September 08, 2016

Environment Canada's accuracy? “You can achieve a better average tossing a coin”

Tim BallRebel Columnist
 

Phone Environment Canada and ask for a prediction for next month, or for the summer of 2017. They will say they don’t do medium or long term forecasts. The best you can get from their web site is a whimsical “Chance of White Christmas.” While there, you can read a report prepared for the Prime Minister that says in part:

The science is conclusive: Warming is unequivocal and human influence on the climate system is clear.

This is a false statement, and the evidence is presented inadequate and easily refuted. If the science is conclusive, their forecasts will work. It is a self-serving report, but more of that later.

The entire global energy, climate, and environmental policies are based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) forecast that the world will warm. The problem is, the forecast is wrong. Worse, every forecast the IPCC ever made starting in 1990 was wrong.

John Christy of the University of Alabama at Huntsville illustrated the problem in Figure 1:


 
(Figure 1)
 
The IPCC average the output of 102 models, but those outputs are themselves averages. Every computer climate model works the same way. They start at a point of equilibrium and double CO2. The computer model calculates the effect and produces a final temperature. The problem is that the result is different every single time because it is a random process, so they average the results. So you have the average results of 102 models then averaged.

The IPCC admitted the problem in their 2001 Science Report.

In climate research and modeling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.

They thought it was safely hidden in the Science Report because they knew few people read or understand them. It disappeared in the 2007 Report.

Canada wastes millions on climate models, but their IPCC model results are the worst, as Ken Gregory demonstrated (Figure 2).
 

 
(Figure 2)
 
These results are not surprising because the same “coupled non-linear chaotic system” limitation applies to weather forecasts. This is why they fail very quickly after about 48 hours.

When Environment Canada experimented with three, six and 12 month forecasts, the results were disastrous. Figure 3 shows the results of a 12-month forecast against a 30-year (1981-2010) average.

The Canadian average accuracy was 41.5 percent. You can achieve a better average tossing a coin.



(Figure 3)
 
This result is not surprising. In 2008 Tim Palmer, climate modeler at the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts in Reading England said in New Scientist:

I don’t want to undermine the IPCC, but the forecasts, especially for regional climate change, are immensely uncertain.

Professors Green and Armstrong explain the problem:

We audited the forecasting processes described in Chapter 8 of the IPCC’s WG1 Report to assess the extent to which they complied with forecasting principles. The forecasting procedures that were described violated 72 principles. Many of the violations were, by themselves, critical. …

The forecasts in the Report were not the outcome of scientific procedures. In effect, they were the opinions of scientists transformed by mathematics and obscured by complex writing.

None of this is surprising. The data on which to build the models is totally inadequate.

There is no data for at least 85 per cent of the world. Where a weather station exists, they assume it represents conditions for a 1200 km radius.

Most weather creating mechanisms are inadequately understood. It is worse with IPCC global climate models because most major mechanisms are omitted.

For example, the three greenhouse gases are water vapour (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4). Their percentages in the atmosphere are 95%, 4% and 0.36% respectively.

Because their research definition says they only look at human causes of climate change, they ignore water vapour.

They argue that humans add water vapour to the atmosphere but, as a minute fraction of the total, it is inconsequential. The problem is we have no idea how much water vapour is in the atmosphere or how much it changes.

The problem with that is that a one percent change in water vapour is greater than any change caused by human additions of CO2. 

If Environment Canada (EC) and the IPCC were basing a business on their forecasts, they would be bankrupt. They only keep going because there is no consequence for failure in government. Once a government agency is set up to solve a problem it is guaranteed to fail because if they solve the problem they are out of business. Instead, they immediately set about obfuscating and expanding the problem. They convince the politicians they are working on the problem, but it is far worse than they thought, so they need more funding.

With the claims of man-made global warming, it was Environment Canada that convinced the government of the problem in the first place. Gordon McBean, former Assistant Deputy Minister at EC, chaired the founding meeting of the IPCC in Villach Austria in 1985. There is no way now that EC is going to tell the politicians and the public that what they told them in 1985 is not true. 

The report presented to the Prime Minister that I mentioned at the beginning was prepared by senior bureaucrats at or connected to EC. Gregory Flato, an EC employee, is a Lead Author of the 2013 IPCC Report. His co-author Alain Bourque is head of Ouranos, a consortium on regional climatology and adaptation to climate change. They do not exist if human-caused global warming does not exist. No wonder EC is a regular Ouranos Consortium member.

The deception continues despite the fact that every forecast the IPCC made is wrong. But it will continue because Catherine McKenna, Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, is a lawyer who knows nothing about climate change and so is another slave to the bureaucrats.

