Bishop Hill Met Office privately predicted cold winter
Jan 4, 2011 Climate: MetOffice Climate: Surface The Mail has a story that the Met Office told the cabinet to expect a cold winter. This was back in October apparently. However, as we know, the public were not told of this, apparently because the Met Office's research had suggested that there was no demand for seasonal forecasts. I'm sure most readers think their reticence was more to do with the fiasco over 2009's barbeque summer.
The story, which was sourced from Roger Harrabin at the BBC, seems to tally with the claim in the Quarmby audit that a Met Office forecast about the cold winter was issued at the end of October. However, as we also know, the Met Office website at the time seemed to be suggesting a warm winter, and nobody has actually seen the cold forecast.
All very intriguing.
In related news, RP Jnr considers the Met Office's attempts to make assessment of its forecasting ability harder.
Bishop Hill
Autonomous Mind has further thoughts.
Reader Comments (59)
Here are a couple of links that suggested to me that the Met Office were predicting another warm winter, albeit privately, in October.
We know they changed their forecast in November to cold.
I think this is a PR exercise designed to restore some credibility - a little leak via Harrabin that 'we got it right, honest guv'.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/208012/Winter-to-be-mild-predicts-Winter-to-be-mild-predicts-Met-Office#ixzz18gTB5uhe
http://www.boris-johnson.com/2010/12/20/is-the-met-office-facing-relegation/
Has anyone seen that "public research" carried out by the Met Office which showed that "a monthly outlook would be of more use which is why we now have the 6-15 day and 16-30 day forecast on our website"?
I prefer a seasonal forecast so that I can prepare for the whole of the winter, not just for 2 weeks or 4 weeks.
I have just asked the Cabinet Office to either send to me, or publish, the Met Office's forecast for an exceptionally cold winter. If the Cabinet Office knew this was coming, that is if the Met Office gave them sufficient warning and weren't doing their usual "forecast" by looking out of the window at the weather, then it seems that the government were in possession of the forecast and failed to act on it. The other intriguing side of this is that the Met Office web site was putting one thing out for public consumption and telling the government the opposite in private.
I am assuming that Harrabin is acting as a conduit for Met Office spin, and that the Met Office are actually pretty crap at spinning, (as well as weather forecasting) because if they're telling the truth the Cabinet Office is going to get a lot of flak, and the Met Office will have to explain why they have diametrically different forecasts for the public and government. And if they're not telling the truth someone will ask the Cabinet Office for the forecast (oops they already have) and they will be found out.
Firstly, if the Met Office really did advise the cabinet office of the likelihood of a long cold winter then we would like to see some evidence for it FOI anyone? Secondly, since the Met Office is funded significantly by the taxpayer, the public has a reasonable right to know this information, at the very least as an 'essence of winter' forecast - it seems that keeping the information from the public (if there is any truth in the story) is just another cynical attempt by the Met Office to manipulate the climate change narrative and be a mouthpiece for government propaganda. Thirdly, public and private bodies pay the Met Office for forecasts - it is a substantial part of their revenue. Can we please find out what they stated to their subscribers. If they strongly believed that we were in for a long cold winter and did not tell their paying subscribers then their integrity will be even more in tatters, and there would be good grounds for legal action against the Met Office. Why should the taxpayer and public and private bodies pay for lies and propaganda?
"It was the public who decided that a monthly outlook would be more useful than a seasonal forecast.."
Spin. We all prefer an accurate short-term forecast to a rubbish seasonal one, but that doesn't mean we wouldn't like a decent long-term forecast. The trouble is that the MO have already said that such a thing is beyond them, and have repeatedly demonstrated just that.
I think I would want to see written evidence of the advice to cabinet - if true, why on earth didn't they tell the rest of us? Perhaps they assumed that their past record would have worked against them, and that everyone would have believed the opposite...
Perhaps there could be a question in the house as to what the official line put to the government in October actually was?
