Sentences with phrase «weather prediction does»

Climate forecasting brings many more variables into play than weather prediction does.

«All the organizational work for weather prediction did little to connect the scattered specialists in diverse fields who took an interest in climate change.

Not exact matches

Not only did Richardson's forecast take longer to calculate than the weather it was calculating took to happen, but it was also a prediction after the fact that remained manifestly wrong.

«We can show dramatic improvements in weather prediction, but you do need a dedicated research effort.»

The IPCC report does suggest that extreme weather events should be expected as the world warms but the prediction is couched in cautious terms and the risk is assessed as «medium» confidence.

«But supposing Congress did pass his budget as - is, yes, it would be devastating to weather prediction across the board, including hurricanes.»

Both teams did the so - called weather prediction task, a well - established test to investigate the learning of probabilities.

A new buzz - word is the concept of «seamless prediction», in which predictions ranging from nowcasting all the way to future scenarios are provided with a sliding time scale and that doesn't make distinction of incremental types such as «weather forecasts» «seasonal predictions» and «climate scenarios».

But some ocean patterns in the climate system can persist much longer, and understanding them can help make useful predictions for regional and global averages that don't depend so much on specific weather patterns.

The prediction of weather took a while for them to learn the difference between what they wanted the weather to be like compared to what the weather would probably be like in that season but did improve.

And although my mother is a weaver and spins silky cloths and wears flowing dresses, she is the one who gives me sailing textbooks and makes me study water safety and weather prediction and says things like «Yes, Sophie, I taught you to sail, but that doesn't mean I like the idea of you being out there alone on the water.

Check the weather as the date gets closer, but whatever the prediction, don't forget to bring layers!

I do apolgise for the state of the car on the outside — we'd been down an unsealed road that morning to do a short walk near Mount Cook and hoped that it would rain before we got back to Christchurch but unfortunately (contrary to weather predictions) it didn't and we didn't see a car wash along the way.

This is quite subtle though — weather forecast models obviously do better if they have initial conditions that are closer to the observations, and one might argue that for particular climate model predictions that are strongly dependent on the base climatology (such as for Arctic sea ice) tuning to the climatology will be worthwhile.

We know that when James Hansen made his famous predictions to congress in 1988 that he didn't know he was comparing a period, which was in the warm end of a sixty year PDO weather cycle with periods in the cool end.

Although ultimately chaos will kill a weather forecast, this does not necessarily prevent long - term prediction of the climate.

Of course, these results can not be directly extrapolated to the real climate system, but they do disprove the common but misguided claim that chaotic weather necessarily prevents meaningful climate prediction.

Or this false construction: «Although ultimately chaos will kill a weather forecast, this does not necessarily prevent long - term prediction of the climate.

OK - this is off topic and I know comments like this invoke just the hysteria I don't want to incite from skeptics, but are the weather patterns we are seeing in Iowa (intense precipitation) consistent with what one would expect from warming predictions?

The constraining of the atmospheric model affect the predictions where there are no observations because most of the weather elements — except for precipitation — do not change abruptly over short distance (mathematically, we say that they are described by «spatially smooth and slowly changing functions»).

If observations do not support code predictions — like more extreme weather, or rapidly rising global temperatures — Feynman has told us what conclusions to draw about the theory.»

One does not have to be skeptical about the science of global warming to be skeptical of excessively «certain» long term predictions that involve weather and climate, the ultimate chaotic system that can not be accurately predicted.

The models, however rigorous, can produce only predictions — and how much do we know about long weather cycles after all?

Also See: Watch Now: Climate Depot's Morano on Fox News Mocking «Climate Astrology»: «This is now akin to the predictions of Nostradamus or the Mayan calendar» — Morano: «There is no way anyone can falsify the global warming theory now because any weather event that happens «proves» their case... Man - made global warming has ceased to be a science, it is now the level of your daily horoscope» — Gore [in 2006 film] did not warn us of extreme blizzards and record cold winters coming»

The differences are (1) that you can not afford spatio - temporal resolution of weather models to simulate thousand years forward, and (2) in weather model you don't care if your prediction will blow up in 100 years yielding Venus condition or Ice Ball, you just stop the computer after a week of simulated time, and start over.

