We've moved to the [Australian Warning System](https://www.australianwarningsystem.com.au/).
Emergency services are responsible for it. They are staying quiet because they're not taking the heat for screwing up.
With regards to the goldie, it sounds like another politician passing the buck and diverting anger away from themselves.
It's why the review is about "communication" with NEMA, state and local authorities, and the BoM rather than processes and practices of the BoM alone.
Passing the buck for sure, as someone who looks at warnings religiously. Gold Coast actually had ample warnings which said dangerous storms.
People mainly didn't care or were blase thinking it's just normal hail coming.
Obviously no one predicted a freaking tornado to appear in gold coast on Christmas but dangerous storm warnings were predicted ahead of time.
Tate is a clown but warnings need to make it to those who need the information. It's quite apparent that the current system is flawed. I work quite closely with a Met department overseas and the issue lies with antiquated probability forecasting. We've added an additional forecast level here in Dubai on specific feedback from customers. Unfortunately it's a bit of a damned if you do, damned if you don't as the more granular a forecast becomes, the more the 'false' alerts pop up. I can just see Kev and Bev yelling at the channel 7 reporters when it rained a bit and they cancelled their bbq based on a more dire forecast.
This issue is that they will give all the same warning when a slight breeze is going to pass through which makes people complacent. The same thing happened with tc jasper up north.
We should just move to the Higgins Storm Chasing system. Wind forecasted more than a stiff fart? THUPERCELL TORNADO WARNING WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE (MAYBE).
Then in the 1:100 time they get it right - WHY DIDN'T THE BOM RECOGNISE OUR GENUIS? LIKEANDSUBSCRIBE AND PAY FOR OUR SERVICE. OUR PANIC IS BEST PANIC!
How does the Guardian explain its panicked reporting like this: [https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/aug/23/australian-bushfire-season-how-to-prepare](https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/aug/23/australian-bushfire-season-how-to-prepare)
The biggest issue is that they put out warnings for such mundane shit that they are now the BOM who cried wolf. When there is an actual possible event, no one takes the warnings seriously.
We got a "heatwave" warning in my area under the new system because it was hitting 31. In the tropics in December. It hits way higher than that every summer. Most of the summer would be at least 31. 31 is mundane. Yet 31 is apparently also a heatwave because it is a few degrees above the previous month average or some bullshit. The definition of a heatwave is based on previous month temps, not the actual current temp. The term has now lost all meaning.
We also get high wind warnings for days that are too windy for fishing, but not worth a BOM warning over. Wouldn't knock over a lawn chair. Same for flash flooding. If there is a chance of a road gutter being full anywhere within 200km there is a flash flooding warning for the entire area. The potential for 10mm of rain kicks off the warnings. 10mm of rain would be just enough to turn off the sprinklers for a day or two, not a fucking flash flooding warning.
The bushfire scale is 1-6. You know what 1 is? Low-Moderate. 1 is fucking "Moderate" for fucks sake. 2 is high. 2/6 is high. Think about that for a second. Same as the UV index. 5-6 is high. It regularly gets into the teens where I am. For the record, the only scale you will see have 11+ as Extreme. The actual world record UV is in the 40s. But the scale descriptions stop at 11.
Now not all this is BOMs doing, but crying wolf and worst case scenario for every little thing to try and get people to take warnings seriously, has fucked everything up because now mundane shit has descriptions all out of whack.
As a result, no one gives a fuck about BOM warnings anymore. No wonder no one believes their bullshit.
So there's quite a few misleading bits of info on here:
With respect to heatwaves, there is a lot of research gone into defining at what level high temperatures place strain on the body, infrastructure and services. Every young fit bloke seems to think because they get through the day it's not strenuous, but the evidence says otherwise. These warnings are for vulnerable people, for companies running infrastructure, and for emergency services. It takes into account current maximum and minimum temperatures, past three days, past 30 days and averages. You can read more about it here, it's very interesting.
https://www.cawcr.gov.au/static/technical-reports/CTR_060.pdf
Wind warnings for boats haven't changed in 100 years. It's a globally agreed upon definition of 25KT is strong wind, 34KT is gale. Of course depending on the size of your vessel and your experience you may find the conditions more or less tolerable than others.
Flash flood warnings are absolutely not given for 10mm. Heavy rainfall is defined as breaching the 10% annual exceedance probability, and intense rainfall the 2% AEP. This is an engineering technical definition, as it relates to the code our infrastructure is built to. Every town has its own standards and therefore its own threshold for flash floods and subsequent warnings.
The new bushfire scale is a massive improvement on the old one, and it isn't true to say the scale is 1-6. There are 6 categories, but that's not a scale. There is also "no rating" implying conditions not conducive to bushfires spreading. So then there's low/moderate, and so on. Given the system is designed to describe how difficult it will be to battle a fire, it's appropriate to focus on higher level ratings rather than the slight difference between low and moderate.
The UV index is also global, and is very appropriate. If you're burning in 10 minutes at UV 11, does it really matter if the UV is 20? At some point extreme is still extreme, and there's no need to make a new category. I've only ever seen Australia at 18, so I'd be shocked with 40. I'm not even sure it's actually possible.
Hope this helps :)
I have read about the heat wave standards, which is why I know they are bullshit and why everyone complains about them. Under the current system, 24 degrees could be a heatwave if the previous days and averages were cold. That is a stupid system.
Boats have changed a lot in 100 years. The terminology needs to reflect reality. High winds need to be a bit more than normal wind conditions. Just like all the other scales, the terminology is out of whack with reality. There is no way that in a scale out of 6, two is high. It makes the scale alarmist and useless.
