Kenring wrote: » Not everywhere gets the same weather. I deal in trends. The only "problem" with predictions is what you make them into. Predictions are only predictions, not certainties. They are some idea of what's coming. You can easily remove the problem by looking away. I predicted fine weather for the first half of July. We all know now that came about. It is easy to say after the fact, "any of us could make similar predictions", but how come I was the only one who did back in January?
Akrasia wrote: » a) Because most people in the business of predicting weather wouldn't dare to make such a prediction 7 months in advance. They know that there is no way of predicting when a blocking system of High pressure will get settled over Ireland. b)Just because you made a prediction, doesn't mean you had any insight. c)In weather, the conditions are variable minute to minute. predicting them a year in advance is witchcraft d)And you can't claim the 'hits' when the weather matches your prediction, and then make excuses for the misses. That's selection bias
relaxed wrote: » Like I said good for you on getting July right, but you also predicted very warm weather around 7th August but there is no sign of it. A stopped clock is right twice a day. If I predict, off the top of my head, 6 dates over June, July and August 2014, around which there will be "very warm spells" my luck would be in at least a couple of times and I could be sitting here this time next year claiming How great I was to predict it.
SamAK wrote: » Hmm, as far as I know, a prediction and a guess are the same thing.
tomcosgrave wrote: » You can't even give me a basic overview - aside from plugging your free book? You seem to spend a lot of time defending yourself on these forums when you have staff to pay and a family to spend time with. Come on Ken, you can do better than fob me off, surely? What is the theory behind the prediction of your trends? Surely there is a simple explanation you can furnish me with? So I will ask again - How do planets that are millions of miles away have an in fluence on the meterology of this planet, using the categories for each planet that you referred to? How does the Moon in the 4th house influence the weather here on Earth?
tomcosgrave wrote: » No Ken, you are not at my beck and call, but I find it hard to accept you'd spend all the time you spend on this forum and not give a decent scientific explanation, and claim demands on your time as a reason why. Come back to me when you can give an explanation based on fact with theories, experiments, control groups and statistics etc.
Kenring wrote: » But I did not set this forum up. It is with reluctance I am even answering your queries. You sound like a petulant child who is not getting its own way.
tomcosgrave wrote: » I am merely frustrated as I cannot understand the science behind your theories Ken, and frustrated that you won't engage with people on them. To be frank, if you focussed on the educational and less on the martyrdom, you'd be much better received. Just my 2 cent and I will leave it at that.
tomcosgrave wrote: » I have never Ken, and this is being honest, been told by someone advocating a particular theory to bugger off and learn themselves, without first getting a basic overview of how their theory actually works. You can't / won't even write a couple of basic paragraphs with an overview. It is not a big ask and as someone who is obviously interested in this stuff and interested in showing people it works, I am frankly amazed you aren't more open to advocacy. It speaks volumes of your attitude to others, and quite frankly, it speaks volumes about how seriously you take your theories - not very. I have actually done a bit of looking around, and I have to be honest - one particular site is, shall we say, less than complimentary of yourself, your theories, you also talk about the prediction of earthquakes, you make comments on this article, but are unable to refute any of what they say. All I have found is condemnation of your theories - not once, nowhere did I find someone showing that you are correct. And that speaks for itself.
Kenring wrote: » a) Most people in the weather business do not do longrange because they do not understand lunar/solar cycles.
b)If I make a series of successful predictions it does mean I have a successful method, according to the rules of science.
c) woo-hoo, your religious bias showing here perhaps? So all predictions a year ahead is witchcraft? How about predicting the outcome of an election?
d)Sorry, I can claim hits when the weather matches my prediction.
tomcosgrave wrote: » I have never Ken, and this is being honest, been told by someone advocating a particular theory to bugger off and learn themselves, without first getting a basic overview of how their theory actually works..
Kenring wrote: » Lunar cycles to consider: 18.613yr, 19yr, 38yr, 56-57 yr, 93yr, 133yr, 186yr. Solar/planet cycles: 11-12yr, 23-26yr, 35-6yr, 60yr. Inner planets: Mercury aspects for wind, Mars for heat, Venus for gentle rain, Neptune for fog, Saturn for cloud, Jupiter for dry. Moon in 4th House can determine up to 80% of weather. Old wives' tales have some relevance, but not all. Things often pass into folklore that work, like "the full moon eats clouds" - old mariners' saying.
