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:
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:
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 “
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.
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.
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:
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”
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
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:
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
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.
==================================================================
* 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
==============================================================
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.




Greg, Rob, thousands of people are dying, and you’re quibbling about a blog post? Quick, men, book immediate passage to the S. China sea, and get out there in a small boat to block the wind, thereby protecting the innocents. Don’t forget to take anemometer readings. Report back here after you’ve protected everyone.
David Ball says: @ur momisugly November 9, 2013 at 6:05 pm
Thank goodness we have fossil fuels to aid in the rescue, recovery, and rebuild of the area devastated.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If the UN truly cared about people instead of power they would have invested money in the equipment needed to rescue people. The governments making up the UN had the weather forecasts that allowed enough time to get in and DO SOMETHING about evacuating these people instead of using the deaths as a button they could push. Sandy, Bloomberg and Christie are another example not to mention the government SNAFUS connected to Katrina.
Why in heck do we have government and taxes if not to deal with these situations CORRECTLY.
Oh, Thats right governments main use is transferring wealth from the poor to the rich. Who cares if the sheeple die because of government incompetence.
gregladen says: @ur momisugly November 9, 2013 at 6:32 pm
…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…..
REPLY: You’re a real prince Greg, remember how your last rant backfired on you?
Yeah Anthony, I visited that time ONCE, enough said.
“does it make a difference if you get killed by 275 or 375 km/h? My thoughts are with the victims who deserve more respect than quibbling about windspeed, especially when it just happened.”
The piety above and from others, is nauseating. People die every day. Lots of them. The issue is mistakes and outright propaganda WRT to the strength of the storm. Life goes on. This doesn’t mean we don’t feel badly for those who were victims. BUt you don’t want to hear that do you? You’re too busy convincing yourself of your moral superiority.
Wow – talk about some obtuse people…
Look – another weather catastrophe, with many deaths and more to come. While we’re worrying about the people, others are manipulating the facts, USING this tragedy to further their own cynical agenda.
How can you POSSIBLY not see the problem here?
Yes, IT IS IMPORTANT. Using tragedies to further a stupid political agenda and crow about “we told you so” may not be criminal, BUT IT SHOULD BE.
Still, can’t fix stupid. There will always be those who just fail to see the actual problem.
WUWT should issue a formal apology for trying to score points on the reporting of this storm. It turned out to be as bad as predicted. A horrible storm.
I visit this site several times a day. I like getting a non-alarmist take on climate topics. You provide a refreshing alternative to the “consensus” crowd. However, your coverage of this storm smacks of childish zealotry. I’m used to such small-minded pettiness from liberals, but not from WUWT.
Please do the right thing.
http://www.worldconstructionnetwork.com/news/adb-to-provide-85-million-funds-for-wind-power-project-in-philippines-170713/
Note: This is the same company UPC/IVPC that had $1B in assets seized in Italy.
Australia’s ABC has reported sustained winds of 315 km per hour too. Good grief! Words fail me. Again. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-11/vietnam-braces-for-typhoon-haiyan-as-thousands-feared-dead-in-p/5081990
The accusation of WUWT being “insensitive” is laughable but expected. Little but straw, hair-splitting, and phoney concern.
Who is greg laden? /rolleyes
Take a look at the satellite imagery and try to argue that Super Typhoon Haiyan was not one of the most powerful storms on record, bring that to ANY meteorologist and they’d be willing to agree that it was, I have yet to see a meteorologist who says he’s seen a more impressive storm on satellite than this one. I’ve got no dog in the fight for or against AGW (personally I see merits to arguments both for and against), and I know that this blog is in place to argue against it and that’s fine, scientific debate is great, but to call this storm “overhyped” is a joke. Of course it can’t be said that the storm is THE most powerful on record, because unlike Atlantic basin hurricanes there is no reconnaissance aircraft in the Pacific to measure the storm so intensity is measured objectively by satellite, and certainly there’s no accurate ground measurements to be taken because any instrumentation in the strongest part of the storm would be ripped to shreds well before recording the peak wind. The reason that PAGASA’s wind estimates are much lower than the Joint Typhoon Warning Center and those quoted by news outlets is because for some reason PAGASA bases their sustained windspeeds on a 10-minute average whereas JTWC bases their sustained windspeeds on a 1-minute average (which is consistent with NOAA and the Saffir-Simpson Scale). You’re comparing apples and oranges with those lower PAGASA estimated windspeeds.
[snip – pointless insulting rant – mod]
Ah, but all those rants favouring Anthony’s position were full of point, eh?
Weak.
Greg Laden’s posting here boils down to two parts.