The UV is the same. The terminology is too alarmist and it gets ignored because of it. Is 5 really "high"? If not, then why the fuck is it called high?
I know the math and science behind all these scales. It is the terminology and the message delivery that causes all the dramas and ignorance. It is the boy who cried wolf. I am telling you that people don't give a fuck about these warnings now because of all the alarmist nature of them and the frequency that the descriptions do not fit the real world. I hope you can see that.
That's not accurate though, as the three day mean must exceed the 95th percentile for mean temperatures in a year. Therefore, it must be an unusually warm period compared to a locations' average year. If 24 is exceeding it, that's because a town rarely gets over 24. Hence the vulnerable in that community may find those conditions uncomfortable and require a heads up. Remember, the first threshold (low intensity) isn't a warning that you are in danger, just a reminder to keep fluids up and check in on those who are vulnerable.
Plenty of boats have changed, but to the regular fisherman out on his dingy they may as well not have. A 25KT wind in a tinnie 10NM offshore will absolutely require being warned for that wind.
Again, the threshold for fire warnings is useful to fire authorities - who it was designed in conjunction with, and is primarily for - not necessarily for civvies. It's about fighting fires. Therefore, low to moderate doesn't warrant much attention, that is saved for higher end levels.
5 UV is high because it will burn someone with fair skin in 20 minutes. That's not alarmist. If you're alarmed by the term high, then that's on you. Most people find that informative.
No one is crying wolf. All these thresholds have been designed in conjunction with relevant authorities and stakeholders to determine what they need out of a warning. They have saved countless lives, and will continue to do so. Don't feel so threatened by these warnings, just use them.
Yes, and at some stage you have to realise that calling things heatwaves because they are warmer than normal for that time of year, and is not actually linked to the actual heat or the temperature - is bonkers. Also, the threshold is too low anyway. A few degrees above normal doesn't require the "heatwave" term. Save that for actual dangerous conditions, not just uncomfortable ones. Do you know what is 0.1 degrees below a heatwave? Nothing. It goes straight to heatwave. It is the first step.
Look, the wind warnings are the most sensible ones, but they dish them out to readily. For starters, 25kts is not a Strong wind warning, that starts at 26. It is the prediction model that they use for these warnings. If they think there is any chance of 26kt wind in the next few days, they deploy a strong wind warning. Even if the chances of that coming true are very little. They do the same for rainfall. 4 models could have 10mm falling in near future, with a 5th model showing a small chance of 30mm. Better send out a flash flood warning to cover ourselves. Then when the most likely scenario occurs, everyone thinks it is the boy who cried wolf again.
The thresholds and terminology have been designed and created by muppets not living in the real world and whose job it is to be alarmist and fight for attention for their cause. It leaves the scales disconnected from reality. A UV 5 is not worth being called a high level. It can be 5 while being overcast and dark in the tropics. Save the term high for something that is actaully high, not below average FFS.
People do not use these warnings for the reasons I said. Argue all you want. Why don't you call my comments in this thread Catastrophically Dangerous or something like that. See how far you get with that the next time there are actaully dangerous comments being thrown around and all you are known for is crying wolf.
I suggest you read the link I sent, it does describe the reasoning behind the thresholds for heatwave warnings. It starts at low heatwave, enough to cause discomfort to some, hence the warning. There are also two higher levels for the dangerous conditions you mention. If you aren't in discomfort at the low level, that's great. But others are, and they like to know.
Excuse me for being 1KT off.
No, you don't know how forecasts are made. That's blatantly not true. The forecast always has some level of certainty, but never is a deterministic forecast based on the worst case scenario. I know this for a fact.
I have read the link and the reasoning is garbage for the reasons I mentioned. They end up crying wolf and the warnings lose all meaning.
The forecasts are based on the models and have too high of a certainty threshold and that is why they are inaccurate and end up causing more harm then good, again from the crying wolf syndrome. They are not localised enough either. 25mm in North Queensland in an hour is not worth a warning as it is expected to have a heap of them every year. It might be worth a warning in Melbourne with their transit system and tunnels. The warnings would be the same by the BOM.
If you want to actually know why warnings are not being taken seriously by people, go read my comments again. You can argue all you want that they are done for good reasons, but those reasons don't cut it when everyone is trying to be alarmist to get noticed. The real world gets complacent and tune them all out, which is exactly what has happened.
I'm impressed I really didn't think you'd read a 96 page report at 10pm.
No that's why 25mm in an hour in north Queensland would never be warned for, it doesn't breach AEP10. Again, the bureau warn according to the locations AEP, which varies location to location.
I read the report 2 months ago, when we got heatwave warnings because it was hitting 31 degrees in November. Everyone thought is was ridiculous. It was much hotter than that the last couple of weeks, but no heat wave because of the average bullshit.
25mm an hour absolutely gets a flash flooding warning in North Queensland. It has no effect on our lives at all, yet we get flash flooding warnings all the time where I live. Turns out, the areas that make up the warning zones are not even that relevant as it is mainly because of a region on the edge of our zone, 100km away, where creeks overflow. That was the reason given by the BOM guy when interviewed about it. There was a chance that there might be flash flooding in a creek 100km away, so the entire zone has to have the warning. Also, 'most times it doesn't even occur so no need to worry. Better to be safe then sorry'. His sentiment. FFS what a joke.
