Indeed. Most of us on here aren't lizards, and wouldn't want it to be. 40°C in July 2022 was way high enough.
I had a friend who was diagnosed with skin cancer. He was astonished as they didnt go out in the sun, holidays abroad etc.. The consultant asked what he did for a living as said he was a driver for about 30 years. next question - did you wear short-sleeved tops and have your arm resting on the window? He said yes as the penny dropped. Might have actually saved his life that diagnosis, as they found out he had prostate cancer as well. After several operations, he's fine now and in good spirits and warns people about the dangers. He was furious about the prostate cancer diagnosis because he had all the classic symptoms, but wasnt aware what they meant, just thought it was all part of the ageing process.
Correct, Then there's the pollen count that affects thousands, including asthma sufferers.
I don't tend to watch the TV forecasts but in the past that sort of thing has been dependant on the situation. If it is a warm/hot spell after weeks of clag, rain and suppressed temperatures in summer, they will tend to project it as good news. If it is following weeks of drought, 30+C temperatures and local wildfires, it will be projected as something to be concerned about. It would arguably be better if they removed all emotive terms from any service designed to present information, otherwise there is always someone who gets rubbed the wrong way when the information is framed incorrectly according to their opinion/feeling.
I think weather forecasts should be just that, weather forecasts. By all means give out extra information important to health such as pollen levels, UV levels, pollution levels etc. but cut out the padding. I don’t need the presenter to tell me I’ll need my big coat on. The forecast should tell me that.
Surely if they’re vulnerable, they’ll know? I learned the hard way being (almost) burn to a crisp in 1972 but learned a valuable lesson. Expecting a broadcaster to state the obvious each time is nonsensical, we’ll have a list of diabetic caveats on cookery programmes next? Then there’s nut allergies…
How on earth do you make a comparison between hot weather events over which no one has any control whatsoever and cookery programmes which are not a matter of the same genre and something the populace can choose to watch or ignore.
Easy - it is called ‘personal responsibility’ it applies to everyone - if you need a nanny to point these things out, it becomes pointless.
Have you written to the BBC to make your views known, or are you just moaning online where they'll never see?
Yes I have. I will make no more contributions upon this thread, as personality attacks have seemed to arise and I do not want to be involved in these.
He was very popular amongst the weather community - including other professionals - which is always a good sign.
Also look at the Met Office 10 day forecast, then in 10 days time look back and see what the weather was really like
And then remember that a forecast is only a prediction of what is most likely to happen (often over a wide area and not specific to your back garden) based on the data available at the time. No-one knows what actually will happen until it happens.Also look at the Met Office 10 day forecast, then in 10 days time look back and see what the weather was really like
In the summer months I do this, though with the 14 day weather forecast for Cambridge on the BBC website.
I get the feeling this may be a sampling bias. Whenever there is a “possible“ heatwave and it does occur, you notice. When they predict the same “possible” heatwave which doesn’t materialise, you are less likely to notice. However this is somewhat deviating from the purpose of this thread.
Actually it isn't. I have been recording the data daily since the middle of June. I know enough about statistics to be aware of the risk of sampling bias, and that's why I have been recording the data every day.
Thanks, I didn't know the 2 week issue.
I hadn’t heard that version. A whisper told me it was about the money, and Meteosat were cheaper and offered multi-platform versions of the data.
The Met Office were probably unwilling to provide a 2 week ahead forecast as they know that in the UK it is virtually impossible to accurately predict weather that far in advance. Obviously the BBC weren’t too bothered about that.
Surely the purpose of a weather forecast is to tell you what they expect the weather to be like, not go through all the implications? You take the information and make life decisions accordingly. If you expect them to spoon feed every person that might be affected in every conceivable way the bulletin will end up going on for ever.
www.metoffice.gov.uk