I would of thought that any government department that still has faith in the MO would be more than willing to back up their claims, otherwise we should expect an investigation into the misuse of public funds to a contractor that cannot provide the services requested of it.
If they quietly hinted there would be a barbecue winter and also quietly predicted a cold winter, they covered both angles - sort of. Then after the fact they could play up one and forget the other. It's all a bit like the prophecies of Nostradamus which are very good at predicting things which have already happened.
The question is how much faith should anyone have in their seasonal forecasts? How much faith do they have in them? The answer is obviously none in both cases.
The other one has bells on it.
All
An FOI asking for the October forecast has been sent by a reader already. I'll keep everyone informed of the outcome.
They'd do better to stick to the old motto, "When you're in a hole, stop digging".
What a total joke they now are! Scared to say in public but covering their asses in private! It get more silly by the day! Mr. Corbyn has put his ass on the line about the coming months....what's says the Met Office! Time we went back to real guys looking out of the windows on RAF camps!
I guess this will hinge on one of two possibilities;
1. The Met Office can make contradictory forecasts with a straight face.
or
2. The substance to the probabilistic forecast included comment on the possibility that the decline in average winter temperatures that began in 2007/08 would continue. Less of a forecast and more of a caveat.
I too have sent in a FOIA request for the communication.
The Government were the ones who could have released / used this information.
Clearly they sat on it for fear of disrupting the Cancun talks.
Having worked in a number of corporate environments I've noticed, as I'm sure many others have, that companies often have a corporate delusion about themselves and their brand that misinforms key decisions.
I reckon something similar is up at the Met Office. Everyone "knows" the planet's heating up, snow's a thing of the past and winters are getting milder. If they predict a cold winter and they're wrong, that's a hit to the faith. They predicted something that supposedly shouldn't be happening at all, and even though it didn't, they conceded the possibility that it could.
If, OTOH, they predict a cold winter and they're right, that's actually two hits to the faith - the prediction, then the fact of the cold winter that shouldn't have happened.
If they predict a mild winter and they're wrong, that's one hit to the faith. But if they predict a mild winter and they're right, then that's no hits to the faith.
It seems likely, therefore, that the CAGW shills at the Met office will always err on the side of predicting mild winters (and hot summers for that matter). Predicting cold winters ensures at least one hit to the faith, whereas predicting mild winters ensures no more than one such hit.
It's their version of Schneider's choice between being honest and being effective. They're choosing to be effective.
Hang on a minute - the Autonomous Mind piece linked on this blog under 'Supercomputers' includes the following:
"Met Office’s Julia Slingo claiming the recent ‘freak weather’ (aka a cold winter) could have been predicted if only the Met Office had more supercomputing power…"
So did they or didn't they? Oh what a tangled web we weave...
I looked at the BBC 5 day ahead forecast for where I live (SE England) yesterday and it was predicting 9 or 10 C max temp and heavy rain for both Thursday and Friday.
Today, it is predicting 5 deg for Thursday, 2 deg for Friday (with sleet / snow) and 9 deg for Saturday.
It's almost as if they have a default forecast of 9 or 10 deg (based on 1979-1998 average plus a small adjustment for global warming) and then they revise to a more realistic forecast this when there is 3 days to go.
They wouldn't really do that would they?!
It's indicative of all the back channel shenanigans between the various climate department teet suckers.
They went for the political message instead of the factual forecast.
They will sit on anything to do with this until we're two weeks into a summer heatwave/drought.
@matthu
Maybe we should check more often to see if there is a regular time throughout the day when they hold the 'roll the dice' meeting before updating the forecast.
All joking apart if the MO is charged with holding a political bias over the release of data then it is dead in the water. Would you pay for services from an organisation that puts a bias into it's products with the focus of political beliefs?