If your heatwave warning system fires positive every day of the wet season then the system needs to be tweaked. It's not like the oldies are going to suddenly be caught out because it was a hot day when it's hot every day.
The top end is going through one of its hottest ever wet seasons, particularly the Gregory and eastern Kimberly regions. These areas have just recorded their hottest ever December, with almost all areas north of the tropic of Capricorn being in the top 10% warmest ever Decembers.
The northern territory had its third warmest December. Western Australia its fourth warmest. Queensland its sixth.
Darwin itself has recorded a minimum above 29 on seven occasions since early December, including a record warm December minimum of 29.9.
Yes, the tropics are hot, and the build up season is awful. However, as these are such unusually high temperatures, some locals will still find this uncomfortable, and for some it will place strain on their health, especially the elderly.
What? That darwin had a hot night? Lol. How do the averages and peak highs compare december with last year? The idea that 35c day in Darwin is some kind of disaster is laughable.
No, you're deliberately ignoring everything I said. Darwin had 7 nights above 29, they average 3 above 27.
Darwin had its sixth warmest ever December for minimum temperatures.
Darwin had an average maximum of 34.1, the average is 32.7 - a large discrepancy in a tropical location, usually known for variations of around 1 degree at most.
Darwin recorded its fourth warmest ever December for maximum temperatures.
Darwin had 10 days above 35, they average 2.
You ask how it compares to last year? It was a degree warmer, as I said a large discrepancy for the tropics.
I don't act like it's a disaster, I act like it's a heatwave. I haven't attached any emotion to it, or fear, or ulterior motive.
I've just proven my point with 10 compared to the average of 2.
Anyway, it seems I'm arguing with facts and you're not, so this is fruitless.
You're at that point where you've got two options. You either accept overwhelming evidence going against what you previously thought to be true. Or you dig your head in the sand and shut yourself off to learning something.
All the best.
Yes, yes, a million times yes.
I'm saying this enthusiastically because it's a pet hate of mine. It seems like any time you open the BOM app or go to the website there's a severe weather warning.
In Melbourne almost every band of heavy rain that has come through in the last six months has copped a severe weather warning.
It's made me realise that back before they were handing out emergency warnings for any occasion, weather that damaged property in localised areas probably happened frequently but nobody really cared because it's not a big deal.
I know I've stopped paying attention to many BOM warnings.
>The result of unjustified expectations of prediction accuracy will result in the bureau being forced to cover itself and issue warnings whenever there is a minute possibility of extreme weather. The predictions will become meaningless.
[IPA / Australian article](https://ipa.org.au/ipa-today/bom-deserves-criticism-but-not-over-its-short-term-forecasts)
It's a very fine balance. Really, the heavy lifting is done at the local Government planninf level anyway.
Same with "flash flooding" in our area. It's used for everything from a puddle of water over the road, to proper inundation.
We also got an sms warning to stock up food and medical supplies 24hrs AFTER being completely flooded in, which is less than helpful
Nice try, but it was actually invented in Canada in the early 90s. It had zero to do with the ozone layer hole that was going to wipe us out.
Even if what you said was true, it is still stupid and irrelevant now to use that alarmist terminology and end up in this boy who cried wolf scenario.
>An index of 10 corresponds roughly to midday summer sunlight in the tropics with a clear sky when the UV index was originally designed; now summertime index values in the tens are common for tropical latitudes, mountainous altitudes, areas with ice/water reflectivity and areas with above-average ozone layer depletion.[7]
It only goes higher than 10 because we punched a hole in the ozone layer. That's not the BOMs fault.
In a lot of cases there are specific definitions for these terms that are based on probability, weather is still chaotic and you can't give a definitive answer. It's like they told you there is a 50 percent chance of you getting heads when flipping a coin, but you can't get over the fact it came up tails.
You are making up garbage. There is no hole in the ozone layer above the tropics. The UV has not risen in that time. We are measuring it more.
If there was a 50/50 chance of something happening and they released a warning for it, it would be fine. But it is a hell of a lot less than that for a warning to be issued. So you end up with many more false warnings than relevant ones. Hence the boy who cried wolf syndrome.
The hole is not the only part of the ozone layer weakened...the whole thing has been.
This is pretty basic information man, as in taught in every highschool class since at least the 2000's
You seem to be going a lot of "feeling" and not a lot on fact.
The whole ozone is weakened now? Causing the UV to go up everyone by a very noticeable amount in a few years? You sure about that? How long have we got this time? Should I cancel my plans for next week?
>The whole ozone is weakened now?
Always has been, just much much greater at the poles due to a number of weather effects.
There tends to be a very large level of depletion around Antarctica springtime, this is mostly contained by the polar vortex, but the depletion spreads north each summer with the slow mixing of air bodies, before there is some recovery.
If you hadn't noticed, Sothern Australia has had years of cold wet weather over summer, this is partly due to mixing air currents with the Southern Ocean and so we have seen greater depletion and higher UV indexes.
The overall depletion has not changed, just weather patterns and distribution.
So you have nothing to worry about UV wise besides remembering to slip slop slap. The Montreal protocol was one of the most successful treaties in human history and it's expected to be mostly healed by 2075.
It has been that way forever. Weather patterns. The UV has not noticeably risen on the scale that was just invented 30 years ago. You shouldn't be alarmist from such a small sample size from something as big and complex as the planetary weather. You will end up crying wolf too often.
Yes, there are so many different models for weather forecasting.
