Piers Corbyn showed up on Fox and Friends this morning to discuss his most accurate prediction of a bone-chillingly cold winter, and throw some ad hominem attacks towards the global warming “cultists”. Many comments in the blizzard stories on WUWT have touted the achievements and skill of Corbyn, but, as with any long-range forecaster, he has been embarrassed by some spectacular failures.
So, is Corbyn a “broken clock” right twice-a-day or is he a visionary that sees things in the tea-leaves differently and correctly? Well, after this blizzard and the European deep-freeze, apparently we haven’t seen anything yet!
We report, you decide … or something.
From Mediaite (click for video link):
Predicting in November that winter in Europe would be “exceptionally cold and snowy, like Hell frozen over at times,” Corbyn suggested we should sooner prepare for another Ice Age than worry about global warming. Corbyn believed global warming “is complete nonsense, it’s fiction, it comes from a cult ideology. There’s no science in there, no facts to back [it] up.”
Got it, thanks Ryan!
We don’t have enough knowledge about climate to say anything. If there are a trend occuring it is still inside system noise.
Piers Corbyn’s temper minds me of Oliver Reed’s Vulcan in the Adventures of Baron Munchausen. That would of course make Joe D’Aleo into Sisyphus for rolling out the data endlessly only to be ignored by clueless powers that be, and Joe Bastardi as Atlas, benchpressing the whole world. Go for it guys!
And Icarus? Well it’s the sun, Mr Gore, you were warned that it burns!
Another ice age seems inevitable in just tick or two of geological time. Compared to that, a minor amount of global warming would be a happy accident that allows humans to build their wealth in order to adapt to the ice age to come.
If global warming washes out all the wealth in coastal areas before the ice age, that’s a different story entirely.
I can verify that there is, with certainty, substance to SOME of what Piers Corbyn is doing, but I hasten to add that such nonlinear thinking is beyond most, not because they are incapable, but rather as a result of the way mainstream education & culture are structured.
While it has become untenable for mainstream weather/climate funding bodies to continue denying Piers Corbyn a substantial piece of the action, I would sternly caution Piers to NOT issue forecasts in which he is not confident (or to at least advertise high uncertainty with crystal clarity). In the court of public opinion (which is dominated by sloppy, over-simplistic, linear “reasoning”), nonlinear failures will not be recognized as mere unnoticed switches.
The question we should be asking ourselves is not, “How good were Piers’ forecasts 20 years ago?” but rather, (a) “Does Piers currently have innovative methods that can make a difference in planning weather-dependent operations?” and (b) “Given Piers progress trajectory, where will he be with his methods in 5, 10, or 20 years if his research is well-resourced? – and can such advances be of indispensable value to society & civilization?”
I would like to see what Piers Corbyn could do with the same resourcing level as the UK Met Office over a period of 5, 10, or 20 years – i.e. level the playing field, let the games begin, and see who forecasts better. Make it a competition that drives new insight (something society & civilization need).
Those defending the notion that weather & climate are pure chaos have become hazardous to society & civilization. Make it a fair competition and in the meantime keep in mind that those with the lion’s share of the resources are not only doing a lousy job, but are also innovatively bankrupt. Until climate models can reproduce earth orientation parameters, they are nothing more than a feedback to modelers, repeatedly clarifying, “You’re not there yet, keep trying…”
It will be most entertaining to watch Mr. Corbyn and his predictions over the next few years. Since ‘warmist’ scientists have shown why this winter’s cold and snowy Europe can also be attributed to AGW, we have a bit of a stalemate at the present time. Go forward however, he’ll either turn out to become very famous or fall into the category of just another crackpot who was right some of the time. He’s drawn his line clearly in the sand, (as has Joe Bastardi) and if the decade of 2010-2019 turns out to be warmer than any previous decade on instrument record, and the Arctic Sea ice continues is multi-decade decline, then both men will be quite wrong in both their assumptions and their science. In such a case, it will also be interesting to see how the AGW skeptics who follow Mr. Corbyn and Mr. Bastardi respond if the events I’ve outlined above come to pass. To be fair, if the decade of 2010-2019 turns out to be colder than 2000-2009, and Arctic sea ice begins to show a significant rebound from its current low year-to-year levels, then I (as a 75% warmist) will be shifting my position to 50/50 at the least, and probably become a supporter of these two men…only the years will tell…
There is no stalemate. Thanks for that laugh.
R. Gates you could never EVER hold a candle to either one of these guys….so…as usual, you are out of your league.
You don’t even have a platform to “outline your events”.
Let’s see your science….your calculations.
You won’t because you can’t.