Harrabin seems to be the first in the MSM to voice concern but it will be the death knell for the MO as we know it when news outlets start to publically compare different sources.
talk about the Delphic Oracle! This is what the Met Office put out into the public domain on October 28:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/archive/2010/probability-forecast
"Winter forecast?
28 October 2010
Following public research, the Met Office no longer issues long-range forecasts for the general public; instead we provide a monthly outlook on our website.
Despite this, you may have seen some reports in the media on Thursday, suggesting the Met Office has produced a forecast for the coming winter.
These media reports have based their interpretation for the coming winter on probability maps on our website. However, they have been selective about the information they have used and you should not take these interpretations as a guide to the coming winter. Instead we would recommend using our monthly outlook and short range forecasts."
So they neither confirmed nor denied the newspaper report that they were predicting a mild winter. But they did admit that the 'interpretation' was based on probability maps which they had provided. They were, of course, 'selective' (a word used to rubbish any good argument) in that they were dealing with temperature rather than, say wind or precipitation. We know that the Met Office class a mild but snowy or windy winter as 'severe' (this is evident from the Quarmby audit reports). But selecting for temperature, it seems clear enough that the Met Office at the end of October WERE publicly giving high probability to higher than average temperatures for this winter as was evident from their probability maps for temperature. If there is any truth in this report about their statement to the Cabinet Office, then they were either lying to them or lying to the public about the likelihood of prolonged cold.
Has anyone got records or screenshots of the Met Office's monthly forecast at the end of October to see whether it forecasted the early arrival of winter in the second half of November, and their forecast in mid-November when they knew the big freeze was on its way whether their monthly forecast showed the UK to be in the grip of severe cold for the whole month looking forward?
"They wouldn't really do that would they?"
I think they would. My browser retains the last-looked-at page of any website, so comparing the MO forecast with its predecessor is easy, and a constant source of amusement. Anything more than 2-3 days away gets amended as the time approaches, temperatures nearly always downwards...
Justice4Rinka,
"Having worked in a number of corporate environments I've noticed, as I'm sure many others have, that companies often have a corporate delusion about themselves and their brand that misinforms key decisions."
I've certainly seen that. A company which built a brand genuinely based on innovation, reliability, luxury etc., loses its way and often ends up as a rebranding outfit. They keep insisting that their offerings are luxury products, high reliability products etc., when anybody can see that they are not and they continue until the worth of the brand is exhausted.
Another way of .looking at the Met Office is that they've become a dedicated marketing outfit. The product they are pushing is Global Warming and their product is Global Warming marketing.
Although marketing can work marvels, it can't sell a product which people are laughing at.
An organisation with one product is treading on thin ice.
SfT, have a look at the comment by John M on the Roger Pielke Jr post linked by the Bish. It may help
http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2011/01/forecast-evaluation-not-wanted.html
"Annual predictions can be resurected, such as this one.
http://web.archive.org/web/20070111051630/www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/seasonal/global/pdf/global_temp_2007.pdf
Other annual forecasts can be called up by typing the portion of the above url starting with "www.metoffice.gov.uk" into the Wayback Machine's search box and replacing 2007 with the appropriate year."
@ cosmic
Yes, I think that's the problem. One thinks, also, of Leyland kidding itself Rover was a luxury brand and trying to price the dodgy cars accordingly.
Once this kind of thinking gets hold, there's not a lot you can do short of replacing every manager.
If, as Frosty suggests, they went for the political message rather than the factual forecast, then they're unfit for purpose.
Surprised that attention has yet to be focused on
Melds well with J4R's diagnosis.
The stupid section of the populace, the sceptics, who do not understand the true needs and the position of the Met Office, has actually expected accurate forecasts from the Met Office. This has diminished our brand value.
The Met Office issues forecasts imbued with the deepest of meanings. Weather is not just the instantaneous geoatmospheric condition, it is an expression of the climate. Some of the more stupid sections of the population have however, superficially and literally interpreted our forecasts. This has diminished our brand value.
