Just look at the set up over Iceland and Scandinavia at the moment,
then explain to me how a set up like that can last until they just
fade away.

Or do unlike pressure systems repell?

On Sep 14, 7:26 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
> Just look at the set up over Iceland and Scandinavia at the moment,
> then explain to me how a set up like that can last until they just
> fade away.
>
> Or do unlike pressure systems repell?

It realy isn't the fault of meteorlogy if you don't understand.

Weatherlawyer  wrote in message
news:7518426d-e3a4-464f-b1d6-3ea72c2517a4@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> Just look at the set up over Iceland and Scandinavia at the moment,
> then explain to me how a set up like that can last until they just
> fade away.
>
> Or do unlike pressure systems repell?


Jetstream, unusually, is heading south to north between UK and Iceland along
longitude 10 deg W or thereabouts and doing what it always does. Shepherding
the lows to its "nearside" and highs to its "offside" ie matching like
airflow directions at the juncture of contra-rotating systems.

--
General electronic repairs, other than TVs and PCs
http://www.divdev.fsnet.co.uk/repairs.htm

Diverse Devices, Southampton, England

On Sep 14, 8:50 pm, "N Cook"  wrote:
> Weatherlawyer  wrote in message
>
> news:7518426d-e3a4-464f-b1d6-3ea72c2517a4@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Just look at the set up over Iceland and Scandinavia at the moment,
> > then explain to me how a set up like that can last until they just
> > fade away.
>
> > Or do unlike pressure systems repell?
>
> Jetstream, unusually, is heading south to north between UK and Iceland along
> longitude 10 deg W or thereabouts and doing what it always does. Shepherding
> the lows to its "nearside" and highs to its "offside" ie matching like
> airflow directions at the juncture of contra-rotating systems.

This magical, very low pressure, high velocity, distant phenomenon,
despite the difficulties engendered in passing its impetus on to
perfect fluids, -not even liquids but almost immutable gasses, has
what ability to confirm rotation on these powerful air masses?

And not just rotation but direction?

How exactly is it that the cyclonic ones can occur near the equator
but seldom at the equator?

But first answer my question about the way they are separated. Or are
we all doomed to await enlightenment from that fool Dawlish?

On Sep 14, 9:52 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
> On Sep 14, 8:50 pm, "N Cook"  wrote:
>
> > Weatherlawyer  wrote in message
>
> >news:7518426d-e3a4-464f-b1d6-3ea72c2517a4@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com..> > > Just look at the set up over Iceland and Scandinavia at the moment,
> > > then explain to me how a set up like that can last until they just
> > > fade away.
>
> > > Or do unlike pressure systems repell?
>
> > Jetstream, unusually, is heading south to north between UK and Iceland along
> > longitude 10 deg W or thereabouts and doing what it always does. Shepherding
> > the lows to its "nearside" and highs to its "offside" ie matching like
> > airflow directions at the juncture of contra-rotating systems.
>
> This magical, very low pressure, high velocity, distant phenomenon,
> despite the difficulties engendered in passing its impetus on to
> perfect fluids, -not even liquids but almost immutable gasses, has
> what ability to confirm rotation on these powerful air masses?
>
> And not just rotation but direction?
>
> How exactly is it that the cyclonic ones can occur near the equator
> but seldom at the equator?
>
> But first answer my question about the way they are separated. Or are
> we all doomed to await enlightenment from that fool Dawlish?

Oh dear, have you been poked with a stick?

Like I said, it is not the fault of meteorologists if you don't
understand.

(Awaits the usual abuse as the argument gets a little too difficult).

We use both a 24 and a 12 hour clock.

We could use a 6 hour clock, if we had a mind or a reason to.

This year's lunar phases would look like this on such a clock face:

8	Jan	5	:	37
15	Jan	1	:	46
22	Jan	1	:	35
30	Jan	5	:	3
7	Feb	3	:	44
14	Feb	3	:	34
21	Feb	3	:	31
29	Feb	2	:	18
7	Mar	5	:	14
14	Mar	4	:	46
21	Mar	6	:	40
29	Mar	3	:	47
6	Apr	3	:	55
12	Apr	6	:	32
20	Apr	4	:	25
28	Apr	2	:	12
5	May	6	:	18
12	May	5	:	47
20	May	2	:	11
28	May	2	:	57
3	Jun	1	:	23
10	Jun	3	:	4
18	Jun	5	:	30
26	Jun	6	:	10
3	Jul	2	:	19
10	Jul	4	:	35
18	Jul	1	:	59
25	Jul	6	:	42
1	Aug	4	:	13
8	Aug	2	:	20
16	Aug	3	:	16
23	Aug	5	:	50
30	Aug	1	:	58
7	Sep	2	:	4
15	Sep	3	:	13
22	Sep	5	:	4
29	Sep	2	:	12
7	Oct	3	:	4
14	Oct	2	:	3
21	Oct	5	:	55
28	Oct	5	:	14
6	Nov	4	:	4
13	Nov	6	:	17
19	Nov	3	:	31
27	Nov	4	:	55
5	Dec	3	:	26
12	Dec	4	:	37
19	Dec	4	:	29
27	Dec	6	:	23

The spacings are from OOo Calc, I never bothered to correct. It might
come in handy for a future effort.

The point is, if as seems likely and with a great leap of missing
physics, these times are now easier to match.
The last 2 phases for example:
30th August 1:58
7th September 2:04

It's a leap of faith I know to ask anyone to follow me but I find it
interesting. The recent hurricanes for example seemed to have a lot in
common. Even the Lows off Britain for a while.

Had that last one hit Sea Area- Irish Sea rather than getting no
closer than Rockall / Shannon, we'd have had yet more floods. In fact
if it had got further south of Rockall I think it would have caused
flooding anyway.

But that's another spell.
God is I think being kind to us and allowing us to learn slowly.

On Sep 14, 10:10 pm, Dawlish  wrote:
> On Sep 14, 9:52 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 14, 8:50 pm, "N Cook"  wrote:
>
> > > Weatherlawyer  wrote in message
>
> > >news:7518426d-e3a4-464f-b1d6-3ea72c2517a4@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> > > > Just look at the set up over Iceland and Scandinavia at the moment,
> > > > then explain to me how a set up like that can last until they just
> > > > fade away.
>
> > > > Or do unlike pressure systems repell?
>
> > > Jetstream, unusually, is heading south to north between UK and Iceland along
> > > longitude 10 deg W or thereabouts and doing what it always does. Shepherding
> > > the lows to its "nearside" and highs to its "offside" ie matching like
> > > airflow directions at the juncture of contra-rotating systems.
>
> > This magical, very low pressure, high velocity, distant phenomenon,
> > despite the difficulties engendered in passing its impetus on to
> > perfect fluids, -not even liquids but almost immutable gasses, has
> > what ability to confirm rotation on these powerful air masses?
>
> > And not just rotation but direction?
>
> > How exactly is it that the cyclonic ones can occur near the equator
> > but seldom at the equator?
>
> > But first answer my question about the way they are separated. Or are
> > we all doomed to await enlightenment from that fool Dawlish?
>
> Oh dear, have you been poked with a stick?
>
> Like I said, it is not the fault of meteorologists if you don't
> understand.

If?

What part of "squiggly line at the end of sentences" do you have the
most trouble with <squiggly line>

> (Awaits the usual abuse as the argument gets a little too difficult).

I'm not going to abuse you Dawl, old bean. (Too easy.)

Do help yourself to a mouthful of biscuits, won't you. There's a sack
of them near the back door on your way out.

(Doomed! We're all doomed!)

<snip>
  > I'm not going to abuse you Dawl, old bean. (Too easy.)
> 
> Do help yourself to a mouthful of biscuits, won't you. There's a sack
> of them near the back door on your way out.
> 

Don't feed the troll Dawlish he already has to many biscuits.

