*EL NINO/LA NINA FORECAST 2010-2011*

[icefisher]

Oct 12, 2010 1:59:16 GMT s12a said:

Regarding that picture, I tried adjusting the color scale to make it more linear and simpler. Tell me what you think:

The reds in the northwest pacific appear too dark and the La Nina peak at 120westlongitude, 0 latitude is way too pale and lighter than the cold spots at 60south that are half the intensity.

cold spots missing between new guinea and australia and west of panama.

An algorithm issue or is it an accuracy issue between sources?

[s12a]

I used pure red for the hottest value, pure blue for the coldest value.
Both scales start at white color (0.0 = white).
Values in-between are linearly interpolated. There are more in-between values than what the scale suggests (126 different values for cold pixels, 125 different values for hot pixels).
As I merely substituted colors in the image color palette, I can only conclude that the NOAA map has on average more warmer values than the one you posted.
Pale areas are where there isn't a significant temperature anomaly. The original image makes them hard to discern.

These are the original color palettes.
Left: original; right: modified.




As the process is semi-automated I can now alter further NOAA sea surface anomaly images with ease.

[steve]

astromet

Amen. Couldn't have said it better Icefisher. I am looking forward to the day when the majority of the pinheads in this field leave it to the professionals, and those with common sense.

You need to realise that icefisher just follows me around and looks for reasons to disagree with me.

I note that you got upset at someone using the word "garbage" in relation to your forecast, but are happy to describe your competitors as pinheads.

You have also studiously avoided my suggestion that you point out the errors in your forecast, and suggested that if I use more of my brain capacity I will realise that your errors cannot be errors since your method is right. I'm afraid I have personally met many charlatans and conmen who, when challenged, have said that maybe I do not understand their healing technique/angel imaging technology/alien communication device because I am not using the full capacity of my brain, so I am not encouraged by your advice.

Since you have avoided answering any of my questions I therefore have to conclude that no matter how erroneous your forecast is you will never admit it. I look forward to your patronising reply which will once again avoid my questions and state that you have nothing to prove (well I know that!).

[AstroMet]

Oct 12, 2010 9:22:57 GMT steve said:

astromet

Amen. Couldn't have said it better Icefisher. I am looking forward to the day when the majority of the pinheads in this field leave it to the professionals, and those with common sense.

You need to realise that icefisher just follows me around and looks for reasons to disagree with me.

I note that you got upset at someone using the word "garbage" in relation to your forecast, but are happy to describe your competitors as pinheads.

You have also studiously avoided my suggestion that you point out the errors in your forecast, and suggested that if I use more of my brain capacity I will realise that your errors cannot be errors since your method is right. I'm afraid I have personally met many charlatans and conmen who, when challenged, have said that maybe I do not understand their healing technique/angel imaging technology/alien communication device because I am not using the full capacity of my brain, so I am not encouraged by your advice.

Since you have avoided answering any of my questions I therefore have to conclude that no matter how erroneous your forecast is you will never admit it. I look forward to your patronising reply which will once again avoid my questions and state that you have nothing to prove (well I know that!).

No Steve, I don't get upset. What is irritating is that you are not a forecaster, do not forecast weather at all and I know I can out-forecast you any day of the week, month, or year ~ and that you dare to pose your "questions" when all your comments really do is waste time.

I remind you again that you are using less than 10% of your own brain's power, but choose to sound off about matters you clearly are not experienced with, or have substantial knowledge of; yet you come off calling things "garbage?"

The sooner people like you are out of the climate field, the better. It is not a game. You are better off with your Playstation if you want to play games.

So, no, I'm not avoiding your "questions," but would much prefer that the person behind the keyboard can ask questions with an intention to learn and expand knowledge rather than sounding off about things he clearly has no knowledge about.

Icefisher gets it. You do not.

Patronize that.

[steve]

No Steve, I don't get upset. What is irritating is that you are not a forecaster, do not forecast weather at all and I know I can out-forecast you any day of the week, month, or year ~ and that you dare to pose your "questions" when all your comments really do is waste time.

