"Richard Dixon" wrote in message
...
On 26 Nov, 11:47, "Martin Rowley"
wrote:

... strictly, his 'phase III' hasn't finished yet (ends 28th
November), but I can't see any signs of .... " and storm with
destructive hurricane force winds at times. Thunder, with tornado
type
events (especially the Midlands and the South). Very heavy sea
swell
and floods likely eg Severn Estuary and South coast. Widespread
damage
of trees, roofs, buildings, high sided vehicles. Travel chaos to
air
sea and road. Exposed buildings in towns near South Coast in danger
... (etc.) "

I suppose he was only *80%* certain...


.... actually, his '80%' refers to the track / areas affected. The
actual forecast (both that put out in the press presentation and on
the detailed forecast that I was lucky (!) enough to see, carries NO
probability marking; it implies that the event WILL happen!

Martin.


--
Martin Rowley
E:
W: booty.org.uk

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 12:08:49 GMT, Martin Rowley wrote in


I suppose he was only *80%* certain...

... actually, his '80%' refers to the track / areas affected. The
actual forecast (both that put out in the press presentation and on
the detailed forecast that I was lucky (!) enough to see, carries NO
probability marking; it implies that the event WILL happen!

He's now extended the time scale to the 2nd December. On this [1] webpage
these words appear:

"The original central highest risk period for dangerous events 23rd-28th
November is now extended to 1st/2nd December.
This is a 'superstorm' period in English & US usage of the word meaning it
is likley to include in the most exposed parts of main storm tracks winds
gusting to over 160kph (100mph) ¡V i.e. resulting from hurricane force winds
of Beaufort force 12 average wind speed.

At the time of writing, deep low pressures are developing over the Atlantic
and short range standard forecasts show 'dartboard' lows, i.e.
exceptionally deep lows of e.g. 955mb. This puts the potential storms on a
par with the most damaging storms of 1990 and 1987 in the UK and Western
Europe."

[1] http://www.lowefo.com/forecast.php?s=Netherlands



--
Mike Tullett - Coleraine 55.13¢XN 6.69¢XW posted 26/11/2007 12:42:47 GMT

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 12:42:47 +0000, Mike Tullett wrote in


He's now extended the time scale to the 2nd December. On this [1] webpage
these words appear:

"The original central highest risk period for dangerous events 23rd-28th
November is now extended to 1st/2nd December.
This is a 'superstorm' period in English & US usage of the word meaning it
is likley to include in the most exposed parts of main storm tracks winds
gusting to over 160kph (100mph) ¡V i.e. resulting from hurricane force winds
of Beaufort force 12 average wind speed.

At the time of writing, deep low pressures are developing over the Atlantic
and short range standard forecasts show 'dartboard' lows, i.e.
exceptionally deep lows of e.g. 955mb. This puts the potential storms on a
par with the most damaging storms of 1990 and 1987 in the UK and Western
Europe."

[1] http://www.lowefo.com/forecast.php?s=Netherlands

And a Dutch TV station interviews an irate Corbyn, suggesting he was wrong.
It is a few minutes into the programme. He accuses the Dutch Met Service
(KNMI) of putting out false information. There follows a piece by two
weather presenters. I think they are asked about his "forecast" as the
word "superstorm" appears several times. Maybe Wijke can help us get the
gist of what is said?

http://player.omroep.nl/?aflID=59668...f052261750d b

--
Mike Tullett - Coleraine 55.13¢XN 6.69¢XW posted 26/11/2007 13:26:14 GMT

On 26 nov, 14:26, Mike Tullett
wrote:

And a Dutch TV station interviews an irate Corbyn, suggesting he was wrong.
It is a few minutes into the programme. He accuses the Dutch Met Service
(KNMI) of putting out false information. There follows a piece by two
weather presenters. I think they are asked about his "forecast" as the
word "superstorm" appears several times

http://player.omroep.nl/?aflID=59668...f62cbad4f05226...

Programme is "Kassa" - a fairly light-hearted consumer show.

The presenter

- compares 5 weather forecasts for a particular day from TV channels
and websites with the actual weather and says which is most accurate;
- visits "Meteoconsult" and decribes briefly how observations are
processed through models whose output is interpreted into a forecast;
- compares several forecasts for 2/3 days ahead and compares them with
the actual weather;
- interviews Piers Corbyn with subtitles;
- interviews 2 presenters whose forecasts turned out best in the
comparisons made earlier; asks them how they produce their forecasts;
asks them what they think of Piers Corbyn's long-term predictions.
They are just as sceptical as posters on here are ...

Colin Youngs
Brussels

Having long drawn out debates with this character's "mates" is all
very well.

To be honest, he'll just soak up yet more publicity.

The alternative choice would be: Ignore

Over-sensationlist media make me sick (look at the joke, The Weather
Channel has now become in the States)

Sorry, life is too short for this kind of trash

Mike Tullett wrote:

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 12:08:49 GMT, Martin Rowley wrote in


I suppose he was only *80%* certain...

... actually, his '80%' refers to the track / areas affected. The
actual forecast (both that put out in the press presentation and on
the detailed forecast that I was lucky (!) enough to see, carries
NO probability marking; it implies that the event WILL happen!

He's now extended the time scale to the 2nd December. On this [1]
webpage these words appear:

"The original central highest risk period for dangerous events
23rd-28th November is now extended to 1st/2nd December.
This is a 'superstorm' period in English & US usage of the word
meaning it is likley to include in the most exposed parts of main
storm tracks winds gusting to over 160kph (100mph) ¡V i.e. resulting
from hurricane force winds of Beaufort force 12 average wind speed.

