From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
There are huge amounts of misinformation in this BBC report:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-66566483
The BBC want you to think this is all record breaking and unprecedented. It is not.
Hilary is a very similar event to the 1939 tropical storm, El Cordonazo,which followed a similar path and dumped similar amounts of rain.
Indeed that was one of four tropical storms to hit Southern California in 1939, although the others did not make landfall.
So much for the silly little theory from Ms Treseder, our ecology expert. Maybe the BBC should get advice from proper hurricane experts in future, who would tell them that these storms are rare, but sometimes happen.
The claims about record rainfall are bogus as well. The BBC focus heavily on “record rainfall” in Palm Springs, but even that is a fake claim. They say that 3.18” fell on Sunday, but that was less than the 3.22” recorded in 1926:
In any event, one cherry picked station does not prove anything at all, The BBC also claim that this was the wettest August day on record:
This, of course, is utterly dishonest, as it was nowhere being a record in Los Angeles, or California as a whole, merely a record for August at most.
In Los Angeles, for instance, daily rainfall of 2” is nothing unusual at all:
As for California’s wettest day, this is an outright fraud .Hilary dumped 11” or so up in the mountains, but at lower levels it was around 2 or 3” at most, as the BBC map indicates:
http://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/discussions/nfdscc4.html
But the 1939 storm was much more devastating, with 5” in Los Angeles:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1939_California_tropical_storm
And the devastation from Kathleen in 1976 was even greater:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Kathleen
Rainfall from Hilary has not reached anything like the 375mm recorded in 1976.
So once again we find that the BBC can get away with playing fast and loose with the facts, just so that it can promote its political agenda.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
So what’s new? Remember the BBC decided back in 2005 or so that “the science is settled”
Yes, it’s a difficult one to decide isn’t it? Richard Feynman or the BBC? The BBC or Richard Feynman? Hmmmm. No, no, don’t bother me right now I’m still weighing up the pros and cons…
Feynman! I miss that man. If he were still around he would be roasting the climate activist mob, including the Kerry’s and the Gores, and the Michael Manns in climate “science”.
Well, they’re right; Dr. Feynman didn’t have a climate science degree.
You are right, but you don’t need a Cimate Science degree to know that “the science is settled” is not science. It is bovine excrement. I was on board the CAGW train until I heard Gore and O’Bama use that phrase. I did not need any additional prodding to stop believing anything said by the Feds about CAGW. If the President’s science advisors are feeding him that lie, then the whole Administration has to be rotten.
Sad to say.
he was overrated
feynman and dyson?
frauds
“Let us keep our minds open, by all means, as long as that means keeping our sense of perspective and seeking an understanding of the forces which mould the world. But don’t keep your minds so open that your brains fall out!”
— Walter Kotschnig November 8, 1939
Well, that was 28 minutes I’ll never get back.
Click-bait physics clips. What is the world coming to?
Unlike the BBC et al, I noticed all was not sweetness and light in Maui, for example.
“Hawaiian’s shout ‘f**k you’ to Biden as he visits fire-devastated island and compares deadly blaze with house fire”
https://www.gbnews.com/news/world/hawaii-joe-biden-visits-fire-backlash-us
The only real shortfall in Orwell’s vision was the fact that the Telescreen goes with you in your pocket, it isn’t fixed to a wall. Everything else is pretty much bang on.
“The BBC Would Like You to Think So” on any subject you care to name, because every subject in every programme is infused with narratives. Especially its Trump Derangement programme: Americast, with Sarah Smith and Justin Webb. Ugh.
Once the BBC produced excellent public information films, but now they aim straight for subliminal indoctrination 24/7.
Take the BBCs flagship soap; Eastenders. It loads what it believes to be relevant social messaging into its plotlines. And many of the families in it reflect TV advertising. Most families are mixed race, or gay etc. It’s light years from reality. But the BBC doesn’t do reality, it does the BBC agenda.
When I see a headline stating BBC Tells the Truth I might just take some notice.
“Gabby, Alex and the rest of the BBC punditry team have flown out to Sydney for the semi-final and final after working the earlier rounds of the tournament from back in England.
Taking to their Twitter pages, user @ForzaMarkF1 posted: “Why have the BBC flown @GabbyLogan@AlexScott all the way to Oz at licence payers expense when they could have stayed in GB? Are they playing?#DefundTheBBC #Lionesses.”
https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1804080/Womens-World-Cup-final-Gabby-Logan-Alex-Scott
Climate is but one front in the info war.
Bring back the good old days of the BBC when misleading stories (eg. spaghetti trees) were a matter of humour. In the BBC of 2023 spaghetti trees would be real and the result of climate change.
I must admit, I fell for the spaghetti tree, but then I was less than 2 months old at the time.
People don’t take kindly to being sacrificed.
I don’t watch broadcast television, but I have noticed streaming programs must now include at least on LBGTQ+ character, just for the sake of diversity and inclusiveness.
