If scientists and weathermen can't predict weather at least 60% of the time, who is an expert in weather?

Question

With all the people screaming about global warming, and how we are responsible, I would like to know who really is correct? It seems that our Weather Experts can't predict next weeks weather, why should I believe them about what will happen next year? If a volcano puts more damaging gases into the ozone layer than we have since walking upright, why does everyone run scared when an activist screams rising tides, world wide flooding?
With 50%+ of the polar ice-cap melted off, why have the tides remained the same as years past?

Answer 1

In my opinion, you show great wisdom asking such questions. The 2006 hurricane season predictions anyone!?! Awful!


That isn't to say weather predictions aren't slowly getting better. I've spent the last 6 1/2 years working on my BS and MS in meteorology... and even in that time you can see improvement. Are weather forecasts better now than in the past. The answer is a distinct yes (there are statistics on prediction skill from the hurricane center, weather service, etc). Models are slowly improving, as is the understanding.
And we are better at some forecasts than others. Larger-scale events are generally more predictable. If the forecast is that a cold front will come through in a few days... it's usually quite good. Rainfall is a lot more difficult to forecast because individual storms are so small. It can rain here and not down the road. There are lot more small-scale features in play. When it comes to talking about a Noreaster or hurricane, there's still some very small-scale features in play... but we've got a bit better handle on where storms will go (remember, Katrina was predicted to hit New Orleans for a few days before it did) and even a bit as to how strong they will be. But it's the real big systems like major troughs and ridges (and associated storm systems and fronts and the like) where we really shine. If you hear it'll be cold this weekend, it probably will.

I will also point out that shortterm forecasting is much easier than longterm. Consider predicting which football teams will be good next year... you know the current conditions and trends, which are quite useful in predicting next season. But try using that to predict which team will win the most Super Bowls in the next 50 years, and it's a whole different ball game. Forecast error accumulates over time. Forecasts out to about a week have some skill (decreasing with time... a forecast for an hour from now is going to be very good... a forecast for a week from now barely better than just taking last year's values for that day).
Beyond that time, forecasts really aren't using the physics so much as they are parameterizing stuff. Short term models predict rainfall using the actual physics equations relating rising air to condensation. Long-term models just parameterize more of a guess based upon a few basic things like global air and water temperature. They purposefully neglect the complexity of the world we live in to try to make a guess. They can be a bit useful... but they are leaving out so much, they are only a tool.
I'll go back to it again, because I totally agree with you... if we weren't even close in the annual hurricane predictions the past three years... there's no way we can be certain in longer term models for stuff like global warming.
Let us not forget that 30 years ago climate modellers were alarmed we were entering an ice age.
Climate modelling is basically still early in the process of:
- Develop a simple model
- See where it goes really wrong
- Come up with a reason to explain a bit of that error
- Repeat
They are still adding new things in which significantly change the models. They are really very simple still.
Most climate models can barely reproduce the current weather patterns, and struggle with past patterns too.
We have gotten to the point where forecasts for natural cycles like El Nino have become useful for up to a year or two out. That's it. And we understand all the mechanisms behind ENSO much better than those in global warming... and can test how well our predictions do every few years.

In my professional and personal opinion, climate modelling is still quite marginal in its scientific basis and usefulness, and it is insane to take its predictions as anything near gospel. They are slowly getting better... but they are still only a weakly useful guess as to the future.

As to global warming: the observations from the past few decades seem to be quite consistent in indicating there has been a real global warming going on. Cause is indeed a lot more difficult to hammer down. It does appear that the recent changes may be quite extreme considering the earth's past history... and that is definitely a warning we may be playing a part. The records do suggest that the Earth has had higher carbon dioxide levels in the past and been warmer. And we do know that other natural phenomena like volcanic eruptions, solar cycles, etc are also key players.
I personally don't see any good reason not to cut back on emissions into the atmosphere and such... it's healthy... and we do have some evidence that not doing so could have major consequences.

It is true... there are a lot of apparent "casual" experts out there (Al Gore, for example)... when the debate in the core of the scientific community rages on. The foundations of science suggest that everyone be very cautious in taking any theory as rule. There are mountains of theories in the past that were accepted as certain, and people arguing against such beliefs were outcast... which have since fallen by the wayside. You are oh-so-right again when pointing out the "insane" sea level rises we were supposed to see haven't played out at all. And yet some predict we'll have massive rises in the NEXT100 years. It really is a scarily alarmist media and society these days, and a lot of evidence contrary to the popular, "exciting", run-for-your-lives viewpoint isn't so publicized (most media forgets to point out that ice levels have risen around Antarctica while declining in parts of the NH).
Look, I am in no place to say it's all a big fraud. But I think you've got it perfectly when you tread cautiously. All we can do is keep living... let experts continue to improve and test their models... be responsible in being careful with our own emitions and support the truly best legislation/candidates. And soon enough we WILL know just how real a threat anthropogenic global warming was/is.

Thanks for having an open mind and being careful in what you accept as truth!

Answer 2

I'd say that if you're religion states predictions or "fortune telling" as a sin, they are probably made a long time ago and had nothing personally against people who scientifically try to establish where clouds or other weather phenomenons are forming. Remember why the texts where written in the first place - it probably has to do with banning magical or mystical calls to the spirit plane or similar and nothing to do with science.

Answer 3

No one is an expert in weatehr. They can only predict what's gonna happen to the best of their ability and with the conditons around them and the rate their occuring at during that time of the prediction. That's why no one NEVER makes a last and final prediction on anything dealing with the atmospere.

Answer 4

If you could predict the outcome of football games correctly 60% of the time, you'd be a billionaire.

Insurance companies are already factoring global warming into their premiums. They know it's a real problem, even while Republicans fiddle as Rome burns.

Answer 5

the weathermen are the only ones who have the MOST MODERN and UP TO DATE equipment for determining the weather... True, here where I am, they miss more than 60% of the time.. I do not understand how they can be so off base with the equipment that they have at their disposal

Answer 6

WEATHERMEN or weatherPEOPLE predict weather...short term stuff.

Climatologists and environmentalists handle global warming. Stop blaming the wrong people.

Answer 7

Good question! The all purpose nuclear answer is this: Partly cloudy, chance of showers. That is the static and perminant forcast for the whole planet.

Enjoy:D

Answer 8

uhhhhh, radar does wonders

Answer 9

God!@~