|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 7, 2011 21:08:20 GMT
The tit for tat is getting a bit old. Theodore has changed the metrics a few times, there is no question about that. No one can read the tea leaves with 100% certainty.
I will say that I think he is on the right track tho. The Old Farmers Almanac has a better track record over the long term predicting long term climate than any other metric. They use the same analysis that Theodore uses. So, there is emperical proof that there is something to astrometeorology.
All of us who have studied climate/papers etc for some time know that the GCM are not very good at predicting anything. The IPCC admits this. I find it a bit of an oxymoron that people who are ardent believers of AGW and the "science" don't acknowledge what the scientists have acknowledged. GCM are infant and can't predict near term weather, and are certainly not useful for regional nor long term climate. That has been pointed out many times on this board, and is scientific reality.
That doesn't mean that we stop investigating GCMs and improving them as rapidly as we can. It just means, at present, they are not a very useful tool, but one can hope they do improve as quickly as possible.
I do think it will take a new mindset to improve them tho, and that is clearly lacking. Co2 is a GHG. No question about that. But is is extremely clear that co2 is a minor player in climate.
The sun, rays, etc......along with water vapor.....now you are talking MAJOR players in climate. WE need to be investigating those players as hard and as fast as we can.
|
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 8, 2011 8:16:43 GMT
astromet accused steve steve pointed out that: It is laughable that you should now excuse yourself by saying: Surely you remember that you first post your forecast here on January 1st 2010 when El Nino was already in full swing! Your allegation of dishonesty has no evidence and makes no sense. You can find my first response to you in October. Which was one word "Ahem!". My only prior posts on that thread were to criticise Joe Bastardi for wrongly predicting the early end of El Nino in October 2009. Be a man and own up that you perhaps confused me with someone else and we'll leave it there. Steve, you do this all the time and it's way past old, got that? Listen, no one said any forecaster is 100% but you seem to think that if any forecaster is successful that that then means it gives you the right to jump in and fart all over the place and frankly, you do not have that right - at all. I don't know where you get off on this pro board to go on and on chirping like a girl with your drama, but if you don't like my forecasts then saying so once is plenty enough. But frankly, you're in no position to criticize anyone. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 8, 2011 8:24:55 GMT
The tit for tat is getting a bit old. Theodore has changed the metrics a few times, there is no question about that. No one can read the tea leaves with 100% certainty. I will say that I think he is on the right track tho. The Old Farmers Almanac has a better track record over the long term predicting long term climate than any other metric. They use the same analysis that Theodore uses. So, there is emperical proof that there is something to astrometeorology. All of us who have studied climate/papers etc for some time know that the GCM are not very good at predicting anything. The IPCC admits this. I find it a bit of an oxymoron that people who are ardent believers of AGW and the "science" don't acknowledge what the scientists have acknowledged. GCM are infant and can't predict near term weather, and are certainly not useful for regional nor long term climate. That has been pointed out many times on this board, and is scientific reality. That doesn't mean that we stop investigating GCMs and improving them as rapidly as we can. It just means, at present, they are not a very useful tool, but one can hope they do improve as quickly as possible. I do think it will take a new mindset to improve them tho, and that is clearly lacking. Co2 is a GHG. No question about that. But is is extremely clear that co2 is a minor player in climate. The sun, rays, etc......along with water vapor.....now you are talking MAJOR players in climate. WE need to be investigating those players as hard and as fast as we can. Well, the Farmers' Almanac depends on who is doing the forecasting. Mainly, it is about the Sun, but astronomic long-range forecasting certainly is accurate enough and regularly outperforms the large Met Offices, NOAA/NWS seasonally and has done so for decades. The problem some have in understanding the metrics of long-range seasonal climate and weather forecasts is that some people have short-range outlooks and memories, so they are not looking at events forecasted much earlier when they arrive. This problem is inherent in those who have five-day outlooks, very short-term, and who treat effects as causes. It is backward thinking and is the main reason for the lack of knowledge and understanding of the Earth's climate. For years, the main climate community has been overwhelmed by short-range thinkers who are not able to think long-range, even medium range, which is a month out. This is because of short-sightedness and ideology. Climate science and meteorology is filled to the brim with short-sightedness and a lot of guessing based on computer models which have solutions treating effects as causes. This never leads to any kind of success in forecasting two weeks to a month out or more. Look at what occurs time and again with municipalities, airports and transport systems not prepared for climate events. It is nearly impossible to do anything about storms when they are seen on radar but to run and take cover. This problem is inherent in those who continue to think in the short-term but forsake the medium and long-range. Forecasters who apply space weather are far ahead of the pack from those looking for ways to consume far more resources then they are able to prove they deserve; which is why they work to demean long-range forecasting - because it is something they cannot do. Climategate and those who push anthropogenic global warming on the public are quite aware of their inability to forecast medium to long-range. The only way to accomplish this feat is by astronomic means, but if you haven't practiced it then it is impossible to forecast outside of two weeks or seasonally, much less years down the road climate-wise. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Jan 8, 2011 15:42:50 GMT
astromet accused steve steve pointed out that: It is laughable that you should now excuse yourself by saying: Surely you remember that you first post your forecast here on January 1st 2010 when El Nino was already in full swing! Your allegation of dishonesty has no evidence and makes no sense. You can find my first response to you in October. Which was one word "Ahem!". My only prior posts on that thread were to criticise Joe Bastardi for wrongly predicting the early end of El Nino in October 2009. Be a man and own up that you perhaps confused me with someone else and we'll leave it there. Steve, you do this all the time and it's way past old, got that? Listen, no one said any forecaster is 100% but you seem to think that if any forecaster is successful that that then means it gives you the right to jump in and fart all over the place and frankly, you do not have that right - at all. I don't know where you get off on this pro board to go on and on chirping like a girl with your drama, but if you don't like my forecasts then saying so once is plenty enough. But frankly, you're in no position to criticize anyone. I do not believe it is possible to do long term predictive forecasting. I believe probabilistic forecasting is possible, so I have no problem with someone making a forecast, getting it wrong sometimes, and then saying where it went wrong. But you clearly are completely unable to admit to any error either in your forecast or, as above, in your apparent mistaking me for one of the people who criticised your El Nino forecast in the summer of last year. The fact that there is a market for people who make imprecise forecasts that are utterly useless to anyone doesn't make your forecast any less nonsensical. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 8, 2011 16:48:26 GMT
