Jump to content
Will it snow? 7 day forecast Weather Radar Will it be cold?
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?

Thundery wintry showers

Site forecast team
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    15,710

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    30

 Content Type 

Blog Entries posted by Thundery wintry showers

  1. Thundery wintry showers
    My piece of insight for the day: when it comes to the erosion of our freedoms, watch for the "small incremental measures add up" problem. When deciding to curb a freedom, no matter how small, before thinking, "well this loss of freedom is a small price to pay for 'doing something'", we need to think, "are our arguments for this measure case-specific, or can they be used as arguments for curbing most other freedoms?".

    Why? Well, typically, we don't accept an "all in one go" curb on 100 activities to legislate for idiots, but we do accept a curb on any one of those activities because it seems like just a small price to pay, and then rinse and repeat individually for the other 99, thus unwittingly achieving the same result as an "all in one go" curb. It just takes longer to get there, that's all, but most of us fail to recognise this.

    Arguments like "you don't need Freedom X to be able to enjoy yourself or survive, so what's wrong with banning X?", "X is non-essential so we have no right to complain about its disposal" and of course "prohibition is necessary because that's life" are common arguments with huge "slippery slope potential". The biggest one, though, is probably the rejection of alternatives because they aren't flawless (e.g. "you can't always tell if something's being abused") while not subjecting prohibition to the same "it has to be flawless" requirement on the basis that it's a "necessary evil". Since there rarely is a flawless way of dealing with misbehaviour, this double standard can be used as a basis for prohibiting almost anything. However, if we can show that a particular act of prohibition is probably less flawed than the alternatives, then OK, we do have a good case-specific argument that doesn't lend itself to a slippery slope of incremental curbs on our freedoms.
  2. Thundery wintry showers
    At the moment I think there is a 70% chance for eastern coastal parts of the North East (yes that means my area!) and 80-90% for inland parts of the region. The current snow cover doesn't look like thawing significantly until Christmas Eve, and unless that channel low gets far north enough on Christmas Eve to draw in a modified easterly, it probably won't thaw significantly on Christmas Eve either!

    In the coming days I expect many media forecasts to be expressing a desire for a warm-up by Christmas, so here's my latest revision to the "At least it will be mild" version of Bing Crosby's song:

    I'm dreaming of a mild Christmas,
    Just like the ones we usually know.
    Where the stratus glistens
    And children listen
    To hear south-westerlies blow.

    I'm dreaming of a mild Christmas,
    With every Christmas card I write,
    May your presents please every child,
    And may all your Christmasses be mild.

    Personally I am hoping that this snow does stick around till Christmas- but I won't mind if it melts on Boxing Day.
  3. Thundery wintry showers
    As a non-driver who studies climate science and takes a strong interest in environmentalism, rather contrarily I'm also a bit of a petrolhead.

    I like motor racing (especially Formula One), have been quad biking in the past, enjoy motor racing games on the computer, and like "sporty" style cars (the ones with rapid acceleration/brakes, rapid cornering and stiff suspensions to make for a ride more akin to being on a rollercoaster instead of gliding along polished glass). I am also a big fan of Top Gear, which is probably my favourite TV program of all at the moment.

    However I also condemn the boy racers, the mindless idiots who drive recklessly (whether for pleasure or otherwise) without regard for safety- of which there are many on the roads, particularly prominent in 17-19 year old macho males. This ties in with my usual recommendation of clamping down on the idiots first and only then thinking of casting the net wider- though it's my usual stance on these kinds of issues anyway.

    As well as being into cars, I also like buses and trains when they're reliable, and I like cycling when there is a decent segregated network available. Cycling is also good for exercise, and getting on a bus or train can be very relaxing. So ideally I would like those to be improved. My favourite example of a good transport system is that of Strasbourg.

    It strikes me that current orthodox transport policies address both issues with a simple and neat solution: clamp down on everyone to legislate for the idiots and also deter car use, with road humps, lower and more absolutely enforced speed limits etc. However I argue that they are simple neat and wrong. They will improve safety but at much larger cost to responsible people than is necessary, and they will achieve a transport equilibrium at a much lower level than is necessary. Many for instance don't want a segragated cycle network because it won't deter car use whereas increasing their rights on the roads will- not good news for me as a prospective cyclist!

    I tend to come in for a lot of stick for my views on transport- like with climate change I have beliefs that incorporate views from both sides of the debate and in between, so it is easy to be lumped together with one side or the other. But in the case of transport it should be easy to see why I have these kinds of contrary views- because I come from a rare background of being an environmentalist, a non-driver, a former bicycle lover, a bus/train lover and a car lover.
  4. Thundery wintry showers

