On 2013-05-25 16:09:31 +0000, Metman2012 said:

On 25/05/2013 16:40, Graham P Davis wrote:
On Sat, 25 May 2013 15:28:34 +0100
Adam Lea wrote:

On 25/05/13 10:45, Graham P Davis wrote:


Which is why I wish they'd return to the strict usage of 'cold,'
'cool,' 'rather warm,' etc., of a few decades ago.

Isn't that subjective as well?

Not at all, they were defined by temperature anomalies. Each word or
phrase was assigned to a range of anomalies.

The following is from the Radio Times, probably somewhen in the 1950s.
The terms and changed before I started work in '62 but give the general
idea. Temperatures are in Fahrenheit.

================================================== =====================
The heat-wave sizzles on as we go to press and a reader asks us to
explain just what is meant by the descriptive terms used in BBC
weather forecasts at this time of the year. We, in turn, asked the
meteorological back-room boys for enlightenment, and they have provided
us with the following table:

Very hot - More than 20 above normal
Hot - 16-20 above normal
Very warm - 11-15 above normal
Warm - 6-10 above normal
Rather warm - 3-5 above normal
Rather cool - 3-5 below normal
Cool - 6-9 below normal
Very cool - 10-15 below normal
Cold - More than 15 below normal

Words such as 'cooler,' 'colder,' 'milder,' 'warmer' are used when a
comparison is made between the temperature conditions expected and
those recently experienced. We should add that 'normal' at the present
time varies between a maximum of approximately 70 in the southern, and
65 in the northern, regions of the United Kingdom.
================================================== =====================


I've been looking in my various Forecaster's Reference books et al for
this, but couldn't find it. I think that in the 70s and 80s these were
changed, as I remember being told that you never used hot in the winter
or cold in the summer. Certainly nothing about 'bitterly cold' etc.
These are useful because we aren't very good at judging temperatures -
12 C in the winter and we think it's warm; in the summer we think it's
cold!


I remember something similar to that as well.

We were not allowed to use cold in summer, or warm/hot in winter, but I
can't remember where that came from. It was written down somewhere.

In summer the worst you could use was "very cool", and in winter the
best was "very mild".

This may have come from the media broadcast notes that were handed out
at various lectures or seminars, and we were told that because certain
senior management staff, or retired senior management staff lived in
the broadcast area, we could be under constant scrutiny.

(Whether this was true or not, I never bothered to find out).

However, I decided that if I added the words "feeling" and "in the wind
or "out of the wind" to the description, then I could get away with
whatever I liked.

Unfortunately and on a slight tangent, I did not get away with a late
evening reference to "drizzly showers" (meaning occasional light
drizzle in a warm sector) because I was informed that " drizzle has no
convective element".

Oh! the contsraints of media forecasting.

Unfortunately and on a slight tangent, I did not get away with a late
evening reference to "drizzly showers" (meaning occasional light drizzle
in a warm sector) because I was informed that " drizzle has no convective
element".

Which is silly, because I'm pretty sure that the average viewer thinks of
showers as "rain that doesn't last long" rather than considering any
atmospheric processes involved.
--
Freddie
Bayston Hill
Shropshire
102m AMSL
http://www.hosiene.co.uk/weather/
https://twitter.com/#!/BaystonHillWx for hourly reports

"Freddie" wrote in message
...
Unfortunately and on a slight tangent, I did not get away with a late
evening reference to "drizzly showers" (meaning occasional light drizzle
in a warm sector) because I was informed that " drizzle has no convective
element".

Which is silly, because I'm pretty sure that the average viewer thinks of
showers as "rain that doesn't last long" rather than considering any
atmospheric processes involved.

Or how about a fragmenting front that is giving intermitent periods
of rain, something that most people would think of as showers.

'Showery rain' perhaps?
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl
Snow videos:
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3QvmL4UWBmHFMKWiwYm_gg

On 26/05/2013 08:17, Bob Martin wrote:
in 379859 20130525 111001 "Col" wrote:
Joe Egginton wrote:

You've guesssed - RACIST!

Not necessarily racist but if you genuinely want to live in
a town with no 'foreigners' then you're certainly Xenophobic.

I spent my working life with a large multi-national and soon found I had far more
in common with French, German, Spanish etc colleagues than with my (English)
neighbours.
Mind you, Americans were a different matter!


I have nothing against foreigners. We are all the same - Human. When I
said I feel like I don't live in my own country anymore, it's because
quite often when on the bus, or around the city I don’t hear English
being spoken. A common language is important for social cohesion, in
making us feel we are one. As for the Americans they aren't that bad
once you get used to them. ;-)

"Joe Egginton" wrote in message
...
On 26/05/2013 08:17, Bob Martin wrote:
in 379859 20130525 111001 "Col" wrote:
Joe Egginton wrote:

You've guesssed - RACIST!