I don't need to be a forecaster to recognise a bad forecast. I do not need to understand your techniques to recognise that its outcomes do not match reality. And if your forecasts are absolutely useless to all that only use the normal 10% of their brain ( ) then they are absolutely useless full-stop.

If you tell me the Mississippi is going to flood and it doesn't flood, I want to know why. If you claim to be able to forecast big events and don't forecast the three big weather news events of the year then I want to know why. If you base a forecast on an El Niño that didn't persist, and a rapidly strengthening solar cycle that didn't rapidly strengthen, I want to know what the implications are. I also want to know why you claim success when you predicted a weak La Niña for next year, and missed the very deep La Niña that we are currently in.

You have used four excuses now to avoid answering my question:
1) Because I am not a forecaster. But what is the point of a forecast that only forecasters can understand? Are you speaking in tongues, and do I need to find an interpreter?
2) Because I am not using all my brain. Perhaps I would use more of my brain if you gave me some answers for it to chew on.
3) Because I am playing games. The only "game" I am playing is asking you straightforward questions and refusing to bow to your un-earned authority.
4) You have claimed you have not avoided my questions. Fair enough. But you haven't given me any answers, so I will rephrase. You have read my questions, realised your answers will show you in a bad light and therefore decided to try and bluster your way out of the situation.

From my long-range astronomical calculations for North America, I've forecasted 2010-11 to be a very strong El Nino year. This is caused mainly by the activity of the Sun, which will undergo an historic solar maximum that will bring to an end the 36-year global warming phase that began in the year 1980 while opening a new global cooling phase that will get underway by the year 2017.

By this time in fall 2010, the Mid-Atlantic should be well within the throes of El Nino, with above average rainfall, and warmer than average temperatures.

How can you tell me with a straight face that your forecast above was anything but exactly the opposite of reality? Does 90% of your brain live in a parallel reality?

[AstroMet]

Oct 12, 2010 14:53:31 GMT steve said:

No Steve, I don't get upset. What is irritating is that you are not a forecaster, do not forecast weather at all and I know I can out-forecast you any day of the week, month, or year ~ and that you dare to pose your "questions" when all your comments really do is waste time.

I don't need to be a forecaster to recognise a bad forecast. I do not need to understand your techniques to recognise that its outcomes do not match reality. And if your forecasts are absolutely useless to all that only use the normal 10% of their brain ( ) then they are absolutely useless full-stop.

If you tell me the Mississippi is going to flood and it doesn't flood, I want to know why. If you claim to be able to forecast big events and don't forecast the three big weather news events of the year then I want to know why. If you base a forecast on an El Niño that didn't persist, and a rapidly strengthening solar cycle that didn't rapidly strengthen, I want to know what the implications are. I also want to know why you claim success when you predicted a weak La Niña for next year, and missed the very deep La Niña that we are currently in.

You have used four excuses now to avoid answering my question:
1) Because I am not a forecaster. But what is the point of a forecast that only forecasters can understand? Are you speaking in tongues, and do I need to find an interpreter?
2) Because I am not using all my brain. Perhaps I would use more of my brain if you gave me some answers for it to chew on.
3) Because I am playing games. The only "game" I am playing is asking you straightforward questions and refusing to bow to your un-earned authority.
4) You have claimed you have not avoided my questions. Fair enough. But you haven't given me any answers, so I will rephrase. You have read my questions, realised your answers will show you in a bad light and therefore decided to try and bluster your way out of the situation.

From my long-range astronomical calculations for North America, I've forecasted 2010-11 to be a very strong El Nino year. This is caused mainly by the activity of the Sun, which will undergo an historic solar maximum that will bring to an end the 36-year global warming phase that began in the year 1980 while opening a new global cooling phase that will get underway by the year 2017.

By this time in fall 2010, the Mid-Atlantic should be well within the throes of El Nino, with above average rainfall, and warmer than average temperatures.

How can you tell me with a straight face that your forecast above was anything but exactly the opposite of reality? Does 90% of your brain live in a parallel reality?

Considering the fact you do not seem to use a calendar or note the rainfall accumulation throughout the Northern Hemisphere as of this point in time (with 2011 to come) the only "reality" missing here is the world you seem to be living in.