    Piracy

    By Thundery wintry showers,

    Here's one topic that often gets up my backside, in particular the way we only ever hear one side of the argument ("piracy is killing our industries") and rather poor counterarguments from downloaders which can generally be refuted in two seconds flat. There is a middle ground to be charted, and as is my nature, I'm one of those to chart it.
    It's far from clear that copying in moderation actually erodes sales (such as the "casual copying" that dominated in the 1990s, when people made copies for friends and 'shared' copies around a household). The potential lost sales, which arise if someone gets a copy of something they would otherwise buy, may be outweighed by the increased brand awareness and exposure that the industries receive. On the other hand, mass copying/distribution probably does erode sales, for if copies are very widely available, many people just snap them up instead of buying anything.
    The biggest problem is counterfeiting- people creating copies of products and selling them, which is essentially a form of theft, as the money goes to the pirate and not the creator of the product.
    However, the main focus on anti-piracy measures has been to crack down on the "casual copying" using intrusive copy-protection measures, and only recently has the efforts expanded significantly to address the organised piracy. The definition of what constitutes "piracy" has expanded with time. So, legitimate users have been punished, criminalised and treated like thieves, so many turned to the stuff the organised pirates were using (hacks, peer-2-peer downloads etc) to reclaim their previous activities and by-pass the copy protection. This will have contributed to the current culture of downloading copyrighted material which is distributed on a wide scale.
    The notion that "piracy is killing the industry" is backed up by statistics. But why aren't there any statistics on the contrary? Answer, because they made it illegal to conduct research that questions the correctness of copyright law. It doesn't suggest they're very confident in the correctness of the law if they defend it by making it illegal to provide evidence against it! Computer gaming forums are littered with arguments like "All forms of piracy should be lumped together under one brush, because it's all illegal, all illegal activity is bad, therefore it should all be illegal", which is essentially a circular argument.
    With systems like Valve Software's Steam in operation (requiring online authentication to play computer games), we may well cut piracy to very low levels in the near future. But, if the industries continue to follow the mantra of zero-tolerance and punishing the many because of the few all the time, we're only ever going to eliminate piracy by eliminating 90% of liberty- which may mean customers being cheesed off, and thus, ironically, lost sales.
    In conclusion, while piracy is a genuine issue, the industries' anti-piracy measures have probably been harming their sales more than piracy itself.
  5. Thundery wintry showers
    I see a lot of posts, particularly in the Model Discussion, about "settled" weather. But what, specifically, is "settled" weather about? In my experience it means different things to different people- and most people's definitions don't entirely match the dictionary definition.
    Most of us, when we think of prolonged settled spells, imagine those weeks on end of clear blue skies, heat, absence of rain, and sunshine, like in the famous hot dry sunny summers, or the Mediterranean summers. But some people use "settled" as a synonym for "no rain", so perhaps a long dry spell like in August 2003, with a combination of dry sunny weather and dry cloudy weather, would qualify as a prolonged settled spell.
    Yet the dictionary definition of "settled" is, simply, not changeable. So, for instance, the two weeks of south-easterly winds, cloud and drizzle that Tyne & Wear experienced in March 1996 were a settled spell by that definition- as the weather hardly changed at all during those two weeks. Or even the week of near-continuous cloud and rain between 25 June-1 July 1997, again the weather hardly changed. Few call those "settled spells" though.
    There's also the consideration of whether you're looking at it from a weather type perspective, or synoptic perspective. From a synoptic perspective, rampant westerlies and fronts, with frequent changes in weather type, is generally regarded as a more "unsettled" pattern than a slack low or col bringing sunshine, showers and thunderstorms. Yet the daily weather is the opposite way round- the boisterous Atlantic often results in it being dull and wet, dry and sunny or dry and cloudy for several hours at a time, whereas with sunshine and showers, you often get frequent changes in the space of just one hour.
  6. Thundery wintry showers
    In the past I have had a habit of purchasing one of those football games for PC every few years (there's little point IMHO of buying one every year or two as they are usually just incremental upgrades).

    The first one, FIFA 2000, was accidental as I was given two PC games for Christmas but accidentally got someone else's in the post. FIFA 2000 was the game that got me interested in football. Since then I took some notice of PC ZONE's ravings over Pro Evolution Soccer, tried it and immediately preferred it to FIFA, so I went on to get PES 3 and PES 6.

    This year, both FIFA [i]and[/i] PES 2010 have impressed me, so I am seriously considering getting one of them- the question is which one? Well, it seems clear that as far as consoles are concerned FIFA, which has made big strides relative to PES's slow incremental changes in the last couple of years, would be the better choice. But for PC, EA have decided to leave the PC out of its next gen capabilities, whereas Konami have chosen to make the PC version as good as the console versions. EA's official line is "we want it to run on a standard PC" but I wouldn't be surprised if their real argument was "PC games are heavily pirated so we would rather people used consoles instead".

    I am increasingly convinced that PC games are heavily pirated partly because DRM measures and tightening of copyright restrictions, and now this, are resulting in paying consumers being increasingly ripped off. For example, consoles encourage 2-4 player multiplayer with one copy of a game, whereas on the PC companies have greedily abused the "war against piracy" to recategorise it as "piracy" and insist that you must buy 3 copies to play 3 player multiplayer or be a "cheapskate".

