Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

[Guest]

Let me give you an example of good forecasters at work: My daughter goes to school in South Carolina. Back a bit when the Carolinas got their snow, I called her to check on the weather down there and she told me something interesting. The local weatherman told them during his coverage of the storm that at that present moment he couldn't make a forecast because they were tracking 50 possible outcomes and that he would give his forecast as soon as he was confident in it. That's the first and only time I've ever heard of a TV weather person even hinting at the existence of the ensembles, let alone say they weren't able to make an exact forecast due to uncertainty so she knew to wait to plan.

On the other hand, there are people like my mom who are a perfect example of what we're talking about. I spent days telling her about a storm that we were tracking and it meant nothing to her until Al Roker mentioned it on TWC. We're in a culture where being on TV or radio gives anybody an air of credibility beyond merit.

As for the last part of rb's post about getting paid for being wrong, I would say this. If a storm is predicted to hit my town and missed a mile off to the east, 3000 people can now say that the forecast was wrong. It makes no difference that the forecast was dead solid perfect for the 10,000 people in the next town. And people remember the mistakes because those are the things that inconvenience them.

[sroc4]

Let me give you an example of good forecasters at work: My daughter goes to school in South Carolina. Back a bit when the Carolinas got their snow, I called her to check on the weather down there and she told me something interesting. The local weatherman told them during his coverage of the storm that at that present moment he couldn't make a forecast because they were tracking 50 possible outcomes and that he would give his forecast as soon as he was confident in it. That's the first and only time I've ever heard of a TV weather person even hinting at the existence of the ensembles, let alone say they weren't able to make an exact forecast due to uncertainty so she knew to wait to plan.

On the other hand, there are people like my mom who are a perfect example of what we're talking about. I spent days telling her about a storm that we were tracking and it meant nothing to her until Al Roker mentioned it on TWC. We're in a culture where being on TV or radio gives anybody an air of credibility beyond merit.

As for the last part of rb's post about getting paid for being wrong, I would say this. If a storm is predicted to hit my town and missed a mile off to the east, 3000 people can now say that the forecast was wrong. It makes no difference that the forecast was dead solid perfect for the 10,000 people in the next town. And people remember the mistakes because those are the things that inconvenience them.  

This last statement can also be applied to the storm that will not be for us this Thursday.  Jim in the other thread said something along the lines of..there was a roidzilla on the table for thursday, and now POOF its gone.   Jim sorry to pick on you bud, you know I love you, but I know many are thinking the same thing.  The system IS NOT GONE.   The two pieces that are to be this system are literally off by about 16-18hrs.  If the energy in the circle in the southern branch was 16-18hrs faster the N energy has a chance to dig into the back side of it and steer it up the coast and boom we have a coastal storm that affects the megalopolous.  



 

Instead the timing is such that the system doesnt disappear; rather, it actually comes together; Its simply coming together too far to our N&E to affect us in OUR backyards.  






Like you said in your example above when a population of people dont get what they expected in their backyards its "how can this happen?"  When in reality, on a scale Mother Nature is used to, a difference of less than 20hrs and 250-350miles +/- when you look at the big picture is nothing.   In reality we collectively saw the potential for this system weeks ago, and called it out.  And we were DEAD ON BALLS spot on.  The system comes together but instead of affecting the N Mid Atlantic it is going to affect N NE.

[Guest]

If it doesn't affect me then I don't care

[rb924119]

It's really very tough, dk, I completely agree. And I think a lot of it could be solved if there was less focus on "credentials" (degrees), and more on ability. Yeah, I went to college for four years for Atmospheric Science, but that had no bearing on whether or not I can make a forecast. For example, I would consider myself as being an "average" forecaster in the Day 1-10 period, MAYBE slightly above average. Outside of ten days, every single thing I now know is because of people on here, such as Frank, Scott, Tom, and more recently now Armando, among others that I'm inconveniently forgetting, as well as people like Bastardi in the professional setting. Heck, until I was a regular on this board and exposed to different view points, methods, and interpretations of things such as ensembles, I honestly had no idea the ability to forecast beyond ten days accurately even existed. They all taught me that, not my school. Sure the school taught me the "why" and "how" of it, but all of the applicable learning for forecasting comes from the ability to watch patterns evolve across various scales in real time and the modeling, then being able to apply those observations to model output and say "wait a minute; the model has predicted this before, but this happened. It's predicting it again, so I'm going to follow the precedent." The atmosphere is strikingly predictable IF AND ONLY IF you have the ability to see these patterns among the chaos of it and the modeling. Sometimes it fails, but more often than not the patterns you observe tend to hold. Like the old thread "As December Goes So Goes the Winter", ok, so the snowfall analysis might not have worked out (correct me if I'm wrong statisticians), but I'll be damned if the overall observation doesn't usually hold true. Perfect examples, last year, all of December torched. So did all of last winter. This year, it got cold to start the month, warmed for the last ten days and into January, then got cold again. My verdict? Winter pattern will not lock in completely, but will be broken up. Reality? Yet again followed December with transient wintry periods. There will be years that doesn't work, but by and large in my opinion it's right more than it's wrong. And things like THAT and stuff with the modeling (how to actually read into it and apply your observations) are things that I ONLY learned here, not in school. I guarantee that if you gave these guys the weather segments on CBS or NBC or wherever, and the general public watched them for just a few weeks even, whatever network they would be on the ratings would soar. Why? The weather affects all of us. If people know that they can count on that forecast 70-80% of the time to be right, they'll plan around it, which means they'll keep watching. And it's really very sad that people the level of God (or any deity you do or don't believe in) given talent are kept at bay and hidden in a way, from showing the hard TRUTH of how accurate we can consistently be, because of a piece of paper that says "you graduated". Really wish it based off talent, because our reputation would be a heck of a lot different.

