Warm Bias: The Met Office’s Disastrous Track Record
From the GWPF
The Met Office has defended its forecast for a hot, dry summer despite some areas looking set to have the most rain since records began. As summer officially came to a close amid extreme downpours on Monday, the forecaster was left facing questions about why it predicted a ‘drier-than-average’ season even though a strong El Nino climate event was expected. In May the Met Office said that it ‘wouldn’t expect (El Nino) to be the dominant driver of our weather’ in the summer months. Yet this weekend Met Office chief scientist Professor Dame Julia Slingo said that the El Nino phenomenon had disturbed weather patterns, which might have been predicted. “We all know that forecasting months and seasons ahead is still in its infancy and much more research needs to be done.”–Sarah Knapton, The Daily Telegraph, 31 August 2015
The Met Office’s prediction for the summer issued at the start of June led us all to believe it would be hot and dry. Instead, it has been one of the coldest and soggiest holiday seasons for nearly 30 years. The level of rainfall was already up 13% on average across Britain by last Wednesday, at 11in. It means it has been wetter than all but five summers since 1988 and the wettest since 2012 – which was the soggiest for 100 years. At the same time, temperatures have fallen to an average of 14C, which is 0.4C down on normal. It means it has been colder than all but four summers since 1988 and the coldest since 2012’s average of 13.9C. –Alistair Grant, Daily Star, 30 August 2015
The chief reason why the Met Office has been getting so many forecasts spectacularly wrong, as reported here ad nauseam, is that all its short, medium and long-term forecasts ultimately derive from the same huge computer model, which is programmed to believe in manmade global warming. Hence the fun we’ve all had with those “barbecue summers” when rain never stopped, and “warmer than average” winters, which promptly saw Britain freezing under piles of snow. –Christopher Booker, The Sunday Telegraph, 30 August 2015
In September 2008, the Met Office forecast a trend of mild winters: the following winter turned out to be the coldest for a decade. Then its notorious promise of a ‘barbecue summer’ was followed by unrelenting rain. Last year, it forecast a ‘drier than average’ spring — before another historic deluge that was accompanied by the coldest temperatures for 50 years. Never has the Met Office had more scientists and computing power at its disposal — yet never has it seemed so baffled by the British weather. But there is no paradox. It is precisely the power of this technology in harnessing climate scientists’ assumptions about global warming that has scuppered the Met Office’s predictions — and made it a propagandist for global warming alarmism. It has become an accomplice to a climate change agenda that now affects where and how we travel, the way houses are built, the lights we read by. And its errors are no laughing matter to tourism industry chiefs in Cornwall and the north-west, who say the Met Office’s false warnings of dire summers cost hundreds of millions of pounds in cancelled bookings. –Rupert Darwall, The Spectator, 13 July 2013
Another Bank Holiday, another washout! It was not meant to be like this! Back in 2006, climate genius David Viner told us: Climate change could “dramatically” change the face of British tourism in the next 20 years, with European tourists flocking to the UK to escape unbearably hot continental summers, experts say. Research shows that European tourists may choose to holiday in Britain as resorts nearer to home become too hot.Weather changes may provide revival opportunities for northern seaside towns such as Blackpool and put new strains on roads and development in southern coastal resorts, a study in the Journal of Sustainable Tourism said. Academic David Viner, a researcher at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit in Norwich, produced the report after analysing the work of experts around the globe. “The likelihood [is] that Mediterranean summers may be too hot for tourists after 2020, as a result of too much heat and water shortages,” the study said. Apparently nobody thought to tell the tourists! –Paul Homewood, Not A Lot Of PPeople Know That, 31 August 2015
A decade ago, Hurricane Katrina slammed Florida and then the Gulf Coast, creating a humanitarian catastrophe in New Orleans. While memories of that devastation remain vivid, there would be 16 more named storms before that year was out, more than in an entire typical Atlantic hurricane season. The record level of activity in 2005 exhausted the traditional alphabetic list of names, ushering in Alpha through Zeta. It might seem disasters on the ground would become financial ones for companies that shoulder those risks. But, if anything, the opposite is true. —Spencer Jakab, The Wall Street Journal, 31 August 2015
European Union bureaucrats sank more than £10 million into subsiding television shows last year, it was revealed yesterday. The money went to make programmes promoting the merits of the EU and warning of the dangers of climate change as well as to support popular series that are already highly successful. A number of the subsidised programmes have been seen on British television – and one, The Great European Disaster Movie, was broadcast by the BBC to widespread derision from critics. Other shows backed by Brussels included one in which a climate change activist searches the world for ways to save the planet. –Steve Doughty, Daily Mail, 1 September 2015
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

It is time to invest in UK BBQ summer related futures.
