Recently the Chief of the met office went on UK TV to say:
“OUR SHORT TERM FORECASTS ARE AMONG THE BEST IN THE WORLD.” (see video here)
Yesterday, the UK Met Office had to make a rare mea culpa, saying they had botched their own recent snow forecast, it is useful to point out that they aren’t the only one with egg on their faces.
In early October, the Arctic Oscillation (AO) took an unexpected dip into deeply negative territory, which led to the sixth snowiest October on record in the Northern Hemisphere and the snowiest on record in the US. If you look at the 14 day forecast at the bottom of the graph below, you can see that the dip caught NOAA forecasters off guard.
Source: NOAA Arctic Oscillation Forecast
According to Rutgers University Snow Lab, October, 2009 was the snowiest on record in the US.
| Contiguous United States | ||||
| Month | Rank | Area | Departure | Mean |
| 12-2009 | 1/44 | 4161 | 1292 | 2869 |
| 11-2009 | 39/44 | 585 | -512 | 1097 |
| 10-2009 | 1/42 | 538 | 385 | 153 |
| 9-2009 | 5/41 | 21 | 13 | 8 |
| 8-2009 | 12-41/41 | 0 | -5 | 5 |
| 7-2009 | 24-40/40 | 0 | -17 | 17 |
| 6-2009 | 32-42/42 | 0 | -64 | 64 |
| 5-2009 | 37/43 | 34 | -151 | 185 |
| 4-2009 | 17/43 | 859 | 106 | 753 |
| 3-2009 | 23/43 | 1964 | -18 | 1983 |
| 2-2009 | 17/43 | 3172 | 110 | 3062 |
| 1-2009 | 15/43 | 3696 | 185 | 3511 |
Source: Rutgers University Snow Lab
The director of NCAR captured the moment perfectly in this East Anglia Email – dated October 12.
From: Kevin Trenberth <trenbert@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>To: Michael Mann <mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: BBC U-turn on climate
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:57:37 -0600
Cc: Stephen H Schneider <shs@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Myles Allen <allen@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, peter stott <peter.stott@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, “Philip D. Jones” <p.jones@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Benjamin Santer <santer1@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Tom Wigley <wigley@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Thomas R Karl <Thomas.R.Karl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Gavin Schmidt <gschmidt@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, James Hansen <jhansen@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Michael Oppenheimer <omichael@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Hi all
Well I have my own article on where the heck is global warming? We are asking that here in Boulder where we have broken records the past two days for the coldest days on record. We had 4 inches of snow. The high the last 2 days was below 30F and the normal is 69F, and it smashed the previous records for these days by 10F. The low was about 18F and also a record low, well below the previous record low. This is January weather (see the Rockies baseball playoff game was canceled on saturday and then played last night in below freezing weather).
Trenberth, K. E., 2009: An imperative for climate change planning: tracking Earth’s global
energy. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 1, 19-27,
doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2009.06.001. [1][PDF] (A PDF of the published version can be obtained
from the author.)
The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a
travesty that we can’t.
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=1048&filename=1255352257.txt
Once again, this begs the question – if the GCMs can’t forecast the AO two weeks in advance, how can they possible forecast snow and cold 70 years in advance? University of Colorado professor Mark Williams used climate models in 2008 to come up with a remarkable prediction (below) in a year when Aspen broke their snowfall record.
Study: Climate change may force skiers uphill
From the From the Associated Press
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
DENVER — A study of two Rocky Mountain ski resorts says climate change will mean shorter seasons and less snow on lower slopes.
The study by two Colorado researchers says Aspen Mountain in Colorado and Park City in Utah will see dramatic changes even with a reduction in carbon emissions, which fuel climate change.
University of Colorado-Boulder geography professor Mark Williams said Monday that the resorts should be in fairly good shape the next 25 years, but after that there will be less snowpack — or no snow at all — at the base areas, and the season will be shorter because snow will accumulate later and melt earlier.
If carbon emissions increase, the average temperature at Park City will be 10.4 degrees warmer by 2100, and there likely will be no snowpack, according to the study. Skiing at Aspen, with an average temperature 8.6 degrees higher than now, will be marginal.
Since the first of October, Colorado is averaging two to eight degrees below normal, as is most of the US:
Source : NOAA High Plains Regional Climate Center
In December 2009, Colorado averaged three to fifteen degrees below normal, once again correlating with a strongly negative Arctic Oscillation
Source : NOAA High Plains Regional Climate Center
Climate models are iterative through time, which means once they go off in the weeds they can not recover. If AO trends can not be forecast more than a few days in advance, it would seem problematic to make any sort of meaningful long-term climate projections using GCMs.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
[quote]
Climate models are iterative through time, which means once they go off in the weeds they can not recover. If AO trends can not be forecast more than a few days in advance, it would seem problematic to make any sort of meaningful long-term climate projections using GCMs.
[/quote]
I’m not so sure short term events like an AO send climate models off into the weeds. Or that GCMs are meant for short-term predictions.
