Better Than The Models ?

[Barbmac]

New forecast

<snip>

However, the work on the 12 Nov and 25 Dec forecasts (and my normal day to day work) has meant that I have overlooked something major (which I identified back in the summer) and I will post today a new forecast of a very rare event in weather terms.

Hello MurcieBoy

I am intrigued by your attempts at forecasting and look forward to your next (even more so if it's a rare event)! Might I suggest that if you have uncertainties such as you had over the high pressure, that you indicate that in your forecast, for example, you said:

The isobars across the UK will be relatively closely packed, with pressure ranging from about 1010mb in the north of Scotland to about 1040mb in the south western tip of Cornwall. London will have a pressure of around 1035mb

re the pressure for London on the same historic day in the past, two very respected and well known sources gave two different pressure levels, one gave 1045mb and the other 1040mb (unfortunately I took the higher and my forecasted level was further out!)

You could in your forecast say you predict a pressure of 1040 mb ±5mb for London, then give the reason for your margin of error as a note below so people know why you have that level of uncertainty. Just a suggestion, helps make your forecasts that bit more scientific and also help to combat the doubting Thomases!

As to my thoughts on long term forecasting, I am doubtful that the same patterns will repeat going ever further (or for that matter back) into the future (or past), or if they do, then there must be some larger (or more accurately longer) cycles/rhythms in force that would alter their effect and so reflect climate change. All incredibly interesting though! I wish we had more detailed weather data going further back!

[Timmytour]

Sorry Mb....I'm no Moderator but I'd like to see you post it here if possible. I think this should be regarded as "your" thread. I'm thinking it may get lost elsewhere, and especially in the model thread, but there are plenty of us now who can draw attention to it and link people back to here.

Just my two cents :smiliz34:

[MurcieBoy]

Thanks for your responses - gratefully received.

Gosh... these charts are taking ages to do! Doing them by hand (as too complex; and they cover whole of north and west Europe, Scandinavia and Iceland) and then will scan. Just done four and there are three to go! Need a break for a lunch!

[mesocyclone]

Thanks for your responses - gratefully received.

Gosh... these charts are taking ages to do! Doing them by hand (as too complex; and they cover whole of north and west Europe, Scandinavia and Iceland) and then will scan. Just done four and there are three to go! Need a break for a lunch!

Hi MurcieBoy,

Been reading this thread with interest and now even more interest! I saw your x mas prediction and the very low pressure in Nov, In my eyes both more accurate than any model I know of at that range.

Any chance you can explain your DNA forecast system in layman terms so we can understand your methods?

I would also say this thread is yours and it would be good to carry on here and keep the unfolding story in one place.

Happy new year!

P.S I saw BFTP comment on rhythmic cycles, I am a producer/sound engineer and since the moment i learned about the physics of sound,waveforms and cycles, everything in nature has made more sense.

Edited December 31, 2010 by mesocyclone

[OldMetMan]

MurcieBoy I am glad you have appeared on this forum, I read your other threads elsewhere and I am hugely intrigued by your methods.

One thing I would like to ask, you mentioned that you had plans to publish your findings in time, is it still your intention to do this?

I am looking forward to your predictions re this rare weather event.

Please keep us all apprised of how you are doing with the development of your method. I sense that what you are doing is very important.

[MurcieBoy]

Gosh, many thanks again for the comments; I will provide a fuller reply to Old MetMan and mesocyclone sometime tomorrow.

The foecast is done with all the charts; and the video is currently being uploaded onto YouTube. Will post on here as soon as its ready.

Happy New Year everyone!

[yamkin]

Gosh, many thanks again for the comments; I will provide a fuller reply to Old MetMan and mesocyclone sometime tomorrow.

The foecast is done with all the charts; and the video is currently being uploaded onto YouTube. Will post on here as soon as its ready.

Happy New Year everyone!

I too look forward to your forecast. The MetO boffs really do think we are going to get colder conditions setting in very soon.

