On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 14:34:01 -0000, "Alastair McDonald"
k wrote:


"martin rowley" wrote in message
...

"Scott Whitehead" wrote in message
om...
I don't know how he has arrived at these odds but at least they're
better than his normal 50:50 heads its mild, tails its cold methods.

To be fair to him he (The Met Office) must put a lot of work into
these trend forecasts.

... just to clarify, Bill Giles no longer has anything to do with the
Met Office or the BBC.


... He no doubt does, but when we did some casual verification of his
long range forecasts (within NMC as was in Bracknell), the forecasts
were sometimes good, sometimes awful, and often neutral - or written in
such a way as to be all things to all men! In other words, good stuff to
give the troops but not often sound. If it hadn't the name 'Bill Giles,
OBE' attached, I doubt anyone would have taken any notice.

Martin.

How can you verify a forecast like that? 60% / 40% is very like "Heads
I win. Tails you loose." Last night's TV program said that the 'String
Theory' was not science (only philosophy) because it could not be
tested. Can't you say the same of the Giles' forecast?

String theory is a model postulated to describe more accurately the fabric of
the universe. Can't see how Bill's unashamedly publicity-seeking pronouncements
can be quoted in the same paragraph.

JPG


Cheers, Alastair.