Not necessarily racist but if you genuinely want to live in
a town with no 'foreigners' then you're certainly Xenophobic.

I spent my working life with a large multi-national and soon found I had
far more
in common with French, German, Spanish etc colleagues than with my
(English)
neighbours.
Mind you, Americans were a different matter!


I have nothing against foreigners. We are all the same - Human. When I
said I feel like I don't live in my own country anymore, it's because
quite often when on the bus, or around the city I don’t hear English being
spoken. A common language is important for social cohesion, in making us
feel we are one. As for the Americans they aren't that bad once you get
used to them. ;-)

I have no problem with people conversing in any language they want as long
as they can speak English as well. That can lead to isolated
people/communities.
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl
Snow videos:
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3QvmL4UWBmHFMKWiwYm_gg

On Sunday, May 26, 2013 10:33:16 AM UTC+1, Joe Egginton wrote:
On 26/05/2013 08:17, Bob Martin wrote:

in 379859 20130525 111001 "Col" wrote:

Joe Egginton wrote:



You've guesssed - RACIST!



Not necessarily racist but if you genuinely want to live in

a town with no 'foreigners' then you're certainly Xenophobic.



I spent my working life with a large multi-national and soon found I had far more

in common with French, German, Spanish etc colleagues than with my (English)

neighbours.

Mind you, Americans were a different matter!





I have nothing against foreigners. We are all the same - Human. When I

said I feel like I don't live in my own country anymore, it's because

quite often when on the bus, or around the city I don�t hear English

being spoken. A common language is important for social cohesion, in

making us feel we are one. As for the Americans they aren't that bad

once you get used to them. ;-)

You're a strange lot you English. You look down on everyone who isn't English and hate the Germans. An anti immigration view is endemic and now you have the nutters in UKIP as well as the Conservative party to voice your narrow opinions. If you don't want immigrants in the UK (I presume your country is the UK or is it just England?),then I presume you would stop emigration to other countries. After all, if you don't want them here then why should they have you in their country? Truthfully, you don't actually like one another, with those north of Watford being definite second class citizens. You continually hark back to Victorian times, The Empire and all the vile imperialism that went with it. Sad!

On 26/05/2013 15:54, Desperate Dan wrote:
On Sunday, May 26, 2013 10:33:16 AM UTC+1, Joe Egginton wrote:
On 26/05/2013 08:17, Bob Martin wrote:

in 379859 20130525 111001 "Col" wrote:

Joe Egginton wrote:



You've guesssed - RACIST!



Not necessarily racist but if you genuinely want to live in

a town with no 'foreigners' then you're certainly Xenophobic.



I spent my working life with a large multi-national and soon found I had far more

in common with French, German, Spanish etc colleagues than with my (English)

neighbours.

Mind you, Americans were a different matter!





I have nothing against foreigners. We are all the same - Human. When I

said I feel like I don't live in my own country anymore, it's because

quite often when on the bus, or around the city I don�t hear English

being spoken. A common language is important for social cohesion, in

making us feel we are one. As for the Americans they aren't that bad

once you get used to them. ;-)

You're a strange lot you English. You look down on everyone who isn't English and hate the Germans. An anti immigration view is endemic and now you have the nutters in UKIP as well as the Conservative party to voice your narrow opinions. If you don't want immigrants in the UK (I presume your country is the UK or is it just England?),then I presume you would stop emigration to other countries. After all, if you don't want them here then why should they have you in their country? Truthfully, you don't actually like one another, with those north of Watford being definite second class citizens. You continually hark back to Victorian times, The Empire and all the vile imperialism that went with it. Sad!


I'm afraid to say Dan, that you've been listening and believing to many
left wing teachers. The British Empire was largely a force for good.

For a century, from 1815 to 1914 there was largely peace in Europe and
the world, through Pax Britannica. It was possible to travel the globe
and visit all continents using just one currency, speaking one language
and all without worry of molestation.

The countries we ruled, we ruled fairly. It did not try to extinguish
the cultures of other nations. Where native religions were opposed to
even simple moral behaviour, we introduced Christianity in order to
right the wrongs of primitive religions and allow these peoples to flower.

The fact that Britain was not interested in changing the cultures and
religions of the peoples it conquered can be seen most clearly in India.

Britain in the 19th century can be considered the educator of the world
- not a corner or a people did not benefit from the glow of western
civilisation and Anglo Saxon culture.

We opposed the slave trade in the 19th century and spread, fair
government, roads, railways, trade, and education.

On Sunday, May 26, 2013 6:59:00 PM UTC+1, Joe Egginton wrote:
On 26/05/2013 15:54, Desperate Dan wrote:

On Sunday, May 26, 2013 10:33:16 AM UTC+1, Joe Egginton wrote:

On 26/05/2013 08:17, Bob Martin wrote:



in 379859 20130525 111001 "Col" wrote:



Joe Egginton wrote:







You've guesssed - RACIST!