Edited December 31, 2010 by yamkin

[MurcieBoy]

The actual crux of the forecasting of this event took about half an hour, as I wanted to undertake certain checks. Writing up the narrative, compiling the charts and the video took about 18 hours!

Part of me wants this forecast to be totally wrong.

I could be proved wrong, but I cannot see how this forecast will not come to pass. If this forecast is not closely fulfilled, I shall spend an awful long time probably trying to work out where it all went wrong!

If my level of expectation of the 12 Nov ’10 prediction was say 75% positive; my expectation for this forecast is considerably higher.

So here it is folks, the Great North Sea Storm of 2011 that should (if it happens) go down in history:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iGKjdOo_A0

[OldMetMan]

The actual crux of the forecasting of this event took about half an hour, as I wanted to undertake certain checks. Writing up the narrative, compiling the charts and the video took about 18 hours!

Part of me wants this forecast to be totally wrong.

I could be proved wrong, but I cannot see how this forecast will not come to pass. If this forecast is not closely fulfilled, I shall spend an awful long time probably trying to work out where it all went wrong!

If my level of expectation of the 12 Nov ’10 prediction was say 75% positive; my expectation for this forecast is considerably higher.

So here it is folks, the Great North Sea Storm of 2011 that should (if it happens) go down in history:

MurcieBoy, that is a very scary scenario. Looking at the synoptic evolution, that is by no means unreasonable in terms of development, but obviously the stength of the pressure gradient is critical. Apart from the famous 1953 storm which has some similarities synoptically, another instance I can recall was in February 1969, when I believe the strongest low level wind gust was recorded in the Orkneys of over 130MPH. A very strong gradient developed in an intense N flow, with small polar lows moving S.

I shall watch developments with interest and look forward to your further reply.

[yamkin]

The actual crux of the forecasting of this event took about half an hour, as I wanted to undertake certain checks. Writing up the narrative, compiling the charts and the video took about 18 hours!

Part of me wants this forecast to be totally wrong.

I could be proved wrong, but I cannot see how this forecast will not come to pass. If this forecast is not closely fulfilled, I shall spend an awful long time probably trying to work out where it all went wrong!

If my level of expectation of the 12 Nov ’10 prediction was say 75% positive; my expectation for this forecast is considerably higher.

So here it is folks, the Great North Sea Storm of 2011 that should (if it happens) go down in history:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iGKjdOo_A0

Very interesting forecast. If this were to materialise, the Thames Barrier would be activated due to the surge from the North Sea.

[Cal]

Thanks for that Murcie Boy, one hell of a forecast is that!

[nking]

Hi Nick,

If this forecast comes off or even close then I think “luck†will have no foundation and there will be quite a few people taking notice of your forecasting method. I have to agree with your feeling that from a purely “risk to life†aspect it would be better if it didn’t.

I’m glad you have decided to contribute directly to this forum, I will follow this thread closely – Happy New Year.

Neil

[Timmytour]

Nick

Thanks for the forecast.....To say I'm looking forward to it seems the wrong thing to say but I do find your theories immensely interesting and love the way you lay your forecast on the line, without the acres of wriggle room some others always give themselves.

I'm tempted to add a typical regional comments...such as - "that's all very well and good but what do you think the chances for snow in Herts will be from this?" - but in view of the seriousness of what your forecasting it might not be appropriate! :unsure:

Thank you once again

[MurcieBoy]

Hello folks, I am really pleased to get positive comments thank you. I shall now try and go through the questions/points raised:

Barbmac (# 52)

Regarding uncertainties, I agree with you, it would be nice if I were able to quantify the parameters that I believe the forecast would be out by. The purpose of the “test forecasts†(and this is what they are) is that I can get to a position where I can provide the tolerances at the time of the forecast.

Yes, you are right, there are larger (very long) cycles that also operate at the same time; so yes, the weather is not exactly the same. Still, being 95% accurate is all one needs to be, especially when predicting very adverse weather conditions.

mesocyclone (# 55)

Gosh, you are first person to say that my forecasts, so far, may better at the Models at the range of say a month ahead. Thanks.

