|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 15, 2011 15:33:08 GMT
Point taken. A little run down at my house; second daughter born 3 weeks ago. Congratulations. You are allowed to be as illogical as you wish for the next 18 months. Congrats Woodstove. As far as 18 months.....you can tell that GLC hasn't had a daughter yet. They are treasures, but they can be quit trying as well. |
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Feb 15, 2011 17:07:34 GMT
Congratulations. You are allowed to be as illogical as you wish for the next 18 months. Congrats Woodstove. As far as 18 months.....you can tell that GLC hasn't had a daughter yet. They are treasures, but they can be quit trying as well. LOL I think that goes for women in general doesn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by glc on Feb 15, 2011 20:06:59 GMT
Congrats Woodstove. As far as 18 months.....you can tell that GLC hasn't had a daughter yet.
I've got two plus a grand-daughter.
|
|
|
|
Post by woodstove on Feb 15, 2011 20:23:26 GMT
Congrats Woodstove. As far as 18 months.....you can tell that GLC hasn't had a daughter yet. I've got two plus a grand-daughter. A lucky man, then! |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Feb 15, 2011 23:52:16 GMT
My gerbil track seems to involve pointing out your inconsistencies and getting ignored. I'm good with that. Here, you have had a go at me for discussing probabilistic forecasts only a day or so after *making* a probabilistic forecast: This isn't the first time you've made a probabilistic forecast, of course. You just have no consistency whatsoever. Are you still ignoring the fact that you said the other day that: But in 2006, you said: The best astrologers obfuscate more, make vaguer predictions and only post to their own websites so they can delete the evidence when it turns out wrong. For one, the astrological year is still 2010, as we do not reach the new year until mid-March 2011. Another thing is that you continue to "read" whatever it is that you want but never look outside into the real world of what is happening, as forecasted. I stated back in 2006 that I expected the Sun to awake with more sunspots in the *years* ahead and I specifically mentioned the years 2010, 2011 and 2012 because that is what I saw astronomically. My forecast has not changed. You went back to the year 2006 and found what I wrote, yes? Well, the minimum I forecasted (before December 2008's minimum by the way) back in 2006 is about to come to an end, as forecasted. Whether or not you believe that is *probabilistic* is your problem Steve - not mine. So how can I be "wrong" about something that is yet to occur? Moreover, we are now at that very point in time where we will see increasing solar activity, as forecasted. I fully expect major activity from the Sun with X-flares and increasing sunspot activity. We are in that time period now that I mentioned back in 2006 based on my long-range calculations. Take a look at the Sun and see what's happening so you can tell me again that I am "wrong." |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Feb 16, 2011 0:50:04 GMT
Take a look at the Sun and see what's happening so you can tell me again that I am "wrong." Yep, pretty much 100% wrong until you reword it after the fact to pretend you're not wrong. I love the way you use two calendars so that you can fudge the dates a fair bit. I want to SEE where you forecast Solar Cycle 24 correctly. "as forecasted" doesn't mean squat unless followed with "on 99/99/99 I said, 'xxxx'." |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Feb 16, 2011 6:06:33 GMT
Take a look at the Sun and see what's happening so you can tell me again that I am "wrong." Yep, pretty much 100% wrong until you reword it after the fact to pretend you're not wrong. I love the way you use two calendars so that you can fudge the dates a fair bit. I want to SEE where you forecast Solar Cycle 24 correctly. "as forecasted" doesn't mean squat unless followed with "on 99/99/99 I said, 'xxxx'." There is only one true calendar Matt. Next time, when you call October the 10th month, try looking up the meaning of Oct and you will discover that it refers to the number 8 - that's the eighth month. The same with September, the seventh month. Right now, you are in the 12th month, that is February. The first month of the year begins in mid-March, that's the first month. It's not enough that you're "wrong" about man-made global warming, now you can't even count the months of the year straight, much less even mind the condition of the Sun. But, using your terminology, I suppose that doesn't mean "squat," since you surely are 100% right about everything that you clearly have not a clue about. Thank the stars you are not a farmer, or we would all starve. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Feb 16, 2011 10:29:15 GMT
astromet
You predicted that SC24 would begin in 2007. You and just about everyone was wrong about the start of SC24. 2007 has already occurred (in both our calendars), so yes I can say you were wrong about that.
You now have about a month for the a strong solar maximum to start exhibiting its peak in your version of the calendar. Good luck with that.
Why did put your forecast for "Winter 2010" just before your forecast for "Spring 2010"? Surely it was Winter 2009 for you? Consistency please.
As your forecast for SC24 has not change you also need to factor in your more recent addition to the forecast:
Hmmm...
