On Friday, March 21, 2014 6:15:30 AM UTC, exmetman wrote:
I think that I can see what you're driving at Len, and I totally agree - I've been on the verge of posting something similar!



We all can interpret what the various models forecast, but we have to remember that the forecast comes from the model and not us. Without NWP there would be no discussion at all about whats happening at T+24 let alone T+240, and certainly no 'my' forecast - we would be totally lost and that applies to both the amateurs pontificating on this newsgroup right down to the professionals at the Metoffice.



Now, if we based our forecast on our own data or observations, we could say 'my' - just like William Foggit did in the 1970's by saying things like: the hazel was out before the ash that means rain, or the song thrush is sat on my anemometer and ****ting on the cups that means there'll be retrogression and cold NW'lys.



I don't mind people commenting on the various NWP models or what they're saying, but less of the 'my' and more of 'this is what the GFS model or the UKMO model' is suggesting - because without the model we would be totally blind beyond even 24 hours!

Absolutely true and for me, you've hit upon the difference between commentary and forecast. What people don't do, because they simply don't know, to be fair, with any proven confidence, is to say with what confidence they have in interpreting the models at a given time.

Now that really would help.

Commentary is exactly that. Forecast implies an outcome which the forecaster expects at a given time. After all, after the news is a weather *forecast* and not a weather commentary and the professional forecaster/presenter, at a few days+, is not giving a forecast based on anything else except NWP output.