Graham P Davis wrote:
smallbabe wrote:

Well, that's highly typical of the exterior hiding something very
different within, Mr. Hand.

Well done, Paul. Replying to Lawrence's post and calling him Mr Hand.

This has happened before - him mixing me up with someone else. And repeating
his same point ad-infinitum. He has not responded yet to my question of how
does one verify Dartmoor forecasts of snow, hail, sleet, wind speed and
visibility when there are no observations above 400m asl? Nor has he
responded to my assertion that if people did not find my forecasts useful
they would not tell me so and that is a reasonable way of verifying
usefulness? For a forecaster to get people telling him that his forecasts
make a difference and are useful are probably more valuable and meaningful
actually than a percentage success rate, even if that were possible for
Dartmoor. I do take Paul's point that my forecasts are not measured
objectively although I do keep track myself to learn from mistakes but what
is the accuracy of professional forecast providers? I also point out that my
forecasts clearly have a disclaimer and now that the MetO are producing
Dartmoor forecasts I will be pointing my readers to those for daily updates
and for key decision making. You may also note Paul that the Ten Tors will
be getting their forecasts from the MetO so don't worry, the good folk of
Dartmoor do know the difference between a heads-up once a week and a
'proper' forecast service. OK I guess everyone has had enough of this, so
have I, Paul has made his point (5 times) and I don't think we are going to
get any further so that's it from me. I have another weekly update to start
preparing :-)

Cheers,

Will
--