Super Typhoon Haiyan/Yolanda – another overhyped storm that didn't match early reports

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:

Huffpo_Haityan_headline

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:

image

image

image

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

image

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.

image

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.

image

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2494635/Philippines-super-typhoon-Haiyan-powerful-storm-history.html

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:

image

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”

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22most+powerful+storm%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

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

Read more at: http://www.firstpost.com/world/all-you-need-to-know-typhoon-haiyan-worlds-most-powerful-storm-1218619.html?utm_source=ref_article

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:

New_Low

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

PH_sitrep

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.

kubotachan2

==================================================================

* 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

==============================================================

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
222 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
aeroguy48
November 9, 2013 6:09 pm

Has the hurricane season officially ended here in the US?

rogerknights
November 9, 2013 6:13 pm

Rob Honeycutt says:
November 9, 2013 at 5:28 pm
My point is, why would this site be downplaying the strength of this storm right when we’re just learning the full extent of the tragedy?

I posted the 1200 number as soon as it first came out, here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/07/super-typhoon-haiyan-one-of-strongest-storms-ever-heads-for-philippines/#comment-1470180

Jquip
November 9, 2013 6:15 pm

Honeycutt: “You people are playing silly number games in the face of real human suffering. You should be ashamed.”
How dare you discuss numeric data when early estimates are that X people….!

rogerknights
November 9, 2013 6:20 pm

aeroguy48 says:
November 9, 2013 at 6:09 pm
Has the hurricane season officially ended here in the US?

Not until Nov. 30.

Margaret
November 9, 2013 6:24 pm

I’m pleasantly surprised to see this
“The typhoon barreled through six central Philippine islands on Friday, wiping away buildings and leveling seaside homes with ferocious winds of 235 kilometers per hour (147 miles per hour) and gusts of 275 kph (170 mph). By those measurements, Haiyan would be comparable to a strong Category 4 hurricane in the U.S., and nearly in the top category, a 5.”
http://ap.stripes.com/dynamic/stories/A/AS_PHILIPPINES_TYPHOON?SITE=DCSAS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

November 9, 2013 6:27 pm

Reuters reporting 10,000 dead in Tacloban city alone. I am skeptical of that number. It would be 5% of the population of the city. We are going to get all kinds of hype.

gregladen
November 9, 2013 6:30 pm

Yeah, I get all my meteorological data from the Stars and Stripes.
“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.”
http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=2575

High Treason
November 9, 2013 6:32 pm

The Left always use human misery to further their cause. So much for the “caring, sharing” myth.The constant use of every warm day being from global warming or every hurricane, storm, even super high tides and tsunamis being caused by global warming should start the alarm bells and bullshit meters going. wake up world, it is a giant propaganda campaign to destroy the achievements of the human race over the past 10,000 years.Hey Green Lefties, you are welcome to go live in the trees.

gregladen
November 9, 2013 6:32 pm

“the internet’s “Best Science” site?”
Are you referring to the contest you guys games? Nice. Fake data about climate, fake data about the quality of this site.
But you are right. I’m impotent here. I knew that before I commented.
In fact I’m so damn impotent here not one of you will bother to visit my commentary on this blog post, let alone comment there. Not one. I’ll be totally ignored. Here:
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2013/11/09/wuwt-science-denialist-blog-hits-new-historic-low/
Begin ignoring now. Full ignore mode on. Check.
REPLY: You’re a real prince Greg, remember how your last rant backfired on you? We’ll wait for something more substantial than an estimate – Anthony

November 9, 2013 6:34 pm

President Aquino doesn’t seem to happy about the casualty counts in some areas. If 10,000 were killed in Tacloban, heads are going to roll.
http://anc.yahoo.com/news/pnoy–tacloban-seemed-unprepared-for-yolanda-123212742.html

November 9, 2013 6:38 pm

Rob Honeycutt;
My point is, why would this site be downplaying the strength of this storm right when we’re just learning the full extent of the tragedy?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because misrepresenting the severity and cause of storms like this is being used to justify policies that keep hundreds of millions of people in poverty and starvation conditions. Yes what has happened in the Philippines is a tragedy. But the policies justified by falsely attributing both the magnitude and the cause of this storm are an even greater tragedy affecting a vastly larger number of people, and for generations at that.

November 9, 2013 6:39 pm

And Rob, this site isn’t downplaying it. This site is reporting the facts as they emerge.

Leslie
November 9, 2013 6:40 pm

crosspatch – thanks for the link to pictures.
In one of the photos it’s interesting to see the big water tower remaining standing amid the destruction.