James P - I find they don't tend to put exact temp forecasts out on the monthly offering...
e.g.
"Monday 17 January 2011 to Sunday 30 January 2011
Grinding to a halt but only temporarily
The indications for the end of the month are for a split across the UK of weather type: Northeast versus southwest.
The northeast looks colder than average, duller than average and wetter than average. That could mean some snow.
Conversely, the southwest, should be "warmer" or about average, sunshine about average and rainfall about average."
rather annoying they don't reference the "average" they're talking about, and their dividing line between NE and SE leaves a lot to the imagination for us east midlanders.
Isn't this evidence that they don't respect the populace's intelligence? Is this the same outfit that said that the "rest of us" lack the smarts to understand how their forecasts incorporate variation due to uncertainty? So why would you expect them to continue to issue their reports to people who can not understand them? But they have to show them to someone. Why not the government? They are much smarter.
Either the Cabinet had a cold forecast and suppressed it because of the forthcoming Cancun Conference or the forecast was so woolly and equivocal that it was useless or someone is lying.
I can't see any other options.
What’s needed is a mid-term political forecast. I’ve just completed a run on my £gazillion über-computer cunningly disguised as a PC. Here’s what the model told me.
* Tensions with the ruling coalition government mean that the current political climate is volatile and, without a shadow of doubt, warming rapidly.
* Efforts by the Met Office to divert attention from manifest failures by blaming leading politicians will tend to exacerbate these tensions not least because the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change is both a zealot and a member of the minority party in the coalition.
* The only course of action open to government is to do what it always does in such situations - it will set up an inquiry into the performance of the Met Office. A significant difficulty is that the Met Office and related bodies have been driving government policy for at least a decade and cannot therefore be seen to be seriously in error.
* Learning from prior handling of the Climategate episode, government will select as chair to the inquiry a member of the House of Lords with senior posts in the “renewables” sector and (60 per cent probability) links with Italian businessmen of dubious provenance.
* The inquiry will start work as soon as practicable (though not before the spring) and spend two days rigorously grilling staff at the Met Office with questions drafted by other staff at the Met Office
* It will present its report just as MPs break up for the summer recess and conclude that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the Met Office’s work bar one or two unfortunate breakdowns in communication.
* It will recommend exempting the Met Office and subsidiary bodies from FoI rules on cost grounds.
* Before presenting a fees note for £60,000, the chair will lobby privately to urge that that obdurate bastard of an Information Commissioner who got uppity about UAE shenanigans should on no account get a gong. Not even an MBE.
This is entering the realm of deliberate bamboozlement. Providing multiple divergent "forecasts" so that there is a "correct" one to pick in hindsight is a weary old conjuror's trick. A prediction that can be recognized only in hindsight is no prediction at all.
The Met Office might not publish long-range forecasts to the public any longer but they do provide them to companies like Netweather.tv who use them as the basis for their own published forecasts. I know for sure that netweather.tv was predicting an average-ish November/December in their long-range forecast. If the Met Office supplied other forecasts they probably supplied a suite of them with some commentary about the probability of each. If they gave the Cabinet Office a suite that contained one for a "Siberian Winter" but assessed it as improbable, then for practical purposes they did NOT forecast a bad winter and to claim otherwise might be seen as a fib.
Before sonograms our doctor told us that, based on heartrate, my wife and I were going to have a boy. When the baby turned out to be a girl he said about his prediction, "You are mistaken. At the time, I wrote your baby was a girl. Here are my notes." Sure enough, on the date he had orally predicted a boy, he had written that, based on heartrate, the baby was a girl.
This doctor and the Met office are always right.
