Hi to those who have recently joined this ezine, where you will find regular bulletins of weather to come and a forum for topical comment on climate and environment. At the risk of getting up some people's meteorological noses, this author believes the weather is created by the moon. The official forecasters tell us accurately about weather yesterday, today and tomorrow; but this space tries to look a little further ahead. I do not have all the answers, nor do I claim 100% accuracy, but then, neither does the metservice.
95bFM report (Tuesdays)
It's the northern declination on Thursday, the new Moon on Friday and the
perigee (moon closest to earth for July) on Saturday. It's the 5th closest
perigee for the year, which is much closer than the one last month which
was the 8th closest. This is a situation astrologers call a Supermoon, and
it always brings stormy weather. In fact any ONE of those 3 factors can
turn the weather bad, and we have 3 factors in a row this week.
It's also a bad earthquake time, and on the weekend I'd be expecting
another big one the size at least of the Peru earthquake which was exactly
one month ago.
As far as weather around here goes, I'd be expecting it to clear on the
weekend, all over by Sunday 22nd, and next week we should be back to cool
clear days.
Some are saying at the moment in some areas I'm about 2 days out. I agree, and I think that's what the perigee does. It knocks the system around a wee bit. The TV3 forecaster was saying last night that HE doesn't know what the weather's going to do in the next few days. And he's looking from a day away. So he's 2 days out too. The difference is that I'm coming from last February, which is when I wrote the Weather Almanac for 2001. So 2 days out over that time's perhaps not too serious. There's snow falling just about everywhere, as my website ALMOST predicted. I said 18th, that's tomorrow, in all ski-fields, and I do ask for a 24 hour error.
As for Kyoto I still say, where's the evidence? Just because an opinion
gets often repeated by the same scientists doesn't make it fact. This new
round of scaremongering has less to do with any new scientific revelation
and more to do with boosting scientific morale for the meeting in Bonn. Is
the government trying to whip up public support to justify making the
decision to ratify, that will keep the Green party happy? It's more than
likely to be politics, and nothing to do with science.
Are they laying the groundwork for further tax increases? They'll say it's
to monitor industry and they'll say it's to discourage the use of cars but
will they pocket the tax and just use it for other purposes?
During the Gulf War they predicted a future oil shortage and that sent
motorists rushing to install LPG. That never happened. Then there was a
no-water scare up in the north, and talk of piping water up from the
Waikato River - which caused many home-owners to hurriedly install water
tanks. Once again, that panic passed. Then, as now, people made money out
of scaring other people. Then there was the Y2K bug which soaked up tax
money for endless testing and impact reports. When are we going to learn?
I have been sent a report from the University of Tasmania Antarctic
Cooperative Research Centre.
It states "The Greenland ice-sheet contains
an amount of ice which, if melted completely, would raise the level of the
world's oceans by 6 meters. Calculations suggest a warming of a few
degrees might trigger the melting of much of the Greenland ice-sheet. The
process would take perhaps one or two thousand years. (So they can't they
make up their mind. One or two thousand is a 50% error either way. That's
a big error factor. And if they are THAT unsure then how come they're so
sure it's happening at all?) The Antarctic ice-sheet's effective volume is
equivalent to 55 meters of global sea level. It is NOT expected that it
would melt as a result of a warming of two or three degrees. This is
because temperatures in most of Antarctica are well below the melting
point of ice.."Ý
So according to them, nothing's going to melt. Down there, temperatures
cool to at least -75deg in winter, so 2 or 3 deg won't even dent it.
Ý
But okay, Let's say Antarctica CAN provide 55m extra water around the
globe. Add Greenland's 6m to that and you have 55+6= 61 meters. If the
icebase was to erode by 10% we would be looking at an extra 6.1m of water
all around the globe. If it decreased by 5%, then over 3m of additional
water would rise all around the globe. Given that we HAVEN'T noticed
anything then means we haven't yet seen a 5% change in the polar icecap.
But 5% is a 1deg shift in a 20deg average global temperature. In actual
fact Earth's average is closer to a year-round 13deg. 2 or 3 deg in 13deg
is a 20% change and so we would expect an extra 15-20m of water to RIGHT
NOW have risen around the globe. After all, 2 or 3 deg is the figure
trotted out that temperatures are supposed to have risen by in the last
decade due to emissions. So..has anyone noticed that 15m of water increase
yet..???
In the NZ Herald Friday, appeared the article headed "Giant icebergs likely for NZ in global warming." But upon reading the article one finds no mention of why they should be coming nor even that they are. It only states that they were PROBABLY around NZ 200,000 years ago. So what?
July: In Whangarei and Auckland, the 19th and 20th are likely to see
minimum temperatures above 10.
August: Only 11th-14th have possible minimums above 10 in Whangarei, and
11th-24th in Auckland.
September: Only the third week seems to get to above 10 in the north, and
minimums are above 10 from the 10th onwards in Auckland.
October: Only the last week will see below 10 minimums.
17th: bad
18th : bad
19th : average
20th : excellent
21st : excellent
22nd : excellent
23rd: bad
24th : bad
Peggy Gilmour article
http://hometown.aol.com/permianbry/mnext.htm
>From Mike in Sydney
(The best thing that's happened to weather forecasting since sliced
bread...)
