Ken Ring

M.T. Cranium

Based on all of this discussion including the investigation I reported on, and then taking into consideration my own LRF (which as I mentioned can be seen posted on 7 Nov in the forecast thread), I really feel that further debate or argument here is pointless for the following reasons:

(a) Ken seems to be demonstrating improvement over random chance in timing precipitation. I would need to see more to assess intensity, but to some extent, timing influences intensity (certainly if few events are predicted, the intensity is likely to be low).

(b) I assume that (a) is true because Ken has identified the same general energy process at work in the atmosphere as in my research; there may be some differences and we should discuss them once I figure out exactly what is different, some concepts he uses are the same.

(c) As he asserts that temperature is not such a strong point in his method, I feel that criticism of temperature within this paradigm of forecasting should shift over to my forecasts where I do claim some success in that element. There's no point in criticizing a research project at an incomplete stage of its development for some element that hasn't been addressed completely.

(d) Ken's definition of astrology is clearly not the astrology of modern culture but the extension of the state of astronomy in ancient cultures, to the point of saying that it is an effort to return to whatever knowledge was contained in it and perhaps to find new forms of knowledge that extend it. So calling him an astrologer or the methodology astrology is really off-target because if the ancients were on the right path with their concepts, then perhaps meteorology has failed to exploit a resource that it should.


I just want to say, as somebody who forecasts on all time scales and uses conventional methods certainly in the short range (but still relies a little on research findings about energy levels), I would expect my method to give a better result at any time after about day 7 on the models, by statistical chance, and certainly anything past day 10 -- the random noise on the GFS model past day 10 is of course legendary.

I would also acknowledge that my research is far from complete, and I have to wonder at this stage in my life (being sixty and change) how much further I could get with it, before either losing interest and/or losing ability to pursue it. So it depresses me to some extent to see that many years into the process, we are still essentially at square one, the orthodox weather community being very skeptical of the whole approach, and those of us who make alternate forecasts being increasingly confident that we are on the right track.

There may be discoveries possible about physical process, equations that narrow down errors to something that nobody could dispute, etc etc, that would resolve this, but to be honest, I think an intermediate stage where the community says, okay this looks non-random but you guys need more workers and funding to get it to another level, is the only possible way forward.

Now, the international met community is probably on a track where they hope one of two things will happen. One, the models will just keep getting better and better until day 10-15 is like day 2-3 now, and some sort of magic ramp into infinity opens up. This is, I gather, the sort of hope of the CFS modelling approach. I would have to say based on 10-15 years of observation of weather models in modern form and my recollections of how they performed in the 1970s, that we have seen improvements only in the day 2 to 5 time range, and perhaps a little bit 6-10, but really, the pace of improvement is so incremental that it would be 2500 AD before day 10 is like day 5 now. That's very little improvement for so much effort and spending (presumably). The reason? Mainly this -- the energy cycles in the atmosphere are partly external in origin and so how can any computer program take today's observations (on any kind of grid) and find these that far in advance, before they even initiate? It would be like predicting which side road along a highway might produce a sudden appearance of a turning vehicle. Unless you can observe that a vehicle is on that side road in advance, how could you do that?

The second thing that the experts may be hoping to see would be infallible methods of tracking pattern change through their current favourite approaches or ones like them. These hold centre stage on large weather forums partly because there is no recognition of any alternative. The fact that these routinely fade in and out of reliable service doesn't faze their proponents, who, to their credit I suppose, have the same faith and optimism about them that we have about astronomical influences. I am less pessimistic about these approaches because I suspect that buried in some of them would be astronomical paradigms unrecognized at this time. The MJO index for example looks suspiciously like a plot of Mercury's orbital declination as seen from a constant frame of reference; I am working on identifying what frame of reference that is, although I am equally trying to figure out if the MJO index is actually that useful in predicting anything (its proponents are very bullish on it).

So anyway, sorry for another long rambling post, but I am pretty sure that anyone reading this thread is very interested in the subject in one way or another. I'm 99% sure that there is a reality basis to this alternate approach, and I'm going to defend Ken's integrity at the same time because we've obviously had some similar experiences and fought some similar battles along the way. If you think about it, a real charlatan out to defraud people would probably concoct a much more lucrative scheme than selling long-range weather forecasts. The news is full of such schemes, but there are very few instances where a person once taken in by a scheme will return and submit to it again, which is where resubscription tends to disprove the idea in this case.

