Crikey I was accused of attacking Ken in 2010 when he started a thread and the following was allowed by a mod at the time and I can't see any reasons why it shouldn't be used again. BTW Ken I was Wobbly Wombat back then and you have been busy in New Zealand with your failed eathrquake predictions causing quite a stir Re: Ken Ring East Australian Winter 2010 Forecast [Re: Ken Ring] #856826 - 02-04-2010 15:38
(Please note the date of our last joust.)
Dammed if I do and dammed if I don't hey Willow? You wanted research well here it is in spades.
To start with I am not attacking a member. But as I have previously said if you put out work into the public arena you must expect it to be examined for it's accuracy.
Don't take my word for it have a bloody look yourselves. Type Ken Ring into Google (Discounting the paranormal research doctor from the US and the rapper of the same name)or any other search engine and it will lead you to the same places I found.
These are my observations and as such are my opinion not those of Weatherzone or anyone else in this forum.
Ken uses the same tactics in all the forums that I have read with him as a member.
As a generalisation I offer the following observations not of his theories but of the way in which he conducts himself while in these forums:
1) He espouses his theories as an alternative to current scientific forecasting methods. Fine I have no problem with alternate theories so long as some form of tangible proof is also offered.
2) He couches his words in such a way as to make them appear a reasonable proposition but without offering any real substance.
3) When he is questioned by someone on one of his points he resorts to arrogance and bullying, claiming he is being pilloried for his views and sending up a smoke screen to deflect the enquiry away from what was originally asked.
4) When one of his general predictions fails to occur he then goes on the defensive and starts telling members that his theories aren’t exact and that they have an in built fudge factor.
5) When pressed for more information as to why his prediction failed to occur he starts claiming that his research isn’t complete, which beggars belief as to why he is then able to sell his predictions in the first place if it isn’t complete.
6) When this fails he then brings in a third party and goes to town on them. Usually an establish Met agency by claiming that they also didn’t predict the event correctly either.
7) He has been caught changing his online weather forecasts to fall more into line of what has already occurred and not changing the edit date on his web page. When confronted by this he claimed he forgot to edit the edit date. Possibly an honest mistake on his behalf who knows but as a webmaster I know it is standard practice to update the dates when pages are changed.
8) It always ends with him leaving the forum with more questions being asked by forum members than he answers.
Irish Boards – Ken Ringhttp://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055720835
Net Weather http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/33985-ken-rings-winter-forecast/
Some not so flattering blog entries from fellow New Zealanders:
Ringworld Blog. http://www.limestonehills.co.nz/Down%20On%20The%20Farm/Topics/Ringworld.html
Silly Beliefs – Ken Ring - Weather forecasting by the moon. http://www.sillybeliefs.com/ring.html
(It's a scam)
Silly Beliefs – Ken Ring — King of Plagiarism http://www.sillybeliefs.com/blog012.html#blog012-4
World Wide Web Weather (W4) http://weather.noble.gen.nz/lunarcy.php
The Second Sight http://thesecondsight.blogspot.com/2006/08/true-lunatic.html
On the farm http://www.limestonehills.co.nz/Down%20O...nTheMoonli.html
Possibly the best observation I have yet found is the following:
A poster on Irish Boards made the following observation: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64064391&postcount=269
If you were to buy a non-fiction book on a subject would you check out the credentials and qualifications of the author who wrote it first? Standard practise in the academic world.
In objectively reviewing your weather forecasting results, I read that you also wrote a book on Palmistry for Cats - 'Pawmistry' as you call it - 'How to read your Cat's Paws'.
On the back cover of that book - on Amazon - it also states the following:
"Ken is a mathematician, a long time magician, mind reader and a public speaker with a passion for the ancient discipline of palm reading. Ken stumbled upon his peculiar calling at a psychic party several years ago, where he was able to deliver a reading of a cat's paw that proved to be uncannily accurate." (c) Pawmistry, 'How to Read Your Cat's Paw's', Ken Ring, 1998http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/reader/15...=0#reader-page
You clearly have a knowledge of cold reading techniques and generalised language patterns - as you are also a mind reader, palm reader, magician, etc - cold reading is not employed by doctors.
I believe - based on your own reactions and communication here on this thread - that anyone interested in your weather forecasting theory should set aside any reference to the weather and frequent themselves with the art of cold reading utilised by mind readers, psychics and magicians/illusionists. E.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_reading
or watch Channel 4's Derren Brown.
My so far analysis of your weather forecasts is that it they are more than likely as follows:
1) Cold Reading & generalised communication techniques used by psychics, mind readers and illusionists - all of which you have experience in - concerning the weather as oppossed to someones future, personality or dead relatives.
2) A bit of mathematics in terms of the probability of weather trends happening. I.e. there are only a few potential general weather potentials so if anyone guesses a percentage of them will always appear to be correct.
3) Marketing - in terms of aggresively comparing your few correct guesses with the Publicly Funded Met Office incorrect forecasts, because the media and general public love to give grief to the Met Office when they get it wrong. This gives the illusion that you seemingly have an insight they don't. A popular ploy utilised by many long term forecasters.
4) Using the magicians art of 'smoke and mirrors and sleight of hand' when the focus is directed onto your techniques or lack of results... just as an illusionist diverts attention from the trick they are performing to create the illusion.
On a personal level, reading your posts here I quite like you and think you are a colourful eccentric character.
I think we both know I'm right regarding all of the above, don't we Ken.
All the best
The next poster asked http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64068363&postcount=270
“I asked you what your scientific qualifications are Ken ?, if you don't wish to elaborate just say so .”http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64068363&postcount=271
“Answering these personal baitings is just a waste of my time. I have already addressed all of these recent questions but if members choose not to listen and would rather push their own barrows of amusement. What I did 12 years ago for whatever reason is neither here nor there. I shall take part in this forum when discussion about weather forecasting returns.
Ken Ring “
Of course that is just my research for the past 4 days looking at around 400 websites, links, blog entries and online news articles, podcasts, book reviews etc so yes I could be accused of a bit of biased and only fruit picking what I want to put forward but for the life of me I haven't yet found one credible source that says anything to the contary.
Let the chips fall where they will.I have since done a little more research today on Ken, see below and make up your own mind about him:
Charlatan Ring merits contempt
NZ Sceptics expose Ken Ring's earthquake predictions and weather forecasts
World Wide Web Weather - Kens forecasting methods are lunarcy