Jump to content
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?

Methuselah

Members
  • Posts

    67,599
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    210

Everything posted by Methuselah

  1. Just to keep things in some kind of perspective I think the folks who make up all these scare-stories should be taken out and shot!
  2. Exactly! I don't think we'll see sustained cold until sometime in January...Can I prove that? Of course I can't!
  3. I agree with you, ABCD...But, if folks make claims, then what is wrong with questioning them? Does the number of words really make any difference? For what it's worth, I'm plenty convinced that we are about to see a 'potentially' notable Arctic Blast!
  4. Will you please desist from rubbishing the GFS: it may not be the best model in the world, but it does give us a 'rough guide' as to what's likely to happen...As do the ECM, BOM, JMA or whatever...
  5. I'd go for snow-fall in the following areas: North Scotty; NE and NW Scotty; NW, SW, NE , E England and East Anglia, primarily...But, who knows what troughs may (or may not) occur in the NNW'erly airflow? Will most inland areas 'escape'?
  6. Do you think guys that - having actually studied the subject - we are in the minority?
  7. I remember learning 'integration by parts', many years' back, but I wouldn't want to try calculating what happens to each individual 'part' of Comet ISON. I think I know that the total momentum will stay the same? But, then, what about the bits that have been vaporized?
  8. When I did mine, it was the very first IPCC report!
  9. It was indeed, spectacular, K...My kids can't even remember seeing it!
  10. Or even - perish the thought - Al Gore!
  11. 25 years' bending the science so that it might fit into his economic model?
  12. That is exactly why I try to ask simple questions, S. IMO, why is that? is a perfectly valid question to ask...I do see a two-, maybe three-day cold snap - nothing in the models really goes against that assumption...? I might well be wrong, if that is the case, then so be it...Would you prefer that I asked the very same question in ten lines, as opposed one?
  13. I don't know that much about the WWF, SI. But, with the 64 million-year-old Earth, Greenpeace were clearly talking out of their bottoms... But, that doesn't make the incoherent, evidence-free, wittering form WUWT and IceAgeNow anything other than garbage, does it?
  14. http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/76448-scepticism-of-man-made-climate-change/page-43#entry2849918 But that's - as one would expect from an economist - all about short-term gain... Need I say more? Not a lot. We are in total agreement on that one.
  15. Well, what does Nigel Lawson know about science, for God's sake...He's an economist! Might as well ask an ironmonger to cure non-Hodgekins Lymphoma?
  16. I try not to 'back' any model, WW...If I interpret things wrongly, then so-be-it...Taking all of the models, in a kind of 'mental mush', it looks like we're in for a two-, perhaps three-day, blast of Arctic air...? Enjoy!
  17. Any chance of sticking to what today's charts are indicating? What transpired in 1946, '62, 2009 and 2010 is largely immaterial...
  18. In other words, both the models and the pundits got it wrong? Edit: Including yours truly!
×
×
  • Create New...