Ken Ring predictions

Su Campu

Kenring wrote: »

No, I'm referring to their "extended" forecasts. It is a standard international leeway. Nothing to do with ME specifically. They all try to look forward a week based on what is on the radar now. They assume constancy and don't take into account the varying speed of weather systems due to lunar declination.

I know of no weather service that has a two day error over the period of 7 days. But in any case I would imagine that over such a short period, upper atmospheric dynamics at t=0 greatly outweigh any influence from the factors you state. But maybe over longer periods your factors become more important, in which case they may hold water (excuse the pun).

By the way I'm not dismissing your methods, my one and only gripe is that your forecasts are to detailed. I don't care whether you're sure that lunar factors will increase the probability of low pressure in September, you have stated on the record that Roscommon (I think it was) will have snow on a certain day in September. Whether that's true or not, it gets the headlines, gets you in the papers and on the radio, and most importantly it gets $ in your pocket from people who are gullible enough to believe enerything in the media withohut checking things out first, such as your forecasting accuracy (which I still haven't got a figure on)

Kenring

Su Campu wrote: »

I know of no weather service that has a two day error over the period of 7 days. But in any case I would imagine that over such a short period, upper atmospheric dynamics at t=0 greatly outweigh any influence from the factors you state. But maybe over longer periods your factors become more important, in which case they may hold water (excuse the pun).

By the way I'm not dismissing your methods, my one and only gripe is that your forecasts are to detailed. I don't care whether you're sure that lunar factors will increase the probability of low pressure in September, you have stated on the record that Roscommon (I think it was) will have snow on a certain day in September. Whether that's true or not, it gets the headlines, gets you in the papers and on the radio, and most importantly it gets $ in your pocket from people who are gullible enough to believe enerything in the media withohut checking things out first, such as your forecasting accuracy (which I still haven't got a figure on)

You brought up several points so I will try to address them.
1. What in your mind is ME's expected error over 7 days? If they consider themselves a branch of science they will have a figure. Or are you saying they have a 0% expectancy of variability, so 100% accuracy rate? Do tell.
2. You are falling into the trap many make of claiming I said something then criticising what you have made up that you think I said. I never said any area will see snow in September. 'Will" is a word I studiously avoid. If it slips in it is unintentional and I am quick to correct. I said there was a potential for snow because of subzero temperatures combined with precipitation. There is equally the same potential for hail, frost, sleet, or just cold rain.
3. Also, don't be fooled by my mentioning a certain day. That is only for point of focus. I am quite prepared for a predicted event to be a week either side if necessary, particularly an event that may be long in generation or intensity. Longrange forecasting is about trends, not specifics. I appreciate that it is a difficult concept to grasp for anyone who is reluctant to see past mainstream meteorology.
4. As to headlines and dollars, I don't live in Ireland so the media approach me. Are you suggesting that because you feel uneasy about seeing that happen, I should henceforth desist?
5. As to accuracy, others on this forum have already said that they have found my lunar method reasonably on the mark. I don't feel any need to prove anything. But just supposing, serious question here, for the sake of argument, what criteria do you consider would be involved for proof, bearing in mind that what I produce and sell is always just my opinion?
6. As to dollars, people pay money for what I issue quite of their own free will. And yes, I make a charge because I have a small staff and a family with food and medical bills and I don't see why I should work for nothing whilst you and others expect wages for what you do in a working day.
www.predictweather.com

Su Campu

Kenring wrote: »

You brought up several points so I will try to address them.
1. What in your mind is ME's expected error over 7 days? If they consider themselves a branch of science they will have a figure. Or are you saying they have a 0% expectancy of variability, so 100% accuracy rate? Do tell.

I don't know what their exact error is, but I would be sure it's less than 2 days. In those forecasts they generally do highlight the that there is uncertainty attached, using phrases like "current indications suggest that...", etc. so the reader knows not to take it as gospel and will inform his/herself further nearer to the time.

2. You are falling into the trap many make of claiming I said something then criticising what you have made up that you think I said. I never said any area will see snow in September. 'Will" is a word I studiously avoid. If it slips in it is unintentional and I am quick to correct. I said there was a potential for snow because of subzero temperatures combined with precipitation. There is equally the same potential for hail, frost, sleet, or just cold rain.

Fair enough. But the only word I saw mentioned was snow, which gets maximum impact to the reader.