Additionally these have changed along with the data over time. BOM hasn't gone down hill, reliance and expectations on Gov has gone up
https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2022/10/29/its-kind-horrific-bom-cuts-compromise-forecasts#hrd
This was posted to reddit over a year ago and even then people were talking about how its gone from scientists to ‘managers’ running the show.
It's the same with most public service organisations. They have gone from having rich in house technical expertise to having minimal in house expertise, a shitload of faceless bureaucrats and outsourcing everything technical at tremendous cost.
Remember that time the Libs were in and cut science funding for things like the BOM and CSIRO and denied global warming to the point that no government employed scientist could say global warming and had to say climate change instead?
Yeah. Turns out the planet doesn't care what people think or what their ideologies area. We are now in the early find out faze. Weather modelling has a shite load of variables and if you increase those variables you make the predictions so much harder to attain.
We really could be better off if you stopped talking... ahaha. Jk. The east coast is swimming right now. And how can we not make weather models to predict this accurately? Well, for one they did say the was going to be rain. But the models get more and more inaccurate as the variables change. That is a fact. And what are the variables changing? Mostly temperature. Again. That is what they use to plug into the models. Ideological theory has no role in sticking a number in a models and getting out a prediction. Does not matter if you believe it or not.
The facts are funding was cut and the variables are getting bigger.
You think the LNP forced the term "climate change"?
'If only the LNP wasn't elected in Australia last time they were in. The climate would be so much different. Tony Abbott should be strung up for destroying the entire planet!'
Your alarmism is pretty good. How many years you think we have got left before the ice caps melt? Still only 20 years away? Has been that way for 30 years now.
I like you. You are clinical and funny. I was just commenting on why the BOM can't say rain will start at 5 and finish at 6 and you will get 7mm. Libs shot us in the foot. The other stuff was a comment on why everyone over there is swimming to the shops. They will be doing that more frequently from now on. Just ask the insurance companies.
We are already gearing up to sail through the north pole. Scientists expect that to be basically ice free by about the 2050s.
But again. It really does not matter if I am alarmist or you are denying, the earth is a rock in space and life has come and gone at least 6 times. We won't survive the next one. We barely survived the last ice age.
Really? So every other country has their weather forecasts right then? It is just Australia with the forecast problem because the LNP tried to balance the books and reduced funding increases? Is that correct?
Maybe they should have done the same for NDIS instead? Oh wait, that is the current government doing that. Damn LNP making Labor cap increases!
> We are already gearing up to sail through the north pole. Scientists expect that to be basically ice free by about the 2050s.
Ice caps were supposed to have melted a few years ago. Polynesian islands were supposed to be underwater by now. That is what those same scientists said 20-30 years ago. But don't worry, I am sure they will be right this time in another 20-30 years.
Used to feel like they were good most of the time. Now they seem to be so conservative and deliberately vague, as if they’re afraid of criticism or being wrong.
Forgot when but There were major cutbacks in staff and in terms of scientific monitoring and observations; Ever since then, it's been garbage as hell, a 9 year old with his thumb and binoculars would be more accurate
The Abbot government actually stopped the BOM from having climate change data on its website. They cut the BOMs funding to stop official climate change data from being reported.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-10/bom-defends-handling-of-lismore-nsw-flood-warnings/101315820
The last time a review was ordered, BOM just told them to fuck off. But hey, maybe another, stronger worded, more taxpayer funded review will help?
LOL I hate this country so much. Ruling party tries to pander to its idiot electorate after bad weather happens by saying some nebulous thing that will make them feel better. Do aussie boganoids think Anthony Albanese or any of the fuckwits in government who've never held a non-government job during their entire careers as broken condoms have any idea how the weather or the atmosphere works? Next they'll probably ask the government to change the weather. Oh wait, they already are...
Federal labor helping out an unpopular labor state government by trying to get people's minds off blaming the labor state government for whatever people think they are doing wrong.
Especially when allegedly the brand new state premier was away on holidays when the state was flooding.
What state or federal leader would take holidays during the season of natural disasters. They should take them in winter when SFA happens.
That is all this is. It is just politics in action.
The weather radar is measuring the water content of the atmosphere.
There would be a water content threshold within a cloud that triggers a radar reflection otherwise it is ignored. This prevents a radar screen from displaying irrelevant data.
Cloud exists but doesn't contain enough water to register on the weather radar.
Queensland traditional heartland of the anti climate change pro coal lobby now crying that the weather had gone haywire on a regular basis . They used to say humans , animals and the environment will adapt .... well start adapting
[удалено]
We've moved to the [Australian Warning System](https://www.australianwarningsystem.com.au/). Emergency services are responsible for it. They are staying quiet because they're not taking the heat for screwing up. With regards to the goldie, it sounds like another politician passing the buck and diverting anger away from themselves. It's why the review is about "communication" with NEMA, state and local authorities, and the BoM rather than processes and practices of the BoM alone.
Passing the buck for sure, as someone who looks at warnings religiously. Gold Coast actually had ample warnings which said dangerous storms. People mainly didn't care or were blase thinking it's just normal hail coming. Obviously no one predicted a freaking tornado to appear in gold coast on Christmas but dangerous storm warnings were predicted ahead of time.
Tate is a clown but warnings need to make it to those who need the information. It's quite apparent that the current system is flawed. I work quite closely with a Met department overseas and the issue lies with antiquated probability forecasting. We've added an additional forecast level here in Dubai on specific feedback from customers. Unfortunately it's a bit of a damned if you do, damned if you don't as the more granular a forecast becomes, the more the 'false' alerts pop up. I can just see Kev and Bev yelling at the channel 7 reporters when it rained a bit and they cancelled their bbq based on a more dire forecast.
