Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 08/04/2010 2:38:40 PM PDT by Vincent Jappi
When I think of all the evidence I have been presented with over the past several years regarding the main driver of our climate, one man stands tall. That would be Piers Corbyn, founder of WeatherAction.com in the UK. He does long range weather and climate predictions and his accuracy is amazing, especially for the extreme events all based on the Sun. I had seen his forecasts on the web but I had my first chance to talk with him in person at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change in New York put on by the Heartland Institute. It was March and Piers had saved his first public trial forecast in the USA for the conference. The prediction was for a record Midwest snowfall in the middle of March, then 2 or 3 weeks away. There was nothing about it from the national weather people. This forecast was way out there. What was more the data for the prediction was available more than a month, as much as 3 months in advance and it was based on the Sun! It was such an extreme prediction that it made eyeballs roll. For those of you who recall that storm, you know it came true. Did it ever! Since then I have observed the outcomes of the predictions Piers has made and he has been amazing in his performance. There have been a few misses but his success is around 85% around the world and a bit higher in the USA. He regularly posts on You Tube, so you can see his predictions come true several times during the year. Let’s get to the discussion:
Kirt: Can you give a brief description as to how you got into this field of endeavor?
Piers: I was interested in how things worked, science and weather from a very early age (maybe 5 years old) and built a weather station and equipment for it as a teenager and had scientific papers published for work done while still at school. This included articles on the making of an electrical thermometer to measure true average temperature over a day and a water (brine) barometer built up the side of the house; home measurement of the eccentricity of the earth's orbit; and on the size and shape of pebbles on Chesil beach Dorset.
I became aware then of supposed possible connections between solar activity and weather. I noticed that the day I was born 10 March 1947 was the day of the thaw and gales and deluges over Southern England (my father told me) and also that on that day the largest sunspot group ever recorded was at the centre of the solar disc! This increased my interest in the subject but it was a long time before it developed into practical forecasting!
I gained a First class degree in Physics at Imperial College London in 1968 and did research in solid state physics but did not pursue meteorology matters until gaining an MSc in astrophysics from Queen Mary College London in 1981 after which I investigated and attempted to construct theories of solar activity. I thought of using past weather as a proxy record of past solar activity to help that and then realized it would be better to attempt to develop theories of solar activity in order to predict weather! I tried various ideas and gave up in 1982.
Then in 1984 during the UK coal miners' strike I was asked if it was going to be a cold winter. I said I hadn't a clue but was persuaded to re-look at what I had been doing and see if I could make a prediction. I worked on it and said it would be a cold winter 84/85 and IT WAS!!! I continued the work and after MANY failed attempts I established in 1988 the rudiments of something which seemed to work with some consistency to better detail than a season. I then placed bets on my weather forecasts with William Hill bookmakers every month from summer 1988 and made money pretty consistently until 2000 when they terminated my account betting arrangement. I established commercial forecasting activity in 1990 but it took a lot more work to reach the level of accuracy and detail around the world which we have now achieved.
Kirt: For anyone who has followed your activities in the past few years, you have had major issues with the Met Office in the UK. Your long-range predictions have been flawless and they have batted a complete zero. Could you give us your insight as to why they continue to harass you in light of their poor record of success?
Piers: By "flawless" I suppose you mean significantly skilled. In terms of general seasonal views when the season is significantly different from normal we have been flawless scoring 5/5 and the MO scored zero since the floody Britain & Ireland summer of 2007. Extreme events and other detail are correct 85% of the time to timing of a day or so from many months ahead.
Within the Met Office there are in fact individuals who greatly respect and appreciate our work but will not say so in public. At a corporate level there are two reasons for their brain-dead malignment of our revolutionary breakthroughs.
(i) Envy - like candle-stick makers being envious of the light bulb.
(ii) The Global Warming dogma which they are funded to propagate for POLITICAL reasons means that they cannot even start to recognize that solar activity is - at very least - the prime driver of weather and climate. They make platitudes of limited acknowledgement of solar effect but only to pretend they have 'considered it'.
Kirt: Not to belabor the downside of your efforts, but why is the media so adverse to your methods when you are clearly correct far more than the traditional forecasters? Are there direct relationships between the government and the media? What are they trying to protect?
Piers: Most of the media are a profiteering part of the unholy Square of self-feeding and self-serving climate fraud / deceit. The Square comprising - see diagram:
* Self-serving 'researchers' and 'experts' who produce climate change / Global warming hysteria.
* The 'Green' media who propagate this drivel and spread malevolence against those who refuse to produce or support climate change falsities.
* Politicians who in the name of saving the planet / Climate change can do what they like in terms of taxation, 'green' projects, controlling world energy supplies, holding back the developing world etc and SHOVELLING MONEY into the 'researchers' who manufacture climate change hysteria.