Get real Steve.

I can understand how easy it must be for you to be in denial, but again, I remind you that you are not learning, but simply staying put on the small amount of knowledge you appear have - with the great majority of your comments resting on your mere opinion.

Not good enough.

El Nino doesn't just turn off like a switch, as I reminded another bumbler with "questions," who cannot see what is happening in the real world on the ground.

It is still raining heavily in many regions throughout the northern hemisphere causing floods. These are torrential rains common to ENSO.

news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101008/wl_asia_afp/indonesiaflood_20101008070214

news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101008/wl_asia_afp/indonesiaflood_20101008070214

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101009/ap_on_re_as/as_bangladesh_rains

www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5hx_ZvodUTd5NZFWrd679CPYXHXoA?docId=4798095

People with little understanding of the climate in general and climate forecasting in particular have a hard time because of their own ignorance. Rather than observe, and study, they pontificate on matters where they lack knowledge and experience. AGW is an excellent example of this fact.

La Nina is still building, and the heat release in the Pacific is ongoing. La Nina 2011 will peak during the Winter of 2011 - mainly in the months of February, March, and April 2011 with what will be like a mini-ice age of sorts with much colder-than-average temperatures.

We will see more of these colder-than-average climate conditions during the 2010s, as global cooling begins in earnest after 2017.

This global cooling will peak in the mid-2030s.

What you will have to do is to learn much much more about the Earth, the fact that our planet lives in space - and the fact that this is where all our climate and weather comes from - not computer models.

Until you learn that principle, your "questions" will be based on fantasy - which is not usable whatsoever to be able to learn anything of value when it comes to knowing how climate and weather is produced here on Earth.

[steve]

Considering the fact you do not seem to use a calendar...

So is that fall 2010 in the Martian or Venusian calendar?

I can understand how easy it must be for you to be in denial, but again, I remind you that you are not learning,

One of the reasons why I may not be learning could be that you have not really addressed my questions.

El Nino doesn't just turn off like a switch, as I reminded another bumbler with "questions," who cannot see what is happening in the real world on the ground.

So anyone who objects to any aspect of your forecaster is a bumbler. Good luck with your customers if you have any.

With massive chutzpah you say:

It is still raining heavily in many regions throughout the northern hemisphere causing floods. These are torrential rains common to ENSO.

news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101008/wl_asia_afp/indonesiaflood_20101008070214

when your original forecast (and normal El Niño climatology for October) would suggest dry weather is more likely in Indonesia. You said:

Droughts can spread through the countries of Australia, China, India, Indonesia, India, Philippines, and Africa. One region of the world - South Asia - will see an powerful series of climate-related disasters as a result from the Sun's activity and effects on the world's coverall climate. It is calculated that world's population at risk from ENSO-related disasters is somewhere between 187 to 250 million people globally.

Drought is also one my biggest concerns from this particular ENSO. Because of certain astronomic indications, some of the world's regions other than the southern to Midwestern United States will see a the spread of droughts and dust storms that may last into the year 2015 at varying intensities along the way - leading to starvation from the year-after-year lack of rains, particularly in parts of eastern and central Africa, all of India, northern & southern China, Indonesia, northern and central Australia, the Philippines, and Japan.

In other words, your original forecast predicted both torrential downpours *and* droughts which allowed you to claim success if either rainfall or drought happened anywhere - unless people looked at the detail of your forecast that is.

It would seem that my pestering has forced you into another erroneous claim of success.

[AstroMet]

Oct 12, 2010 14:53:31 GMT steve said:

No Steve, I don't get upset. What is irritating is that you are not a forecaster, do not forecast weather at all and I know I can out-forecast you any day of the week, month, or year ~ and that you dare to pose your "questions" when all your comments really do is waste time.

I don't need to be a forecaster to recognise a bad forecast. I do not need to understand your techniques to recognise that its outcomes do not match reality. And if your forecasts are absolutely useless to all that only use the normal 10% of their brain ( ) then they are absolutely useless full-stop.