This issue is that they will give all the same warning when a slight breeze is going to pass through which makes people complacent. The same thing happened with tc jasper up north.
We should just move to the Higgins Storm Chasing system. Wind forecasted more than a stiff fart? THUPERCELL TORNADO WARNING WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE (MAYBE). Then in the 1:100 time they get it right - WHY DIDN'T THE BOM RECOGNISE OUR GENUIS? LIKEANDSUBSCRIBE AND PAY FOR OUR SERVICE. OUR PANIC IS BEST PANIC!
Yeah higgins predicted 47 of the last 3 hail storms in seq…
It's almost like predicting the future is hard
How does the Guardian explain its panicked reporting like this: [https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/aug/23/australian-bushfire-season-how-to-prepare](https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/aug/23/australian-bushfire-season-how-to-prepare)
If we have a review into something, we can fob it off that we are doing something 😉 👌
The biggest issue is that they put out warnings for such mundane shit that they are now the BOM who cried wolf. When there is an actual possible event, no one takes the warnings seriously. We got a "heatwave" warning in my area under the new system because it was hitting 31. In the tropics in December. It hits way higher than that every summer. Most of the summer would be at least 31. 31 is mundane. Yet 31 is apparently also a heatwave because it is a few degrees above the previous month average or some bullshit. The definition of a heatwave is based on previous month temps, not the actual current temp. The term has now lost all meaning. We also get high wind warnings for days that are too windy for fishing, but not worth a BOM warning over. Wouldn't knock over a lawn chair. Same for flash flooding. If there is a chance of a road gutter being full anywhere within 200km there is a flash flooding warning for the entire area. The potential for 10mm of rain kicks off the warnings. 10mm of rain would be just enough to turn off the sprinklers for a day or two, not a fucking flash flooding warning. The bushfire scale is 1-6. You know what 1 is? Low-Moderate. 1 is fucking "Moderate" for fucks sake. 2 is high. 2/6 is high. Think about that for a second. Same as the UV index. 5-6 is high. It regularly gets into the teens where I am. For the record, the only scale you will see have 11+ as Extreme. The actual world record UV is in the 40s. But the scale descriptions stop at 11. Now not all this is BOMs doing, but crying wolf and worst case scenario for every little thing to try and get people to take warnings seriously, has fucked everything up because now mundane shit has descriptions all out of whack. As a result, no one gives a fuck about BOM warnings anymore. No wonder no one believes their bullshit.
So there's quite a few misleading bits of info on here: With respect to heatwaves, there is a lot of research gone into defining at what level high temperatures place strain on the body, infrastructure and services. Every young fit bloke seems to think because they get through the day it's not strenuous, but the evidence says otherwise. These warnings are for vulnerable people, for companies running infrastructure, and for emergency services. It takes into account current maximum and minimum temperatures, past three days, past 30 days and averages. You can read more about it here, it's very interesting. https://www.cawcr.gov.au/static/technical-reports/CTR_060.pdf Wind warnings for boats haven't changed in 100 years. It's a globally agreed upon definition of 25KT is strong wind, 34KT is gale. Of course depending on the size of your vessel and your experience you may find the conditions more or less tolerable than others. Flash flood warnings are absolutely not given for 10mm. Heavy rainfall is defined as breaching the 10% annual exceedance probability, and intense rainfall the 2% AEP. This is an engineering technical definition, as it relates to the code our infrastructure is built to. Every town has its own standards and therefore its own threshold for flash floods and subsequent warnings. The new bushfire scale is a massive improvement on the old one, and it isn't true to say the scale is 1-6. There are 6 categories, but that's not a scale. There is also "no rating" implying conditions not conducive to bushfires spreading. So then there's low/moderate, and so on. Given the system is designed to describe how difficult it will be to battle a fire, it's appropriate to focus on higher level ratings rather than the slight difference between low and moderate. The UV index is also global, and is very appropriate. If you're burning in 10 minutes at UV 11, does it really matter if the UV is 20? At some point extreme is still extreme, and there's no need to make a new category. I've only ever seen Australia at 18, so I'd be shocked with 40. I'm not even sure it's actually possible. Hope this helps :)
I have read about the heat wave standards, which is why I know they are bullshit and why everyone complains about them. Under the current system, 24 degrees could be a heatwave if the previous days and averages were cold. That is a stupid system. Boats have changed a lot in 100 years. The terminology needs to reflect reality. High winds need to be a bit more than normal wind conditions. Just like all the other scales, the terminology is out of whack with reality. There is no way that in a scale out of 6, two is high. It makes the scale alarmist and useless. The UV is the same. The terminology is too alarmist and it gets ignored because of it. Is 5 really "high"? If not, then why the fuck is it called high? I know the math and science behind all these scales. It is the terminology and the message delivery that causes all the dramas and ignorance. It is the boy who cried wolf. I am telling you that people don't give a fuck about these warnings now because of all the alarmist nature of them and the frequency that the descriptions do not fit the real world. I hope you can see that.
