Ken Ring

Gene Derm

Villain wrote: »

umm so your saying that your forecasts are as accurate as horoscopes?

No, you are saying that you think I am saying that. There is a difference. I am saying my forecasts are opinions, just like horoscopes are someone's opinions. It's funny how people twist things to suit their negative purposes. If you look for fault it will be everywhere, in everything someone says, before that someone has even opened his mouth, as in, he's a politician and his lips are moving so he must be lying. I don't believe in horoscopes that are in popular publications, there is no reliability there and it is intended only for entertainment and titillation. Further, a trend, which is a fluctuation, does not invoke accuracy; a method does.
Ken Ring

Gene Derm

Villain wrote: »

225 NZ Dollars for a year was €109 when I paid for it and I never said that was for 2 weeks, I simply asked how in the first month of a yearly forecast I paid €109 for you got it so wrong.

You said then that Temps can't really be that accurate but the fact is you include them in a yearly forecast.????

I am trying to explain. You have to have points of focus to come up with a graph to show trends. That is stated on top of the data spreadsheet. The figures themselves are meaningless and are not to be taken literally. The mistake is to regard the data in the same way you would view data from Met Eireann. It is apples and pears. If you can get past the actual figures and view it as trends, warmer or cooler, wetter or drier, sunnier or cloudier, you will find my work useful. If you can't, and look for exact day-figure-matches, you will find my work annoying.
Ken Ring

Villain

Gene Derm wrote: »

I am trying to explain. You have to have points of focus to come up with a graph to show trends. That is stated on top of the data spreadsheet. The figures themselves are meaningless and are not to be taken literally. The mistake is to regard the data in the same way you would view data from Met Eireann. It is apples and pears. If you can get past the actual figures and view it as trends, warmer or cooler, wetter or drier, sunnier or cloudier, you will find my work useful. If you can't, and look for exact day-figure-matches, you will find my work annoying.
Ken Ring

So you agree that it was €109?

I think you are too used to defending yourself and are getting very defensive for no real reason. I haven't had a go at you at all, I simply asked a question which you answered and led me to suggest that perhaps you should exclude the temps or add a warning.

I understand what you say about trends etc but its very hard not to ask questions when we have had such a cold spell and your forecast didn't show it all. I'm not trying to beat you with a stick here simply asking questions you have just chosen to jump into ultra defensive mode. I paid the money that was my choice I was just wondering was there a reason it was so wrong and by asking that question it has suggested that temps shouldn't be used to any great extent.

You brought up the horoscopes analogy not me.

octo

Villain wrote: »

So you agree that it was €109?

I think you are too used to defending yourself and are getting very defensive for no real reason. I haven't had a go at you at all, I simply asked a question which you answered and led me to suggest that perhaps you should exclude the temps or add a warning.

I understand what you say about trends etc but its very hard not to ask questions when we have had such a cold spell and your forecast didn't show it all. I'm not trying to beat you with a stick here simply asking questions you have just chosen to jump into ultra defensive mode. I paid the money that was my choice I was just wondering was there a reason it was so wrong and by asking that question it has suggested that temps shouldn't be used to any great extent.

You brought up the horoscopes analogy not me.

So, did he get the 'trend' (whatever that means) right? My guess is you got recycled data from Kilkenny from 17 years and 10 days ago.

octo

Gene Derm wrote: »

Further, a trend, which is a fluctuation, does not invoke accuracy; a method does.
Ken Ring

I thought you were a maths teacher? Ever heard of differentiation?

Gene Derm

Villain wrote: »

So you agree that it was €109?

I think you are too used to defending yourself and are getting very defensive for no real reason. I haven't had a go at you at all, I simply asked a question which you answered and led me to suggest that perhaps you should exclude the temps or add a warning.

I understand what you say about trends etc but its very hard not to ask questions when we have had such a cold spell and your forecast didn't show it all. I'm not trying to beat you with a stick here simply asking questions you have just chosen to jump into ultra defensive mode. I paid the money that was my choice I was just wondering was there a reason it was so wrong and by asking that question it has suggested that temps shouldn't be used to any great extent.

You brought up the horoscopes analogy not me.

