From the Cliff Mass Weather Blog
The Seattle Times ClimateLab stories are often sloppy and incorrect, with the article in today’s paper a good example of poor journalism, with politicized, error-filled claims.
The headline on a front page story today asks whether “this story is a goodbye to the National Weather Service…”?
Then it describes a last visit to the National Weather Service before Trump and MAGA
Haven’t got the point yet? Then read into the story.
So the claim is that the Trump folks are closely following the Project 2025 document, which calls for ending NOAA and sending NWS forecast functions to the private sector.
Want it even clearer? The Seattle Times article then quotes an article in the Atlantic discussing “the MAGA plan to end free weather reports”
The Big Problem with the Seattle Times Story
The essential problem with the story is that NONE OF IT IS TRUE.
False, unsupported claims, that are overtly pushing a partisan viewpoint.
Stronger words would be appropriate, but I will leave those to others.
Fact 1: No National Weather Service office has been terminated.
Fact 2: No change in National Weather Service (NWS) products has been made or proposed.
Fact 3: President Trump explicitly denied that he follows Project 2020 plans and has explicitly rejected it.
Let me say this again….President Trump has explicitly stated he does not support Project 2025. He said it presents thoughts of the far right. NOT HIS.
Fact 4: The new head of the Department of Commerce (Howard Lutnick), the department to which NOAA and the NWS belong, has explicitly stated that he will not eliminate NOAA or the NWS.
Don’t believe me? Check out this AXIOS article.
Lutnick stated he would maintain the NWS in his testimony in the U.S. Senate.
Fact 5: I have talked to folks in the new administration. They have made it clear that there is no agenda to get rid of NOAA or the NWS.
Disappointing “Journalism”
The author of this story, Erik Lacitis, called me up when he was writing the article. I told him the facts. I have a deep knowledge of the situation in the NOAA and the NWS, having served on several advisory committees and having written several papers on the situation.
Yet, even given the facts, the author produced this clearly incorrect article. Very disappointing.
The Trump Administration Has Not Done Well So Far with NOAA/NWS
Finally, let me be clear.
The Trump administration has made several serious mistakes, such as firing probationary NOAA/NWS employees and then having to rehire them. The Trump folks don’t seem to have a logical game plan for understanding what needs to be fixed in NOAA and then doing something about it.
NOAA has deep flaws that need to be addressed. This administration needs to reach out to those who understand the issues and have ideas about how to fix them.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
There is such a thing as malicious compliance. Can bureaucrats “follow” an order with dumb insolence, and misconstrue that order so as to undermine the intent?
Mass still makes the mistake that this is sloppy journalism. No, it’s precise propaganda.
Yes, you have to think it is deliberate propaganda when the reporter is given the facts by Cliff and then ignores them, in his effort to smear the Trump administration.
Once a media outlet has invested years and huge $$$$$s selling a particular storyline to their readership. regardless how wacky said storyline is, they are not about to be redirected about the content of their established storyline just by some factual realities being presented to them.
Plus, they might lose their subscription to such oracles of climate truth like https://coveringclimatenow.org/
Since NWS can’t even get a 24 hour forecast in Seattle right it is time to shut their ass down.
^^THIS!!
NOBODY gets the weather forecasts right. There is not one weather service anywhere in the world that can accurately forecast the weather 3 days in advance. Sometimes they aren’t even accurate 1 day in advance, as you have pointed out.
That doesn’t mean we should shut them all down.
What value do they serve then?
Isn’t there a lot of fish waiting to be wrapped in Seattle?
As has been observed for may years –
weather forecasters are there to make economists look good.
(and vice-versa)
Yes, yes it does. Stop funding liars.
There are plenty of alternatives.
Pretty much every TV station has their own meteorologists who make their own weather forecasts, using one of more of the major weather models.
If the NWS were to go away, most people wouldn’t see a difference.
If those who currently get the NWS forecasts for free, had to pay for them, very few people would see any difference.
If the NOAA were to start charging for access to the data it collects, very few people would see any difference.