Gene Derm

M.T. Cranium wrote: »

. The MJO index for example looks suspiciously like a plot of Mercury's orbital declination as seen from a constant frame of reference; I am working on identifying what frame of reference that is, although I am equally trying to figure out if the MJO index is actually that useful in predicting anything (its proponents are very bullish on it).
.

I have found Mercury's declination is a good indicator of temperature swings, according to season. The Solar System Barycentre is the point of focus for the planets, the orbital fluctuation of which produces the solar cycle, the timing of which involves the Moon (which behaves like a planet) as it also orbits the Sun (despite the Earth keeping getting in the Moon's way). All the planets contribute, via the SSB to the timing of the solar wind tide, particularly the big gas giants Jupiter and Saturn, particularly conjuncting or opposing the Sun. It can therefore be said that the planets influence life on earth, albeit indirectly through the Sun. This is the essence of the old idea of astrology in daily action, and why the Christian West does not want to go there.
I fascinated by what you say about this MJO Index and will pursue this further, because the "Mercury factor" of temp swings has been included in all my almanacs over the past 5 years, following my initial discovery of what I thought to be its relevance and following this for the 2 years prior. You may be interested in a 2-yr old article I did on the subject
http://www.predictweather.co.nz/assets/articles/article_resources.php?id=44
I submit that exactly the same Mercury factor was, and is still, probably in effect this winter, between 12-29 December (particularly just prior to Xmas), and January 11-25, particularly 17-20.
regards
Ken Ring

kerry1960

Lol , still the same old mumbo jumbo Mr Ring , Mercury this Saturn that , you even managed to squeeze Jupiter in there, but where's Pluto :pac: , well back to plain language again all i want is to know how come your 'predictions' for this Winter are so wrong , the point of a long range forecasts is to pinpoint trends or extremes , (and funnily enough for most people that would include temperatures) ,all i see in your predictions Ken is averages , nothing more , purely based on averages most people here on the Boards could submit forecast for the year with a good deal of success , but then nobody here would have foreseen the exceptional floods and the very severe freeze we have just experienced , and you sure as hell didn't did you :rolleyes:, yet you can submit a reply as below on 21/12/09 that claims to forecast cloud cover for a specific day over specific counties 6 months in advance, amazing :eek: .

Gene Derm wrote: »

Hi Tucker1971
I have mostly dry for the whole country between 1-9 July, except for rain in north and SW on 5 July, and starting to cloud over with drizzle patches across the north and Sligo to Louth on 8th and 9th. If you give me your latitude and longitude I can supply an astrological analysis.
cheers
Ken

I would also like to publicly apologise to you Ken for calling you a 'quack' , i looked up the term in the dictionary and it has nothing at all to do with Meteorology .

Gene Derm

kerry1960 wrote: »

I would also like to publicly apologise to you Ken for calling you a 'quack' .

Apology accepted
Ken

snow ghost

Gene Derm wrote: »

Well, that New moon snow has arrived as expected. Cold air temperatures means low evaporation. Low evaporation means no moisture to make snow. The best snow does not come from the north. It comes when warm moist air from the south mixes with cold air from the north. That's what has been developing over the last few days so one wonders why the big surprise on the part of weather services. They must be aware that winter snow falls on rising temperatures because it is textbook stuff that a snowflake is an iceflake that expands.
Get ready soon for that run of dry days.
Ken Ring

Ken,

It snowed on Tuesday 12th Jan in parts of the country - predomonantely in the daytime - the New Moon was on Friday 15th Jan. So objectively on that occassion I have to say your forecast wasn't very accurate.

“This month coming up I am saying there should be overnight snow around this month's New Moon then precipitation will dwindle to almost nothing, with a dry spell beginning on or near the 19th, although still staying cold.


Even giving due consideration to the fact you said 'on or around' the new moon, on the day that it last really snowed the moon was in the waning crescent faze.

