If the Weatherman can't accurately predict tomorrow's weather, how can they predict Global Warming

First, my rant:

Weathermen get way to much air time. They are the first person to report on the local news and get at least ten minutes of air time during the "weather" portion of the news. They give seven day forecasts when most of the time they can't even accurately predict the weather for the next freaking day... sometimes they don't even get the weather correct on the same day!

They have more technology than ever before, satellites, computers, etc. etc., and IMO it seems like their predictions have gotten worse. I would love to have a job where I could screw up as much as they do and not get fired!

IMO, most of the time spent on weather could be put to better use by spending it on, oh say, sports!

Now, The Question:
So if the weatherman, with all their technology, can't tell me accurately whether it will rain or not the next day, how is it that the scientists can predict the temperature of the Earth for the next decade or more?

First of all, how are average temperatures taken? Are thermometers randomly placed throughout the world? In cities, suburbs and rural areas? In deserts, mountains, and plains? Is the temperature of the atmosphere taken into consideration? If so at what elevation?

Secondly, for how long have these averages been measured to get a base line? I can't imagine average temps being recorded for more than a few decades or so.

Lastly, how are the computer models created to make these predictions? Computer programs can be programmed to give certain results, perhaps not intentionally, if one has a bias or is looking for a particular answer or outcome. Either way if they are the same computer the weatherman uses, I wouldn't trust any of it!

In Conclusion
It seems to me that there are way too many variables involved to give accurate results. I admit there does seem to be a warming trend, with the melting of glaciers, etc going on now (however it's been absolutely frigid in Milwaukee for the last couple weeks). But does that mean it's all man made? Can we accurately predict that things won't turn around and start cooling off again sometime soon?

My point via metaphor:
I cannot perdict my mood upon waking up 3 days from now, but i know if i keep smoking there is a good chance i'll get cancer.

Weathermen get way to much air time. They are the first person to report on the local news and get at least ten minutes of air time during the "weather" portion of the news. They give seven day forecasts when most of the time they can't even accurately predict the weather for the next freaking day... sometimes they don't even get the weather correct on the same day!

Well i don't know about USA's Meteorologists but in Britain i would say that there predictions are normally spot on. The warned us a couple of days ago about today's snow storms and even got the snow depths very accurate... The recent storms to hit Britain were also predicted correctly including wind speeds... in fact, i regularly rely on the Met Office for picnics, travel etc and find them to be very accurate.

First of all, how are average temperatures taken? Are thermometers randomly placed throughout the world? In cities, suburbs and rural areas? In deserts, mountains, and plains? Is the temperature of the atmosphere taken into consideration? If so at what elevation?

I believe average temps are taken from many various sources... Ocean buoys measure sea temps, Weather balloons, various met station based around the world and even satellites are used to measure global temps.

Please check out...

www.metoffice.gov.uk...

Secondly, for how long have these averages been measured to get a base line? I can't imagine average temps being recorded for more than a few decades or so.

I believe that global temperature records go back over 100 years (which is not a lot considering the age of the planet) however, scientists are able to trace temps back further using various techniques like Tree ring samples, Ice core samples etc...

Lastly, how are the computer models created to make these predictions? Computer programs can be programmed to give certain results, perhaps not intentionally, if one has a bias or is looking for a particular answer or outcome. Either way if they are the same computer the weatherman uses, I wouldn't trust any of it!

Er... to be honest ive got no idea how the computer models work... sorry

It seems to me that there are way too many variables involved to give accurate results. I admit there does seem to be a warming trend, with the melting of glaciers, etc going on now (however it's been absolutely frigid in Milwaukee for the last couple weeks). But does that mean it's all man made? Can we accurately predict that things won't turn around and start cooling off again sometime soon?

Well there is always the risk of any predictions/theories etc being wrong... doesn't mean we shouldn't take precautions. I believe that the stakes are far to high to sit back and think "maybe their wrong and we are all gonna be ok"

Just want to give applause to the Author of this post.

and I agree as well that the weathermen/women are somewhat a crock. I don't know where you live but in California I've heard about rain in the forecast and can tell you how funny it is when the first twenty minutes of the 5:00 broadcast is devoted to a "Stormwatch 2007" segment......


"We're here live in (anywhere) where residents are bracing for what might be a considerable amount of rain. City officials are preparing......blah blah blah...."

End result ?? a few sprinkles. What a joke !

Meteorology is in it's infancy still, or it is limited. Will we ever be able to accurately predict tornadoes? (path, intensity, duration) Even hurricanes and their path are left to the last minute untill they're pretty much right on top of us.

