k19

Has to be the one we experienced last year- It started snowing at about 6pm on Friday the 17th and didn't stop until about 6am on the 18th. It wasn't always massively heavy, but was never light, and by the morning it had left about 10 inches of snow. It took a week to get this down to about 6 inches ( Only on heat conducting surfaces though) and then that remainder had gone in a day with the extremely heavy rain. Would love for that to be a regular thing but it's such a rare event.

That may be the case but the Met office has given my area a warning too, and it suggests it should be raining somewhat more than it is. I'm not complaining, its a good thing if anything, but I just don't see what the met office thought was going to happen.

I don't see what the fuss is about. We've had rain but i would hardly describe it as heavy. Maybe we are on the edge of the heavy stuff.

If it was confirmation bias it certainly isnt anymore. Although now the charts look like a mish mash of different outcomes, there are a significant amount of outliers going for low pressure around that time.

A very interesting outlier in FI EDIT: Even the Operational is suggesting a drop in pressure

I think he is confusing the idea of DNA with the idea of effects?

I'd just like him contributing to the forum. It would make the whole experience a lot more interesting to have a famous face actually answering questions/making observations. Same for Michael Fish

Nice to hear someone mention the uppers. Since the airflow around low pressure is anti clockwise, could this potentially give a notherly, and therefore, a very snowy storm?

No, generally <0 is needed for snow, but many other factors determine the likelihood os snow. As a General rule you need: -At most 528 DAM line ( This can be flexible in heavy precipitation, but any lasting snow at low levels really generally needs this) -At most -5c 850's ( Also flexible, but for anything decent at lower levels, this is a must) - The Zero Degree Isothern must be low enough. I believe its something like 300m for lower levels to see snow

Its not that we are trying to dissect the theory, MB should keep doing forecasts in my opinion- especially if this one comes off, however if no information is given out, and perhaps, at his own admission, his relatively new knowledge of how the weather works may cause an upset here and there, thus altering the forecast, possibly causing it to be wrong. If some minor details were given out then people like roger and BFTP might be able to help refine the method before it's dismissed. It would be a huge loss to our understanding if he gets this forecast wrong, and then gives up when it may be that a few slight details- which could be provided by people here- were missing.

Do not assume that his view is shared by all. If you get this one right then your forecasts will be much anticipated

Using cycles and past days with the same factors coming in to play suggests that it's already statistical gambling ha! But yes even if MB shed some light on why the method is using only 3 basic factors but requires 200 pages, i'm by no means saying he should reveal all, I just think its strange to 'test' this method when in fact, if he gave out minor pieces of information then others could help refine the system. Great inventions/discoveries are rarely the sole work of one person, and usually take years to develop, but today with the internet that could be sped up so much! Yes I see what you mean its a real dilemma. If everything natural/human on earth can be predicted in advance, and the world knows this then countless would be saved, but also countless lost, as the world turned to mush- if economy's could be predicted the world wouldn't function. Although I think that at this stage it seems that only 'extreme' weather events can be forecasted by this. I.e MB is predicting a sever weather event in 25 days, and the low pressure of November 12th was relatively severe by normal standards. It seems the system didn't work for a relatively 'average' day ( As far as last december goes!) with the christmas forecast.

Yes I agree.MB, You can say you want to try and test it all you want, but how do you expect people to help you along without disclosing your ideas? If you are not serious enough to use the wealth of knowledge on this forum to help iron out any issues in your theory then i struggle to understand why you post predictions at all. If you tell us what these 3 'variables' are- just the names- then others may pay attention to this system, after all, surely disclosing these variables can cause no problems. I really cannot fathom why you can't tell us these- you don't even need to explain them if you don't want.

Yes good point. I also wonder if he uses the idea of string theory i.e. the 'variables' are on the other string

On the thread on Piston Heads he mentions the same method can be used to predict earthquakes, and in reply to one of my questions he suggested anything can be predicted on the earth, and so for that reason the variables he's using are not on this planet.