Ýhttp://www.theregister.co.uk/content/2/19442.html
Ý
Atmospheric tides
http://www.auf.asn.au/meteorology/section1a.html#atmospheric_tides
Cam pictures of the skifields
www.snow.co.nz
Global warming website
www.globalwarming.org
Changes to polar ice caps
http://polar.jpl.nasa.gov/
One of NASA's sites
http://www.sepp.org/
Interview questions for NZ Surf Mag
1. How accurate do you feel your Almanac weather maps are?
(I think pretty much so, if you look at a trend of 2 or 3 days. With the
equipment I have available, which isn't much, that's the best I can do.
The main thing to look at is the moon's declination pattern. From my
website you'll find the direction the moon is going - up from the south or
down from the north. Coming down it moves the weather to the southeast and
going up, to the northeast. Right on northern or southern points the
moon's orbit is parallel to that of the Earth, and the weather is hauled
by the moon along those latitude lines. Around these northern or southern
declination points, fronts and troughs will sweep across the south of the
South Island which send swells northwards a couple of days later.)
2. What would you recommend to any surfers who want to use your Almanac as
a means of seeing when and where the low pressure systems are going to
track?
(I'd say flip a few pages (days) in either direction. Low pressure systems
hang around northern declinations and turbulence in the atmosphere is
fairly typical when the moon is crossing the equator going either way. Of
all declination reference points, the southern declination in the southern
hemisphere brings the clearest weather.)
3. One of the more common theories/myths that surfers relate to the moon
is that there will be more (bigger) ocean swell during the full moon.
No-one seems to know exactly why, but very often it seems to be true. Is
this just coincidence, or can you conceive a reason for it?
(In the southern hemisphere in January and February, Full Moons coincide
with the northern declination, and March-April Full Moons occur as the
Moon crosses the equator. These declinations set up turbulence. In
June/July/August the FM is at the southern declination. At end of October
the FM is again crossing equator and at end of December it's at the
northern declination again. Plus at FM there are king tides, not only in
the water but in the air too. It all adds up to increased pulling to and
fro of waves.)
4. Ocean tides are also a factor that surfers consider; some spots work
best on high tides, some are better on low tides. This is the most obvious
influence of the moon as far as surfers are concerned. Can you think of
other moon patterns that might have an obvious effect on the ocean and
surf conditions?
(Of course it depends which side of the country you're on. Northeasterlies
affect the eastern side and bring storm pattern waves rolling into the
harbours. The wind often swings around clockwise, so after a southern
declination and southwesterlies have been blowing for a while, in about
two weeks there could well be an opposite situation. Also, I've found that
Full Moons are often preceded by westerlies and bring easterlies
afterward. -K)
Hi Ken
(From Mike)
What do you think about the methane pollution tax proposed by the Green
Party?
(I think, as you probably know, their stand is based on false premises and
misinformation. It defies all logic. There are fewer animals and birds on
the planet than ever before. The planet has always coped.)
Is the Green Party potentially dangerous in driving a governments view
towards pollution taxation of industrials which form the backbone of New
Zealand's primary industry and do not actually produce much pollution on a
global scale?
(The Green party are behaving little better than right wing fascists,
anxious to thrust their views onto the rest of us and command us what to
think, do and not do in the name of their own petty emotional small-minded
world views).
Or is the Labour Party using the Green Party to promote further taxation
based on the fears of the general public who have been bombarded with
global warming and will simply accepted another form of taxation with out
question?.
(I cannot see that as a Labour Party policy. I think they, too, are
misled, and, anxious for support in caucus, do as governments have always
done - put out small fires that threaten the future vote count.-K)
Hi Ken
(from Steve)
The weather often seems very settled just coming up to a full moon and
then once the full moon has past, the weather breaks, winds increase or
rain comes in.
(Yes, that's the age-old pattern and it has a sound scientific
explanation.)
Did you predict the droughts for Wellington, Marlborough etc earlier this
year which also seem to be continuing in Wellington now. We have only
about 1mm of rain so far this month.
( I did, it's in this year's Almanac. I also said that Wellington is going
to get a good wet period soon - from the 18th-29th of this month.)
Also regarding tides which are related to the moon, I have noticed that
the wind seems stronger at high tide, then drops away as the tide goes out.
(As well as a high tide being common to water AND air, there is a
friction effect between the surface of the sea and the air just above it.
They both pull each other in and then suddenly settle together on the
turn, which seems to shake the clouds enough to sometimes enable a shower
or two to fall. Sailors and fishermen have often told me that rain comes
on the turn, and that there's a big blow just before the turn.-K)
Contact
Editor: Ken Ring
Phone: land. 09-817-7625, fax. 09-817-2203, mobile 021 970-696
Postal: P.O.Box 60197 Titirangi, Auckland 7, New Zealand.
E-mail: ken@weatherman.co.nz
Internet: http://www.predictweather.com
Subscribe: Send a blank email to weather-subscribe@topica.com.
Contributions: The editor reserves the right to include or exclude contributions
submitted. Comments or questions for Q's and A's should be addressed to
ken@weatherman.co.nz
Disclaimer: The contents of this document are the views and opinions of the editor and/or associates only, and carry no guarantees as to accuracy. No responsibility will be undertaken by the editor or webmaster for actions or outcomes on the part of readers as a result of information contained herein. Opinions expressed by contributors and reprinted are likewise their own and may or may not reflect the views of the editor or the webmaster.
Copyright: This e-zine is subject to international copyright laws but may be freely distributed to all interested parties; except for purposes of unauthorized
commercial gain. All Rights Reserved (c) Ken Ring 2000 - 2001.