The maximum temperature Outlook must be a comprehensive failure over eastern Australia extending to the 50% line inside WA. Maps of actual weather averages can be made here.
The cool success in WA has to be limited by the warmth of the western WA coastal strip which would lower the score there. Overall surely a serious fail mark.
The minimum temperature Outlook must be an even worse failure – with not one square centimetre of the continent predicted to be even as cool as average. If anyone can spot the BoM 50% line – let me know. I see the “National night-time HotSpot” shining through – you can not hold down BoM errors.
There are many people viagra pill price who find themselves faced with the problem of spending for prescription medication. According to this health discipline, this interference is the main ingredient of continue reading these guys online levitra that it used for curing the erectile dysfunction. viagra generic wholesale It may be surprising, but some women don’t feel the need to experience orgasm to enjoy sex, some find the lack of it as a personal matter that shouldn’t be discussed out in the open. Thus, be vegetarian to avoid erectile dysfunction is true.When you eat apcalis 20mg meat, the excessive amount of cholesterol and fats available in the meat get stuck in the arteries and veins that supplies blood to the genitals. 
Even the rainfall Outlook fails overall despite a win or two here and there. You have to look at the huge areal extent of the predicted dry inside the 50% line – note the majority of the NSW highest ever rain areas were predicted dryer than average.
And our gullible policymakers and politicians are convinced the BoM can predict the future – what a sick joke.
Third coldest March on record. Fourth wettest March on record. This summer was the 11th coolest on record. Nothing to do with CO2 – all to do with La Nina.
What amazes me and I have to think a long way back to High School science class, is what happened in the BoM-Bunker around 20th December 2011 when they went to their Oracle in the Temple (computer model) and asked for the next series of Outlooks. Out drops this minimum temperature prediction that say – “the entirety of Australia will have warmer nights without exceptions”.
Is anybody sceptical? Does anybody question this extreme result? Presumably these are all bright young people educated in our finest schools and universities.
They could have easily made this map of the minimum temp anomaly for the previous 12 months, 1 Dec 2010 to 30 Nov 2011. Which shows that as they sat there talking to the BoM Oracle, pretty much half of the continent had been anomalously COOL for the previous 12 months. Did they consider that?
Presumably they must have thought they were on the cusp of some golden period of extreme warm nights. How comprehensively wrong they were.
How they waste our taxes producing this utter twaddle month after month after month. BTW – I enjoyed seeing that the “National night-time HotSpot” shows beautifully in the 12 month map.
Beachgirl:
Fully agree with your incredulity about the lack of common sense shown at the BOM. Obviously they accept that anything coming out of a computer must be right.
Either that or the BOM actually makes three sets of predictions.
One to mislead the public, a second to mislead the Government and the last to mislead themselves.
They seem to have succeeded to some extent.
Warwick, their rainfall prediction is for above average rains across ALL of Australia. (“exceeding the median”).
It’s true that the areas where they predicted low rainfall got heavy rain, and where they forecast higher rainfall (e.g. the SW of WA) they got their lowest ever.
But they have been predicting drought along the Qld and northern NSW coasts for over 20 years. At the same time they have predicted the SW of WA would be wetter than normal. Why should they give up now? Their forecasts are based on a belief in man made global warming, so as soon as AGW comes, their predictions will be correct.
By the way, were their predictions for the next 3 months released on April the first? It would seem an appropriate date.
This is truly evidence of an Epic Failure. It is not their first failure and it will not be their last as they are not focusing of climate prediction but on climate propaganda.
They will never give up the struggle as their forecasts are based on belief and not on Science. They know that man-made global warming is the True Faith and no amount of evidence will shake their Faith, Theirs is the True Religion. As soon as AGW finally comes to the Earth, their predictions will all be shown to be correct.
You really have to wonder if anybody at BoM has considered the possibility of an audit of practices or some other enquiry into proceedures & direction which may come after a change in Canberra.
If they do exist, they will be the ones keeping a low profile & dreaming of a “Phoenix” ascendancy.
For some time I have had doubts about calling believers in AGW “warmists”. It has connotations from the children’s game of getting closer to the goal, whereas they are getting further and further away.
On JoNova a Peter Miller makes a comment
“The problem is the global warming industry has now become so big and so many people still believe passionately in it; the fact they are goofy, greenie and/or gullible is unfortunately irrelevant”.
I propose that from now on we refer to the “warmists” as the 3G’s. It will baffle them, and then upset them when they find out that it stands for goofy, green and gullible. It will serve them right for coming up with the Denier tag.
a pertinent article www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/climate_change_act_three.html
bit of cut and paste
Editor note: Although this was caught by the SpamCatcher – it raises the very interesting Kang et al 2011 paper which used models to link the ozone hole with rain – and Australia got a mention. So I let this through to remind me to take a look at what data I can fig out to test the Kang et al hypothesis.
From the BBC Link – “Start Quote There is also the rising trend in carbon dioxide, and that is acting in the same direction as the ozone hole” End Quote, Dr Sarah Kang, Columbia University _______________ The rising trend in CO2 levels correlates with population rise, even though nearly all population rises happen in under-developed countries. (1billion people rise, 20ppm rise in CO2) Maybe ozone holes correlate with population. _______________________________________________________ Followed by some blather about weather in the UK -These high-altitude winds are key to determining weather patterns, in both hemispheres. Much of the cold weather felt in the UK over the last couple of winters, for example, was caused by blocking of the Northern Hemisphere stream. _______________________________________________________ The Columbia team found that overall, the ozone hole has resulted in rainfall moving south along with the winds. But there are regional differences, particularly concerning Australia. In terms of the average for that zone, [the ozone hole drives] about a 10% change but for Australia, it’s about 35%, Dr Kang told BBC News. ____________________ So it’s a scientific fact that a hole in the ozone causes rain? There is of cause a peer reviewed scientific paper that shows this, isn’t there? Or is this just correlation proving causation? ________________________________________________________ Their modelling indicated that global warming due to greenhouse gas emissions was also a factor although natural climate cycles are also thought to be important, as Australia suffered severe droughts in the era before ozone depletion and before the warming seen in the late 20th Century. This study does illustrate the important point that different mechanisms of global change are contributing to the climate impacts we’re seeing around the world, observed Professor Myles Allen of Oxford University, a leading UK climate modeller. It’s very important to unpack them all rather than assuming that any impact we see is down simply to greenhouse gas-mediated warming. ” ________________ So the study shows that by opportunistically throwing in unvalidated data into a computer model can cause impacts to modelers the world over. And of cause the last line does say they wouldn’t jump to any conclusions even though they had.You believe that and I got a computer model to sell you!