Yes, with the likes of Octo and his meteorologist mates on this forum attacking me almost on everything I say, one does seek to clarify. :-)
I wouldn't call it ultra-defensive, just trying to correct impressions, and you did challenge me to explain what you saw as inaccuracies in predictions. I was just responding. I'm not saying throw away the temperature readings. They should be used to see rises and falls.
Ken Ring

WolfeIRE

Gene Derm wrote: »

I'm not saying throw away the temperature readings.
Ken Ring

Forgive me, but did anyone else notice it is quite hot in here:rolleyes:

Gene Derm

Villain wrote: »

You brought up the horoscopes analogy not me.

Yes but I also brought up other analogies like doctors, economists and consultancies, but you might like to question why you lept on the horoscopes one like a shark that hadn't eaten for a week!!

Villain

Gene Derm wrote: »

Yes but I also brought up other analogies like doctors, economists and consultancies, but you might like to question why you lept on the horoscopes one like a shark that hadn't eaten for a week!!

You see there you go again with the attack. I think you have no sense of the attitude that I have posted with, if you are going to post like that I don't see any reason to continue to discuss the topic.

I paid for a service, I wondered about an aspect of it and asked a question based on that, I never attacked you or your methods.

Turtwig

Villain wrote: »

You see there you go again with the attack. I think you have no sense of the attitude that I have posted with, if you are going to post like that I don't see any reason to continue to discuss the topic.

I paid for a service, I wondered about an aspect of it and asked a question based on that, I never attacked you or your methods.

Might just be a knee jerk reaction from your user name.:pac:

Gene Derm

Villain wrote: »

I paid for a service, I wondered about an aspect of it and asked a question based on that, I never attacked you or your methods.

And I'm grateful that you are a customer that seeks clarification and interpretation. I think a clearer way of seeing the method at work would be to buy my 440-page book Predict Weather for Ireland for 2010. I am told that the main centres' reports since the start of the year have been spot on so far e.g. fine/mist or drizzles. The trouble is that in Ireland snow doesn't come down in measurable volume, unlike the USA which has an inch system, so there is no good historial record to draw from.
Ken Ring

snow ghost

M.T. & Gene, perhaps one of you can help me here:

Is it accepted by the scientific community that sea tides affect the weather during their ebbs and flows?

Just asking because I have always noticed in this part of the World that quite often the weather and wind changes with the tides, especially high tides, e.g. if the tide is completely out the weather is usually not as wet and wild as when it comes in and is near to full.

I always assumed that there was a scientific reason for this.

Gene Derm

snow ghost wrote: »

M.T. & Gene, perhaps one of you can help me here:

Is it accepted by the scientific community that sea tides affect the weather during their ebbs and flows?

Just asking because I have always noticed in this part of the World that quite often the weather and wind changes with the tides, especially high tides, e.g. if the tide is completely out the weather is usually not as wet and wild as when it comes in and is near to full.

I always assumed that there was a scientific reason for this.

Ha ha, well, this is how and why I got into all this business in the first place, because I lived at the water's edge for 10 continuous years, and noticed lots of things, like storms always accompanying the highest tides. Most older yachties also know stuff, like that there is a big blow just before the tide turns, and calm comes in on the turn. The weather will typically change at that point, either rain (if about) when dry before, or rain stopping at that moment. I doubt that scientists know about this, you really have to ask the people who live it, because otherwise science will have to admit that there is a moon-weather connection and they won't do this any time soon, even if they know there is one. Why? Because they will have egg on their face. People will say why didn't you tell us about that, we could have used that knowledge all these years. Plus, the moon and tide are about cycles, which contradicts the idea of global warming and climate change, the widespread awareness of this truth of which, would stop their lucrative funding.
Ken Ring

Turtwig

Hi Ken,

Did you try taking your observations down the scientific route? There are so many cases of the moon influencing human and animal behaviour,the environment and far more eccentric stuff currently being investigated, that I'm sure you'd find someone who would like to test your predictions.
Also, if you don't mind me asking what is your rationale for rejecting global warming?

Regards,
Malt
P.s The phenomenon of tidal winds that you correctly identified is well known to occur at many coastal regions.