3. Also, don't be fooled by my mentioning a certain day. That is only for point of focus. I am quite prepared for a predicted event to be a week either side if necessary, particularly an event that may be long in generation or intensity. Longrange forecasting is about trends, not specifics. I appreciate that it is a difficult concept to grasp for anyone who is reluctant to see past mainstream meteorology.

OK, but I've heard you several times on radio and you've always given specific dates. Now the fact that you mean a week either side of that does not come across to the listener, well not to me anyway. You say something like "from the 14th to the 23rd...." that's being pretty specific if you ask me, and will amaze any average listener.
I know longrange forecasting is about trends, that is why you don't get any other forecasters being that specific. And if you were referring to me when you said "reluctant to see past mainstream meteorology" then take a look at my comments to MT on his thread".

4. As to headlines and dollars, I don't live in Ireland so the media approach me. Are you suggesting that because you feel uneasy about seeing that happen, I should henceforth desist?

I never said I was uneasy about that. You are entitled to make a buck whatever way you wish (within the law of course!). We all have bills to pay and you're no different.

5. As to accuracy, others on this forum have already said that they have found my lunar method reasonably on the mark. I don't feel any need to prove anything. But just supposing, serious question here, for the sake of argument, what criteria do you consider would be involved for proof, bearing in mind that what I produce and sell is always just my opinion?

And many have equally highlighted where you were wrong. I asked you some time ago for your forecast accuracy and still haven't got it. But that's the problem, how can we prove if something's accurate if we don't know when it was supposed to happen. The general lifetime of a mid-latitude depression is around 7 days, and when we get one we usually get more after it, so over the space of a couple of weeks we could get 4 or five depressions. If you have predicted "a depression to bring rain around the 23rd" for example, then which depression is the actual one you predicted? We saw above that you gave Villain a rainfall forecast for each if the first 14 days of June, and some were right and some were wrong....overall was it an "accurate forecast"? Plus the fact that you gave highly specific rainfall totals, how is that possible when using "trends"?

6. As to dollars, people pay money for what I issue quite of their own free will. And yes, I make a charge because I have a small staff and a family with food and medical bills and I don't see why I should work for nothing whilst you and others expect wages for what you do in a working day.
www.predictweather.com

There's one born every minute.

Kenring

Su Campu wrote: »

If you have predicted "a depression to bring rain around the 23rd" for example, then which depression is the actual one you predicted? ..Plus the fact that you gave highly specific rainfall totals, how is that possible when using "trends"?
QUOTE]
Once again you are asking questions that make what I am doing try to fit into mainstream meteorology. It will never come up to that mark. The technology is entirely different, I don't have access to a range of models, big computers, satellites, or committees. I've no idea which depression, any more than the tide has any idea which currents will propel higher water into every bay on the Irish coastline around July 14.
The specific rain amounts I mention are just focus ideas, not actual amounts. They are to be read as 'large amounts' and/or 'small amounts'. When under 2mm they may indicate wet or dry weather, because that moisture reading may equally be dew, frost, snow flurries, haze, fog, drizzle. Therefore small readouts are not to be given as much credence as larger quantities.
I don't claim to be highly specific - just the opposite. You and others try to hold me to be so, despite my denials, yet you persist, and I think it is an attempt to try to dissuade others. It is as if an athlete is training for an event in the future. He may think he stands a chance of a possible placing based on form and says so. His opponents ask him what place in what race, and with what exact time. He answers I don't know, I just think I stand a chance. His opponents try to smear him with labels of fraud etc, just because he does not comply with their interrogation. The race day arrives, he performs well, and his opponents say it must have been a fluke
www.predictweather.com

Su Campu

Kenring wrote: »

Once again you are asking questions that make what I am doing try to fit into mainstream meteorology. It will never come up to that mark. The technology is entirely different, I don't have access to a range of models, big computers, satellites, or committees. I've no idea which depression, any more than the tide has any idea which currents will propel higher water into every bay on the Irish coastline around July 14.
The specific rain amounts I mention are just focus ideas, not actual amounts. They are to be read as 'large amounts' and/or 'small amounts'. When under 2mm they may indicate wet or dry weather, because that moisture reading may equally be dew, frost, snow flurries, haze, fog, drizzle. Therefore small readouts are not to be given as much credence as larger quantities.
I don't claim to be highly specific - just the opposite. You and others try to hold me to be so, despite my denials, yet you persist, and I think it is an attempt to try to dissuade others. It is as if an athlete is training for an event in the future. He may think he stands a chance of a possible placing based on form and says so. His opponents ask him what place in what race, and with what exact time. He answers I don't know, I just think I stand a chance. His opponents try to smear him with labels of fraud etc, just because he does not comply with their interrogation. The race day arrives, he performs well, and his opponents say it must have been a fluke
www.predictweather.com

Fair enough, it's a good analogy.