Popoutman wrote: » I have to say as an astronomer, the concept of planet timings affecting either long term climatic trends or day to day weather on Earth is one that I have a hard time reconciling. What mechanism is present that allows this? I'm not aware of any mechanism that would work. The only ways that I can think of that planets could possibly affect Earth in any way would be .
Popoutman wrote: » So, to correctly label them: 18.613: lunar nodal tidal constituent 19 years: 1x Metonic cycle - coincidence of: 19 solar years, 235 lunar phases , 254 lunar orbits (sidereal) and 255 lunar node passes. 38 years: 2x of the Metonic cycle. 56-57 year: 3x Metonic is 57, so why 56? This appears to be an anomolous number. 133: 7x Metonic cycles 93: Resonance of southern hemisphere long term high average movements. 186: Resonance of southern hemisphere long term high average movements. Issues with the choice of cycles: Multiples of Metonic cycles missing - why would 4x 5x and 6x Metonic cycles be ignored? Apparently there are actually 31/62/93/186 year periodicities listed as relevant for these cycles , so why are the 31 and 62 year cycles not listed? I have to say as an astronomer, the concept of planet timings affecting either long term climatic trends or day to day weather on Earth is one that I have a hard time reconciling. What mechanism is present that allows this? I'm not aware of any mechanism that would work. The only ways that I can think of that planets could possibly affect Earth in any way would be a) tidal and far too small to have *any* measurable effect. Jupiter's tide on Earth would have a 100,000 times smaller effect than the Sun+Moon and Venus has 10,000 times smaller effect. b) electromagnetic variation of the solar wind (and we're too close to the sun for Mars, Jupiter or Saturn to have any effect on us, and Mercury's magnetic field is negligible and Venus' magnetic field is negligible. The solar wind variation is many many times larger than any possible inner planetary effects. Are there any proper statistical results to base your hypothesis that the planets affect Earth conditions and to what sigma are they confident? I'm not aware of any.
Kenring wrote: » I am not fobbing you off but I am not at your beck and call. Planets have an influence on earth not by gravitation but by electromagnetism. They all have magnetic fields, as does the sun, as do we. We all influence each other just as the members of one family affect each other. The moon in 4th House? The answer is too long, which is why I directed you to my free book. It is to do with the tides in the air. 4th House is called the IC position, when the air-tide is right "out"
BillG wrote: » Look up Henrik Svensmark, he did it for me
Akrasia wrote: » An educated guess is a guess where you have very limited knowledge but can use it to eliminate some of the choices.
Akrasia wrote: » hold on, magnetic fields do not extend indefinitely into space, they are contained around the body that generates them Mars and Venus don't even have a planetary magnetic field anymore. The boundary of the magnetic field is called the Magnetopause and there is no way that any of the other planets magnetic field can ever interact with earth in order to affect our weather.
SamAK wrote: » My understanding is that farmers are trying their best to make an educated guess on what the weather is going to do, and if Mr Ring's Almanac helps them to make a decision and eliminate some choices, what's the problem? There's never ever going to be 100% certainty anyway, regardless of source. It's all educated guesses, predictions, models and trends. We know we don't know a lot of things, but what we don't know is just how much we don't know we don't know.
Weathercheck wrote: » Last post 7 years ago and you popped up for this thread! :eek:
Kenring wrote: » If you say so.. :rolleyes: I happen to disagree. And I suppose you imagine that nothing beyond earth is responsible for earthquakes, and that the surface plates rattle and cause disturbances 400kms down, to come up again and part the same plates?
Popoutman wrote: » Are there any proper statistical results to base your hypothesis that the planets affect Earth conditions and to what sigma are they confident? I'm not aware of any.
Akrasia wrote: » Earthquakes are not fully understood yet, we have no way of predicting when an earthquake will occor, however, with computer models and statistical analysis we are slowly getting better at it. .
