tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post4434130405187094692..comments2024-02-15T04:42:41.606+00:00Comments on James' Empty Blog: February CorbynwatchJames Annanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04318741813895533700noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-19524487312171611532008-03-04T15:26:00.000+00:002008-03-04T15:26:00.000+00:00Seems to me that an analysis of a forecast after t...Seems to me that an analysis of a forecast after the forecast period is no skin off any subscriber's back not that I assume anyone takes Corbyn seriously. Well maybe those subscribers.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-70673664546446920282008-03-04T13:20:00.000+00:002008-03-04T13:20:00.000+00:00I've got a copy of the Wheeler paper somewhere. If...I've got a copy of the Wheeler paper somewhere. If it turns up I may comment in more detail.James Annanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04318741813895533700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-81932306820101046612008-03-04T02:31:00.000+00:002008-03-04T02:31:00.000+00:00Ah! About the "PS". I should have read the link to...Ah! About the "PS". I should have read the link to Stoat first, it seems.P. Lewishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08586624400531767627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-40284115343926875482008-03-04T02:20:00.000+00:002008-03-04T02:20:00.000+00:00According to Answers.com, this seems to be the gis...According to <A HREF="http://www.answers.com/topic/piers-corbyn?cat=technology" REL="nofollow">Answers.com</A>, this seems to be the gist of the Wheeler study of PC’s method published in J Atmos Sol-Terr Phys:<BR/><BR/><I>Weather Action itself claims that their record demonstrates "proven skill verified by independent academic statisticians and published in scientific literature," and has been verified in Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics.[4] The Journal study, the single academic work conducted involving Corbyn's work, was done by Dr. Dennis Wheeler of the University of Sunderland and took Weather Action predictions for the island of Britain for October 1995 to September 1997. Only predictions of gale force winds were analyzed. It uses a variety of statistical techniques to come up with success rates varying from 37% to 73% depending on the technique. 23 gales were successfully predicted, 21 gales were falsely predicted, and 18 gales occurred that were not predicted. Dr. Wheeler concluded, "that forecasts prepared by Weather Action would repay further attention. The results provide little evidence to dismiss the observed success rates as being attributable to mere chance or good fortune. Indeed the balance of evidence indicates that the system performs better than chance although it is recognized that the margin of success differs greatly between the seasons and is lowest in winter when gales are most frequent.”[5]</I><BR/><BR/>This is the first time I've seen anything quoted other than the Wheeler abstract. It's easy to see where the 37% comes in. I'm unclear on how the 73% might be obtained though. I could hazard a guess that in one or more months (what odds on it being an Oct, Jan or Mar?) or a season the figure reached the heady heights of 73%. Without reading the actual paper to check a few things, though, it’s difficult to know.<BR/><BR/>However, to me, “prediction” means noting that <I>a specific event will take place at some specific future time/location</I>. On that, I’d say 37% accurate prediction or a failure rate of ~63% might also be a conclusion. Perhaps a reading of the paper is warranted.<BR/><BR/>PS. Do you think he wants any of this written about in blogs? Because …<BR/><BR/>Corbyn now says on his website that <I>Media or web users who wish to quote from the forecast must check what they have in mind with Piers Corbyn … and preferably use an issued summary form (below for this month) which is written to give an accurate rendering of essential points without giving away the detail which subscribers have paid for.</I><BR/><BR/>Gosh! We have been warned I suppose.P. Lewishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08586624400531767627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-7739269487432923572008-03-03T20:46:00.000+00:002008-03-03T20:46:00.000+00:00Corbynwatch and Weatheraction are one and the same...Corbynwatch and Weatheraction are one and the same.<BR/><BR/>Piers doesn't like critcism by the way:<BR/><BR/>http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2008/03/corbynwatch_shhh.phpDeanohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03310394564421749181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-46003754891901425032008-03-03T20:09:00.000+00:002008-03-03T20:09:00.000+00:00Is Corbyn the same as weatheraction.com? They als...Is Corbyn the same as weatheraction.com? They also stumbled badly. Sun wasn't bright enough to see their feet, or something.Hank Robertshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07521410755553979665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-30430479795016295682008-03-03T20:08:00.000+00:002008-03-03T20:08:00.000+00:00Is Corbyn the same as weatheraction.com?Is Corbyn the same as weatheraction.com?Hank Robertshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07521410755553979665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-65797148354341630732008-03-03T11:43:00.000+00:002008-03-03T11:43:00.000+00:00"But I'll only count that as a single failure sinc..."But I'll only count that as a single failure since rain and sun are obviously negatively correlated (rain and temp is not so clear: Jan was warm and wet, Feb was warm and dry)."<BR/><BR/>Interestingly (or not), the winter as a whole, was above average in temp., precipitation and sunshine.<BR/><BR/>See:<BR/>http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2008/pr20080228.htmlskankyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14584908320777937193noreply@blogger.com