As we all know, weather’s not climate. And AOs and short-term predictions are both weather.
BRILLIANT POST ANTHONY.
Damn irrefutable.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Here in the North wet coast, we’ve had a relatively mild winter so far, with the Pineapple Express bringing us rain on a regular basis. I wonder how the 2010 Winter Olympics will cope with the poor conditions?
Pineapple Express:
http://www.komonews.com/weather/faq/4307577.html
As for weather forecasts, anything more than a few days is hit and miss. One wonders how these climateers can keep a straight face as they give their pronouncements of guaranteed global warming 50 years into the future.
Once again, this begs the question – if the GCMs can’t forecast the AO two weeks in advance
I think this logic is faulty. Let me illustrate with some examples:
1) Take a massive landslide. We cannot predict where each little pebble goes, but that safely predict that the whole mess will end up down in the valley.
2) We cannot predict where next month’s sunspots will be [the astrologers expected, of course], but we can predict with some success the size of the next cycle [at least roughly]
3) When a dam breaks and the water rushes downstream we don’t know where individual pieces of debris will end up, but can be sure that the water eventually flows to the sea.
4) We cannot predict where an individual molecule of a hot gas will strike the wall enclosing the gas, but we can predict quite well the pressure of all the molecules in toto
etc.
Here in Northern WI they sort of got the long term outlooks right. Sort of in that they were expecting a warmer than normal winter. They were basing that mostly on ENSO, and the AO saved their bacon.
I am not sorry to miss out on the bone chilling cold today, which is normally our coldest day of the year. Last year’s hi/lo was -2/-22F, today we are chasing 38/21F . (KRHI)
And maybe there’s too much attention or focus on the impact El Niño has on weather patterns. To hear one of the local on-air TV meteorologists here in Buffalo, the El Niño has reasserted itself and, because of its effects, our weather will be closer to normal for the next couple weeks (or even a bit warmer) after a couple weeks of bitterly cold weather. No mention of any other cycles.
Perhaps the problem is that, with a generation having learned their craft during a warm-phase PDO, other factors/cycles aren’t being adequately considered.
I’ve said it before — how can you offer long-range predictions about the climate if you can’t forecast the cycles (such as the PDO). And how can you do that without understanding what triggers phase shifts. What’s the point in having huge supercomputers and massive numbers of data points if you can’t see the underlying drivers? In other words, how can you talk about the forest if you can’t see it for the trees?
“Climate models are iterative through time, which means once they go off in the weeds they can not recover.”
Chaotic system = cannot model
These dimwits are far more concerned with election forecasting than weather. They somehow envision Meteorologists as being a ultragovernment. That is what it is all about. Frankly I prefer my weather news from the fox with big breasts on the local news, who seems more concerned about the commute or school drive rather than these left wing fanatics that have bent reality for 10 years.
[Post] Once again, this begs the question – if the GCMs can’t forecast the AO two weeks in advance…
Leif Svalgaard (22:50:02) :
I think this logic is faulty. Let me illustrate with some examples:
1) Take a massive landslide. We cannot predict where each little pebble goes, but that safely predict that the whole mess will end up down in the valley.
Beg to differ. The analogy is faulty. Something as localized as a two week forecast of pressure differences in the Arctic is not AT ALL in the same league in predicting every pebble in a massive landslide….not to mention predicting that the “whole mess will necessarily end up down in the valley.”
There have been many MANY fortnight or less teleconnection forecasts that turn out to be busts.
The point raised is very valid: How can one trust models extrapolating into the far future, when they bust into the very near??
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
We live in a biosphere called Earth, not Mars or Venus.
Increasing C02 will feed plants.
We are darned lucky to have enough tectonic activity to keep renewing the C02 that the biosphere wants to sequester into oblivion. Earth without C02 will snuff out life. Appreciate what we got.
.0385 % C02 as opposed to .0250% is a pathetically small amount.
What C02 rise are we talking about? .0135%
– wow –
No wonder the GCM’s are so bad. They have correlated the climate to something which doesn’t do much more than drive a drop into a swimming pool.
Natural analog weather forecast based on Lunar declination, works as good, if you adjust for the increased cold and snow, due to the solar minimum being deeper and longer, than expected.
With Polar air masses extending further South than expected from past cycles, as a result of the solar pause in heating, colder conditions will be around for most of the 5 year period forecast.
http://www.aerology.com/national.aspx
(retired CNC machinist, right off of the production floor.)
Leif Svalgaard (22:50:02) :
Yes, you are correct, they didn’t get the toto (big picture).
They didn’t get the landslide that should have been rather obvious given the leapfrogging winters N to S the past couple of years.
The point is that they have NOT been paying attention to anything going on in the real world. Look how long it took you to convince Hathaway that he was way off the mark. What Anthony’s point is that as long as they keep fiddling with thier GCM’s and not taking into account the factors that are changing in the real world, they are going to looking silly and predicting wildly.
savethesharks (23:18:21) :
Beg to differ. The analogy is faulty.
start begging then.
