Paul Bartlett notwithstanding, do we have any resident people who
yearly attempt to do some pattern-matching with previous years ahead
of the forthcoming winter? If so, can we have your thoughts please?

No movement from the UCL guys for this winter (Adam Lea are you
reading?!) http://climate.mssl.ucl.ac.uk/for_nao.html - nor the MO,
I'm always interested to see what ounce of useful information we can
get out of these forecasts.

Cheers
Richard

Richard Dixon wrote:

Paul Bartlett notwithstanding, do we have any resident people who
yearly attempt to do some pattern-matching with previous years ahead
of the forthcoming winter? If so, can we have your thoughts please?

No movement from the UCL guys for this winter (Adam Lea are you
reading?!) http://climate.mssl.ucl.ac.uk/for_nao.html - nor the MO,
I'm always interested to see what ounce of useful information we can
get out of these forecasts.


I lost faith in pattern-matching as a long-range-forecasting tool in the
late autumn of 1963 I think it was. The monthly forecast mentioned a
particular year as having the best match for the month just ending. As it
was a fairly recent year I still had a vague memory of it and thought that
the weather had been completely different. I checked the monthly summary
concerned and found that one month was described as mild, dry and sunny,
whereas the other was said to have been cool, cloudy and wet. I said at the
time that I didn't have much faith in the LRF for the coming month when the
two matching months synoptic-wise were completely opposite weather-wise. The
forecast, unsurprisingly, turned out to be totally wrong.


--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks., UK. E-mail: newsman not newsboy
"I wear the cheese. It does not wear me."

"Graham P Davis" wrote in message
...
Richard Dixon wrote:

Paul Bartlett notwithstanding, do we have any resident people who
yearly attempt to do some pattern-matching with previous years ahead
of the forthcoming winter? If so, can we have your thoughts please?

No movement from the UCL guys for this winter (Adam Lea are you
reading?!) http://climate.mssl.ucl.ac.uk/for_nao.html - nor the MO,
I'm always interested to see what ounce of useful information we can
get out of these forecasts.


I lost faith in pattern-matching as a long-range-forecasting tool in the
late autumn of 1963 I think it was. The monthly forecast mentioned a
particular year as having the best match for the month just ending. As it
was a fairly recent year I still had a vague memory of it and thought that
the weather had been completely different. I checked the monthly summary
concerned and found that one month was described as mild, dry and sunny,
whereas the other was said to have been cool, cloudy and wet. I said at
the
time that I didn't have much faith in the LRF for the coming month when
the
two matching months synoptic-wise were completely opposite weather-wise.
The
forecast, unsurprisingly, turned out to be totally wrong.


Hi Graham, I have never been a fan of it either. IIRC on TWO I criticised
Brian Gaze about it and I also disputed the value with Paul Bartlett on
here. My argument was that in a changing climate, pattern matching is futile
with nugatory value. Also what do you match? The atmosphere is a
3-dimensional fluid, so matching surface patterns or 500 mb charts will not
give the whole story. I accept there are teleconnections and important SST
anomalies that may give useful signals but that is as far as I would stretch
it. I have indeed used some of these myself in the past plus a few other
"indicators" with mixed results. Seasonal forecasting is incredibly
difficult, even getting the phase of the NAO is not easy, let alone weather
variations. I'm more than happy to see what the big professional
organisations put out and take an average!

Will
--

On Sep 24, 8:50*pm, "Will Hand" wrote:
"Graham P Davis" wrote in ...





Richard Dixon wrote:

Paul Bartlett notwithstanding, do we have any resident people who
yearly attempt to do some pattern-matching with previous years ahead
of the forthcoming winter? If so, can we have your thoughts please?

No movement from the UCL guys for this winter (Adam Lea are you
reading?!) *http://climate.mssl.ucl.ac.uk/for_nao.html- nor the MO,
I'm always interested to see what ounce of useful information we can
get out of these forecasts.

I lost faith in pattern-matching as a long-range-forecasting tool in the
late autumn of 1963 I think it was. The monthly forecast mentioned a
particular year as having the best match for the month just ending. As it
was a fairly recent year I still had a vague memory of it and thought that
the weather had been completely different. I checked the monthly summary
concerned and found that one month was described as mild, dry and sunny,
whereas the other was said to have been cool, cloudy and wet. I said at
the
time that I didn't have much faith in the LRF for the coming month when
the
two matching months synoptic-wise were completely opposite weather-wise..
The
forecast, unsurprisingly, turned out to be totally wrong.

Hi Graham, I have never been a fan of it either. IIRC on TWO I criticised
Brian Gaze about it and I also disputed the value with Paul Bartlett on
here. My argument was that in a changing climate, pattern matching is futile
with nugatory value. Also what do you match? The atmosphere is a
3-dimensional fluid, so matching surface patterns or 500 mb charts will not
give the whole story. I accept there are teleconnections and important SST
anomalies that may give useful signals but that is as far as I would stretch
it. I have indeed used some of these myself in the past plus a few other
"indicators" with mixed results. Seasonal forecasting is incredibly
difficult, even getting the phase of the NAO is not easy, let alone weather
variations. I'm more than happy to see what the big professional
organisations put out and take an average!

