On Nov 3, 10:17*pm, "Col" wrote:
"Teignmouth" wrote in message

...

I like the Charlatans, great bandhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhSA8FwdS2

Great track, bought that as a single.

But never mind all that, why is Dawlish any more of a 'charlatan' for
his forecasts, for which he clearly identifies the criteria they are issued
under, and those who brag about their 'successes' yet conveniently
forget about their failures.
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

He's replied to a stalker Col, who'd not even worth wiping from the
sole of your shoe. I actually like the Chartatans too. Terrific band.
Tend to be folllowed by herds of sheep on fora, if I remember rightly.

Dawlish wrote:
On Nov 3, 10:17 pm, "Col" wrote:
"Teignmouth" wrote in message

...

I like the Charlatans, great
bandhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhSA8FwdS2

Great track, bought that as a single.

But never mind all that, why is Dawlish any more of a 'charlatan' for
his forecasts, for which he clearly identifies the criteria they are
issued under, and those who brag about their 'successes' yet
conveniently
forget about their failures.
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

He's replied to a stalker Col, who'd not even worth wiping from the
sole of your shoe. I actually like the Chartatans too. Terrific band.
Tend to be folllowed by herds of sheep on fora, if I remember rightly.

Ah, right. I have that idiot killfiled so it appeared to me that
Teignmouth was replying to you.
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

On Nov 3, 12:53*pm, Dawlish wrote:
On Nov 2, 9:20*pm, John Hall wrote:



In article ,
*Graham P Davis writes:

On Tuesday 02 November 2010 17:41, Teignmouth scribbled:

Here's the link for SW England, cos that's where I live.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?a...;loc=SWEngland

And here's the full winter F/C:
http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?a...nter-forecast;...

I see that, unlike many commercial outfits who attempt to make seasonal
forecasts, they describe their methodology. It looks to me - admittedly
no expert - that though their forecast may well be wrong it deserves to
be taken seriously.
--
John Hall
* * * * * * * *"I look upon it, that he who does not mind his belly,
* * * * * * * * will hardly mind anything else."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Dr Samuel Johnson (1709-84)

It's another forecast; no more. They appear to be going down the road
of saying that La Nina will affect our winter, but they don't refer to
any research. What research there is not conclusive about the link
from the Equatorial Pacific to us in the UK in a La Nina winter (or an
El Nino, or transition winter either!). I think they are looking at
the main difference in conditions between this winter and last and
guessing that the kind of winter we will have will be different to
last year; hence the colder and drier forecast. *No-one* including
netweather has any decent track record in seasonal forecasting, so why
should we really take any of them seriously? When someone gets it
right around 75% of the time over about a dozen seasons, I'll begin to
start taking an interest in what they are doing. No-one appears to
have managed to do that yet.

I'm incredibly frustrated by the lack of progress in seasonal
forecasting over the last 20 years. Far more research is needed and we
are nowhere near being able to forecast this winter's weather with any
confidence. The demand for people to be able to get it right is great,
but no-one can meet the demand. That creates a market for the
commercials. The commercials also have a vested interest in drumming
up business and if they mention cold, it will wed most of their
participants to their site, as they will be hoping they've got it
right. If they say "cold" they'll also get far more publicity than if
they say "mild". It will also attact new coldies because they will
think that someone has found the holy grail of forecasting a cold
winter. They haven't. Really; they haven't.

Frustrating; pretty hopeless; not what the coldies will want to hear,
but there you go.

Teleconnections are far from reliable when it comes to Europe but
there is a bias towards strong La Niña events/episodes producing
normal or milder-than-normal winters in the UK - about 70 per cent of
the time. But that's without taking any of the several other
considerations into account, and I won't go into that here given that
it's part of the suite of services we provide commercially.

FWIW, though, the Netweather winter forecast is at least a reasonable
and reasoned stab, and I don't think it is unfair that they note
differences from last winter, because a) last winter was so
exceptional and b) there are so many rent-a-mouths shouting in the
press about how it is going to be as cold and snowy a winter as last
year.

