Jump to content
Thunder?
Local
Radar
Hot?

ribster

Members
  • Posts

    814
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by ribster

  1. 7 minutes ago, joggs said:

    're the couple of posts above answer to BH.

    Your correct but how many times have we been here at day 10 then then confusion ensues with people telling people to look for this and that and then this will happen.

    That's been my problem recently on here.

    Then models back off.............

    I think I know what you're referring to, and I find that style of analysis very interesting - rather than simply taking charts at face value, based on their years of experience they have at go at working out how they might evolve.

    Hats off to them, everyone should understand they are not a guarantee and it's just their opinion based on their knowledge and experience. If you don't like you can always use the ignore button. I hope said posters continue with their fantastic analysis.

    • Like 6
  2. 10 minutes ago, TEITS said:

    If im going to have the Tut taken out of me then I won't bother.

    Suffice to say the mistake everyone is making is they are ignoring the fact the UKMO at +144 is very different to every model at that timeframe. The +144 like last night is a text book classic of an impending 1980s type E,ly. Just wait and watch how the high to the N will extend SW with its associated cold pool whilst at the same time any atlantic intrusion heads SE. The date of arrival for a classic 1980s E,ly is around 15th Jan!

    FWIW I'd like to see please

    • Like 4
  3. I don't think I've ever been in an environment where the old addage 'a little knowledge is dangerous' is more appropriate. Have people throwing their weight around in the model thread as if they know the lot. I expect age is a significant factor. I know it's an amateur forum and people are learning, but a little humility wouldn't go amiss. There are between 5 and 10 posters worth following, sadly more often than not they are being insulted themselves. A real shame...

    • Like 2
  4. Got in from football to read the model thread, but decided I can't be bothered wasting my time on the last umpteen pages, simply puerile, moronic carnage in the main, with one or two exceptions...

    GP had just posted at the time, so something worth reading...

    • Like 1
  5. 54 minutes ago, danthetan said:

    Noted that the GFS 6Z was completely different @96hr to its 00Z run with the placing of low pressure systems so charts @ 8-10day cant hold much credence

    Not sure that makes any sense, I wouldn't expect it to look the same. A more informative analysis would be to compare it to the next 6z run...

  6. 1 hour ago, bobbydog said:

    of course, its a long way off and plenty of time for things to change but the background signals, teleconnections and drivers have been hinting at this for some time. we now have this repeatedly shown in the models at the projected timeframe. coincidence?....

    Indeed, if it was against a background of noise or contradictory signals then I would tend to agree. However, it's not and I certainly wouldn't be betting against.

    • Like 1
  7. 13 minutes ago, Winter Hill said:

    Was the 18z an upgrade then ? 

    Or have 2 features vanished from the 12z 

    I'm a coldie but I'm just replying to what I see. 

    What is the problem with that ?

     

    Any chance of dropping this now, it's getting awfully tiresome. I think we all agree the general cold theme is there. Troughs, polar lows, disturbances, front edge, back edge, knife edge yada yada yada...

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...