Type 2 dynamic downscaling refers to regional weather (or climate) simulations in which the regional model's initial atmospheric conditions are forgotten (i.e., the predictions do not depend on the specific initial conditions), but results still depend on the lateral boundary conditions from a global numerical weather prediction where initial observed atmospheric conditions are not yet forgotten, or are from a global reanalysis.

Projections of these changes of risk using models in which changes in the background climate are incorporated, and applied using models that do a fair job at the short time scale (like high resolution weather prediction, or hydrological discharge, or...) is thus a viable procedure, and does yield added value.

For example, it is impossible for skeptics and alarmists to come together so long as alarmists pretend — as you do, Fred, in this very essay — that recent weather trends in one part of the world lend proof to their theories and predictions.

Luke, What does getting good weather info have to do with wrecking economies over climate predictions?

When do you graduate from long range weather to the much more lucrative climate predictions?

However, climate and weather patterns do not follow the predictions.

That requires considerable sensitivity research with state - of - the art numerical weather prediction (and climate) models... This hand - waving theory may not hold up when a rigorous scientific hypothesis is tested, yet McKibben does not provide a citation or reference aside from Masters» quotations, which are not peer - reviewed in the slightest.»

They don't even pretend to predict the weather in the coming season — «but they make predictions of 50 or 100 years from now and ask you to believe the Earth will get warmer.»

«We have groups doing numerical weather prediction, hurricanes, climate, oceans, but in the international arena, countries have whole institutions doing the functions of these individual groups,» said Dr. Ronald J. Stouffer, who designs and runs climate models at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton, N.J., a top Commerce Department center for weather and climate work.

Hanley does a fantastic job of distinguishing between weather and climate, and stressing that we can't yet attribute extreme events to specific causes while acknowledging that this summer's wild weather fits with IPCC predictions and will become a lot more common in the future.

When we talk about regional modeling or regional numerical weather prediction we are really doing the same thing except that we are focusing on more and more detail for the region where you are located.

If we could do this, this could help meteorologists to make dramatically better weather predictions.

It does apply to climate predictions as well as long term weather predictions.

«The problem with climate prediction and projections going out to 2030 and 2050 is that we don't anticipate that they can be tested in the way you can test a weather forecast.

Much like I evaluate the weather predictions, although admittedly, it is much easier to do than climate claim validation.

Do you at least agree that the better analogy for climate prediction is seasonal change than weather patterns?

I do think weather and climate clearly chaotic (as per fact, Lorenz and the rest), but I also think the time and effort being put into the forecasting of both suggest a lot of fine minds think useful prediction of this chaotic system possible.

Climate Depot's Morano on Fox News Mocking Gore's «Climate Astrology»: «This is now akin to the predictions of Nostradamus or the Mayan calendar» — Morano: «There is no way anyone can falsify the global warming theory now because any weather event that happens «proves» their case... Man - made global warming has ceased to be a science, it is now the level of your daily horoscope» — Gore [in 2006 film] did not warn us of extreme blizzards and record cold winters coming»

It is one thing to run a weather prediction model over a continent, test its predictability over the next 1 to seven days, do this every day in parallel over 40 years.

It is that we haven't seen convincing evidence or arguments that don't appear to have been contrived, fudged, based on invalid calculation methods, or based on models (or proxies) that haven't been validated, by people who haven't owned up to past errors in prediction but are apparently continually rewriting history so that the latest weather calamity is suddenly discovered to have been predicted all along.

But as this Holland dataset confirms, the actual empirical global and regional trends of a climatic shift of ever more severe weather events do not support the alarmists» predictions; the irrational fears of more frequent / larger weather disasters as a result of CO2 or global / regional «warming» is unjustified, per the scientific evidence.

has sponsored a bill (H. R. 2413) that would likely defund at least some of the climate research done by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in favor of weather prediction.

The models do nt attempt to predict weather, are poor at regional prediction and have no skill at even decadal level prediction.

The Seasonal and Climate Applications group of the Finnish Meteorological Institute is composed of internationally known experts who do research on the post-processing possibilities and usage of different scale weather and climate predictions models.

I don't want to come across as a wet blanket, but just as a general comment on prediction (weather, climate, or otherwise): If a prediction is made and believed then people will act on that prediction in order to change the predicted future in some manner if it is in their interest and power to do so.