On Nov 18, 7:22*am, "Joe Whyte" wrote:
"Neo" *wrote in message

...

HI Neo.

You said this on Nov 13th when you opened this discussion with the
title; "The Models will all change their long term ideas in the next 3
to 4 days":

Neo

Paul has established himself as the newsgroup's resident "debunker" or, as
some might even put it, the thought police! He raised very valid points
himself about the integrity or credibility of certain forecasters who you
will see mentioned now and again on this newsgroup. These are the amateur
money-making headline spinners who, when they're wrong, will never admit to
it. These "charlatan" forecasters are legends in their own mind and their
forecast accuracy is dubious except to themselves.

I don't think you're in that category and, having only started posting to
this newsgroup, I think you should be given the time and place to express
your thoughts and establish your own credentials further before what is
basically now seen as a judgement.

I wouldn't be brave enough, or skilled enough, to try and forecast anything
beyond the 5-day limit myself. When others do I hope to see tat they will
expand on their thoughts; give clear reasoning and when or if things go awry
that they can acknowledge that an learn from it.

Carry on posting however be prepared for what will hopefully be constructive
criticism (or praise). That's how it should be I imagine.

Good luck Neo.

Dawlish isn't a debunker. He is just hard of reading.
The OP posted that the models would change "in a few days", Dawlish
hasn't quite realised that a model isn't actual weather.

Or maybe there is something in the way that he puts things that I
missed?

Not being interested in upper air models or long range computer
runs...
Or anything Dawlish has to say.