But just to be pedantic one more time a "wet" day is defined as having 1.0mm or more precipitation, be it rain, drizzle, hail or snow.

Deep Easterly

Su Campu wrote: »

But just to be pedantic one more time a "wet" day is defined as having 1.0mm or more precipitation, be it rain, drizzle, hail or snow.

What if the 1.0mm fell in 5 minutes at 4am and the rest of the day was filled blue skies and white fluffies and temps reaching 30c, would it still be defined as a wet day?

Su Campu

Deep Easterly wrote: »

What if the 1.0mm fell in 5 minutes at 4am and the rest of the day was filled blue skies and white fluffies and temps reaching 30c, would it still be defined as a wet day?

Yes it would, and a whole grey dreary drizzly day with only 0.9mm would be dry!

Deep Easterly

Su Campu wrote: »

Yes it would, and a whole grey dreary drizzly day with only 0.9mm would be dry!

OK, I get it now. It all makes perfect sense...

pauldry

Yes understandable but who made up the 1.0mm rule originally?

Gerald Fleming?

pauldry

and Ken, if any of your predictions turn out to be wrong... Ill be after you!!

Dont worry just jokin

Kenring

pauldry wrote: »

and Ken, if any of your predictions turn out to be wrong... Ill be after you!!

Dont worry just jokin

That's okay Pauldry. Let me save you the trouble - they're all wrong, and they're all flukes

pauldry

Kenring wrote: »

That's okay Pauldry. Let me save you the trouble - they're all wrong, and they're all flukes

dont worry your secret is safe with...................oh wait a minute:eek:

Kenring

Su Campu wrote: »

Yes it would, and a whole grey dreary drizzly day with only 0.9mm would be dry!

This is why it's such an inexact science. You can get low lying areas where 1mm feels very wet whereas not much actually gets recorded. Around the summer last quarter moon you can sometimes get a really heavy afternoon shower out of an otherwise mostly blue sky. In the old days when reports came in from actual people who knew the areas, you got more accurate reports. With automatic weather stations in places like lighthouses, it has necessitated more conservative and cautious reporting, with more reliance on whatever has actually crossed the coast and already arrived. The metservice policy in NZ is to call something a tropical cyclone only when it has actually arrived and is belting down. Until then it is a low pressure system they say "we are keeping an eye on"

Speak Now

Kenring wrote: »

I think next winter will be milder. And yes, I think the best part of this summer is going to finish with widespread rains leading to floods in some places about mid July.
www.predictweather.com

I'm with Ken on this one. As last winter was our coldest in over 45 years i also predict next winter will be milder.

padi89

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: »

I'm with Ken on this one. As last winter was our coldest in over 45 years i also predict next winter will be milder.

lol

Poly

Your prediction for this week is shaping up nicely Ken, I've planned the weekend in Donegal around it.
Thanks

nacho libre

Kenring wrote: »

I think next winter will be milder. And yes, I think the best part of this summer is going to finish with widespread rains leading to floods in some places about mid July.
www.predictweather.com

do you mean relatively milder compared to the freakish one we had?
or do you forsee a winter dominated by prevailing south westerlies. do you share the view of M.T and paddy1 that the active Hurricane season to come will eventually hearld a significant change in the weather pattern that we have experienced over the last six months?

Kenring

nacho libre wrote: »

do you mean relatively milder compared to the freakish one we had?
or do you forsee a winter dominated by prevailing south westerlies. do you share the view of M.T and paddy1 that the active Hurricane season to come will eventually hearld a significant change in the weather pattern that we have experienced over the last six months?