As to the methods that I use, it will be a lot easier for me to discuss if/when the method really proves itself. As Neil says (#63) if the Feb 2011 forecast proves to be accurate or near accurate the issue about “luck†may be removed a wee bit. Incidentally, if some posters in another place are to be believed, I should win something on the lottery every time I do it, as I am “so luckyâ€!

As a sound engineer you would be familiar as to how separate/individual sounds (waveforms) can be combined to produce a “composite†cycle or waveform. The composite cycle or waveform may appear to be chaotic, but if one knows the constituent cycles or waveforms, it is a lot easier to predict the composite and therefore realise that it is not chaotic.

If you like, I deal in the underlying constituent waveforms that when combined produce the weather. The constituent waveforms are very easy to predict and if one knows the “weight†of each of their influence on the end product when combined, it is relatively easy to predict the “chaotic†composite waveform.

I have a deep respect to the need to get this information out at the right time; the right time will only be if/when the method proves itself totally. To release it piecemeal beforehand will not show respect to the reader or to the vastly important subject in hand.

So OldMetMan (# 56), I will publish, it is my prime objective, but only when I know what I write is a proven fact backed up with example after example of how the method works. The “testing†that I am doing at the moment is part of the groundwork therefore to the book.

I really don’t want to spend the rest of my life arguing with people about what is objective truth or science, I will just give them the method with all the backup, which they can test to the n^th degree and they can hopefully see it for themselves. If that can happen, we will see the end to the way weather forecasting is undertaken around the world. You can see from my video #2 how the models are found wanting, trying to forecast a day more than 7 days ahead. To quote Roger J Smith from 1 November 2005 “if we built bridges and airplanes the way we make weather forecasts, a lot of people would refuse to get on a plane or drive a carâ€.

Nothing that I will write will be new. It has been known for aeons; how do I know that? Well there are clues everywhere. For example, every time I look at my watch I am reminded. Only someone who had an intimate knowledge of how nature works would divide the day into 24 equal divisions, why didn’t they choose 22 or 20? They chose 24 for a specific reason. Also, why does the watch face only have 12 divisions, why not 24? One can come up with theories all day long, but there is only one right answer and that answer can only be provided by those that have an intimate understanding of how Nature unravels. Please don’t get me wrong, I am still learning and not speaking from any lofty position.

Thanks for your comments to the video Timmytour (#64); as you know, I am no good at predicting snow, so can't say if there will be snow in Herts! BTW, I thought your post #28 was pure genius!!!

[weatherguy]

Only just stumbled across this and it is very interesting indeed...If this truly does arise then the problems would be immense, as you point out in that video

Thanks for this though, hopefully (if this is indeed correct) then weather forecasting methods will become much more accurate in general with time

But wow...160mph winds coming from the NE...

[OldMetMan]

So OldMetMan (# 56), I will publish, it is my prime objective, but only when I know what I write is a proven fact backed up with example after example of how the method works. The “testing†that I am doing at the moment is part of the groundwork therefore to the book.

I really don’t want to spend the rest of my life arguing with people about what is objective truth or science, I will just give them the method with all the backup, which they can test to the n^th degree and they can hopefully see it for themselves. If that can happen, we will see the end to the way weather forecasting is undertaken around the world. You can see from my video #2 how the models are found wanting, trying to forecast a day more than 7 days ahead. To quote Roger J Smith from 1 November 2005 “if we built bridges and airplanes the way we make weather forecasts, a lot of people would refuse to get on a plane or drive a carâ€.

Nothing that I will write will be new. It has been known for aeons; how do I know that? Well there are clues everywhere. For example, every time I look at my watch I am reminded. Only someone who had an intimate knowledge of how nature works would divide the day into 24 equal divisions, why didn’t they choose 22 or 20? They chose 24 for a specific reason. Also, why does the watch face only have 12 divisions, why not 24? One can come up with theories all day long, but there is only one right answer and that answer can only be provided by those that have an intimate understanding of how Nature unravels. Please don’t get me wrong, I am still learning and not speaking from any lofty position.