    The neglect of the FIFA 2010 PC port may well mean that I end up getting Pro Evolution again. It does have a much better edit mode, and I like to play with custom teams.
  7. Thundery wintry showers

    Update

    By Thundery wintry showers,

    The 8-week period before starting the PhD is down to 5 weeks- trying to make the most of what I'm up to now, while part of me is looking forward to the PhD and another part is apprehensive.
    Been continuing with the level episode I'm doing for Doom 3, with only one level (a short level as well) to go, I hope to finish that last level before I start my PhD as I'm aware I won't be spending as much time on level editing once the PhD gets underway! It will most likely be a 'beta' product, for as most amateur level designers know, level editing skills tend to advance as one progresses through the episode- so the earlier levels aren't as good as the later ones. Thus I expect to be tinkering around a bit with the earlier ones.
    It's all very much a hobby- ever since I first got the original Doom, I had always wanted to create a Doom-themed level episode. I have no intention of becoming a professional level designer.
    As for the weather, it looks like the pattern of downgrading of settled spells is continuing. To be honest, the first third of August wasn't too bad at all in the North East, indeed sunshine was much above average, but we're starting to return to the sort of summer we got used to in June and July. Haven't had any thunder-days yet either up here.
    Had to get a new power supply for my computer as the fan was deciding to pack in, but fingers crossed, it's now fitted.
  8. Thundery wintry showers
    I have resisted "My Documents" and "Program Files" for many years, and the main reason is user choice: if we all "give in" to having no user choice, there'll be no incentive for Microsoft to keep it in future versions of Windows.

    [b]My Documents[/b]
    Proponents of the "My Documents" system say that it's good because it gives each user a standardised home directory and makes it easy for multiple users to have multiple accounts on one system with their own "My Documents" directories.

    If this was all that it amounted to, I wouldn't have a problem with it. It would be no different to using C:/ as a home directory except that the location is standardised and set up for multiple users. But unfortunately, it's also come at the expense of users who want to set up files and folders how they like within their home directories. Microsoft has set up a standardised pattern, e.g. "Pictures", "Music" and "Videos", and applications religiously default to them. In addition applications increasingly install various things into subdirectories of "My Documents" which you can't choose- in the past you could usually define where they should be installed.

    In addition there's a trend towards all programs defaulting to using My Documents instead of "the last place you saved to", at least every time you restart the computer. This is a flaw as far as I'm concerned, because it encourages users to bung everything into My Documents instead of subdirectories within My Documents- it's not much better than bunging everything in C:/. Some default to specific subdirectories, but those contain the problem described earlier- users don't get a choice as to what subdirectories they go into.

    [b]Program Files[/b]
    Microsoft's idea behind Program Files appears to be to move towards a standardised system where all of your program data is stored in Program Files and can't be modified in any way, and all editable files go into My Documents. It's argued as a "security feature"- I guess this refers to the fact that multiple users can log on without risk of one of them deleting program data that the others rely upon.
    However, many of us don't have multiple users on one machine, or can trust other users not to modify/delete our program data, in which case this security provision isn't necessary. My personal home computers are usually used only be myself.
    On Vista and Windows 7, it is extremely problematic with many computer games that require modification of the game's installation directory for mods and the like. For example stories are rife about how on Vista and Windows 7, you can only make/install mods for most games if you install them outside of C:/Program Files or remove User Account Control altogether (thereby defeating the point of the system).
    Again, it's also enforcing a specific file structure and removing choice from the user. What about those who liked the system of having games install to C:/Games and general tools to C:/Program Files? What about those who want to install to drive D instead of drive C?

    I also note that installers, while providing the option to change the installation directory away from the default, are increasingly hiding that option, e.g. tucking it away in "Custom Install" or even a small print checkbox. One problem is that the default directories are often quite hard to locate, e.g. instead of defaulting to "C:/Program Files/Program" they default to the likes of "C:/Program Files/Company Name/Publisher Name/Applications/Games/Program". They call it "putting all programs in one place for ease", but the way it is at the moment, it's not much better from that perspective than bunging all programs in C:/. Although Microsoft probably assumes you won't ever need to find where the programs are installed...

    [b]Useability Testing for Newbies[/b]
    One common justification for the "removing user control" is that users need to be protected from themselves because computers have to be set up so that "Granny" can use them intuitively. But this goes back to the "black and white priorities" problem- newbies are considered more important than experienced users so experienced users get completely ignored, instead of being assigned a lesser weight.

    It wouldn't be too difficult to simply make the factory defaults easier to modify without them keep resetting themselves, or even provide two installation options: "Standard Install" and "Advanced/Experienced User Install" where the former applies default settings suitable for newbies and the latter for experienced users.
  9. Thundery wintry showers
    I don't have the time (or will) to put in complete summaries for Jan, Feb and Mar, but here is a brief outline.
    January 2006: Max 6.6, min 1.4, mean 4.1, precip 30mm, sleet/snow falling 2, snow lying 0.
    It was a benign, and rather uninteresting month, and very dull until the final third, which was relatively sunny. The least warm January since 2001.
    February 2006: Max 7.1, min 2.0, mean 4.5, precip 22, sleet/snow falling 3, snow lying 1.
    Quite similar to January, with an easterly non-event during the last week- temperatures were no lower than average for the time of year! The only cold snap of note occurred on the last day, with a northerly bringing some snow flurries and a dusting of lying snow at 0900. The month was slightly duller than average. It was the least warm February since 2003, and the driest since 2003.
    (Note: I say "least warm" because temperatures were, if anything, slightly above the long-term normal)
    March 2006: Max 7.2, min 1.4, mean 4.3, precip 57, sleet/snow falling 11, snow lying 5.
    It was the snowiest March for snow falling since I started taking records, beating the previous record of 10 days in March 1995; for snow lying it was equal snowiest since 2001. A cold, bright snowy first week was followed by a brief mild interlude. Then after a classic mild vs cold battleground around the 12th, with the coldest day maximum in March since 1996, it was generally cold and cloudy. The sun re-emerged around the 22nd/23rd, then the last week was very mild and unsettled, but not mild enough to offset the cold weather of the first three weeks.
    Overall, it was the coldest and wettest March since 2001, but the average maximum was the lowest since 1996. It was slightly duller than the long-term normal, but less so than last year, sunshine totals certainly boosted by the exceptional first week.
  10. Thundery wintry showers
    I think there is a lot wrong with the current generation of BBC weather forecasts, but it's no good just sitting whining non-constructively. Here's a list of changes that I would like to see in the forecasts:

