On Jun 7, 10:31*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:
From: http://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/astron.../data-services...
31st May @ 03:22 just ended.
this one the 7th June @ 18:12 has just started and will end
15th June or thereabout, with the phase @ 22:15
Now the thing is, if there was a strong positive in the North Atlantic
there would be a hurricane in it for this phase. With the oscillation
positive in the North Pacific there is more likely going to be
convergence in that ocean. Maybe off Mexico.
Maybe more strong earthquakes near the Isthmus of Panama.
Is that actually a forecast of strong earthquakes in an area? If so,
what's the timespan in which they are likely to occur, define "near"
and what do you mean by "strong".
The last spell should have been thundery but the thing turned into a
real sunny one at first, going downhill on Saturday as the next spell
came along.
Why wasn't it thundery? Where wasn't it thundery? This was obviously a
wrong forecast. and it certainly looks like a forecast from your
initial post in 03:22, base on this; "It's a thundery spell with knobs
on"
So here we are once again with a pattern that should be cool, dull,
overcast and not particularly wet.
Is that some kind of forecast??
It has rained continually, isn't that cold and has been completely
overcast. And the spell has hardly started yet. This could be fun.
Where has it rained continually?? Was your initial forecast wrong
then?
Looks pretty negative in the North Atlantic to me with low Highs and
high Lows:
What on earth are the definitions of low highs and high lows?
That's a "seismic convergence" then.
You've made that phrase up, haven't you? it's just two words sat next
to each other that doesn't actually mean anything isn't it?
Can you see how many regard this as gobbledygook? There could be
another two incorrect forecasts in there, but it is almost impossible
to determine when you've actually forecast anything - unless of
course you come back to tell us that somewhere in the midst of one of
your impenetrable posts you actually did forecast it. Come on W. Be
clear about the forecasting. Indeed, be honest about it. Analyse your
successes AND mistakes and give reasons for each; finally, produce
some kind of verification stats. Then you'd have a lot more people
taking you seriously.