Jump to content

Borei

Members
  • Content Count

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Borei

  1. This is where grammar and punctuation are crucial. Your words could mean two completely opposite sentiments, and I have no idea which. Please clarify.
  2. The GFS 6z ensembles illustrate that the ops run was on the mild side, and overall continue to show temperatures likely on the cold side of normal. How that translates in actuality is another matter, but anyone thinking of switching to a hunt for early warmth is likely to be engaging in a chase even more futile than the long running hunt for cold.
  3. GFS 6z ensembles show a very distinct trend to early spring like conditions through day 10 plus. This trend has gathered pace of the last day or so, and is of course completely contrary to other guidance, but hard to ignore given the notable failure of other guidance this winter in relation to northern blocking.
  4. This is called confirmation bias. You have rationalised every outcome as being a vindication of 'experts'. When I look at MO I see a relative (not total) lack of northern blocking and a resurgence of an active although meridional jet. There is no proven causal link of current synoptics to the much vaunted tele-connective signals. There's a danger here that the science is not challenged because confirmation bias leads to a complacency. I'd like to see a little more self critical analysis by 'experts' of what has gone wrong. Why has the trop response not been forthcoming, or been so
  5. The next potential has been at 300 hours for over a month. Personally I believe neither the models beyond 144 nor those who tell us about tele-connected led macro events. The truth seems to be that our understanding of atmospheric science is still a long way from being able to predict very much into the future. Thus isn't a plague on 'experts' it's just a reality check. The MO thread is a testament to exaggerated claims and eventual frustration. Model output have evolved over the last 24 hours to a much less favorable outlook for U.K. cold. It may change again ........ and
  6. The elephant in the room: Confirmation bias. If there is a cold spell it will be attributed to teleconnections and SSW. If there isn't it will be attributed to the fact that SSWs do not guarantee UK cold. But there will be no causal analysis. It will be taken as a given.
  7. Yes, we've heard about teleconnections for weeks now. The so called 'experts' have talked about the incredibly positive background signals, although they have also pointed out that they don't necessarily guaranteee UK cold. Indeed, presumably it's possible we could end up with unusual warmth? The problem for me is that none of the NWP output shows anything particularly unusual, and we're looking now up to 3 weeks past SSW beginning. There is I think an irrational and almost religious obsession with teleconnections among some. But I suspect that our understanding of such is pro
  8. Yes, and the job of BBC forecasts is to predict at the micro level. They failed and that's the point.
  9. The European Commission undertook a public consultation last year about stopping all clock changes. Public opinion was overwhelmingly in favour of remaining on a single time zone year round (although over 80% of responses were from Germany). The Commussion believes that clock changes damage human health. So the Commission told EU states that it wanted to stop clock changes from October 2019, and states needed to decide what time zone they wanted to be on permanently. EU states have however pushed back, asking for more time to consult and decide. Consequently the Commission's plans
  10. Since I'll be accused of negativity if I post in the Hunt for Cold thread I've turned to here if you don't mind. The fact is that neither the GFS nor EC ensembles show anything resembling a winter nirvana. That whole thread is more about what isn't showing in the models but might in future than it is about model discussion. If people are supposed to get excited over cherry picked charts from one ens member at 360 then so be it. But it looks to me as though the 'expert' group think is that SSW willl deliver something in the future, so any suggestion to the contrary is not permitted e
  11. Yes. The wording suggests the 'change' is during the third week (which is 15th- 21st). Effectively therefore the colder weather is now due during the last third of January. The wording is being manipulated over time to reflect to delay in the cold weather. Or to put it another way, the forecasts reflected a month ago have not verified.
  12. It ends with no northern or even mid lat blocking in sight, and a seemingly increasingly well formed polar vortex. This is the exact opposite of what the tele-connections brigade have been forecasting for a seeming eternity.
  13. Yes. I think what is most annoying is that not just is the trop modelling not indicating any change to the long promised cold, it's actually moving in the opposite direction to high level blocking. There is I think a certain over-confidence among some, including the Met O, about their knowledge of atmospheric modelling and the eventual impact on surface weather. If this long promised cold spell fails to materialise, then I hope it will prompt a re-consideration of what we do (and do not) understand about the atmosphere. Because this will amount to another of the MetO's disastr
  14. There's little point in pretending that the Met O have not pushed back the start of the potential cold. We can see this in black and white by simple time comparison. It is what it is .......... a forecast which may, or may not, be accurate. But let's not kid ourselves that the MetO have some mystical and un-failingly reliable insight into what will actually transpire.
  15. I accept that, but unrealistic interpretation of the model output does not make cold happen, and serves only to mis-lead and disappoint.
  16. I've read pages and pages of hope-casting and analysis about how much better the output is, occasionally how it's now showing the down-welling effects of SSW, and why (although it's still fairly zonal) that's just because of model bias. Yet, on a rational basis, there are still very few signs of northern blocking. It's just not there on current output.
  17. Okay thanks NWS. I think local knowledge and experience is often a better guide than an app. Out of interest, did anyone west of M6 get anything worthwhile out of December?
  18. Which app NWS? I live near Burnley at 220m. My Meto app says rain too, apart from sleet on Tuesday night. I usually ignore it though because it's really really poor in my experience.
  19. Wonder where the greatest risk of being killed by a terrorist lies? In 'civilised' Europe or Alabama? Anyway, the problem with the block being too Far East is one we've seen played out numerous times before. The UK ends up in mildish dross with depressions running into the block and becoming slow moving near or to our west. Plus we'll still have to listen to micro analysis of how the block is 25 miles further west and the GFS is 'correcting' to the ECM/UKMO/ GEM (depending on which is favoured today). Roll on the far away block getting even further away.
  20. Not often driven to post here, but I see a lot of commentary which doesn't fit the evidential body. Although ECM and GEM ops runs consistently churn out a Scandi high of some form which adverts cold upper air, we know from clusters that ECM is split. The GFS suite by contrast virtually unanimously rejects the ECM op offerings, as do MetO, as do many ECM ensemble members. It seems to me that some people have been heavily and irrationally influenced by certain ops runs, probably because they show what we want to see. Consequently every GFS run is dismissed as faulty, or m
  21. A descriptive narrative really would be helpful please.
  22. GFS, in FI, is consistently showing high pressure building to our south and south east - a veritable winter killer. This is consistent with the MetO long ranger.
  23. Borei

    Russia

    Oh - look, I don't think the West has 'full on democracy'. The ability to effect change is very limited (see Brexit), and the amount of real choice offered to voters is minimal. Moreover, the EU is a technocracy not a democracy. So, back to Russia. I agree it's a managed democracy. Opposition is very clearly permitted, but it's also controlled within limits. That doesn't make it not pluralist or not a democracy. Just a different form to the equally flawed version played out in the West. As for the likes of Litvinenko - he was a traitor not a meaningful political figure, and Russian
×
×
  • Create New...