Roger Harrabin gets the Biased BBC treatment to reveal his green side jobs.
http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2011/01/green-business.html
There is a good analysis at http://autonomousmind.wordpress.com/2011/01/04/bbc-spins-that-met-office-got-winter-right-just-kept-it-secret-from-public/
We know from the probability maps that in October they had around 80% confidence on above normal temperatures for November, December and January. But how much above normal? Take a look at the ensemble mean anomaly for global temperature forecast by the Met Office in October for the months November, December and January:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/science/specialist/seasonal/ensemble/ens_mean.html
[select October 2010, Months 2-4, 2 m temperature]
They forecast temperature anomaly in UK around +0.5 degC above normal. And the whole of Finland +2 degC, and vast tracts of Siberia as well, where it has been way, way below normal. My correspondent in Finland assured me on December 20:
"We haven’t had so much snow in December since 1915, 95 years ago! And the temperature has been on average 5 to 10 degrees below normal the last two months."
Cosmic @1053
You have smacked the nail firmly on the head.
Anyone who has bought products from the MO, and eventually gone elsewhere, will tell you that their marketing strategy was to charge more because they were the best.
This is a case of 20/20 hindsight. "Oh, did we say 20 C? -- Well, we actually meant 20 F. Sorry, old chap."
This is the headline in the Mail: "Met Office knew big freeze was coming but hushed it up."
If you were to ask me it's a double ploy, what we have is Harrabin castigating the Met Office for knowing the big freeze was on the way but not telling us.You see he's telling them off, but at the same time getting the message over that they aren't a useless bunch of toss-pots as unfairly suggested by those who have pointed to their consistent failure to forecast the weather correctly (and don't believe that short term excellence they speak of, just look at the BBC forecasts and capture the screens everyday for a week, that'll be long enough for you to know they are pretty bad at short term as well as long term). So the Met Office's cunning plot is to get Harrabin to tell them off for not telling us that there was a cold winter coming along when they knew all the time. Presumably hoping this admonishment will distract our attention from their web-site forecasts in October for another mild winter. They are clearly employing Baldrick in their PR department.
They are also playing a rather dangerous political game, if they did send a forecast of a severe winter to the Cabinet Office in October then all hell will be let loose on Cameron and Clegg for ignoring it and not preparing the country for the £15bn loss of business that ensued, so C and C are not going to be happy bunnies. If they didn't but the MSM get hold of the story and believe it's true C and C will be blamed unfairly in which case they are more likely to be like wounded tigers than unhappy bunnies.
@ Pete Hayes 'What a total joke they now are!'
They have been for years, my friend, they have been for years!
DaveB at 11.41 has it exactly right.
There is no conceivable possibilty of the government (especially one with Chris Huhne in it) allowing the Met Office to be shown to be dysfunctional. As much as I loathed the last lot, there is no useful difference in energy policy between the old and new masters.
This BBC piece contains some very amusing quotes from an internal Met Office report:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/opensecrets/2010/12/met_office_seasonal_forecasts.html
An internal executive paper noted the impact as follows:
"Unfortunately, less 'intelligent' (and potentially hostile) sections of the press, competitors and politicos have been able to maintain a sustained attack on the Met Office ... The opprobrium is leaking across to areas where we have much higher skill such as in short range forecasting and climate change - our brand is coming under pressure and there is some evidence we are losing the respect of the public."
This report argued that one downside of the seasonal forecasts was that they remained on the website and could easily be later compared to reality. It said:
"One of the weaknesses of the presentation of seasonal forecasts is that they were issued with much media involvement and then remain, unchanged, on our website for extended lengths of time - making us a hostage to fortune if the public perception is that the forecast is wrong for a long time before it is updated."
Nice to know they have higher skill in climate change and that a weakness of seasonal forecasts is that they remain on their website for future comparison. The brand is definitely under pressure.
So, we are stuck with 30 day forecasts from the Met Office because their seasonal forecasting was so appalling.