Gene Derm

Malty_T wrote: »

Hi Ken,

Did you try taking your observations down the scientific route? There are so many cases of the moon influencing human and animal behaviour,the environment and far more eccentric stuff currently being investigated, that I'm sure you'd find someone who would like to test your predictions.
Also, if you don't mind me asking what is your rationale for rejecting global warming?

Regards,
Malt
P.s The phenomenon of tidal winds that you correctly identified is well known to occur at many coastal regions.

There is arguably no scientific route anymore as meteorological and climate science is so riddled with corrupted data, fiddling of figures and cooking of books in order to get ongoing funding. No one funds skeptics, nor lunar studies that will divulge cycles. This would destroy mainstream meteorology as it is now known, because it would show weather is predictable and not something random and chaotic. This issue is far bigger than me vs them because it hits at the heart of what is PC christianity and what is still considered heresy (the moon was the symbol of paganism).
What have I against global warming? Only that it is the greatest scam this century, promoted by frauds and liars, justified by made-up evidence and manipulated computer models and supported by tax-grabbing politicians. It will create massive poverty and cause internal civil wars, water shortages and enable warlords to rise in power supported by the internally corrupt UN. Economic blackmail will cripple international trade and if the governing cartels get their way every person on the planet will find their freedoms curtailed. All because a rise of 3 hundreths of a degree over the past century is supposed to signal the end of the planet. The greatest problem is mass gullibility and the biggest challenge is how to stop laughing at the silliness of humans. Global warming? Where?
Ken Ring

kerry1960

Just read back through this thread and it becomes very clear that Ken Ring is a quack , its a case of buyer beware .

Gene Derm

kerry1960 wrote: »

Just read back through this thread and it becomes very clear that Ken Ring is a quack , its a case of buyer beware .

I notice that every time you come on here all you do is complain about me. What exactly is your problem? I also notice you have a weather station. Do you work in the metservices like your mate Octo?

Tipp Man

Gene Derm wrote: »

I notice that every time you come on here all you do is complain about me. What exactly is your problem? I also notice you have a weather station. Do you work in the metservices like your mate Octo?

Gene, i think you are Ken Ring, is that correct??

If so can you tell me if you have produced an almanac for Ireland for 2010, and if so where can i buy it??

also have you anything else on Irish weather, particularly for 2010??

kerry1960

Gene Derm wrote: »

I notice that every time you come on here all you do is complain about me. What exactly is your problem? I also notice you have a weather station. Do you work in the metservices like your mate Octo?

He he , my dear Mr Ring i do not work with Octo , or anyone else for that matter , but since you have mentioned Met Eireann many times in this thread it was enlightening to hear our Evelyn Cusack tear your umm methods to shreds , yes we have met before on page 8 of this thread , this ''straw doll'' is only an ordinary lad with a background in farming , so debating about astrology with a shadow is not one of my strong points , but im calling it as i see it Mr Ring , and i would tell you straight to your face if i had the chance '' you are a quack '', its nice to see such a simple sentence rattles you .

Gene Derm

Tipp Man wrote: »

Gene, i think you are Ken Ring, is that correct??

If so can you tell me if you have produced an almanac for Ireland for 2010, and if so where can i buy it??

also have you anything else on Irish weather, particularly for 2010??

Yes, we produce the 440-page almanac, called Predict Weather for Ireland for 2010. It can be purchased online from our website www.predictweather.com. It covers trends for all counties for the whole year.
I do a monthly column for the Irish Farmers Journal. There are also many updates on my website about what's coming in Ireland for 2010.
Here's some
https://www.predictweather.co.nz/assets/articles/article_resources.php?id=159
https://www.predictweather.co.nz/assets/articles/article_resources.php?id=164
https://www.predictweather.co.nz/assets/articles/article_home.php?id=68
https://www.predictweather.co.nz/assets/articles/article_resources.php?id=143

and yes, I am
Ken Ring

snow ghost

kerry1960 wrote: »

He he , my dear Mr Ring i do not work with Octo , or anyone else for that matter , but since you have mentioned Met Eireann many times in this thread it was enlightening to hear our Evelyn Cusack tear your umm methods to shreds , yes we have met before on page 8 of this thread , this ''straw doll'' is only an ordinary lad with a background in farming , so debating about astrology with a shadow is not one of my strong points , but im calling it as i see it Mr Ring , and i would tell you straight to your face if i had the chance '' you are a quack '', its nice to see such a simple sentence rattles you .