...can tell you how funny it is when the first twenty minutes of the 5:00 broadcast is devoted to a "Stormwatch 2007" segment...

I thought we were the only ones with "Stormwatch '07" segments!

We have businesses and schools shut down early because the night before, during one of those "Stormwatch" segments they predict a foot of snow. Then, the next day, when we get an inch or so, everyone is wondering why their kids are home from school.

I don't want this to turn into a weatherman bash (even though I think they deserve it) but more to the point of if they can't do the job of predicting rain/sun/cold/snow then how accurate can Global Warming possibly be.

Gobal warming.... I don't think so... It's been almost 3 weeks that the temperature outside is around -30°C with the wind here... and the average temperature for the month of february is around -10°C.

Originally posted by mecheng
Now, The Question:
So if the weatherman, with all their technology, can't tell me accurately whether it will rain or not the next day, how is it that the scientists can predict the temperature of the Earth for the next decade or more?

First of all, how are average temperatures taken? Are thermometers randomly placed throughout the world? In cities, suburbs and rural areas? In deserts, mountains, and plains? Is the temperature of the atmosphere taken into consideration? If so at what elevation?

Secondly, for how long have these averages been measured to get a base line? I can't imagine average temps being recorded for more than a few decades or so.

Lastly, how are the computer models created to make these predictions? Computer programs can be programmed to give certain results, perhaps not intentionally, if one has a bias or is looking for a particular answer or outcome. Either way if they are the same computer the weatherman uses, I wouldn't trust any of it!

In Conclusion
It seems to me that there are way too many variables involved to give accurate results. I admit there does seem to be a warming trend, with the melting of glaciers, etc going on now (however it's been absolutely frigid in Milwaukee for the last couple weeks). But does that mean it's all man made? Can we accurately predict that things won't turn around and start cooling off again sometime soon?

Maybe it is because you don't understand what the data sources are, and it is a great deal more than weather records. By the way, it isn't Meteorologists that predicted, or predict, or research, Global Warming; it is Climatology, Geology, Glaciology, and Forestry--yes, Forestry. In fact, this is one of the very, very, few areas of science that is Polymathmatical; depending on more than one field of Science.

Data is taken from weather records, yes, but much more is taken from Ice cores and from trees (Dendochronology) in sample from all over the world. About 2/3rds of the Data analyzed that points to Global Warming spans up to 25,000 years of time. Global Warming is not a joke, but, in order to understand the analysis, you are going to have to do your homework on the Data, how the research is done, and by what sciences and Scientists.

I'll guarantee you that none of those people are your local TV weatherman.

[edit on 8-2-2007 by Ed Littlefox]

Originally posted by mecheng
Weathermen get way to much air time. They are the first person to report on the local news and get at least ten minutes of air time during the "weather" portion of the news.

I agree, many local TV weathercasters aka media bubbleheads are not even meteorologists and don't spend enough time reviewing the data that they parrot off the teleprompter while they wave around at geewhiz graphics. Regional forecasts may become less accurate too, since we are entering a period of climate change that is abnormal with extremes that haven't been plotted before.

You can get the forecast and the degree of accuracy for your region here:
www.forecastadvisor.com...

Originally posted by mecheng
IMO, most of the time spent on weather could be put to better use by spending it on, oh say, sports!

A beer and bratwurst review would work...hehe

Originally posted by mecheng
So if the weatherman, with all their technology, can't tell me accurately whether it will rain or not the next day, how is it that the scientists can predict the temperature of the Earth for the next decade or more?

There are numerous models in use for weather and climate forecasting and it depends on the degree of resolution, time span, and the variable you're trying to predict a trend in. Average temperature on a global scale is much easier to forecast than a regional event too.

Recent example: UK's Met Office forecast of annual global temperature has proved remarkably accurate, with a mean forecast error size of just 0.06 °C.

Originally posted by mecheng
First of all, how are average temperatures taken? Are thermometers randomly placed throughout the world? In cities, suburbs and rural areas? In deserts, mountains, and plains? Is the temperature of the atmosphere taken into consideration? If so at what elevation?

There are remote weather stations all over the land and sea. They also use radar, satellite, aircraft, and radiosonde data to access upper atmosphere temps and correlate it with ground obs.

Originally posted by mecheng
Secondly, for how long have these averages been measured to get a base line? I can't imagine average temps being recorded for more than a few decades or so.