How about the other ones? My point is that it is sometimes easier to predict the behavior of an ensemble of entities than each individual one.
And re-reading my post I see that it was a little faulty in and of itself. [I am sure Leif will tear through this heh heh].
The point is that: how is one to trust long term models if (on the same scale) the short term models can go awry so easily.
Why not ask the GFS for his piss poor performance over the past few years.
Until his makers (we will build you stronger, faster, smarter) correct some short term problems….you definitely do not want to extrapolate him into infinity.
Meanwhile….for a short OT diversion and entertainment….watch this video if you have never seen: 🙂 Even though they call it a cyclone…it ain’t. Just a crazy-ass thunderstorm! I know, I know….OT….but worth watching again.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
I love Lief, but his metaphors, this time, are false.
Of course a scree slope will in time decay downhill thanks to gravity and erosion. Forecasting the most complex natural system on the planet is far less linear. No one has even delineated the strange attractors that hold global climate much less invented the mathematics necessary to forecast the evolution of such a system over time.
A better metaphor would be describing (to the millimeter) the flux waves in a waterfall 50 years hence.
savethesharks (23:38:46) :
The point is that: how is one to trust long term models if (on the same scale) the short term models can go awry so easily.
wes george (23:39:09) :
I love Leif, but his metaphors, this time, are false.
My examples are biased by what I do: I think we can predict the solar cycle [i.e. solar climate] 10 years hence, even though we have no idea how to predict next month’s sunspots. Now, there are people that think solar cycle prediction is impossible too [e.g. Tobias and Weiss] and there are people whose solar cycle prediction has failed, so perhaps those people would by more sympathetic to the post.
savethesharks (23:38:46) : Meanwhile….for a short OT diversion and entertainment….watch this video if you have never seen: 🙂 Even though they call it a cyclone…it ain’t. Just a crazy-ass thunderstorm! I know, I know….OT….but worth watching again.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
This is a typical storm generated by the turning of the lunar declinational tides, was Maximum North on the 15 of November of 2008 and should have generated severe weather for the next four days, which it did.
Simple. The Arctic is warming, ergo the Arctic Oscillation is just another positive feedback. And its worse than we expected.
A GCM ain’t PV=NRT. ’nuff said.
Leif Svalgaard (23:32:47) :
Not begging here. But, point taken about your other examples 2 through 4.
But sometimes even the entire ensemble is outsmarted by the observed, as pointed out in this post of the NOAA forecasts versus the observed for the AO.
So not trusting long term models when those same ones (on a similar scale) can not get it right in less than two weeks, is not unreasonable, and not faulty logic. It is simply skepticism.
And I know YOU appreciate that (being skeptic)!
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Leif Svalgaard (22:50:02) :
I wouldn’t say that not being able to forecast the Arctic Oscillation is indicative of GCMs one way or the other, but I would like to say that you would assume the water would flow to the sea (picked this example for the clearest demonstration), but it may not if it were to get stopped, say in a reservoir, and drunk by a person, who would then turn it into waste product on a tree during a camping trip, which would then eventually evaporate, and eventually precipitate down into the ocean.
So you have the right answer, but I wouldn’t call it correct. GCMs predicting with some successes so far does not mean that the issues are yet understood, or anything is even correct in the models. Yet, if you find something clearly incorrect in them, such as sunspots on the moon, then wouldn’t you at least wonder how it happened?
Dave F (00:18:54) :
anything is even correct in the models.
I don’t believe the current models are correct [too many things are parameterized], but my beef was with the bland assertion that because we cannot predict two weeks ahead, all prediction further out is impossible. If the climate to a large extent is self-regulating [negative feedbacks] then a model may not necessarily ‘go off the rail’ in the far future, but may be kept within bounds by the regulator [whatever it may be].
As butterflies in a complex, chaotic system. When one flaps its wings and flies, all havoc breaks loose! Sure more are quietly waiting in these models for Mother Nature’s queue.
Not to mention the temperature in all the deep currents . Now, thats a lot of water. That is heat in the pipeline. Is it in the models?
Kath (22:48:38) :
Here in the North wet coast, we’ve had a relatively mild winter so far, with the Pineapple Express bringing us rain on a regular basis. I wonder how the 2010 Winter Olympics will cope with the poor conditions?
Pineapple Express:
http://www.komonews.com/weather/faq/4307577.html
As for weather forecasts, anything more than a few days is hit and miss. One wonders how these climateers can keep a straight face as they give their pronouncements of guaranteed global warming 50 years into the future.
If you look at the weather widget slightly up the page here on WUWT and compare the Precipitation pattern on the map with the forecast for today on my web page (I posted two years ago) you will see a very similar picture.
There are some of us who can get things right, but only by using methods that use all of the influences on the atmosphere, that are driving the global circulation.
If you would like to see what the winter of 2010 will look like use the calendar feature and take a look at the maps presented.