1. Considerably milder northern hemisphere winter.
2. More active hurricane season, but more so in the southern hemisphere. 2015 could be the year to batten down the hatches in the northern hemisphere.
www.predictweather.com

nacho libre

Kenring wrote: »

1. Considerably milder northern hemisphere winter.
2. More active hurricane season, but more so in the southern hemisphere. 2015 could be the year to batten down the hatches in the northern hemisphere.
www.predictweather.com

no Ken say it ain't so:(

no offense intended but i hope you're wrong:)

Lumi

nacho libre wrote: »

no offense intended but i hope you're wrong:)

+1 Some decent snowfall is LONG overdue in the west:rolleyes:

Kenring

Fionagus wrote: »

+1 Some decent snowfall is LONG overdue in the west:rolleyes:

You should move to NZ. Later this year I'm expecting more snow than the skifields will be able to cope with.
www.predictweather.com

Mothman

Deep Easterly wrote: »

What if the 1.0mm fell in 5 minutes at 4am and the rest of the day was filled blue skies and white fluffies and temps reaching 30c, would it still be defined as a wet day?

Just to throw a spanner in the works, the standard Met day is 09-09z, so this rain would make the previous day a wet day

Kenring

Mothman wrote: »

Just to throw a spanner in the works, the standard Met day is 09-09z, so this rain would make the previous day a wet day

If on Saturday the forecast is for a wet Monday, Sunday is dry, hot and sunny, and a storm dumps 100mm at 8.55am on Monday morning, it would show in the records as Sunday very wet. And this from only a day away. But it is worse when it comes to mean temperatures, which are taken as max+min/2. If on a hot summer Sunday a nice southerly brings a maximum of 25degC at 4pm, but on Monday at 8.55am a sudden northerly switch brings an icy blast recording -5degC, the Sunday temperature average would have to be reported as 10degC. Yet for all of that real Sunday up til midnight the minimum may have been a fairly constant very toasty 20degC and not hit 10degC at any time nor place.
Now imagine that happened every day for three months, because it theoretically could. Later in a summer overview the season would show up as predominately 10degC days. A hot summer (actual, and possibly the hottest ever) would have to be recorded as a record cold season and, based on figures possibly the coldest ever. This is not just an error of one or two days, it is an error of massive proportions and renders forward predictions fairly meaningless when we read of a summer prediction by say, ME.
www.predictweather.com

Mothman

Well life is full of ifs.
The theoretical examples of extreme weather such as 100mm in 5 minutes or series of 25C/-5C max/min temperatures don't happen in current Irish climate so hence in my opinion they should not be mentioned even at a theoretical level. I was thinking it is very off topic, and then thought that if they are in your predication then they wouldn't be!

However staying with this theoretical example, it may well seem like a hot summer if all one did was live in the afternoon but I don't believe we'd define a summer as hot if our tender plants got killed by severe frosts just becasue it was 25C during day.

Kenring

Mothman wrote: »

Well life is full of ifs.
The theoretical examples of extreme weather such as 100mm in 5 minutes or series of 25C/-5C max/min temperatures don't happen in current Irish climate so hence in my opinion they should not be mentioned even at a theoretical level. I was thinking it is very off topic, and then thought that if they are in your predication then they wouldn't be!

However staying with this theoretical example, it may well seem like a hot summer if all one did was live in the afternoon but I don't believe we'd define a summer as hot if our tender plants got killed by severe frosts just becasue it was 25C during day.

Of course they should be mentioned, as it is the way metservices have set their own criteria. I agree that such extremes usually don't happen, but given the structure of data-collecting and the definition of a Met day they easily could, and the last winter was a good example of one with temperatures out of the bag. Who is going to go through every reading and say this one is suspect because of the timing, this one is sound, this one isn't..etc.?
It is hardly off topic when I am questioned about accuracy whilst ME is held up to be without discrepancy. We are dealing with an inexact science for which we are required to use figures and define empirical rules and come up with ideas about trends. We all do our best but our methodologies will always be found wanting in some regard.

www.predictweather.com

Mothman

If on a hot summer Sunday a nice southerly brings a maximum of 25degC at 4pm, but on Monday at 8.55am a sudden northerly switch brings an icy blast recording -5degC, the Sunday temperature average would have to be reported as 10degC. Yet for all of that real Sunday up til midnight the minimum may have been a fairly constant very toasty 20degC and not hit 10degC at any time nor place.

