In article ,
Phil Layton writes:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/we.../Outlook-fair-
for-amateurs-as-Met-Office-releases-data.html

Not sure what 'data' this is referring to. Perhaps we may get hourly
synops on the web :-)

Sounds like good news.

But it was a poor article, with the usual ill-informed sniping at the
Met Office. The Telegraph seems to have something of a campaign going
against the MO. A couple of years ago they switched the provider of
their daily forecast from the MO to Accuweather. They don't seem to have
noticed - or maybe just don't care - that this has resulted in their
publishing poorer forecasts.

It's lucky that the MO forecasters' standards of accuracy are rather
higher than those of many journalists. In this article the most glaring
error was the reference to Sir Tim Berners-Lee having invented the
Internet. (He invented the WWW, of course, but even today the two are
not synonymous.)

There's also a third leader in the Telegraph, mentioning the possibility
of the greater release of data leading to "cowboy" forecasters. The
writer clearly doesn't realise that there are plenty of those already
(mostly those pretending to offer forecasts for a month or more ahead).
--
John Hall
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism
by those who have not got it."
George Bernard Shaw

Graham P Davis wrote:

On 28/11/11 10:26, The Other Mike wrote:
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 09:23:25 +0000, Graham P Davis
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 06:44:08 +0000
Phil wrote:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/we...fair-for-amate
urs-as-Met-Office-releases-data.html

Not sure what 'data' this is referring to. Perhaps we may get hourly
synops on the web :-)

I haven't the foggiest idea.

Dissemination of real-time observational data is limited by
international treaty

Is it?

Got a reference for that?



We had this discussion over a decade ago in this group. I didn't think I'd
have a cat-in-hell's chance of finding a reference but luckily remembered the
answer was "40" and not "42". A quick glance shows me that my memory of what
it covered was a bit foggy.

http://www.wmo.int/pages/about/Resolution40_en.html

Each state meteorological service can decide which of its own data is classed
as "essential". I don't have a reference, but I think that several years ago
the Met Office decided that all of its observational data could be released
without restriction on its use.

--
Norman Lynagh
Tideswell, Derbyshire
303m a.s.l.

John Hall wrote:
In article ,
Phil Layton writes:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/we.../Outlook-fair-
for-amateurs-as-Met-Office-releases-data.html

Not sure what 'data' this is referring to. Perhaps we may get hourly
synops on the web :-)

Sounds like good news.

But it was a poor article, with the usual ill-informed sniping at the
Met Office. The Telegraph seems to have something of a campaign going
against the MO. A couple of years ago they switched the provider of
their daily forecast from the MO to Accuweather. They don't seem to have
noticed - or maybe just don't care - that this has resulted in their
publishing poorer forecasts.

It's lucky that the MO forecasters' standards of accuracy are rather
higher than those of many journalists. In this article the most glaring
error was the reference to Sir Tim Berners-Lee having invented the
Internet. (He invented the WWW, of course, but even today the two are
not synonymous.)

There's also a third leader in the Telegraph, mentioning the possibility
of the greater release of data leading to "cowboy" forecasters. The
writer clearly doesn't realise that there are plenty of those already
(mostly those pretending to offer forecasts for a month or more ahead).
-------------------
Very well put, John.
Dave

On Nov 29, 9:23*am, Dave Cornwell wrote:
John Hall wrote:
In article ,
*Phil Layton writes:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/we.../Outlook-fair-
for-amateurs-as-Met-Office-releases-data.html

Not sure what 'data' this is referring to. Perhaps we may get hourly
synops on the web :-)

Sounds like good news.

But it was a poor article, with the usual ill-informed sniping at the
Met Office. The Telegraph seems to have something of a campaign going
against the MO. A couple of years ago they switched the provider of
their daily forecast from the MO to Accuweather. They don't seem to have
noticed - or maybe just don't care - that this has resulted in their
publishing poorer forecasts.

It's lucky that the MO forecasters' standards of accuracy are rather
higher than those of many journalists. In this article the most glaring
error was the reference to Sir Tim Berners-Lee having invented the
Internet. (He invented the WWW, of course, but even today the two are
not synonymous.)

There's also a third leader in the Telegraph, mentioning the possibility
of the greater release of data leading to "cowboy" forecasters. The
writer clearly doesn't realise that there are plenty of those already
(mostly those pretending to offer forecasts for a month or more ahead).

Very well put, John.
Dave

Quite
apart from where he referred to anything to do with the OP that is

....or the source.

But anyone who hates journalists is OK by me.