At the time of writing, deep low pressures are developing over the
Atlantic and short range standard forecasts show 'dartboard' lows,
i.e. exceptionally deep lows of e.g. 955mb. This puts the potential
storms on a par with the most damaging storms of 1990 and 1987 in the
UK and Western Europe."

[1] http://www.lowefo.com/forecast.php?s=Netherlands



The following also appears on the Weather Action website:

----------------------------------------------------------------

Today, after 23 refinements to his method, Piers Corbyn is able to
forecast big storms with almost 100% accuracy, even years in advance.
In the eight month forecast delivered in December, 2006 Piers Corbyn
forecast not only the exceptionally rainy summer in Britain, but also
every strong rain and flood on the day. The only miss was the rain
front of August 5th ¡V 8th , which passed further North than predicted,
causing floods and mudslides in Scotland and not in the whole of
Britain. The success rate for ¡§normal weather¡¨ is on average 70-80%
and for extreme cold and dry periods, in between.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

I won't put my comments on a public forum!

Norman
--
Norman Lynagh
Chalfont St Giles, Buckinghamshire
85m a.s.l.
(remove "thisbit" twice to e-mail)

On 26 Nov, 12:42, Mike Tullett
wrote:

He's now extended the time scale to the 2nd December. On this [1] webpage
these words appear:

"The original central highest risk period for dangerous events 23rd-28th
November is now extended to 1st/2nd December.
This is a 'superstorm' period in English & US usage of the word meaning it
is likley to include in the most exposed parts of main storm tracks winds
gusting to over 160kph (100mph) - i.e. resulting from hurricane force winds
of Beaufort force 12 average wind speed.


But "superstorm" is not in current English and US usage, nor has it
ever been. It has no formal definition, except that supplied by
Weather Action themselves.

I've seen a later proclamation talking of "hurricane force
gusts" (sic), not mean wind speeds.

Stephen.

On 26 Nov, 12:42, Mike Tullett
wrote:

He's now extended the time scale to the 2nd December. On this [1] webpage these words appear:

So despite the fact he trumpets about being able to forecast strong
winds up to a year in advance, he still makes changes when convenient.
You set out your stall as a long-range forecasting company and then
make alterations at short-return periods!! Hilarious.

Clearly he's seen the models pointing to a windy end of week. I wonder
if he'll extend the period further if such winds don't occur. What a
joker!

Richard

"Richard Dixon" wrote in message
...
On 26 Nov, 12:42, Mike Tullett
wrote:

He's now extended the time scale to the 2nd December. On this [1]
webpage these words appear:

So despite the fact he trumpets about being able to forecast strong
winds up to a year in advance, he still makes changes when convenient.
You set out your stall as a long-range forecasting company and then
make alterations at short-return periods!! Hilarious.

Clearly he's seen the models pointing to a windy end of week. I wonder
if he'll extend the period further if such winds don't occur. What a
joker!

Richard

Might be worth extending it to the end of March just to be safe. Give me
strength !

Jon.

On Nov 26, 12:08 pm, "Martin Rowley"
wrote:

... actually, his '80%' refers to the track / areas affected. The
actual forecast (both that put out in the press presentation and on
the detailed forecast that I was lucky (!) enough to see, carries NO
probability marking; it implies that the event WILL happen!

Am I the only one here that seeks the reasoning behind his forecasts?
From his site:

"The original central highest risk period for dangerous events
23rd-28th November is now extended to 1st/2nd December.
This is a 'superstorm' period in English & US usage of the word
meaning it is likley to include in the most exposed parts of main
storm tracks winds gusting to over 160kph (100mph) - i.e. resulting
from hurricane force winds of Beaufort force 12 average wind speed.

At the time of writing, deep low pressures are developing over the
Atlantic and short range standard forecasts show 'dartboard' lows,
i.e. exceptionally deep lows of e.g. 955mb. This puts the potential
storms on a par with the most damaging storms of 1990 and 1987 in the
UK and Western Europe."

http://www.lowefo.com/forecast.php?s=Netherlands

It is a truth that with very "positive" North Atlantic sequences, very
deep lows occur and they tend to move laterally to the West Coast of
Europe and are very likely to hit Britain.

(Negative anomalies tend to go north at Greenland and even avoid
Norway.)

However I can't reconcile tornadic periods with strong winds except in
the vortices themselves.

As it happens I too see there are reasons to forecast tornadic
activity -either that or derechos (I'm not sure that's how to spell
that phenomenon, I'm not even certain I mean that sort of event
either.)

But here is an odd thing: The tornadic spell we should be getting due
to the lunar phase -which incidentally, runs over the same time
period; is subverted by hurricanes in the North West (Asian) Pacific.

This piece is revealing:

"Predicted solar effects make the present period one of rapid and
accelerating weather change for the whole of the north Atlantic region
from Greenland to St Petersburg and from North Norway to Belgium."

First off he is stating he uses the solar behaviour to forecast the
weather. Nothing new there but it is nice to have it writing. So long
as it unequivocal truth. He has every right to hide his methods but
not to tell lies.

Periods "of rapid and accelerating weather change" are not tornadic
spells. The background to those are settled, calm, humid periods but
of course marked striations show that things are somewhat different in
the upper air.

He has though, got the last bit right hasn't he? Between Iceland and
Greenland, the pressure changes some 46 millibars in 20 degrees
longitude, on one of these sea level charts:

http://www.westwind.ch/?link=ukmb,ht...racknell+13 2

On the other hand such a situation is normal for this side of the
North Atlantic at this time of year.

Not all that much to go on. Pity Mike Tullet hasn't got an impartial
attitude. He might be clever but if his bent is only to deride the
man, he shows a stupid lack of insight.