http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...nds-met-office

On Jan 19, 9:53*pm, "Les Hemmings" wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...r-weather-frie...

Interesting Les. I feel very much the same way as Mr. Fish. The MetO
is the best solution for shorter-term forecasting for the UK and LRF
is in its infancy. It is those who criticise the MetO for its long-
range forecasts and laud the forecasts of others, whose outcomes are
*even worse*, that don't know what they are talking about. LRF is a
very inexact science. To confuse that with shorter-range forecasting
and lump the two together in general criticism shows a complete lack
of understanding IMO, but there are always some who will. They often
have their own agendae there. The dog's breakfast that is the severe
weather warnings site is mainly poor presentation, not poor
forecasting.

Interesting that Michael Fish doesn't go with the current vogue (hope?
need? longing? desperation?) for a continuing cold winter - but....
"there's a guy works down the chip shop swears he's Elvis.....but he's
a liar and I'm not sure about Fish"........or Corbyn.......or
*******i......or the coldie-Internet-winter-forecasting brigade, or
others!

That cynicism, of course is based on a rock-solid foundation. No long
term outcome forecasting success: no use........yet. I'd back the MetO
against any of them.

In article ,
Les Hemmings writes:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf.../fair-weather-
friends-met-office


There was a very good full page article by Philip Eden in yesterday's
Telegraph covering much the same ground:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/we...et-Office.html

Ignore the headline, which doesn't reflect the tenor of the article.
--
John Hall
"Acting is merely the art of keeping a large group of people
from coughing."
Sir Ralph Richardson (1902-83)

On Jan 20, 10:16*am, John Hall wrote:
In article ,
*Les Hemmings writes:http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf.../fair-weather-
friends-met-office

There was a very good full page article by Philip Eden in yesterday's
Telegraph covering much the same ground:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/we...wished-you-cou...

Ignore the headline, which doesn't reflect the tenor of the article.
--
John Hall
* * * * * *"Acting is merely the art of keeping a large group of people
* * * * * * from coughing."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Sir Ralph Richardson (1902-83)

Yes, thanks John. I'd read parts of it, but I don't take the
Telegraph. Just lots of sense. Especially this bit:

"The publicity given to a handful of self-styled long-range
forecasters who got lucky with their own forecasts for this winter is
understandable, but nevertheless ill-conceived. None of their output,
when analysed over a long period, bears any sort of scrutiny. Their
philosophy seems to be to hype up the one lucky hit in eight attempts,
and to quietly sweep the other seven under the carpet."

A few posters, who have lauded the prescience of some of these people,
really have to examine the forecasting credentials of these "self-
styled long-range forecasters". Those credentials are not found in
what they write, or the beliefs that they hold; they are found in
their outcome success rates and *nothing else*. Point me to one that
has a good success rate, over a long period of time, that doesn't
involve the simple hindcast odds that I use and I'll show you a long-
range forecaster who has the capabilities to break the present LRF
stalemate. Lots, lots, more research and more powerful models are
needed before seasonal and even monthly forecasting comes into the
realms of reasonable accuracy - by anyone.

"Dawlish" wrote in message
...
On Jan 20, 10:16 am, John Hall wrote:
In article ,
Les Hemmings
writes:http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf.../fair-weather-
friends-met-office

There was a very good full page article by Philip Eden in yesterday's
Telegraph covering much the same ground:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/we...wished-you-cou...

Ignore the headline, which doesn't reflect the tenor of the article.
--
John Hall
"Acting is merely the art of keeping a large group of people
from coughing."
Sir Ralph Richardson (1902-83)

Yes, thanks John. I'd read parts of it, but I don't take the
Telegraph. Just lots of sense. Especially this bit:

"The publicity given to a handful of self-styled long-range
forecasters who got lucky with their own forecasts for this winter is
understandable, but nevertheless ill-conceived. None of their output,
when analysed over a long period, bears any sort of scrutiny. Their
philosophy seems to be to hype up the one lucky hit in eight attempts,
and to quietly sweep the other seven under the carpet."

A few posters, who have lauded the prescience of some of these people,
really have to examine the forecasting credentials of these "self-
styled long-range forecasters". Those credentials are not found in
what they write, or the beliefs that they hold; they are found in
their outcome success rates and *nothing else*. Point me to one that
has a good success rate, over a long period of time, that doesn't
involve the simple hindcast odds that I use and I'll show you a long-
range forecaster who has the capabilities to break the present LRF
stalemate. Lots, lots, more research and more powerful models are
needed before seasonal and even monthly forecasting comes into the
realms of reasonable accuracy - by anyone.
-----------------------
Absolutely spot on - but I'd expect no less from Philip. I've been trying to
say the same thing (badly) on here for years about medium to long range
forecasts.

Dave

Felly sgrifennodd John Hall :
In article ,
Les Hemmings writes:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf.../fair-weather-
friends-met-office


There was a very good full page article by Philip Eden in yesterday's
Telegraph covering much the same ground:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/we...et-Office.html

That is a fascinating article. I disagree with Philip on one thing
though:

quote
But research, especially in its early stages, should be described in
peer-reviewed journals, not in the tabloid press. There is absolutely no
need for the Met Office to publicise this work, particularly when skill
levels are demonstrably so limited, and it will probably be decades
before the accuracy of seasonal forecasts is useful to the general
public.
/quote

It is not the Met Office's fault that we have such an irresponsible
tabloid press. Admittedly maybe the Met Office should have been more
vocal about the health warnings, and had a standard reply to the press
somthing along the lines of "This is experimental; please don't make too
much of it", but to hide the information from us just because the
tabloids might egg it up too much really doesn't seem to be the right
approach.

If the Met Office didn't publish this information, I can see the
headlines:

"This summer's heatwave was predicted by Met Office models, but they
didn't warn us!"

Adrian
--
Adrian Shaw ais@
Adran Cyfrifiadureg, Prifysgol Cymru, aber.
Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, Cymru ac.
http://users.aber.ac.uk/ais/weather/ uk

In article ,
Adrian D. Shaw writes:
Felly sgrifennodd John Hall :
In article ,
Les Hemmings writes:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf.../fair-weather-
friends-met-office


There was a very good full page article by Philip Eden in yesterday's
Telegraph covering much the same ground:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/we...er-wished-you-
could-fire-the-Met-Office.html

That is a fascinating article. I disagree with Philip on one thing
though:

quote
But research, especially in its early stages, should be described in
peer-reviewed journals, not in the tabloid press. There is absolutely no
need for the Met Office to publicise this work, particularly when skill
levels are demonstrably so limited, and it will probably be decades
before the accuracy of seasonal forecasts is useful to the general
public.
/quote

It is not the Met Office's fault that we have such an irresponsible
tabloid press. Admittedly maybe the Met Office should have been more
vocal about the health warnings, and had a standard reply to the press
somthing along the lines of "This is experimental; please don't make too
much of it", but to hide the information from us just because the
tabloids might egg it up too much really doesn't seem to be the right
approach.

If the Met Office didn't publish this information, I can see the
headlines:

"This summer's heatwave was predicted by Met Office models, but they
didn't warn us!"

Adrian

I suspect that the main problem is that there is a lot of pressure from
the utility companies, big business and councils for seasonal forecasts,
especially for the winter quarter, and that if the Met Office refused to
provide them they would be ignoring a big source of revenue. And if you
release a forecast to a large number of customers, there's no hope of
keeping it from the media so you might as well release it to them as
well.
--
John Hall
"Acting is merely the art of keeping a large group of people
from coughing."
Sir Ralph Richardson (1902-83)