JB Tweets Misleading Piece on NOAA

[donsutherland1]

In his twitter stream, Joe Bastardi tweeted:

 

 Joe Bastardi ‏@BigJoeBastardi

NOAA Deception Over 2012 Heatwave http://wp.me/p1R7BZ-CO  via @wordpressdotcom

 

 

The message links to the following blog: http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2013/01/26/noaa-deception-over-2012-heatwave/

 

The blogger writes:

 

As part of their “2012 Second Most Extreme Year” propaganda, NOAA include a section entitled “Summer Days over 100F”. They comment:-

 

The nation has experienced its warmest and 2nd warmest summers in back-to-back years. The heatwave that gripped the Southern Plains in 2011 was intense and long lasting, resulting a record warm June-August for several southern states. While the summer heatwave in 2012 was not as intense, it was further reaching. In 2012, approximately one-third of the nation’s population experienced ten or more days of 100°F temperatures.

 

Notice two things:

1. The NOAA message refers to the nation as a whole experiencing the warmest and 2^nd warmest summers in back-to-back years.
2. The NOAA message notes that during the last summer, “approximately one-third of the nation’s population experienced ten or more days of 100°F temperatures."

The summer data for the nation as a whole can be found here:

 

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/na.html

 

The top 3 summers in terms of warmth were 2011 (73.77°F), 2012 (73.75°F), and 1936 (73.64°F).

 

The blogger pulls a bait-and-switch effort to evade the reality of the data. Rather than relying on the national data, he chooses Kansas. He writes:

 

A quick look at the NCDC graph of summer temperatures for Kansas shows straightaway that NOAA have not been telling the whole truth. Temperatures were much higher in 1934 and 1936. Indeed there have been eight summers, since 1895, that have been hotter than 2012.

 

Kansas and the nation are not synonymous. Kansas is a state within the U.S. His substituting Kansas for the nation as a whole is deceptive.

 

On the second point, he engages in similar cherry picking. He chooses a single town within Kansas to argue against the NOAA’s report concerning 100° temperatures. He writes:

 

Horton is a small town in Kansas, with a population of 1776. According to the metadata, the USHCN station has been in exactly the same spot since 1893. The original hand written monthly meteorological records are available for all USHCN stations, via NOAA’s website. These list daily temperature observations, as in the example below from July 1934…

 

Using these records, let’s compare the summers of 2011 and 2012, with those of 1934, 1936 and 1980.

 

The NOAA was not making a claim specific to Horton. Horton’s data does not disprove NOAA’s description of the incidence of 100° temperatures.

 

In the end, even as he engaged in deceptive tactics that had no relevance to the NOAA’s report, the blogger concludes:

 

Nobody is denying that the summer last year was unusually warm, both in Kansas and the rest of the US. However, for NOAA to publish the information, that they have, without putting it into context, is misleading and dishonest.

 

While it is true that Bastardi did not write the piece, he bears at least a degree of responsibility for its deceptive claims from his disseminating it. As he often quotes from conservative leaders or pundits, perhaps the old Reagan advice for dealing with the Soviets, “trust but verify,” is applicable here. At a minimum, he should check the claims made before retransmitting blog entries, particularly from bloggers who have no experience in meteorology or climate science. In this case, even if one had no access to the NOAA data, a reasonable person would know that the contiguous United States and Kansas are not the same thing and that a single data point (Horton, KS) is not the same thing as a larger geographic region.

 

For those who have read Bastardi over the years, his transformation into an uncompromising opponent of AGW, with a seeming tendency to ignore facts and evidence to sustain his narrative, is disappointing. If one recalls, during the last summer he portrayed the DMI’s SST data as ice coverage data, something that the DMI stated should not be done. He did so on repeated occasions, even after having been informed that the charts he was using were SST charts, not ice coverage charts.

 

If one wants to point to residual uncertainties concerning AGW e.g., modest uncertainties regarding climate sensitivity to a doubling of CO2, that’s one thing. Openly broadcasting obviously incorrect information is quite another.

 

Hopefully, going forward, Bastardi will be more careful about what he tweets or retweets. His disseminating incorrect information takes away from his work in the field of meteorology and it risks undermining his credibility.

[aslkahuna]

JB has been anti-NOAA from his Accuweather days so I would not consider him a credible source.

[HailMan06]

I remain convinced that his constant cold/snow bias in winter forecasting is a direct result of his growing obsession with "disproving" AGW.

[A-L-E-K]

I remain convinced that his constant cold/snow bias in winter forecasting is a direct result of his growing obsession with "disproving" AGW.

 

 

no doubt

[Ottawa Blizzard]

I remain convinced that his constant cold/snow bias in winter forecasting is a direct result of his growing obsession with "disproving" AGW.

This. Funny, then, how the weather has been consistently slapping him in the face these past two winters. He's now claiming that the period from February 10-March 10 looks like February 2010s snowmaggedon...according to the Korean model.

