On Feb 24, 9:27*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On 24 Feb, 04:54, "jbm" wrote:

"Weatherlawyer" wrote in message

....

When the High over Greenland moves away or disappears. Have you not
been paying me any attention at all?

And when, pray, will that be? Sometime this year, maybe?

I have not tried to link my recent endeavours to the times of the
phase of the moon. But it does seem that some more research along the
lines I have been following will help.

The fact is that the times of the phases this year are very difficult
for me to command. The same was true of last year.

When the minutes in the times divide the hour by three (times such as
those at 20 past or to the hour) the chances of getting a clear hit on
intense lows of inflated highs is slim (for me, at the moment.)

(What is the term for high highs by the way. "Building" is for waxing
anticyclones where "deepening" is for Lows but what is the fatty
accompliance? Extensive? Can't be.)

When the time is around the 2nd, 4th, 8th or 10th ~hour, that too
means flaccid spells in the North Atlantic. I have yet to look at the
co-incidents for Greenland Highs of any nature or maturity.

There is nothing to stop anyone else (apart from Dawlish) from looking
at it themselves.

Leeds Uni has an extensive archive of charts for 2007 and 8 if anyone
wishes to take a load:http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/

The Canucks also house a good archive (of the Northern hemisphere no
less) no link for that at the moment though.

The USA has stupendous resources (for the USA only of course) but
since a huge amount of our weather comes from there it is still
useful.

Going a little away from the topic of course. But just in case there
really are any bods on here that are interested in getting an
education not strangled at birth by reliance on constupiders.

No apologies for the near rant but really!

Thank you for metioning me and no-one else. The reason for that is
that this particular piece of monitoring gets under your skin.

*14% success over 8 forecasts over a 4 month period in 2009*.

No matter how much you'd like someone, anyone, to believe you, your
ideas simply don't work. The only way to judge any forecaster is by
outcome success over time. Your forecasting success, quite simply, is
no good.

Now be a good W; change Jim's thread title back to what it was and go
and sit on the naughty step for changing it in the first place.