Jump to content
Problems logging in? ×
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?

AtlanticFlamethrower

Members
  • Posts

    1,747
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by AtlanticFlamethrower

  1. When the time is right the research will be written up for a scientific journal. Please stop trolling this thread with your pompous assertions as to what science is or isn't. He who laughs last laughs hardest. Save yourself for the day. From the look of the models there is no reason to think MB will be exactly right. MurcieBoy, when Roger J Smith first joined this forum many years ago his first threads were greeted with more indignation than yours have been. Hard to believe it's worse than you are getting but it was for this reason: in contrast with you, Roger faced questioning from almost everyone: "laymen" interested in learning meteorology as well as serious amateur and professional meteorologists. That must have been especially galling for Roger, because people like me knew barely anything about meteorology and we were passing judgement over Roger who understood both meteorological science and the method he invented himself. Perhaps we did that because we came to netweather to learn something about traditional meteorology (which the newbies hadn't done by then). Either way, today there is a much larger pool of readers who are willing to explore alternative theories. BTW: I think I speak for many when I say I'm willing to take you (and Roger) at your word(s) that your approach is scientific, and is intended for publication in a peer-reviewed science journal. If I thought you were a hoaxer I could easily ignore the thread. 18z... again similar to your synoptic high pressure / low pressure pattern - broadly the theme is still supported. But as far as a weather forecast for a "Storm" it would fail because the high is too dominant, too far north and east, and there is no wind. Perhaps things will shift south and west by the day
  2. 18z again shows MB's pattern for Feb 3rd which would be impressive if that verifies but the detail of the forecast - namely it being windy - doesn't look close to being accurate at this stage.
  3. Not a bad 18z GFS for MB. That's the new closest yet.
  4. I'm not so much interested in the details as the pattern - not at this stage anyway. 00z is closest yet. Shows high to West of the British Isles and a northerly for the first week in February.
  5. 18z GFS If this set-up occurred I'd consider MB's forecast useful, although next time I'd be wary about taking the details seriously as these winds wouldn't be anything exceptional. Still FI though.
  6. His first forecast was of the unspectacular variety.
  7. Yes, this is true in many areas of life and when there is a fat middle class willing to pay more taxes, because they do believe everything they read in the media, these schemes can get really impressively pointless. It's not the thread to bring up examples. Just a note on the 12z - nothing in FI. Yet, blocks have a tendency to persist longer than forecast. Could it possibly last until the end of the month and end with this Great Storm? I think by this weekend we'll have an idea which way this is going.
  8. Great post by RJS. Self-publish a textbook to make your work more accessible. Stop trying to appeal to those who are already getting a salary by being fake. Pitch for the students who are still willing to learn. Announce it like it's a done deal. As for MB's forecast, 12z and 18z today give no clue about the Great North Sea Storm (if it's going to happen).
  9. This is science in action, folks. A great learning opportunity for younger readers. Notice that MB hasn't decided his theory is right. This is the correct scientific method. Scientists don't decide beforehand whether something is right and wrong and look for data to confirm it. An hypothesis, in this case MB's forecast method, is tested against data, that is, the reality of our weather. If it holds up to repeated testing the idea is then considered useful for further research into this reality. It is because MB doesn't assume his method is correct that he is full of doubts. This may appear at odds to the specificness of the forecast but if you think about it that makes sense. The forecast needs to be specific because the more specific it is the more MB can learn about how to improve his method, which is not assumed to be correct. That's how science goes. It is why a biochemist pipettes a drop of virus into a culture that contains ingredients for a vaccine and also into one that does not. Surely the biochemist has already done a lot of work to get a vaccine and doesn't need to observe the virus grow in unvaccinated petri-dish? No. The chemist tests with the vaccine and without to observe differences that may improve the method, which is not assumed to be correct. (Sorry to virologists out there that this example is very simplified caricature of what actually happens).
  10. Some people have forgotten making forecasts is fun. We can decide whether MB is "just guessing" later. Even if he is, why not join the fun and hope he gets it right again and again? 12z 31 Jan looks a bit familiar.
  11. This is my view. On a forum like this fun is the first priority. PhDs matter if MB gets to the stage he wants to publish in an academic journal. Until then these forecasts are for everyone, for whom it's just a bit of fun... and maybe more if he gets another direct hit.
  12. If MB has a database of patterns from 1 billion years ago, or from Jupiter, it wouldn't predict anything. The method doesn't have to suggest the cause of the weather is also the cause of geological activity. The historical patterns in MB's database obviously depend on the current configuration of the continents. The method hasn't been tested after major volcanic activity so we don't know whether the prediction is unaffected. The factors biasing one particular outcome are obviously unaffected. We all are skeptical. Nobody accepts unconditionally without evidence. That's what testing is for. MB should be encouraged, even by skeptics. It would be cool if he has discovered something.
  13. Then they ask for millions and millions more tax payer's money to do it better next time. What price failure? There is no failure... at the Met O everyone's a winner, or it seems like it.
  14. This snipped reposted from this site. If you want to read what Piers Corbyn said, kindly follow the link. http://autonomousmind.wordpress.com/
  15. We shouldn't really pester MB with questions until this forecast has been tested. There's not much to say, other than: is it going to happen? The idea the weather system is chaotic and exact patterns impossible to predict weeks ahead of time is current orthodoxy. A lot of highly-paid people and expensive machines proceed on the basis this is so. This way of forecasting is being challenged. I'm so glad we have posters here on Netweather who give space, time and respect to people trying out alternative forecasts that this "revolution" in forecasting could be said to begin here. In the end, who is right won't be down to who has the better discussion technique but how well the predictions verify. The truth might be somewhere in between: the weather may be more chaotic than pattern/observation forecasters realise but less chaotic and more predictable than traditional number-crunch forecasters have supposed.
  16. All very interesting. It would be fun if you made an appearance with the other forecasters in the Model Discussion thread every now and then this winter, if only a short note on what you expect to occur next. They're use to posters who take a variety of approaches so I'm sure they won't bite - you might even be thought of as normal :D
  17. Welcome to Netweather. I'm going to add you to the large list of frequent forecasters I check out on the forum. I think your youtube videos are a great way to present your forecasts! Perhaps others could learn to do this... one tip though, I find reading the words hard when the music in the background is a song that has spoken words, so I had to turn the music off. Is it possible to embed youtube videos? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rc0GDiGJkJE
  18. That is fairly remarkable or lucky. Looks like his main errors are the exact position of the low and high pressures being 24 hours out (26th looks like it will match up better than 25th) and the high pressure that is much much lower than he expected. Also he did not predict the expected ice day - his temps were as high as 7C in some places. He would seem to be getting the gales in the NW islands right. He's done enough to keep people interested in his forecasts but certainly he can learn a lot more to make them more accurate. Merry Christmas everyone.
  19. Why don't we stop spending billions adapting to global warming and instead spend some of it on preparedness for cold winters?
  20. There doesn't appear to be any support for his December predictions from any of the models at the moment. Maybe he has some refining to do on his model.
  21. I'd say. For the first half of the month I worried my guess was far too low. For the second half of the month I'm worrying my guess is far too high.
  22. This might also be for another thread but I notice the below image of seasonal model output and your analogue basket here are pretty similar. The set up doesn't rule out snowy cold snaps, but I'm getting the impression of a consensus from multiple sources that overall the UK winter should not be as cold as last year.
×
×
  • Create New...