John
Maybe they should stop trying emulate The Weather Channel and Weather Underground and just pay attention to what’s happening outside their window?
@Gerry, England September 1, 2015 at 2:50 pm
Wait for it….here it comes….any second now…
“…the finger prints of Global Warming were present in the forecast for the D-Day landings. Using carefully adjusted data that factors in the signal lost due to poor instrumentation…” says a gravy train, rent seeking numpty from East Anglia.
Wonder if the sweaters, gloves and stocking caps in abundance at The Open gave the MET a clue?
Why do some people have difficulty with this? Katrina was not a superstorm. New Orleans is below sea level and a levee (dike for you Europeans) broke. The resultant flooding caused 95% of the damage, injuries and deaths. Being the city is below sea level there was no “runoff”. The water just sat there week after week till it was finally pumped out. Had the levee (dike) not broken Katrina would be unremembered.
Eugene WR Gallun
You are totally wrong.
Katrina was and exceptionally large, intense and symmetrical circulation, with a massive strong Windfield and exhibited central pressure drops that were shockingly deep at maximum. It only came ashore in a slowly weakening high Cat-4 mode due to drier air on its western limb wrapping in of the land. Katrina was without a doubt a super Hurricane, in both area and strength.
AND new Orleans is below sea level.
See the difference?
So stop pretending one being true means the other was false, or that data on a storm can be ignored to serve your warped assertion about it, you apparently were not paying attention back then, or since.
Katrina was not that strong of a Hurricane. It was rapidly weakening before it hit the Mississippi Delta
Unmentionable,
Do you see the difference between your “weakening high Cat-4” and the FACT that when the storm made landfall, it had a Category 3 rating on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale? Gallun is right, you are wrong.
Wrong. When it went over the southeast half of the delta it was still cat 4, several hours later it came on shore as a high cat 3, (thought then to still be a Cat 4, btw). Rapidly weakening it was not. And rapidly weakening cat 3s, that are not both unusual strong and unusually large do not produce surges anything like 30 feet high for kilometers inland as Katrina produced. Nor large surges all the way into the Florida pan handle .I watched the tops of the street lights in Mobile Alabama go under water that morning. And Mobile is a long way from where the eye came ashore. The effect of Katrina was far bigger than Camile.
“The chief reason why the Met Office has been getting so many forecasts spectacularly wrong, as reported here ad nauseam, is that all its short, medium and long-term forecasts ultimately derive from the same huge computer model, which is programmed to believe in manmade global warming. ”
The second chief reason why the Met Office has been getting so many forecasts spectacularly wrong, as reported here ad nauseam, is that all its short, medium and long-time forecasters are programmed to believe in manmade global warming.
I’ll bet the entire bureaucracy staff is a bunch of entrenched activists.
That’s what happens over time when an ideology seeks control and they want their friends on board.
With the Met forecasts, it’s like watching Groundhog day every day.
Clearly inputs and cumulative errors in models limit useful forecasts to 4 to 5 days. The rest of the weather bureau blurb past that period is delusional pseudo-science.
No forecaster worth his salt goes strictly on models. Seasonal forecasts especially require a degree of common sense and an ability to see what is really driving the local or regional weather patterns for the next 2-3 months. The UK Met office missed a rather obvious major parameter – plunging North Atlantic sea-surface-temperatures.
I figured that would be the case, but is their guidance model so bad it doesn’t look at change in change of SST? The seasonal guidance model is only as good as the forecaster that uses it, and the forecaster is only as good as the guidance model can make them. I’m still going with 4-5 days divergence, until I see far more consistent results from the season trends and stat prediction maps. I don’t really expect to see it before I drop off the twig. 😉
I wonder if future historians will look back this period in our history as being that of the electronic tarot card.
Perhaps, the Met Office should have looked at the plunging North Atlantic SSTs the last 10 months or so. Sheesh. The Central Pacific is on the other-side of the world. The North Atlantic is in their backyard.
Didn’t they recently replace their supercomputer with a bigger faster more powerful supercomputer costing 100million pounds? Seems like they need a newer, faster more powerful one still, one they can spend 200million pounds on. Then they can be more wrong even faster.
Let us invite Professor Dame Julia Slingo ( What a marvellous title for getting it wrong so often) to put out one of her many press releases explaining why she and the Met Office have got their predictions wrong once again.