You know just enough to be dangerous but therein lies the fraud.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
R. Gates says:
December 27, 2010 at 7:35 pm
“[…]then I (as a 75% warmist) will be shifting my position to 50/50 at the least, and probably become a supporter of these two men…[…]”
You do know that that is called ‘hindsight’ and has by definition no predictive skill, right?
Paul Vaughan says:
December 27, 2010 at 7:34 pm
“Those defending the notion that weather & climate are pure chaos have become hazardous to society & civilization. Make it a fair competition and in the meantime keep in mind that those with the lion’s share of the resources are not only doing a lousy job, but are also innovatively bankrupt. Until climate models can reproduce earth orientation parameters, they are nothing more than a feedback to modelers, repeatedly clarifying, ‘You’re not there yet, keep trying…’ “
===================================
Well said as always Paul, and repeated here for effect.
The phrase “innovatively bankrupt” that is CLASSIC and so very very VERY true.
Hope your holiday season is going well!
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
DirkH says:
Or, perhaps he is referring to all the “skeptic” armchair economists who are stating (as a matter of assumption, based on what, I do not know) that mitigating our emissions will “wreck our economies”?
The reason why the Met Office gets its forecasts so hopelessly wrong is that they are based on those same computer models on which the IPCC itself relies to predict the world’s climate in 100 years time. They are programmed on the assumption that, as CO2 rises, so temperatures must inexorably follow
http://bit.ly/e6XmE0
Let’s not fall into the trap of making predictions that do not come to fruition. This is where the warmists went wrong.
A possible return of a mini ice age is pure speculation, yet a Dalton Minimum looks a good bet.
Didn’t Piers first gain a reputation by betting on the weather, until he was banned by the British bookmakers because of his accuracy?
kim says: December 27, 2010 at 5:21 pm
We are cooling, folks; for how long, even kim doesn’t know.
Most recent warming half-cycle peaked in 1998, so that puts us about ten years into a stable to cooling half-cycle. So we have another twenty years of coolth, then back into warming.
Assuming, of course, that the Holocene continues.
DirkH says:
December 27, 2010 at 8:07 pm
R. Gates says:
December 27, 2010 at 7:35 pm
“[…]then I (as a 75% warmist) will be shifting my position to 50/50 at the least, and probably become a supporter of these two men…[…]”
You do know that that is called ‘hindsight’ and has by definition no predictive skill, right?
_____
Currently, being a 75% “warmist” I’ve cast my lot with the belief that 2010-2019 will be warmer than 2000-2009 and that we’ll see a continued decline in Arctic Sea ice. Furthermore, we’ll see (over the period of the decade) a continued rise in ocean heat content, continued melting of permafrost, continued acceleration of the hydrological cycle, continued cooling of the statosphere, and continued acidification of the oceans. These are fairly specfic forecasts made by the best GCM models. They are happening now (as forecast) as should continue to happen so long as CO2 continues to build as rapidly has it has over the past few hundred years.
However, it could just be the case that some other event (solar or longer term ocean cycle) has fooled the “honest warmists” (those who really have no political axe to grind) such that this other event just so happens to have displayed the exact same set of events as forecast to happen by the effects of global warming. I, unlike some in the “warmist” camp, hold out the possibility this other event could actually exist. This may be (and likely is) because of my lack of a professional scientific background, or perhaps because I like to think there as still grand surprises for us that nature has yet to reveal. Either way, it keeps me always looking out for the possibility that men such as Mr. Corbyn could just be on to something worth taking a look at, as since I’ve got no dog in this fight, I’ve got nothing but time to see how Mr. Corbyn’s predictions pan out. I suspect we’ll look back on him 10 years from now and think what a crackpot he was, but if he turns out right, then I’ve learned something either way….
VICTOR says:
December 27, 2010 at 8:27 pm
The reason why the Met Office gets its forecasts so hopelessly wrong is that they are based on those same computer models on which the IPCC itself relies to predict the world’s climate in 100 years time.
______
Or it could be that the best GCM’s (which did not predict the steep decline in arctic sea ice in 2007) are incapable of seeing the deterministic but unpredictable chaotic effects of a climate system on the edge of chaos. Accurate modelling of exactly what will happen when there is more open water later in the season (as there is in the Arctic this winter) is impossible. These are chaotic effects that can only begin to be understood as they happen. Arctic sea ice is currently (as of Dec. 27, 2010) at it lowest level of extent for this date on satellite record. Could this low level of Arctic Sea ice and the cold winter in Europe be related? The “warmest” camp would say it is possible…Mr. Corbyn (and probably Joe Bastardi as well) would not necessarily connect to the two events.