Gene Derm

snow ghost wrote: »

Ken,

It snowed on Tuesday 12th Jan in parts of the country - predomonantely in the daytime - the New Moon was on Friday 15th Jan. So objectively on that occassion I have to say your forecast wasn't very accurate.

“This month coming up I am saying there should be overnight snow around this month's New Moon then precipitation will dwindle to almost nothing, with a dry spell beginning on or near the 19th, although still staying cold.

Well, it was as accurate as Met Eirann, so are you writing to them also? The Met Eireann forecast was for snow in Ulster on the 13th, and hail and sleet in the west and north on 15th (sleet is a mix of rain, snow and hail). Would you like copies of their forecast as proof? I would call the "new moon period" from the 13th-17th. I said "around" the new moon, and in any longrange, not just me, it's always a 3-day window of applicability. So I'd say a fairly correct prediction, seeing I did it about a year ago on readiness for pre-winter radio interviews.
And that dry period is starting to show signs of arriving.
regards
Ken Ring

Gene Derm

snow ghost wrote: »

Ken,
on the day that it last really snowed the moon was in the waning crescent faze.

Actually phase alone is not strong factorally. But when it bunches up with the apsidal line or the lunar equinox or lunar solstice, then events are triggered more.

snow ghost

Gene Derm wrote: »

Well, it was as accurate as Met Eirann, so are you writing to them also? The Met Eireann forecast was for snow in Ulster on the 13th, and hail and sleet in the west and north on 15th (sleet is a mix of rain, snow and hail). Would you like copies of their forecast as proof? I would call the "new moon period" from the 13th-17th. I said "around" the new moon, and in any longrange, not just me, it's always a 3-day window of applicability. So I'd say a fairly correct prediction, seeing I did it about a year ago on readiness for pre-winter radio interviews.
And that dry period is starting to show signs of arriving.
regards
Ken Ring

Ken,

I'm just giving what I consider ot be a fair and objective analysis of your forecast, and it wasn't accurate.

If you had said it will be wet, windy and turn milder around the new moon you would have been correct.

As I said part of me would like you to be right, regretably on this occassion you were way off the mark.

kerry1960

Quoting from you here Ken ...
''Looking forward he said: "The autumn will be wet apart from a dry and cool first week in November. December will be dry between the 10th and 24th, and Christmas (will be) wet but not white. Chances of snow do come around on January 20 and February 20, and in the first week of March."

The Autumn will be ''wet'', brilliant ..... this is the Met Eireann summery for November ...(mods if there copyright issues my mistake , feel free to delete this post)
Wettest November on record brings widespread flooding; mild and windy
http://www.met.ie/climate/monthly_summarys/nov09.pdf

December...
Coldest December for almost 30 years; wet in east and south but sunnier than normal everywhere
http://www.met.ie/climate/monthly_summarys/dec09.pdf

The cold spell ....
13 January 2010

The December 2009 to January 2010 cold spell has been compared with previous notable cold spells in 1981-82, 1979, 1962-63 and 1947. The attached graphs for the long-term station at the Phoenix Park in Dublin provide a visual presentation of periods when the mean daily temperature was below normal for the time of year.
http://www.met.ie/metadmin/useruploads/file/Dec-Jan%20Cold%20Spell.pdf.

snow ghost

Interesting Kerry... I note one of Ken's qoutes you posted is from the Irish Independent farming section:

"The autumn will be wet apart from a dry and cool first week in November. December will be dry between the 10th and 24th, and Christmas (will be) wet but not white. Chances of snow do come around on January 20 and February 20, and in the first week of March."

http://www.independent.ie/farming/kiwi-weather-expert-forecasts--a-watery-end-to-dreadful-2009-1886289.html

Yet Ken has also been forecasting that there will be a dry spell starting around the 19th???

“This month coming up I am saying there should be overnight snow around this month's New Moon then precipitation will dwindle to almost nothing, with a dry spell beginning on or near the 19th,"

Ken,

Your forecast for around the 19th, 20th of January are totally in contrast to each other, could you kindly explain why this is so?

Either a dry spell is going to start around the 19th or it is going to snow around the 20th... it can't be both and I don't understand why your forecasts are for both?