If you tell me the Mississippi is going to flood and it doesn't flood, I want to know why. If you claim to be able to forecast big events and don't forecast the three big weather news events of the year then I want to know why. If you base a forecast on an El Niño that didn't persist, and a rapidly strengthening solar cycle that didn't rapidly strengthen, I want to know what the implications are. I also want to know why you claim success when you predicted a weak La Niña for next year, and missed the very deep La Niña that we are currently in.

You have used four excuses now to avoid answering my question:
1) Because I am not a forecaster. But what is the point of a forecast that only forecasters can understand? Are you speaking in tongues, and do I need to find an interpreter?
2) Because I am not using all my brain. Perhaps I would use more of my brain if you gave me some answers for it to chew on.
3) Because I am playing games. The only "game" I am playing is asking you straightforward questions and refusing to bow to your un-earned authority.
4) You have claimed you have not avoided my questions. Fair enough. But you haven't given me any answers, so I will rephrase. You have read my questions, realised your answers will show you in a bad light and therefore decided to try and bluster your way out of the situation.

From my long-range astronomical calculations for North America, I've forecasted 2010-11 to be a very strong El Nino year. This is caused mainly by the activity of the Sun, which will undergo an historic solar maximum that will bring to an end the 36-year global warming phase that began in the year 1980 while opening a new global cooling phase that will get underway by the year 2017.

By this time in fall 2010, the Mid-Atlantic should be well within the throes of El Nino, with above average rainfall, and warmer than average temperatures.

How can you tell me with a straight face that your forecast above was anything but exactly the opposite of reality? Does 90% of your brain live in a parallel reality?

Listen man, I don't get it. You want me to say my forecast is perfect? I never said that anywhere.

Two, obviously you are not a forecaster, because if you knew the work and intensity involved, then you wouldn't be so casual about your words, rather, you'd be more interested in knowing how to forecast astronomically.

Three - the point of forecasting is to gain at least 85% accuracy and to maintain it. Due to the fluidity of the Earth's atmosphere, and the fact that all things are in constant motion, the variable mathematics are always changing.

Four - whether you think I "earned" my authority or not is not my concern. I've worked hard to forecast and as a professional I've earned it after years of blood and sweat. So screw you pal. At least I'm not sitting on my ass poo-pooing forecasters who work very hard to provide a service.

If you don't like what you read, then do not read it - it is that simple Steve.

Five - the year 2010 is not over, nor is the year 2011 here. I forecasted ENSO for 2010-2011, so at least you can wait to see how much of my long-range forecast was accurate and how much was not rather, you dismiss it out of hand. Where do you come off doing that? How about answering that question?

At least you know I was accurate in my call for ENSO. I did that years in advance.

The fact that you're jumping the gun on the entire forecast shows your bias. What's the hurry Steve? Can't wait for the years forecasted to complete itself before you shit all over it?

Six - If you don't like my "answers" to your "questions," so what? Those are my answers. I'm not going to answer questions pose rudely, with attacks, and with no manners. Just how old are you?

Or, are you one of those "wannabe" forecasters, you know, the kind that proliferate on weather boards poo-pooing every true forecaster because you cannot do it yourself?

I issued this forecast back in 2008. I forecasted ENSO from 2006 for the time period 2010-11.

Comments on 2010 Climate -

"A stormy year is ahead for many countries in 2010. According to my forecast the year will be warmer and much wetter than normal leading to widespread floods on three continents; parts of Asia, the Americas, and Europe.

Flooding of regions has been recorded in late December 2009 in parts of the Americas and Europe and continues into early January. Heavy rains have led to widespread floods in Argentina, Spain, and Portugal. This will become more common in other regions as 2010 progresses.

I expect many more regions to experience significant flooding in a year dominated by El Nino.

This particular El Nino, from my analysis, appears to be a combination of the 1982-83 ENSO and the 1997-98 ENSO, but will exhibit unusual features not seen in previously recorded ENSO states."

This will make the developing ENSO state not only an historic one, but also an unusual climate phenomena worthy of lengthy study after all is said and done."

