|
|
Post by glc on Jan 27, 2011 11:37:26 GMT
However success or failure is measured I think we can say with some certainty that Piers Corbyn's January forecast for the UK was a complete crock. That's a 50% success rate so far.
Just to put Piers Corbyn betting 'successes' into perspective. On Tueday night I heard Blackpool were beating Man Utd 2-0 at Half-Time. I went to the local William Hill's shop and bet Man Utd would win @ 10 to 1. The shop staff commented that I always seemed to win these 'in match' bets. Result:
Blackpool 2 Man Utd 3
That's a success rate of 23/25 in the past 18 months. Oh - and William Hill's haven't barred me yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by saturnv on Jan 27, 2011 15:27:27 GMT
Agreed. Corbyns UK forecasts have been way off the mark since just after Christmas. Think he got a bit excited about issuing 'public warnings' on his weatheraction website. First one before Christmas was ok but nothing the UKMetOffice weren't shouting about and lets be honest beating the UKMetOffice at their own game is hardly validation as an expert in any field let alone weather forecasting.
Having read through some of these posts have to apologise to Steve, at least he can respond in some sort of adult mature fashion but OMG Astromet, you need to re-read some of your posts. They say science wouldn't be science without scepticism so maybe give the people who don't necessarily agree with you a bit more respect.
|
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 27, 2011 18:34:09 GMT
It doesn't matter what I "think" about Piers' January forecast. He does just fine applying his astronomic techniques on his own. Ask him. In my view, Piers is an expert and knows his business. That should be good enough for anyone, including you. Now, if you can do better than the rest of us professional forecasters, then please Steve, by all means, show us, so we can learn from your expertise there on your "better ground," so us little people down here on the field can try to match your unequaled success of advanced climate and weather forecasting. Steve is not the one claiming what is essentially super-powers with regard to forecasting. Steve is not the one making personal attacks, put-downs, and insults. Astromet, you couldn't forecast your way out of a paper bag and your people skills are non-existent. How about a challenge? Pick your best region and do a monthly forecast including the reasons - "The moon is_____ so February will be cold." Let's see if you can actually beat the experts 85% to 10% I won't even dignify your comments Matt - just too funny. Yeah, right, and the world will always "warm" according to your man-made global warming Co2 bogeyman religion. Please, go home kid ~ you're not even in the same league. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 27, 2011 18:52:47 GMT
Agreed. Corbyns UK forecasts have been way off the mark since just after Christmas. Think he got a bit excited about issuing 'public warnings' on his weatheraction website. First one before Christmas was ok but nothing the UKMetOffice weren't shouting about and lets be honest beating the UKMetOffice at their own game is hardly validation as an expert in any field let alone weather forecasting. Having read through some of these posts have to apologise to Steve, at least he can respond in some sort of adult mature fashion but OMG Astromet, you need to re-read some of your posts. They say science wouldn't be science without scepticism so maybe give the people who don't necessarily agree with you a bit more respect. I've always been a true skeptic. Always will be. All real scientists are. What I do not respect are "false skeptics," - effectively whiners and cry-babies who go on and on with how the Earth is warming because of humanity. That say mankind is the cause of climate change? That's a total load of so much crap, piled so high that it's laughable why anyone with an IQ over 50 would put any stock in that bane stupidity. But that's exactly what guys like Steve, Glc and Matt and others have been pushing and it's silly. Any forecaster worth his meddle knows this. I certainly do. Nothing is ever good enough for people like them. They are never around when forecasts hit, but are ready to pounce like fleas on a dog's ass whenever a forecaster "misses," as if not being 100% perfect gives these play-acting "critics" the right to complain and whine and poo poo astronomic forecasting? Right, and the Earth is flat. Who cares if people like that want to "measure" my forecasts or that of Piers Corbyn. What would that even matter since these are the same fellows going around telling people that humanity is the cause of global warming? These are people who can't even look up at the Sun - which contains 99% of the mass of our system and say to themselves, "you know what? I think that's the cause of climate change." Checking out the Sun is free you know. All you have to do is look up. But those guys are too busy playing around with their computer models and poo pooing anything which doesn't conform to their man-made warmist ideology and pseudo-science. Listen, any climate forecaster works to maintain a high rate of consistency. That's the name of the game. All professional forecasters know this. The Earth's atmosphere is highly fluid, but you do not see conventional met weather reporters, climate centers, amateur forecasters, weather board hawks, and climate computer modelers, and the so-called "skeptics" get anywhere even NEAR 5% percent accuracy