Just to point something out which I believe about this whole theory. I touched on the issue earlier. If as MB says in many posts that everything on earth is cyclic in nature, and as he mentions on other forums the sharp spikes ( Such as on a graph for pressure or even stock exchange prices) which would 'appear' to have an obvious, but unpredictable cause, are in fact predictable by looking at the underlying cause, then the three "variables" he mentions must be the same in ALL scenarios. If the weather can be altered by say, a volcanic eruption, and the prediction made before said eruption comes good anyway, then the determining factors must have taken into account this event. Since the event ( a volcanic eruption) cannot be CAUSED by the weather, but can have an effect on the weather, there is no way any weather models could take this into account before hand. But if this new method hypothetically could, it suggests that it uses the same method to predict the Volcanic eruption as well as the weather. In summary I have to say I'm still skeptical about the idea, but come February 5th, I think I will have made up my mind to a high degree. The only way I can put what I have written differently is this (Sorry but I'm going to do this in terms of markets with reference to weather instead of the other way round: - All conventional methods are predicting a steady increase in share prices for a year. -New system predicts a sharp drop in prices after 6 months. - 6 months later there is a huge hurricane which causes much destruction -Shares drop dramatically because of this - The new system was correct in this instance, but there is no way anything we normally relate to stocks could have predicted this. The fact is that the new system predicted the weather, not the stock prices, so it wasn't that the weather was the cause, there was a series of things which changed the weather which then caused a drop in shares. .... therefore the same 3 factors must be used when determining the result of anything on earth... again, im still a skeptic.

Sorry, but I think you missed something I wrote. I asked if the 3 'variables' that determine the weather and the DOW were in fact the same thing?

After having read through as much of your piston heads discussion ( 78 pages, I believe im on page 30) I have to say i am more interested than ever. I understand you believe cycles in nature repeat themselves i.e. Earthquakes do, but you also believe human driven things such as the DOW are cyclic. And for every cycle you speak of you say you can count the 'driving' factors on one hand. This makes me wonder if some, possibly even All the factors are the same in each circumstance. After reading through the discussion on piston heads you often give 'clues' but unfortunately they come in the form of links which are broken or require subscriptions . Also I'm interested to see if you believe things such as the lottery are random. Is there a cycle in which numbers come out? Surely there are no external, or for that matter accessible, driving factors to this.

hmmm very philosophical. I will be watching this closely to see if in fact there is a storm, and if there is, then that is one incredible prediction. Also I like your logic, but can you explain to me how 'Nature unravels' is related to 12 divisions on a clock? Is this merely a musing? Thanks

Thanks for the great help everyone, I have bought one of the books John recommended, but I might buy more. Once again thanks for all the great reccomendations

I find the netweather guides very usedul and appreciate the effort that has gone into them, but I would like a book of some sort ( at a relatively basic level). I was wondering if anybody knows of good books for beginner meteorology? Thanks

You've just made me wish I was at the docks on Friday night now. Sparks must have looked amazing.

I may be completely wrong here but here's my theory on the whole thing. First of all I'd like to pitch the idea that BP aren't to blame but that's another story. Okay Global Warming is supposedly melting the ice caps and they say that the salinity difference in fresh water and seawater is what is causing the gulf to slow down (as it 'evidently' has been for years). This according to many of the videos posted, combined with the solar minimum and other factors such as volcanic eruptions should in theory cool the earth down. Now correct me if i'm wrong but I am envisioning a loop here. Global warming warms the earth. The gulf stream and other factors caused by global warming then cool the earth. Surely this will be a cycle and a natural thermostat will keep us within boundaries?

Hi I live near Preston and can tell you that I saw nothing on Friday, and only heard of a power cut on Thursday night. However the real storm was on Saturday morning. I went out to clean the car of the dust that had been blown on it (from the storm on thursday) and heard the loudest crack of thunder ever, and the odd hailstone shower hitting me. On my way to work i pass through a village and it looked as though they had bore the brunt of that storm. About 30 minutes after the storm had gone past my house ( I should mention that this 'village' is about 2 miles away) there was a thick layer of large hailstones covering the ground. It was surreal, that suddenly the ground was covered in ice.

Can we see a shot of what it looked like at the height of winter last year?