 

 


 

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2016-09-10 22:41:41 -0400
@jamie MacMaster
“when the invisible script in the lost Calendar of the Aztecs is read aloud, recorded, and then played backwards”
Haha, nice one. I couldn’t have said it better myself.
commented 2016-09-10 04:11:52 -0400
150 years ago earth was in a mini-ice age. The planet has been warming up since then. So of course when studies report that the planet’s temperature average has been rising it has been rising. Picking the arbitrary timeline of the past 150 years biases any study.

Something more accurate would be an analysis of the past 1,000,000 years. But alias no. It would not fit the desired outcome.

It has been determined that 800 years ago the planet was two to three degrees C warmer than now. 1200 years ago the Middle East was cooler and greener. 6000 years ago the Amazon area was grasslands and savanna. 17000 years ago ⅔ of North America and most of northern Europe was covered by an ice cap two to thee kilometres thick. 600,000.000 to 650,000,000 years ago earth was engulfed in a planet covering layer of snow and ice with a predicted equatorial average of -45C. Before Australia broke off from the Antarctic so changing the ocean’s currents, Antarctica was tropical. Note the theme: climate changes, warm is better than cold, nothing man can do to change this.

My prediction, cheeper and 100% accurate, is that in fifty years earth will be cooler, the same, or warmer. Guaranteed.
commented 2016-09-09 16:36:53 -0400
“That is what the elite want to happen to fulfill the prophecy of the Georgia guidestones. "

True, CHRISTOPHER, true. Not to mention the 3rd Ascension of the King of the Bilderbergers, so eerily foretold when the invisible script in the lost Calendar of the Aztecs is read aloud, recorded, and then played backwards.
commented 2016-09-09 15:56:47 -0400
I wouldn’t put my faith in anything that man has conjured up!
commented 2016-09-09 13:38:43 -0400
Well, the first clue is the ‘I’ in IPCC; InterGOVERNMENTAL! When there is a Scientific Panel on Climate Change that deals with CLIMATE SCIENCE, NOT FRUIT-FLIES, I think I will put more faith in them, but I’m not holding my breath.
commented 2016-09-09 09:47:25 -0400
Brad Cooke you are a typical koolaid drinker. Do you even know how to form your own opinion or do you prefer to be a good little lefty and think what they tell you to think. Does a different opinion scare you brad, is everyone who does not think what you tell them to a chimp brad.
commented 2016-09-09 00:01:28 -0400
Gotta love the stone above , more value than the whole liberal government and smarter as well.
commented 2016-09-09 00:00:16 -0400
Yeah i am still reeling from that ice age they said was coming.
commented 2016-09-08 23:52:23 -0400
The only thing heating up is the hubris: they can’t get the weather forecast right more than 24 hours out, yet they’ll tell you, with a completely straight face, what the climate will be in 20 or 50 years and expect you to leap forward to hand them more of your hard-earned money to “mitigate” it. Sorry, but when I want to get taken that badly I’ll respond to the next email from the Nigerian prince.
commented 2016-09-08 23:32:47 -0400
@jamie MacMaster
Ah, well my scenario is created out of what you say here.

“The sooner the useful have nothing left, the sooner there will be nothing for the government to distribute to the useless. "

See if this happens?

’That way everyone dies, and not only the original poor. Not as many people end up dying if you just let the poor people starve immediately."

This is the result. That is what the elite want to happen to fulfill the prophecy of the Georgia guidestones. Global communism, or nuclear war, it does not matter. It’s all a means to an end for them. They don’t need us anymore.
commented 2016-09-08 23:20:28 -0400
Not me. I’m dead serious, CHRISTOPHER.
commented 2016-09-08 23:07:18 -0400
@jamie MacMaster
I thought we were having a dark humour competition.
commented 2016-09-08 21:43:25 -0400
We’ve known that they’ve been rigging the numbers for years.
commented 2016-09-08 20:59:37 -0400
The only " unpredictable and irreversible" climate changes we will have will be caused by the wholesale destruction of birds, bats, bees and hundreds of other insects by wind mills and solar panels. Nature is ONE and this massive lost will have a far greater effect on agriculture and the welfare of mankind than any other changes in climate. (changes that have been going on for millenniums). Pseudo-scientist fed by undeserved and unwarranted research grants will warp our children’s view of climate science and contaminate lame brained politicians. (does not take too much too contaminate most of them…. look at “The Little Potato’s” cabinet and most bureaucrats at the UN)
commented 2016-09-08 20:49:18 -0400
“That way everyone dies, and not only the original poor. Not as many people end up dying if you just let the poor people starve immediately”