in short-range, medium-range, and long-range forecasting. That's a fact. All of the above depend on computer models with faulty solutions, treat effects as "causes," but they guess and cannot forecast the weather outside of 5 days to two weeks, much less than a month or more out. That's seasonal forecasting and astrometeorologists have regularly outperformed these guys BY FAR.Yet the so-called "critics" and "whiners" don't spend nearly half the time pointing out all the faults of those guys, now do they? Something that makes you go "mmmm." The so-called "critics," do not forecast. They guess. They whine while they continue to ignore actual physics as if their opinions actually matter. It doesn't - not to the climate and certainly not to me, or to Piers Corbyn. We're too busy actually working for a living and doing advanced forecasting. We never claimed to be perfect, and never will, but we've got MUCH better accuracy, consistency and MUCH better percentage forecasting rates - in high double digits - than of all the above - combined. Any loser who continues to pitch man-made global warming - especially at this late juncture - hasn't got all 52 cards in their deck and certainly does not have both oars in the water. The so-called "warmist crowd," who can't count and have tons of really fuzzy math to push on the general public like to pretend they know what they are talking about when it comes to the climate, weather and especially long-range forecasting - but they are not using even a tenth of the brain-power of astronomic forecasters. Give me a break and get real. |
|
|
|
Post by saturnv on Jan 27, 2011 20:33:30 GMT
Whoooaaa...easy tiger! I'm with you my friend, half the planet probably doesnt beleive in AGW and I am one of them. The Sun is almost certainly the cause of most of the climate on this and other planets (as my father found out many many years ago)!!
The way it's going we'll almost certainly be in another Ice age within 500/1000years. Just trying to make the point that there ways of putting your opinions across. Everyone has their right to an opinion and I guess most people on this sight have very educated opinions you need to respect those as well whether you believe them or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 27, 2011 20:48:37 GMT
I won't even dignify your comments Matt - just too funny. Yeah, right, and the world will always "warm" according to your man-made global warming Co2 bogeyman religion. Please, go home kid ~ you're not even in the same league. I notice you couldn't help yourself, you dignified my comments, and thank God I'm not in the same league. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 27, 2011 20:50:23 GMT
Whoooaaa...easy tiger! I'm with you my friend, half the planet probably doesnt beleive in AGW and I am one of them. The Sun is almost certainly the cause of most of the climate on this and other planets (as my father found out many many years ago)!! The way it's going we'll almost certainly be in another Ice age within 500/1000years. Just trying to make the point that there ways of putting your opinions across. Everyone has their right to an opinion and I guess most people on this sight have very educated opinions you need to respect those as well whether you believe them or not. That's good to hear Saturnv, because you are on the side of science and truth. Opinions never constitute facts and everyone has one has "opinions" just like everyone has an arse, yes? Opinion posing as truth doesn't mean a thing. It's just static noise. And rampant opinion is exactly what has fueled the whole warmist ideology from the very start. It has caused real problems. People have lost lives over this ideological AGW pseudo-science babble and untold millions have been wasted on man-made climate change, while barely pennies on the dollar have gone into producing real climate science and reliable energy sources for what is coming - and that is global cooling. That is why it is best that those giving their "opinions" (as facts) need to get off the climate and forecasting stage. They screwed it all up with their pseudo-science ideology and wasted three decades - that is valuable time we never can get back. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 27, 2011 20:51:36 GMT
I won't even dignify your comments Matt - just too funny. Yeah, right, and the world will always "warm" according to your man-made global warming Co2 bogeyman religion. Please, go home kid ~ you're not even in the same league. I notice you couldn't help yourself, you dignified my comments, and thank God I'm not in the same league. Good - because you never will be Matt, touting that AGW religion everywhere you pop up. |
|
|
|
Post by justmeanu on Jan 27, 2011 20:55:56 GMT
Hey guys I like coming here, I get information here that can not be found anywhere else easily. I notice there are a few short fuses here. That's not a problem for me I enjoy the exchanges. Worried about a couple of you though, try not to let the smart arse gene bubble to the surface. As for me I used to know jack Shiiiit, but he moved
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 27, 2011 20:59:13 GMT
Hey guys I like coming here, I get information here that can not be found anywhere else easily. I notice there are a few short fuses here. That's not a problem for me I enjoy the exchanges. Worried about a couple of you though, try not to let the smart arse gene bubble to the surface. As for me I used to know jack Shiiiit, but he moved Yep.....he cooled off and went south fer de winter. I wahnder when he wall be cming back? |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 27, 2011 21:08:32 GMT