* Businesses and NGOs who gain from the policies of Carbon trading (banks) and high energy prices (energy industry) and any green drivel business. They of course support 'research' to justify the situation, which enables them tomake money. The UN bureaucracy is part of this business.
There are some pretty nasty networks which keep this in place but is it a conspiracy? Probably partly, but one need not go over the top on this because you don't need a conspiracy for a newspaper editor to want to print hype or for a politician to respond to hysteria and accept a duty to 'save the planet' through taxation.
Kirt: On a more positive note, how is your accuracy score been of late? I know that in the trial forecasts in the US you have only missed one or two events. One was a Hurricane which failed to materialize where you said but I believe it popped up elsewhere in the Atlantic. That means that you have predicted a several events long before the traditional meteorologists picked up on them. I remember the March storm that you announced at the Heartland Conference in 2008. That was a beaut! And you were right on! For those of you who don’t remember, that storm was unknown to the media and set all time snow records in the Midwest.
Piers: The success score stands at 85% - probably more for USA extreme events, against a result by chance of about 10% to 20%. If Al Gore successfully predicted ONE specific event in the name of man-made climate change that would be hailed as 'proof' of the theory and the righteousness of green handouts and taxes.
We have been making trials on more events and have had a limited look at volcano and earthquake extra activity, but this is in early stages.
Kirt: You have repeatedly mentioned that all the weather we have, we have had before. I would assume that accurate old weather records are very useful to your forecasts. Does the shorter record in the US handicap your forecasting? Are forecasts more reliable for extreme events?
Piers: Yes accurate weather records WITH DATES are vital. The weather records of the USA are the best kept and most accessible in the world thanks to consistent government/military taxpayer support.
There are longer European data sets but the USA data is enough to forecast major extreme events.
Kirt: How do you see WeatherAction.com as an enterprise in the future? Do you see it becoming a government supported entity? Currently, that seems unlikely.
Piers: We wouldn't mind being 'nationalized' (maybe - subject to conditions?!!) but that is totally off the cards as long as governments are committed to the climate fraud industry. We only survive by selling forecasts to those who live and die by weather especially extremes - farming - much of the insurance & energy industries (but they have a problem because the biggest players are making huge profits from the climate fraud industry) - travel -retail.
Kirt: The main thing my readers are interested in is what is going to happen in coming months. I suspect most of my readers are in the US but certainly not all. Some stretch from Spain to Ecuador and ustralia/New Zealand to Canada. They might be interested in the world events and how they might be affected. (Piers has supplied me with several PDF’s with predictions but I have only been able to upload some of the You Tube videos)
Piers: Some of the things I have seen you tout include, shifting the jet stream, Mobile Polar Highs, Top Solar Weather Impact periods. Could you describe how these things actually affect our weather? I don't suppose you would divulge how you predict these things based on the Sun and the Moon?
The key thing to understand is that solar activity causes shifts in the jet stream with consequent changes in weather patterns and triggers processes that lead to storm formation.
Animation Examples of the chain of influence can be seen in WANews(2010)No8
http://www.weatheraction.com/docs/WANews10No8.pdf
essentially: Solar Activity (Flares, CMEs...)
=> Solar wind changes - modulated by lunar position, => Geomagnetic activity & Sudden ionospheric disturbances (SIDs)
=> (modulated by stratospheric winds, magnetic linkage...)
Shifts in jet stream, polar circulation, storm formation parameters
=> Weather changes and (eg) storm developments.
(That folks is how he does it. kcg).
Kirt: At the Heartland Conference in March 2009, you made a presentation regarding a 60 year cycle of warmth and colder temperatures. Could you do a thumbnail explanation of this effect for the future and the past? You had mentioned that it had to do with the beat frequency between the Sun and the Moon if I recall.
Piers: The ODD solar cycle peaks give the best Sun-Earth magnetic connectivity (and Even cycles the worst) and highest world temps - about every 22yrs. These peaks are enhanced when the moon's orbit is in a certain plane - namely when it crosses the plane of the ecliptic at certain positions of the line from Earth to Sun (the axis of which is also tilted relative to the ecliptic) - about every 9.3yrs.
The enhancement is greatest according to the beat period between these two signals of 22.2yrs and 9.3 yrs - which is about 60 years.
The alternate sunspot cycle ( Hale cycle) has period of about 22 years or frequency Z/2 , where Z = 1/11 per year, is the sunspot cycle frequency.
