On Wednesday, August 26, 2015 at 7:28:01 PM UTC+1, Graham Easterling wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2015 at 6:14:02 PM UTC+1, wrote:

Why so?



This has been said many times before but it worth saying again. The BBC forecasts aren't intended for weather enthusiasts but for those who might want to allow extra time for their journey to work due to adverse conditions or simply whether to take a brolly.

If you take the people who don't work, work from home, don't work in a large settlement, have shift work, or self employed and can choose when they work, are close to where they work etc. you are left with a smallish minority involved in a metropolitan rush hour.

Well I appreciate that, that's why I 'many' people are interested in rush hour weather, clearly there are a lot of others to which the reference to the rush hour is irrelevant. Thing is the rush hour is usually only mentioned if there is adverse weather expected at that time, commuters are a sizeable minority so it seems reasonable to flag up the weather at that time if deemed necessary. The rest of the forecast is for everybody else.
They are for the *general public* so have to cater for everybody.

Col

Cornwall is relatively densely populated county believe it or not - due to it's old industrial base, but it's only Truro and Saltash that have anything resembling a rush hour. If I take my mixed road in Penzance - I'm semi retired, but I used to walk to work. My neighbour is self employed and works at times to suit himself. Then comes a retired Scotsmen followed by a German university lecturer who spends half the year in Penzance writing books. Across the road are 2 Polish builders, Barry who's the landlord, and a chap that works at a Adult Day Centre within easy walking distance. Also a couple of fisherman. The rush hour is pretty irrelevant to all of them. If there's a time in Cornwall when you want to avoid traffic chaos it's 10:00-11:00am on a Saturday changeover day.

I'm not sure how many of my neighbours are weather enthusiasts, though on the tip of Cornwall weather is something you tend to notice more than in say London (where I spent 6 years) where the weather tends to blend into the background umless it was really extreme. You would be surprised how many people I know are USW lurkers, a couple have posted on the odd occasion.

There are people who work outside in all weather, farmers, fishermen, builders etc. who are more in need of advice than people who are so brain dead they have to be be told to turn on the windscreen wipers because there might be spray if it rains.

The forecasts seem to be aimed at a narrow section of society, that many of the presenters belong to.


Of course a bit of 'education' along the way wouldn't go amiss!


Well, I won't argue with that!

Graham
Penzance

On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 5:34:50 PM UTC+1, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Thursday, 27 August 2015 07:57:19 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:
On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 2:57:57 AM UTC+1, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 August 2015 21:48:25 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:

And as usual, I see you obsessed with me and paying no attention whatsoever to the thread.

Really?? Apart from the fact that you replied to my alternative view to your hack's poor article immediately after you'd posted this. Nothing ever works for you hughes, does it? You say one thing about me in one post, then totally contradict your scribblings in the next. The knots you tie yourself in are myriad and the clear obsession is yours, dear boy.

Dig away, should you wish, or return to the thread title and continue your moaning.


Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

My post, to which this is a reply, is for some reason not quoted here despite that being the normal practice. You have quoted your own previous post but not mine. Nobody will know who you're talking to.

Also, you have put *my* name at the end of *your* post, not for the first time. Why?

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

He's started doing the same in replies to me. I've (politely) asked him to stop as it's now clearly deliberate.

Graham
Penzance - Cool, but dry & fairly sunny today.

On 27/08/2015 09:40, Dawlish wrote:
On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 8:13:39 AM UTC+1, wrote:
"Graham Easterling" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, August 26, 2015 at 6:14:02 PM UTC+1,
wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2015 at 1:54:21 PM UTC+1, Graham Easterling
wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2015 at 11:26:48 AM UTC+1, Dave Cornwell wrote:
On 25/08/2015 01:31, Tudor Hughes wrote:
This is from the Guardian:


http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...h-warning-cold

I'm with him on practically all points. Includes an example
from USW's favourite paper.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

----------------------------------------------------------
Yes, most of us are, I would like to think.
Dave

I certainly do. The constant reference to rush hours is one of my pet
hates.

Why so?



This has been said many times before but it worth saying again. The BBC
forecasts aren't intended for weather enthusiasts but for those who might
want to allow extra time for their journey to work due to adverse
conditions or simply whether to take a brolly.

If you take the people who don't work, work from home, don't work in a large
settlement, have shift work, or self employed and can choose when they work,
are close to where they work etc. you are left with a smallish minority
involved in a metropolitan rush hour.

