On Thursday, December 11, 2014 12:06:40 AM UTC, Bernard Burton wrote:
Scott. I am not sure how you have arrived at those figures. Using the values
on the link you gave, and taking my own average monthly mean temp for the
periods 1882 to 1990 as an approximation, I find that for the years you
list, the Dec cold spells were followed by:
Normal (anom +1 to -1) Jan 38%, Feb 24%, Mar 34%
Cold (anom colder than -1) 48%, Feb 34%, Mar 32%
Mild (anom warmer than +1) 14%, Feb 42%, Mar 34%
So the 38 minus rule in Dec was followed by an average or warmer Jan in 52%,
Feb in 66% and Mar in 68%. I can see no useful peredictave value in that.

--
Bernard Burton

Wokingham Berkshire.

Weather data and satellite images at:
http://www.woksat.info/wwp.html

"Scott W" wrote in message
...
After being reminded about this a couple of weeks ago I decided to have a
look at the stats back to 1806 and see what the results are.

If there is a run of cold days (3.3C or less) around mid-month the chance of
an average to colder than average January and February is 94% and 74%
respectively. The chance of an average to colder than average March is 96%.
Also notable is that the chance of a severe spell in January (4C colder than
normal) is 30%.

The full blog post can be found here. http://wp.me/p2VSmb-wO



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

Thanks Bernard. The Excel link is http://1drv.ms/1ByrMYC

It is possible that my figures are skewed in favour of cold ie Luke Howard's records 1806-1831? Another possible discrepancy is that I use Paul Bartlett's average of -0.7C to +0.7C when compiling these tables.

Best regards, Scott

"Scott W" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, December 11, 2014 12:06:40 AM UTC, Bernard Burton wrote:
Scott. I am not sure how you have arrived at those figures. Using the
values
on the link you gave, and taking my own average monthly mean temp for the
periods 1882 to 1990 as an approximation, I find that for the years you
list, the Dec cold spells were followed by:
Normal (anom +1 to -1) Jan 38%, Feb 24%, Mar 34%
Cold (anom colder than -1) 48%, Feb 34%, Mar 32%
Mild (anom warmer than +1) 14%, Feb 42%, Mar 34%
So the 38 minus rule in Dec was followed by an average or warmer Jan in
52%,
Feb in 66% and Mar in 68%. I can see no useful peredictave value in that.

--
Bernard Burton

Wokingham Berkshire.

Weather data and satellite images at:
http://www.woksat.info/wwp.html

"Scott W" wrote in message
...
After being reminded about this a couple of weeks ago I decided to have a
look at the stats back to 1806 and see what the results are.

If there is a run of cold days (3.3C or less) around mid-month the chance
of
an average to colder than average January and February is 94% and 74%
respectively. The chance of an average to colder than average March is
96%.
Also notable is that the chance of a severe spell in January (4C colder
than
normal) is 30%.

The full blog post can be found here. http://wp.me/p2VSmb-wO



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

Thanks Bernard. The Excel link is http://1drv.ms/1ByrMYC

It is possible that my figures are skewed in favour of cold ie Luke
Howard's records 1806-1831? Another possible discrepancy is that I use
Paul Bartlett's average of -0.7C to +0.7C when compiling these tables.

Best regards, Scott

Further to this thread:
I have analysed the monthly mean temperature anomaly for each Jan, Feb and
Mar from 1882 to 2011 in the Wokingham series data, and ranked them into
categories, Mild or very mild = anom +1, Normal = anom +1 to -1, and cold
or very cold, anom -1. I have assumed that the years selected as having 38
minus Decembers at Greenwich will be applicable to Wokingham.
For the years meeting the 38 minus rule in December as shown in the link to
Scott's blog, in January there are 10.0% of all years in the cold/very cold
category, in Feb there are 7.7% in that category, and in March, also 7.7 %.
For other cold/very cold cases, in Jan 20.0% did not satisfy the 30 minus
rule, Feb 19.2% and Mar also 19.2%.
For the years satisfying the 38 minus rule, the ratio of cold/very cold to
normal, warm or very warm is : Jan 48:52, Feb and Mar 37:63.
So, twice as many cold or very cold Januarys are not preceded by a 38 minus
rule Dec as are preceded by one, and 2.5 times likewise for both Feb and
Mar.
If a forecast of a cold or very cold January was based on the 38 minus rule,
it would be correct on 48% of occasions. For both February and March this
would drop to 37%.
So as a predictive rule it doesn't have a lot going for it, IMHO.

--
Bernard Burton

Wokingham Berkshire.

