24 replies to this topic

[cyclonic happiness]

Ian Brown, on 17 December 2009 - 19:36 , said:

Unfortunately my forecast thread got locked due to bickering so I'm just starting a new one to say that my forecast has obviously gone very wrong and is effectively bust.

Even if Jan and Feb turn out as I predicted (which I don't think they will) then it would be for the wrong reasons.

Oh Ian matey
That you do a winter forecast at all is probably oneof the most important efforts anyone could make to a weather forum and you go to alot of time and hassle to compile them, so don't think that you are unappreciated, there are far too many folk on here ready to stick the boot in when they see fit.
But the truth is the majority of us wouldn't have the guts or knowledge to do a forecast, and the more information we have about coming events the better, we can all decide afterwards.

Keep up the good work matey

[Victor Meldrew]

Busted AGAIN!.. Told you many many times not to use the modern E.. Theory

However i will say , well done for putting your hands up for admitting the forecast was wrong.

Have a great xmas and a happy new year

[Solar Sausage]

It seems like your forecast has gone the same way as my (unpublished) thoughts. I'd fully expected mildness...

[Thundery wintry showers]

Good to see this- it can take guts to admit to being completely wrong!

My December forecast was along similar lines to yours (I envisaged more of a cyclonic southerly bias, and possibility of cold snowy weather after Christmas, but the general theme of mild and 6.5C CET was in strong agreement). I think it's fair to say that my December forecast has been comprehensively busted as well, which is why it was paramount that I got in the midmonth update promptly.

I am starting to seriously wonder if the synoptic trends associated with the "modern winter" are starting to reverse. There are a few scientific papers out there which have hinted at this, suggesting that part of the Northern Hemisphere warming may have been assisted by changes in synoptic patterns (stronger westerlies, warm anomalies over the continents and cold anomalies over the oceans) and that this may be starting to flip back towards more prevalence of synoptics that were common in earlier decades. While some of the recent changes in synoptics can be explained by the NH warming and higher SSTs, it's clear that not all of it can be. So we'll have to see if, in future, we go into an era of winters which, while not as cold or snowy as the 60s or 80s, exceed those of the 90s and 00s, at least for a time.

[Mark Bayley]

I think many people got caught out this December with most expecting the cold weather arriving after Christmas! Still takes guts to admit your forecast is wrong so early in the season! You put time into your forecast and actually wrote one unlike some who just sat and criticized (yet couldn't write one themselves)

Hope you have a good chrismas

[Victor Meldrew]

Thundery wintry showers, on 19 December 2009 - 11:38 , said:

which is why it was paramount that I got in the midmonth update promptly.

I personally believe that no Long Range Forecast should be updated or touched , because this can lead to some claiming that the forecast was correct even though it wasn't at the time.. Not saying you do that but i have through my time on weather forums seen it happen. It's ok if you want to post a reply as an update but the original MUST be left intact

[Thundery wintry showers]

Does this really apply to a monthly forecast that is updated twice a month, once at the beginning and once in the middle? It's surely better than having a one-off forecast issued on the 1st of the month that looks completely wrong and out of date by the time we get to the 20th...

In addition, in the midmonth update I always make references to the forecast issued at the beginning of the month, e.g. "this cold spell is set to be much more potent and longer lasting than I expected at the start of the month".

I can see the point but there is a large difference between this and, say, updating a month-ahead forecast whenever I feel like it and turning around and saying "the original forecast is invalid- this forecast counts and I was right so there!".

[Solar Cycles]

Ian Brown, on 17 December 2009 - 19:36 , said:

Unfortunately my forecast thread got locked due to bickering so I'm just starting a new one to say that my forecast has obviously gone very wrong and is effectively bust.

Even if Jan and Feb turn out as I predicted (which I don't think they will) then it would be for the wrong reasons.

Aye, but my best guess is still looking good Ian. Anyway, I think you have been very gracious in defeat, so to speak!

[Anti-Mild]

Ian Brown, on 17 December 2009 - 19:36 , said:

Unfortunately my forecast thread got locked due to bickering so I'm just starting a new one to say that my forecast has obviously gone very wrong and is effectively bust.

Even if Jan and Feb turn out as I predicted (which I don't think they will) then it would be for the wrong reasons.

Hats off to you Mr Brown!!

Because of your 'modern winter' stance you do get a lot of abuse on this forum, and although I feel that sometimes you do yourself no favours, nearly all of the abuse is totally unwarranted.