Btw, I had white Christmas this year in Ireland, and I wasn't alone.

kerry1960

Im sure there will find some tenuous similarities with your Autumn predictions in those Met Eireann summaries Ken but your so called ''trends'' that you claim is the basis of those same forecasts have been quite clearly blown out of the water , surprise surprise .


quoting from you here again Ken...

''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)''.

January...
So lets look this in a little more detail again , as regards rainfall you were actually correct about the first 10 days of January , it was snowing :rolleyes: , but at least i have some nice clear frosty nights to look forward to, 19th to the 27th you say, i like frost , and seeing that with half the month gone you prediction for January so far has been about as useful as dolphins urine i really hope you are right about the remainder .

February...
Well i hope that that ''significant rain'' isn't as bad as some of deluge we had in November (another one you missed remember) but at least it will rain for only 4 days , excellent and im sure people will be thrilled that the sun will be ''breaking through''on ''6 or 7 days'', fantastic , btw how long does a break through last ? ie is it 5 minutes or all day ?.

March ...
Mad as a March Hare we say here , but back to the weather , much too far away to be predicting that far ahead as we all know but on average it can be a disturbed month , so if i was to make an educated guess i would forecast a miserable month , so we agree there then .

Speaking of education ,in earlier years you were a mathematics teacher Ken right ? ,but what are your scientific qualifications please ?.

snow ghost

Gene Derm wrote: »

And that dry period is starting to show signs of arriving.
regards
Ken Ring

I just watched the BBC countryfile forecast, it's not looking at all good for your dry spell arriving on the 19th Ken... anything but. If the Met office forecasts are correct it looks like there is going to be heavy rain on Tuesday.

We'll wait and see, but my money is on the Met Offices being correct.

kerry1960

Hi MTC , how are you , I'm breaking my own resolution here in not involving 3rd parties and please don't take this personally but i must comment on a point you made , and its not taken out of context because what you say has an overall relevance to Mr Rings LRF .

quote
(c) As he asserts that temperature is not such a strong point in his method, I feel that criticism of temperature within this paradigm of forecasting should shift over to my forecasts where I do claim some success in that element. There's no point in criticizing a research project at an incomplete stage of its development for some element that hasn't been addressed completely''.

You say ''temperature is not such a strong point in his method'' and then you go on to say ''there is no point in criticizing a research project at an incomplete stage'' , lol , regarding temperature , that is the most basic requirement of any forecast , it might rain or it might snow ???, as for his incomplete project what is he selling on his website then ???, its no wonder he is getting things so wrong .

I would prefer if Ken himself replied to this please

ch750536

As a profession I model complex systems, as a hobby I modle extremely complex systems, or at least spend a lot of time thinking about them.

One thing that is required of any model, before you start with any algorithms, in a basic understanding of what influences the model and what does not.

I would be certain that the moon has direct and indirect influences in the weather, the indirect being the tides, the direct being the gravitation pull of the atmosphere (and any content), the small amount of sunlight it send our way and such things as the small amount of radiation it blocks perhaps from other sources.

I would love to build a weather model at some point in my life, I do use non-conventional methods for many things both professionally and as a hobbyist but I have to admit my complete lack of understanding.

I do belive that KR is moving along the right path, we all have to rethink where we are as much as where we want to be sometimes. I wouldn't discount KR's approach, the location of the moon definately has a direct influence in the weather, working out what is the tricky bit.

Joe Public

snow ghost wrote: »

I just watched the BBC countryfile forecast, it's not looking at all good for your dry spell arriving on the 19th Ken... anything but. If the Met office forecasts are correct it looks like there is going to be heavy rain on Tuesday.

We'll wait and see, but my money is on the Met Offices being correct.

Don't forget there's a 3 day window.;)

Gene Derm

ch750536 wrote: »

As a profession I model complex systems, as a hobby I modle extremely complex systems, or at least spend a lot of time thinking about them.

One thing that is required of any model, before you start with any algorithms, in a basic understanding of what influences the model and what does not.

I would be certain that the moon has direct and indirect influences in the weather, the indirect being the tides, the direct being the gravitation pull of the atmosphere (and any content), the small amount of sunlight it send our way and such things as the small amount of radiation it blocks perhaps from other sources.

