Mr Sleet

But where is your DATA snowman ?

Yes you are right. But a doubling of C02 levels will most likelyo nly raise global temps up to 2.7degC. See these pieces of work. Interesting that the energy input to the atmoshere of a doubling in CO2 is about 4 watts per sq metre.Most of these climate models include adjustments to energy flows of 100 watts per sq metre. Food for thought. http://brneurosci.org/co2.html http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=15726 With pleasure http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/j...f?sessid=6006l3

So they had the AMO wrong before - what is to stop them being wrong AGAIN ?

Point is though the temp rises then the CO2 starts to go up. CO2 solubility decreases as water temp rises.

Thanks to all who have taken the time to contribute.I do not have an agenda but am getting a bit exasperated at the current " it's definitley man-made warming, done and dusted" fashion. I have noted that the recent rise in temps started before the CO2 level began to rise-this is something that ahs happened in the past as well. I found this piece with a simple Google search. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13 I expect someone will tell me this site is dodgy too !

I'll kick it off http://www.scientific-alliance.org/news_ar...erecomesthe.htm

Not quite sure how you work that one out. Just a hunch I guess.

There will be another ice age, as sure as eggs is eggs. In fact, we are still in one. 90% of the Earth's history has been totally ice free , and I mean totally. The definition of ice age is the presence of ice somewhere on the surface of the Earth, even if it is a 5 square metre patch in the middle of the Antarctic . If anyone has a different definition, I'd love to hear it. All this was on a rather good Geology programme ( British) on Beeb 2 a couple of years ago.

Hey do we have another Aldershot Town fan ? B)

I have been a big critic of these new BBC forecasts since they came out in May. Now with the advent of proper thunderstorm lightning, wind directions and force, synoptic charts more frequently, and a graphic for fog, I have to say that I think overall the forecast is better now than what went before .Addressing these glaring negatives alllows one to appreciate the positives e.g. on saturday I was expecting rain to Reach Thame at 3:30 pm , sure enough it did, almost on thE dot so I was able to plan my fishing trip around it. Sure we could do with more time but oh well. Well done to all on this forum for lobbying and well done to Microburst for your assistance.Thanks.

Just more regular synpotic charts would be nice. It seems so hit and miss. I'm sure that since Mr Grade went on Breakfast TV saying that he couldn't understand synoptic charts the frequency of their use has dropped significantly.

I've been watching the evening forecasts for two weeks now and there are still hardly any synoptic charts shown. How hard can it be to have a bit of a flash to denote Tstorms? The situation has not noticeably improved.

OK- How about tilting the Home page a bit and having a brown background. Oh and remove all synoptic charts. Seriously, Net-Weather provides all the info I need, and I am not going to criticise a free service which people put a lot of their spare time into. As a constructive suggestion, it can be a bit untidy;after a year of visiting I just about know where everything is, but newbies may not, and they may be coming on here because they are nonplussed by the Beebs latest offering. How about a medium term look at a more user friendly layout, easier to find things. It's what Metcheck have done, quite successfully ( when the server is up) Mr Sleet

Hi Jackone.At the risk of being dubbed the " Victor Meldrew of Net-weather" ,I have to say that personally I think the website is worse too. Poorly drawn and labelled synoptic charts, low res rain radar that is usually well out of date, summaries that are often wrong ( last friday a good case in point; full sun symbols over Thame when it had been cloudy all morning and we were in the throes of a violent thunderstorm). No sorry, whoever has got hold of the weather service has buggered it up big time. PS The classic one this morning was Helen Willets showing the cloud/rain moving through last night and this morning. The caption : "EARLIER" in massive letters in a box.The dumbing down knows no bounds.

I think the storms are definitely NOT over N Wales (yet)

According to the lightning detector on this site, all the storms are over N Wales

Some quite heavy altocumulus here now.No sun and a moderate south easterly. Anyone know what is up with the lightning strike part of this site ?All hell is breaking loose over North Wales according to Meteorologica, but rain radar shows nothing !

Fair enough, but all you quote are wind arrows and UV levels ( obvious anyway at this time of year , surely).Apart from the wind arrows , very little has changed from day one. I fear that what is happening is that you are getting used to it , as the memory of the old style fades.This is exactly what the BBC are counting on. I do agree with JH though that the time allowed is derisory and not helping a broader look at the situation.

So where do you think exactly the graphics/forecast has improved? -winds arrows ( sometimes) -slight retilt I'm open to suggestions.I really cannot see any major improvements.Really. John, I can only comment on what I see.I have listed my constuctive comments to the BBC but the forecast is still woeful. Thank God for sites like this

Well John I think that you are simply just getting used to it, that is all. Apart from wind arrows ( sometimes) and a slight retilt, what exactly has changed ? (And I'm talking about the daily forecasts here.) I think my statement on the situation sums the situation up quite well.I don't think it is bland , in fact it is quite descriptive. Definitely not staid and boring.Sorry if this disenfranchises you. . I have fed my constructive feedback to the BBC. If things are really better in three months time then I'll start the applause.But as it stands it's definitely a balls-up.

It's not that I don't appreciate your efforts, but apart from the odd wind arrow and occasional poor graphic synoptic chart , I can't see much improvement, sorry

Well I refer back to my previous mail where we were told that the graphics could do anything.Well either they can't or it's pure stubbornness by the BBC. Thing is , the main reason given for the change was that they wanted to make the weather easier to understand - the green blobs quite clearly do not portay a thunderstorm risk which quite clearly is one of the most dangerous of weather phenomenon. I take your point about them listening and making changes, but apart from a few cosmetics here and there the changes amount to diddly squat in practise and the whole exercise is still a top class bodge up

Thanks for the info MB. Problem is , wasn't it predictable that lightning flashes would be needed ?We were told that these new graphics could do anything-why does it need heaven and earth to be moved to get wind arrows FGS. It suggests that the thought processes that led to these new graphics are a bit off kilter to put it mildly :o