[Guest]

Is it even on credentials anymore? As media weather coverage has become more a part of viewing culture, especially with TV, the focus seems to be shifting increasingly towards appearance and/or personality. It's become a matter of "Who is it that can get the most eyeballs on the big snowflake or raindrop or sun on the screen?" To modify Dickens' "A Christmas Carol": There's more of ratings than of rain about it.

[rb924119]

If it doesn't affect me then I don't care

That's a very large problem too lmao well what destroyed that, quite honestly, was the NWS categorical POPs. Percent chance of Precipitation. People read that as a probability; "there's an 'x' chance of precipitation." Less than 50, "none for me", greater than 50, "plans are ruined". What they don't realize is that those percentages are actually based off the the relative coverage of precipitation OVER THE ENTIRE FORECAST AREA. For example, you have a "30% chance of snow" on Thursday. People will say "oh it's not gonna snow" and assume that and move on. Their minds are made up. What that really means is that 70% OF YOUR TOWN will not see snow, but 30% will. They aren't specifying which 30%. Could be your side of town, could be the other side, could be here and there. That's what those forecasts mean, but people don't understand that. So when it rains with a 30% chance, that was a good forecast; you just happened to be under the 30% coverage that day. They'd be much better served completely eliminating the categorical POPs and just go with a scale like: "None", "Isolated", "Few", "Scattered", "Numerous/Widespread", "Rain/Snow/etc." that way people don't get the false pretense of situations like "30% chance".

[rb924119]

Is it even on credentials anymore? As media weather coverage has become more a part of viewing culture, especially with TV, the focus seems to be shifting increasingly towards appearance and/or personality. It's become a matter of "Who is it that can get the most eyeballs on the big snowflake or raindrop or sun on the screen?" To modify Dickens' "A Christmas Carol": There's more of ratings than of rain about it.  

Unfortunately, yes, it is. Think about it; if the segment ratings flop and they don't have a "certified" individual, that falls back entirely on the network. If, however, they do have a "certified" individual and they are so bad that the segment ratings drop, it then becomes "oh, well he/she didn't understand what he/she was doing, so we will just move on." It's the blame game. BUT, you are absolutely correct in that they are also very concerned with appearance/delivery. So, these on-air mets may not give scientifically "good" or "accurate" forecasts, but they sure look and sound great doing it, which helps ratings and keeps them there, even if the forecasts are less than lackluster.

[docstox12]

rb, yes school taught you the 'why" and the "how" but your situation reminds me of when I started my Dental Office back in the stone age when I was your very age of 25.Those textbooks and lectures do help you pass and get your degree, but you will find as the years go by your practical EXPERIENCE on a day to day basis will create your own data bank or "textbook" that you will never forget.I have experienced this in my second occupation I started in 2001 when I left dentistry after 25 years, trading investments for a living.After thousands of trades, a sixth sense develops, and you will create that in your work in meteorology.

[sroc4]

rb, yes school taught you the 'why" and the "how" but your situation reminds me of when I started my Dental Office back in the stone age when I was your very age of 25.Those textbooks and lectures do help you pass and get your degree, but you will find as the years go by your practical EXPERIENCE on a day to day basis will create your own data bank or "textbook" that you will never forget.I have experienced this in my second occupation I started in 2001 when I left dentistry after 25 years, trading investments for a living.After thousands of trades, a sixth sense develops, and you will create that in your work in meteorology.

Same in Veterinary Medicine Doc. Great point!