When people lie about a bad event, Laden wants us to embrace the lies and overwrought hype.
He’s desperate for visitors to his site.
Greg Laden can be summed up as a pathetic liar who bounces between weepy and hotheaded rages.
Regarding the censorship issue raised earlier: WUWT has one of the best sets of policies for moderating comments of any blog I’ve seen, including the snipping policy. The result has been to make the comments consistently worth reading.
The blogs that allow any and all rants often accumulate thousands of comments per post, making them rarely worth reading even though there might be some excellent commentary buried in the rant pile. It’s just not worth taking the time to find them.
The present moderation policy is working just fine.
Carlo Napolitano MD PhD … you hit the nail right on the head Carlo!!!
Your tolerance for error on death toll numbers should be matched by a tolerance for error on wind speed numbers in early reports, wouldn’t you think? Both will be sketchy early and more precise later.
Thanks, Anthony. Good reporting.
A Cat 4 is a monster of a storm nevertheless, but the hype about it is even more monstrous (although it’s just a word storm).
Please donate to lessen the suffering of this poor people!
Claimsguy: “Your tolerance for error on death toll numbers should be matched by a tolerance for error on wind speed numbers in early reports, wouldn’t you think?”
The reported estimates were 1*10^4 deaths. By ignorance of journalists that are incapable of numerical conversion this is widely reported as an estimated single death. It’s better than we thought!
It’s not an estimation problem, it’s a basic cockup in units of measurement.
The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley says:
November 10, 2013 at 12:15 am
Mods, obviously I have no idea of what Rob Honeycutt is saying, …
Frankly dear ghost there is no need to hear rants from all kind of alarmists.
There is a tragedy that happened, and we all should be trying to help as we can as pointed out by the moderator, pls give generously:
b4llzofsteel says:
November 9, 2013 at 11:44 pm
the issue is with the wind speed reporting by the media versus actual measured winds, did you not notice the last line of the post and the link to Red Cross? give generously -mod]
On the other side there is the issue with the ghouls that feed on suffering and want to use such catastrophe to further their snake-oil salesman agenda.
And this is the point that this post tries to address. Catastrophes should not be used as arguments to manipulate the people and this can be done only if the information is kept accurate.
There are a number of sites reporting that sustained winds were, in fact 195 mph (314 kph), and that this was a Cat 5 storm. I really don’t understand the attempt to minimize the size and severity of the storm before the facts are known.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/10/us-philippines-typhoon-idUSBRE9A603Q20131110
[ reporting on actual measured wind speeds from the Philippine met agency is an “attempt to minimize the size and severity of the storm”? – what an odd attitude – mod]
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
[REPLY: Oh the beautiful simple-mindedness of Tenny when she’s on a mission to prove somebody wrong.
Those aren’t measurements Tenny, 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 ]
Chris – you don’t get confused by a reality. You must report a reliable estimated wind speed, not a measured one. And our respect for people dying or losing everything should leave only those nice folks at Weather Underground in charge.
Hey, FWarner, don’t let the facts interfere with your blovation. Worldwide ACE is unchanged from the 1970’s. Haiyan cannot even be considered an outlier, It is a storm that can easily find it place in the normal statistical distribution. The devastation and loss of life is tragic. Nature is too cruel. Blame God,
Rob Honeycutt says:
November 9, 2013 at 5:14 pm
This is a particularly callous post, even for WUWT. Fatality numbers are just starting to come in and the latest are now saying over 10,000 have perished.
You people are playing silly number games in the face of real human suffering. You should be ashamed.
Rob Honeycutt – this is not a minor matter; millions of idiots will now recall that this year the worst storm in history with unheralded windspeeds occured. They will go on to support spending billions on stupid ideas like windfarms, CO2 mitigation and the like instead of spending that money for concrete storm shelters that could have saved all those lives. The real crime is the misallocation of resources resulting from ACGW fraud. Talk about callous.
The content and particularly the title of this post are very poorly judged, as are many of the comments. Just wait until the Alarmists start selectively quoting it. Why give them the ammunition? Now is not the time for point scoring. Be better than them. In everything.
Jonathan Abbott says:
“Be better than them. In everything.”
We are.
===============================
FWarner says:
“Every decent meteorologist knows that the raising of the global average temperature by the best part of 1 degree will have significant impacts on weather events such as these – undeniably so.”
FWarner, you are flat wrong.
Hurricanes and extreme weather events have been decreasing. Your alarmism is based on feelings and beliefs, not on empirical evidence.
The alarmist crowd is trying desperately to link a single hurricane to global warming. And of course, they want people to believe that global warming is due to human activity. But as the links show, they are wrong. As usual.