Was Evelyn Cusack Right?

MRPRO03 · 17-11-2013 02:02AM #1

I don’t know if you guys heard about this Evelyn Cusack controversy but for the last 24 hours I’ve seen quite a lot of discussion all over the net about whether or not Evelyn did the right thing in trying to tackle the likes of the Postman Michael and Ken Ring and other quacks who believe they can make long-term predictions about the weather.

The pro-Evelyn side are saying she did the right thing in trying to tackle pseudoscientific nonsense by claiming that science cannot predict more than 10 days in advance for weather systems.

The anti-Evelyn side seem to be saying, well, that doesn’t mean animals can’t make such predictions. They seem to be attaching themselves to what Evelyn said in last night’s broadcast that ‘animals cannot predict the weather’. So therein lies part of the controversy.

Others are claiming that she shouldn’t have even lowered herself to deal with Postman Michael and Ken Ring given that she’d be giving an even bigger platform to them to air their views.

Personally? I think she absolutely did the right thing and it’s about time somebody spoke up for their profession and not see it maimed by the likes of Postman Michael who are no better than Mystic Meg in my view.

Up Evelyn is what I say!! Here’s the clip that’s courting all the controversy for those who aren’t aware:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-ehkocbOcY

So what do you make of all this?

NIMAN · 17-11-2013 02:04AM

She's right.

imitation · 17-11-2013 02:09AM

Dead right, I'm fed up of the bolloxolgy, most of these chancers are constantly guessing, and half the believer i see pipe up when they are right, but when they are wrong they say nothing. I'm also willing to be they stay safe with there guesses - in irelands case - "it will be wet" - hurray, right 75% of the time !

It did kinda random come outta nowhere, "at night very cold weather.. were expecting some severe frosts, this begs the question is it going to be a cold winter" huh ?

amdublin · 17-11-2013 02:09AM

Very informative. No idea why its courting controversy.

Now if it had been the other one in her leathers and tinfoil now

poundapunnet · 17-11-2013 02:12AM

That woman always sounds half cut.

There is no end to this country's obsession with the weather.

Say what you want but if I see the goats coming down from the mountain beyond I run for the clothes line.

Frosty McSnowballs · 17-11-2013 02:12AM

The best thing since Jean Byrnes diva outfit requests

xXxkorixXx · 17-11-2013 02:14AM

great drying out today

mrsdewinter · 17-11-2013 02:16AM

I think she was dead right. Some people have said she was showing up her own insecurities in the face of 'alternative' forecasters but I think the issue is bigger than that.
As somebody on the Weather forum said today, when nobody speaks out about practices that are based on superstition or myth, these non-scientific approaches gain a kind of currency, as if they are as valid as the scientific models, backed up by the hard data that's been gathered by the Met office.
To my mind, she was encouraging people to investigate the area for themselves.
Look. If you happen to have a theory that your cat can predict earthquakes, etc, then why not apply the scientific process to providing the data which will prove your point. You'll be doing us all a favour.
Until Ken Ring or the Donegal postman can produce reproduceable results in a format that can be reviewed by their peers (That's professional meteorologists, by the way, not faith healers), I'll stick with Evelyn.

TLDR: Team Evelyn!

dpofloinn · 17-11-2013 02:18AM

What difference does it make? If you believe in quacks and bolloxology then no amount of reason will change your mind and conversly if you believe in science and reason then no amount of bolloxology will change your mind

keith16 · 17-11-2013 02:23AM

xXxkorixXx wrote: »

great drying out today

Fierce close mind.

Frosty McSnowballs · 17-11-2013 02:26AM

'twas fierce mild out

MRPRO03 · 17-11-2013 02:26AM

dpofloinn wrote: »

What difference does it make? If you believe in quacks and bolloxology then no amount of reason will change your mind and conversly if you believe in science and reason then no amount of bolloxology will change your mind

To be honest, it makes a huge difference! The only way you can change people’s minds about these issues is by slowly informing them over a long period of time and allowing them to think more about the issue. If no challenge is made, then people will never think about it and nothing changes. The only way to change the status quo about any issue in society is to challenge it. It may take a long time to yield results but it has to start some place. In this case, Evelyn has started it and kudos to her for doing so.

roast · 17-11-2013 02:29AM

Absolutely right. It's insulting for some to belittle the profession, nothing wrong with her defending the science with a little quip at the chancers.