Kerry,

It might it be better to point out the reasons why you disgree with Ken's weather forecasting results or methodology than him as a person.

Turtwig

Gene Derm wrote: »

There is arguably no scientific route anymore as meteorological and climate science is so riddled with corrupted data, fiddling of figures and cooking of books in order to get ongoing funding. No one funds skeptics, nor lunar studies that will divulge cycles. This would destroy mainstream meteorology as it is now known, because it would show weather is predictable and not something random and chaotic. This issue is far bigger than me vs them because it hits at the heart of what is PC christianity and what is still considered heresy (the moon was the symbol of paganism).
What have I against global warming? Only that it is the greatest scam this century, promoted by frauds and liars, justified by made-up evidence and manipulated computer models and supported by tax-grabbing politicians. It will create massive poverty and cause internal civil wars, water shortages and enable warlords to rise in power supported by the internally corrupt UN. Economic blackmail will cripple international trade and if the governing cartels get their way every person on the planet will find their freedoms curtailed. All because a rise of 3 hundreths of a degree over the past century is supposed to signal the end of the planet. The greatest problem is mass gullibility and the biggest challenge is how to stop laughing at the silliness of humans. Global warming? Where?
Ken Ring

Hey Ken,

Many thanks for the reply. It's a pity that you think there is no scientific route. Throughout history many controversial theories have been slow to gain mainstream acceptance. However, in general, the good science based on evidence always comes to the fro. There are thousands of scientists working today trying to get some theory or hypothesis recognised. Many of which are pushing stuff that may sound counter intuitive, or indeed, nonsense to many. The point is though that they are trying, you seem to just have gone the route alone.

I cannot stress how badly the risk you're taking with this particular route. If you have discovered a simple method to predicting the weather (A discovery that would no doubt help many people) then if you don't push it mainstream the majority of the people will never listen to you. It's like asking them to trust an alternative medicine doctor over the conventional one. They'll most likely see you as a quack or a crackpot. I'm not saying you are either of these, but it would really help your case if you tried going down the official route.

Even if you were outright rejected by the peer review route, the very fact that you have a paper rejected and can show people the feedback it received would definitely help your case. If you don't try, then I'm afraid you're just as likely to be trusted as much as if I were to start claiming tomorrow that I figured out a way to make water combustible (via expensively created radio waves that only I know how to create) and we could all run the "combustwater" in our cars but refused to have my methods or theory scrutinised by science. If you don't at least try to get science to examine your claims then skeptics aren't really going to take you that serious. I don't think the general public will either.

As for your excuse of "heresy", I gotta admit that I would be very surprised if this was the case. Every Dec 25th the entire western world celebrates Christmas through the use of pagan symbols such as lights and Christmas trees. Society is far more open these days and no scientist really cares about the religious or superstitious origins of a technique if they work. To give you one example, buddhism sounds crazy to many, yet neuroscience has found many interesting things from examining buddhist claims. Not everything in buddhism is useful, but some of it is. No matter how outlandish the claim, if you have evidence to support your assertions people may not listen in your lifetime, but they most probably will listen eventually. If you don't try; then they definitely won't.

With regards to your stance on AGW, I am more than willing to discuss it with you if you want. Though, I would recommend starting another thread because this one is solely about you weather predictions and queries that others may have. Nobody is talking about the end to the planet.

Regards,
Malt

kerry1960

Your ''outlook for January'' is already in the bin Mr Ring , im sure that Met Eireann can confirm that the the cold spell has already departed , also note the words ''should'' and ''may'' figure a lot in your predictions ...utter rubbish .