Along with current recorded weather history, they have climate proxy data (polar/glacial ice, tree rings, coral skeletons, sea beds, fossils, rock strata, sediments, etc) going back 100's of 1000 years that are used in global models like the GCM and IPCC AR4. The US National Weather Service has been recording data since 1870. The UK Met Office started in 1854 and has recorded data that goes back 300+ years.

Here's a couple of the latest and greatest in weather tech:



Yes, there are way too many variables for the human brain to fathom, but supercomputers that make millions of calculations per second have become more and more accurate in trend analysis and forecasting. The agriculture industry is heavily dependent on accurate climate forecasting and without such tools theuir crop yields would be reduced and food shortages could occur. Man laughs at complexity and see it as only challenge, otherwise the idea of Atomic theory would of never produced the nuclear power plant.



Regional US weather models:
www.meteo.psu.edu...
weather.cod.edu...

Note: Global climate models are not regional numerical weather models...there's a big difference.

Btw, February is the hardest month to forecast in regards to regional temps, where as July and August are the easiest.

Here's a place where amatuers and pros learn about weather: Storm2K


[edit on 8-2-2007 by Regenmacher]

Mecheng, in the navy we didn't call them (the Aerographer's Mates) Weather Guessers*, for nothin'.

*wxguesser, for short

Originally posted by psyopswatcher
*wxguesser, for short

They better guess right or the whole crew will be fish food.
NRL Monterey Marine Meteorology Division- Tropical Cyclone Page

Bet they're also happy that they no longer walk the plank for miscasting.






[edit on 8-2-2007 by Regenmacher]

agreed, the weatherman & that tele-prompter position is due for the dust bin.
even the cult of personality draw the stations use to their advantage is losing its clout.

since weather forecast is not an 'absolute', a short 2 minute (including commercial) slot would be adequate.
leave the severe weather alerts/warnings/watches in the present display mode as a "horizontal scroll" on the bottom of a TV screen.

then let "up-to-minute-weather" be a service one subscribes to on their blackberry or cell phone ....using a GPS status or cell location as the requestor



***

as for as climate change, global warming...
it too is in the realm of "Probability" instead of "Absolute"

so the global warming paradigm is just a 'probability forecast' = Trend,
masqueraded as Empiracle Absolute (or something to that effect) Fact


only in the last 2 generations have 'we' had temperature data from satellite
readings.
which is a whole lot different than a mercury device at the end of a airport runway, or a NOAA station at some State Park pier taking readings...
as macadam, buildings, traffic & other changes alter the sun/wind/surface conditions at the NOAA station recording the data

I only have one liner's to say about this.

The weather is natural it doesnt follow any pattern so some sort of trend can be found to make predictions from. althought the weather is also a part of global warming.

They can't accurately predict global warming. It's only a theory, and far from proven. The Earth is still very much a mystery to scientists.

Aren't scientists the ones predicting global warming?

most of the time the weatherman are right...atleast around here. A couple times they are off but and when they are people notice it and so they have a misconception that meteorologists are usually wrong when thats not always the case.

Anyway thats besides the case because Weather men that are on t.v arent at the fore front of predicting global warming, its a combination of scientists and Al Gore

Nobody can predict anything, think about it.

how much money do people spend each day trying to predict sways in
the stock market ? Billions....

That being said, if we cant even predict whats going to happen to something
we created (the stock market) how in the hell are people going to predict
anything ?

I cant even predict my loved ones most of the time, and I have been with
them forever !

PS: Its all political or keeps your mind occupied


[edit on 8-2-2007 by R3KR]

I have now lived in three states, two in the northwest and now Hawaii. Weather reports were a joke in the northwest. Maybe once a week they were right. In hawaii they say it's going to rain just about everyday. Somtimes they're right, sometimes they're wrong. I could really care less though. i take the weather report as a grain of salt.
So the weatherman has a seven day forecast, Global Warming Scientisits have a 100 year forecast. To bad I won't be here to see the outcome.

Although I don't believe that 90% of this is man made, I will still do my part conserve. My grandchildren who's parents haven't even been born yet deserve more than a gamble that these scientists are no better than our weatherman.

Excellent thread, I'll just add my little rant here...

I'm off to Norway on Monday and have been checking the weather forecast daily for over a month. Every single day I check various sources, accuweather, metcheck, etc and the forecast has been VASTLY different every time. This happens every time I go away, the weather is forecast so inaccurately that I genuinely don't know what to expect when I arrive in the country.

I know there is always going to be a margin for error but they're not even close half the time.

Originally posted by mnmcandiez
Aren't scientists the ones predicting global warming?

Sort of, but their predictions aren't based on conclusive evidence, or anything close to it, so it's really more of a guess.