Corkfeen · 17-11-2013 02:30AM

Weather forecaster states truths and recommends that people read up on Chaos Theory. If that is classified as 'controversial' then this country has issues. It's a tiny number of people that view it to be controversial from what I gather.

Fair play to her, would be great if people read up on the numerous pseudoscience they believe to be legitimate. Homeopathy could be next week's forecast!

ballsymchugh · 17-11-2013 02:30AM

she's been on newstalk numerous times talking about the bolloxology that those two individuals come out with, and the next day, ken ring will be on newstalk telling anyone who'll listen what the summer will be like.
no one pays attention to what they say anyway, their predictions are forgotten long before the time.

pebbles21 · 17-11-2013 02:35AM

There is just two types of weather in this country ...
Its either raining or its going to rain!

Tzar Chasm · 17-11-2013 02:37AM

ah you forgot the best bit, just after raining

Busted Flat. · 17-11-2013 02:39AM

I don't think FIFA made a comment about this, or get their knickers in a twist.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPaul_the_Octopus&ei=qx2IUs7NO4fH7AaikICADg&usg=AFQjCNHtXmOISnsQoh17ZICawPcadcrKdQ

Tin Foil Hat · 17-11-2013 02:40AM

poundapunnet wrote: »

Say what you want but if I see the goats coming down from the mountain beyond I run for the clothes line.

Me too. The fukkers are always eating my underpants.

TheBoffin · 17-11-2013 02:40AM

I think she is right to defend the profession. The amount of stupid speculation and barstool metrology goes on in the country is crazy.

People are making decisions on buying extra fuel because Johnny's knees down in the bar are sore, that means its gonna snow apparently! FFS

I have my own weather station (proper one) here which is connected up to the PC, I use it for my amateur radio hobby to determine conditions and even with that, its not really possible to determine anything more than a day or two at a time. It nearly always equates to the same information as on met.ie but perhaps a tiny bit more accurate in terms of real-time information.

Delighted to see a stance made!

poundapunnet · 17-11-2013 02:41AM

pebbles21 wrote: »

There is just two types of weather in this country ...
Its either raining or its going to rain!

Yeah but there's about 47 different types of rain!

Heard someone once describe the weather in Ireland as "always the same and yet constantly changing", sums it up well enough

dpofloinn · 17-11-2013 02:54AM

MRPRO03 wrote: »

To be honest, it makes a huge difference! The only way you can change people’s minds about these issues is by slowly informing them over a long period of time and allowing them to think more about the issue. If no challenge is made, then people will never think about it and nothing changes. The only way to change the status quo about any issue in society is to challenge it. It may take a long time to yield results but it has to start some place. In this case, Evelyn has started it and kudos to her for doing so.

Its one thing informing people and letting them form their own opinion its another thing to condecend towards them
Having a dig at these guys wont stop them making predictions.It wont stop some people believing the bull****.It wont stop the media rolling them out to fill in a light hearted segment on the news or on a chat show.In all fairness who does anything based on the forecast prediction of a postman? Can anyone show me what harm these guys are doing?

Adamantium · 17-11-2013 02:57AM

I INVOKE CARL SAGAN = NO BULL**** ON MY WEATHER FORECASTS

And now on RTE 1, In other changes to our scheduled programming, we'll be showing Cosmos on continuous loop until Evelyns Cusack's demands are met. RTE employees will be released on these terms only.

Sadly, I've a fair nudge that a lot of people were saying "Who the **** is Carl Sagan?"

TheBoffin · 17-11-2013 03:06AM

In all fairness who does anything based on the forecast prediction of a postman? Can anyone show me what harm these guys are doing?

Last year an elderly neighbour of mine was told in September by a shopkeeper that we were going to have tonnes of snow in December (2 months away and he could even tell it was going to be about 4 foot of snow). The neighbour went off and got extra coal for 2 months to stock up believing that the snow was coming, left herself short to the point where she tried to trade a bag of coal with me for a loan of a television due to her one breaking down. I gave her the television from my spare room and I had a chat with the local coal supplier on her behalf who agreed to take back some of the stock pile and refund her.

Im not saying that having a prediction for fun is a bad thing entirely, but it is a bad thing when you are pushing it on an elderly audience who don't know any better other than going out and stocking up for fear their tiny state pension wont cover them when the sh1t hits the fan and its sub zero out.

