Did Anyone See?
Forum rules
These topics are a read-only archive and may be subject to out-of-date information.
For today's weather discussion head to: New Zealand Weather & Climate
These topics are a read-only archive and may be subject to out-of-date information.
For today's weather discussion head to: New Zealand Weather & Climate
-
- Posts: 18489
- Joined: Wed 12/03/2003 22:08
- Location: Raukapuka Geraldine
- Has thanked: 1769 times
- Been thanked: 1412 times
Did Anyone See?
JohnGaul
NZTS
Did anyone see the 'frowner', Kim Hill's, interview with Eric Brestoum,Brenstoum (whatever his handle) last night on "Face to Face" on TVOne?
NZTS
Did anyone see the 'frowner', Kim Hill's, interview with Eric Brestoum,Brenstoum (whatever his handle) last night on "Face to Face" on TVOne?
- Willoughby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4433
- Joined: Sat 14/06/2003 16:18
- Location: Darwin, Australia: Storm city
- Has thanked: 264 times
- Been thanked: 288 times
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 18489
- Joined: Wed 12/03/2003 22:08
- Location: Raukapuka Geraldine
- Has thanked: 1769 times
- Been thanked: 1412 times
- Willoughby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4433
- Joined: Sat 14/06/2003 16:18
- Location: Darwin, Australia: Storm city
- Has thanked: 264 times
- Been thanked: 288 times
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 3745
- Joined: Sat 24/01/2004 16:56
- Location: Wellington
- Has thanked: 188 times
- Been thanked: 123 times
His name is Erick Brenstrum, Lead Forecaster at Met. Service (I think that's the title). Has done a lot of research on past storms, particularly the Feb. 1936 monster that most people today haven't even heard of. he also has a lot of detailed info. on the whitewash (passing as an inquiry) that followed the Wahine/Giselle disaster. Also has regular articles in NZ Geographic.
Unfortunately I didn't know that it was not going to be an interview with some damned politician, else I'd have been watching. Only saw the last 2 minutes.
Unfortunately I didn't know that it was not going to be an interview with some damned politician, else I'd have been watching. Only saw the last 2 minutes.
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Fri 30/09/2005 14:04
- Location: Christchurch, NZ
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
Perhaps we have a second chance to catch this interview with Eric.RWood wrote:His name is Erick Brenstrum, Lead Forecaster at Met. Service (I think that's the title). Has done a lot of research on past storms, particularly the Feb. 1936 monster that most people today haven't even heard of. he also has a lot of detailed info. on the whitewash (passing as an inquiry) that followed the Wahine/Giselle disaster. Also has regular articles in NZ Geographic.
Unfortunately I didn't know that it was not going to be an interview with some damned politician, else I'd have been watching. Only saw the last 2 minutes.
I think the "Kim Hill" show is repeated on TV1 on Saturday mornings 8:00 - 8:30am, so set your VCR's!
Last edited by Kiwi Geoff on Fri 30/09/2005 21:20, edited 1 time in total.
Regards, Kiwi Geoff
http://www.geocities.com/kiwi_36_nz/
http://www.geocities.com/kiwi_36_nz/
-
- Posts: 18489
- Joined: Wed 12/03/2003 22:08
- Location: Raukapuka Geraldine
- Has thanked: 1769 times
- Been thanked: 1412 times
-
- Posts: 349
- Joined: Tue 07/06/2005 15:46
- Location: Christchurch
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Did Anyone See?
Hi Geoff,
Welcome aboard....your partner on your website looks very familiar...haha!
All the best
Weathermad(Richard)
Perhaps we have a second chance to catch this interview with Eric.
I think the "Kim Hill" show is repeated on TV1 on Saturday mornings 8:00 - 8:30am, so set your VCR's![/quote]
Welcome aboard....your partner on your website looks very familiar...haha!
All the best
Weathermad(Richard)
Perhaps we have a second chance to catch this interview with Eric.
I think the "Kim Hill" show is repeated on TV1 on Saturday mornings 8:00 - 8:30am, so set your VCR's![/quote]
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Fri 30/09/2005 14:04
- Location: Christchurch, NZ
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
Re: Did Anyone See?
Hi Richard,Weathermad wrote:Hi Geoff,
Welcome aboard....your partner on your website looks very familiar...haha!
Yes, I gather you work at the same "institution" as Nettie!
I just checked my VCR, and the Kim Hill program this morning was NOT about the weather. I had the time right, but the TVOne website had no program details as to who was the guest. So sorry about that.