The lunar nodal rotation period is 18.6 yrs (=1/R where R per yr is the rotation rate) so the appearance of either node along a certain Sun-Earth line is every 9.3 years, ie at frequency 2R
Main beat B = 2R - 2xZ/2= 2R-Z = 1/9.3 - 1/11 (approx),1/B = 60yrs
Kirt: Are you still predicting 100 years of cool weather/Climate? Shortly before his death, Timo Niroma predicted a high likelihood for a 300 year cooling period. How does that work for you? Is that possible or maybe even likely?
Piers: YES. 100 year (at least) is based on the idea that the modulation by slow solar activity changes of the 60 yr Lunar-magnetic envelope peaked around 2000-2004 so therefore that is a peak of peaks and what will happen next is ROUGHLY a mirror image of what happened up to around 2002 - details being subject to solar periods etc. Going AT LEAST two 60 yr envelope peaks forward from 2002 takes us AT LEAST 112 years on from now - and quite likley AT LEAST 172 years on etc. It could easily be 300 years or it might be that the decline into the next ice age will take over in the next 100 years or so in which case such temperatures will not return for 100,000 years.
Kirt: Where do you see the AGW argument going in the next few years in light of the revelations of the CRU in East Anglia? They seem to be circling the wagons instead of surrendering as more problems are coming to light almost daily.
Piers: We have to keep up the fight for evidence-based science and policy. The world economic recession will help force politicians to face reality and stop wasting money on climate fraud games. I think two things will happen.
a) students and intending students will shun courses which include the teaching of climate change fraud. This will encourage university departments to think about re-branding themselves.
b) Under popular pressure (both to save money and through our collective campaigning) one or two political parties and governments will give up AGW.When this happens the rest will follow within months or years and the fraudsters will re-brand themselves and rewrite history.
It may be that nothing will finally change until we publish our theory of how weather and climate appear to actually work. The paradigm shift that this should cause is not however automatic and will only succeed when the situation is right. (Recall the case of John Harrison and the measurement of longitude.)
He was proven right by measurement and observation again and again and again but not recognized for decades. I do intend to publish everything in due course, but in the meantime have to produce and sell forecasts to live and support research and support campaigning to change the academic/political situation into one which would actually accept the evidence-based science on which we rely. Tropical forecasts for July just past are here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKyWXhExBGw&NR=1 and here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcZidNbreyU&NR=1 . And here, Piers discusses the weather relative to his forecast for July: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUbPFcFAVN4&feature=channel
Piers has developed an improved forecast method that he calls SLAP’s for Solar-Lunar Action Period. Perhaps we can get Piers to explain this breakthrough in an upcoming article. Piers will answer your questions personally so fire away. Just be respectful in your uncertainty. We know you are not used to such accuracy in weather forecasting. Honest, Piers is not a witch nor is he clairvoyant. He is a scientist!
DO YOU REMEMBER THESE EVENTS? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLwCY2FZwho&feature=player_embedded
Would someone ask him what the weather will be like tomorrow. I was planning to play golf.
Stupid....Turn the sun off and see what happens....AAUGH!
The only reason Earth has weather/climate is due to heating from the Sun. Take away the solar heat input and we are a lifeless icy rock.
Huh? He says AGW is a fraud and bases his predictions (which people volutarily pay for) based on solar and lunar cycle. Why does that make him a Flat Earther?
thanks for posting this. very interesting. we really do live in amazing times.
” I then placed bets on my weather forecasts with William Hill bookmakers every month from summer 1988 and made money pretty consistently until 2000 when they terminated my account betting arrangement. “
That’s great!!!!!!
read the article and check out his site - weatheraction.com. Corbyn’s view is that the Sun is basically responsible for all changes in weather and he is using his theories to make accurate long range forecasts.
Ok, I take it back, I got suckered in by the headline. I will ask the moderator to remove.
Happens to the best of us.
Piers: YES. 100 year (at least)
If this happens, the rats will slowly jump off the sinking AGW ship.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VakA4-qAuWE
This guy has been right 100% more often than Al Gore has ever dreamed of.
syf,
I just sent this article to all my AGW dweebo friends. I changed a name, or a formula late in the article to include their names, and told them they were mentioned. It’s the only way to get them to read almost the whole thing!
Climate Ping!!
Greenhouse theory is pure bunkum.
No Smoking Hot Spot (The Australian)
The Hidden Flaw in Greenhouse Theory
Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics
Harvard astrophysicist dismisses AGW theory, challenges peers to 'take back climate science'
It Is Impossible For A 100 ppm Increase In Atmospheric CO2 Concentration To Cause Global Warming
Claim That Sea Level Is Rising Is a Total Fraud house gases."
No mealy mouthed circumlocution from Piers. He gives it them with both barrels.
bookmark
Like many Freepers you are happily posting without reading the article. It does save a lot of time, doesn't it?
Headline writers depend on that. At most newspapers those people are a separate group from the reporters and often the headline is quite different from the article. The headline is usually more liberal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.