-- 
Joe Egginton
Wolverhampton
175m asl

Weatherlawyer wrote:
> We use both a 24 and a 12 hour clock.
> 
> We could use a 6 hour clock, if we had a mind or a reason to.
> 
> This year's lunar phases would look like this on such a clock face:
> 
> 8	Jan	5	:	37
> 15	Jan	1	:	46
> 22	Jan	1	:	35
> 30	Jan	5	:	3
> 7	Feb	3	:	44
> 14	Feb	3	:	34
> 21	Feb	3	:	31
> 29	Feb	2	:	18
> 7	Mar	5	:	14
> 14	Mar	4	:	46
> 21	Mar	6	:	40
> 29	Mar	3	:	47
> 6	Apr	3	:	55
> 12	Apr	6	:	32
> 20	Apr	4	:	25
> 28	Apr	2	:	12
> 5	May	6	:	18
> 12	May	5	:	47
> 20	May	2	:	11
> 28	May	2	:	57
> 3	Jun	1	:	23
> 10	Jun	3	:	4
> 18	Jun	5	:	30
> 26	Jun	6	:	10
> 3	Jul	2	:	19
> 10	Jul	4	:	35
> 18	Jul	1	:	59
> 25	Jul	6	:	42
> 1	Aug	4	:	13
> 8	Aug	2	:	20
> 16	Aug	3	:	16
> 23	Aug	5	:	50
> 30	Aug	1	:	58
> 7	Sep	2	:	4
> 15	Sep	3	:	13
> 22	Sep	5	:	4
> 29	Sep	2	:	12
> 7	Oct	3	:	4
> 14	Oct	2	:	3
> 21	Oct	5	:	55
> 28	Oct	5	:	14
> 6	Nov	4	:	4
> 13	Nov	6	:	17
> 19	Nov	3	:	31
> 27	Nov	4	:	55
> 5	Dec	3	:	26
> 12	Dec	4	:	37
> 19	Dec	4	:	29
> 27	Dec	6	:	23
> 
> The spacings are from OOo Calc, I never bothered to correct. It might
> come in handy for a future effort.
> 
> The point is, if as seems likely and with a great leap of missing
> physics, these times are now easier to match.
> The last 2 phases for example:
> 30th August 1:58
> 7th September 2:04
> 
> It's a leap of faith I know to ask anyone to follow me but I find it
> interesting. The recent hurricanes for example seemed to have a lot in
> common. Even the Lows off Britain for a while.
> 
> Had that last one hit Sea Area- Irish Sea rather than getting no
> closer than Rockall / Shannon, we'd have had yet more floods. In fact
> if it had got further south of Rockall I think it would have caused
> flooding anyway.
> 
> But that's another spell.
> God is I think being kind to us and allowing us to learn slowly.

Weatherlawyer doesn;t come from the Pottyries for nothing !

-- 
Joe Egginton
Wolverhampton
175m asl

On Sep 15, 7:56 am, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
> On Sep 14, 10:10 pm, Dawlish  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 14, 9:52 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 14, 8:50 pm, "N Cook"  wrote:
>
> > > > Weatherlawyer  wrote in message
>
> > > >news:7518426d-e3a4-464f-b1d6-3ea72c2517a4@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > > Just look at the set up over Iceland and Scandinavia at the moment,
> > > > > then explain to me how a set up like that can last until they just
> > > > > fade away.
>
> > > > > Or do unlike pressure systems repell?
>
> > > > Jetstream, unusually, is heading south to north between UK and Iceland along
> > > > longitude 10 deg W or thereabouts and doing what it always does. Shepherding
> > > > the lows to its "nearside" and highs to its "offside" ie matching like
> > > > airflow directions at the juncture of contra-rotating systems.
>
> > > This magical, very low pressure, high velocity, distant phenomenon,
> > > despite the difficulties engendered in passing its impetus on to
> > > perfect fluids, -not even liquids but almost immutable gasses, has
> > > what ability to confirm rotation on these powerful air masses?
>
> > > And not just rotation but direction?
>
> > > How exactly is it that the cyclonic ones can occur near the equator
> > > but seldom at the equator?
>
> > > But first answer my question about the way they are separated. Or are
> > > we all doomed to await enlightenment from that fool Dawlish?
>
> > Oh dear, have you been poked with a stick?
>
> > Like I said, it is not the fault of meteorologists if you don't
> > understand.
>
> If?
>
> What part of "squiggly line at the end of sentences" do you have the
> most trouble with <squiggly line>
>
> > (Awaits the usual abuse as the argument gets a little too difficult).
>
> I'm not going to abuse you Dawl, old bean. (Too easy.)
>
>
> - Show quoted text -

*>)). Too true. Abuse comes easily and naturally to you, W.

MInd you, about the equator thingy and cyclones; any decent geography
"A" level text book would help you.

"Joe Egginton"  wrote in message 
news:6j6g5jF1lrg7U1@mid.individual.net...
> Weatherlawyer wrote:

(crap deleted)
>
> Weatherlawyer doesn;t come from the Pottyries for nothing !
>
> -- 
> Joe Egginton
> Wolverhampton
> 175m asl

Joe

Please do not feed the troll by spreading his crap :)

Regards, Roger

On Sep 15, 8:11 am, Joe Egginton  wrote:
>
> Weatherlawyer doesn't come from the Pottyries for nothing

Quite right, I want muny.

On Sep 15, 11:33 am, "Roger Smith"  wrote:
>
> Please do not feed the troll by spreading his crap

Idiot. I wonder what he thinks Dawlish likes best to roll in? Road-
kill?

On Sep 15, 1:30 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
> On Sep 15, 11:33 am, "Roger Smith"  wrote:
>
>
>
> > Please do not feed the troll by spreading his crap
>
> Idiot. I wonder what he thinks Dawlish likes best to roll in? Road-
> kill?

8>))

1/7, 14% since April 24th. It just doesn't look good, however you look
at it........

On Sep 15, 7:46 am, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
>
> It's a leap of faith I know to ask anyone to follow me but I find it
> interesting. The recent hurricanes for example seemed to have a lot in
> common. Even the Lows off Britain for a while.

I have been working on another idea relating to the time lapses of
earthquakes over 4.9 mag.

It appears to me that the intensities increase as the time between
them does. You might liken it to the physics of Impedance:

I = F/V

Impedance equals the force of the harmonics divided by the velocity of
the particles or fluid involved.

Or you could put it another way:
When there is little or no motion for a while, the bump when it does
get going -at the next quake, is going to be playing catch-up.

That's my hack for the hex. But heck, since we don't have a better
kludge....

And it relates to Hurricanes in that the greater the time difference
the greater the intensity of a tropical storm -should any arise.

And is reduced according to how close a so called aftershock takes
place.
(Except that this last lot has so far failed to produced anything
serious, though a Mag 7 is still on the cards. Probably when Ike is
finally decommissioned.)

One I still have to look at is when two large quakes occur at a great
interval with no other quakes intruding. Which is what happened
recently. Work in progress.

On Sep 15, 2:53 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
> On Sep 15, 7:46 am, Weatherlawyer  wrote:


> (Except that this last lot has so far failed to produced anything
> serious, though a Mag 7 is still on the cards. Probably when Ike is
> finally decommissioned.)

May we take that as a sort of forecast? If a mag 7 happens, you will
be the first to tell us that is exactly what you foretold. People who
make forecasts based on poor science, but never return to their
forecasts when wrong, always do; Piers Corbyn, Joe Bastardi and a host
of other cold winter-searchers (apologies to the few that always
return to their forecasts and analyse them), do the same on a regular
basis. They only remind you of their successes and they publish no
records of accuracy. You've been expecting a mag 7 earthquake for well
over a month. So have I. In fact I forecast one, based on
probabilities, just over a month ago on this ng. It hasn't happened.
0/7, 0% over a month, for me. Hopeless eh? mind you, we both missed a
7.0 mag in Japan, by 0.1 mag! Shame, just a teensy, weensy bit more
and I'd be sitting on 100% and you'd be claiming you forecast it.