Now, if you are a honest person, and not a jerk, you will see that I was correct about the torrential rains and the floods, which occurred, as forecasted on these continents, and are now ongoing. See the weather news of 2010 for confirmation.

I did this years in advance, because that is the power of astronomical forecasting. Pure and simple.

Also, if you knew anything about climate, you would know that torrential rains and droughts can co-exist, and often do. You seem to be under the false belief that they cannot. I say you are wrong.

Regions suffering from drought can, and do suffer when torrential rains arrive, which causes mudslides that can kill.

Regions suffering from torrential rains can also go into drought mode afterward. These are the extremes of weather I forecasted years ago.

The same with temperature. If you have been paying attention, you would have noticed that over the past several years some regions have suffered higher than normal temperatures will sudden drops in temperature over a period of a day, or so.

This is the transition phase we are seeing from global warming to global cooling - which lasts years. We are now in the 29-30th year of global warming with about 6-7 years to go before global cooling officially begins.

This has been my long-range climate forecast for years, and nothing has changed. You will see it for yourself, that is, if your eyes are actually open.

Your "opinion" on this matter does not matter. It has no relevance whatsoever to the facts of astronomical conditions that direct Earth's climate. This is your problem it appears. You refuse to accept it and want someone, anyone, me, to "explain" it to you, but you will learn nothing with the attitude you continue to present.

Observation is key to forecasting science. If you observe the motions of the Sun, Moon, and planets relative to Earth, and note the weather in your own local region, and learn to record weather events over periods of time, then you too may be able to learn astronomical forecasting.

My "authority" as a forecaster rests on my ability to forecast. I do it as best as I can, and yes, I've earned it through many years of hard work in meteorology and forecasting.

People who know my work, and who have followed my long-range forecasts know my abilities. The climate and weather forecasted either confirms or does not confirm my prior forecasts. Show me where I said I was perfect, because for the life of me, I can not ever recall ever saying that once.

You use the word "success" as if you are jealous or something. What's with that? You want to deal with what forecasters sometimes receive?

Then by all means, get on the playing field and forecast and you will get a taste of just how difficult this science is to practice. In effect, get up off your behind, and do some real work Steve, that is, if you have the smarts to do it.

Learn to respect what I do, and get off the can, and then maybe we can hold an intelligent conversation without your cynicism, name-calling, and need to lie about what my forecast said and what it did not.

People can see what was forecasted beforehand, what was confirmed, and what busted. Climate and weather forecasting is not a perfect science, but we forecasters are always perfecting our work nonetheless. Respect that.

It isn't easy, though people like you seem to think that because we issue forecasts that all of it must occur for any of it to be true. That is the perspective of a child.

You want to ask questions? Please, feel free to do so, but drop the bullshit, the tone of your language, pestering like a girl, the stupid remarks, and the game playing, and then maybe we can talk.

In effect, act your age and not your shoe-size.

Got that?

[astroposer777]

Astromet,

Were your predictions based on a typical solar minimum, or an extended solar minimum( Which I don't think was forecast by anyone)?
If you were to recast based on the extended minimum, would that effect the timing of the ENSO predictions?

[AstroMet]

Oct 12, 2010 16:18:34 GMT astroposer777 said:

Astromet,

Were your predictions based on a typical solar minimum, or an extended solar minimum( Which I don't think was forecast by anyone)?
If you were to recast based on the extended minimum, would that effect the timing of the ENSO predictions?

Hi Rob, some of my forecasts were based on the solar minimum, but I also use the planets, which modulate the magnetic field of space associated with where the Earth orbits.

I use a wide variety of astronomical methods, then I synthesize all of it to forecast, according to hemispheric region, and the seasons.

The extended solar minimum was known by me based on my calculations for the start of Solar Cycle #24, which many scientists jumped the gun on too fast several years back.

The overall cycle for the current solar activity remains within the global warming range of 36 years in total. We are in the 30th year of this phase, with about six more years to go.

So the Earth will experience the effects of global warming from 2011-2016, more or less, but we are in the down-phase of this cycle in my estimation, and transitioning towards global cooling, which is worse than global warming.