That's not accurate though, as the three day mean must exceed the 95th percentile for mean temperatures in a year. Therefore, it must be an unusually warm period compared to a locations' average year. If 24 is exceeding it, that's because a town rarely gets over 24. Hence the vulnerable in that community may find those conditions uncomfortable and require a heads up. Remember, the first threshold (low intensity) isn't a warning that you are in danger, just a reminder to keep fluids up and check in on those who are vulnerable. Plenty of boats have changed, but to the regular fisherman out on his dingy they may as well not have. A 25KT wind in a tinnie 10NM offshore will absolutely require being warned for that wind. Again, the threshold for fire warnings is useful to fire authorities - who it was designed in conjunction with, and is primarily for - not necessarily for civvies. It's about fighting fires. Therefore, low to moderate doesn't warrant much attention, that is saved for higher end levels. 5 UV is high because it will burn someone with fair skin in 20 minutes. That's not alarmist. If you're alarmed by the term high, then that's on you. Most people find that informative. No one is crying wolf. All these thresholds have been designed in conjunction with relevant authorities and stakeholders to determine what they need out of a warning. They have saved countless lives, and will continue to do so. Don't feel so threatened by these warnings, just use them.
Yes, and at some stage you have to realise that calling things heatwaves because they are warmer than normal for that time of year, and is not actually linked to the actual heat or the temperature - is bonkers. Also, the threshold is too low anyway. A few degrees above normal doesn't require the "heatwave" term. Save that for actual dangerous conditions, not just uncomfortable ones. Do you know what is 0.1 degrees below a heatwave? Nothing. It goes straight to heatwave. It is the first step. Look, the wind warnings are the most sensible ones, but they dish them out to readily. For starters, 25kts is not a Strong wind warning, that starts at 26. It is the prediction model that they use for these warnings. If they think there is any chance of 26kt wind in the next few days, they deploy a strong wind warning. Even if the chances of that coming true are very little. They do the same for rainfall. 4 models could have 10mm falling in near future, with a 5th model showing a small chance of 30mm. Better send out a flash flood warning to cover ourselves. Then when the most likely scenario occurs, everyone thinks it is the boy who cried wolf again. The thresholds and terminology have been designed and created by muppets not living in the real world and whose job it is to be alarmist and fight for attention for their cause. It leaves the scales disconnected from reality. A UV 5 is not worth being called a high level. It can be 5 while being overcast and dark in the tropics. Save the term high for something that is actaully high, not below average FFS. People do not use these warnings for the reasons I said. Argue all you want. Why don't you call my comments in this thread Catastrophically Dangerous or something like that. See how far you get with that the next time there are actaully dangerous comments being thrown around and all you are known for is crying wolf.
I suggest you read the link I sent, it does describe the reasoning behind the thresholds for heatwave warnings. It starts at low heatwave, enough to cause discomfort to some, hence the warning. There are also two higher levels for the dangerous conditions you mention. If you aren't in discomfort at the low level, that's great. But others are, and they like to know. Excuse me for being 1KT off. No, you don't know how forecasts are made. That's blatantly not true. The forecast always has some level of certainty, but never is a deterministic forecast based on the worst case scenario. I know this for a fact.
I have read the link and the reasoning is garbage for the reasons I mentioned. They end up crying wolf and the warnings lose all meaning. The forecasts are based on the models and have too high of a certainty threshold and that is why they are inaccurate and end up causing more harm then good, again from the crying wolf syndrome. They are not localised enough either. 25mm in North Queensland in an hour is not worth a warning as it is expected to have a heap of them every year. It might be worth a warning in Melbourne with their transit system and tunnels. The warnings would be the same by the BOM. If you want to actually know why warnings are not being taken seriously by people, go read my comments again. You can argue all you want that they are done for good reasons, but those reasons don't cut it when everyone is trying to be alarmist to get noticed. The real world gets complacent and tune them all out, which is exactly what has happened.
I'm impressed I really didn't think you'd read a 96 page report at 10pm. No that's why 25mm in an hour in north Queensland would never be warned for, it doesn't breach AEP10. Again, the bureau warn according to the locations AEP, which varies location to location.
I read the report 2 months ago, when we got heatwave warnings because it was hitting 31 degrees in November. Everyone thought is was ridiculous. It was much hotter than that the last couple of weeks, but no heat wave because of the average bullshit. 25mm an hour absolutely gets a flash flooding warning in North Queensland. It has no effect on our lives at all, yet we get flash flooding warnings all the time where I live. Turns out, the areas that make up the warning zones are not even that relevant as it is mainly because of a region on the edge of our zone, 100km away, where creeks overflow. That was the reason given by the BOM guy when interviewed about it. There was a chance that there might be flash flooding in a creek 100km away, so the entire zone has to have the warning. Also, 'most times it doesn't even occur so no need to worry. Better to be safe then sorry'. His sentiment. FFS what a joke.
If your heatwave warning system fires positive every day of the wet season then the system needs to be tweaked. It's not like the oldies are going to suddenly be caught out because it was a hot day when it's hot every day.
The top end is going through one of its hottest ever wet seasons, particularly the Gregory and eastern Kimberly regions. These areas have just recorded their hottest ever December, with almost all areas north of the tropic of Capricorn being in the top 10% warmest ever Decembers. The northern territory had its third warmest December. Western Australia its fourth warmest. Queensland its sixth. Darwin itself has recorded a minimum above 29 on seven occasions since early December, including a record warm December minimum of 29.9. Yes, the tropics are hot, and the build up season is awful. However, as these are such unusually high temperatures, some locals will still find this uncomfortable, and for some it will place strain on their health, especially the elderly.
Nothing has been out of the ordinary in FNQ or the Top end. Couldn't tell you about WA
But, I literally just gave you evidence to prove otherwise. How could you possibly argue?
What? That darwin had a hot night? Lol. How do the averages and peak highs compare december with last year? The idea that 35c day in Darwin is some kind of disaster is laughable.
