Jonathan Powell

Thank you for the more constructive and understanding feedback from the forum, other forums on other sites have been less unforgiving.

Thought it wise to get the first salvo in, although, at the time of being questioned by the Express, this really did look a distinct possibility and to some extent, still does. Granted, it was only 2% of the actual over all statistical readout, right on the extreme far edge of foreecasts, as the other 298 models saw a less severe look to matters, however, I couldn't ignore the 2%. It would have been a Mr Fish incident, the storms that weren't supposed to but actually did. I didn't, (to the best of my knowledge), call it a "beast" either. As for Piers, well, he might be right, but I don't think it's going to sink that far south. All models pointed toward disruption, I think I've said enough for now, I'll get me coat Jonathan PWS How it's compiled: 300 plus computer models that I run from self written software, collating data of my own since 1979.