On Friday, 17 February 2017 04:24:17 UTC, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Thursday, 16 February 2017 14:38:54 UTC, wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 February 2017 18:03:20 UTC, Col wrote:
On 15/02/2017 06:23, wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 February 2017 23:21:26 UTC, Weatherlawyer wrote:

'dawlish'

Back on the obsession.

You are are just as obsessed as he is by commenting on it every time.

--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl
Snow videos:
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3QvmL4UWBmHFMKWiwYm_gg

And I always will. 😂😂😂 Every single time the idiot refers to me in a post.

Most of us rather like Weatherlawyer despite his various eccentricities, and tend to leave him alone. You failed to pick this up when you joined even when it was gently pointed out to you. It's obvious to most of us but too subtle for you. You just got him completely wrong and eventually he became uncharacteristically aggressive. You managed to bring out the worst in both him and many others, including me. I'd say you've got a social IQ of about -6 and will never achieve anything where you are on an equal footing with others.

Tudor Hughes

I always enjoyed banter that tended to go OTT but that was because it usually tended to get seriously funny. I got lost in dealing with Dawlish's trolling because I didn't realies that not ony had he no imagination but he wasa a compulsivestalker. When you come across an Alex Jones type who just can't help himself for anyone's good you can take it or leave it.

If something is on the ball sooner or later it will become well accepted even if it remain alternative unlit it is too late to stop it and the point is mooted in history.

I came to this group wit certain undeveloped apostate ideas about tidal theory. I could see where everyone had been mislead by the shorthanded explanations. And how they had eagerly handed the problem over to experts who were doing nothing about it.

I tried reading Newton knowing that to find out where a branch of belief system had gone wrong one would have to analyse where the error came from. Not understanding maths I immediately dropped onto his least squares idea as the root of the problem in that you can't square a circle.

The modern concept would be the butterfly effect of floating points (e.g. getting 2x2 to equal five in a computer.) I had already developed the singularities chronology before I got here ad was merely looking for a way to improve it.

Also in my research I had noticed two things that always seemed to occur with tragedies. The problems were exacerbated by the weather. And there is always a blocking Low before a disastrous earthquake.Something no expert on here has ever willingly conceded.

I learned rapidly that the warm front unwrapped and disappeared from the model runs with each large quake and thus began to make forecasts about them to the annoyance of everyone here i just couldn't get off that horse.

From Wikipedia:

Control theory is an engineering method that deals with the behavior of dynamical systems with inputs, and how their behavior is modified by feedback.

The usual objective of control theory is to control a system, often called the plant, so its output follows a desired control signal, called the reference, which may be a fixed or changing value.

To do this a controller is designed, which monitors the output and compares it with the reference.

The difference between actual and desired output, called the error signal, is applied as feedback to the input of the system, to bring the actual output closer to the reference.

Some topics studied in control theory are stability (whether the output will converge to the reference value or oscillate about it), controllability and observability.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_theory

I had latched onto where weather models go wrong; in effect their butterfly/floating point problem. Because I had an intimate grasp of lunar theory's place in this, I could see where it was likely to go wrong and often they did but not necessarily the way I felt they should.

My main problem is that I was a spiteful aggressive. I just lumped all criticism as dawlish in intent. Mostly because it has been, more or less. I had had no idea how important Globalls had become to the non dissenting.

Apparently it had completely taken over terrestrial physics regardless of anything the so called experts on here (didn't) say about it. I don't have any time for monkeys. Personally I was glad when they were all led off to the new plaice and it only annoyed me that some old stalwarts stayed to paper their **** on the walls.

Endlessly pasting ****e will not improve model theory. Nor will it bring world peace.