Coming up
I have a relatively dry period beginning on 19 January but the cold should persist until the end of this month, which is when the Earth-Moon distance is the shortest for the year, after which extreme cold should start to abate. So there should be respite by the second week in February. Then the Moon will be in the warmer south for the bulk of February, reaching the north again in the last week which is when temperatures may again fall.
So in February, the second and third weeks should be warmer, but spring minimums should rise only slowly, with air frosts in some places continuing until the middle of April.
2010 should be cooler than average as the globe continues the cooling trend it has been experiencing over the past 9 years due to lower solar radiation levels.
Summer arrives for Ireland in the form of a fortnight of sunny weather from the last week of May onwards, then repeats a month later from the last week of June to the first week of July.

Gene Derm

kerry1960 wrote: »

He he , it was enlightening to hear our Evelyn Cusack tear your umm methods to shreds .

I suppose in the spirit of consistency our Evelyn tore the UK mets to shreds after they said it would be a BBQ summer for the UK and Ireland? Oh, she didn't? How very odd. Must be just good fun to tear someone to shreds when they are not there to defend themselves.

kerry1960

Gene Derm wrote: »

I suppose in the spirit of consistency our Evelyn tore the UK mets to shreds after they said it would be a BBQ summer for the UK and Ireland? Oh, she didn't? How very odd. Must be just good fun to tear someone to shreds when they are not there to defend themselves.

A typical reply from you , you start losing a debate so to distract attention you involve a 3rd party (UKMO) as for Evelyn there was absolutely no need for you to be there she knew what she was talking about .

Gene Derm

Malty_T wrote: »

Hey Ken,

Many thanks for the reply. It's a pity that you think there is no scientific route. Throughout history many controversial theories have been slow to gain mainstream acceptance. However, in general, the good science based on evidence always comes to the fro. There are thousands of scientists working today trying to get some theory or hypothesis recognised. Many of which are pushing stuff that may sound counter intuitive, or indeed, nonsense to many. The point is though that they are trying, you seem to just have gone the route alone.

I cannot stress how badly the risk you're taking with this particular route. If you have discovered a simple method to predicting the weather (A discovery that would no doubt help many people) then if you don't push it mainstream the majority of the people will never listen to you. It's like asking them to trust an alternative medicine doctor over the conventional one. They'll most likely see you as a quack or a crackpot. I'm not saying you are either of these, but it would really help your case if you tried going down the official route.

Even if you were outright rejected by the peer review route, the very fact that you have a paper rejected and can show people the feedback it received would definitely help your case. If you don't try, then I'm afraid you're just as likely to be trusted as much as if I were to start claiming tomorrow that I figured out a way to make water combustible (via expensively created radio waves that only I know how to create) and we could all run the "combustwater" in our cars but refused to have my methods or theory scrutinised by science. If you don't at least try to get science to examine your claims then skeptics aren't really going to take you that serious. I don't think the general public will either.

As for your excuse of "heresy", I gotta admit that I would be very surprised if this was the case. Every Dec 25th the entire western world celebrates Christmas through the use of pagan symbols such as lights and Christmas trees. Society is far more open these days and no scientist really cares about the religious or superstitious origins of a technique if they work. To give you one example, buddhism sounds crazy to many, yet neuroscience has found many interesting things from examining buddhist claims. Not everything in buddhism is useful, but some of it is. No matter how outlandish the claim, if you have evidence to support your assertions people may not listen in your lifetime, but they most probably will listen eventually. If you don't try; then they definitely won't.

With regards to your stance on AGW, I am more than willing to discuss it with you if you want. Though, I would recommend starting another thread because this one is solely about you weather predictions and queries that others may have. Nobody is talking about the end to the planet.

Regards,
Malt

As to my method, my free book on my website is a good start. If anyone has my almanac they will see on p33-34 an analysis of sunspot cycles for a guide to what is coming. They will also see weather for main cities on each page - that comes from astrological analysis of planet aspects, no cycles involved. It is a lot to explain to those unfamiliar with astrological language.
As to global warming, fine, Matt. I just replied to you. I didn't bring the subject up.
ken

kerry1960

snow ghost wrote: »

Kerry,

It might it be better to point out the reasons why you disgree with Ken's weather forecasting results or methodology than him as a person.