As we are continuing with this theoretical scenario, The -5C at 8.55am on Monday is put down as the minimum temperature for Monday, not Sunday, but if it did subsequently reach 25C by 9am on Tuesday, thenthe mean temperature for Monday is 10C.
I don't see anything wrong with this. How would you present temperature averages?

Who is going to go through every reading and say this one is suspect because of the timing, this one is sound, this one isn't..etc.?

There are a bout 100 climatological stations in Ireland of which I manage one. All readings are quality controlled and I am queried about any suspect readings.

I understand that your long range forecast service and the Met office short term forecast are like apples and oranges and I believe cannot be compared. I think you should stay away from giving specific detail such as rain amount on a given day. Is this what your customers demand? Also cultural difference may mean that your choice of words may mean something different in Ireland compared to what you actually mean.

Perhaps consider writing a glossary for the common words that you use so that your forecasts are understood better. It appears to me that a lot of issues arise out of unfulfilled expectations and working on communication may help in this regard.

Kenring

Mothman wrote: »

As we are continuing with this theoretical scenario, The -5C at 8.55am on Monday is put down as the minimum temperature for Monday, not Sunday, but if it did subsequently reach 25C by 9am on Tuesday, thenthe mean temperature for Monday is 10C.
I don't see anything wrong with this. How would you present temperature averages?.

The whole question of temperature averages is clearly silly, especially when you do not see anything wrong with a 10C reading for a day that has a -5C figure for 5 minutes and perhaps a 25C figure for 23 hours 55 minutes. I would come clean and admit the system was seriously flawed.

Mothman wrote: »

I think you should stay away from giving specific detail such as rain amount on a given day. Is this what your customers demand? .

My customers understand that the rain figures are trends and a point of focus. They understand it is not a figure set in concrete. They understand a "maybe" as a five year old would. It is not a miscommunication. If your averages based on just two readings in a 24-hr day that may well be anomalies are in your opinion examples of sound science then you must wear the critique levelled at such a system, because it will always be flawed.

Mothman wrote: »

Also cultural difference may mean that your choice of words may mean something different in Ireland compared to what you actually mean. Perhaps consider writing a glossary for the common words that you use so that your forecasts are understood better. It appears to me that a lot of issues arise out of unfulfilled expectations and working on communication may help in this regard.

Okay, what words that I use are confusing to you?

Mothman

-5C figure for 5 minutes and perhaps a 25C figure for 23 hours 55 minutes.

In real life this doesn't happen. Days with -5c and 25C such as may happen occasionally in the Scottish Glens would only have a very short time at either extreme.

admit the system was seriously flawed.

I don't deny it is flawed, but what other suggestions are there? Apart from abandoning averages altogethe.

My customers understand that the rain figures are trends and a point of focus. They understand it is not a figure set in concrete.

My impression from earlier exchange with Villain earlier seemed to be an issue of misunderstanding...perhaps I've misunderstood.

Okay, what words that I use are confusing to you?

Wet and Dry, although I don't think I'm confused, but I get impression that others may have been before you clarified earlier.

Kenring

Mothman wrote: »

In real life this doesn't happen. Days with -5c and 25C such as may happen occasionally in the Scottish Glens would only have a very short time at either extreme..

Yes, but science is an empirical process and should endeavour to be accurate...[/QUOTE]

Mothman wrote: »

I don't deny it is flawed, but what other suggestions are there? Apart from abandoning averages altogether

I would advocate abandoning them because temperature is a farce. Unless there is a thermometer every few metres and readings from them are taken every few seconds they are only recording anomalies, they will never be representative of a 24-hr day. Science must be always ready to abandon what is not working and revise itself. Thermometers only record the temperature on the surface of the bulb. A reading will differ even an inch away. That is why a doctor will put a thermometer under your tongue and not in the ground at the airport.

Mothman wrote: »

Wet and Dry.

These are useless terms. A dry day to some is what happens in their waking hours, because they are asleep through the night and not outside. So zero rain by day and rain by night would be a dry day to someone having a wedding. That is not the case to a hay or concrete contractor nor a groundsman. Nonrecordable amounts of less than 0.2mm may not be considered wet days, but a fine drizzle all day to many would be classed as wet. I don't think these are cultural interpretations because what I have just said could be understood and appreciated by anyone in any country.

www.predictweather.com

Su Campu

I thought the average temperature was taken as the average of all the hourly readings (ie. T1+T2+T3...../24)?