    [b]Presentation/Format[/b]

    I suggest less emphasis on the current day's weather. Just a brief outline perhaps, briefly mentioning any significant events, then straight into the forecast. Also, we don't need that tour of Britain for 8am, it takes up valuable forecast time covering the country in micro-detail, and mainly just the south. People switch off because it takes ages for them to get the forecast for their area for the next day. I think they should just stick with showing the whole country at once.

    Synoptic analysis should be included, but should be integrated into the main body of the forecast rather than preceding it. This is because, contrary to the BBC's assertions, people switched off at the synoptic analysis mainly because it preceded forecasts and took ages to get into the forecast itself, not because they felt "disenfranchised". So to quote a simplistic example, instead of having a series of synoptic charts and then the forecast, we could have synoptic chart, forecast for day 1, synoptic chart for day 2, forecast for day 2 etc. That way people get the information, but it is spread out over the forecast and only occurs for brief periods at a time, so people don't switch off.

    [b]Subjectivity[/b]
    I suggest going back to the old tradition of simply presenting the information without bias, rather than introducing a lot of subjectivity. There is plenty of scope for non-subjective ways to make a forecast sound jolly and interesting, like "you might need a brolly", "scorching hot", "it'll feel nippy out there" etc.

    Presenting a lot of subjectivity not only annoys people who don't share the same set of weather type preferences as the presenter is suggesting, it also misleads people- this goes for both positive and negative spin. A forecast for sunshine and showers where "rainy unsettled awful weather" is emphasised will mislead people into thinking it's going to be mainly dull and wet. A forecast for dry mild cloudy windy weather where "staying fine and dry and mild" is emphasised will mislead people into thinking there might be a fair amount of sunshine and not much wind.
    The forecasters' job is to tell us what the weather is going to be, not to educate us as to what types of weather we should and shouldn't like. The rest of the media does enough of that already. And no, there isn't a set of weather type preferences that are shared by the vast majority. That's just the media trying to marginalise any opinions that differ from the opinions it thinks we should have.

    The Met Office, Philip Eden etc. are perfectly capable of keeping subjectivity to a minimum- why did the BBC stop?

    [b]Graphics[/b]

    I think most of the problem with the "new-style" graphics is the changes to the forecast presentations that they've brought in with them. The graphics themselves can be used to good effect, as the regional and Countryfile forecasts often demonstrate. Thus I'm not one of those who campaigns for the return of the old-style look- for me they're about six and two threes.

    I note that the BBC often says the current forecasts are the best because "research" shows that most people wanted the changes and find them very helpful. My question is, is this research representative or have they just done the usual tactic of wording a survey to get the answers they want from people? Judging by their defensiveness over this "research" I guess it's more likely to be the latter.
  11. Thundery wintry showers
    Here I'm going to put my neck on the line and suggest a series of proposals that will be rather controversial, as many of them contradict conventional ways of thinking. But I strongly believe that they should be challenged, since although many of their aims are good, they seek to achieve said aims in unnecessarily negative ways.

    [b]1. Encourage a more sustainable/balanced transport system by aiming to turn cars into more of a recreational thing, promoting the use of alternatives for point-to-point journeys.[/b]

    This certainly goes against conventional thinking, but think about it, the advantages of private transport aren't the "getting from A to B" but mainly the spontaneity and the sense of freedom, and certain social benefits, such as taking people for trips out and going to visit people. The only reasons why a lot of people "need" to drive for work is because there aren't enough initiatives for alternatives, including working from home, pooling schemes (think of how workplaces could implement voluntary schemes similar to the school buses that are used in some secondary schools for instance, and the European Union's recent sustainability manifesto has various interesting ideas on how smaller-scale forms of public transport can be developed). Some people enjoy driving, but others find it a chore but feel that they "have" to drive. It surely, thus, makes sense to try to reduce overall car use by removing the drivers who find it a chore, reducing car use without negating its benefits, and thus making it better for everyone. This approach also encourages an emphasis on improving alternatives to the car, a positive approach aimed at giving a sustainable transport system at a high level.

    At the same time we can promote initiatives for cleaner vehicles, while discouraging excessive consumption through taxes on fuel consumption, and compensate the traditionally disadvantaged groups, e.g. with fuel tax breaks for people registered as living in rural areas. I consider this to be compatible with the European Union's ambitious proposal of phasing out petrol-driven cars in cities by 2050.

    In contrast, today's mainstream policies of traffic calming, reducing speed limits etc. will have the opposite effect- they will negate the main advantages of cars, phase out social-recreational car use, and leave us in a situation where people continue to drive but everybody sees it as a chore, and if they do achieve a sustainable, balanced transport system (which is by no means certain) it will be based on the lowest common denominator.