Will
--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Philip Eden has certainly done some Autumn-to-Winter pattern-matching
in the past which I've read with interest. I'm no great believer in
any winter forecasting which can't be backed by successful outcomes,
as you know; indeed I'm no believer in any forecasting that can't be
matched by outcomes, but Philip's pattern-matching seemed to provide a
rare example of some possibilities in this field. Sorry Philip, but I
can't provide links. Maybe you can elaborate.

Will Hand wrote:

"Graham P Davis" wrote in message
...
Richard Dixon wrote:

Paul Bartlett notwithstanding, do we have any resident people who
yearly attempt to do some pattern-matching with previous years ahead
of the forthcoming winter? If so, can we have your thoughts please?

No movement from the UCL guys for this winter (Adam Lea are you
reading?!) http://climate.mssl.ucl.ac.uk/for_nao.html - nor the MO,
I'm always interested to see what ounce of useful information we can
get out of these forecasts.


I lost faith in pattern-matching as a long-range-forecasting tool in the
late autumn of 1963 I think it was. The monthly forecast mentioned a
particular year as having the best match for the month just ending. As it
was a fairly recent year I still had a vague memory of it and thought
that
the weather had been completely different. I checked the monthly summary
concerned and found that one month was described as mild, dry and sunny,
whereas the other was said to have been cool, cloudy and wet. I said
at the
time that I didn't have much faith in the LRF for the coming month
when the
two matching months synoptic-wise were completely opposite
weather-wise. The
forecast, unsurprisingly, turned out to be totally wrong.


Hi Graham, I have never been a fan of it either. IIRC on TWO I
criticised Brian Gaze about it and I also disputed the value with Paul
Bartlett on here. My argument was that in a changing climate, pattern
matching is futile with nugatory value. Also what do you match? The
atmosphere is a 3-dimensional fluid, so matching surface patterns or 500
mb charts will not give the whole story. I accept there are
teleconnections and important SST anomalies that may give useful signals
but that is as far as I would stretch it. I have indeed used some of
these myself in the past plus a few other "indicators" with mixed
results. Seasonal forecasting is incredibly difficult, even getting the
phase of the NAO is not easy, let alone weather variations. I'm more
than happy to see what the big professional organisations put out and
take an average!

Will
--


I pattern match months by wetness/dryness, warmth/cold, relative to the
30 average. I can honestly say, although I try month after month, I can
never find two consecutive months that correspond from one year to
another. My base data goes back to 1960. And of cause it would only be
for my location, so as an example August comes up as dry, but we know
what the rest of the Country was like! In fact just looking at
August/September 2003 match, so do I then say October will be cold
followed by an average to mild winter? Actually, that may be so ;-)

--
Keith (Southend)
http://www.southendweather.net
e-mail: kreh at southendweather dot net

On 24 Sep, 20:50, "Will Hand" wrote:

Hi Graham, I have never been a fan of it either. IIRC on TWO I criticised
Brian Gaze about it and I also disputed the value with Paul Bartlett on
here. My argument was that in a changing climate, pattern matching is futile
with nugatory value. Also what do you match? The atmosphere is a
3-dimensional fluid, so matching surface patterns or 500 mb charts will not
give the whole story. I accept there are teleconnections and important SST
anomalies that may give useful signals but that is as far as I would stretch
it. I have indeed used some of these myself in the past plus a few other
"indicators" with mixed results. Seasonal forecasting is incredibly
difficult, even getting the phase of the NAO is not easy, let alone weather
variations. I'm more than happy to see what the big professional
organisations put out and take an average!

Oh come on Will, where's your sense of fun gone!! It's part of the
sense of fun in the run-up to winter to wonder what may be in store
and what previous winters may have led to, so please stop your
discouragement. Frivolous part of reply over.

On a sciency note, I was reading a paper the other day (I will dig out
the reference) that was highlighting using climate model simulations
to point to situations where the atmospheric circulation on a seasonal
scale was more predictable than normal. Given that these papers are
still being churned out by those large-scale climatologists (that
neither of us I can safely say claim to be world-leading experts in),
then there must be some mileage in it.

Richard

On Sep 24, 10:47*pm, Richard Dixon wrote:
On 24 Sep, 20:50, "Will Hand" wrote:

Hi Graham, I have never been a fan of it either. IIRC on TWO I criticised
Brian Gaze about it and I also disputed the value with Paul Bartlett on
here. My argument was that in a changing climate, pattern matching is futile
with nugatory value. Also what do you match? The atmosphere is a
3-dimensional fluid, so matching surface patterns or 500 mb charts will not
give the whole story. I accept there are teleconnections and important SST
anomalies that may give useful signals but that is as far as I would stretch
it. I have indeed used some of these myself in the past plus a few other
"indicators" with mixed results. Seasonal forecasting is incredibly
difficult, even getting the phase of the NAO is not easy, let alone weather
variations. I'm more than happy to see what the big professional
organisations put out and take an average!

