View Single Post
  #8   Report Post  
Old September 25th 12, 03:57 PM posted to uk.sci.weather
haaark haaark is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by Weather-Banter: Jul 2007
Posts: 305
Default "......for the time of year"

On Sep 24, 11:02*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Sep 24, 9:54*pm, Stephen Davenport wrote:





On Monday, September 24, 2012 7:09:33 PM UTC+1, haaark wrote:
I get cross enough when some weatherbimbette reading off an autocue


says that a deep depression in July is "unusual for the time of year",


but when Peter Gibbs, who really ought to know better, says the same


thing on the 6.30 pm forecast today my blood starts to boil.


If a really deep low is unusual in late September when is it going to


be *usual?. Will he be repeating the same mantra in December?.


The only reason I can think of is that the public is being softened up


to believe that AGW is the reason for any weather event, unusual or


not.


Any thoughts?.


=========


Certain quarters of the media might like to try to make facile links between extreme/unusual/rare events and climate change (although not noted even there on this occasion) but, with respect, it's a bit insulting to suggest that meteorologists in general and Peter Gibbs in particular are getting up to some underhanded strategy in that regard.


I don't think Peter Gibbs is far wrong either.


It's unusual for a cyclone to maintain low pressure over land as it
diminishes rapidly once it hits a continental shelf.

Perhaps the Met Office and Beeb aught to spend more time explaining
stuff like that rather than going anywhere near advocacy or even
mention of "climate" and certainly never anywhere near Glowballs.

If we could just wean them onto the Atlantic chart. Or shoot the lame
*******s. One or the other. Anyone of them claiming to believe in
evolution should be prepared for that test of their faith.

Any not so confident should get back in the Blue Peter Garden and stay
there. Umbrella and fishing rod in hand.


I take back my knee-jerk reaction to PG's surprise at our present
synoptic set-up. The reasons for it are obvious. The climate norms of
he and his colleagues budding youthful interest in the weather
coincided with the relatively benign couple of decades that ended in
2007. The norms of my youth were the late 50s and 60s. The Marches to
September of 1956,57,58,62,63,65,66 and so on, were dominated by
disturbed weather-often severely so. No-one would have remarked on a
deep depression with buckets of rain sitting directly over us in any
month of those years.
Sadly the 20-odd relatively pleasant years are now a distant memory,
and I think their return is pretty unlikely while I'm around.
The new norm is the old one, so we'd all better get used to the
idea.