Hello, Tudor!

You are 100% correct from a computer-model point of view. If I used the same or
a similar method to forecast, I would fully agree with you.

But there are other methods of forecasting the weather which give better, and more
reliable results over a longer period of time. In my own method there is no chaos,
no butterflies, no 4 to 5 day limit of success, no ten or more shots at a
forecast until it's correct. In my own case, weather is organized and on time -
and this fact allows me to make forecasts for any time in the future and in the
past.

You should however, form your own opinion, and I advise you to check the
forecasts for yourself against actual conditions (not against another forecast -
it's a waste of time that way) Perhaps we could talk again at a later time.

Cheers, Keith

TudorHgh schrieb:

There are good theoretical reasons for saying that a 20-day forecast of
the positions of synoptic-scale systems is intrinsically impossible, regardless
of the accuracy of the initial observations and the degree of perfection of the
computer model. This is due to the way in which energy is transferred from the
sub-micro scale (inches or less) to the synoptic scale in the atmosphere. In
other words, chaos. Also, more pragmatically, no-one has ever achieved success
on the synoptic scale at this range, even if long-term forecasts of monthly
averages are occasionally useful. So why should anyone take you seriously?

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.