There are, on average, 17 earthquakes per year of 7.0mag, of over. You
know that. Again, I'll forecast that one occurs in the next month,
somewhere in the world. They occur randomly and the precise location
and strength is not predictable.......yet. One day they may be
predictable, but I doubt hugely whether it will be down to the odd
theories that you propagate. That's doubt, never a certainty.

The likelihood is that a mag 7 will occur in the next month. Predict
it with a reasonable timespan and a fairly accurate location. That's
not much to ask, but please don't come back on here telling us it
happened because of the demise of a hurricane Ike, if you aren't
prepared to actually forecast it will happen before the event.

Forecasts can only be verified by accuracy at outcome. Making vague
hints and then trying to claim you got it right, will not cut any
mustard with anyone.

Here's your chance. Predict us an earthquake. It appears that you feel
one is about to occur. Where? How big? When?

On Sep 15, 2:53 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
> On Sep 15, 7:46 am, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
>
>
>
> > It's a leap of faith I know to ask anyone to follow me but I find it
> > interesting. The recent hurricanes for example seemed to have a lot in
> > common. Even the Lows off Britain for a while.
>
> I have been working on another idea relating to the time lapses of
> earthquakes over 4.9 mag.
>
> It appears to me that the intensities increase as the time between
> them does. You might liken it to the physics of Impedance:
>
> I = F/V
>
> Impedance equals the force of the harmonics divided by the velocity of
> the particles or fluid involved.
>
> Or you could put it another way:
> When there is little or no motion for a while, the bump when it does
> get going -at the next quake, is going to be playing catch-up.
>
> That's my hack for the hex. But heck, since we don't have a better
> kludge....
>
> And it relates to Hurricanes in that the greater the time difference
> the greater the intensity of a tropical storm -should any arise.
>
> And is reduced according to how close a so called aftershock takes
> place.
> (Except that this last lot has so far failed to produced anything
> serious, though a Mag 7 is still on the cards. Probably when Ike is
> finally decommissioned.)
>
> One I still have to look at is when two large quakes occur at a great
> interval with no other quakes intruding. Which is what happened
> recently. Work in progress.

One other rule of thumb with them, which in my not very humble seems
to remove them from the prison of plate theory altogether, is that
earthquakes tend to occur over a circle of the earth that is just in
or outside the so called shadow zone.

There is a recent series pinned up at the NEIC > 5 list ATM. (Or do I
mean the < 5 list? I always get them mixed up.)

It's one thing to declare that shadow zones indicate the activity and
make up of the part of the earth that we have never been to and are
unlikely to visit shrtly.

It is quite another to maintain the theory at the expense of the lives
of those most desperate for our help.

Well, my help. The rest of you might as well be Dawlish for all the
difference it makes. So stuff the lot of you.

Turbulence arises in  boundary layers when the rate of shear within
the layer becomes large enough. The onset can reduce drag on
obstacles, at which point the boundary layers separateat the places of
least resistance.

This is the wake of the disturbance where the boundary layer becomes
turbulent  The separation of flow forms as eddies smaller than the
original shear wave.

Turbulence in the boundary layer imposes a drop in the drag
coefficient when the Reynolds number is about 3 × 10^5.

For example:
The dimples on golf balls encourage such turbulence to drop drag
effects in the boundary layer. The claim is made that shagreen has the
same effect for sharks and the process was utilised in some rough hewn
boats in ancient times, a process partially utilised in race-craft
today with stepped hulls.

(Not quite the same thing.)

Now suppose that the explanation for the increased velocity of sound
in solids is akin to the motion of fluids. What attenuation takes
place? There is no rarefaction or the opposite is there?

On Sep 16, 10:06 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
> Turbulence arises in  boundary layers when the rate of shear within
> the layer becomes large enough. The onset can reduce drag on
> obstacles, at which point the boundary layers separateat the places of
> least resistance.
>
> This is the wake of the disturbance where the boundary layer becomes
> turbulent  The separation of flow forms as eddies smaller than the
> original shear wave.
>
> Turbulence in the boundary layer imposes a drop in the drag
> coefficient when the Reynolds number is about 3 × 10^5.
>
> For example:
> The dimples on golf balls encourage such turbulence to drop drag
> effects in the boundary layer. The claim is made that shagreen has the
> same effect for sharks and the process was utilised in some rough hewn
> boats in ancient times, a process partially utilised in race-craft
> today with stepped hulls.
>
> (Not quite the same thing.)
>
> Now suppose that the explanation for the increased velocity of sound
> in solids is akin to the motion of fluids. What attenuation takes
> place? There is no rarefaction or the opposite is there?

Just for info - this is what W has been up to on other, competely W
dominated ngs, It's quite amazing the complete gobbledygook that one
person can write.
On Sep 15, 8:05 am, Weatherlawyer  wrote:


> On Sep 15, 7:28 am, Weatherlawyer  wrote:

> > On Sep 15, 12:26 am, Weatherlawyer  wrote:


> > > On Sep 14, 4:25 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:


> > > > On Sep 14, 7:51 am, Weatherlawyer  wrote> > > > > On Sep 13, 11:50 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:


> > > > > > On Sep 13, 9:37 am, Weatherlawyer  wrote:


> > > > > > > On Sep 13, 12:13 am, Weatherlawyer  wrote:


> > > > > > > > On Sep 12, 2:39 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:


> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I knew these things were related but couldn't see how.:


> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Vanuatu
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Andaman Islands, India Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Mid-indian Ridge
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Bonin Islands, Japan Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Hindu Kush Region, Afghanistan
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  North Of Ascension Island
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Izu Islands, Japan Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Vanuatu
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Hindu Kush Region, Afghanistan
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Kermadec Islands Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Western Xizang-india Border Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Santa Cruz Islands
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Santa Cruz Islands
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Iran-iraq Border Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Solomon Islands
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Santiago Del Estero, Argentina
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Tonga
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Northwestern Iran
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Vanuatu
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Eastern New Guinea Reg, Papua New Guinea
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Flores Region, Indonesia
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Nias Region, Indonesia
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Izu Islands, Japan Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Kepulauan Talaud, Indonesia
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Tonga Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Fiji Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  South Of The Fiji Islands
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Fiji Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  Tajikistan
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  South Of The Fiji Islands


> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are near locations that repeat.


> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > By "near locations that repeat" I meant that some of the places were
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not many degrees from others in that list. They are a few degrees
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apart. About how far apart they would be if they were under a storm
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that was traveling about 6 to 12 knots -about as far as it would
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > travel in the times they are apart.


> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tropical storms tend to move at the same speed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Coincidence?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think so.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whatever controls the movements of storms controls the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > movements of earthquake epicentres. Which lends itself to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a theory about clarifying the movements of storm tracks.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Present techniques are pretty good but run within an error parameter
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that indicates that one or more of the functions used in the input
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > data is a related value caused by the same initial forces but
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > appearing as a symptom, not a disease.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So if we can use the above information to correct that bit, computed
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > weather models will improve dramatically.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which brings me to another problem I have been mulling over for the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > last few days.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ACTIVE STORMS
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ike (Atlantic)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lowell (East Pacific)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hanna (Atlantic)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ike is a cat 2 hurricane.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The N Atlantic chart is interesting> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >http://www.cuckney.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/weather/Dorridge.htm
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ordinarily the isobars go up or down in 4 mb increments. I think
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Britain is under a col. I don't know how long it will last. Or what
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > will displace the void.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Last week a bunch of Lows gathered off the coast and rotated as they
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > elongated over the UK, eventually ending up south of the Isles and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > running through via Sea Area:Shannon. Always a bad sign.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Floods ensued.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The charts had better definitions This one is a mess.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meanwhile over in Vanuatu something stirred?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2008/09/08
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5.2     19:52    -17.5    179.5         Fiji
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 7.0     18:52    -13.5    166.9         Vanuatu
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5.2     10:44     -2.2    100.4         Kepulauan Mentawai, Indonesia
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6.2     03:03    -20.0    169.1         Vanuatu
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I wonder how far apart these places are.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I bet they mark the 7 M. down to a 6.8 or lower, it being an
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > aftershock and all. There should be another one due around the 14th to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 16th. And speaking of that spell, it is some 1 hour different to this
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Or 5 or 7 hours, depending on how you look at it. I don't think it
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hurts to be meticulous. I aught to give it a try. One of those thing
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to put on my list.)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Over in the Americas, Ike is now a mere hurricane heading for Texas,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > more stirrings due in the Andreanof Islands by the look of things.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here we go with that reason the Vanuatu quake wasn't so terrible:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >http://www.hurricanezone.net/tcgraphics/wp1508.gif
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now we will see something from this spell that will explain the 6 hour
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > difference in the spell.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or not, as the case may be.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sinlaku
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th = 90k
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th = 105k
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11th = 120k
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 12th =1115k
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was 70 knots a few hours back. It seems to have followed the clock
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on this one:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6.1 M. 09th @ 12:23. -9.3; 158.3. SOLOMON ISLANDS
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  5.5    10th @ 03:00      2.5     96.3  Simeulue, Indonesia
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  5.2    10th @ 01:28      30.9    83.4  Western Xizang
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  5.0    10th @ 01:15      30.8    83.5  Western Xizang
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  5.1    10th @ 00:19      2.5     96.2  Simeulue, Indonesia
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  5.6    09th @ 23:18     -11.8    166.5         Santa Cruz Islands
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  6.1    09th @ 12:23      -9.3    158.3         Solomon Islands
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So the bottom 2 quakes signal a cease and desist as well as an
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > increase in intensity. I think that's fairly safe to say both Ike and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the new one are involved there.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > New one on me though (thus new to the world as far as I know.)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Chinese ones signal the end of Ike as a major player until it
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fills the playground up to the Rockies and decides to go home. It will
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be interesting to see if it works in concert with any other storms by
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the time it or they get to the Carolinas.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also of interest will be any measure of tornadic stuff with the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chinese ones. Or perhaps that signal is lost in the arrival ashore of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ike? Maybe it will spawn cyclonic (or maybe it is the cyclonic)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > activity.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which just leaves us the 2 Indonesian ones. I can't say. But would the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pair be a pairing similar to the others? (The locations of the first
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > two being pretty close.)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Basically it is a lot of signal and very little white noise.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can hear it calling, calling my name
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The sky is falling, falling's what it says.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can't speak any louder, I hear it shout
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it's very interesting and that there is no doubt.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh I, I see things everywhere
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes I can see it everywhere
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh I...
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes I, I can see it everywhere
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes I can see it everywhere
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BBC has sent a representative to the junket that is the physics lab in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Geneva where they hope to avoid setting the planet aflame with
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > particle physics.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a lot of activity along the lines of one of Shakespeare's
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > plays. It may be much ado about nothing or it might be a well matched
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > distraining pair. But I think that the Santa Cruz Islands and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Solomon Islands count as the same place.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have definitely got a cracked mind.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > The BBC sent a bunch of losers to Geneva and saw a lot of nothing.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Despite which, dedicated a lot of airspace to the affair.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 500 hundred souls got killed in Haiti after a storm that was well
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > forecast. No one wanted to go there, obviously.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If they are a close match and the distance apart chronologically
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > counts for anything, then this is a clue to the disposition of and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > probable intensity of tropical storms.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It could tell us where and what. The when will be obvious according to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the weather forecast some 3 to 5 days prior.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which lends itself to the forecasting of...
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > damn... lost the thread.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No matter, it will return if it is worth knowing. And I will have lost
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nothing if it was worth nothing.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's annoying though.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Maps/10/165_-10.php
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > A series of quakes acted as pre-quakes or fore-shocks to the ...
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hell, there is no such thing as a fore-shock or an after-shock. They
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > are no more related to each other than lightning in the same storm.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are one phenomenon.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > (as is the case with a lot of tornadoes in wide-spread storms.)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meanwhile over in the North Atlantic, the gathering:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >http://www.cuckney.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/weather/Dorridge.htm
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > A repeat for Britain, of last weeks weather spell?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > It doesn't take much for geophysics to throw the phenomena up on a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > distant shore.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Something to do with a thought I had decades ago, that weather
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > forecasts might foretell earthquakes.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why did it not click? What eludes me?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Because one half of my brain quite often doesn't know what is going on
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the other half. And I don't know how to get them in harmony. I know
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I need to leave it, go away to a diversion and come back to it
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > refreshed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > But I just don't wish to let it go. It's an intense learning period
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that drains all the pleasure out of it. I want to re-read the posts,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > go back and look at the websites I visited and see if I can see
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > anything when I retrace my steps.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > But of course, all I am doing is making an effort. I'd be better off
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > going to the shop and getting some eggs for my breakfast.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2 storms now in the Asian Pacific:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >http://www.hurricanezone.net/
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Outrageous fortune for those in the so called far east:http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Maps/10/145_40.php
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Some heady stuff most of it too recent to have hit the list yet.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the 6.9 M in Hokkaido might be promoted to a 7 or more.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > MAP      5.0    2008/09/11 04:01:03       41.987          143.878       35.0     HOKKAIDO,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > JAPAN REGION
> > > > > > > > > > > > > MAP      5.2    2008/09/11 02:16:10       26.915          55.754        10.0     SOUTHERN
> > > > > > > > > > > > > IRAN
> > > > > > > > > > > > > MAP      5.0    2008/09/11 01:08:12       41.747          143.929       35.0     HOKKAIDO,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > JAPAN REGION
> > > > > > > > > > > > > MAP      5.4    2008/09/11 00:32:49       41.784          143.790       35.0     HOKKAIDO,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > JAPAN REGION
> > > > > > > > > > > > > MAP      6.9    2008/09/11 00:20:53       41.979          143.625       35.0     HOKKAIDO,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > JAPAN REGION
> > > > > > > > > > > > > MAP      6.6    2008/09/11 00:00:02       1.865           127.439       93.1     HALMAHERA,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > INDONESIA
> > > > > > > > > > > > > MAP      5.8    2008/09/10 16:12:04      -20.261          -69.151       38.0     TARAPACA,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > CHILE
> > > > > > > > > > > > > MAP      6.6    2008/09/10 13:08:15       8.091           -38.748       10.0     CENTRAL MID-
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ATLANTIC RIDGE
> > > > > > > > > > > > > MAP      6.1    2008/09/10 11:00:35       26.862          55.801        15.0     SOUTHERN
> > > > > > > > > > > > > IRAN
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Something about this is hiding in my brain cells but I can't connect
> > > > > > > > > > > > > to it. My race relied on people like me when there was no such thing
> > > > > > > > > > > > > as radio and the Outer Isles were at the neck of the end of the world.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Those gifted with or touched or some such they were called.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunates. And they must have been very frustrating to the rest of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > the tribe.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > OK.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's have a look at the above
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 5.0     Hokkaido, Japan Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 5.2     Southern Iran
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 5.0     Hokkaido, Japan Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 5.4     Hokkaido, Japan Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 6.9     Hokkaido, Japan Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 6.6     Halmahera, Indonesia
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 5.8     Tarapaca, Chile
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 6.6     Central Mid-atlantic Ridge
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 6.1     Southern Iran
> > > > > > > > > > > > > That's the sequence
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 5.0     Hokkaido, Japan Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 5.0     Hokkaido, Japan Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 5.4     Hokkaido, Japan Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 6.9     Hokkaido, Japan Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 6.6     Halmahera, Indonesia
> > > > > > > > > > > > > That's the topic for today, children.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 5.2     Southern Iran
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 5.8     Tarapaca, Chile
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 6.6     Central Mid-atlantic Ridge
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 6.1     Southern Iran
> > > > > > > > > > > > > These are the also rans.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Lots of pairing. including another 4.9 in Hokkaido to add to this
> > > > > > > > > > > > sequence:
> > > > > > > > > > > > 5.0     Hokkaido, Japan Region
> > > > > > > > > > > > 5.2     Southern Iran
> > > > > > > > > > > > Yet the storm Sinlaku is still a Cat 2 at 120 knots and slated to
> > > > > > > > > > > > reach 130 knots before it starts to unwind.
> > > > > > > > > > > > But all this pairing indicates otherwise. I must be wrong.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Or not, as the case may be.
> > > > > > > > > > > And so we get another storm:
> > > > > > > > > > > ACTIVE STORMS
> > > > > > > > > > > Ike (Atlantic)
> > > > > > > > > > > Sinlaku (West Pacific)
> > > > > > > > > > > 16W (West Pacific)
> > > > > > > > > > > Lowell (East Pacific
> > > > > > > > > > > 16W isn't likely to grow greater than 30 knots though> > > > > > > > > > > Over here it was a wet night but looks like it could get to be a nice
> > > > > > > > > > > spell if it holds out. Which may be wishful thinking but the day was
> > > > > > > > > > > nice.
> > > > > > > > > > > Here's hoping.
> > > > > > > > > > The several ghosts in the machine that threw me off a day or so back
> > > > > > > > > > turned up as more storms. Ah the wonders of mass communications. I
> > > > > > > > > > wonder that the wisdom of Solomon prevailed against religious
> > > > > > > > > > strictures in his day.
> > > > > > > > > > No wonder he left the straight and narrow to go exploring.
> > > > > > > > > > Ike appears to be headed along the same track as its immediate
> > > > > > > > > > predecessor. This spell has proven similar enough (though somewhat
> > > > > > > > > > less closely matched up here in the UK) to the last one (as I stated
> > > > > > > > > > it would be) to allow me to prognosticate that:
> > > > > > > > > > Ike will fill the hinterland as far as the Rockies and the Canadian
> > > > > > > > > > border before being swept east in the normal run of things.
> > > > > > > > > > Last week an High developed over the Great Lakes pushing the remnants
> > > > > > > > > > of (I forget which) previous hurricane out of the country via the
> > > > > > > > > > Carolinas.
> > > > > > > > > > Which egress served along with the broaching of yet another storm, to
> > > > > > > > > > induce several quakes in the places alluded to in previous forecasts.
> > > > > > > > > > Ike and a contemporary would do the same. In the absence of another
> > > > > > > > > > storm broaching just as Ike is leaving, we will see something else of
> > > > > > > > > > interest. Of this there is no doubt.
> > > > > > > > > > Meanwhile the Low that was threatening Ireland and points east, has
> > > > > > > > > > now gone to Iceland which means we will have nice weather today.
> > > > > > > > > Atlantic Westerlies.
> > > > > > > > > They tend to stall at Iceland and / or disperse at the Baltic or go
> > > > > > > > > North along Norway. Usually when stalled at the Baltic, the spell
> > > > > > > > > changes and the low dissipates.
> > > > > > > > > These present spells see the lows joining up at the Iceland sticking
> > > > > > > > > place. They will likely drop back down to Britain where the first one
> > > > > > > > > was. It is interesting to watch them rotate and to fan out afterwards.
> > > > > > > > > That is, after flooding the country.
> > > > > > > > > Usually when they reach Iceland there is no coming back. Sometimes
> > > > > > > > > they come back from the graveyard as this one did. Something to bear
> > > > > > > > > in mind for spells at 02:00, 08:00; 14:00 and 20:00.
> > > > > > > > > Look out for earthquakes of Magnitude 6 and more too.
> > > > > > > > > Speaking of which, the last one was a 5.1 M. on the 11th @ 22:35 near
> > > > > > > > > Hokkaido, Japan. 14 and more hours ago. 15 hours rings a bell. 18 is
> > > > > > > > > for a cigar.
> > > > > > > > > Now then, where is Vancouvre Island?