    [b]2. Ideas for promoting walking and cycling.[/b]
    I am in favour of segregated cycle facilities provided that they are thoughtfully laid out rather than just bunged in to be "seen to be doing something" (as haphazard segregated facilities don't really succeed in encouraging cycling and actually cause more accidents). Environmentalists usually dismiss this idea as "giving in to motorists" but it's not about that, it's about giving them an alternative. I agree with the Highway Code's stance that use of segregated cycle facilities should be encouoraged but not made compulsory, i.e. cyclists should still be allowed to use the roads if they wish. I also think dedicated cycle lanes, rather than shared cycle/pedestrian lanes, are more effective and less likely to lead to increases in accidents. At the same time, we should encourage more respect between drivers and cyclists who are using the roads together.

    I am in favour of [i]selective[/i] use of "home zones" with low speed limits, cobbled streets etc, the aim being to create communal areas where people can congregate without being subjected to heavy traffic, play out in the streets etc. The idea is that, when combined with a network of relatively high-speed roads around towns, "through-traffic" is directed, through a carrot-and-stick mechanism, out of those areas and into the high-speed roads.

    In contrast the wholesale application of low speed limits and traffic calming will largely lose that benefit as using major routes won't be significantly more attractive to drivers than taking shortcuts through "home zones". Instead, in my opinion, that agenda (such as the blanket 20mph limits in Norwich) is mainly about discouraging social-recreational car use, and will have numerous negative side-effects such as longer bus journeys and potential for increased traffic volumes (due to increased journey times).

    The blog will get too long if I go onto sections 3 and 4 here, these will be urban planning and road safety respectively, and will be covered in the next blog.
  12. Thundery wintry showers
    In recent years Philip Eden has repeatedly voiced a concern that as a society, our reactions towards normal wintry weather have become more and more intolerant, and it could get very ugly if we were to get a severe wintry spell. The latest wintry episode has shown that it isn't the general public who are intolerant, it is the media, which makes an enemy of the weather and wants us all to do the same.

    News broadcasts around 4-8 January were full of stories of the misery and inconvenience that the snow causes, footage of people telling the reporters how disgraceful the snow is, and how lovely it would be to enjoy two weeks of drizzle, 3-5C and hardly a glimmer of sunshine. They clearly chose their cross-sections carefully. Had they gone to UEA they'd have had a much harder time getting their message across, amidst the hundreds of people sledging, chucking snowballs, building snowmen and laughing their heads off.

    Meanwhile, there are far more than just a few childish weather enthusiasts getting sick and tired of the current dull drizzly spell and wishing that we could have the bright snowy weather back. The news and tabloids and weather forecasts seem blissfully unaware that those people actually exist. But they do.

    The bright, snowy weather was perfect for alleviating symptoms of SAD, with the combination of sunlight and reflective snow cover. It helped gather communities together, playing out in it, appreciating the impact it had on our surroundings, and helping out the less fortunate among us that were heavily inconvenienced by it. For many weather enthusiasts, in the meantime, there was a lot to discuss and a lot to appreciate.

    In our world of market economics and Health & Safety we are becoming too disconnected from the physical world around us, and losing sight of the social factors which contribute to making people happier. Weather enthusiasts are doing society a service by illustrating that there is value in appreciating the asthetic and pleasurable things in life, things that economics alone cannot measure, things like the awe of an electrical storm, the beauty of a double rainbow, the eerieness of a misty, hazy, bright red sunset shining onto layers of illuminated cloud. They should not be made to feel guilty for appreciating unusual or dramatic weather out of "respect" for those who suffer from it- this is otherwise known as martyrdom. Why are those who love mild dull drizzly weather not required to feel guilty because of the misery it causes to snow lovers, sun lovers and SAD sufferers alike? Because mild dull drizzly weather doesn't damage the economy, that's why.

    So, by all means, let it snow, let it snow, let it snow. Not just because it keeps snow enthusiasts happy, but because it continually highlights the fact that our world is too focused upon money, and that we should really start taking more notice of the other things that help to make the world tick over.
  13. Thundery wintry showers
    Jan '84 was an exceptionally snowy month from the Midlands northwards, but quite mild with relatively little snow south of the Midlands. Certainly an interesting-sounding month.
    But I think January 1958 was even more interesting. It began with a rather chilly NE'ly:
    http://www.wetterzentrale.de/archive/ra/19...00119580102.gif
    Then the Atlantic came pouring in for about ten days, with some cooler NW'lys interspersed with mild SW'lys and some rough winds:
    http://www.wetterzentrale.de/archive/ra/19...00119580107.gif
    http://www.wetterzentrale.de/archive/ra/19...00119580109.gif
    Then an anticyclonic spell in the third week:
    http://www.wetterzentrale.de/archive/ra/19...00119580116.gif
    Then a remarkable northerly, assisted by a strong Greenland/Atlantic block, that persisted for a week and brought severe cold and heavy snowfalls from polar lows over much of the country:
    http://www.wetterzentrale.de/archive/ra/19...00119580121.gif
    Then an exceptional mild end:
    http://www.wetterzentrale.de/archive/ra/19...00119580127.gif
    We hear a lot about Januarys 1984 and 1987, and rightly so- those months featured some remarkable weather. But for me, the Holy Grail has to be January 1958, as it was the month that had everything.
  14. Thundery wintry showers
    Well, after plenty of heated discussions on the TV forecasts, notably recent trends at the Beeb, it's become clear to me what the main problem is: forecasters being encouraged to make people "feel good" by "emphasising positives", and to do that, naturally, they have to second-guess what the majority of the population consider to be good and bad weather.