Thanks for your comments to the video Timmytour (#64); as you know, I am no good at predicting snow, so can't say if there will be snow in Herts! BTW, I thought your post #28 was pure genius!!!

Thank you MurcieBoy, I am very pleased to hear it. I understand your measured approach to releasing details of the method and I agree that enough successful hits will prove it beyond dispute.

However, it hardly needs saying, but there will be those who will have a vested interest in debunking what you do, regardless of how accurate your method is, just as happens in the world of medicine when better, safer and more time-tested cures exist in the world of alternative medicine. But I like to think that yours is an idea whose time has come. I think we are entering an era where a lot of accepted theories, and not just about the weather, will be thrown out.

I wish you every success with what you are doing.

[mesocyclone]

Thanks for the reply Murcie Boy.

I love how my mind can understand the workings of what appear complex cycles and chaotic order, yet would have no idea as to explain it in a mathematical equation.

I'm currently reading a book i received as an x-mas gift about astronomy. I find it refreshing how many self taught astronomers their were in the past. I'm 100% self taught in my profession and now make my living in it. All minds at various levels can add to many fields without understanding fully the workings of it. As science knows, just when you begin to think you understand, you often find more to the puzzle that takes you back to the drawing board. A programmed mind can often miss what the un-programmed doesn't.

I now have a moral dilemma as i wish for you to be correct in your forecast so we can begin to see more advancement in weather modeling. I do believe we need to look outside our world as well as in it for cycles repeating. However that is a beast of a storm forecast. Much devastation would occur from that. If you are correct many will ask what could have been done with this prior knowledge (if it can be proven and more importantly accepted).

Interesting comments on "it has been known for aeons" Are we just catching up with ancient knowledge, especially when it comes to nature??

I could talk for hours on that!

Happy new year and all the best in your work.

Meso.

Edit

However, it hardly needs saying, but there will be those who will have a vested interest in debunking what you do, regardless of how accurate your method is, just as happens in the world of medicine when better, safer and more time-tested cures exist in the world of alternative medicine. But I like to think that yours is an idea whose time has come. I think we are entering an era where a lot of accepted theories, and not just about the weather, will be thrown out.

Very good point, especially the co2 gang!

Let's hope we are entering an era of more open mindedness, a refreshing thought.

Edited January 1, 2011 by mesocyclone

[k19]

Nothing that I will write will be new. It has been known for aeons; how do I know that? Well there are clues everywhere. For example, every time I look at my watch I am reminded. Only someone who had an intimate knowledge of how nature works would divide the day into 24 equal divisions, why didn’t they choose 22 or 20? They chose 24 for a specific reason. Also, why does the watch face only have 12 divisions, why not 24? One can come up with theories all day long, but there is only one right answer and that answer can only be provided by those that have an intimate understanding of how Nature unravels. Please don’t get me wrong, I am still learning and not speaking from any lofty position.

hmmm very philosophical. I will be watching this closely to see if in fact there is a storm, and if there is, then that is one incredible prediction. Also I like your logic, but can you explain to me how 'Nature unravels' is related to 12 divisions on a clock? Is this merely a musing?

Thanks

[La Bise]

Interesting forecast, hopefully it will never come to pass.

The number 24 is significant in so much as it is related to something that affects all life on Earth, the Circadian rhythm, well worth a read about it, fascinating stuff. The Egyptian were the first to divide the day in 24 hours it seems based on archeological findings. The number 12 significance has Biblical origins in our culture. Numbers do often have mystical meaning associated to them, as human being we do tend to seek patterns, an evolutionnary byproduct when our ancesters had mainly their wits to survive on and evolved something truly unique to us human, self-aware sentience. To this day we like to ascribe meanings to our chaotic universe, our brains simply don't cope very well with disorder it seems hence the rise of religions, superstitions, etc, etc

Ancient knowledge is often mentionned in hushed tones as if our ancesters had a far deeper understanding of our planet than our current civilisation. They also worshipped an incredible amout of divinities, practiced human sacrifice, thought the sun was a tiny warm blob in the sky, that stars were angels flying, that the Earth was flat, etc, etc, etc. Let's not descend into mystical worship of our past, we have an exponentially greater understanding of how our planet works, how our mind works, how our body works, we would appear as nothing short of gods to someone who lived 5000 years ago.

