now?
——————————
Good idea. I think some have been doing that already.
One major reasons models fail to match reality is that errors in initial conditions propagate in a compounding fashion with successive iterations of the data. In the absence of unphysical constraints and “plug” quantitative adjustments, the whole enterprise quickly runs off the rails. I am not contending the models are entirely useless, merely that they are by definition simulations of reality. The models generally are very poor as to outlier events and step changes that occur in natural variability precisely because model runaway from error compounding must be dampened somehow. Otherwise no good data will ever derive from the model runs.
Even if this blog post has a point, I’ll play devil’s advocate and underline the fact that a correct climate model *could* predict a general long term trend and fail to give us correct medium term predictions.
I believe the main effect of Climategate, since the warmers are undeterred, has been to give too much confidence to the “skeptics”, so that some comments here have become a bit too optimistic, self-reliant and sketchy.
We need to stay on guard and question our assumptions.
Steve Goddard (21:08:59) :
“It is true that CPC shows Florida cold in their Nov-Jan forecast, but it will be another five weeks before that forecast can be evaluated. August was the most recent Oct-Dec forecast.”
Thanks Steve – I did think about that, but of course we’re nearly 2/3rds of the way through the forecast period. I suppose it could turn colder, but it would have to be a lot colder to markedly influence the three month average. And the short range forecast shown above for the next week doesn’t indicate an imminent cold snap…