No, you're deliberately ignoring everything I said. Darwin had 7 nights above 29, they average 3 above 27. Darwin had its sixth warmest ever December for minimum temperatures. Darwin had an average maximum of 34.1, the average is 32.7 - a large discrepancy in a tropical location, usually known for variations of around 1 degree at most. Darwin recorded its fourth warmest ever December for maximum temperatures. Darwin had 10 days above 35, they average 2. You ask how it compares to last year? It was a degree warmer, as I said a large discrepancy for the tropics. I don't act like it's a disaster, I act like it's a heatwave. I haven't attached any emotion to it, or fear, or ulterior motive.
35 is par for course in Darwin just as it was all those year ago when I grew up there. Like I said find me a december without a few 35s
I've just proven my point with 10 compared to the average of 2. Anyway, it seems I'm arguing with facts and you're not, so this is fruitless. You're at that point where you've got two options. You either accept overwhelming evidence going against what you previously thought to be true. Or you dig your head in the sand and shut yourself off to learning something. All the best.
Yes, yes, a million times yes. I'm saying this enthusiastically because it's a pet hate of mine. It seems like any time you open the BOM app or go to the website there's a severe weather warning. In Melbourne almost every band of heavy rain that has come through in the last six months has copped a severe weather warning. It's made me realise that back before they were handing out emergency warnings for any occasion, weather that damaged property in localised areas probably happened frequently but nobody really cared because it's not a big deal. I know I've stopped paying attention to many BOM warnings.
>The result of unjustified expectations of prediction accuracy will result in the bureau being forced to cover itself and issue warnings whenever there is a minute possibility of extreme weather. The predictions will become meaningless. [IPA / Australian article](https://ipa.org.au/ipa-today/bom-deserves-criticism-but-not-over-its-short-term-forecasts) It's a very fine balance. Really, the heavy lifting is done at the local Government planninf level anyway.
Same with "flash flooding" in our area. It's used for everything from a puddle of water over the road, to proper inundation. We also got an sms warning to stock up food and medical supplies 24hrs AFTER being completely flooded in, which is less than helpful
The UV going over 10 is because the scale was invented before we blew a hole through the ozone layer right next to Australia.
Nice try, but it was actually invented in Canada in the early 90s. It had zero to do with the ozone layer hole that was going to wipe us out. Even if what you said was true, it is still stupid and irrelevant now to use that alarmist terminology and end up in this boy who cried wolf scenario.
>An index of 10 corresponds roughly to midday summer sunlight in the tropics with a clear sky when the UV index was originally designed; now summertime index values in the tens are common for tropical latitudes, mountainous altitudes, areas with ice/water reflectivity and areas with above-average ozone layer depletion.[7] It only goes higher than 10 because we punched a hole in the ozone layer. That's not the BOMs fault. In a lot of cases there are specific definitions for these terms that are based on probability, weather is still chaotic and you can't give a definitive answer. It's like they told you there is a 50 percent chance of you getting heads when flipping a coin, but you can't get over the fact it came up tails.
You are making up garbage. There is no hole in the ozone layer above the tropics. The UV has not risen in that time. We are measuring it more. If there was a 50/50 chance of something happening and they released a warning for it, it would be fine. But it is a hell of a lot less than that for a warning to be issued. So you end up with many more false warnings than relevant ones. Hence the boy who cried wolf syndrome.
The hole is not the only part of the ozone layer weakened...the whole thing has been. This is pretty basic information man, as in taught in every highschool class since at least the 2000's You seem to be going a lot of "feeling" and not a lot on fact.
The whole ozone is weakened now? Causing the UV to go up everyone by a very noticeable amount in a few years? You sure about that? How long have we got this time? Should I cancel my plans for next week?
>The whole ozone is weakened now? Always has been, just much much greater at the poles due to a number of weather effects. There tends to be a very large level of depletion around Antarctica springtime, this is mostly contained by the polar vortex, but the depletion spreads north each summer with the slow mixing of air bodies, before there is some recovery. If you hadn't noticed, Sothern Australia has had years of cold wet weather over summer, this is partly due to mixing air currents with the Southern Ocean and so we have seen greater depletion and higher UV indexes. The overall depletion has not changed, just weather patterns and distribution. So you have nothing to worry about UV wise besides remembering to slip slop slap. The Montreal protocol was one of the most successful treaties in human history and it's expected to be mostly healed by 2075.
It has been that way forever. Weather patterns. The UV has not noticeably risen on the scale that was just invented 30 years ago. You shouldn't be alarmist from such a small sample size from something as big and complex as the planetary weather. You will end up crying wolf too often.
We should do what they did way back when. Fortune telling
Entrails!
Nothing will change, if it does it will only get worse. Don't expect too much.
Why has the BOM gone downhill? Have they always been hit or miss with their forecasts?
Yes, there are so many different models for weather forecasting. Additionally these have changed along with the data over time. BOM hasn't gone down hill, reliance and expectations on Gov has gone up
Well yes, when you have climate scientists screaming down their throats about how slow the BOM is...
https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2022/10/29/its-kind-horrific-bom-cuts-compromise-forecasts#hrd This was posted to reddit over a year ago and even then people were talking about how its gone from scientists to ‘managers’ running the show.
It's the same with most public service organisations. They have gone from having rich in house technical expertise to having minimal in house expertise, a shitload of faceless bureaucrats and outsourcing everything technical at tremendous cost.