NWS weather forecasts aren’t free. We taxpayers pay for the service.
I tend to disagree with your premise. Yes,TV stations have their own meteorologists but each of those “Weathermen” get their data from NOAA. Not all of them use GFS or Euro. And even GFS and Euro gets data from NOAA. At least in my area, SW FL, each set of meteoroligists make their own model based on NOAA data and analogs, that is what happened when we had similar data. Without NOAA data, forecasts would be no better than slinging mud against a map..
Whether the NOAA data is accurate is a different question.
I didn’t say anything about getting rid of data acquisition, just that they shouldn’t give it away for free. The weather prediction is no better, and in many cases, worse than local forecasters. It should be gotten rid of.
Here in the UK, l feel there has been some turning of the tide at least with the BBC weather reports.
As over last few weeks l have noticed their weather reports have become more honest in their reporting. As rather then trying to link any above average temps to climate change. They are now starting to explain how shifts in weather patterning and wind direction have been the cause of any above average temps. They still feel the the need try to link warmer temperatures with climate change at the end of the report. But at least now they correctly explaining that any warmer temps are due to the weather rather then the climate.
Which l feel is certainly a step in the right direction, so we just need to keep pressure on then to keep them honest in their reporting.
But “… shifts in weather patterning and wind direction …” are a consequence of Climate Change (TM).
Only to the empty headed.
Weather affects climate which affects weather. The perfect circular reasoning that ignores logic because it ignores cause and effect.
The Seattle Times is the US equivalent of the Guardian. It’s a commie rag. Seattle itself is the poster city of urban woke decay.
It used to be a nice place to live. Seattle was prosperous; many great companies headquartered there. Then the residents went crazy and wrecked it. The extreme leftists in Seattle are now destroying the entire state. Vicious woke degenerates have infected the state government. To be fair, Oregon, California, and Colorado are falling off the same cliff. I don’t know what the cure might be, or even if there is one.
I’m reminded of a party I was at several years ago. I ran into a guy who worked for the Weather Service in Denver and had to joke with him about their snow forecasts being no better than chance. He admitted that, as a joke, they had once installed a dart board. On it they mapped out several areas for ‘trace’, 3″ to 5″, 6″ to 10″, etc. with the total of the areas for each amount matching the probabilities. When they expected snow, they threw a dart at the board. He told me that no one could reliably forecast snow in Denver and the dart was as accurate as any of the forecasters in the office.
So experienced people based their dartboard outlines on their past experiences using numbers that they knew to be within the realm of possibility. Sounds a lot like how AI algorithms work.
ClimateLab
Lol, tells you all you need to know.
The Kitchen Laboratory provides a hands-on learning environment which allows students to gain practical experience in cooking…
https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/facilities/kitchen-laboratory
The books.
Cliff Mass runs a special PNW weather forecasting study project with his students where the group pits their forecasting skill against the NOAA NWS efforts.
Cliff’s team comes out on top almost every year.
The PNW is one of those climate & weather regions where the “one size fits all” forecasting / modeling templates just don’t cut it.
There are hundreds, if not thousands of such ‘different’ climate / weather regions all around the world.
But apparently, climate “science” can just add all the weather metrics together, then divide by the number of entries, and present an “average” construct that represents how THE climate / weather of this planet behaves now, and also what it will be doing in 100 years time.
(and the Seattle Times et al reckon that skeptics are crazy . . . )
Cliff,
you should make it more clear as to what you think of the Seattle Times 🙂
The Seattle Times won’t let you read their 2 day old stale journalism unless you turn off your adblocker.
Since the story is a regurgitation of other journalists work, you’d think they wouldn’t care.
Tells me all I need to know about them.
I have no idea who decides who gets dismissed or what criteria is used to make that decision. There will surely be mistakes it is inevitable. The point is NOAA and NWS both need attention, we can sit and whine about it but what is important is that something is being done. If mistakes are made correct them and keep on keeping on.
“The essential problem with the story is that NONE OF IT IS TRUE.”
Sound like what is being fed to the far-left “Hands off” and “Tesla” protestors.