Cornwall is relatively densely populated county believe it or not - due to
it's old industrial base, but it's only Truro and Saltash that have anything
resembling a rush hour. If I take my mixed road in Penzance - I'm semi
retired, but I used to walk to work. My neighbour is self employed and works
at times to suit himself. Then comes a retired Scotsmen followed by a German
university lecturer who spends half the year in Penzance writing books.
Across the road are 2 Polish builders, Barry who's the landlord, and a chap
that works at a Adult Day Centre within easy walking distance. Also a couple
of fisherman. The rush hour is pretty irrelevant to all of them. If there's
a time in Cornwall when you want to avoid traffic chaos it's 10:00-11:00am
on a Saturday changeover day.

I'm not sure how many of my neighbours are weather enthusiasts, though on
the tip of Cornwall weather is something you tend to notice more than in say
London (where I spent 6 years) where the weather tends to blend into the
background umless it was really extreme. You would be surprised how many
people I know are USW lurkers, a couple have posted on the odd occasion.

There are people who work outside in all weather, farmers, fishermen,
builders etc. who are more in need of advice than people who are so brain
dead they have to be be told to turn on the windscreen wipers because there
might be spray if it rains.

The forecasts seem to be aimed at a narrow section of society, that many of
the presenters belong to.
========================

Very well said Graham. Agree entirely. Substitute Cornwall for a lot of
Devon too. Here the so called "rush hour" is a car at the road junction. Do
I need to be told to put my wipers on or that there will be spray on the
road after it has been raining, er no. Neither do a lot of people who live
and work in this county where I suspect we take notice of the weather more
than in Greater Suburbia.

Will
--
http://www.lyneside.demon.co.uk/Hayt...antage_Pro.htm
Will Hand (Haytor, Devon, 1017 feet asl)
---------------------------------------------

You are retired and live on Dartmoor. Hence your view of morning traffic and commuting. shakes head at the silliness of that views.

Where there is no rush hour, few live. Odd that, isn't it?


Will lives on Dartmoor because he can't face the real world. Will
experiencing the real world is in too much of a conflict with his
liberal peter pan fantasy world.

On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 9:39:03 PM UTC+1, jumper wrote:


Will lives on Dartmoor because he can't face the real world. Will
experiencing the real world is in too much of a conflict with his
liberal peter pan fantasy world.

You stupid bloody idiot, Will lives on Dartmoor because he loves snow and when the Met Office moved to Exeter he moved to Dartmoor as he was still working for them. Therefore he was obviously engaged with the 'real world' (whatever that is exactly) with a daily commute etc.

Idiot, idiot, IDIOT.

Col

On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 9:31:37 PM UTC+1, Graham Easterling wrote:
On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 5:34:50 PM UTC+1, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Thursday, 27 August 2015 07:57:19 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:
On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 2:57:57 AM UTC+1, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 August 2015 21:48:25 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:

And as usual, I see you obsessed with me and paying no attention whatsoever to the thread.

Really?? Apart from the fact that you replied to my alternative view to your hack's poor article immediately after you'd posted this. Nothing ever works for you hughes, does it? You say one thing about me in one post, then totally contradict your scribblings in the next. The knots you tie yourself in are myriad and the clear obsession is yours, dear boy.

Dig away, should you wish, or return to the thread title and continue your moaning.


Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

My post, to which this is a reply, is for some reason not quoted here despite that being the normal practice. You have quoted your own previous post but not mine. Nobody will know who you're talking to.

Also, you have put *my* name at the end of *your* post, not for the first time. Why?

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

He's started doing the same in replies to me. I've (politely) asked him to stop as it's now clearly deliberate.

Graham
Penzance - Cool, but dry & fairly sunny today.

I always do it. I reply to parts of the body of posts and I don't sign off. I've done it thousands of times and I reply to others in that way too. Always have. Never noticed that? That would be because you've just failed to find another way to castigate, haven't you?

Nothing ever works, hughes, does it?

On Friday, August 28, 2015 at 7:42:16 AM UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:
On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 9:31:37 PM UTC+1, Graham Easterling wrote:
On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 5:34:50 PM UTC+1, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Thursday, 27 August 2015 07:57:19 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:
On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 2:57:57 AM UTC+1, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 August 2015 21:48:25 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:

And as usual, I see you obsessed with me and paying no attention whatsoever to the thread.

Really?? Apart from the fact that you replied to my alternative view to your hack's poor article immediately after you'd posted this. Nothing ever works for you hughes, does it? You say one thing about me in one post, then totally contradict your scribblings in the next. The knots you tie yourself in are myriad and the clear obsession is yours, dear boy.

Dig away, should you wish, or return to the thread title and continue your moaning.


Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

My post, to which this is a reply, is for some reason not quoted here despite that being the normal practice. You have quoted your own previous post but not mine. Nobody will know who you're talking to.

Also, you have put *my* name at the end of *your* post, not for the first time. Why?