    The easiest (though certainly not the best) source of such guesses is the general media, so my feelings that the BBC might be trying to "educate" us to see the weather in a certain way have receded- it's probably more that the media makes it look as if we all make an enemy of the weather.

    The equivalent of this, in sports coverage, is the backing of British competitors to make people "feel good" by "emphasising positives"- e.g. ITV F1's strong bias towards Lewis Hamilton in 2007/08. The equivalent of "it will be dull and drizzly but at least it will be mild", in F1 terms, could be "it will probably be a dull processional F1 race but at least Lewis Hamilton has the best chance of anyone on the grid"... so in a nutshell it is definitely a part of the dumbing down process.
  15. Thundery wintry showers
    Here is a summary of what happened in Cleadon, Tyne & Wear, during December 2005.
    Mean Max: 7.1C
    Mean Min: 1.6C
    Mean Temp: 4.3C
    Highest Max: 13.2C (11th)
    Lowest Max: 0.9C (29th)
    Highest Min: 8.3C (11th)
    Lowest Min: -6.0C (29th)
    Air frosts: 12
    Note that the lowest max was recorded using the standard Met Office 0900-0900 recording system: using an 0000-0000 system, the temperature on the 29th got no higher than -1.2C, the lowest day maximum for exactly 10 years.
    Precipitation: 35mm
    Days of falling sleet/snow: 3
    Days with hail: 2
    Days with more than half cover of snow at 0900: 4
    It was the coldest December since 2001, and after a wet start, was generally dry with generous amounts of sunshine. The 'beast from the east' may have disappointed for some, but it certainly didn't disappoint here: the 28th to 31st all had lying snow although by the 31st this had turned to a patchy covering of ice. The mean temperature was certainly below the local 1971-2000 average, and may have also been a fraction cooler than the 1961-90 average- making it two below average months in a row at this location.
    In terms of quantity it was only the snowiest December since 2001, but the persistence of snow cover was the greatest since late December 2000.
    I awarded the month 63% overall, which is pretty good for December.
  16. Thundery wintry showers
    I wonder where I would appear in a typical assessment of "climate change believer" vs "climate sceptic". I certainly appear more towards the "believer" end in the climate change discussion threads, but on the other hand I remain sceptical about the ability of computer models to predict the future (they have improved a lot in recent years and will probably continue to get better, but even so, there are all kinds of areas where they could go wrong).

    As per usual, while most of those with strong opinions on the subject take up one side or the other, I've formed a strong opinion that is somewhere in the middle, though perhaps further from the "sceptic" end than the "believer" end.

    It's rather odd, though, how the definition of "sceptic" seems to have migrated away from its dictionary definition, which is merely someone who is sceptical. By this measure, given the first paragraph, I would actually classify as a "sceptic", and some of those with anti-AGW positions would be better categorised as "disbelievers". I prefer that term to "deniers" which has a strong jibing element to it.
  17. Thundery wintry showers

    UEA Norwich

    By Thundery wintry showers,

    I arrived on Saturday to UEA, and have been getting to grips with the campus. With being here for Fresher's Week I can get my bearings for a week before the PhD work starts on 1st October.
    I'm going to see what sort of societies are about tomorrow. Of course I'm going to need to do plenty of work for the PhD, but hopefully I should be able to fit work and social events around each other so I can both get the work done to the best of my ability, and have a good social life (which I managed to do pretty well during that fantastic year at Leeds University). I'm also hoping that, as in Leeds, 'work' and 'leisure' may overlap to some extent; the work I did over there often didn't feel like work, and I sometimes did work-related things in my leisure time.
    So far I've been very impressed by the UEA campus. The student's union is very good, the IT facilities look good, and there are plenty of good restaurants and pubs around the campus.
    As for the weather, I may as well quote an extract from Trevor Harley's site here:
    I don't know if Norwich really is the thunderstorm capital of Britain, but I've only been here four days, and there was thunder today.
  18. Thundery wintry showers

    Christmas

    By Thundery wintry showers,

    I may well be very fortunate with cold/snow over the coming week. The snowfalls from the easterly look like kicking in just after I get back to the North East, so hopefully no disruption to the train journey. And then the upcoming northerly looks like the sort of spell where it would definitely be better to be in Tyneside than in Norwich, as the warmer air will be further south. Could get a hefty spell of snow cover from this.

    It is uncertain how long this cold air will hang around for. Until around 27th/28th December would be most ideal as it would mean a white Christmas, and after a 10-day cold snowy spell I would most likely not be averse to a pattern change to warmer weather- especially if temporary, like the one near the end of December 1981.

    An interesting article on the death of the Christmas party:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8409155.stm

    Interesting because I've had a few Christmas dinners already! But the article makes a point that it cannot easily explain- and I can:
    [quote]He believes it's happened because the media suggests it is inappropriate for companies to throw parties, using terms like "squander".