Geez, get a grip CHRISTOPHER.
I mean, you’re not in the same boat as Sean and Brad and Ron,….or are you?
commented 2016-09-08 18:29:09 -0400
How can they say the science is proven, when their biggest supporter NASA just published a story saying they have no clue on how the sun works.
Date:
September 1, 2016
Source:
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
Summary:
Ever since the 1950s discovery of the solar wind — the constant flow of charged particles from the Sun — there’s been a stark disconnect between this outpouring and the sun itself. The details of the transition from defined rays in the corona, the sun’s upper atmosphere, to the solar wind have been, until now, a mystery.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/09/160901152106.htm
commented 2016-09-08 18:20:08 -0400
I hope the IPCC climate changers feel the hot breath of satan when they get delivered to hell. God does not like liars and stealers. Check out the ten commandments and you can see them fit themselves nicely into a hot place in hell. God says we are to love our enemies and I still have a huge problem with this.
commented 2016-09-08 18:03:32 -0400
Maurice Potvin commented
“The whole Climate Change scam has nothing to do with climate and everything to do with a redistribution of wealth and a One-World-Government ruled by the privileged elites, like JT.”

Exactly. I’ve been saying for years it is nothing but a cash grab, a scam to fleece the population. Australia wised up and repealed their carbon tax because it did nothing for the environment but it greatly hurt the economy and the populace. Even though we have an example of what will happen Junior (Fed.) and Wynnie (ON) are going ahead with their plans of carbon taxation anyway – proof they want the destruction of the Canadian economy. Canada won’t survive this Trudeau and Lib reign, once the economy tanks, and it will, this country will be totally screwed. Move over Greece.
commented 2016-09-08 17:50:51 -0400
@jamie MacMaster
" The sooner the useful have nothing left, the sooner there will be nothing for the government to distribute to the useless. "

Yea, that’s the point. To make everyone useless and poor. Communism. That way everyone dies, and not only the original poor. Not as many people end up dying if you just let the poor people starve immediately. Jeez guys, common sense.
commented 2016-09-08 17:48:52 -0400
I was never sure about Gore, but now I conclude he is not a true believer, but just another huckster making millions off the climate change scam.
commented 2016-09-08 17:24:36 -0400
I’m happy that the climate change parasites and their useful idiots are speeding up the approach of The Great Reckoning. The sooner the useful have nothing left, the sooner there will be nothing for the government to distribute to the useless.
commented 2016-09-08 17:20:56 -0400
These were the ‘scientists’ who protested before the election about being “muzzled” by Harper from presenting their so-called ‘science’.
commented 2016-09-08 16:58:14 -0400
The whole Climate Change scam has nothing to do with climate and everything to do with a redistribution of wealth and a One-World-Government ruled by the privileged elites, like JT. Is climate change real? Absolutely! That’s what climates do…. always have done and always will do. I’m 69 years old and I remember the seasons being far more predictable when I was a child. So what? We humans are not in charge of the weather. That’s God’s department….. WAY above our pay grade! The most telling paragraph in Dr. Tim Ball’s article is this one:

“If Environment Canada (EC) and the IPCC were basing a business on their forecasts, they would be bankrupt. They only keep going because there is no consequence for failure in government. Once a government agency is set up to solve a problem it is guaranteed to fail because if they solve the problem they are out of business. Instead, they immediately set about obfuscating and expanding the problem. They convince the politicians they are working on the problem, but it is far worse than they thought, so they need more funding.”

Thank you once again, Dr. Tim Ball, for your insightful article.
commented 2016-09-08 16:53:57 -0400
Ball once again demonstrates why nobody in the scientific community takes his “work” seriously. Good thing all the chimps who read the rebel exist to stoke his ego and inflate his pocket book.
commented 2016-09-08 16:50:36 -0400
It must be all that CO2 in these wobbly pops they’re guzzling at Enviro-Can that clouds their long tern forecasting ability – I told you CO2 was intoxicating.
commented 2016-09-08 16:19:04 -0400
Away back when, there was Percy Saltzman and his chalk, drawing clouds and snowflakes on an outline of Canada on a blackboard. Then CBC went to it’s five day forecast, and my Dad would howl at the TV: “Five days? Get tomorrow right you bastards!”
commented 2016-09-08 15:28:19 -0400
How bad is it that when I saw the “Average of 102 IPCC…” chart, I read it as “Average of 102 IPCC CHIMP climate models.”

Does that mean I think a group of chimps could come up with the same standard of predictions?