Weather data and satellite images at:
http://www.woksat.info/wwp.html



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Thursday, 11 December 2014 18:13:52 UTC, Bernard Burton wrote:
"Scott W" wrote in message
...
Wrote on his blog:
One popular myth is that very large blackberries mean a harsh winter. The fact that this has more to do with plentiful rainfall plumping up the fruit at harvest time is ignored.

The size of fruit is dependent on water supplied as well as sunlight. Levels of temperature and soils quality also have an effect but what they might be could be surprising without checking on them.

It is difficult to imagine what other reasoning the old sages would have had for such sources of forecasting. One has to assume though that it was a consensus opinion arrived at by people who knew about blackberries.

Most of the book produced by the Met Office written by Richard Inwards in the days before the flower people took over the science concerns the behaviour of harvested produce.

This was in an era of transportation difficulties when a freak spell of weather could break farmers in a region affected by a few days of the wrong sort of weather.

It takes just 7 days for a smallholder to lose his hay crop for instance. If he can't find something to cover himself he will be signing on the dole for several months. He wouldn't have had much relief from the Parish in the good old days.

On Thursday, December 11, 2014 12:06:40 AM UTC, Bernard Burton wrote:
Scott. I am not sure how you have arrived at those figures. Using the
values
on the link you gave, and taking my own average monthly mean temp for the
periods 1882 to 1990 as an approximation, I find that for the years you
list, the Dec cold spells were followed by:
Normal (anom +1 to -1) Jan 38%, Feb 24%, Mar 34%
Cold (anom colder than -1) 48%, Feb 34%, Mar 32%
Mild (anom warmer than +1) 14%, Feb 42%, Mar 34%
So the 38 minus rule in Dec was followed by an average or warmer Jan in
52%,
Feb in 66% and Mar in 68%. I can see no useful peredictave value in that.

--
Bernard Burton

Wokingham Berkshire.

Weather data and satellite images at:
http://www.woksat.info/wwp.html

"Scott W" wrote in message
...
After being reminded about this a couple of weeks ago I decided to have a
look at the stats back to 1806 and see what the results are.

If there is a run of cold days (3.3C or less) around mid-month the chance
of
an average to colder than average January and February is 94% and 74%
respectively. The chance of an average to colder than average March is
96%.
Also notable is that the chance of a severe spell in January (4C colder
than
normal) is 30%.

The full blog post can be found here. http://wp.me/p2VSmb-wO



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

Thanks Bernard. The Excel link is http://1drv.ms/1ByrMYC

It is possible that my figures are skewed in favour of cold ie Luke
Howard's records 1806-1831? Another possible discrepancy is that I use
Paul Bartlett's average of -0.7C to +0.7C when compiling these tables.

Best regards, Scott

Further to this thread:
I have analysed the monthly mean temperature anomaly for each Jan, Feb and
Mar from 1882 to 2011 in the Wokingham series data, and ranked them into
categories, Mild or very mild = anom +1, Normal = anom +1 to -1, and cold
or very cold, anom -1. I have assumed that the years selected as having 38
minus Decembers at Greenwich will be applicable to Wokingham.
For the years meeting the 38 minus rule in December as shown in the link to
Scott's blog, in January there are 10.0% of all years in the cold/very cold
category, in Feb there are 7.7% in that category, and in March, also 7.7 %.
For other cold/very cold cases, in Jan 20.0% did not satisfy the 30 minus
rule, Feb 19.2% and Mar also 19.2%.
For the years satisfying the 38 minus rule, the ratio of cold/very cold to
normal, warm or very warm is : Jan 48:52, Feb and Mar 37:63.
So, twice as many cold or very cold Januaries are not preceded by a 38 minus
rule Dec as are preceded by one, and 2.5 times likewise for both Feb and
March.
If

Weather data and satellite images at:
http://www.woksat.info/wwp.html

If you could supply a graph for the warm anomalies and one for cold anomalies or peaks -or whatever, I am pretty sure they WOULD be useful. Bear in mind that with inexperience, never mind disbelief, the chances of clicking on what might also be occurring is nearly impossible to interpret. We are not gods.

On Wednesday, 10 December 2014 13:53:07 UTC, Scott W wrote:
After being reminded about this a couple of weeks ago I decided to have a look at the stats back to 1806 and see what the results are.

If there is a run of cold days (3.3C or less) around mid-month the chance of an average to colder than average January and February is 94% and 74% respectively. The chance of an average to colder than average March is 96%. Also notable is that the chance of a severe spell in January (4C colder than normal) is 30%.

The full blog post can be found here. http://wp.me/p2VSmb-wO

See how things run in the years where super-quakes occur will you, please?

I am pretty sure that if this winter has the snow threatened by some that later in the year we will have another visitation from the angel of death. Presumably these things will become more and more frequent until we all wake up.