> > > > > > > > Blast, forgot to mention that in keeping with an acoustic explanation
> > > > > > > > for things geophysic; the Highs which had been massed above the
> > > > > > > > Rockies are now on their way to the great lakes.


> > > > > > > > Grate or wot?


> > > > > > > > 5.1 M. 11th @ 17:12. TARAPACA, CHILE. 19.7S. 69.0 W
> > > > > > > > 5.0 M. 11th @ 04:01. HOKKAIDO, JAPAN 42.0N. 143.7E.


> > > > > > > > 13 hours and 140 degrees apart. Got to try and remember that Chile and
> > > > > > > > Japanese disconnection.


> > > > > > > > And those N Atlantic Lows have split up once more. Interesting but....
> > > > > > > > confused.


> > > > > > > ACTIVE STORMS
> > > > > > > Ike (Atlantic)
> > > > > > > Sinlaku (West Pacific)
> > > > > > > 16W (West Pacific)
> > > > > > > Lowell (East Pacific)


> > > > > > > The actual number of huuricane strength storms that have the same
> > > > > > > definitions as hurricanes or typhoons is non-existent at the moment
> > > > > > > with Ike and etc broaching.


> > > > > > > So now it is a matter of weight and sea.


> > > > > > > Problems with my computer ensued as is the norm when geophysics goes
> > > > > > > critical. This time it was router trouble. The office was closed so I
> > > > > > > couldn't get help tll gone 08:00. And it took a fair bit of shuffling
> > > > > > > to clear the clock on my modem.


> > > > > > > I even managed to get a flat tyre on my bicycle. Not sure how the god
> > > > > > > of the underground managed that.


> > > > > > > Lots of pairing on here: >http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_big.php


> > > > > > > And as far as the North Atlantic is concerned, the difference with
> > > > > > > this spell and the previous one is that last week the spell was
> > > > > > > negative anomaly with the Lows low and the Highs low too.


> > > > > > > This week the Lows are high and the Highs are high too. So is that a
> > > > > > > positive or negative anomaly?


> > > > > > > The North Atlantic Oscillation:


> > > > > > > This is a phenomenon that is assumed classically by the average
> > > > > > > temperature over the winter months.


> > > > > > > Weatherlawyer has his own rules for that though.


> > > > > > > With me the pressure systems dictate the condition.


> > > > > > > When the Lows are low and the Highs are high, that is a positive
> > > > > > > condition. It is by far the most common one. And is related to the
> > > > > > > weather we know and love. Lows come out of North America via
> > > > > > > Newfoundland and cross the Atlantic almost straighrt across the 60
> > > > > > > degree parallel.


> > > > > > > With high Lows and low Highs the situation is totally different. the
> > > > > > > weather lacks intensity, pressures hover around 1010 to 1020 with the
> > > > > > > 1016 mb forming an ellipse just off the coasts of Europe and North
> > > > > > > America.


> > > > > > > Usually when this occurs, tropical storms move directly north and go
> > > > > > > into the Arctic to the east of Iceland. Newfoundland Lows go into the
> > > > > > > Arctic over Greenland. Look out for increased volcanic eruptions.


> > > > > > > With these spells (and I assume the time of the phase in all of them
> > > > > > > is 2 and 8 o'clock am and pm) the Lows are high while the Highs are
> > > > > > > also high or the Lows are low and the highs are low too.


> > > > > > > Look out for tropical storms with a mixture of high and low
> > > > > > > intensities one after the other in that sequence.


> > > > > > > The ones that hit North America may travel up along the east of the
> > > > > > > rockies filling the great plains and pushing high pressure regions
> > > > > > > north to the Great Lakes. When the system drains into the sea there
> > > > > > > are increases in the
> > > > > > > activity of seismicity at the western fault zones.


> > > > > > > Blocking Lows. In fluid mechanics these are "singularities", IIRC. I
> > > > > > > believe the meteorological expression is much the same.


