TPACane04 wrote:Senor, I understand your piece, but understand that I (and probably others)have trouble with someone banging this kind of prediction out there and potentially basing it on theories only a PhD can appreciate...we have excellent Mets on here who deal in reality, synoptics, sat presentations, etc. Even Watkins has struggled this week with TD10 and I respect his game as much as anyone on the board.
I could throw something up here that says I am a renowned psychic and predict "such and such" based on a dream I had last night, and would get blasted off the board...
nuff said, I will be back Sunday night to serve or enjoy some yummy crow.
I understand that many do not understand the connection for which Jim is mentioning. To be very honest, it isn't a field that I'm very comfortable with simply because of a lack of experience. That wasn't what my post was about.
The fact of the matter is, he is basing it off of meteorological theories which he's sited before. There is a huge difference between basing something on a unique, underinvestigated meteorological theory and basing something on a hunch. Jim, however, is basing on the former.
Furthermore, Jim's theories are just that -- theories. So is much of the meteorological community. There is little in meteorology that isn't based on theory. Some theories are more contraversial than others, such as the continuous polar front theory. Regardless, some theories are more studied than others. The affects of solar activity to the realm of tropics has hardly been studied when compared to other fields. In addition, even the topic of solar weather is by far underexplored when compared to the other fields.
My point is, however, that you and others shouldn't blast Jim on his theories when he has provided support. It doesn't matter whether or not only a PhD could appreciate it, it's the fact that he does have support. When someone bases a forecast on a hunch, that isn't supported.
Instead of calling his forecasts "bathroom reading," either investigate the points he's provided that supports his forecast and then debate it or... pipe down and move on.
