Slashdot Mirror
Supercomputers Are Driving a Revolution In Hurricane Forecasting (arstechnica.com)
Ars Technica's Eric Berger reports of how dramatic increases in computer power have helped improve the accuracy of hurricane forecasts: Based upon new data from the National Hurricane Center for hurricanes based in the Atlantic basin, the average track error for a five-day forecast fell to 155 nautical miles in 2017. That is, the location predicted by the hurricane center for a given storm was just 155 nautical miles away from the actual position of the storm five days later. What is incredible about this is that, back in 1998, this was the average error for a two-day track forecast. In fact, the annual "verification" report released Wednesday shows that for the hyperactive 2017 Atlantic hurricane season -- which included the devastating hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria -- the National Hurricane Center set records for track forecasts at all time periods: 12-hour, 24-hour, and two-, three-, four- and five-day forecasts.
Clearly the air mass is revolving at very high speeds in hurricanes.
Ezekiel 23:20
The 'error' is due to real hurricanes failing to comply with the NHC's demands. Young, budding hurricanes will be imaged and scrutinized in extreme graphic detail to force the fully-grown hurricanes to step into line. Don't even ASK about the NHC's usage of things like 'spinning', 'blowing' and 'torrential showers' to bend poor hurricanes to their will. What, you thought they did those things of their own free will?! The freedom fighters end up on Youtube, but the revolution will not be televised on The Weather Channel.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
I assume you either get paid to do this, or you simply can't be bothered to read up on the results from even a single model. Every model has a fairly large range, but - just like the hurricane predictions - that range has narrowed with time. In the 90s, some models even allowed for some cooling - but that result has disappeared as the uncertainty continues to get better. Every single model gives a somewhat different result, but they all now agree on a general upward trend. And when you use CO2 as an independent variable, all of the models agree that this has a very significant effect. Without exception (and if I'm mistaken, please correct me), every single scientist who has planted their stake on the "denial" side of the issue is NOT involved in actually building a climate model.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
I assume you either get paid to do this, or you simply can't be bothered to read up on the results from even a single model.
It could be both.
Every model has a fairly large range, but - just like the hurricane predictions - that range has narrowed with time.
Our ability to correlate more data points has also increased with time, but there are diminishing returns - you certainly don't get twice as accurate with twice as much data crunched at the same time.
Irma was forecast to go up off the east coast of Florida. Then the track moved westward until it was in the Gulf of Mexico. Then Irma's path moved back east before the storm finally came up the west coast of Florida. This caused many people from the east coast of Florida to evacuate to the west coast of Florida which was directly in the hurricane's path.
The forecasting is still not accurate enough for you to safely evacuate and stay in Florida. The majority of hotel rooms in Florida are on the coast. You can evacuate and find yourself in the direct path of the storm in a hotel on the beach.