Oh come on Will, where's your sense of fun gone!! *It's part of the
sense of fun in the run-up to winter to wonder what may be in store
and what previous winters may have led to, so please stop your
discouragement. Frivolous part of reply over.

On a sciency note, I was reading a paper the other day (I will dig out
the reference) that was highlighting using climate model simulations
to point to situations where the atmospheric circulation on a seasonal
scale was more predictable than normal. Given that these papers are
still being churned out by those large-scale climatologists (that
neither of us I can safely say claim to be world-leading experts in),
then there must be some mileage in it.

Richard

Some unnecessary prejudice there against climatologists (the "churned
out" comment speaks volumes). Methinks you could learn much from the
more informed of them. As you say, you can safely say you are not a
world-leading expert. Probably best to leave it to those that know
more.

Pattern-matching, as practised by most is an exercise in frovolity,
IMO. However, as practised by a climatologist that is prepared to
actively research, it becomes an excercise of interest, which could
lead to learning. H. Lamb was a fine climatologist. You'd do well to
read his work.

Look forward to the reference.

On 24 Sep, 23:16, Dawlish wrote:

Some unnecessary prejudice there against climatologists (the "churned
out" comment speaks volumes). Methinks you could learn much from the
more informed of them. As you say, you can safely say you are not a
world-leading expert. Probably best to leave it to those that know
more.

You've misread me marvellously, Paul. I have nothing but respect for
the climatologists and long-range forecasters who are battling to find
meaning in the noise that is seasonal forecasts, of which I'm sure
there is genuine value. If you're in the school of "seasonal forecasts
have no value" then I will disagree wholeheartedly given the amount of
research time paid to it. Note lack of use of word "churn" this time.

Pattern-matching, as practised by most is an exercise in frovolity,
IMO.

Yes, I agree, but it's a bit of fun, and something I like to follow as
it gets us ready for the run-up to winter. It's a shame that the likes
of Paul Bartlett don't post on here any more, critical analysis of his
efforts or not.

However, as practised by a climatologist that is prepared to
actively research, it becomes an excercise of interest, which could
lead to learning. H. Lamb was a fine climatologist. You'd do well to
read his work.

I have done. I have H H Lamb's "Historic storms of the North Sea,
British Isles and Northwest Europe" - a fine read. And for what it's
worth, I still actively research in meteorology.

I'll dig out the research paper for you.

Richard

On Sep 25, 12:15*am, Richard Dixon wrote:
On 24 Sep, 23:16, Dawlish wrote:

Some unnecessary prejudice there against climatologists (the "churned
out" comment speaks volumes). Methinks you could learn much from the
more informed of them. As you say, you can safely say you are not a
world-leading expert. Probably best to leave it to those that know
more.

You've misread me marvellously, Paul. I have nothing but respect for
the climatologists and long-range forecasters who are battling to find
meaning in the noise that is seasonal forecasts, of which I'm sure
there is genuine value. If you're in the school of "seasonal forecasts
have no value" then I will disagree wholeheartedly given the amount of
research time paid to it. Note lack of use of word "churn" this time.

Pattern-matching, as practised by most is an exercise in frovolity,
IMO.

Yes, I agree, but it's a bit of fun, and something I like to follow as
it gets us ready for the run-up to winter. It's a shame that the likes
of Paul Bartlett don't post on here any more, critical analysis of his
efforts or not.

However, as practised by a climatologist that is prepared to
actively research, it becomes an excercise of interest, which could
lead to learning. H. Lamb was a fine climatologist. You'd do well to
read his work.

I have done. I have H H Lamb's "Historic storms of the North Sea,
British Isles and Northwest Europe" - a fine read. And for what it's
worth, I still actively research in meteorology.

I'll dig out the research paper for you.

Richard

Merci.

"Richard Dixon" wrote in message
...
On 24 Sep, 20:50, "Will Hand" wrote:

Hi Graham, I have never been a fan of it either. IIRC on TWO I criticised
Brian Gaze about it and I also disputed the value with Paul Bartlett on
here. My argument was that in a changing climate, pattern matching is
futile
with nugatory value. Also what do you match? The atmosphere is a
3-dimensional fluid, so matching surface patterns or 500 mb charts will
not
give the whole story. I accept there are teleconnections and important
SST
anomalies that may give useful signals but that is as far as I would
stretch
it. I have indeed used some of these myself in the past plus a few other
"indicators" with mixed results. Seasonal forecasting is incredibly
difficult, even getting the phase of the NAO is not easy, let alone
weather
variations. I'm more than happy to see what the big professional
organisations put out and take an average!

Oh come on Will, where's your sense of fun gone!! It's part of the
sense of fun in the run-up to winter to wonder what may be in store
and what previous winters may have led to, so please stop your
discouragement. Frivolous part of reply over.


Richard, my sense of fun is still here believe you me, but this newsgroup
has changed. If I put out something, I'll be accused of guessing and a great
debate will start. This newsgroup is really no place for frivolity anymore.
Remember years ago Paul B. and I collaborated and put out joint efforts - a
lot of work but great fun! IIRC Paul got fed up because his indicators kept
out coming mild with little variability.

Will
--