I would love to build a weather model at some point in my life, I do use non-conventional methods for many things both professionally and as a hobbyist but I have to admit my complete lack of understanding.

I do belive that KR is moving along the right path, we all have to rethink where we are as much as where we want to be sometimes. I wouldn't discount KR's approach, the location of the moon definately has a direct influence in the weather, working out what is the tricky bit.

Thanks for the support, and I suggest you be careful on this forum if you don't want to be shrieked at, pointed at, threatened as to what people are going to step up and say to your face if you ever step foot in Ireland, and generally laughed out of court by those intent on pouring over your every reported word, if you start ascribing to the moon's control on weather.
What this forum is supposed to be about is discussing this notion, but it is easier to kick the person than the ideas, as Kerry, Octo and others have gleefully shown. I may not get the forecasting correct enough down to the day for the satisfaction of some detractors, but that does not mean the moon method is fallacious, only that I may not be good enough at it yet.
Part of the problem is that the moon-weather science, as I would call it, does not have a language of its own, so must be described using mainstream meteorological register, and it doesn't always take kindly to that. It is like trying to describe what a blue sky looks like through red sunglasses. Also, how longrange differs from the short and extended-range that everybody is used to, that also tries to pass itself off as longrange, needs more discussion, because the refusal to allow leeway over trends displays basic misunderstanding as to what is claimed. I know I cite particular days and dates, but they are only as points of focus - which one has to have - they are not to be taken too literally in the larger scheme of things. I may say I will be at or near Grafton St in Dublin around 18 June, but that could mean within 50 miles of it on the day.
Ken Ring

Gene Derm

kerry1960 wrote: »

Hi MTC , how are you , I'm breaking my own resolution here in not involving 3rd parties and please don't take this personally but i must comment on a point you made , and its not taken out of context because what you say has an overall relevance to Mr Rings LRF .

quote
(c) As he asserts that temperature is not such a strong point in his method, I feel that criticism of temperature within this paradigm of forecasting should shift over to my forecasts where I do claim some success in that element. There's no point in criticizing a research project at an incomplete stage of its development for some element that hasn't been addressed completely''.

You say ''temperature is not such a strong point in his method'' and then you go on to say ''there is no point in criticizing a research project at an incomplete stage'' , lol , regarding temperature , that is the most basic requirement of any forecast , it might rain or it might snow ???, as for his incomplete project what is he selling on his website then ???, its no wonder he is getting things so wrong .

I would prefer if Ken himself replied to this please

Happy to. Perhaps you do not fully understand what temperature is, or more accurately, isn't. Every single metre and foot of this planet, every 5 seconds, has a different and shifting temperature, and this can be demonstrated with a sensitive digital thermometer. I have such a machine, an expensive farmers' soil thermometer called an EcoScan.
Temperatures mean nothing. Any number of factors can switch them almost instantaneously; sun, no sun, shade, wind direction and speed, reflection from surfaces, no reflection, colour of surface, terrain flat or hilly, proximity to ocean, proximity to heat sources like roads, buildings, stone walls, fields, elevation etc etc. If forecasting relied on temperatures then each foot of the planet would need its own satellite and weather station. All temperatures can indicate is a rough range, so if you see, say, a prediction for 5degC, it really means about 2-8, and would be classed as potential for frost or snow if there was precipitation accompanying. This is a different way of thinking about weather for you, possibly, but it is the way I think of it.
As to the 'incomplete' website, my new one goes live in about a week, we are testing it now, and all Ireland will be automatically accessible. Just think of the fun you'll have criticising that, why, you are doing so before it has even appeared!!
Ken Ring

Gene Derm

snow ghost wrote: »

Ken,

I'm just giving what I consider ot be a fair and objective analysis of your forecast, and it wasn't accurate.

If you had said it will be wet, windy and turn milder around the new moon you would have been correct.

As I said part of me would like you to be right, regretably on this occassion you were way off the mark.