Steve, you do this all the time and it's way past old, got that? Listen, no one said any forecaster is 100% but you seem to think that if any forecaster is successful that that then means it gives you the right to jump in and fart all over the place and frankly, you do not have that right - at all. I don't know where you get off on this pro board to go on and on chirping like a girl with your drama, but if you don't like my forecasts then saying so once is plenty enough. But frankly, you're in no position to criticize anyone. I do not believe it is possible to do long term predictive forecasting. I believe probabilistic forecasting is possible, so I have no problem with someone making a forecast, getting it wrong sometimes, and then saying where it went wrong. But you clearly are completely unable to admit to any error either in your forecast or, as above, in your apparent mistaking me for one of the people who criticised your El Nino forecast in the summer of last year. The fact that there is a market for people who make imprecise forecasts that are utterly useless to anyone doesn't make your forecast any less nonsensical. Let me see: you've said this multiple times Steve and no matter how much you say the same thing does not make it true. First, I never said I was never "wrong." Moreover, no forecaster ever says they are 100% right, as no human being is 100% right about anything - and that includes you. Second, you make assumptions which are clearly out of bounds using the words "utterly useless to anyone." Just who are you to speak for everyone? Third, just because you do not believe in long-range forecasting does not make it not true. That is a narcissistic attitude that has no relevance to the facts of astronomical forecasting. The Sun, Moon, planets and the cold of outer space as it causes the Earth's climate and weather do not require your beliefs to do their jobs Steve. Now, we've all heard you the first time about what you do not believe. Can we go now? |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Jan 8, 2011 18:33:20 GMT
I didn't say that you claimed never to be wrong. I said that you never admit to errors. There is a difference which probably means that no, we can't go on.
At the moment you are failing to admit that you mistook me for someone else and called me dishonest as a result.
|
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 8, 2011 21:02:49 GMT
I didn't say that you claimed never to be wrong. I said that you never admit to errors. There is a difference which probably means that no, we can't go on. At the moment you are failing to admit that you mistook me for someone else and called me dishonest as a result. Enough of the drama Steve. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Jan 10, 2011 11:20:18 GMT
You're the one providing the drama with your fruity insults. All I am doing is using *your* words to question *your* forecast. Clearly you have no confidence in your forecasting abilities because you just get aggressive when reasonable questions are asked.
Start making an honest appraisal of your forecasts please and you might gain a smidgen of respect, and you might start to see why your forecasts are so pointless. Why would one be interested in a forecast that says:
which means that "for certain" 2/3 of the country is average or warmer than average, but doesn't tell you which 1/3 is cooler. It's a completely pointless statement to have in a forecast.
As it happens, September 2010 was warmer than even the 1990-2000 September average over the whole of the US. Did you check?
|
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 10, 2011 14:15:10 GMT
You're the one providing the drama with your fruity insults. All I am doing is using *your* words to question *your* forecast. Clearly you have no confidence in your forecasting abilities because you just get aggressive when reasonable questions are asked. Start making an honest appraisal of your forecasts please and you might gain a smidgen of respect, and you might start to see why your forecasts are so pointless. Why would one be interested in a forecast that says: which means that "for certain" 2/3 of the country is average or warmer than average, but doesn't tell you which 1/3 is cooler. It's a completely pointless statement to have in a forecast. As it happens, September 2010 was warmer than even the 1990-2000 September average over the whole of the US. Did you check? In your mind Steve, everything is "warmer." As for the rest of your comments, again, I've said all there is to say to you since you are quite dense and know very little about forecasting. I have much better things to do than to ping pong with a person who not only believes in anthropogenic global warming but also doesn't have a clue as to where his own weather comes from. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Jan 10, 2011 16:13:26 GMT
You mean you've said all you have to say, not all there is to say, as you haven't answered the criticisms.
If you don't have the time it is because you are too busy diverting attention from fair validation and commentary on your prognostications.
|
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 10, 2011 18:28:05 GMT
You mean you've said all you have to say, not all there is to say, as you haven't answered the criticisms. If you don't have the time it is because you are too busy diverting attention from fair validation and commentary on your prognostications. Well, today is my birthday Steve, and though I am working on advanced climate forecasts I'd like to take a break from the tit for tat with you for a bit if that's alright with you. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by boxman on Jan 10, 2011 18:29:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 10, 2011 18:59:03 GMT
Thanks boxman, that is so kind of you! |
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Jan 10, 2011 22:50:13 GMT
You mean you've said all you have to say, not all there is to say, as you haven't answered the criticisms. If you don't have the time it is because you are too busy diverting attention from fair validation and commentary on your prognostications. Well, today is my birthday Steve, and though I am working on advanced climate forecasts I'd like to take a break from the tit for tat with you for a bit if that's alright with you. Thanks.  |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 11, 2011 0:36:13 GMT
Well, today is my birthday Steve, and though I am working on advanced climate forecasts I'd like to take a break from the tit for tat with you for a bit if that's alright with you. Thanks. Thank you Scpg02! You're too kind. |
|