Nothing is ever good enough for people like them. They are never around when forecasts hit, but are ready to pounce like fleas on a dog's ass whenever a forecaster "misses," as if not being 100% perfect gives these play-acting "critics" the right to complain and whine and poo poo astronomic forecasting? Matt: glc gave Piers Corbyn a 50% rating so far. Do you agree with that rating? I have a forecasting coin that happens to match his record so far. Checking out the Sun is free you know. All you have to do is look up. Matt: Do you spend a lot of time staring into the sun? Listen, any climate forecaster works to maintain a high rate of consistency. That's the name of the game. All professional forecasters know this. The Earth's atmosphere is highly fluid, but you do not see conventional met weather reporters, climate centers, amateur forecasters, weather board hawks, and climate computer modelers, and the so-called "skeptics" get anywhere even NEAR 5% percent accuracy in short-range, medium-range, and long-range forecasting. Matt: A coin does 50% yet the experts can't do 5%? |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Jan 27, 2011 21:38:24 GMT
Nothing is ever good enough for people like them. They are never around when forecasts hit, but are ready to pounce like fleas on a dog's ass whenever a forecaster "misses," as if not being 100% perfect gives these play-acting "critics" the right to complain and whine and poo poo astronomic forecasting? Matt: glc gave Piers Corbyn a 50% rating so far. Do you agree with that rating? I have a forecasting coin that happens to match his record so far. Checking out the Sun is free you know. All you have to do is look up. Matt: Do you spend a lot of time staring into the sun? Listen, any climate forecaster works to maintain a high rate of consistency. That's the name of the game. All professional forecasters know this. The Earth's atmosphere is highly fluid, but you do not see conventional met weather reporters, climate centers, amateur forecasters, weather board hawks, and climate computer modelers, and the so-called "skeptics" get anywhere even NEAR 5% percent accuracy in short-range, medium-range, and long-range forecasting. Matt: A coin does 50% yet the experts can't do 5%? What's with this 50/50 coin flip shtick you got going Matt? That's not how you measure anything of value in science. This isn't a child's game, or a sport where you say "heads" or "tails." Just how young are you? |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Jan 27, 2011 21:48:56 GMT
Science is more about falsification than truth. You make a prediction based on a theory to try and falsify it. Therefore, part of a forecast is agreeing beforehand what metrics are to be forecast and then testing for success or failure against the metrics.
The latter part of this is severely lacking here.
For example, the Corbyn forecast is held up as a success when it is a failure. It's not its failings that concern me so much as the inability to acknowledge said failings.
saturnv, thank you for the apology, though I don't I deserve it being a serial yanker of chains. Yes of course the sun is the main driver of climate. The AGW question is how important all the minor drivers are in influencing short term climate (ie. decades and centuries). In the context of this thread, the question is whether it is possible to forecast based on the sun given that the weather is strongly a function of heat stored by the ocean over many years (and also whether the apparently minor influences of planets also have an effect).
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 27, 2011 22:23:14 GMT
Steve:
That brought a smile to my face.....ya have a 1/2" logging chain do ya?
All the factors you mention drive climate. We are back to weather now.....interesting reading but to be frank.....I am not learning a lot on this thread anymore.
We all know that you think co2 is a strong driver of climate. I differ in that opinion. I think it is a minor driver. Time will tell who is correct. There are deff two sides to this issue and the science leads one to either way as it is really not that good with present events.
We know that we have warmed. Now even Mr. Trenbeth is stating that the weather is being caused by AGW. You mention the heat stored by the oceans over a many year time period. I agree with you totally on that. I also think that there is a very strong correlation to solar max and the build up of the heat.
When one looks at how much heat is escaping the earth presently, it does not bode well for any kind of increased heat, nor even maintainence of stored heat. We have been going the wrong way for many years to prove AGW.
As I have stated, we are still waiting for the pot to boil aren't we? Tied temps don't equate to more heat, they only say that we have not gotten hotter on a global scale.
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 28, 2011 0:19:03 GMT
What's with this 50/50 coin flip shtick you got going Matt? That's not how you measure anything of value in science. This isn't a child's game, or a sport where you say "heads" or "tails." Just how young are you? Get with the picture, astro. We're trying to define the definition of success and the rate of success for your forecasts. So far you're doing rather poorly. A coin will predict a binary such as success/failure 50% of the time. |
|