Anyway, must get off the phone and enjoy the Foehn instead!
Regards, Kiwi Geoff
http://www.geocities.com/kiwi_36_nz/
http://www.geocities.com/kiwi_36_nz/
-
- Posts: 12305
- Joined: Mon 10/03/2003 16:30
- Location: West Coast Road, Manukau Peninsula, North Island
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
- Willoughby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4433
- Joined: Sat 14/06/2003 16:18
- Location: Darwin, Australia: Storm city
- Has thanked: 264 times
- Been thanked: 288 times
- Contact:
Re: Did Anyone See?
Me rambling a bit but, I like the dutch old way of calling 'Nieuw Zeeland', New Sealand. If translated properly from dutch to english, that would actually be our country name. Tasman named NZ after the southwestern dutch province of Zeeland, characterised by many islands. There must've been one dumb translator back in history, or they just preferred Zealand upposed to Sealand.Kiwi Geoff wrote: Anyway, must get off the phone and enjoy the Foehn instead!
Sorry for this random post lol
-
- Posts: 3745
- Joined: Sat 24/01/2004 16:56
- Location: Wellington
- Has thanked: 188 times
- Been thanked: 123 times
NIWA's September summary is finally out:
http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncc/cs/0509sum.pdf
(or the shorter summary at http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncc/cs/mclimsum_05_09)
Apart from the obvious items (eg midmonth snow event) there was the slightly unusual situation for Christchurch of being quite dry yet very cloudy - the run of foggy/cloudy days in the first half saw to that.
http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncc/cs/0509sum.pdf
(or the shorter summary at http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncc/cs/mclimsum_05_09)
Apart from the obvious items (eg midmonth snow event) there was the slightly unusual situation for Christchurch of being quite dry yet very cloudy - the run of foggy/cloudy days in the first half saw to that.
-
- Posts: 18489
- Joined: Wed 12/03/2003 22:08
- Location: Raukapuka Geraldine
- Has thanked: 1769 times
- Been thanked: 1412 times
JohnGaulRWood wrote:NIWA's September summary is finally out:
http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncc/cs/0509sum.pdf
(or the shorter summary at http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncc/cs/mclimsum_05_09)
Apart from the obvious items (eg midmonth snow event) there was the slightly unusual situation for Christchurch of being quite dry yet very cloudy - the run of foggy/cloudy days in the first half saw to that.
NZTS
Thanks for that Mr. Wood
Didn't have to get the binnoculars out to read the origional report from off NIWA's official website
Incidentally, why does NIWA leave the R off their insignia?
It's the National Institute of Weather and Atmospheric Research?
Should be NIWAR???
-
- Posts: 2363
- Joined: Sun 18/01/2004 18:59
- Location: Omarama
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
I think they should all have guns.RWood wrote:In fact, it was NIWAR in the early days, to about 1990 I think. But with the political conflicts over SOEs (*) at the time many thought it sounded too "warlike", so they dropped the "R"!
(*) When they split the old Service in two, some scientists left of course.
-
- Posts: 462
- Joined: Tue 18/03/2003 18:00
- Location: Havelock North, New Zealand
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
A question. How are average temperatures calculated? When I started taking an interest in weather, the average was calculated from the daily max and min temps. I suspect that in today's computer age, the average could be calculated from hourly, or 3-hourly readings. This could account for some of the supposed rise in temperatures.
Just a thought from a sceptic.
Just a thought from a sceptic.
- TonyT
- Moderator
- Posts: 2883
- Joined: Thu 08/05/2003 11:09
- Location: Amberley, North Canterbury
- Has thanked: 354 times
- Been thanked: 1156 times
I think I read somewhere that averages from 24 hourly readings are higher than from max/min because in most parts of the world the night time minimum is a narrow dip in the graph, while the daytime peak is broader (in other words, more of the hours of the day are near to the maximum reading, than are near to the minimum reading).
IMHO, its impossible to be sceptical about climate change.
IMHO, the evidence of a warming trend in many parts of the world is pretty compelling and leaves little room for scepticism either.
IMHO, there is some small room for scepticism about what is causing this warming trend and how exceptional it is in the broader context of climate change over the millenia.
IMHO, there is considerable room for scepticism about what will happen to the climate in the near to mid future, particularly at the local and regional level.
Finally, IMHO there is huge uncertainty about the consequences of future climate change.
Perhaps this all belongs in a different thread...
IMHO, its impossible to be sceptical about climate change.
