Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,528
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Gonzalo00
    Newest Member
    Gonzalo00
    Joined

February Banter Thread


NEG NAO

Recommended Posts

the snow part is a laugher, however +5 is easily reachable, and actually well within the possibilities, already have a nice head start thanks to 3 very warm days, another torch today and a warm day tomorrow, and fire around Vday.........

Its the " 50 percent " i disagreed with . Whats th other 50 perc 1 below 3 below - 8 above ?

what isnt 50 percent .... just not profound IMO .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

the snow part is a laugher, however +5 is easily reachable, and actually well within the possibilities, already have a nice head start thanks to 3 very warm days, another torch today and a warm day tomorrow, and fire around Vday.........

The longer range remains highly uncertain, but I guess I should expect another very mild month. After all that anticipation of the PNA, the MJO, the long range models showing blocking and a massive PNA ridge, the pattern is going to turn out exactly like December and January, what a joke.

On the bright side, we may actually record a negative departure day this weekend.

I think most of us are just ready to put this miserable winter behind us and look forward to next winter, which can only be better than this one, once it hits March 1, I'll be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the snow part is a laugher, however +5 is easily reachable, and actually well within the possibilities, already have a nice head start thanks to 3 very warm days, another torch today and a warm day tomorrow, and fire around Vday.........

Let's be clear here-you predicted not too long ago that Feb would feature a -2.5 temp departure and a bucketload of snow...what happened to that?

and let's remember, in 01-02 Feb had no snow...this year's temp departures and lack of precip are very similar to that winter. If we miss Wed and this weekend and it warms up right after that, zero snow becomes much more likely

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you understand anything about probability? The other 50% would be less than +5 and more than 0 snowfall.

Since I run an Equity despersion book im pretty familiar with probablitly , ( not sure if u know what equity desperson is ) . saying anything other than departures 5 above and 0 snowfall is equal to a 50 perc chance that inifity can happen being viewed as equal probablity is just clutter .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since I run an Equity despersion book im pretty familiar with probablitly , ( not sure if u know what equity desperson is ) . saying anything other than departures 5 above and 0 snowfall is equal to a 50 perc chance that inifity can happen being viewed as equal probablity is just clutter .

You mean equity dispersion? In any event, what he is saying is rather binary:

If there is a 50% chance of A happening, it logically follows that there is ALSO a 50% chance that not A happens. It isn't clutter because it's saying that there is a one-in-two chance of seeing +5 departures with 0 snow, which by itself is quite anomalous for feb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean equity dispersion? In any event, what he is saying is rather binary:

If there is a 50% chance of A happening, it logically follows that there is ALSO a 50% chance that not A happens. It isn't clutter because it's saying that there is a one-in-two chance of seeing +5 departures with 0 snow, which by itself is quite anomalous for feb.

I think we are arguing about 2 different things . You had to look at the history of the poster to see why many people view him the way they do.

He`s not posting it as a forecast . The arguement wasnt a statiscal one , but answering just another post of " TORCH " " RAIN " " THERES NO STORM " . It just always seems to be a NEG post . It was related to the history . So when I posted I guess 50 perc of anything else could happen as clutter , was meant as yes infinity can happen . And yes its one of the larger " disperion " book on the street . Trading correlation and watching the weather at the same time , makes for bad typing and grammer at times .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we are arguing about 2 different things . You had to look at the history of the poster to see why many people view him the way they do.

He`s not posting it as a forecast . The arguement wasnt a statiscal one , but answering just another post of " TORCH " " RAIN " " THERES NO STORM " . It just always seems to be a NEG post . It was related to the history . So when I posted I guess 50 perc of anything else could happen as clutter , was meant as yes infinity can happen . And yes its one of the larger " disperion " book on the street . Trading correlation and watching the weather at the same time , makes for bad typing and grammer at times .

Fair enough. So does the GFI in your sn stand for GFI the broker-dealer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is he stil allowed to post if he is posting blatantly false information?

It wasn't false, a couple days ago the ECMWF had the MJO wave dying in phase 8, and I agreed w/ him that it was more likely to verify. However, today's guidance now suggests the Euro is coming into line w/ the GFS's more potent depiction of MJO wave propagation. Possibly b/c the GFS has a better read on ongoing convection in the Indian Ocean; we'll see how it goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't false, a couple days ago the ECMWF had the MJO wave dying in phase 8, and I agreed w/ him that it was more likely to verify. However, today's guidance now suggests the Euro is coming into line w/ the GFS's more potent depiction of MJO wave propagation. Possibly b/c the GFS has a better read on ongoing convection in the Indian Ocean; we'll see how it goes.

When you talk about whether stuff will verify, you provide sound scientific reasoning....please dont take my post(s) as any type of attempt to ridicule you...i have learned more from your posts (and john, HM, etc) this year than i thought was possible. Some here just like to troll and poo poo on "threats" without any reasoning whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you talk about whether stuff will verify, you provide sound scientific reasoning....please dont take my post(s) as any type of attempt to ridicule you...i have learned more from your posts (and john, HM, etc) this year than i thought was possible. Some here just like to troll and poo poo on "threats" without any reasoning whatsoever.

The issue of persistence has to be taken into account--while there is technically no scientific reasoning, i.e. last year was persistently stormy and this year is not, one has to take that into consideration when factoring in a model that wants to dump a foot of snow on us this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue of persistence has to be taken into account--while there is technically no scientific reasoning, i.e. last year was persistently stormy and this year is not, one has to take that into consideration when factoring in a model that wants to dump a foot of snow on us this year.

With regards to sensible weather and the pattern? Yeah i can agree with that. But this is about the mjo, and considering its never really been where it already is right now, this season, im not sure that holds water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...