[icefisher]

Oct 12, 2010 8:04:48 GMT s12a said:

As I merely substituted colors in the image color palette, I can only conclude that the NOAA map has on average more warmer values than the one you posted.

That appears to be the explanation. Quite interesting that the NOAA charts are showing up to 2 degree differences from the Unisys chart.

That would make for an interesting investigation.

[steve]

Listen man, I don't get it. You want me to say my forecast is perfect? I never said that anywhere.

No I didn't. You said in a very confident way:

My long-range forecast called for La Nina on the back end of El Nino, which has occurred on time. This winter season in the hemisphere, according to my outlook remains the same - dominated by La Nina with much colder and wetter than normal winter conditions.

I pointed out that you were clear that autumn would be dominated by El Niño and La Niña was not expected till 2011. When you reacted, I made the comment that you should acknowledge both the positives *and* the negatives of your forecast. I said quite reasonably and politely:

If you are going to make month-by-month and day-by-day predictions, you should acknowledge the misses as well as the hits. Eg. even if any of the very great details of the following forecast turn out to be correct, they are predicated on El Niño having continued into winter 2010 which has not happened.

solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=gotopost&board=globalwarming&thread=987&post=56830

My posts #465 and #467 on Page 32 were equally polite but nonetheless insistent in requesting that you accept that your forecast would not be perfect and be open about what was not right. I made it quite clear that I did not expect perfection, only honest verification.

Following this were a number of pages of evasion by you, and attempted belittling of me and professional forecasters, which culminated in attempting to claim Indonesian floods as a success related to El Niño after-effects when you'd actually predicted a drought possibility for Indonesia.

If you want to get riled, and start using terms like "jerk", "pinhead", "bumbler" and so forth then fair enough. You have put your forecast up for a public viewing and I am entitled to question whether your forecast is good or not.

The fact that you're jumping the gun on the entire forecast shows your bias. What's the hurry Steve? Can't wait for the years forecasted to complete itself before you shit all over it?

I didn't jump the gun on the entire forecast. I asked you to say why you were pleased about your forecast of the La Niña when it had come 6 months early, and was apparently much deeper than expected, and undermined a lot of the details of your forecast. Similarly, I asked you about the implications caused by the apparent lesser activity of the sun. As you see robham has just asked a similar question.

You want to ask questions? Please, feel free to do so, but drop the bullshit, the tone of your language, pestering like a girl, the stupid remarks, and the game playing, and then maybe we can talk.

Asking questions was all that I did originally. But you didn't answer my questions so I was persistent, and yes of course I was playing games. If that is "pestering like a girl" then so be it, as it successfully exposed your inappropriate attempt to use the Indonesian floods to verify your forecast. I'm pretty sure that the tone of my language has been mostly strained politeness and the tone of yours has been overbearing and insulting.

Probably I will sign of by saying of course astrology is complete nonsense, of course the Sun is likely to influence the weather, of course nobody is close to a good understanding of the linkage between the weather and the Sun, of course the planets have no detectable effect on the weather, of course the best we can do for medium term weather is provide probabilities, of course your forecast is unverifiable and not useful to anyone.

[poitsplace]

Yeah, steve...it really is annoying when you point out that they're trying to dodge your question...and then they just dodge again in the reply. (seriously, no hidden meanings or anything here...just the exchange with astro)

[AstroMet]

Oct 12, 2010 16:53:58 GMT steve said:

Listen man, I don't get it. You want me to say my forecast is perfect? I never said that anywhere.

No I didn't. You said in a very confident way:



I pointed out that you were clear that autumn would be dominated by El Niño and La Niña was not expected till 2011. When you reacted, I made the comment that you should acknowledge both the positives *and* the negatives of your forecast. I said quite reasonably and politely:



solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=gotopost&board=globalwarming&thread=987&post=56830

My posts #465 and #467 on Page 32 were equally polite but nonetheless insistent in requesting that you accept that your forecast would not be perfect and be open about what was not right. I made it quite clear that I did not expect perfection, only honest verification.