> > > > > > > It remains to be seen what differences the NAO shows with these two
> > > > > > > spells. Last week it was Andreanof Island quakes along with an
> > > > > > > increase in other west coat region quakes.
> > > > > > > So called fault zones. Mascon margins more likely.


> > > > > > It's been a glorious day here, quite in keeping with the distance of
> > > > > > the Low I have been watching but not in keeping with the one over the
> > > > > > UK earlier.


> > > > > > It's all rather tempting to insist the spell is anticyclonic in lieu
> > > > > > of tropical storms of hurricane intensity and above.


> > > > > > Except that the last earthquake today was around 9:30 am this morning:
> > > > > > 13th @ 09:32    COLOMBIA (5.7M.)


> > > > > > Which indicates an increase of severity in a storm now in existence,
> > > > > > or there is another on its way. Or something else I have yet to
> > > > > > consider such as tornadic stuff as would be expected with the storm
> > > > > > Ike. Or a volcanic eruption?


> > > > > > Check this space tomorrow.
> > > > > > That's all for tonight, folks.


> > > > > Misty morning, an unforseen phenomenon that I once stated went hand in
> > > > > glove with tropical storms. They certainly did for the hurricane
> > > > > season of 2005.


> > > > > 2008/09/
> > > > > 6.0 M. 14th @ 00:00      EAST TIMOR REGION
> > > > > 5.7 M. 13th @ 09:32      COLOMBIA


> > > > >  (Nothing since the East Timor one, 7 hours ago, less the 2 hours or
> > > > > so analyis.)


> > > > > Ike has run out to the Great lakes where instead of the predicted
> > > > > Highs the pressure is low. Ike is a Stream that extends north from
> > > > > Luisiana to the Canadian border where it runs straight into the sea.


> > > > > 17 Tornado reports (Looks like 9 or 10 tornadoes) >http://www.spc.noaa.gov/climo/reports/080912_rpts.html


> > > > > There is a new depression marked on >http://www.hurricanezone.net> > > > > Pearl Harbour has this to say about the once super-typhoon:


> > > > > Remarks:
> > > > > 140300z Position Near 24.8n 121.9e.
> > > > > Typhoon (Ty) 15w (Sinlaku), Located Approximately 35 Nm Southeast Of
> > > > > Taipei, Taiwan Has Been Quasi-stationary Over The Past Six Hours.
> > > > > Maximum Significant Wave Height At 140000z Is 30 Feet. Next
> > > > > Warnings At 140900z, 141500z, 142100z And 150300z. Refer To
> > > > > Tropical Depression 17w (Seventeen) Warnings (Wtpn32 Pgtw) For
> > > > > Six-hourly Updates


> > > > > It is interesting that the storm paused and that Ike too did much the
> > > > > same thing. I wonder what can be made of that? It occurred along with
> > > > > the change in the weather over here. Worth looking at next time I
> > > > > think. If I remember.


> > > > > Ike didn't waste much time after going ashore.
> > > > > Hardly a General Lucas


> > > > > On the 15th of September the new spell is in Britain at least a spell
> > > > > for thundery flash floods:
> > > > > Sep 15  09:13 >http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/phase/phase2001gmt.html


> > > > > So what the North Americans are seeing now is a move to that new
> > > > > phase.
> > > > > All very interesting, if I may say so.


> > Moved


> > > > With an anticyclone over Scandinavia and a not very low Low in the
> > > > region of Iceland warm air is making Britain a very nice place for a
> > > > walk in the countryside for a change. Developments there will also
> > > > prove interesting.


> > > > Unfortunately the weather in Britain this year has been disastrous for
> > > > many wheat growers and certain other crops. Some brassicas have done
> > > > well though, beets for example.


> > > > Wheat dryers cost some £80 an hour to run, that's on agricultural
> > > > fuel. Red diesel is very low tax for instance. But still hardly cheap
> > > > to do what was once done for free by the sun.


> > > > The crops lying in the fields are in the way of the next crop.


> > > > Mind one, it is a valid point that ancient agricultural practice was
> > > > far less intensive and employed rotations in which the land lay
> > > > undisturbed one in so many years.


> > > > Perhaps this year, world wide, the lands are paying their Sabbath.


> > > > 6.0 M.  14th @ 00:00    East Timor Region
> > > > TD 17W looks to be in the frame but if I could, I'd bet on tornadoes
> > > > in the USA. Might get a Mag 7 somewhere too since the end of the spell
> > > > is in the air -or not, as it were.


> > > 5.1 M. 14th @ 18:51      Kepulauan Barat Daya, Indonesia


> > > So it will be another intense whatever it turns out to be then.
> > > Nearly 19 hours. Not tornadoes by the look of it.


> > > The sites are fairly close together:


> > > 7.5 S. 128.2 E.
> > > 8.7 S. 126.8 E.


> > > So that means...
> > > I have no idea.


> > > I'm missing something terribly important here. Something I should have
> > > paid more attention to, perhaps. Something only recently noticed. I
> > > thought I'd have more time to cogitate upon it.


> > When the intensity of an earthquake is due to increase by enough
> > magnitude to take it into the very critical realms of geophysic's
> > fluid mechanics, the time between the dangerous quake and the last
> > quake of magnitude 5 or over is quite a long period:


> > 6.3 M.  2008/09/03 @  11:25     Santiago Del Estero, Argentina


> > 5.4 M.  2008/09/02 @  20:01     Tonga


> >  >http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/qed/


> > So the next major quake is going to be a big one too:
> > 5.1 M.          2008/09/14 @ 18:51       Kepulauan Barat Daya, Indonesia


> > What are the chances that it will be on a great circle some 140
> > degrees to that place in Indonesia?


> > That is just on the shadow zone. So it could be 100 degrees just as
> > likely. (The shadow zone is anywhere from about 105 to 135 degrees
> > from the epicentre.)


> > A 100 degree ark from  Kepulauan Barat Daya, Indonesia runs from Cape
> > Town through Rhodes to Juneau , Alaska . Past Pitcairn Island and the
> > far side of Antarctica.


> > A 140 degree arc cuts Chile just north of Valparaiso, Montevideo,
> > Buenos Aries; New Orleans or where that once great city used to be in
> > the Discordant States; Just east of Cape Race, Newfoundland (wait till
> > Ike gets there) and Grand Canaria to Monrovia, West Africa


> > If I get anywhere near with either of those arcs I will consider it as
> > time I woke up rather than anything of great note.


> > The only problem is that I am not getting any joint pain but I am
> > getting leg cramps, so I still think it will be tornadic in nature.


> > Or not, as the case may be.


> 5.2     2008/09/15 05:41:48       51.345         -178.289       49.3     ANDREANOF
> ISLANDS, ALEUTIAN IS., ALASKA


> Boy, that was a lot of work for no pay.



But those circles are worth bearing in mind: >
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Maps/10/295_-25.php

I wouldn't book an holiday to experience one on the strength of it
but
it did turn up something of interest.


Well, that was a great run out. We all must do this again sometime. I
want to thank you all for your input. The insights were fascinating.

If you bothered to read all that (I did, sad case that I am, as I was
searching for an actual forecast - don't try looking for that, there
isn't one) you'll realise why so very few people pay any attention
whatsoever to these theories, or to W. I almost pity him. Now that's
saying something.

On Sep 16, 10:06 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
>
> Now suppose that the explanation for the increased velocity of sound
> in solids is akin to the motion of fluids. What attenuation takes
> place? There is no rarefaction is there?

What I am trying to get at but having some difficulty in doing so is
that the relative differences in spells for quakes or storms is
acoustic.

Not least among the difficulties in  that is one imposed by
perception. Frequency or pitch varies with the intensity apparently.
High pitches grow higher with loudness whilst low pitches seem to grow
lower.