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

He's started doing the same in replies to me. I've (politely) asked him to stop as it's now clearly deliberate.

Graham
Penzance - Cool, but dry & fairly sunny today.

I always do it. I reply to parts of the body of posts and I don't sign off. I've done it thousands of times and I reply to others in that way too. Always have. Never noticed that? That would be because you've just failed to find another way to castigate, haven't you?

Nothing ever works, hughes, does it?

Or even Mr Easterling....

Any comments about you two being totally out of touch with present day BBC audiences, instead of me? It's honestly hard keeping up with you. All my comments to Graham's (inaccurate, IMO) post and a reply which concentrates, not on the thread, but upon little old me.

Get over it.

On Friday, August 28, 2015 at 8:39:14 AM UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:
On Friday, August 28, 2015 at 7:42:16 AM UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:
On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 9:31:37 PM UTC+1, Graham Easterling wrote:
On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 5:34:50 PM UTC+1, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Thursday, 27 August 2015 07:57:19 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:
On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 2:57:57 AM UTC+1, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Wednesday, 26 August 2015 21:48:25 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:

And as usual, I see you obsessed with me and paying no attention whatsoever to the thread.

Really?? Apart from the fact that you replied to my alternative view to your hack's poor article immediately after you'd posted this. Nothing ever works for you hughes, does it? You say one thing about me in one post, then totally contradict your scribblings in the next. The knots you tie yourself in are myriad and the clear obsession is yours, dear boy.

Dig away, should you wish, or return to the thread title and continue your moaning.


Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

My post, to which this is a reply, is for some reason not quoted here despite that being the normal practice. You have quoted your own previous post but not mine. Nobody will know who you're talking to.

Also, you have put *my* name at the end of *your* post, not for the first time. Why?

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

He's started doing the same in replies to me. I've (politely) asked him to stop as it's now clearly deliberate.

Graham
Penzance - Cool, but dry & fairly sunny today.

I always do it. I reply to parts of the body of posts and I don't sign off. I've done it thousands of times and I reply to others in that way too. Always have. Never noticed that? That would be because you've just failed to find another way to castigate, haven't you?

Nothing ever works, hughes, does it?

Or even Mr Easterling....

Any comments about you two being totally out of touch with present day BBC audiences, instead of me? It's honestly hard keeping up with you. All my comments to Graham's (inaccurate, IMO) post and a reply which concentrates, not on the thread, but upon little old me.

Get over it.

My original post:-

"I certainly do (agree) . The constant reference to rush hours is one of my pet hates."

I wrote this because I agreed with the original post, and I'm fed up hearing references to the rush hour"

Nothing about target audiences or you - geddit!

Well I tried the polite approach. - You ****bag

Graham
Penzance


Graham
Penzance

On Wednesday, August 26, 2015 at 9:53:05 PM UTC+1, Dawlish wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2015 at 9:37:26 PM UTC+1, JohnD wrote:
"Dawlish" wrote in message
...

The BBC educates well.

Only at a fairly primitive level, as far as I can see...

You have to think of the average viewer; not the average weather nut, many of whom have degrees and all of whom have a great deal of knowledge, compared to the average TV watcher. Meteorology is incredibly difficult for most people; in fact, the physics and their application is beyond almost everyone who watches the BBC forecasts. The 'primitive level' is only from a viewpoint of being way beyond 'primitive', John. We are not the BBC's target audience.

This is sheer arrogance. I'm sure many "weather nuts" have degrees, but just look around the myriad of social networks and forums and you'll understand that many people who have a fascination for the weather, are just ordinary, everyday folk. (Awaits pointed remark).

I see you class yourself as not being amongst the primitive folk, again such arrogance. Where did you do your meteorological study?

I'm sure you find that most people who have an interest in the weather have learnt on the hoof, many of them, myself included, have learnt from joining groups such as this and I am indebted to many of the contributors on here for helping me to learn and understand far more than when I found this group 20 years ago.

As for the BBC forecasts, why are they not relevant to anyone on this group, or indeed anyone whatever their level of meteorological education or understanding? I watch them, not as regularly as I used to, and use their broad forecast as something that I can interpret using local knowledge, into something more relevant to me.

I also like to see the broad perspective of what is happening nationally and not just in my own local area.

What I don't appreciate is the "dumbing down" of forecasting and the situation where the presenter becomes the focal point and not the forecast. Carol and Tomasz come into that category and annoy me intensely and I rue the day that forecasters like Bert Foord disappeared from our screens.

If only we could bring back the presentation style of yore and combine it with some of the technology that current presenters have available to them.

So don't include me in your arrogant comments Dawlish, I'm part of the target audience for BBC forecasts as much as almost anyone who has an interest in this fascinating subject.