Pamela Gray
November 9, 2013 6:41 pm

Hurricane deaths are affected by time in-between the last one. Meaning that development (of various quality) has occurred since the last one, and probably at a greater concentration. This type of “rebound” leads to increased devastation and death when the next one rolls in. However, this time evacuations were begun early and were more complete than previous efforts. Lives were saved.

Tim Walker
November 9, 2013 6:42 pm

There are weak/sick/? people posting on here that are just like Jihadist trying to hide behind unfortunate people. This is their meme: Ignore the weather facts, ignore the spurious AGW claims. There are people’s lives involved and it is terrible. It is even more terrible that those lives are being used by snake oil salesmen to sell the AGW agenda!!! But the weak/sick/? people will defend the snake oil salesmen right to use any and all disasters to sell their garbage.

Karl W. Braun
November 9, 2013 7:01 pm

According to PAGASA, these were the top five storms since 1970 to strike the Philippines prior to Yolanda. Note that four of them made their landfall in the exact same place:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=245857625570999&set=a.211004039056358.1073741831.163550757135020&type=1&theater

Konrad
November 9, 2013 7:14 pm

1mph = 1.6 kph
1 kph = 0.6 mph
1knot = 1.85 kph
It’s not hard for most, but one should never underestimate the snivelling incompetence of the lame stream media. And initially the errors in reporting would just appear to be incompetence. However it does raise serious questions of those “journalists” who go on to build a “worst storm evah!!!” story on top of figures they clearly didn’t check. That’s beyond incompetence, that’s wilful negligence.
Lying by commission, lying by omission and now lying through incompetence –
“but, but, but it fit the “narrative”, of course we didn’t check the figures!”

rogerknights
November 9, 2013 7:16 pm

What were the death tolls from previous typhoons that hit the Philippines?

Konrad
November 9, 2013 7:25 pm

gregladen says:
November 9, 2013 at 6:32 pm
“….I’ll be totally ignored…..”
—————————————-
Greg,
I understand you have put many many hours into promoting the AGW scare and vilifying sceptics and it is a shame that much of your work is ignored. However the Internet is keeping a permanent record, so your effort is not wasted.
The good news is that with the collapse of AGW, a great number of people will be paying a great deal of attention to those that sought to promote or profit by AGW advocacy. Very shortly you will likely have more attention than you could have ever wished for!

Peter
November 9, 2013 7:28 pm

It seems that the Washington Post is also adding stuff to up the size of Haiyan. In an article, they compare the size of Katrina and Haiyan in a side-by-side image of satellite pictures of both storms:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/11/08/super-typhoon-haiyan-one-of-worlds-most-powerful-storms-in-history-from-space/#!
You have to scroll down a bit to see the pictures.
The picture make you believe that the eye of Haiyan is much larger than the eye of Katrina, and thus implying Haiyan was much bigger and stronger. Because there is no scale, there is not way to directly compare the sizes.
However, it seems that the eye of Katrina was bigger than the eye of Haiyan.
Haiyan: 8 nautical miles, http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/haiyan-northwestern-pacific-ocean/#.Un73_icclEU
Katrina: 25 miles, srh.noaa.gov/mfl/?n=katrina

Ben D.
November 9, 2013 7:35 pm

Hopefully it was less destructive than the world’s most destructive ones…
http://www.debate.org/reference/top-10-deadliest-typhoons-hurricanes–cyclones

November 9, 2013 7:40 pm

A larger eye doesn’t make for stronger storm. A very tight eye can have some seriously strong winds. Generally an eye contracts as a storm intensifies. See Hurricane Andrew as an example.

Jquip
November 9, 2013 7:55 pm

davidmhoffer; “And Rob, this site isn’t downplaying it. This site is reporting the facts as they emerge.”
You misunderstand, the posters here have taken the unprecedented action of pre-emptive denial. They’ve presented facts before they could be adjusted, homogenized, gridded and installed under a narrative. It’s worse than we thought!

DDP
November 9, 2013 8:03 pm

My mom asked me what 235kmh was when she was watching a news item on the BBC on Friday night, because we work in mph and it meant absolutely nothing to us. I said then I bet someone can’t be arsed to do a little bit of arithmetic and just convert it. Looks like I was right. However, they just changed the kph to mph instead. Hardly surprising, it’s just too damned hard to use the calculator on your phone.
It’s no different to the amount of times somebody in the media refers to financial figures in pounds sterling without converting from US dollars because they are (a) too lazy to divide the sum by whatever current exchange rate (£1 = $1.6), and (b) the media are incompetent and rarely check facts, and only bother after complaints.
I doubt the BBC will issue a retraction though, they’ll more than happy to push the ‘more frequent and bigger storms ‘ BS on the back of the storm that hit southern England last week still fresh in viewers memory.