Following this were a number of pages of evasion by you, and attempted belittling of me and professional forecasters, which culminated in attempting to claim Indonesian floods as a success related to El Niño after-effects when you'd actually predicted a drought possibility for Indonesia.

If you want to get riled, and start using terms like "jerk", "pinhead", "bumbler" and so forth then fair enough. You have put your forecast up for a public viewing and I am entitled to question whether your forecast is good or not.



I didn't jump the gun on the entire forecast. I asked you to say why you were pleased about your forecast of the La Niña when it had come 6 months early, and was apparently much deeper than expected, and undermined a lot of the details of your forecast. Similarly, I asked you about the implications caused by the apparent lesser activity of the sun. As you see robham has just asked a similar question.

You want to ask questions? Please, feel free to do so, but drop the bullshit, the tone of your language, pestering like a girl, the stupid remarks, and the game playing, and then maybe we can talk.

Asking questions was all that I did originally. But you didn't answer my questions so I was persistent, and yes of course I was playing games. If that is "pestering like a girl" then so be it, as it successfully exposed your inappropriate attempt to use the Indonesian floods to verify your forecast. I'm pretty sure that the tone of my language has been mostly strained politeness and the tone of yours has been overbearing and insulting.

Probably I will sign of by saying of course astrology is complete nonsense, of course the Sun is likely to influence the weather, of course nobody is close to a good understanding of the linkage between the weather and the Sun, of course the planets have no detectable effect on the weather, of course the best we can do for medium term weather is provide probabilities, of course your forecast is unverifiable and not useful to anyone.

Confidence is important in professional forecasting. It does not mean the forecaster thinks he/she is perfect. It just means that they are experienced. Nothing more, nothing less. Try not to confuse confidence with believing that one thinks that they are perfect.

That is the view of a baby.

Yes, you would like that wouldn't you? If my forecasts were unverifiable, but you can't have that now, can you?

The climate & weather verifies all forecasts pal. Never forget that.

What's so weird is that you say that I am wrong, that my ENSO forecast is wrong, and all that I forecast is wrong, but then you can't back those statements up?

I mean, listen to your own logic. Think about it. If I am "wrong," as you say, but if my forecasts are "unverifiable" as you also said, then just how is that even possible?

What are you smoking dude?

When you discuss the climate and weather, and astrometeorology, come to the table with all 52 cards in your deck, okay?

Then if that isn't enough with you, we read this "... by saying of course that astrology is complete nonsense, and of course the Sun..." and you go on and on, blathering about that which you have no knowledge of as if that is the gospel.

This means, of course, that you have learned all there is to know about everything. Excuse me, I didn't know that about you Steve, I guess I should stop forecasting astronomically right now, since you've pronounced it all garbage, right?

If my forecast is wrong, and unverifiable at the same time, then perhaps you should have stopped reading my forecasts long ago since Steve ~ since it is OBVIOUS I use astrological means to forecast the climate and weather.

And since that is all NONSENSE then why have you been posting on this thread - with a ENSO forecast - since it is all "nonsense?" to you?

You wouldn't be bothered with it in the first place, right?

It's all mumble jumbo anyway, right? And since I practice this mumble jumbo, me, and my climate forecasts are "garbage," right?

I mean that is what you are saying, isn't it?

But, then you demand to ask me "questions," and poo-poo that you are not getting your "answers" on all of this, since it is garbage to you anyway.

I just wanted to get all that straight.

The fact that you are so BOTHERED should tell you a lot about yourself that perhaps you ought to look into so that way, you don't have to bother the rest of us who care about the climate, the weather, and the impacts on populations.

By the way, it's "sign-off," not "sign of."

Have a nice day.

[steve]

Then you should have done THAT a while ago Steve, since it is quite OBVIOUS that I use astrological means to forecast the climate and weather.

The fact that you are BOTHERED should tell you a lot about yourself that perhaps you ought to look into so that way, you don't have to bother the rest of us who care about the climate, the weather, and the impacts on populations.

I bother about these things because I don't like the proliferation of pseudoscience. There is no point in being upfront about my lack of belief as I need *you* to expose *yourself*, which you eventually did.