[Better Than The Models ?]

if you dont agree or like the thread.why not just go away? i could phrase it more direct but the swear filter may explode.

This is my last post. I thought this forum engaged in genuine weather discussions, not pseudoscience. This forum isn't for me.

Read the pseudoscience link on Wikipedia and take a moment to reflect.

I'm off to the pub to engage in some intelligent conversation.

Goodbye

Pieman

[Better Than The Models ?]

Quote

'Forecasters' who will not discuss their methods have little credibility to me - regardless of the outcome of the forecast.

Anyone can roll a dice.

Pieman

Your point has been made. Can this be the last time?

Yes it can.

Scientia non habet inimicum nisp ignorantem

Pieman

[Better Than The Models ?]

You're all completely missing my point.

I'm not interested in criticising anyone's forecast, and I'm not going to make any forecasts myself. I want to engage in a proper scientific debate, which has to include an airing and discussion of the forecasting methods being used, not just the forecast outcomes.

'Forecasters' who will not discuss their methods have little credibility to me - regardless of the outcome of the forecast.

Anyone can roll a dice.

Pieman

No... next time we'll have a control with one of MB's critics, Pieman, you, Steve Murr, independently come up with their own specific forecast. We'll see who's closest.

If it is all down to random chance, as you seem to think, you are all just as likely to get it right as MB. Or even more right.

Ed: MB will pick the date and will ask us for our forecasts before he posts his. I may even have a go myself

PaulB - I wholeheartedly agree with you. Your post is a breath of fresh air compared with those of many other contributors.

Pieman

My first (and probably my only) post on this thread.

Credit could, and can be given to some extent, if Nick was forecasting a general pattern. However, Nick has given a very specific forecast with specific pressure readings for specific locations. Now, no disrepect to Nick here, but anyone who knows a thing or two about meterology will acknowledge the fact that it is impossible to come up with detailed pressure charts two months or so before a specific day like Nick has and expect to be correct. Whilst the general pattern may be right, Nick's forecast will have to go down as being wrong purely because he is being so specific and he has indicated the importance of this accuracy himself. We can already see that the chart Nick came up with for yesterday was technically wrong, although the overall pattern wasn't too far out. A 1005mb low over Spain where a 1030mb high actually was forecast to be can not go down as being right. At the same time, a 1025mb ridge of high pressure over Ireland is not the same as a 1040mb high sitting there.

I don't begrudge anyone trying to come up with new methods of long range forecasting, but I do feel very strongly that it is a case of trying to run before you can even walk. Drawing pressure maps for 2 months out with self proclaimed high confidence is never going to work, whatever the methodlogy. However, going on and drawing a sequence of pressure maps for a specific time period 2 months out is just a waste of time to be frank, let alone going on to predict an event that is actually probably scientifically impossible to actually occur! No disrespect to you Nick, but it will never work. Stick to general patterns and give yourself some leeway and you may be onto something, but don't get into specifics because you will be fighting a losing battle from day 1.

[Better Than The Models ?]

Lorenzo, You've hit the nail on the head. Science is about understanding mechanisms and being able to reproduce the results. It is not sufficient just to say 'lets see how it turns out'.

It is like me saying to everyone that next time I roll a dice it will turn up '6' (my forecast).

• If I do roll a '6' then I take the glory and give you all a load of tosh on 'my method' and 'how I did it'. I can say anything I like 'because it worked'.
• If I don't roll a '6' (this bit deleted by OON).......unless I was to roll a '1' which means I have a correlation coefficient of -1 (i.e. the dice is upside down).

Pieman

My queries are and remain -

3 Unwillingness to discuss method and give ethereal responses to why method should or shouldnt be discussed when there are 12k users fascinated by weather who could contribute, yet the rebuttal is you looked at wheat prices for trading and this gave birth to a passion spawning a wild forecast that took 15 mins in the brain and more time on paper.

[Better Than The Models ?]

Science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is an enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the world.

What bugs me is a wild assertion about possible future events which is not based on testable explanations (or at least not in a transparent way). This offends the scientific principle.

Pieman

What bugs me more than anything is arrogance, especially of the so-called scientific kind, whose perpetrators are never wrong - in their own eyes.

[Better Than The Models ?]

And your point is what exactly? Clearly there's little in common between these three. Shows how long range forecasts are usually little better than guesswork.

Look atthe pressure gradient between Iceland and Norway; you have it falling towards Norway, the ECMWF has it rising and the GFS shows little gradient.

Pieman

Here's the 3 Feb 2011 12:00hrs + 192 and comparison with Storm Forecast:

[Better Than The Models ?]

Today's (22 Jan) Met Office long range forecast is just a description of the UK climate. Anyone could do this.

UK Outlook for Sunday 6 Feb 2011 to Sunday 20 Feb 2011:

This period looks to start mainly dry across southern parts of the UK, with cloudier, wetter and milder conditions in the north and west. Overnight frost and fog patches could continue for many southern parts of England and Wales. Meanwhile, spells of rain or drizzle, perhaps heavy at times with strong winds, are more likely further north across Scotland and Northern Ireland, with hill snow also possible here at times.

Updated: 1145 on Sat 22 Jan 2011

Here's my forecast for April 20th 2011.

Temperatures about normal for the time of year, but with periods of warm spring sunshine at times in the midlands, east and south-east England. Generally dry, but some light showers are possible, especially in the north and west. Mostly light winds.

Pieman

[Better Than The Models ?]

Just found this. It could be the first signs of the forecast stormy winds. There's definitely some kind of vortex here - maybe this could be the beginning of the Great North Sea Storm?

Pieman

[Better Than The Models ?]

I'm finding this thread increasingly like an argument in the pub at closing time.

Its getting boring.

Time to move on.

Pieman

[Better Than The Models ?]

I posted the Feb 2011 forecast on here because I was asked by AF #46 and Snooz #45 to offer more forecasts.

OK if your view is the wider feeling on here, that is my last forecast that I will post. I don't want to risk being suspended from another forum.

All the best

MB,

I am interested to see your 'forecast' but if you won't discuss your method, your workings, or your data sources then you have little credibility in my eyes.

If you now refuse to post any more 'forecasts' unless we stop asking you about 'your method' then that further reinforces my doubt.

I'm sorry, but I'm not willing to worship your ego until you can show me some science.

Pieman.

[PhD in Meteorology and lifetime weather observer]