Well then, and I'm not targeting you, Met Eireann wasn't accurate either, and they were only a day away, and they used the words I quoted. What would one say to that - and them??
Ken

Gene Derm

snow ghost wrote: »

Your forecast for around the 19th, 20th of January are totally in contrast to each other, could you kindly explain why this is so?

Either a dry spell is going to start around the 19th or it is going to snow around the 20th... it can't be both and I don't understand why your forecasts are for both?

Sure it can be both. I didn't say snow, definitely, nor heavy snow, nor did I say fine sunny days ongoing, or completely dry, nor uninterrupted dry. I said "around" I meant that in this week there will probably be the odd snow fall in places because it is still winter, the odd rain shower, maybe sleet or hail, but on the whole a drying will enter the picture and this trend should build and establish itself as the dominant pattern. It may not happen at exactly 4.35pm over 39a Brown St, but drying should slowly emerge. Try to get away from thinking in terms of daily forecasting.
Ken Ring

snow ghost

Gene Derm wrote: »

Well then, and I'm not targeting you, Met Eireann wasn't accurate either, and they were only a day away, and they used the words I quoted. What would one say to that - and them??
Ken

Ken,

I'd say why do you persist in directing me to met eireann forecasts, when the topic at hand and discussion is on your forecasts?

Directing attention on to another topic doesn't exactly make for a cogent argument or discussion does it?

I think I have been fair and I am trying to be objective, in that respect all I am interested in is the results of your methods.

I'm trying to help you here Ken, I'm asking you to help convince me there is merit in your theories and forecasts.

snow ghost

Gene Derm wrote: »

Sure it can be both. I didn't say snow, definitely, nor heavy snow, nor did I say fine sunny days ongoing, or completely dry, nor uninterrupted dry. I said "around" I meant that in this week there will probably be the odd snow fall in places because it is still winter, the odd rain shower, maybe sleet or hail, but on the whole a drying will enter the picture and this trend should build and establish itself as the dominant pattern. It may not happen at exactly 4.35pm over 39a Brown St, but drying should slowly emerge. Try to get away from thinking in terms of daily forecasting.
Ken Ring

Ken,

I spoke to you on another thread about my interest and knowledge of language patterns, espcially those employed by clarvoyants, psychics, etc, to giving seemingly accurate readings when they are in fact employing cold reading and eriksonian generalised language patterns.

Your communications - as can be seen in your post above - correlate extremely well with the generalised language patterns of psychics.

Now i note on a website posted here that you are also a magician and co-wrote a book called "How to Read your Cat's Paws', about palmistry for cats paws. Is that true?

Would I be correct in saying that as a Magician and especially someone with a knowledge of palmistry that you are au fait with cold reading techniques? Cold reading is used by both illusionists and psychics.

I am trying to remain objective and view your weather forecasts based on their accuracy, yet if I'm honest I'm clearly seeing the langauge techniques being used in pschic readings, and fortune telling being seemingly transfered to weather forecasting.

I look forward to being proved wrong, as I'd like to think there is something in your moon weather theory.

Gene Derm

snow ghost wrote: »

Ken,

I'd say why do you persist in directing me to met eireann forecasts, when the topic at hand and discussion is on your forecasts?

Directing attention on to another topic doesn't exactly make for a cogent argument or discussion does it?

I think I have been fair and I am trying to be objective, in that respect all I am interested in is the results of your methods.

I'm trying to help you here Ken, I'm asking you to help convince me there is merit in your theories and forecasts.

I hear your point about trying to help, and your question about why I bring Met Eirann into it, and in reply I am pointing out that by not bringing Met Eireann into the discussion there is a type of information bias, because stated or not, my system is being held against that of Met Eireann, at least by Terry and co who are thinking meteorologically and about which I have to defend myself, and the unstated question is, how does this guy who doesn't even live in Ireland or anywhere near it, stack up, how does is theory hold water and is it worth considering over and above the service that is already available to us. If I am on the same page as ME then at least my methodology must have merit, given that they have access to zillions of pounds worth of technology to utilise. So whatever they say I do take note of because from a day away they can see potentials very clearly. And if they forecast snow for the 15th, day of new moon, from a day away, which they did, and I did too, from a year away, then it is par for the course when analysing me. It is not ME itself that I am bringing into the discussion, but any day-to-day metservice, because they all use the same satellites. We are always talking about potentials, not actual weather events. That is the business both ME and me are in.
cheers
Ken

snow ghost

Gene Derm wrote: »