I've now managed to recover a couple of their 30 day forecasts from archive, issued on October 12 and November 10. Bearing in mind that November 10 was a week or so away from being hit with the start of the cold episode, it would not have taken a genius to have forecast somewhat cooler weather. However, I don't think that "Occasional snow is likely over the higher ground of Scotland and perhaps Northern England...Later in the period there is a chance of drier and more settled weather in the south of the UK...Temperatures generally near or below average across the UK, with a risk of overnight frost on most nights under any clear skies" is quite up to the mark for the period November 15-24, which led up to the largest November UK snowfall since 1993. The Met Office press release on November 23 was
"UK set for early taste of winter
23 November 2010
Colder weather will take hold across the UK as we head through this week with snow showers becoming increasingly likely across eastern Scotland and north-east England through the second half of the week..."
just as the snow was about to fall. Just about as good as looking out of the window. The first indication in a press release about colder weather on the way was November 18:
"Colder weather
18 November 2010
Following recent spells of wet and windy weather, forecasters at the Met Office are predicting a change to colder conditions as we head through the weekend and into next week..."
Below are the 30-day forecasts:
[12 October - 10 November]
Headline:
Dry for many parts, but generally cloudier and cooler.
This Evening and Tonight:
Dry and clear across many parts of the UK at first, but patchy low cloud or fog is likely to reform overnight. Cloud may be thick enough for occasional drizzle in northern and eastern parts of the UK. Quite chilly.
Wednesday:
Largely dry but cloudier and cool for many, with the best of any brightness across southwest England and Wales. Drizzle still possible in northern and eastern parts of the UK.
Updated: 1506 on Tue 12 Oct 2010
Outlook for Thursday to Saturday:
Remaining largely dry and cloudy with a few spots of rain at times, mainly in northern and eastern parts of the UK. Temperatures feeling cooler in a strengthening northerly wind.
Updated: 1506 on Tue 12 Oct 2010
UK Outlook for Sunday 17 Oct 2010 to Tuesday 26 Oct 2010:
Dry and bright conditions in southern parts of the UK at first, with cloud and outbreaks of rain in the north and northwest gradually spreading southwards to much of the country by Monday evening. A mainly unsettled theme is expected from Tuesday (19th) with showers or longer outbreaks of rain for many, heaviest and most persistent in north and northeastern parts of the UK, but with some sunshine towards the west. The remainder of the period starts unsettled, with rain and strong winds in eastern parts, and the best of any dry and bright weather towards the west and southwest, especially towards the end of the period. Temperatures will gradually become cooler than normal, with a risk of overnight ground frost in shelter. Winds will be quite brisk too.
Updated: 1215 on Tue 12 Oct 2010
UK Outlook for Wednesday 27 Oct 2010 to Wednesday 10 Nov 2010:
Generally changeable at first, especially in the north, with the best of any drier, brighter weather in the south and southwest. As the period evolves, the best brightness is expected to spread across the west of the country, with above average sunshine here. By contrast the east should see nearer normal values. In terms of rainfall, the north of the country is expected to be drier than would be typical for autumn, with perhaps higher rainfall towards the southeast. Both minimum and maximum temperatures are expected to be well below average for the time of year, with overnight frost likely.
Updated: 1215 on Tue 12 Oct 2010
****************************************************************************************************
[10 November - 9 December]
Headline:
Widespread gales, severe in places.
Today:
Overnight rain clearing to the east, followed by sunshine and blustery showers for many. More persistent rain later in Northern Ireland, Scotland and northern England. Gales in many places becoming locally severe later.
Tonight:
Widespread gales and stormy conditions in parts of northwest England. Occasional rain or showers in northern and western areas. Above normal temperatures.
Friday:
Strong westerly winds slowly easing during the day. Showery conditions in the north and more persistent rain spreading to most of southern England and Wales. Near normal temperatures.
Updated: 0343 on Thu 11 Nov 2010
Outlook for Saturday to Monday:
Rain could take a while to clear some parts on Saturday but much of the weekend and Monday should see a mixture of sunshine and showers, heavy at times. Colder.