Not that I think that can be a major factor in diagnosing spells. Or
not, as the case may be. >
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/sound/pitch.html

Have I mentioned already that both weather and earthquake phenomena
occur on the same same circles for any given spell? I can't be
bothered checking and anyway, I have stated the fact now.

While earthquakes occur one after the other in places that are
something just over the far side of each other's shadow zones, storms
tend to occur in the middle of those very zones.

Which phenomena is in keeping with the origin of the spells in the
first place. Which as you all know by now, is the interplay of the
earth, sun and moon.

Just how the conversion of inertia, dynamics and acoustics takes place
is at the moment beyond describing.

Though no doubt my pet dog in its omniscience will have more to say on
the subject.

One thing I am certain of though is that criticality of the Reynolds
number -or something closely akin to it, has a marked effect on these
weather spells.

On Sep 14, 7:26 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
> Just look at the set up over Iceland and Scandinavia at the moment,
> then explain to me how a set up like that can last until they just
> fade away.
>
> Or do unlike pressure systems repel?

I thought the long lasting gap between the Scandinavian and Azores
highs was odd but it is nothing to the low in the NW  North Atlantic
at the moment: >

http://www.cuckney.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/weather/Dorridge.htm

Do like pressure gradients create an unlike one? It could seem logical
if you didn't know a more likely cause. Two circulating air masses in
close proximity would pile up another air mass between them.

So two lows would create and high. And two highs would create an even
higher.

On Sep 17, 12:06 am, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
> On Sep 16, 10:06 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
>
>
>
> > Now suppose that the explanation for the increased velocity of sound
> > in solids is akin to the motion of fluids. What attenuation takes
> > place? There is no rarefaction is there?
>
> What I am trying to get at but having some difficulty in doing so is
> that the relative differences inspellsfor quakes or storms is
> acoustic.
>
> Not least among the difficulties in  that is one imposed by
> perception. Frequency or pitch varies with the intensity apparently.
> High pitches grow higher with loudness whilst low pitches seem to grow
> lower.
>
> Not that I think that can be a major factor in diagnosingspells. Or
> not, as the case may be. >http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/sound/pitch.html
>
> Have I mentioned already that both weather and earthquake phenomena
> occur on the same same circles for any given spell? I can't be
> bothered checking and anyway, I have stated the fact now.
>
> While earthquakes occur one after the other in places that are
> something just over the far side of each other's shadow zones, storms
> tend to occur in the middle of those very zones.
>
> Which phenomena is in keeping with the origin of thespellsin the
> first place. Which as you all know by now, is the interplay of the
> earth, sun and moon.
>
> Just how the conversion of inertia, dynamics and acoustics takes place
> is at the moment beyond describing.
>
> Though no doubt my pet dog in its omniscience will have more to say on
> the subject.
>
> One thing I am certain of though is that criticality of the Reynolds
> number -or something closely akin to it, has a marked effect on these
> weather-spells.

Someone working on the same thing as I but using it for purposes that
I dread:

http://www.google.com/search?q=John%20Alden%20Knight

The short term aspect of this is that the users of his method might
have better hunting.

The long term effect of this is that if the short term effect isn't
carefully monitored and licensed, the users will have no decent
hunting.

So it is with me wondering how the insurance people would mistreat
those in most need of insurance.

But we have already seen how unkempt the insurance and banking
industry is and anyone relying on "The City" in times of distress are
going to have a bumpy ride.

Besides which most of the damage that has to happen has already been
done.

From the middle of the last century the move towards building houses
on drained marshlands grew out of control.

The result is that now we have extremely expensive property built on
land that relies on drainage that might fail in regions that are
subject to periodic storms that wash out even deep foundations.

And big business and insurers have allowed all this, even encouraged
it.

There is no salvation for anyone who has bought such property on
trust.

Where was the salvation for the world's animals when white settlers
moved into great plains all over the colonies?

Investments tend to move on out of control. If you have bought a pig
with lipstick on, sell the pig and eat the pork.

Move on and next time build a house by digging a lot deeper. Lay a
decent foundation upon the rock-mass. Then, when a flood comes and the
river rises against that house it won't shake it

Otherwise you will get stuck in a rut of more repair and further
damage... like a man who built a house upon the ground without a
foundation. Against it the river dashed, and immediately it collapsed,
and the ruin of that house became great.

2000 years of fairly obvious words of wisdom later and what have we
accomplished?

Global warming? Really?

8th Jan @ 11:37

15th Jan @ 19:46

22nd Jan @ 13:35

30th Jan @ 05:03

7th Feb @ 03:44

14th Feb @ 03:34

21st Feb @ 03:31

29th Feb @ 02:18

7th Mar @ 17:14

14th Mar @ 10:46

21st Mar @ 18:40

29th Mar @ 21:47

6th Apr @ 03:55

12th Apr @ 18:32

20th Apr @ 10:25

28th Apr @ 14:12

5th May @ 12:18

12th May @ 03:47

20th May @ 02:11

28th May @ 02:57

3rd Jun @ 19:23

10th Jun @ 15:04

18th Jun @ 17:30

26th Jun @ 12:10

3rd Jul @ 02:19

10th Jul @ 04:35

18th Jul @ 07:59

25th Jul @ 18:42

1st Aug @ 10:13

8th Aug @ 20:20

16th Aug @ 21:16

23rd Aug @ 23:50

30th Aug @ 19:58

7th Sep @ 14:04

15th Sep @ 09:13

22nd Sep @ 05:04

29th Sep @ 08:12

7th Oct @ 09:04

14th Oct @ 20:03

21st Oct @ 11:55

28th Oct @ 23:14

6th Nov @ 04:04

13th Nov @ 06:17

19th Nov @ 21:31

27th Nov @ 16:55

5th Dec @ 21:26

12th Dec @ 16:37

19th Dec @ 10:29

27th Dec @ 12:23

What I aught to do now is have a look at all the charts for the North
Atlantic to see how one spell differs from another.

I have the feeling that in the absence of any major tropical storms in
the second week of January, things would run pretty much as they are
doing now -save for the fact that the Lows wouldn't be heading up into
the Arctic.

On Oct 12, 3:30 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
> 8th Jan @ 11:37
>
> 15th Jan @ 19:46
>
> 22nd Jan @ 13:35
>
> 30th Jan @ 05:03
>
> 7th Feb @ 03:44
>
> 14th Feb @ 03:34
>
> 21st Feb @ 03:31
>
> 29th Feb @ 02:18
>
> 7th Mar @ 17:14
>
> 14th Mar @ 10:46
>
> 21st Mar @ 18:40
>
> 29th Mar @ 21:47
>
> 6th Apr @ 03:55
>
> 12th Apr @ 18:32
>
> 20th Apr @ 10:25
>
> 28th Apr @ 14:12
>
> 5th May @ 12:18
>
> 12th May @ 03:47
>
> 20th May @ 02:11
>
> 28th May @ 02:57
>
> 3rd Jun @ 19:23
>
> 10th Jun @ 15:04
>
> 18th Jun @ 17:30
>
> 26th Jun @ 12:10
>
> 3rd Jul @ 02:19
>
> 10th Jul @ 04:35
>
> 18th Jul @ 07:59
>
> 25th Jul @ 18:42
>
> 1st Aug @ 10:13
>
> 8th Aug @ 20:20
>
> 16th Aug @ 21:16
>
> 23rd Aug @ 23:50
>
> 30th Aug @ 19:58
>
> 7th Sep @ 14:04
>
> 15th Sep @ 09:13
>
> 22nd Sep @ 05:04
>
> 29th Sep @ 08:12
>
> 7th Oct @ 09:04
>
> 14th Oct @ 20:03
>
> 21st Oct @ 11:55
>
> 28th Oct @ 23:14
>
> 6th Nov @ 04:04
>
> 13th Nov @ 06:17
>
> 19th Nov @ 21:31
>
> 27th Nov @ 16:55
>
> 5th Dec @ 21:26
>
> 12th Dec @ 16:37
>
> 19th Dec @ 10:29
>
> 27th Dec @ 12:23
>
> What I aught to do now is have a look at all the charts for the North
> Atlantic to see how one spell differs from another.
>
> I have the feeling that in the absence of any major tropical storms in
> the second week of January, things would run pretty much as they are
> doing now -save for the fact that the Lows wouldn't be heading up into
> the Arctic.