I hear your point about trying to help, and your question about why I bring Met Eirann into it, and in reply I am pointing out that by not bringing Met Eireann into the discussion there is a type of information bias, because stated or not, my system is being held against that of Met Eireann, at least by Terry and co who are thinking meteorologically and about which I have to defend myself, and the unstated question is, how does this guy who doesn't even live in Ireland or anywhere near it, stack up, how does is theory hold water and is it worth considering over and above the service that is already available to us. If I am on the same page as ME then at least my methodology must have merit, given that they have access to zillions of pounds worth of technology to utilise. So whatever they say I do take note of because from a day away they can see potentials very clearly. And if they forecast snow for the 15th, day of new moon, from a day away, which they did, and I did too, from a year away, then it is par for the course when analysing me. It is not ME itself that I am bringing into the discussion, but any day-to-day metservice, because they all use the same satellites. We are always talking about potentials, not actual weather events. That is the business both ME and me are in.
cheers
Ken

Ken,

Your forecasts are being held against what actually happens here in Ireland with the weather... as I pointed out with your new moon forecast.

Met Eireann's forecasts are irrelavent to discussing how accurate your forecast was... unless bringing them into it is a diversionary tactic to take the focus away from your forecast- 'smoke and mirrors and slight of hand' perhaps?

Gene Derm

snow ghost wrote: »

Ken,

Your forecasts are being held against what actually happens here in Ireland with the weather... as I pointed out with your new moon forecast.

Met Eireann's forecasts are irrelavent to discussing how accurate your forecast was... unless bringing them into it is a diversionary tactic to take the focus away from your forecast- 'smoke and mirrors and slight of hand' perhaps?

You are still missing the point I am trying to make. My forecasts should be held against the potential to happen, not what actually does. Nothing happens without the potential, and even with the potential may not, which is what potential means. Met Eirann describes the potential very nicely day by day. In that they do a good job.
You keep on an on about my magicianship. You do not seem to realise that cold reading is done in every walk of life. A doctor will say, for a condition, take this or that and it will clear up either today, tomorrow or in a few days, maybe in about a week. Nobody questions this. I am saying the same when I say it may clear up today, tomorrow or in a few days. So are you saying a doctor is doing cold reading, that he is employing sleight of hand, that he is using diversionary tactics? I think not. So why single me out for that treatment?
Ken

boardswalker

snow ghost wrote: »

Met Eireann's forecasts are irrelavent to discussing how accurate your forecast was... unless bringing them into it is a diversionary tactic to take the focus away from your forecast- 'smoke and mirrors and slight of hand' perhaps?

I posted already about what I see as being huge inconsistencies in how posters here are treated. This is just more of it.

Yesterday's Sunday Tribune had this article:
"We were told to expect snow so heavy and ice so cold that the Minister for Education closed every school for three days... and then nothing happened.
We were told the thaw wouldn't happen for at least seven days... and it arrived overnight. Just how did the men and women of Met éireann get it so wrong?

BLAME it on the weather man – Met Eireann's inaccurate forecasts last weekend led to a nationwide closure of schools, a decision later reversed as fears for the worst began to thaw.

In the run-up to last weekend, forecasters had the public bracing themselves for heavy snow and icy conditions with the potential to cause calamity.

But for much of the country on Sunday's d-day, rain simply turned the previous night's heavy snowfalls into rivers of slushy water. A far cry from the three or four inches of snow that had been confidently predicted.

How did they get it so wrong?"

What puzzles me is why many of the conventional weather buffs on here choose only to ridicule the long range forecaster but accept unreliable forecasts from ME without question.

If you want an example of vague forecasts, you don't have to travel any further than ME.

I understand why weather forecasting, long or short range, is inexact but I cannot understand why there is such antagonism towards the long range guy who is trying to do something that ME don't even attempt to do.