    "There's a perception that spending on events like Christmas parties is somehow wasteful. The point I try to make to people is there's no such thing as good or bad spend, there's just spend in the economy from one part to another. I find this distinction bizarre," he says. [/quote]

    The distinction is quite simple actually. If it's pleasurable, it's deemed non-essential. If it's work-related, or a health and safety issue it's deemed essential. This is becuase of a perception that we all "need" to work and be healthy and safe in order to fund ourselves and make a living, but we don't "need" to enjoy ourselves. The fundamental flaw in this is that the whole point of making lots of money is so that we have a larger "pot" to tap into in order to raise overall quality of living. So if it's essential to have lots of money in order to fund this, why is it non-essential to enjoy ourselves even though the latter contributes even more directly to well-being than having lots of money does?

    I'm afraid the above is a significant factor in why we are having so-called "nanny state"-ism. If a minority abuse a work-related activity in a way that presents a risk to health and safety or money, since work is deemed essential, people look at the issue objectively and look for ways of addressing this abuse that do not curb this essential activity too much for it to be justified. But if the activity is pleasurable, it is deemed non-essential and thus curbing it altogether is considered justified even for the sake of negligible risk reduction. Arguments like "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" and "the minority have to spoil it for the majority" can then be trotted out whenever anyone complains.

    This is my biggest area of contention with the philosophy of free market capitalism- it's not the market freedom in itself, it's the tendency to measure attainment purely in financial terms and ignore social factors and we end up free [i]financially[/i], but not [i]socially[/i]. Somehow, we need to engineer some kind of "social capitalist" system that measures well-being in terms of the broad spectrum of socio-economic factors that contribute to it, rather than just money and health & safety.
  19. Thundery wintry showers
    I was in the Debating Society in first year at Lancaster University. Now, I certainly wouldn't be in favour of banning phones, but could someone come up with a set of convincing arguments for banning them? Here are some obvious arguments that I think could be used:
    Telephones are abused by people who send prank calls, harrass and stalk others. We need to do something about these prank calls; thus, in order to put a stop to the problem, we should ban phones; then nobody would be able to send prank calls and abuse them to harrass others.
    “But surely such a law would punish a lot of the wrong people, criminalising the general public?”
    The law is the law. Everyone would know what the law said; if everyone obeyed it there wouldn't be a problem.
    “But there would be a problem with the law; the punishment of the many because of the few!”
    The minority spoil it, that’s life, it can’t be helped because that’s just the way it is.
    “But it can be helped; you can try to differentiate the idiots from the responsible majority!”
    HOW???????? You can’t always tell if someone has made a prank call, therefore other methods are flawed, therefore they won’t work. We have to do something about prank phone calls, therefore we have to ban phones, end of story, a minority have made it necessary.
    Now I'd hope that most people wouldn't be convinced into supporting a ban on telephones by those arguments. Yet, consider what normally happens when a few idiots abuse something. Nine times out of ten, similar blanket bans/restrictions are adopted, and the arguments that are used in support of these measures are identical to the ones I have just presented in favour of a ban on phones.
    Such token measures rarely do stop the idiots, and when they do, the idiots usually move onto abusing other things. It strikes me that with this standard method of dealing with irresponsible behaviour, the only way we will ever make significant inroads against it is to carry out measures that substantially erode human liberties. I thus propose; we need to start considering alternative methods of tackling irresponsible behaviour...
  20. Thundery wintry showers
    I had a decent birthday yesterday, got lots of good wishes on Facebook, and got a few pressies, plus had cakes at 4pm.

    The temperature reached 27C during the afternoon at Norwich Airport- fitting since 27 is my favourite number. I like to have showers/storms with sunshine on my birthday most of all, but a warm/hot sunny dry day is my second preference so I'm not complaining about what I got.
  21. Thundery wintry showers
    I think even sleet is unlikely to occur in Norwich next week, because of the long airmass track over the North Sea- Norwich often seems to struggle to get much snow from northerlies early in the season (22-23 November 2008 was a notable exception, but that one really caught East Anglia full in the face, and it was still very marginal).

    But could it possibly snow in Cleadon in Tyne and Wear? That really would be a "first" because the north-east coast is particularly prone to being warmed by the North Sea and I haven't come across any recorded instances of snow in October near the Tyne and Wear coast.

    It'll be interesting to see how that one pans out.
  22. Thundery wintry showers
    Reading through Summer Model Discussion threads... sometimes I wonder what it would take to abolish the air of negativity in there!

    Hot and sunny for at least a week won't do, people complain that it's too hot.
    Modestly warm, dry and sunny (or cloudy) for at least a week won't do, people complain that it's too boring.
    Anything less than either of those two won't do, because people complain that we aren't having a summer and pray for a prolonged settled spell (hence "at least a week" in the above).

    I find the convective discussion threads a breath of fresh air because they involve people finding positives in the weather we're having. True, some people don't see anything to like in convective weather, just as I don't see anything to like in days on end of stratus trapped on the periphery of an anticyclone. We all have different preferences after all. But it would be nice if those who despise particular types of weather would stop imposing their misery on everyone else when they occur.
  23. Thundery wintry showers
    This is a slightly controversial topic that used to be referenced quite frequently by Philip Eden- how does one define "showers"? The dictionary typically tells us that a shower is a brief fall of precipitation, whereas most meteorologists use the term "shower" to refer to convective precipitation.

