wrote in message
oups.com...
Quite a surprise to hear her doing the Radio 4 forecasts Saturday
morning.

She sounded a little nervous. I presume it's not someone else with
the
same name (a daughter perhaps?)

.... same person Jack: she's been back some time on tv but only on the
'twilight' channels / slots.

Martin.

--
FAQ & Glossary for uk.sci.weather at:-
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/booty.weather/uswfaqfr.htm
and
http://booty.org.uk/booty.weather/metindex.htm

Quite a surprise to hear her doing the Radio 4 forecasts Saturday
morning.

She sounded a little nervous. I presume it's not someone else with the
same name (a daughter perhaps?)

Jack

In article .com,
writes:
Quite a surprise to hear her doing the Radio 4 forecasts Saturday
morning.

She's done a few others within the last week or two.

She sounded a little nervous.

Still a lot clearer than most of the R4 forecasters manage, though.

I presume it's not someone else with the
same name (a daughter perhaps?)

I suspect that Suzanne might be a little miffed at the implication that
her daughter could be old enough for that.
--
John Hall
"Acting is merely the art of keeping a large group of people
from coughing."
Sir Ralph Richardson (1902-83)

I suspect that Suzanne might be a little miffed at the implication that
her daughter could be old enough for that.

Ah yes you are so right. I had always thought of her father Bobby as
being much older than me. He is in fact only one year older. So
apolgies to Ms Charlton.

Jack

"John Hall" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
writes:
Quite a surprise to hear her doing the Radio 4 forecasts Saturday
morning.

She's done a few others within the last week or two.

She sounded a little nervous.

Still a lot clearer than most of the R4 forecasters manage, though.

She is very concise and comes across far better than some of the more recent
additions to the team who are obsessed with temperature despite the fact it
is staring the viewer in the face. They repeat the term "degrees Celsius"
about 20 times and waste time giving Fahrenheit conversions.

More useful would be to inform us that we are stuck in a trough and that the
rest of May is going to be a complete mediocre wash-out...

David Haggas wrote:
They repeat the term "degrees Celsius"
about 20 times and waste time giving Fahrenheit conversions.



Waste time giving Fahrenheit conversions?

I have been told many times that people liked my radio broadcasts
specifically *because* I gave Fahrenheit conversions. Mind you, I never
found out the average age of the listeners, but if that is what the
majority want - then that is what they get.

wrote in message
ups.com...

David Haggas wrote:
They repeat the term "degrees Celsius"
about 20 times and waste time giving Fahrenheit conversions.



Waste time giving Fahrenheit conversions?

I have been told many times that people liked my radio broadcasts
specifically *because* I gave Fahrenheit conversions. Mind you, I never
found out the average age of the listeners, but if that is what the
majority want - then that is what they get.


Well I can appreciate that there is a vocal minority. I like the style of
Phil Avery who just says "temperatures in the range 15 to 17". Most people
know exactly what that means without a mention of degrees, Celsius or
Fahrenheit.

David

wrote:


David Haggas wrote:
They repeat the term "degrees Celsius"
about 20 times and waste time giving Fahrenheit conversions.



Waste time giving Fahrenheit conversions?

I have been told many times that people liked my radio broadcasts
specifically *because* I gave Fahrenheit conversions. Mind you, I never
found out the average age of the listeners, but if that is what the
majority want - then that is what they get.

Fahrenheit was dropped some forty years ago so I think everyone should have
got used to Celsius by now. I agree with David that it's a waste of time,
given the little time they're allotted, to give the conversions and to
mention "degrees Celsius". While they're at it, I wish they'd drop the
unnecessary use of "its way" and "their way".


--
Graham Davis
Bracknell

In message , Graham P Davis
writes
wrote:


David Haggas wrote:
They repeat the term "degrees Celsius"
about 20 times and waste time giving Fahrenheit conversions.


Waste time giving Fahrenheit conversions?

I have been told many times that people liked my radio broadcasts
specifically *because* I gave Fahrenheit conversions. Mind you, I never
found out the average age of the listeners, but if that is what the
majority want - then that is what they get.

Fahrenheit was dropped some forty years ago so I think everyone should have
got used to Celsius by now.

"Should". Now there's a word implying that the user knows what's best
for other people.

Funnily enough, there is a point of view that Celsius works better from
about 15 downwards, and Fahrenheit begins to make better sense from
about 70 upwards. While this clearly has no scientific or objective
justification, it does fit the observed behaviour of some people I know.

I agree with David that it's a waste of time,
given the little time they're allotted, to give the conversions and to
mention "degrees Celsius". While they're at it, I wish they'd drop the
unnecessary use of "its way" and "their way".

A centralised change introduced a mere forty years ago is recent enough
to have been cheerfully ignored by much of the population. It is sublime
arrogance to assume that they *will* have "got used to it." The figures
are given for the benefit of the users, not the other way round.

With the general presentation of broadcast forecasts at a level of
vagueness where the reaction to anything 'interesting' is to look at the
charts on Web, saving time by cutting Fahrenheit really wouldn't do much
to help.

--
Peter Thomas

In message , David Haggas
writes

"John Hall" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
writes:
Quite a surprise to hear her doing the Radio 4 forecasts Saturday
morning.

She's done a few others within the last week or two.

She sounded a little nervous.

Still a lot clearer than most of the R4 forecasters manage, though.

She is very concise and comes across far better than some of the more recent
additions to the team who are obsessed with temperature despite the fact it
is staring the viewer in the face. They repeat the term "degrees Celsius"
about 20 times and waste time giving Fahrenheit conversions.


While I take your point about information "staring the view in the face"
I always thought that part of the presentation had to take into account
people with poor eyesight or who are doing something else and just
following the speech.

More useful would be to inform us that we are stuck in a trough and that the
rest of May is going to be a complete mediocre wash-out...



For you maybe, but I'd welcome some more rain. I am always annoyed but
the "hot/dry = good weather" some presenters repeat.
--
Tim
http://www.stopharlownorth.com/