I have just got hold of the charts from the first three months of the
year. (Boy that wasn't fun!) Running them on Windows Fax Viewer I saw
immediately that the phase that started with the15th, not the 8th, was
the one that sends the Lows up the Denmark Strait.

Which explains why only one Low has gone up there so far this week. (A
left-over from last week's spell.) The phases for the 15th and the
22nd of January are vaguely similar. (Something like 6 hours
different.)

And Low and behold their affect on the weather is similar.

Who's a clever boy then?

(Yes Dawlish is. (Good boy.))

Weatherlawyer wrote:
> On Oct 12, 3:30 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
>> 8th Jan @ 11:37
>>
>> 15th Jan @ 19:46
>>
>> 22nd Jan @ 13:35
>>
>> 30th Jan @ 05:03
>>
>> 7th Feb @ 03:44
>>
>> 14th Feb @ 03:34
>>
>> 21st Feb @ 03:31
>>
>> 29th Feb @ 02:18
>>
>> 7th Mar @ 17:14
>>
>> 14th Mar @ 10:46
>>
>> 21st Mar @ 18:40
>>
>> 29th Mar @ 21:47
>>
>> 6th Apr @ 03:55
>>
>> 12th Apr @ 18:32
>>
>> 20th Apr @ 10:25
>>
>> 28th Apr @ 14:12
>>
>> 5th May @ 12:18
>>
>> 12th May @ 03:47
>>
>> 20th May @ 02:11
>>
>> 28th May @ 02:57
>>
>> 3rd Jun @ 19:23
>>
>> 10th Jun @ 15:04
>>
>> 18th Jun @ 17:30
>>
>> 26th Jun @ 12:10
>>
>> 3rd Jul @ 02:19
>>
>> 10th Jul @ 04:35
>>
>> 18th Jul @ 07:59
>>
>> 25th Jul @ 18:42
>>
>> 1st Aug @ 10:13
>>
>> 8th Aug @ 20:20
>>
>> 16th Aug @ 21:16
>>
>> 23rd Aug @ 23:50
>>
>> 30th Aug @ 19:58
>>
>> 7th Sep @ 14:04
>>
>> 15th Sep @ 09:13
>>
>> 22nd Sep @ 05:04
>>
>> 29th Sep @ 08:12
>>
>> 7th Oct @ 09:04
>>
>> 14th Oct @ 20:03
>>
>> 21st Oct @ 11:55
>>
>> 28th Oct @ 23:14
>>
>> 6th Nov @ 04:04
>>
>> 13th Nov @ 06:17
>>
>> 19th Nov @ 21:31
>>
>> 27th Nov @ 16:55
>>
>> 5th Dec @ 21:26
>>
>> 12th Dec @ 16:37
>>
>> 19th Dec @ 10:29
>>
>> 27th Dec @ 12:23
>>
>> What I aught to do now is have a look at all the charts for the North
>> Atlantic to see how one spell differs from another.
>>
>> I have the feeling that in the absence of any major tropical storms in
>> the second week of January, things would run pretty much as they are
>> doing now -save for the fact that the Lows wouldn't be heading up into
>> the Arctic.
> 
> I have just got hold of the charts from the first three months of the
> year. (Boy that wasn't fun!) Running them on Windows Fax Viewer I saw
> immediately that the phase that started with the15th, not the 8th, was
> the one that sends the Lows up the Denmark Strait.
> 
> Which explains why only one Low has gone up there so far this week. (A
> left-over from last week's spell.) The phases for the 15th and the
> 22nd of January are vaguely similar. (Something like 6 hours
> different.)
> 
> And Low and behold their affect on the weather is similar.
> 
> Who's a clever boy then?
> 
> (Yes Dawlish is. (Good boy.))


It is nice when it all comes together eh?

-- 
Gianna

http://www.buchan-meteo.org.uk
* * * * * * *

On Oct 14, 4:24 pm, Gianna  wrote:
> Weatherlawyer wrote:
>
> > Who's a clever boy then?
>
> It is nice when it all comes together eh?

It is. But it was such a PITA getting the charts downloaded that I
can't be bothered with them now.

I think what it is is that they are so confusing when they don't do
what I want them to do.

Then there are the jumps the lows make when they reach about 5 mb
either side of that magic 975 mb. pressure centre. I know there are
earthquakes involved but I can't be bothered going looking for them.

Once they fall off the recent NEIC, charts they too become a PITA to
play with.

On Oct 14, 6:57 pm, Weatherlawyer  wrote:
>
> It was such a PITA getting the charts downloaded that I
> can't be bothered with them now.

Ooyah!

I lost a load of them around the middle of May so I took another look
at the site and found an easier way to fish for them:

I just got the list of these from the server:
/080501_0000_analysis.gif

And stuck them to the prefix:
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice
using Calc and Writer:

Now let's see Google boil the bag:

http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_0000_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_0000_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_0000_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_0000_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_0000_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_0000_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_0000_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_0600_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_0600_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_1200_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_1200_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_1200_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_1200_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_1200_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_1200_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_1200_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_1200_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_1800_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080501_1800_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_0000_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_0000_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_0000_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_0000_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_0000_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_0000_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_0600_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_0600_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_1200_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_1200_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_1200_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_1200_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_1200_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_1200_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_1200_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_1200_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_1200_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_1800_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080502_1800_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_0000_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_0000_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_0000_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_0000_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_0000_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_0000_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_0600_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_0600_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_1200_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_1200_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_1200_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_1200_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_1200_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_1200_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_1200_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_1200_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_1200_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_1800_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080503_1800_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_0000_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_0000_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_0000_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_0000_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_0000_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_0000_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_0000_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_0000_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_0600_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_0600_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_1200_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_1200_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_1200_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_1200_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_1200_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_1200_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_1200_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_1200_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_1200_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_1800_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080504_1800_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_0000_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_0000_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_0000_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_0000_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_0000_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_0000_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_0000_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_0000_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_0000_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_0600_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_0600_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_1200_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_1200_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_1200_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_1200_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_1200_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_1200_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_1200_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_1200_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_1200_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_1800_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080505_1800_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_0000_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_0000_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_0000_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_0000_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_0000_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_0000_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_0000_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_0000_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_0000_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_0600_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_0600_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_1200_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_1200_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_1200_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_1200_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_1200_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_1200_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_1200_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_1200_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_1200_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_1800_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080506_1800_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_0000_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_0000_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_0000_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_0000_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_0000_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_0000_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_0000_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_0000_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_0000_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_0600_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_0600_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_1200_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_1200_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_1200_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_1200_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_1200_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_1200_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_1200_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_1200_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_1200_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_1800_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080507_1800_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_0000_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_0000_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_0000_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_0000_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_0000_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_0000_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_0000_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_0000_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_0000_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_0600_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_0600_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_1200_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_1200_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_1200_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_1200_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_1200_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_1200_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_1200_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_1200_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_1800_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080508_1800_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_0000_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_0000_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_0000_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_0000_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_0000_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_0000_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_0000_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_0000_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_0600_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_0600_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_1200_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_1200_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_1200_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_1200_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_1200_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_1200_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_1200_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_1200_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_1200_sst.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_1800_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080509_1800_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080510_0000_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080510_0000_forecast_120.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080510_0000_forecast_24.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080510_0000_forecast_36.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080510_0000_forecast_48.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080510_0000_forecast_60.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080510_0000_forecast_72.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080510_0000_forecast_96.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~lecimb/met/metoffice/080510_0600_analysis.gif
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.