I'm not sure who or what you mean by "the commercials". If you mean
certain websites then they can certainly drive traffic by continually
forecasting severe weather. However, eventually anybody with any sense
(and more importantly with any money to spend) will spot regular cries
of "wolf", so they are commiting commercial suicide. Anyone dropping
by for a "hopecast" is not going to be a commerecial client -- so as
many "participants" as they can attract can be "wedded" to their
website but it makes no business sense except perhaps to get a brand
name trumpeted around the web or in lazy newspapers. Or perhaps I
misunderstand what you mean by "the commercials".

Which brings me to my final point - there are a lot more seasonal
forecasts in the market than are made freely available, and it is
wrong to say that there has been no progress in the last 20 years.
Nobody is suggesting a *high* degree of accuracy or usefulness in
these forecasts but there is *some* usefulness or the eminently
sensible and thrifty clients who buy them would not do so. I am
fortunate enough to be privy to one that proved startlingly good last
winter and during the past summer when there was a strong enough
signal. We have no right to assume, however, that accurate seasonal
forecasting will ever be tenable, ot at least not soon.

Stephen.

On Nov 4, 10:09*am, Stephen Davenport wrote:

Which brings me to my final point - there are a lot more seasonal
forecasts in the market than are made freely available, and it is
wrong to say that there has been no progress in the last 20 years.
Nobody is suggesting a *high* degree of accuracy or usefulness in
these forecasts but there is *some* usefulness or the eminently
sensible and thrifty clients who buy them would not do so. I am
fortunate enough to be privy to one that proved startlingly good last
winter and during the past summer when there was a strong enough
signal. We have no right to assume, however, that accurate seasonal
forecasting will ever be tenable, ot at least not soon.

The most sense I've heard on here on the topic.

You're a fool to pin your hopes on a seasonal forecast as much as you
are to totally rubbish them all.

Richard

On Nov 4, 12:05*pm, Richard Dixon wrote:
On Nov 4, 10:09*am, Stephen Davenport wrote:

Which brings me to my final point - there are a lot more seasonal
forecasts in the market than are made freely available, and it is
wrong to say that there has been no progress in the last 20 years.
Nobody is suggesting a *high* degree of accuracy or usefulness in
these forecasts but there is *some* usefulness or the eminently
sensible and thrifty clients who buy them would not do so. I am
fortunate enough to be privy to one that proved startlingly good last
winter and during the past summer when there was a strong enough
signal. We have no right to assume, however, that accurate seasonal
forecasting will ever be tenable, ot at least not soon.

The most sense I've heard on here on the topic.

You're a fool to pin your hopes on a seasonal forecast as much as you
are to totally rubbish them all.

Richard

Show me the forecast accuracy over time and I'll show you someone's
forecasts that should be taken seriously. Until then, it's not
"rubbishing" anything. It's being completely sensible and realistic
against a tide of forecasters.some of which would obviously convince
you. Why they'd convince you might be a little difficult to say, apart
from the fact that they employ good meteorological language in the
forecast - though you are welcome to have a go, of course. In
forecasting, outcome success is *everything*. No track record of
success over a decent period of time; no need to take the forecast
seriously at all.

why do you lot bother with this ogre.

hes so far up his own arse its tickling his eyeballs.


On 04/11/2010 7:59 PM, Dawlish wrote:
No track record of
success over a decent period of time; no need to take the forecast
seriously at all.

shouting spite again or is that spouting ****e?
reported to mr google.

On 04/11/2010 6:05 AM, Dawlish wrote:


He's replied to a stalker Col, who'd not even worth wiping from the
sole of your shoe. I

no forecast?

On 03/11/2010 10:17 PM, Col wrote:

But never mind all that, why is Dawlish any more of a 'charlatan' for
his forecasts,