I have to ask you Gavin are you being mischievous or do you really rate TWO
and Metcheck as serious forecasters? I say this as you keep quoting/linking
them.

I say this as you keep quoting/linking
them.



Not just me noticed it then, i thought gavin used
to love TWO... perhaps he is their advertising campaign

"nguk..." wrote in message
...
I say this as you keep quoting/linking
them.



Not just me noticed it then, i thought gavin used
to love TWO... perhaps he is their advertising campaign



:-). I just like the discussion. They make good discussion topics :-)

"Lawrence" wrote in message
...
I have to ask you Gavin are you being mischievous or do you really rate
TWO
and Metcheck as serious forecasters? I say this as you keep
quoting/linking
them.


I regard them as something to add to a debate. I don't rate them as hard
scientific gospel. They do offer a service for popular use. You could not
use it for scientific research obviously. Some of the forecasts they do are
accurate or at least reasonably accurate. Sometimes they are way out, but
then again so is the BBC and more of us hold that as gospel.
I tend refer to them as I have lost a bit of faith in the BBC forecasts.
I now prefer to read something as the standard of presentation on all the TV
forecasts has plummeted.
I use TWO and Metcheck for rough guidelines. I think Metcheck as an
independent has got the accurate edge. I quote their comments on here to
make a good discussion.
Having said that it is nice that so many join in for the debates. That
is what it is all about and there are a lot of decent people on this ng.
That's it really.

Regards, Gavin.

Just remember Gavin they want 'hits' , so you won't see many long range
forecasts with the word 'mild' in.
Naturally, they will continue to 'guess' cold snaps.
But I agree, the forums and discussion is interesting, but only some of it
in my opinion... Alot of it is 'long range model hunting' , which so many
take seriously, especially the youngsters.
I find the discussion in this ng much more down to earth and realistic, and
like you, can find soem honest forecasts\info here, unlike on the BBC.

----------------------------------------------------------------
"Gavin Staples" wrote in message
. ..

"Lawrence" wrote in message
...
I have to ask you Gavin are you being mischievous or do you really rate
TWO
and Metcheck as serious forecasters? I say this as you keep
quoting/linking
them.


I regard them as something to add to a debate. I don't rate them as hard
scientific gospel. They do offer a service for popular use. You could not
use it for scientific research obviously. Some of the forecasts they do
are
accurate or at least reasonably accurate. Sometimes they are way out, but
then again so is the BBC and more of us hold that as gospel.
I tend refer to them as I have lost a bit of faith in the BBC
forecasts.
I now prefer to read something as the standard of presentation on all the
TV
forecasts has plummeted.
I use TWO and Metcheck for rough guidelines. I think Metcheck as an
independent has got the accurate edge. I quote their comments on here to
make a good discussion.
Having said that it is nice that so many join in for the debates. That
is what it is all about and there are a lot of decent people on this ng.
That's it really.

Regards, Gavin.