will do,

many thanks.

Mike

the subhuman you converse with is a resident troll
banned from all weather forums on the internet

1500+ posts a month on hundreds of groups calling everyone a nutter,
denier, racist

google doesnt lie

https://groups.google.com/groups/sea...er&sitesearch=


On 18/11/2011 8:29 AM, Dawlish wrote:
On Nov 18, 7:22 am, "Joe wrote:
"Neo" wrote in message

...

HI Neo.

You said this on Nov 13th when you opened this discussion with the
title; "The Models will all change their long term ideas in the next 3
to 4 days":

Neo

Paul has established himself as the newsgroup's resident "debunker" or, as
some might even put it, the thought police! He raised very valid points
himself about the integrity or credibility of certain forecasters who you
will see mentioned now and again on this newsgroup. These are the amateur
money-making headline spinners who, when they're wrong, will never admit to
it. These "charlatan" forecasters are legends in their own mind and their
forecast accuracy is dubious except to themselves.

I don't think you're in that category and, having only started posting to
this newsgroup, I think you should be given the time and place to express
your thoughts and establish your own credentials further before what is
basically now seen as a judgement.

I wouldn't be brave enough, or skilled enough, to try and forecast anything
beyond the 5-day limit myself. When others do I hope to see tat they will
expand on their thoughts; give clear reasoning and when or if things go awry
that they can acknowledge that an learn from it.

Carry on posting however be prepared for what will hopefully be constructive
criticism (or praise). That's how it should be I imagine.

Good luck Neo.

Joe

"debunker", heh. I've been called a lot worse! *)) That's how it
will be. Joe's right in many ways. I base forecasting capability of
outcome success and I never judge a forecast by what is written in it;
no matter how believable it sounds. When someone foecasts something
and it doesn't happen, oddly, I doubt the skill of the forecaster and
I monitor others' forecasts. If a forecast goes wrong, I like the
forecaster to admit that and explain why. Your discussion thread said
the models would change to show very different conditions within 3-4
days, from 13th Nov, implying colder conditions would establish
themselves within a 16-day period i.e. before the end of November.
They haven't changed at all and continue to show fairly mild weather.
Instead instead of offering an explanation, you've just re-forecast
the establishment of any cold back into December and started to give
me a little grief instead.

Monitoring others' forecasts doesn't seem to go down well, for some
reason. I don't think anyone likes having their forecasts monitored,
they'd generally rather write them, often full of meteorological
language, but the proposed reasons seldom (and I mean seldom) have the
positive (and usually cold) outcome they have proposed. That can lead
to the forecaster turning a little sour when I say they were wrong and
ask them why.

If you wish to forecast, then achieve accuracy and I'll be the first
to praise; promise. The regular posters know me well here and my
google profile will give you all the information you need. Perhaps
you'd like to introduce yourself and tell the source of your
"information", as all we know about you is your pseudonym. I live in
Dawlish, hence my name and my name is Paul. Good luck Neo.

LOL!
i just rang ofsted and they couldnt give me 10 day T240 forecast and
hung up on me
im saying this with 80% accuracy

On 18/11/2011 8:45 AM, Eskimo Will wrote:


===============================

Neo, just some points. (Dawlish) Paul does NOT work in the Met Office in
Exeter nor for any other weather institution. He has no formal
qualifications in weather forecasting just an interest. His day job,
FWIW, is that he is a private Ofsted Consultant. He has a web site which
you can find easily via Google using "paul garvey ofsted consultant" if
you really wish to find out more. Keep posting, it's always interesting
to see other points of view.

Cheers,

Will

On Nov 18, 9:39*pm, The Texican wrote:
LOL!
i just rang ofsted and they couldnt give me 10 day T240 forecast and
hung up on me
im saying this with 80% accuracy

On 18/11/2011 8:45 AM, Eskimo Will wrote:









===============================

Neo, just some points. (Dawlish) Paul does NOT work in the Met Office in
Exeter nor for any other weather institution. He has no formal
qualifications in weather forecasting just an interest. His day job,
FWIW, is that he is a private Ofsted Consultant. He has a web site which
you can find easily via Google using "paul garvey ofsted consultant" if
you really wish to find out more. Keep posting, it's always interesting
to see other points of view.

Cheers,

Will

It ain't changing til after Christmas.

Keith (Southend)

you seem to know a lot of stuff
got any fags on you

On 18/11/2011 2:22 AM, Jim Kewley wrote:
In message , The Texican
writes
i did warn you with a troll alert
please place "it" in your ignore or killfile

keep posting, much appreciated neo...dont let shrek run you off this
newsgroup




And you certainly know a troll when it appears Mr KY.

"Eskimo Will" wrote in message
...

Neo, just some points. (Dawlish) Paul does NOT work in the Met Office in
Exeter nor for any other weather institution. He has no formal
qualifications in weather forecasting just an interest. His day job, FWIW,
is that he is a private Ofsted Consultant. He has a web site which you can
find easily via Google using "paul garvey ofsted consultant" if you really
wish to find out more. Keep posting, it's always interesting to see other
points of view.

I really do hope than in these cash-strapped times, not too much taxpayers'
money is being spent by schools trying to get through their Ofsted
inspections!
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

On Nov 19, 8:56*am, "Col" wrote:
"Eskimo Will" wrote in message

...
*

Neo, just some points. (Dawlish) Paul does NOT work in the Met Office in
Exeter nor for any other weather institution. He has no formal
qualifications in weather forecasting just an interest. His day job, FWIW,
is that he is a private Ofsted Consultant. He has a web site which you can
find easily via Google using "paul garvey ofsted consultant" if you really
wish to find out more. Keep posting, it's always interesting to see other
points of view.

I really do hope than in these cash-strapped times, not too much taxpayers'
money is being spent by schools trying to get through their Ofsted
inspections!
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

email me and I'll tell you all about it!

On 18/11/11 19:29, John Hall wrote:
In ,
Eskimo writes:
"John wrote in message
...
It's surprising how worked up scientists can get.)

Only when people are being stupid! :-)

But many scientists seem to define stupid as "anyone who doesn't agree
with me". (I'm not anti-scientist BTW. I was one myself, after a
fashion.)

No they don't, such an attitude would fly completely in the face of the
scientific method.

On Nov 19, 8:56*am, "Col" wrote:

I really do hope than in these cash-strapped times, not too much taxpayers'
money is being spent by schools trying to get through their Ofsted
inspections!
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

Your hopes are not being realised Col,
Nice work if you can get it: £400 a day http://www.weatheroakinspections.co.uk/consultancy.htm
No wonder these people can bugger off to the states for the summer!
I hope little Harry's school can afford new books this year

But is it working? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...t-working.html
Jobs for the boys anyone!
Sean

In article ,
Adam Lea writes:
On 18/11/11 19:29, John Hall wrote:
In ,
Eskimo writes:
"John wrote in message
...
It's surprising how worked up scientists can get.)

Only when people are being stupid! :-)

But many scientists seem to define stupid as "anyone who doesn't agree
with me". (I'm not anti-scientist BTW. I was one myself, after a
fashion.)

No they don't, such an attitude would fly completely in the face of
the scientific method.

Indeed it would, but scientists are human beings and as such are liable
to have human failings. Saying "many" was perhaps a bit unfair, but I've
seen exchanges in the letters pages of scientific journals that, if they
had occurred in a newsgroup, would have been described as flame wars.
--
John Hall
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism
by those who have not got it."
George Bernard Shaw