I’m not alone in feeling these token characters add little to these programs. Amazon allegedly stop using consumer input for deciding which shows to produce or renew.
https://fandomwire.com/amazon-reportedly-stopped-using-audience-scores-to-rank-shows-after-fans-found-lgbtq-stories-off-putting/
It’s not just the expense, but it’s also the CO2 emissions.
If climate change is the crisis that the BBC insists it is, how can they justify flying to Australia to cover the match from there. They have already proven that they are perfectly capable of covering the match from their home studio.
I refuse to take claims of a CO2 crisis seriously, until those who are pushing scam start behaving like they believe it is a crisis.
Flying half way around the world when there is no need, is proof that they don’t believe in the scam either.a
and the craziest thing, as I’ve found out personally, is that if you put that sort of stuff into a BBC comments thread – it’ll get deleted.
You’ll be told you’re: Off topic, Peddling misinformation (lying/exaggerating) or delivering Ad-Hom
The BBC is utterly and completely off its head paranoid
Just. Like. The. Grauniad. – where they get their news from anyway
Meanwhile, EpochTimes has an opinion…..
https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_app/opinion/debunking-environmental-myths-overblown-messages-challenged-with-facts-5477331
Wunderground went all ‘headless chicken‘ about Hilary. A hangover from Jeff Masters I ‘spose. So while the little 60second videos are all still there it’s worth watching them – from the initial panic beforehand to the (measured) disappointment afterwards.
Said disappointment is palpable BUT: At least they’re honest.
You haven’t been banned at the Beeb?
They must be getting slack, they booted me out in 2004; closely followed by Komment Mach Frei at the Guardian.
But I count that as a blessing, really. They’re mostly unhinged – especially on KMF
The BBC have a recently constructed fact checking department.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zmknnrd
Asleep at the wheel.
What can we expect – it’s the BBC? Hilariously, they recently appointed a Disinformation Correspondent who, needless to say, never looks at BBC output. I wrote in to point out that surely their Environmental reporter, Justin Rowlatt, was already holding that position but I don’t think they get the joke…
When you are the joke you will never understand the joke.
“So much for the silly little theory from Ms Treseder, our ecology expert. Maybe the BBC should get advice from proper hurricane experts in future, who would tell them that these storms are rare, but sometimes happen.”
The BBC probably did ask a proper hurricane expert but didn’t like the answer and so kept going down the list until they found someone who did fit their narrative. Watching the BBC news for me is now a game of which news story has the most tenuous link to Global Warming, I thought I was on a winner with the story of the rescue of school children from a cable car in Pakistan after one of the cables snapped, but no I missed.
So the flooding that happened in the same region LAST YEAR did not actually happen? Really?
Not just 1939 – “Before that, the San Diego Hurricane made landfall in October 1858 – California’s only hurricane landfall on record”
https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/chenowethlandsea.pdf
I wonder how this rainfall compares:
“Beginning on December 24, 1861, and lasting for 45 days, the largest flood in California’s recorded history occurred, reaching full flood stage in different areas between January 9–12, 1862. The entire Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys were inundated for an extent of 300 miles (480 km), averaging 20 miles (32 km) in breadth. State government was ⁶forced to relocate from the capital in Sacramento for 18 months in San Francisco. The rain created an inland sea in Orange County, lasting about three weeks with water standing 4 feet (1.2 m) deep up to 4 miles (6 km) from the river.[1] The Los Angeles basin was flooded from the San Gabriel Mountains to the Palos Verdes Peninsula, at variable depths, excluding the higher lands which became islands until the waters receded. The Los Angeles basin lost 200,000 cattle by way of drowning, as well as homes, ranches, farm crops & vineyards being swept-away.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floods_in_California
Yes. There is a reason that Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay area have extensive flood channels. Presumably the BBC ‘forgot’ they were there.
We had a tropical storm in San Diego back around (I’m not precisely sure – it was nearly 50 years ago after all!) in 1975 or 1976 during my Navy days when my sub was home-ported there. Got a little windy, dropped a bunch of rain. Nobody remembered it after all – in fact I forgot until my wife reminded me.
Every winter during the typical rainy season in California we’d have mud slides that would damage the many hillside homes there. What usually happened was the prior year’s rainfall would produce a bumper crop of grass on the hillsides, which would then result in a lot of grass fires that denuded the slopes, then the following winter rainy season the naked slopes would slide. Nobody thought a thing about it …. and that was in the days when the worry warts were proclaiming a new Ice Age cometh!
“on record”
I missed all of the BBC reportage about the all of the electric rescue equipment (boats, helicopters, ambulances) and electric equipment used to clear roads, remove heavy debris, and rebuild bridges (bulldozers, road graders, excavators, cranes). Did anybody else miss that?
Their batteries got wet so ….