IMHO, the evidence of a warming trend in many parts of the world is pretty compelling and leaves little room for scepticism either.
IMHO, there is some small room for scepticism about what is causing this warming trend and how exceptional it is in the broader context of climate change over the millenia.
IMHO, there is considerable room for scepticism about what will happen to the climate in the near to mid future, particularly at the local and regional level.
Finally, IMHO there is huge uncertainty about the consequences of future climate change.
Perhaps this all belongs in a different thread...
-
- Posts: 12305
- Joined: Mon 10/03/2003 16:30
- Location: West Coast Road, Manukau Peninsula, North Island
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 3745
- Joined: Sat 24/01/2004 16:56
- Location: Wellington
- Has thanked: 188 times
- Been thanked: 123 times
Without getting into the tedium of long arguments, I would draw people's attention to some of these stories as a "starter set":
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/ear ... ate-change
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/ear ... ate-change
- Storm Struck
- Posts: 4871
- Joined: Wed 17/11/2004 21:25
- Location: Belfast Christchurch
- Has thanked: 23 times
- Been thanked: 388 times
-
- Posts: 2363
- Joined: Sun 18/01/2004 18:59
- Location: Omarama
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Is it happening? Probably.TonyT wrote:I think I read somewhere that averages from 24 hourly readings are higher than from max/min because in most parts of the world the night time minimum is a narrow dip in the graph, while the daytime peak is broader (in other words, more of the hours of the day are near to the maximum reading, than are near to the minimum reading).
IMHO, its impossible to be sceptical about climate change.
IMHO, the evidence of a warming trend in many parts of the world is pretty compelling and leaves little room for scepticism either.
IMHO, there is some small room for scepticism about what is causing this warming trend and how exceptional it is in the broader context of climate change over the millenia.
IMHO, there is considerable room for scepticism about what will happen to the climate in the near to mid future, particularly at the local and regional level.
Finally, IMHO there is huge uncertainty about the consequences of future climate change.
Perhaps this all belongs in a different thread...
Are humans responsible for it? Possibly.
Has it ever happened before? Almost certainly, going by long-term fossil and climatological evidence.
As far as glaciologists are concerned, the Earth is still in the tail-end throes of an Ice-Age. Apparently the Earth doesn't normally have lots of ice (The Arctic, Antarctica, glaciers, etc)... Normally (as in for the vast majority of geologic history) the Earth had a tropical climate.
Is there a vast and juicy gravy-train that has been eagerly boarded by droves of "researchers" from both the pro- and anti- camp? You betcha.
Will GW wipe out humanity? Dunno, and it doesn't really matter in the long term, does it?
Just In My Humble Opinion.
-
- Posts: 3745
- Joined: Sat 24/01/2004 16:56
- Location: Wellington
- Has thanked: 188 times
- Been thanked: 123 times
This is the first part of an article from Scientific American, March 2005.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID ... 414B7F0000
In essence it suggests that human activity has for a lengthy period been forestalling the cooling that should have been occurring as part of a 20,000 year cycle (the toplike motion of the earth that goes thru' a 20,000-year "nodding" round). There's little comfort in the suggestion that there may be a large rise in temperature, followed by an even worse fall when the methane & CO2 effects have been played out.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID ... 414B7F0000
In essence it suggests that human activity has for a lengthy period been forestalling the cooling that should have been occurring as part of a 20,000 year cycle (the toplike motion of the earth that goes thru' a 20,000-year "nodding" round). There's little comfort in the suggestion that there may be a large rise in temperature, followed by an even worse fall when the methane & CO2 effects have been played out.
-
- Posts: 3745
- Joined: Sat 24/01/2004 16:56
- Location: Wellington
- Has thanked: 188 times
- Been thanked: 123 times
This is the first part of an article from Scientific American, March 2005.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID ... 414B7F0000
In essence it suggests that human activity has for a lengthy period been forestalling the cooling that should have been occurring as part of a 20,000 year cycle (the toplike motion of the earth that goes thru' a 20,000-year "nodding" round). There's little comfort in the suggestion that there may be a large rise in temperature, followed by an even worse fall when the methane & CO2 effects have been played out.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID ... 414B7F0000
In essence it suggests that human activity has for a lengthy period been forestalling the cooling that should have been occurring as part of a 20,000 year cycle (the toplike motion of the earth that goes thru' a 20,000-year "nodding" round). There's little comfort in the suggestion that there may be a large rise in temperature, followed by an even worse fall when the methane & CO2 effects have been played out.