Updated: 0343 on Thu 11 Nov 2010
UK Outlook for Monday 15 Nov 2010 to Wednesday 24 Nov 2010:
It is likely to stay unsettled and windy with showers or longer spells of rain for most of the UK. The rain most persistent and heavy across northwestern parts at first, then elsewhere during the course of the first week. Occasional snow is likely over the higher ground of Scotland and perhaps Northern England. Drier and brighter interludes can also be expected, these most likely in the south and east. Later in the period there is a chance of drier and more settled weather in the south of the UK, but elsewhere it is likely to remain unsettled and cold with showers, still wintry in the north. Temperatures generally near or below average across the UK, with a risk of overnight frost on most nights under any clear skies.
Updated: 1149 on Wed 10 Nov 2010
UK Outlook for Thursday 25 Nov 2010 to Thursday 9 Dec 2010:
There is a trend for slightly more settled, but colder weather to become established across much of the UK. Precipitation should be mostly below average, especially in the west, with the driest and brightest weather expected here. Northeasterly winds could bring wintry showers into eastern areas at times. Temperatures are likely to be below average across much of the country, with an increased risk of overnight frosts.
Updated: 1154 on Wed 10 Nov 2010
***********************************************************************************************************************
Bonuses all round.
MetGate ?
Met Office: "we have much higher skill .. in .. climate change"
So I guess they must have predicted "no significant global warming over the next fifteen years" back in 1995. I missed that one. Perhaps they just mentioned it to John Gummer privately.
Metgate it is then.
Not only does the Emperor have no clothes, we can now all plainly see that he has an exceedingly small weenie.
Presumably someone's already suggested this ... but ... it would be better if the Met Office issued their forcasts as a outcome probability distributions for each of the sites where the actual outcome can be subsequently measured.
Stats nerds could then automate the process of comparing preduction with outcome on a location-by-location basis and as a function time. A standardised delivery format would allow weather predictions from different vendors to be compared on a like-for-like basis.
Surely the 'high skill' Met Office would welcome the opportunity to submit its predictions to objective analysis and comparison?
I posted this at AM, so cross posting here.
I think this story has some legs. No hang on, wait, let me finish.
The basic story here is that the Met Office gave a forecast in confidence to uk.gov of a cold period. uk.gov did not pass this on, otherwise we would have known about it.
The conclusion the Met is hoping for is that uk.gov knew about it and did not do any extra planning or spending to cope. Given that this cold snap has cost billions of quid and a few lives then this is not good press for the government, especially one of cuts.
I can't see the Met making this claim (even via a 3rd party) unless they have some evidence. If they do then uk.gov is in the dock. If not then the Met have declared PR war on uk.gov in which case they will lose.
So I suspect they may have some documentation, minutes, emails, memos etc. to back this up.
Just wondering.
1. In October 2010 the Met Office posted on their website the results of their seasonal model that the European winter would probably be warmer than normal.
2. Julia Slingo in Nature at the end of December 2010 states that the biggest obstacle to better seasonal predictions is the lack of supercomputing power.
3. We now hear on the 4th January 2011 from Roger Harrabin of the BBC no less that the Met Office privately forecast a cold European winter.
The question that has to be asked of and answered by the Met Office is how they were able to forecast a cold winter when it is clear that their own modelled prediction was in error and that they acknowledge themselves they lack supercomputing power to make better predictions.
1. In October 2010 the Met Office posted on their website the results of their seasonal model that the European winter would probably be warmer than normal.
2. Julia Slingo in Nature at the end of December 2010 states that the biggest obstacle to better seasonal predictions is the lack of supercomputing power.
3. We now hear on the 4th January 2011 from Roger Harrabin of the BBC no less that the Met Office privately forecast a cold European winter.
The question that has to be asked of and answered by the Met Office is how they were able to forecast a cold winter when it is clear that their own modelled prediction was in error and that they acknowledge themselves they lack supercomputing power to make better predictions.