On Feb 16, 8:36*pm, Adam Lea wrote:
On 16/02/11 15:09, Stephen Davenport wrote:





On Feb 16, 2:46 pm, *wrote:
On Feb 16, 2:25 pm, Stephen *wrote:

On Feb 15, 6:20 pm, *wrote:

There aren't any like for like stats at 10 days. Which "forecasting
houses" (whatever they are) produce those stats? You've just made that
up, haven't you? If there are stats; link to them. I'd be really
interested to see them, but there aren't any at 10 days, which is why
I know you've just made that up.

Are you suggesting that forecasting companies do not perform regular
verification of 10-day (indeed all) forecasts? I'd be very surprised
if that were the case.

Stephen.

It's not made public and therefore it's impossible to verify.

Why would verifications be made public? Except the Met Office's,
perhaps.

Stephen.

1. To demonstrate the skill of their forecasts to the public.

2. To demonstrate that they have nothing to hide by being open with
their forecast skill.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Absolutely correct. One thing I have always been is open and honest. I
always expose every single forecast I iussue to scrutiny - in fact, I
welcome it (though the scrutiny tends to surround the incorrect ones!).