Your version of the calendar makes your forecast for 2010 to be an strong El Niño year look even worse as the ENSO indices were showing that El Niño ended in the second month of your 2010.
|
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Feb 16, 2011 13:08:38 GMT
astromet You predicted that SC24 would begin in 2007. You and just about everyone was wrong about the start of SC24. 2007 has already occurred (in both our calendars), so yes I can say you were wrong about that. You now have about a month for the a strong solar maximum to start exhibiting its peak in your version of the calendar. Good luck with that. Why did put your forecast for "Winter 2010" just before your forecast for "Spring 2010"? Surely it was Winter 2009 for you? Consistency please. As your forecast for SC24 has not change you also need to factor in your more recent addition to the forecast: Hmmm... Your version of the calendar makes your forecast for 2010 to be an strong El Niño year look even worse as the ENSO indices were showing that El Niño ended in the second month of your 2010. Your nitpicking. The "official" El Nino index is for a very small patch of the equatorial pacific ocean. But the El Nino effects on global weather did not end until December 2010. I would think it would be quite unreasonable to hold a astrometeorologist to a forecast for an obscure part of the pacific ocean when their data really relates to a correlation of astronomy to general weather patterns or the impact of ENSO. Granted Astromet brings on the problem himself by adopting the term ENSO but that is human nature and a lot of people are doing that but viewing it still from an "impact" point of view. Myself I am interested in weather it stays as cold for February and March as it was for December of if it gets warmer. If he gets 2 of 3 cooler I would have to say he nailed the prediction for a strong ENSO "impact" for the first of the year assuming we can figure out when the first of the year is. I am not surprised as Spencer noted the impact of ENSO was late in coming. Perhaps it is an astronomical impact that is driving it assuming Astromet can educate us more on the physical nature of an astronomical year as opposed to a calendar year. One would think the ancients had a method to their madness in naming the months. |
|
|
|
Post by woodstove on Feb 16, 2011 16:31:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by steve on Feb 16, 2011 17:52:25 GMT
Icefisher, El Niño is correlated with drought in Indonesia. La Niña is correlated with floods in Indonesia. astromet forecast "Droughts can spread through the countries of Australia, China, India, Indonesia," which is consistent with El Niño. But Indonesia got hit with floods in October, which sounds like La Niña. Ironically, the floods were used by astromet to validate his forecast for drought! solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=gotopost&board=globalwarming&thread=987&post=57455If your Indonesian house were washed away you might think this was a big nit. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Feb 16, 2011 19:33:46 GMT
astromet You predicted that SC24 would begin in 2007. You and just about everyone was wrong about the start of SC24. 2007 has already occurred (in both our calendars), so yes I can say you were wrong about that. You now have about a month for the a strong solar maximum to start exhibiting its peak in your version of the calendar. Good luck with that. Why did put your forecast for "Winter 2010" just before your forecast for "Spring 2010"? Surely it was Winter 2009 for you? Consistency please. As your forecast for SC24 has not change you also need to factor in your more recent addition to the forecast: Hmmm... Your version of the calendar makes your forecast for 2010 to be an strong El Niño year look even worse as the ENSO indices were showing that El Niño ended in the second month of your 2010. There you go again Steve... reading what you want into things. Listen, for one, do not put words into my mouth, ask if what I've written is not clear to you, but do not make up what you want using my words. Thanks. As for "my version of the calendar," - listen, if you are unable to know that there are 12 months in a year and that the year is calculated from March to March, then that is your problem, or are you saying that there are 10 sides to an octagon rather than eight? |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Feb 16, 2011 19:45:31 GMT
astromet You predicted that SC24 would begin in 2007. You and just about everyone was wrong about the start of SC24. 2007 has already occurred (in both our calendars), so yes I can say you were wrong about that. You now have about a month for the a strong solar maximum to start exhibiting its peak in your version of the calendar. Good luck with that. Why did put your forecast for "Winter 2010" just before your forecast for "Spring 2010"? Surely it was Winter 2009 for you? Consistency please. As your forecast for SC24 has not change you also need to factor in your more recent addition to the forecast: Hmmm... Your version of the calendar makes your forecast for 2010 to be an strong El Niño year look even worse as the ENSO indices were showing that El Niño ended in the second month of your 2010. Your nitpicking. The "official" El Nino index is for a very small patch of the equatorial pacific ocean. But the El Nino effects on global weather did not end until December 2010. I would think it would be quite unreasonable to hold a astrometeorologist to a forecast for an obscure part of the pacific ocean when their data really relates to a correlation of astronomy to general weather patterns or the impact of ENSO. Granted Astromet brings on the problem himself by adopting the term ENSO but that is human nature and a lot of people are doing that but viewing it still from an "impact" point of view. Myself I am interested in weather it stays as cold for February and March as it was for December of if it gets warmer. If he gets 2 of 3 cooler I would have to say he nailed the prediction for a strong ENSO "impact" for the first of the year assuming we can figure out when the first of the year is. I am not surprised as Spencer noted the impact of ENSO was late in coming. Perhaps it is an astronomical impact that is driving it assuming Astromet can educate us more on the physical nature of an astronomical year as opposed to a calendar year. One would think the ancients had a method to their madness in naming the months. Another excellent point Icefisher. At least there are some people using their brains and thinking. People like Steve do that a lot. They read whatever it is they want into things because ideology is their science - not science itself and surely he isn't living in the real world. The "nit-picking" is part and parcel of the kind of bs the science has had to deal with - those who have gravitated to climatology and meteorology over the years - really weird and rude people, for some reason, have decided that they want to lift their legs and take leaks all over the fields. Go figure. Astronomically, which, by the way, dictates and regulates the Earth's climate/weather, has the year from mid-March to mid-March, or vernal equinox to the next vernal equinox. That is the true calendar year. The new year does not begin on Jan. 1st. As for the term ENSO - I could use the distinction differently, but I choose to use ENSO since most people are not familiar with how El Nino and La Nino work in tandem with one another. That's a problem because most researchers and climate centers have very little knowledge about the oscillations and cannot forecast them in advance. Their analog data is unreliable when it comes to predicting the onset of major oscillations in the Pacific, so they tend to call small oscillations in remote regions of the Pacific either an El Nino or La Nina in what really are non-ENSO years. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Feb 16, 2011 20:02:24 GMT
astromet
There are ten sides to an octagon if you include the top and the bottom. This brings up the point about communication though.