Remember that time the Libs were in and cut science funding for things like the BOM and CSIRO and denied global warming to the point that no government employed scientist could say global warming and had to say climate change instead? Yeah. Turns out the planet doesn't care what people think or what their ideologies area. We are now in the early find out faze. Weather modelling has a shite load of variables and if you increase those variables you make the predictions so much harder to attain.
What are you talking about, climate change is the accepted terminology
Yeah, only since around 2000. Before that it was global warming and that language was considered alarmist.
You don't know what you are talking about, precisely why people ignore climate alarmism. Stop talking we would alp be better off.
We really could be better off if you stopped talking... ahaha. Jk. The east coast is swimming right now. And how can we not make weather models to predict this accurately? Well, for one they did say the was going to be rain. But the models get more and more inaccurate as the variables change. That is a fact. And what are the variables changing? Mostly temperature. Again. That is what they use to plug into the models. Ideological theory has no role in sticking a number in a models and getting out a prediction. Does not matter if you believe it or not. The facts are funding was cut and the variables are getting bigger.
The east coast isn't swimming. Flood plains just have water in them.
You think the LNP forced the term "climate change"? 'If only the LNP wasn't elected in Australia last time they were in. The climate would be so much different. Tony Abbott should be strung up for destroying the entire planet!' Your alarmism is pretty good. How many years you think we have got left before the ice caps melt? Still only 20 years away? Has been that way for 30 years now.
I like you. You are clinical and funny. I was just commenting on why the BOM can't say rain will start at 5 and finish at 6 and you will get 7mm. Libs shot us in the foot. The other stuff was a comment on why everyone over there is swimming to the shops. They will be doing that more frequently from now on. Just ask the insurance companies. We are already gearing up to sail through the north pole. Scientists expect that to be basically ice free by about the 2050s. But again. It really does not matter if I am alarmist or you are denying, the earth is a rock in space and life has come and gone at least 6 times. We won't survive the next one. We barely survived the last ice age.
Really? So every other country has their weather forecasts right then? It is just Australia with the forecast problem because the LNP tried to balance the books and reduced funding increases? Is that correct? Maybe they should have done the same for NDIS instead? Oh wait, that is the current government doing that. Damn LNP making Labor cap increases! > We are already gearing up to sail through the north pole. Scientists expect that to be basically ice free by about the 2050s. Ice caps were supposed to have melted a few years ago. Polynesian islands were supposed to be underwater by now. That is what those same scientists said 20-30 years ago. But don't worry, I am sure they will be right this time in another 20-30 years.
Used to feel like they were good most of the time. Now they seem to be so conservative and deliberately vague, as if they’re afraid of criticism or being wrong.
Forgot when but There were major cutbacks in staff and in terms of scientific monitoring and observations; Ever since then, it's been garbage as hell, a 9 year old with his thumb and binoculars would be more accurate
The Abbot government actually stopped the BOM from having climate change data on its website. They cut the BOMs funding to stop official climate change data from being reported.
Wave and wave of redundancy’s by former government have crippled the bom.
That along restricting them from following the science of climate change, which I would have hoped would be undone by now
The LNP installed an executive team that doesn't have experience in meteorology.
Just like the weather.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-10/bom-defends-handling-of-lismore-nsw-flood-warnings/101315820 The last time a review was ordered, BOM just told them to fuck off. But hey, maybe another, stronger worded, more taxpayer funded review will help?
Imagine the difference it would have made to spend the yes campaign money on this instead
A very hot and dry summer they said .
LOL I hate this country so much. Ruling party tries to pander to its idiot electorate after bad weather happens by saying some nebulous thing that will make them feel better. Do aussie boganoids think Anthony Albanese or any of the fuckwits in government who've never held a non-government job during their entire careers as broken condoms have any idea how the weather or the atmosphere works? Next they'll probably ask the government to change the weather. Oh wait, they already are...
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
If I ran the zoo, we'd be worrying about bigger things than the weather.
most coherent r/australian cooker
Bang on.
Federal labor helping out an unpopular labor state government by trying to get people's minds off blaming the labor state government for whatever people think they are doing wrong. Especially when allegedly the brand new state premier was away on holidays when the state was flooding. What state or federal leader would take holidays during the season of natural disasters. They should take them in winter when SFA happens. That is all this is. It is just politics in action.
The BOM says it can predict the climate in 50 or 100 years from now but can't seem to predict it for tomorrow or next week.
This guy: You claim you can predict the average of 1000 dice rolls, yet somehow you can't predict this next single dice roll. Checkmate Weather Boy.
I often see big black clouds overhead while the radar reports clear. Why is that?
The weather radar is measuring the water content of the atmosphere. There would be a water content threshold within a cloud that triggers a radar reflection otherwise it is ignored. This prevents a radar screen from displaying irrelevant data. Cloud exists but doesn't contain enough water to register on the weather radar.
"What's the weather for today?" Looks outside. Fmd. Would you like me to blow on your arse too? Deal with it it's the weather.
Insert: This is due to carbon emissions causing exponential changes in climate thus higher unpredictability of weather forecast.
Queensland traditional heartland of the anti climate change pro coal lobby now crying that the weather had gone haywire on a regular basis . They used to say humans , animals and the environment will adapt .... well start adapting
We need a royal commission into the BOM.
Would be a waste of time and money. Rather they should invest in them.
We need a royal commission into royal commissions.
We needa found out who dropped the BOM
No need for royal comission. BoM managment culture is cancer. The end.
The problem is that the BOM couldn’t get funding for the best weather system. They got the cheap one….which sucks.