By the way, Not a flake of snow in December last yr here anyway, probably milder than other years overall.

Tzar Chasm · 17-11-2013 03:08AM

dpofloinn wrote: »

Its one thing informing people and letting them form their own opinion its another thing to condecend towards them
Having a dig at these guys wont stop them making predictions.It wont stop some people believing the bull****.It wont stop the media rolling them out to fill in a light hearted segment on the news or on a chat show.In all fairness who does anything based on the forecast prediction of a postman? Can anyone show me what harm these guys are doing?

the harm these guys do is the perpetuation of superstitious bullsnit whilst attempting to pass it off as something other than that, the number of people who will defend their brand of quackery or try to equate what these charlatan do with the valid scientific efforts of the met office is disturbing.

that's why I applaud her stance

MRPRO03 · 17-11-2013 03:10AM

dpofloinn wrote: »

Its one thing informing people and letting them form their own opinion its another thing to condecend towards them
Having a dig at these guys wont stop them making predictions.It wont stop some people believing the bull****.It wont stop the media rolling them out to fill in a light hearted segment on the news or on a chat show.In all fairness who does anything based on the forecast prediction of a postman? Can anyone show me what harm these guys are doing?

So when you present scientific theories to the public it becomes condescending and arrogant but when you have the likes of Ken Ring condescending the public about his meteorological supernatural powers then it’s normal?

It’s not a question of harm; it’s a question of professional meteorologists now allowing their profession to be ridiculed in this way. They’re standing up for their profession, and in the process, educating the public as well they should.

Tin Foil Hat · 17-11-2013 03:18AM

dpofloinn wrote: »

Its one thing informing people and letting them form their own opinion its another thing to condecend towards them
Having a dig at these guys wont stop them making predictions.It wont stop some people believing the bull****.It wont stop the media rolling them out to fill in a light hearted segment on the news or on a chat show.In all fairness who does anything based on the forecast prediction of a postman? Can anyone show me what harm these guys are doing?

Meh!
If you put yourself out there, by talking bollox on public airwaves, you leave yourself open to being told that you're talking through your hoop by trained professionals in the field to which your spoofings pertain.

hansfrei · 17-11-2013 03:20AM

Thread is very high horsey.

No one can predict weather very well, animals sometimes can. Thats something weather forecasters need to face up to and deal with. The amount of stuff I don't know is greater than the amount of stuff Ido know.

For example ; Found out last week about a paracite that causes risky behaviour in humans.
Toxaplasma inhabits 1 in 4 and cases people to become less risk averse. So I'm told.

http://www.npr.org/2012/07/03/156216620/common-parasite-may-influence-human-behavior

dpofloinn · 17-11-2013 03:23AM

TheBoffin wrote: »

Last year an elderly neighbour of mine was told in September by a shopkeeper that we were going to have tonnes of snow in December (2 months away and he could even tell it was going to be about 4 foot of snow). The neighbour went off and got extra coal for 2 months to stock up believing that the snow was coming, left herself short to the point where she tried to trade a bag of coal with me for a loan of a television due to her one breaking down. I gave her the television from my spare room and I had a chat with the local coal supplier on her behalf who agreed to take back some of the stock pile and refund

There's my point people will believe bull**** no matter how illogical and regardless of how much scientific information there is to prove otherwise

poundapunnet · 17-11-2013 03:23AM

Tin Foil Hat wrote: »

Meh!
If you put yourself out there, by talking bollox on public airwaves, you leave yourself open to being told that you're talking through your hoop by trained professionals in the field to which your spoofings pertain.

I was really hoping you'd be on the other side of the debate when I saw your username

damn username writing cheques your rational views can't cash

Edit: I see hans is here, nvm. Good man hans.

Tin Foil Hat · 17-11-2013 03:25AM

hansfrei wrote: »

Thread is very high horsey.

No one can predict weather very well, animals sometimes can. Thats something weather forecasters need to face up to and deal with. The amount of stuff I don't know is greater than the amount of stuff Ido know.

It helps to realise that the amount of information in your own head is vastly, vastly less than the amount of information known to mankind.
This is precisely why it is a good idea to listen to educated, trained professionals and to ignore spoofing charlatans.

Was Evelyn Cusack Right?

Comments