On Thursday, 19 December 2002 16:23:12 UTC, Keith Darlington wrote:
From the quality of the answers to this topic, it seems quite clear
that the scientific community has little to do with this corner of
physics. I'm reading the usual excerpts from the text-books I read in
the fifties And since then there still doesn't seem to be enything new
on offer.

Back in the fifties there was nothing practical on weather/astronomy
or weather/astrology, so I researched as much as I could on both
subject-areas. I think I spent a good number of years searching for
some useful connections. The astrology findings were difficult in
practice, because they represented world-wide- weather and I couldn't
pin-point the forecast to one location. The astronomy findings were
much better when agreements in moon phase, moon declination and moon
proximity to the earth, were chosen. There was a large degree of
agreement in the forecast, but there were also a number of fall-outs
which made the weather/astronomy connection messy.

I did, however, learn quite a lot about real weather, something which
the science community has missed out on. I've learned, for example, that
weather is not subject to chaos. Chaos comes from a system which has
an input of real-weather-observations and tries to project this single
input into the future. Indeed, there are some meteorologists who
believe that by inputting the observations of 1st January they can
then eventually print-out the Christmas forecast of the same year.

I can suggest to Michael McNeil that he should try out his theories,
by all means. After all, the metorology of today has ten shots at a
ten-day forecast and we expect sixty percent of those to be wrong
anyway. So it's time we had some new ideas. However, Michael should
realize that the road he is taking has been done before. (I remember
reading a report from 1865 on this very subject).

I must also warn about 'beginner's enthusiasm'. My advice: learn for a
year, make a weekly forecast for another year, and if you are without
a single error, THINK about publishing.

Cheers, Keith


Good advice but a notice board however Gog of Maggooled is still a place to post earnest enquiries. Once you have removed honest discussion all you are left with is full killfiles and words that you want to hear all the time.

Such stuff is contrary to the art of honest enquiry and contrary to the wisdom discussed in the Proverbs.
(Eminently suitable for this place now.)

I have been trying to find the claim about lunar craters I posited some years back; someone posted a link to the reserch that suggested ice on the moon. I pointed out that an earlier post about lunar craters should suggest the same thing.

However it seems that the recent ruling about controlling the Internet has given Gog of Magog the secrecy it wanted to hide what it wants until the laws from Brussels can be instituted with no real effort made to revert to freedom of information once the various countries involved in Globalism reassert themselves.