Piers Corbyn goes global cooling

Terry Jackson wrote, “[…] 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.”
Don’t fall for that junk. It’s not that simple.

Terry Jackson says:
December 27, 2010 at 10:10 pm
The historic record shows cycles. When the models and the theory around AGW replicate the cycles they may begin to be believable.
Indeed, they do. The longer versions surely show some relation to time and which phase H2O exists in. Most of the time, very icy, sometimes, warm. Not sure how this is all explained by CO2, when the 800 year lag problem is acknowledged. I realize it has been explained, and that the explanation is that CO2 doesn’t cause the initial warming, but once released causes a sort of stabilization pattern. Great.
One small problem. In the time frame of 800 years, there is a lot of solar forcing going on. Ask Leif for the amount of total received energy from the Sun. Compare it to the amount of forcing received from added CO2. Over an 800 year period. Perspective is in order, for sure. There is another explanation. ~70% of Earth is ocean surface, but much of the ground surface is covered in ice, also. More so in Ice Ages. The Sun’s interaction with H2O is very important, and the long term record shows there are indeed regime changes. What causes them is poorly defined by the current scientific literature.

I have only be watching Piers for a year or so.
His site gives audited reports of his previous predictions.
Has anybody checked these out?
Does this ignore many of his failed predictions over the same period or is it valid?
My completely subjective impressions about his predictions follows:
1. He seems to be more accurate that the now withdrawn seasonal predictions of the UK Met.
2. He makes very precide predictions for the UK and Europe, nominating exact dates some weeks in advance.
3. He claims 85% accuracy.
4. His predictive skill falters badly when he ventures down to Australia.
But hey! The Australian BOM were remarkably accurate until recently during our very long dry spell, now ended. These days they mainly say “fine with some rain” or words to that effect. Their models appear to be tuned to global warming and at present have lost the plot. I’m sure they are furiously relearning and their skill will improve once again.
Piers comes from a long line of long term forecasters.
We have had them in Australia since the mid 19th century.
They have had some remarkable successes and some very embarrasing flops.
But then, forecasting is difficult, particlularly forecasting the future.
Myself, having looked very carefully at the 1880-2008 annual NCDC land and sea data, I predicted the onset of the current downswing in the temperature and an uptick in the rain in eastern Australia.
To date, I have been 100% correct.
Not bad for a few days download and excel charting.
But my principal view is that we are in a very interesting time, when the various climate hypothises are being tested.
Will it start to get warm again soon and possibly at an accelerating rate (CO2 AGW)?
Will it go into the normal cool phase of the cycle for the next 30 years, before trending up again?
Or is this the end of the cycles that have existed for the last 150 years – are we about to plunge into a new ice age and will that be little, & short or long and big?
If you think that you know the answer then you just don’t know what you don’t know.

The “warmist” models will all continue to show CO2 caused anthropogenic global warming for as long as the entire premise behind global warming is based on the claim that ‘… it must be Co2 because we cannot find any other reason for it’
And will continue for as long as the warmists insist on focusing on tiny portions of the climatic historical record.
If I did my math correctly, IF a single appx 120,000 year glacial-interglacial climate cycle is one climate cycle “day” then the post industrial period of appx 400 years equals appx 4.8 minutes of one climate cycle “day” … and the last 40 years which most of the warmists base most of their claims on is equal to appx. 29 seconds of one climate cycle “day”
The warming alarmists base their doom and gloom on those 5 minutes, or some on just that half a minute, out of one glacial-interglacial climate cycle “day”
Its a simplistic demonstration – but illustrative … the warmists would have us believe they can tell us with accuracy what will happen all day “today” (one 120,000 year climate cycle) by looking at data for just 5 minutes (or some just a half a minute) of the climate cycle “day”
Warmists refuse to answer or address the long term climatic cycles and related historical record – which pretty clearly shows us due, overdue, for a sharp drop – a “tipping” into a glacial period … exactly as has happened every 110,000 to 120,000 years for the last 800,000 years or so record

“But ‘there is a sucker born every day’, so he’ll continue to have clients as long as he does not divulge his method”
Just maybe these “suckers” are making good decisions from running their farms and businesses, with bigger profits from using Pier’s forecasts…….then who are the real suckers mate!

The battle between Piers and the Met Office has been going on by proxy for many years. William Hill, the large bookmaker in UK, draws up odds on weather based on Met Office predictions. Piers puts his money where his mouth is and has won significant winnings by betting according to his predictions against the Met Office predictions. So much and so often has he won that he is now banned by William Hill for placing bets. He has just done a public bet, however, with William Hill on the Xmas weather here in UK which has made a healthy profit.
A punter who strikes lucky now and again can make money, but will usually lose it in the long term. That Piers can beat the Met Office regularly at the bookmakers would seem to indicate that he is more than a lucky punter.

I agree with Baa Humbug (us antpiodeans tend to stick together) in that Piers is running a business and running it quite well; he is not chasing peer review or academic honours, he is selling a product – ie, a reasonably accurate longish range weather forecast and if he gets it wrong his business goes tits-up. He would be insane to make his methods and data public as he is not, as stated earlier, chasing academic validation but running a business.
As to the Met Office and their ability to make ultra-long range climate forecasts, I have only recently discovered that they are unsure of their own forecasts 24 hours ahead – they alter their daily forecasts regularly, obviously with one eye on their radar. I get the Met Office forecast each morning around 6.45 am from the BBC website; I was checking my own sheets, on which I enter my daily max, min and rainfall readings, against forecasts one evening recently and I discovered the forecast had been altered on the BBC website. So much for the wonderful Teraflop computer which ‘er in charge tells us enables them to model the climate so accurately for decades into the future! The woman is talking pure bollocks, obviously.

The Corbyn’s are an interesting family: I have long admired his brother who is a very left wing maverick MP who stands out from other politicians because he is a bit wacky; for instance he is always visable in the Commons because he wears a bright pink and red jackets and the local community because his subgarden is full of chickens. But he is more than just a show off, he is a man with priciples who stands by his very strongs views. He was very much against Blair’s wars and the EU superstate. I once almost bought his house where I met his very pretty wife (I later heard other MP’s credited him with having prettiest wife of any MP) who I later heard divorced him because he refused to agree to send his children to private schools. I think his brother has similar wacky traits and strong views, I would often disagree with him but at least he stands up and says what he thinks.

In the video Corbyn stated that he had predicted severe storms in the US north east (the prediction was from 12th December). The news man replied by saying it hadn’t happened yet.
Of course, now we know that Corbyn’s prediction for the US north-east was, shall we say, chillingly accurate.
Chris

Here in the UK we have high street betting shops where we gamble on anything, sports, election results, snow falling on Christmas Day, etc.
The mark of Piers Corbyn is that the bookmakers will no longer accept his bets on weather. (And gambling winnings are not taxed in the UK).