Weather Banter - View Single Post

Keith Dancey · October 12th 05, 12:35 PM posted to uk.sci.weather

In article , "Shaun Pudwell" writes:

That's probably because like everyone else, they don't have a clue what it's
actually going to do.

Sorry to keep harking on, but they must have some idea. As an example, they
(the Met Office) might have said the current ten-year winter/January average
was x, while the current 30-year winter/January average was y.

(That demonstrates something, immediately)

Then their forecast, based on whatever, might be 65% that this winter/January
will be upto (x - 3), 15% that it will be upto (x - 5), 10% worse than (x - 5)
and 10% (x) or better.

The ranges would depend upon the forecast figures, of course, and there may be
be more than four... and they could be tabulated for easy reading... But it
immediately encapsulates the problem and stops wild speculation in the media.

They could update the figures as winter progressed...

That they have *some* idea is demonstrated by their statement that they expect
the (chiefly) January period to be worse than the average *since* a given date.
Otherwise, why else mention the date at all?

Cheers (and I hope you survive the worst without too much fuss:-)

keith

---
Iraq: 6.5 thousand million pounds, 90 UK lives, and counting...
100,000+ civilian casualties, largely of coalition bombing...
London?...