Keep your powder, and batteries, dry.
… they blew up.
Even when it doesn’t happen, they find a way to include their catastrophic wording used in all articles leading up to landfall. The BBC is just part of the misinformation parade–near the front of course.
NYT
California Evades Catastrophic Damage From Rare Tropical Storm
Just like we’ve “evaded” the “C” in CAGW all these decades.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/failed-prediction-timeline/
Omigod!!!! 2.48 in of rain in Los Angeles!!! Stop the presses!
Heck, 2 and a half inches of rainfall is an average thunderstorm here in Florida and the Gulf Coast area. We don’t even think much about any storm that drops less than 5 or 6 inches, and all it does is cause some clogged up storm drains to pond some water for a few hours. We’ve experienced up to 13-14 inches of rain in a day or less here at my home during tropical storm events which occur practically every year somewhere here in Florida and the Gulf Coast.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Sure, right . . . that word absolutely must be changed for another word . . . I mean, just look at the definition of that word! Its use is just absurd.
Which definition?
The real one or their new one?
Unprecedented!
Inconceivable!!!!
Where did the spring waters come from in Palm Springs?
From palms, obviously.
(Did I earn a face palm?)
California Drought Undeniable Evidence Of Climate Change – UPDATE: California Rain Undeniable Evidence Of Climate Change
https://babylonbee.com/news/california-drought-undeniable-evidence-of-climate-change—update-california-rain-undeniable-evidence-of-climate-change
Lots of ridicule of the Hurricane Hilary Hype over at the Babylonbee!
This was the best
https://babylonbee.com/news/hilary-makes-landfall-destroys-over-30000-emails
What they don’t mention is the areas hit with flash floods had weak storm drainage systems because that’s all they needed. Rain is rare in those areas although wind is high. True ‘flash floods’ are walls (1ft+) of water coursing across the desert from the mountains where they originate and quite a scary sight to see coming at you.
It’s like cities in the south that shut down whenever there is a trace of snow.
When you only get snow that sticks, once every 5 years, it just isn’t worth buying lots of snow equipment. Easier and cheaper, to just shut down for a day while the snow melts.
I lived in Texas for a year back in the early 70’s.
They still sometimes talked about the Interstate (I don’t remember which one.) shutting down a couple of years earlier because of 2 inches of snow.
Hindsight: Probably 2 things involved. They didn’t have the equipment to deal with it such as plows, salt trucks, etc.
The drivers weren’t used to driving on snow so it was unsafe conditions for them.
Being in the Midwest, I don’t know if I’d bother to shovel 2 inches of snow off my driveway.
(Well, maybe to prevent it from being compacted into ice. Ice is no fun to drive on.)
Hillary was a normal monsoon type storm, tracking a bit west of where such storms normally track.
It was stronger because it was further west and hence more of it was over water, instead of land.
Maybe cut the BBC some slack. They need to compete with their peers: News of the World, National Enquirer, The Globe, Aliens Weekly, Astrology for dummies, Rolling Stone etc. It’s a hard market.
Most days the BBC can’t even compete with the Beano.
The BBC is on par with the New York Times and Washington Post and the rest of the MSM, which means it has absolutely no credibility, it abandoned journalism for leftist activism long ago. Yes we in Southern California had a storm, the predictions of catastrophe were laughable. In Moorpark we had 4″+ of rain, at my house I measured 6″ and in years past I have measured up to 7″ in one day, but the sun came out the next day things are drying out. As long as we are prepared, know the flood prone areas, we can manage.
All they want is the “scare factor” to stick.
nothing unusual
I lived in long beach for a decade it flooded every day.
its like them BLM riots in 2020 nothing unusual i was in LA in 92. totally normal riots
crime and homelessness in san fran? totally normal. theres always been crime. and sleeping outside is as old as humanity.
everything that can happen has happened
Usual Homewood junk, apparently he didn’t read the BBC article!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-66566483
Seems to track with what Homewood says.
Maybe read it again ?
Better yet, go there this weekend and witness the desert bloom all the way down to Cabo, an amazing sight. Was there 40 years ago after one of these went by.
The desert requires these periodic dumps the same way every forest on earth is designed to burn periodically or die.
“…witness the desert bloom all the way down to Cabo…” +1
Perhaps you should read it again. E.g. the title: “Hurricane Hilary Unprecedented? The BBC Would Like You to Think So”, except of course they never said ‘unprecedented’.
“So much for the silly little theory from Ms Treseder, our ecology expert. Maybe the BBC should get advice from proper hurricane experts in future, who would tell them that these storms are rare, but sometimes happen.”
If you read the article you’ll see that the BBC actually said: “The last time a tropical storm made landfall in Southern California was in Long Beach in 1939.”
Got into San Diego Sunday night
A few palm fronds down, piles dead tree needles washed onto roads by the rain
A couple of puddles to drive through
That’s it
“on record”