In what follows, I want to strike the right balance. I am not a sceptic of the anthropogenic global-warming (AGW) theory, in the sense of one who says that man definitely has no measurable impact on the climate. We ought to take account of the risk and continue to try to understand it. But neither am I an alarmist who is convinced that the science is done and dusted. I think we also ought to take account of alternative (or complementary) theories of why our climate is changing. What I say below does not mean that I have now joined the ranks of those sceptics. It is a criticism of the worst kind of credulous, proselytizing alarmist. It says, we should represent the facts accurately, and keep our eyes and our minds open to all possibilities.
A reporter on BBC Radio 5Live has just said something like "Of course, no one could have forecast the recent downpours, but experts say that extreme weather events like this will become more common if climate-change theories are correct." This was echoed by that other peddler of received wisdom, The Independent. Michael McCarty writes:
"Even though yesterday's remarkable downpours seem very much out of the ordinary, no scientist is going to say that in themselves they prove the climate is changing. There have always been floods; there have always been severe floods. The natural variability of the climate has always included extremes. However, if the predictions of supercomputer climate models are correct, rain of the unusual intensity experienced in many places yesterday is going to become a much more commonplace feature of the weather in Britain as the century progresses."
A couple of problems:
- Every AGW model forecasts lower rainfall in England in summers. It is in winters that rainfall (and therefore flooding) is expected to increase. This event is contrary to the models, not evidence of them.
- Someone did predict the downpours. His name is Piers Corbyn. His company is WeatherAction Long-Range Forecasters. He forecast on the 30th May the downpours of both the 12-14th and the 24-26th June. In the case of the 12-14th, he forecast the downpours six months previously. Piers is an astrophysicist, and a leading AGW sceptic, whose weather-forecasting models are based on the same principles that lead him to contest the AGW theories. I have asked him for permission to publish his 30th May forecast, and will put them up on this site if he agrees.
This is not probitive. But it is illustrative. The attempts by the AGW alarmists to shoehorn, by implication and innuendo, the recent events into their view of the world was entirely predictable. And thoroughly dishonest.
UPDATE: Piers has allowed me to make his 30th May forecast available. I have attached the Acrobat file (PDF) containing the detailed forecast to this post (click "Read more" if you are viewing this from the home page and can't see the link), and have copied the relevant parts of his accompanying email in the Comment below.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
 BILR0706JUNE30dUpdateSWT23Aissue30.pdf | 271.56 KB |
Comments
Piers Corbyn's forecast
As I am not currently paying for Piers's forecasts, I didn't receive the original month-ahead forecast on the 30th May, which predicted the recent downpours and floods. Instead, I received an email on the 16th June, pointing out his success in forecasting the rain of 12-14th June, and predicting further heavy rain and floods on 24-26th June. That email contained the following information and observations, plus an Acrobat file, which is attached to the main post):
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: FW: => WARNING OF SURPRISE FLOODS which the Met Office
wouldn't see coming issued by Weather Action 4 days before the torrents
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 02:14:57 +0100
From: Piers Corbyn
Weather Action The Long Range Forecasters
-----------------------
The remainder of the email relates to the climate-change debate, and disputes stemming from Channel 4's Great Global Warming Swindle programme, in which Piers participated. You can find this information on WeatherAction's website.
It seems to me that this shows a pretty good track-record, not only at predicting the weather, but at predicting how climate-change alarmists would respond to it. Important points to remember, though, are (a) that weather is not climate, and (b) that both sides agree that solar activity has an impact on the climate, but disagree on the extent.
This shows that we should take Piers's analysis very seriously, but it does not mean that man cannot also be having an impact. We need to keep an open mind about the extent of natural causes and the extent of man-made causes, and to continue to expand our understanding of climate systems without predetermining the outcome by looking only for evidence of man-made effects and for reasons to discard evidence of natural effects. Attempts such as that of the Royal Academy to try to close down debate would be despicable from ignorant lay-people, but coming from a supposedly reputable body representing professional scientists, the effort is beneath contempt.
Updated comment from Piers on recent weather
I attended the Institute of Physics seminar on June 7th, referred to below, and can confirm that Piers warned then of the washout at the start of Wimbledon.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: FW: Flood disasters. It's down to the Sun and there is more to come in July say solar-based long range forecasters. Global Warmers Challenged
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:00:12 +0100
From: Piers Corbyn
Weather Action The Long Range Forecasters
Professor Rosie Boycott
Here's a classic example of the alarmists' spin. Rosie Boycott (of course) on This Week:
"This is really serious. This is also a direct result of climate change. I mean people talk about global warming thinking it's all about hot weather. It's not. It's about weird weather, and we are right in it."
Do you think Rosie would consider the evidence on this issue? ? ? Sorry, to do that to you. Pick yourself up off the floor.
Is "weird weather" a
Is "weird weather" a technical term?
Oh yes. I believe it is
Oh yes. I believe it is defined as "whatever weather we get".