Whilst the predicted storm was not anywhere near as bad as some thought, the Met Office have done a fantastic job warning people. The problem is that a probabilistic forecast can tell us that damage will occur but because the effects of storms can be very localised it cannot say exactly who will suffer damage and who will not. And if we don’t personally suffer a falling tree, we tend to think the warnings of falling trees were over-blown.
The problem is that both at the regional level the exact centre of the storm is difficult to predict in advance, and even when it is known where it will hit, the effects at the local level will be affected by local land topology which can funnel the wind in one area and not in another depending on the wind direction. And to cap it, turbulence from a 300m hill can extend 3km away causing local devastation from falling trees in one street with minor damage in another.
But whilst we praise their work for the short term forecast let’s not forget the same organisation still will not admit it cannot predict the global temperature just one year in advance having said they were only 0.06C per year out … when the predicted warming was 0.05C!
BBC up to their old tricks.Two big weather stories in the southern hemisphere. One of unusual warming and one of unusual cooling. The BBC only covers one with only minor trimming of the feathers of the bird brained journalists who always try to infer such events were caused by global warming:
But I cannot find any mention at all of a similar story about excessive cold in Chile:
Same old BBC: Hot so pro-warming is news, but cold so anti-warming is not. And they wonder why we want to stop the BBC tax.
The problem with the BBC is that they know they have to stop the obvious bias of their journalists who wanted to blame any unusual weather on global warming. So they no longer say “global warming caused”, but instead “could global warming have caused”. But that is a long long way from being impartial, and giving equal weight to cold as well as heat and equal prominence to news that contradicts the global warming scare as that which could support it.