Jump to content
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?

Jimmy0127

Members
  • Posts

    110
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Jimmy0127

  1. Yup.... Thankfully some of us have learned not to care a jot whether it's a mild, average or cold outcome and to then concern ourselves wIth 12-72hr forecast issues. All interesting whatever the outcome...!

     

    But you are clearly somewhat interested:

    "UKMO view (just chatted with them) remains as before: i.e. for Scandinavian block to establish after next week's milder (for some, notably so) phase and a progressively colder return from SE/E thereafter.  

     

    "Yup, 'could' being the key phrase given the timescale ahead. However, the notion of the colder block (with UK somewhere to western edge of it) remains the form horse they favour currently. I've not seen the DECIDER output behind it, but have perused the EC32, so can see the rationale being employed. Anyway, we watch with interest. The polarization of solutions past next week is very striking currently and it would be foolhardy to wholly write-off any solution (including the NCEP 'Winter Blowtorch') at this juncture, albeit the seemingly contractually-required return to a more zonal or Atlantic-dominated status-quo is a known GFS trait and one often highlighted by the senior forecasters at Exeter, as a note of caution for those perusing stuff progged out past T+240. But that doesn't mean it's wrong. We just don't know...

     

    "We just having a chuckle on phone with UKMO about what certain newspapers will do to 'square' their recent/ongoing/interminable editorial line of late, versus the 12C Theta-W approaching Scotland in the UKMO-GM at T+144... ;-)" 

    Surely accurate long range forecasting is a meteorologists goal? Especially when potentially hazardous weather is foreseeable. 

  2. Thanks very much to Mr O'Toole and anyone else involved in this.

     

    All of the key teleconnections and influential phenomena, so often talked about and advocated in isolation on the forums, are presented in a concise and digestible manner.

     

    I'm just hope one day we'll understand how to weight their significance and interaction! 

     

    Edit: no sarcasm in the above, just a whimsical aspiration of weather forecasting. 

    • Like 2
  3. If I am proven wrong in my concerns then what of it? What have we lost? If your constant assurances that nothing is amiss and that all is well proves unfounded, and your calming tomes has resulted in a lack of action when it was really necessary, then what?

    This is an area called risk management, which requires an evaluation of the probability and the potential consequences of a risk, followed by a decision on what, if any, measures to take to reduce either.AGW is tricky because it is unprecedented and predictions are many and varied and have historically shown poor verification. Even if you accept IPCC's analysis as gospel, there's huge error in its estimation of CO2 sensitivity. As for the effect of the resulting temperature change, we are getting even closer to speculation. So the consequences of inaction are essentially unknown. This makes an effective risk assessment impossible.If you can't gauge the risk, then you are no better than guessing to gamble on the future. Grey-Wolf could build a bunker in his garden to protect against an unprecedented nuclear war, based on the above rationale. Maybe one day it'll save his life.
    • Like 5
  4. At least we haven't seen a spin that this terrible Typhoon Haiyan was due to 'man made climate change'

     

    http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/11/09/scientists-reject-typhoon-haiyan-link-to-man-made-global-warming-storm-expert-brian-mcnoldy-of-u-of-miami-we-dont-get-to-pick-and-choose-which-storms-are-enhanced-by-a-warmer-climate-and-which/

     

    That 'need jerk reaction' has been more tempered in recent years which is pleasing to see.

     

    Beg to differ, Stewfox. BBC Question Time last night devoted 10 minutes to this question.

     

    Awkward it was too, as both sides used the IPCC's report to justify themselves - Nigel Lawson citing the lack of evidence supporting consequentially larger and stronger storms, and Ed Davey citing evidence supporting consequentially larger and stronger storms.

     

    Lawson essentially lost the argument, and looked most foolish, when he raised the question of "the pause", and was rebuffed on the grounds that this is selective timing. We need to look at the bigger picture. 

    Because everyone knows that global warming actually started in 1960. 

  5. A snapshot of tomorrow's newspaper headlines.

     

    Outrageous is the word, this really has gotten out of hand. This circus could do big damage

    to the credibility of Met Institutions.

     

    This weekend's weather has been fantastic PR for the Met Office. Frankly, well deserved - long range forecasting of hazardous weather.

    And if I hear anyone tomorrow say something like, "wasn't as bad as they said", I'm going to teach them basic thermodynamics at gunpoint. 

    • Like 5
  6. I wish I could tell where this thing is , It is almost impossible to tell on Infrared images . If it comes in over the Bristol Channel or further South then most of the West country will be in the center of the low and miss the High winds , If it comes in over Wales the whole of the West country will see a period of intense winds. The surface pressure plots are no where near matching the infrared , it is looking more like a weather front than a deepening low on most images. 

     

    I don't understand how you can't see it - centre is tracking Pemroke to Grimsby, pending unforeseen deepening. North Somerset should be pretty windy then, no?

  7. Forgive me, but this storm is not moving over the entire UK, and some perspective is needed. Far more potent systems than this one regularly pound Scotland and it's islands - indeed even the heavily populated central belt of Scotland - yet media coverage has never been so "dramatic" as now.

     

    I've read the BBC news website and other news outlets and am truly gobsmacked at the writing.

     

    Central belt of Scotland is c.1.5mn people, S/SE England is c.15mn people. Hence 10 times the interest, potential damage etc etc.Journalists will be journalists though. 

  8. yes why cancel this early, why not take a view first thing

     

    Obviously because if people know about it they can make alternative arrangements.

     

    In 2007, I spent 5 hours on a train due to a fallen tree ahead and a bottleneck behind - no stations in between. I'd rather they checked out the line and warned me in advance.

     

    In terms of the system - it does look to be tracking slightly further south and strengthening later than expected. Middle East coast (and obviously extreme SW) must surely be highest risk?

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...