Not necessarily racist but if you genuinely want to live in



a town with no 'foreigners' then you're certainly Xenophobic.







I spent my working life with a large multi-national and soon found I had far more



in common with French, German, Spanish etc colleagues than with my (English)



neighbours.



Mind you, Americans were a different matter!











I have nothing against foreigners. We are all the same - Human. When I



said I feel like I don't live in my own country anymore, it's because



quite often when on the bus, or around the city I don�t hear English



being spoken. A common language is important for social cohesion, in



making us feel we are one. As for the Americans they aren't that bad



once you get used to them. ;-)



You're a strange lot you English. You look down on everyone who isn't English and hate the Germans. An anti immigration view is endemic and now you have the nutters in UKIP as well as the Conservative party to voice your narrow opinions. If you don't want immigrants in the UK (I presume your country is the UK or is it just England?),then I presume you would stop emigration to other countries. After all, if you don't want them here then why should they have you in their country? Truthfully, you don't actually like one another, with those north of Watford being definite second class citizens.. You continually hark back to Victorian times, The Empire and all the vile imperialism that went with it. Sad!





I'm afraid to say Dan, that you've been listening and believing to many

left wing teachers. The British Empire was largely a force for good.



For a century, from 1815 to 1914 there was largely peace in Europe and

the world, through Pax Britannica. It was possible to travel the globe

and visit all continents using just one currency, speaking one language

and all without worry of molestation.



The countries we ruled, we ruled fairly. It did not try to extinguish

the cultures of other nations. Where native religions were opposed to

even simple moral behaviour, we introduced Christianity in order to

right the wrongs of primitive religions and allow these peoples to flower..



The fact that Britain was not interested in changing the cultures and

religions of the peoples it conquered can be seen most clearly in India.



Britain in the 19th century can be considered the educator of the world

- not a corner or a people did not benefit from the glow of western

civilisation and Anglo Saxon culture.



We opposed the slave trade in the 19th century and spread, fair

government, roads, railways, trade, and education.

Our altruism knows no bounds!

On Sunday, May 26, 2013 6:59:00 PM UTC+1, Joe Egginton wrote:
On 26/05/2013 15:54, Desperate Dan wrote:

On Sunday, May 26, 2013 10:33:16 AM UTC+1, Joe Egginton wrote:

On 26/05/2013 08:17, Bob Martin wrote:



in 379859 20130525 111001 "Col" wrote:



Joe Egginton wrote:







You've guesssed - RACIST!







Not necessarily racist but if you genuinely want to live in



a town with no 'foreigners' then you're certainly Xenophobic.







I spent my working life with a large multi-national and soon found I had far more



in common with French, German, Spanish etc colleagues than with my (English)



neighbours.



Mind you, Americans were a different matter!











I have nothing against foreigners. We are all the same - Human. When I



said I feel like I don't live in my own country anymore, it's because



quite often when on the bus, or around the city I don�t hear English



being spoken. A common language is important for social cohesion, in



making us feel we are one. As for the Americans they aren't that bad



once you get used to them. ;-)



You're a strange lot you English. You look down on everyone who isn't English and hate the Germans. An anti immigration view is endemic and now you have the nutters in UKIP as well as the Conservative party to voice your narrow opinions. If you don't want immigrants in the UK (I presume your country is the UK or is it just England?),then I presume you would stop emigration to other countries. After all, if you don't want them here then why should they have you in their country? Truthfully, you don't actually like one another, with those north of Watford being definite second class citizens.. You continually hark back to Victorian times, The Empire and all the vile imperialism that went with it. Sad!





I'm afraid to say Dan, that you've been listening and believing to many

left wing teachers. The British Empire was largely a force for good.



For a century, from 1815 to 1914 there was largely peace in Europe and

the world, through Pax Britannica. It was possible to travel the globe

and visit all continents using just one currency, speaking one language

and all without worry of molestation.



The countries we ruled, we ruled fairly. It did not try to extinguish

the cultures of other nations. Where native religions were opposed to

even simple moral behaviour, we introduced Christianity in order to

right the wrongs of primitive religions and allow these peoples to flower..



The fact that Britain was not interested in changing the cultures and

religions of the peoples it conquered can be seen most clearly in India.



Britain in the 19th century can be considered the educator of the world

- not a corner or a people did not benefit from the glow of western

civilisation and Anglo Saxon culture.



We opposed the slave trade in the 19th century and spread, fair

government, roads, railways, trade, and education.

Breathtaking imperialism. shakes head Your view of history is incredibly anglocentric and unbelievably myopic. Truly amazing.

On Monday, 27 May 2013 06:12:10 UTC+12, Dawlish wrote:
Breathtaking imperialism. shakes head Your view of history is incredibly anglocentric and unbelievably myopic. Truly amazing.

Surely the guy's joking? - but wait ... !!