Fair enough point SG but im not going to get into a three way debate with other posters on this subject , what i think of Kens methods or otherwise i will address to him , if other posters wish to defend him thats fine , after all this is a debating form .

First of all as regards Kens 'methodology' there isn't any , its a total scam , he got a lucky break last September but look at what has happened since , these so called 'forecasts' :pac: have been buried under the record breaking floods of November and the record freeze from late December to early January neither of which this self styled weather guru came even close to umm forecasting , yet he continues to haunt the Boards trying to flog his 'products' at every opportunity ,for people seriously interested in Meteorology ,this Astrological garbage is is about as useful as toilet paper .

As regards his personality i suggest we look back through this thread , same tactic keeps cropping up again and again , arrogance disguised as defence , this keyboard warrior is incapable of answering some very reasonable arguments addressed to him without resorting to aggression , and if he can't bully the poster he resorts to plan B ie involve a third party , well im not one of those who hide behind a straw doll when faced with this 5hite .

Gene Derm

kerry1960 wrote: »

Your ''outlook for January'' is already in the bin Mr Ring , im sure that Met Eireann can confirm that the the cold spell has already departed , also note the words ''should'' and ''may'' figure a lot in your predictions ...utter rubbish .

That's not true. I did get the November rain, we have discussed this in earlier posts and I showed texts that provided for that prediction, and I did say it would be colder from mid December. You can see from my graphs in the links I provided a post or two ago that the air frost days (for Cumbria but same trends for Ireland) were always going to be greatest between mid Dec-mid Feb. The graphs were put up on the web in December but they were prepared in November before Cumbria got flooded. You can also view my post on
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63115693&postcount=103
"Between 11-23 December should be..cooler .."
I was interviewed on radio in Mayo in the first week of January, heard by Padi89 and commented on in this forum on 7 January and I said things were (then) going to warm up slightly and they definitely did within a week of that. But there is more cold to come and it is still winter, and the sun is still dormant.
I thought you said you were going to discuss the science. This is a debating forum, not a mudslinging one. I can't really reply to personal insults.
Of course I say 'may' and 'should' as do all forecasters. I am not God.
Ken Ring

Sponge Bob

This is what you said on the 21st November my emphasis in Bold and Italic

Clare, December to March
December: Chance of rain 1-10 December (FM+N dec) but few if any subzero minimums, most rain arriving within 2 days either side of the 4th (P), and mostly overcast conditions. Between 11-23 December should be mainly dry but cooler (NM+S dec), possibly two subzero minimum days giving frosts about the new moon 18-20 December (A), then rains returning just before Xmas with some heavy falls between then and the end of the year ( FM+N dec).
January: still unsettled weather but contracting to much lesser rainfall amounts in the first 10 days of January (LE+lastQ), followed by some heavy falls around midJanuary (NM+A), with rain potential petering out about 20 January (LE). Then a run of dry days between 21-31 January (1stQ+N dec+FM and P, these events well spaced which suggests more settled weather) but cold enough for frosts between 19-27 January (FM+P).
February: the month doesn't see much precipitation, perhaps 3-4 significant rain days and the sun breaking through on about 6-7 days, which may be mostly between the last week of February and first week of March (FM+P+LE).
March: a miserable month, mainly cloudy and wet, however apart from the first few days few if any frost-prone minimums likely (LE interrupting FM and NMs).

You completely missed the very cold snap , your next prediction is rain to stop in a few days with a crisp with frost at night run from 19-31 Jan with frosts petering out 27-31 Jan. Lets see

Gene Derm

Sponge Bob wrote: »

This is what you said on the 21st November my emphasis in Bold and Italic



You completely missed the very cold snap , your next prediction is rain to stop in a few days with a crisp with frost at night run from 19-31 Jan with frosts petering out 27-31 Jan. Lets see

I've already explained that I make no claim to be able to pinpoint temperatures, except as a trend, upwards or downwards, because temperatures are not controlled by the Moon, only their 'events' rising or falling. I keep saying this but the critics keep coming back to temperatures. You will notice from your own bolding that I said rain but it really means snow or rain, because you don't get snow out of dry air. If you substitute snow for rain you will get your snow dumps pretty much when they fell.
Ken