This forum is a very interesting place for the lay user but it is extremely disappointing to see the forum decscend to name calling and ridicule in what are essentially "turf wars".

ch750536

Gene Derm wrote: »

...If I am on the same page as ME then at least my methodology must have merit, given that they have access to zillions of pounds worth of technology to utilise....

Guessing you've never been to Ireland Ken.:)

Gene Derm

ch750536 wrote: »

Guessing you've never been to Ireland Ken.:)

Ha ha, no. But ME obviously get some funding, and they do have access to the world's satellite data, a closed shop to everyone else unless they pay through the nose. So you could say they have access to millions of pounds worth of technology. I couldn't even get access to selected Irish historical data as Met Eirann won't sell it to the public. I had to find some other way.
Ken

snow ghost

Gene Derm wrote: »

You are still missing the point I am trying to make. My forecasts should be held against the potential to happen, not what actually does. Nothing happens without the potential, and even with the potential may not, which is what potential means. Met Eirann describes the potential very nicely day by day. In that they do a good job.
You keep on an on about my magicianship. You do not seem to realise that cold reading is done in every walk of life. A doctor will say, for a condition, take this or that and it will clear up either today, tomorrow or in a few days, maybe in about a week. Nobody questions this. I am saying the same when I say it may clear up today, tomorrow or in a few days. So are you saying a doctor is doing cold reading, that he is employing sleight of hand, that he is using diversionary tactics? I think not. So why single me out for that treatment?
Ken

Ken,

If you were to buy a non-fiction book on a subject would you check out the credentials and qualifications of the author who wrote it first? Standard practise in the academic world.

In objectively reviewing your weather forecasting results, I read that you also wrote a book on Palmistry for Cats - 'Pawmistry' as you call it - 'How to read your Cat's Paws'.

On the back cover of that book - on Amazon - it also states the following:

"Ken is a mathematician, a long time magician, mind reader and a public speaker with a passion for the ancient discipline of palm reading. Ken stumbled upon his peculiar calling at a psychic party several years ago, where he was able to deliver a reading of a cat's paw that proved to be uncannily accurate." (c) Pawmistry, 'How to Read Your Cat's Paw's', Ken Ring, 1998

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/reader/1580081118/ref=sib_rdr_bc?ie=UTF8&p=S02S&j=0#reader-page

You clearly have a knowledge of cold reading techniques and generalised language patterns - as you are also a mind reader, palm reader, magician, etc - cold reading is not employed by doctors.

I believe - based on your own reactions and communication here on this thread - that anyone interested in your weather forecasting theory should set aside any reference to the weather and frequent themselves with the art of cold reading utilised by mind readers, psychics and magicians/illusionists. E.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_reading or watch Channel 4's Derren Brown.

My so far analysis of your weather forecasts is that it they are more than likely as follows:

1) Cold Reading & generalised communication techniques used by psychics, mind readers and illusionists - all of which you have experience in - concerning the weather as oppossed to someones future, personality or dead relatives.

2) A bit of mathematics in terms of the probability of weather trends happening. I.e. there are only a few potential general weather potentials so if anyone guesses a percentage of them will always appear to be correct.

3) Marketing - in terms of aggresively comparing your few correct guesses with the Publicly Funded Met Office incorrect forecasts, because the media and general public love to give grief to the Met Office when they get it wrong. This gives the illusion that you seemingly have an insight they don't.A popular ploy utilised by many long term forecasters.

4) Using the magicians art of 'smoke and mirrors and sleight of hand' when the focus is directed onto your techniques or lack of results... just as an illusionist diverts attention from the trick they are performing to create the illusion.

On a personal level, reading your posts here I quite like you and think you are a colourful eccentric character.

I think we both know I'm right regarding all of the above, don't we Ken.

All the best

kerry1960

I asked you what your scientific qualifications are Ken ?, if you don't wish to elaborate just say so .

Gene Derm

kerry1960 wrote: »

I asked you what your scientific qualifications are Ken ?, if you don't wish to elaborate just say so .

Answering these personal baitings is just a waste of my time. I have already addressed all of these recent questions but if members choose not to listen and would rather push their own barrows of amusement. What I did 12 years ago for whatever reason is neither here nor there. I shall take part in this forum when discussion about weather forecasting returns.
regards
Ken Ring