I suspect method X is related to astrology (12...although it should be 13 really if "ancient knowledge" was really taken into account).

Anyhow, interesting read, you should contact Fortean Times or even propose an article, that's the kind of stuff they go for (excellent magazine, I suscribe to it).

[weatherguy]

Interesting forecast, hopefully it will never come to pass.

It's actually quite a dilemma really - If it proves to come true, then obviously lives will be lost and severe damage caused. However, this would also prove that this forecasting method is highly successful and could potentially cause a revolution in forecasting; allowing for greater preparedness for such events which may save lives, and also of course improve accuracy of general forecasting which is always beneficial

Edited January 1, 2011 by weatherguy

[Great Plum]

A very interesting forecast thank you. I hope, as many on here have professed that it doesn't come off, for obvious reasons but I hope your forecasting methods are vindicated...

I'm also at center parcs in Elveden from the 31st Jan -4th Feb so that could be interesting!!

[LomondSnowstorm]

I'm staying agnostic about MB's forecasting methods for the time being. If this storm comes to pass, and to a degree I really hope it doesn't because of the implications it would have, then I think the study of meteorology has to be fundamentally re-examined by the scientific establishment.

[VillagePlank]

Fourier analysis can be used to break down a signal based on time to a signal based on frequency (Fourier Transform) I've had a go at it, myself, using the CET, here. The hardest part is to accept that it's not always 'on the money' and other factors nudge the cycles, so Fourier (and it's cousin wavelets) start to break down with their usefullness - ie they become limited. Removing trends, ensuring constant variance, and performing cursory ARIMA analysis can help to find the cyclical lags, analytically - there will more on my blog in due course wrt climate change using exactly these methods.

I think the analytical scientific basis, from what I can glean from inference, for forecasts such as these is already out there - it's the preparation of the data, and the selection of the data that is key; I am looking forward to finding out what these are.

As for the forecast - that's a pretty scary one, and should show on the ensembles within a very short period. I have to say that I hope it's right in the sense that I am quite fond of alternative methods (although most, unfortunately do turn out to be quite ropey) but I really hope it doesn't come to fruition for the inevitable chaos that's going to ensue if it verifies.

Edited January 2, 2011 by VillagePlank

[lorenzo]

Some notable low pressure systems from Feb 4th from Wetterzentrale archive.

1948 975 mb Iceland SE

1950 960 mb Iceland SW

1951 965 mb Ireland W

1957 960 mb Mid Atlantic

1960 975 mb UK N

1962 960 mb Iceland N

1964 970 mb Iceland NE

1966 975 mb mid Atlantic

1968 975 mb Iceland S

1970 975 mb Scandi

1972 965 mb Ireland W

1981 970 mb Norway

1988 980 mb Ireland

1989 955 mb Iceland

1990 950 mb Mid Atlantic

1994 955 mb Ireland

1999 970 mb Iceland

2008 970 mb UK NW

[jennyjane]

I'm staying agnostic about MB's forecasting methods for the time being. If this storm comes to pass, and to a degree I really hope it doesn't because of the implications it would have, then I think the study of meteorology has to be fundamentally re-examined by the scientific establishment.

I'm following this discussion with interest but really I don't see why someone couldn't come up with a new method of interpreting or forecasting weather charts.It reminds me of when they said the world was flat then other methods of working it out were discovered.I think its great that we evolve and discover new ways of thinking about things.I am sure there are other weather related issues we have yet to discover and may not discover for decades to come.It would be boring to think that everything which could be discovered has already been discovered.