    I don't agree with Philip Eden's assertion that a shower should be termed a brief fall of light rain and that a brief, torrential fall is a "cloudburst" (it has to be said, I rarely disagree with what he says, but this is one such occasion). Think about it, most non-weather definitions of "shower" (e.g. taking a shower, being showered with gifts) involves short, sharp outbreaks, so I don't see why a cloudburst can't reasonably be called a heavy shower. However, I do agree with his point that to most of the "lay" public, the type of cloud that the precipitation falls from is not really relevant, and if a frontal system breaks up to give brief falls of precipitation, to most people, they would constitute "showers".

    In my view, though, when talking about showery weather on a large scale (such as when making a forecast) the distinction based on convective vs non-convective precipitation makes a lot of sense, because it is very rare for brief falls of precipitation to occur on a wide scale without them being at least partly convective in origin- plus it is much easier for forecasters to differentiate convective vs non convective precipitation than to differentiate prolonged vs short-lived precipitation (in addition to the fact that the two are strongly correlated anyway). It wouldn't surprise me if this was the main reason why "showers" as referring to convective precipitation came into widespread use.

    Another part of confusion concerns the definition of my favourite weather type, which . In the old days, it was sunshine mixed with brief falls of precipitation. These days my favourite weather type is rather more specific- sunshine mixed with [i]convective[/i] precipitation.
  24. Thundery wintry showers
    In some discussions on this forum I've often displayed a questioning attitude towards rules and laws, and refused to accept without question that "rules are rules". I think I know where this attitude comes from.
    It's by analogy with being picked on for being "different" (years of experience of it at school, and also at Lancaster University to some extent). If you complain about being picked on for being different, you often end up with a discussion like this:
    I: I'm being bullied.
    A: Well, just fit in then. The peer group make it clear where they draw the line; everyone knows what the rules of the peer group are: you fit in and get accepted, you don't fit in, you are bullied. It's your problem not theirs; fit in, and the problem is solved.
    I: No, the problem is the suppression of my ability to be who I am.
    A: That's life. You've got to fit in to help give a sense of community, and you've got to abide by what is considered socially acceptable; if everyone chose to abide by what was socially acceptable just when they felt it was right, you'd have the equivalent of anarchy. For example, you could say "it's socially unacceptable to beat people up, but I think that's suppression of individuality, so I think I'm entitled to beat people up".
    I: But there's a difference between deviating from social norms in a way that is harmful (e.g. beating people up) and doing things where the only thing "wrong" is its difference (e.g. having unusual interests, such as the weather)
    A: Doesn't matter. The peer group have their rules. Rules are rules- if you don't fit in, you get bullied. That's life. There isn't a problem with the rules of the peer group; we know this because if everyone abided by them there wouldn't be a problem.
    I: But there is a problem- you can't be who you are, you get ostracised for doing harmless things and treated as you would if you'd beaten someone up!
    A: That's life. It is necessary to penalise responsible people because of the actions of irresponsible people, because the minority spoil it for everyone else and that's life.
    I: It doesn't have to be that way- you can differentiate harmful different activities from harmless ones.
    A: (defensively) HOW do you? You can't, because the minority spoiling it is unavoidable; if it wasn't, it wouldn't be a fact of life.
    I think that's the kind of analogy that makes me a bit more questioning of rules and laws than most.
  25. Thundery wintry showers
    I had my swine flu jab on Tuesday (probably much to the angst of PersianPaladin). It gave me a mild headache for a few hours yesterday and my right arm has become fairly sore. Other than that there have been no problems- and in the meantime I feel at far less risk of ending up on a ventilator (somewhat fittingly, the remnants of last week's cold has set my normally-mild asthma going at times over the last few days).

    Am hopefully about to get an academic paper published, which should be good!

    In other news I've been playing a lot of table football (thanks to UEA's Table Football Society where you pay a one-off fee of £3 then get unlimited free games on Wednesday & Sunday evenings) and also a social event at Quasar tomorrow with another society.

    I am also waiting for the "Left 4 Dead + Left 4 Dead 2" pack to come down below £40 on Steam. I missed an opportunity to get L4D1 for £12.49 a while ago, but it's worth noting that if I'd bought that and then got L4D2 separately it would still have come in at over £40- a lot considering that digital distribution cuts out the publisher. Hopefully Valve will issue some kind of offer once L4D2 "activates" on 20 November, whereupon they'll get my money. Meanwhile the "Escape from Enemy Mountain" mod is still progressing- slowly- for Doom 3, but in relation to the above, I've implemented a Left 4 Dead style random monsters system.

    Regarding the weather there's not much to say. October 2009 came in at 1.1C above average at Cleadon making it the warmest October since 2006, and the most recent below-average month (using the 1971-2000 reference period) was January 2009. The first half of November has come in close to average with warm days and cool nights, but I expect the second half to raise temperatures much above average. I can't say I'm a big fan of these relentless "Atlantic" patterns when pressure is frequently high to the SE and fronts move across at regular intervals, preventing those sunshine-and-showers polar maritime regimes from taking hold. They may be changeable, but for me, changeable in quite an uninteresting way!
×
×
  • Create New...