[donsutherland1]

This. Funny, then, how the weather has been consistently slapping him in the face these past two winters. He's now claiming that the period from February 10-March 10 looks like February 2010s snowmaggedon...according to the Korean model.

 

I have to strongly disagree with the KMA scenario. As I don't see the KMA, I can't say what it shows regarding the magnitude of blocking, but February 2010 had record blocking. During that month, the AO reached -5 or below on 3 days, -4 or below on 19 days, and -3 or below on 24 days. The highest daily figure was -2.300. The monthly average was -4.266, the lowest on record. Not even the most extreme GFS ensemble members point to anything like that. In short, with a high degree of confidence, I can state that it is very unlikely that the February 10-March 10 timeframe will experience blocking comparable to that of February 2010, much less see the kind of excessive snowfall that resulted in parts of eastern North America during that month (much less active subtropical jet, less widespread cold).

[Kelathos]

Much as I would love to see a fantastic winter, I've got to give credability to donsutherland1 over JB.

/broken heart

[usedtobe]

Nate Silver's book "Signal and the Noise" is a good one for anyone to read who is interested in forecasting.  It discusses why forecasts bust in different fields (financial, meteorology, poltical). essentially any field that deals with non-linear dynamic responses.  In the book Silver classifies forecasters and hedgehogs and foxes.  The latter are always unsure, put things in probabilistic terms because they know there is uncertainty and their forecasts usually improve with added data.  Hedgehog forecasts are just the opposite. The forecaster is always confident,  is slow to change their forecast if conditions change and often make worse forecasts as more and new kinds of data becomes available to them.  The latter actually are more entertaining but are less accurate.  JB is a classic hedgehog.  Usng the Korean  model, a model with less verification stats than other operational models, as a reason to go cold and extremely snowy is a classic move.  Hedgehogs swing for fences.  I too will go with Don over JB.  The latter may end up being right on occasion, maybe even this time but his forecast is bucking the odds.

[donsutherland1]

Nate Silver's book "Signal and the Noise" is a good one for anyone to read who is interested in forecasting.  It discusses why forecasts bust in different fields (financial, meteorology, poltical). essentially any field that deals with non-linear dynamic responses.  In the book Silver classifies forecasters and hedgehogs and foxes.  The latter are always unsure, put things in probabilistic terms because they know there is uncertainty and their forecasts usually improve with added data.  Hedgehog forecasts are just the opposite. The forecaster is always confident,  is slow to change their forecast if conditions change and often make worse forecasts as more and new kinds of data becomes available to them.  The latter actually are more entertaining but are less accurate.  JB is a classic hedgehog.  Usng the Korean  model, a model with less verification stats than other operational models, as a reason to go cold and extremely snowy is a classic move.  Hedgehogs swing for fences.  I too will go with Don over JB.  The latter may end up being right on occasion, maybe even this time but his forecast is bucking the odds.

It's a great book. I second everything you wrote about it.

[Quixotic1]

JB is either a liar or a zealot. Either one makes a poor prognosticator.

His cherry picking has gotten to absurd levels. Minimizing the drought and heat in the midwest while screaming about Nome Alaska being iced in is not reality based. i cant even look at his twittter page anymore because of the strident obsessive rants.

[isohume]

Who?

[usedtobe]

It's a great book. I second everything you wrote about it.

 

I thought you might have read it.  All forecasters should read it.

[WXheights]

Nate Silver's book "Signal and the Noise" is a good one for anyone to read who is interested in forecasting.  It discusses why forecasts bust in different fields (financial, meteorology, poltical). essentially any field that deals with non-linear dynamic responses.  In the book Silver classifies forecasters and hedgehogs and foxes.  The latter are always unsure, put things in probabilistic terms because they know there is uncertainty and their forecasts usually improve with added data.  Hedgehog forecasts are just the opposite. The forecaster is always confident,  is slow to change their forecast if conditions change and often make worse forecasts as more and new kinds of data becomes available to them.  The latter actually are more entertaining but are less accurate.  JB is a classic hedgehog.  Usng the Korean  model, a model with less verification stats than other operational models, as a reason to go cold and extremely snowy is a classic move.  Hedgehogs swing for fences.  I too will go with Don over JB.  The latter may end up being right on occasion, maybe even this time but his forecast is bucking the odds.

Thanks for this reminder to read

[bobbutts]

He is clearly dishonest in his effort to cast others as dishonest.

[aslkahuna]

He is clearly dishonest in his effort to cast others as dishonest.

As I said above, JB is not a credible or reliable source of information.

 

Steve

[HailMan06]

Imo JB used to be a great long range forecaster, but over the past few years he has been going downhill fast. Really sad to see this happen to him. Years ago I always looked forword to his forecasts on Accuweather. He knows his stuff really well, but unfortunetly he's been quickly sliding down to be on par with Watts, Spencer and others like them.