Clearly many here are playing devil’s advocate, attempting to rouse Piers into the state most articulately portrayed by OneRepublic in their song “Secrets”:
“So tell me what you want to hear,
Somethin’ that’ll light those ears,
Sick of all the insincere…”
“Thought you saw me wink, no…”
“‘Til all my sleeves are stained red,
From all the truth that I’ve said…”
“This time, don’t need another perfect lie,
Don’t care if critics ever jump in line…”
“…all the problems we could solve…”
“I’m gonna give all my secrets away.” – OneRepublic – “Secrets”
I don’t buy the standard line that methods can’t be made public because of research-investor concerns. I speculate that that’s just a convenient straw man. The real reason is far more likely to be physical than financial – i.e. because weather records don’t go back far enough for the vast majority of the globe (including Australia, Canada, & USA). (Additionally, Piers barely has enough staff/resources to forecast for just Europe – and for some parts of the world there are additionally data quality issues beyond record-length limitations.)
Piers, given the clear frustration of some who are either incapable or incompetent at nonlinearly analyzing solar & lunisolar data themselves, maybe consider not issuing USA, Canada, & Australia forecasts when your confidence isn’t 95% or more. It’s not like these folks like the dogma being pushed by their local weather & climate authorities – and that frustrated linear anger readily transfers, as evidenced by the knives in your back. A high solar- & lunisolar-based forecasting success rate for UK alone should be enough to get other agencies from around the world interested (in the closet – i.e. secretly) in what you are doing. Publicly taking on USA & other places lacking sufficient records might be too much of a short- to medium-term liability for the nonalarmist & climate science reform movements. A lot is at stake; I advise against accepting high & unnecessary risk (and I suspect Piers is already thinking this way – see “convenient straw man” explanation above).
OneRepublic – “Secrets”:
http://www.onerepublic.net/secrets/
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHm9MG9xw1o&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3]
Love the cello part.
Amusing… the “Google Ad” for the US Chamber of Commerce position on Global Warming gives a broken link… wonder if that’s prophetic 😉
Pamela Gray says:
December 27, 2010 at 6:53 pm
His drive-by comments regarding lunar/solar/oceans/virgin sacrifices are just too much for me. Stop the drivebys and tell us the mechanism -with calculations- you subscribe to.
Absolutely with you on this. If it worked, he could publish it because the calculations would make sense. Of course, everyone is reduced to speculation when it comes to Piers Corbyn’s method. Even when he said he would share it, it was precious little detail. Enough to amount to no detail at all. I don’t trust those types of scenarios as a rule of thumb. Bernie Madoff anyone?
As a Canadian, I am putting my money in beaver pelt futures. It seems the EU may need them once again. The alarmists need to shut up now. I say that with the best of intentions for all.
Pamela Gray says:
December 27, 2010 at 6:53 pm
“His drive-by comments regarding lunar/solar/oceans/virgin sacrifices ……”
Darn it! I take a little sabbatical and I miss a virgin sacrifice!
‘Oh, the weather outside is frightful,
But the fire is sooooo delightful!’
Happy New Years Everybody!
R Gates said: “Since ‘warmist’ scientists have shown why this winter’s cold and snowy Europe can also be attributed to AGW, we have a bit of a stalemate at the present time.”
Perhaps he really meant asserted, alleged, hypothesized. Shown would involve actual facts. You know, things that are actually observed and measured. Hard to square with their earlier assertions that snow would be rare.
Don Easterbrook has come at the issue as a geologist and been asserting a 30-year coldening. He seems to base his forecast on the PDO cycle.
The historic record shows cycles. When the models and the theory around AGW replicate the cycles they may begin to be believable.
Look , it’s clear that weather forecasting is serious business.
Piers Corbyn clearly forecast the blizzards for NE USA and the UK cold winter temps yet he clearly blew the predictions for SE Queensland.
It only proves that short term forecasts are serious business therefore long-term forecasts are near impossible!!
I don’t understand the people who are calling on Piers to release his methodology and data.
The man is NOT publishing in a journal. The man is NOT looking for grants.
The man runs A BUSINESS which he developed himself. He does NOT require peer review.
His is the ultimate peer review, i.e. if he is wrong enough times, nobody will buy his product and his business will fail.
Now put the Met Office to the same test. They should have gone bankrupt years ago. Imagine if Piers says he doesn’t provide long range forecasts anymore. He’d shut down instantly.
The fact that the Met Office doesn’t do long range forecasts anymore is an admission that they have failed, yet they still receive millions, their executive still receive BONUSES let alone salaries. Piers should be so lucky.
love it!
stinkyanddinky@yahoo.com
ShrNfr says:
December 27, 2010 at 5:29 pm
If he can predict correctly and give the scientific methodology that is testable to predict in the future, then he is more than worth listening to.
As long as he has not explained his ‘method’ it is worthless as science. But ‘there is a sucker born every day’, so he’ll continue to have clients as long as he does not divulge his method [who would pay money for something everybody could do by just following the recipe?]