Of course, to the true disciples of Gaia, it doesn't make much difference whether it's getting warmer or colder. All change is BAD.
Posted on 06/06/2007 9:21:59 PM PDT by EPW Comm Team
The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition Hon Secretary, Terry Dunleavy MBE, 14A Bayview Road, Hauraki, North Shore City, NZ 0622 Phone (09) 486 3859 - Mobile 0274 836688 - Email - terry.dunleavy@nzclimatescience.org.nz Media release (immediate) 7 June 2007 World climate predictors right only half the time
“The open admission by a climate scientist of the New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA), Dr Jim Renwick, that his organisation achieves only 50 per cent accuracy in its climate forecasts, and that this is as good as any other forecaster around the world, should be a wake-up call for world political leaders,” said Rear Admiral Jack Welch, chairman of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition. Yesterday the coalition published an analysis of seasonal climate predictions by NIWA over the past five years which found that the overall accuracy of the predictions was just 48 per cent. Defending the Niwa record, Dr Renwick said his organisation was doing as well as any other weather forecaster around the world. He was quoted by the country’s leading newspaper, the New Zealand Herald as saying: “Climate prediction is hard, half of the variability in the climate system is not predictable, so we don’t expect to do terrifically well.” Later on New Zealand radio, Dr Renwick said: “The weather is not predictable beyond a week or two.” Admiral Welch said that these statements warrant immediate attention by governments around the world. “Dr Renwick is no lightweight. He was a lead author on Working Group I of the IPCC 4th Assessment Report, and serves on the World Meteorological Organisation Commission for Climatology Expert Team on Seasonal Forecasting. He is presumed to be au fait with the abilities of the official governmental climate prediction community round the world. “All round the developed world, governments are being pressured by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to accept the integrity of scenarios of future climate behaviour agreed by their own climate bureaucrats, but these bureaucrats are the very people that Dr Renwick now tells us get it right only half the time. Worse, he tells us they are unable to predict weather beyond a week or two, yet in conjunction with the IPCC they presume to tell us what to expect over the next few decades. “The link between climate and weather is well known: climate is determined by averaging weather variables over an extended period (usually 30 years) at one place or for a region. How can there be any faith in climate predictions by officials who admit they are unable to forecast the weather beyond a week or two? “Perhaps now, governments will pay heed to those many independent climate scientists around the world who have been challenging the exaggerated projections by IPCC officials, and those political zealots such as Al Gore who use those predictions to mislead the ordinary public. “In the light of these revelations and recent strong evidence that the sun not carbon dioxide controls the climate, the new Secretary General of the UN, Ban Ki Moon would do the world a great service by creating an opportunity for the world to hear from the independent scientists who disagree with the IPCC’s blaming mankind for climate variability that is natural and historic. There is no scientific justification for some of the extremist economic and social penalties that a minority of zealots are trying to impose on the people of the world. “This is a matter of grave import and urgency for poorer nations who will suffer most from the proposed penal measures, “ said Admiral Welch. ends 550 words Contact: Rear Admiral (ret) Jack Welch CBE, tel 0064 9 4891237 Email: welchfam@woosh.co.nz
Uh, the title isn't even right. Last time I checked, 48% was less than half.
I know I’m spltting hars in my previous post, but damn, the scientists should just flip a coin for their data.
Man, oh man... this is predicting for FIVE years? And they need to convince us about the next hundred? I’ll have to look into what this guy is actually talking about later tomorrow...
Ha, ha! You guys suck!
:D
Concedes? Is that what it’s called when you seek the truth? No, that’s what it’s called when you begrudgingly are forced to accept the truth.
They can’t help spewing, no matter what. Liars all. The lowest of the low.
That’s actually a really good reply. I wish more people had that reaction to these climatologists and their crappy models. Of course, I got a laugh out of it, too.
Of course, to the true disciples of Gaia, it doesn't make much difference whether it's getting warmer or colder. All change is BAD.
so can we pollute half the time then?
A 50% prediction rate is actually a very telling number.
This signals that the climate overall is stable and half the time it is slightly warmer and half the time it is slightly cooler. Half the time, we get more rain than average, half the time we get less rain than average.
The weather is very predictable. Just take the average and you won’t be far off.
Correct half the time? That’s pretty darn good. I’d say “Climate modles have little or no demonstrable relationship with reality.”
50%? Let me guess...
The first time they run the model, the results are not what they want, they “adjust” the data, run it again, and get the “correct” results.
Since Al Gore can predict the weather out 50 years, he should properly apply his talent as a weather dude on the 10 PM news.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.