It takes courage to issue a detailed winter forecast, particularly if you are as well known as you are, and you are daring to forecast a mild winter.

It takes a great deal more courage to admit that you are wrong, especially as there will be a large faction hoping that you fall on your face.

[Nick L]

Fair play to you Ian, shame that the Met Office don't do this with their LRFs!

[Optimus Prime]

Well although the December forecast is bust I certainly wouldn't rule out a very mild January/February. December has on average been the coldest month of the winter and effectively the only month to show a cooling.

[Solar Cycles]

Optimus Prime, on 23 December 2009 - 09:41 , said:

Well although the December forecast is bust I certainly wouldn't rule out a very mild January/February. December has on average been the coldest month of the winter and effectively the only month to show a cooling.

Not impossible, but highly unlikely, given the current synoptics being shown!

[Thundery wintry showers]

nick2702, on 23 December 2009 - 09:10 , said:

Fair play to you Ian, shame that the Met Office don't do this with their LRFs!

Sadly, that is one area where the MetO gets criticised where I have to agree with much of the criticism.

A mild January/February is, indeed, not impossible- but I think a mild January is starting to look quite unlikely. A mild February is still a possibility but as Ian went for a closer to average February that wouldn't help!

[Ben_Cambs]

It does take guts to admit messing up your forecast, so that is fair play to you like Nick said. I think a majority of people thought December was going to be a milder than average month, including me, with above rainfall. This cold spell has took me by suprise especially as these synoptics are very rare for pre-christmas

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Nice one IB.
Intersting point made by TWS re potential reversal of synoptic pattern. I believe this to be the case and that the spreading of the ITCZ and the jet moving northward is in line with the solar/lunar cycles and the warming seen. The solar cycle says reversal and so does the lunar cycle.
Re IB saying his forecast is bust even if Jan then Feb turn mild, if folk read what he is saying is that it would be for the wrong reasons hence his forecast is wrong. I admire this because Ian has made his forecast on the back of his theory and that the synoptics would be because of this theory. I have made mine with RJS with me using the the solar/lunar cycles that say the jet is on a longterm southward shift. RJS using his excellent theory and they marry up hence why we do it jointly. If we had cold due to an intense HP sat over us then our forecast would be wrong even if was cold as we don't forecast that, we forecast retrograde northerly blocking HPs with southerly tracking LPs etc.
I believe Ian was onto something and that we had seen a change as I have stated many times BUT not because of AGW and not irreversible..... I believe the reverse started in 2007.

BFTP

[Mr_Data]

Ian Brown, on 17 December 2009 - 19:36 , said:

Unfortunately my forecast thread got locked due to bickering so I'm just starting a new one to say that my forecast has obviously gone very wrong and is effectively bust.

Even if Jan and Feb turn out as I predicted (which I don't think they will) then it would be for the wrong reasons.

A bit too early to call it bust but where do you think it went wrong at least for December, Ian? Last winter, you played the "Hale winter phenomenon" card, you can't use that this time, though.

Infact, if we speculate, this winter turns out a touch colder than last winter, how do the supporters of the "Hale winter phenomenon" explains this? For the record, I don't buy the theory.

[chionomaniac]

I would just like to say well done to Ian for admitting that his forecast has gone bust. It is difficult to even know where to begin to put out a forecast anyway and I certainly would have gone along the same lines that you did Ian for December so I would have been completely wrong there as well.

One thing though, Ian, that I would have to question was your steadfast belief during the autumn months that any factors that could possibly be drivers of cold, and I am sure that I brought these to your attention, were seemingly not considered. Is this because you didn't see them as being strong enough or that they didn't fit in with your overall mw theory. I too would like to know what factors in your opinion that have caused your forecast to bust.

c

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Ian
That's a good question by C, after last winter and now this one...why do you think your theory has floundered? Before one misreads the point, the change in pattern over past 20years was sound [maybe not causation]. To see the jet staying south for so long MUST be ringing alarm bells with you?

regards

BFTP

[Mr_Data]

BLAST FROM THE PAST, on 02 January 2010 - 10:23 , said:

...why do you think your theory has floundered?

The problem for me was that the theory was applied, absolutely and rigidly. There was no room for flexibilty and as a result as what happens to a building that is inflexible, when a tremor strikes, it collapses. The theory would have been fine if to say northerly blocking is becoming rarer but could still occur. Ian gave the impression that northerly blocking during the winter season had become extinct.

Even Ian can't say there has been no true northerly blocking this winter thus far.