“We can accurately forecast the future, but not the present”.
That is the paradox a panel of senior climate scientists will discuss at a meeting in London later this year. A representative from the Met office will be a guest speaker. A spokesperson for the group said “this is a huge issue, especially for the weather forecasting community. No one likes to be consistently wrong in their forecasts, even though we know that, when added together, those forecasts will get us to where we expected to be”. “Clearly, bigger computers, more funded studies and more human resources are needed if this paradox is to be solved”.
“Yet this weekend Met Office chief scientist Professor Dame Julia Slingo said that the El Nino phenomenon had disturbed weather patterns, which might have been predicted. ”
Looks like the Met Office played the same game as NOAA did in 2014 first denying that the 2014/2015 El Nino existed or even had an effect . This way they can falsely claim that the warm weather is purely due to man induced global warming
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears_ERSSTv3b.shtml
Hey, they had the forecast right. It was a BBQ summer only about 1000 Km to the east.
I projected this poor summer in early June due to mainly ocean temperatures in North Atlantic ocean, strength of El Nino and pattern with AO & NAO. The ENSO on the UK generally has low influence, but there are exceptions when we have a strong El Nino or strong La Nina. A very expensive computer is not required at all, especially as HH Lamb’s knowledge far better than any at the Met Office now.
Despite an El Nino existing during the last 3 months of 2014 ,NOAA in their State of the climate Report for 2014 said
“ Although 2014 was largely ENSO-neutral, “
Referring to 2014 they again said
“ Similar to 2013, the North Atlantic season was quieter than most years of the last two decades with respect to the number of storms, despite the absence of El Niño conditions during both years. “
In their press release for the 2014 Report, they said
“The El Niño–Southern Oscillation was in a neutral state during 2014, although it was on the cool side of neutral at the beginning of the year and approached warm El Niño conditions by the end of the year”
So the global warming alarmists use the El NINO as they see fit , denying it when they want to blame warmer than normal weather on man induced global warming or blaming it for their missed forecast even though it was in existence for months before the forecast
https://www2.ametsoc.org/ams/index.cfm/publications/bulletin-of-the-american-meteorological-society-bams/state-of-the-climate/
At least they are not trying to predict public health outcomes like asthma with climate science models. That is what the EPA is doing and saying with regulatory over reach spreading outward from California.
So, just for fun, who wants to try their own hand at some predictions? Chances are that we will do far better than UKMO or NOAA for the upcoming NH Winter!!
Given that the sun has been trending towards spotless again (average of 3 to 5 sunspots on the entire sun – not just the Earth-facing side, but the whole thing) for the past several weeks, and given that the Nino 1+2 region appears to be starting to cool down, how does this affect the upcoming NH Winter?? My guess is that most of the Northern Hemisphere is going to be cooler than normal, with above average precipitation because of the lack of sunspots and the El Nino which will be weakening (in my opinion) over the next several months, but it won’t be completely going away just yet…
Probably about time for another solar cycle update here on WUWT, the cycle finally seems to be winding down, and we haven’t had an update for a bit now (hint, hint).
Are we actually sure the Met didn’t get it right, and the actual climate (you know, the thing Mother Nature does…) got it wrong?
Oh yea, sarc off.
Just briefly reading some of the comments and I would like to note that what Mosh said is not unreasonable in the context within it was probably intended – i.e. detecting a long term trend (say, in temperatures) and forwarding that (based on assumed continuation) does indeed suggest we would know more about ‘future’ climate than next ‘month’. So, I see nothing wrong with his statement really, its basic ‘modelling’ at its best!
Next; on the Met Office forecasting failures – my prime beef is that the various parts of MSM seizing on any forecast hints are usually WITHOUT equally seizing on the uncertainties involved. As usual, overly stating a ‘BBQ summer’ sells page views, as opposed to stating that its ‘uncertain we will have a BBQ summer’. Of course, in the case of the Met Office (following the CAGW theme) they EQUALLY do NOT exactly HIGHLIGHT the uncertainties either in their press releases, often clouded in semi-logical English phrasing – which is perhaps just as well, as otherwise all their press releases would simply state the DART method and add that they ‘haven’t got a clue, really!’, in order to be factually correct, anyway.
The Met office should move to San Diego California. All the weatherman has to do is say tomorrow is going to be nice. He will be right most of the time.
“We all know that forecasting
months and seasonsahead is still in its infancy and much more research needs to be done.”Pretty sure that’s what she meant.