Most people would conclude that 2010 refers to January 1st 2010 to December 31st 2010. What did Dionysis Exiguus have to say about this?
Tax (in the UK) starts the year on 6th April, but accountants do not have the conceit to say that 6th April 2010 to 5th April 2011 is all 2010, they refer to the Financial year 2010-11.
I recommend that you refer to the astromet year March 2010- March 2011 if you want the average person to understand you.
After all it was *you* who referred to Winter 2010 when *clearly* you meant winter 2009 !?
|
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Feb 16, 2011 20:14:16 GMT
Icefisher, El Niño is correlated with drought in Indonesia. La Niña is correlated with floods in Indonesia. astromet forecast "Droughts can spread through the countries of Australia, China, India, Indonesia," which is consistent with El Niño. But Indonesia got hit with floods in October, which sounds like La Niña. Ironically, the floods were used by astromet to validate his forecast for drought! solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=gotopost&board=globalwarming&thread=987&post=57455If your Indonesian house were washed away you might think this was a big nit. There you go again, re-read what I actually wrote about drought rather than presuming what you will. And, to correct (again) your fuzzy math Steve - An Octagon is an 8-sided polygon that has 8 sides and eight angles. A regular octagon is a regular ordered polygon that has 8 equal sides and 8 equal interior angles. Perhaps you want to ask Dionysis Exiguus about this as well? On floods & droughts - ENSO conditions are also signs of impending drought. It has happened before and the astronomic signals I've read show it happening again. The problem you have is that you are unable to see long-range as I do, you see only in the present, which is not sufficient to be able to forecast. That is why you confuse dates of my long-range forecasts. You have even told me that I've been "wrong" about years which have not yet arrived. What's with that nonsense? What you need to do is to see the bigger picture, learn to read the true calendar (which is astronomic) and stay far away from believing your own uninformed opinions. That will do you a ton of good if you are to actually open your eyes. Now, a tutorial - Floods and drought can, and do exist at the same time in regions of the world experiencing either climate conditions, though you would obviously be ignorant of this fact, but that's your problem (again.) They often follow or precede one another. You show ignorance of climate variability. You tend to see things either "black" or "white." You do not see, nor observe the many shades of gray in-between. All forecasters must. This is why you are unable to forecast. Your eyes and your mind are closed - not open. This is why you are confused. Want to reverse it? Then open your eyes first, then your mind. Put your AGW ideology into the trash bin and learn that all climate and weather is astronomically-forced. Look at the real world and for heaven's sake stop dismissing the laws of physics, which do not move a millimeter for your probabilistic ideology and your opinions. The laws of physics could care less Steve. There is drought coming to the very regions that experienced floods, which I also forecasted. It's already begun in Asia. The problem that you do not believe it is not a factor, nor is the mis-reading you do of my forecasts and my comments within my forecasts. Whenever any forecaster goes about forecasting they must account for climate variability - and there is much of it. We live on a planet that can quickly shift from one climate phase to another, which causes even more disasters to take place easily due to not being prepared. In fact, heavy precipitation in regions of the world, with the right astronomic configurations, can and often do lead to droughts following floods and floods following droughts. This is one major reason why food prices are rising; another is speculation in the commodities markets, but the climate is the primary player here. We will see increasing levels of drought occur in 2011, and it continue into the mid-Twenty-Tens according to my long-range forecasts. See -> ictsd.org/i/news/biores/100122/See -> www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hU37Dx9c8v2OGyq3bmwtxF1e6jTw?docId=462549f393694d8cafdcf66a5d7d0c9cSee -> www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-16/china-rains-may-come-too-late-to-avert-damage-to-wheat-forecaster-says.htmlSee -> www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/11/us-afghanistan-drought-feature-idUSTRE71A2Y820110211See -> business.financialpost.com/2011/02/16/policymakers-worry-over-food-security-inflation/See -> www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/11/asia-rice-idUSL3E7DB14520110211Open your eyes Steve and quit playing immature and childish games with me on my forecast thread. |
|
