You're on it Kaunas.The BOM uses over 35 global models and...

  1. 4,815 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 296
    You're on it Kaunas.

    The BOM uses over 35 global models and cherry picks the ones that they think, and I emphasis the word 'THINK', will meet their needs.

    As a farmer I try to make decisions based on the 7 day forecast for eg planting seeds, baling hay etc as these rely heavily on weather conditions at the time and can be somewhat critical to the task. I am continually frustrated by the way the forecast changes sometimes on a daily basis. You often see typically something along the lines of 95% chance of rain 5-15mm only to see that change over a course of three days to 40% chance 0-4mm. I would add I was also a professional pilot for over 30 years and can tell you that there were a number of times the weather bureaus around the world would get their forecasts wrong. As a pilot you never trusted the forecast despite its legal standing in aviation.

    So this begs the question if the BOM cannot reliably forecast the weather over a 7 day period and quite often a 24hr period then what hope do we have to ever get to the truth on what is happening to the climate.

    There is a lot of climate change hysteria out there and a lot of bias reporting especially on the bed wetting ABC. Joe O'Brien almost melted down this morning when the Science Minister wouldn't engage him on a climate change question. As a final point I just wonder how many people are getting rich and a case in point is Al Gore's effort who is laughing all the way to the bank as we bought his tenet and so called inconvenient truth hook, line and sinker. It's great to have something like climate change working so hard for you, almost like religion, and if you preach loud and long you will benefit financially. I would dearly like to learn who are all these scientists that subscribe to climate change. Over the years the ABC, the BBC, and probably NPR have hosted global debates such as the 'Intelligence Squared Debate' but I haven't seen (and i have looked and am willing to be corrected here) any effort where prominent scientists are lined up for one of these styled debates on one of the supposedly biggest issues confronting mankind. Why!?

    Inconvenient truths work both ways and at the moment, while I acknowledge that the weather is front and centre - and I just wonder about the amount of reporting that is so prevalent - I do not believe I am being told the truth, inconvenient or otherwise.

    Cheers
    BW
    Last edited by barneyw: 15/01/20
 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.