[rb924119]

rb, yes school taught you the 'why" and the "how" but your situation reminds me of when I started my Dental Office back in the stone age when I was your very age of 25.Those textbooks and lectures do help you pass and get your degree, but you will find as the years go by your practical EXPERIENCE on a day to day basis will create your own data bank or "textbook" that you will never forget.I have experienced this in my second occupation I started in 2001 when I left dentistry after 25 years, trading investments for a living.After thousands of trades, a sixth sense develops, and you will create that in your work in meteorology.

It's so true!!! And that practical experience is what matters to audiences, not how many degrees you have. The power of commercialism, politics, and greed, of eroding the long-standing reign of Jacob's Ladder. Sad.

[docstox12]

rb, yes school taught you the 'why" and the "how" but your situation reminds me of when I started my Dental Office back in the stone age when I was your very age of 25.Those textbooks and lectures do help you pass and get your degree, but you will find as the years go by your practical EXPERIENCE on a day to day basis will create your own data bank or "textbook" that you will never forget.I have experienced this in my second occupation I started in 2001 when I left dentistry after 25 years, trading investments for a living.After thousands of trades, a sixth sense develops, and you will create that in your work in meteorology.

Same in Veterinary Medicine Doc.  Great point!

Doc, I KNEW you would get my point on this!Remember when we first started? Man we know it all.I met an old timer Dentist right when I started and his advice for me was an old song,LOL..."Fools rush in where angels fear to tread!".No substitute for experience that those grey hairs on your head say you've earned!

[gigs68]

Was wondering how much snow has fallen so far in Central Park this season? Where can you find that stat for all cities?

[sroc4]

rb, yes school taught you the 'why" and the "how" but your situation reminds me of when I started my Dental Office back in the stone age when I was your very age of 25.Those textbooks and lectures do help you pass and get your degree, but you will find as the years go by your practical EXPERIENCE on a day to day basis will create your own data bank or "textbook" that you will never forget.I have experienced this in my second occupation I started in 2001 when I left dentistry after 25 years, trading investments for a living.After thousands of trades, a sixth sense develops, and you will create that in your work in meteorology.

Same in Veterinary Medicine Doc.  Great point!

Doc, I KNEW you would get my point on this!Remember when we first started? Man we know it all.I met an old timer Dentist right when I started and his advice for me was an old song,LOL..."Fools rush in where angels fear to tread!".No substitute for experience that those grey hairs on your head say you've earned!

Doc Im not quite the gristled veteran that you are, about half the years, but I can certainly call myself seasoned now. I have a young lady doing an externship with me right now who is a senior student in Vet school in Missouri. She was an assistant at the last hospital I used to work for. I can now impart wisdoms untaught in acedemia and it brings me back. Ive already heard a bunch of times over the last few weeks "wow they dont teach you that in vet school". My mentors did the same for me. My mentor told me you'll know you've settled in when you can look back and recognize when your mind set was....I think I know, to... I know I know to...I know I'll never know it all and thats ok, but I will always know how, where, and who to talk to to find out the answers.

I love the quote " Fools rush in where angels fear to tread!".No substitute for experience that those grey hairs on your head say you've earned!" Lord knows I now have plenty of grey hair, or should I say badges of honor. lol

[sroc4]

Was wondering how much snow has fallen so far in Central Park this season?  Where can you find that stat for all cities?

Compliments of Tom Downs. Those poor DC bastards


City                          Snowfall-to-Date(As of Feb 12th)  Normal-to-Date                          % Departure
Red Sox Suck                    32.4                                         27.8                                        +16%
Providence                        38.2                                         22.9                                       +67%
Syracuse                          89.7                                         88.0                                        +2%
Buffalo                             45.3                                         69.4                                        -35%
New York                           20.5                                        16.0                                        +28%
Philadelphia                       8.0                                          14.3                                          -44%
Washington                       1.4                                           11.1                                         -87%
Cincinnati                          8.0                                          15.3                                          -48%
Chicago                            18.3                                         24.6                                          -26%
Minneapolis                       26.8                                        37.2                                          -28%
Salt Lake City                     40.0                                       39.4                                            +2%

[Guest]

Was wondering how much snow has fallen so far in Central Park this season?  Where can you find that stat for all cities?

Compliments of Tom Downs.  Those poor DC bastards


City                          Snowfall-to-Date(As of Feb 12th)  Normal-to-Date                          % Departure
Red Sox Suck                    32.4                                         27.8                                        +16%
Providence                        38.2                                         22.9                                       +67%
Syracuse                          89.7                                         88.0                                        +2%
Buffalo                             45.3                                         69.4                                        -35%
New York                           20.5                                        16.0                                        +28%
Philadelphia                       8.0                                          14.3                                          -44%
Washington                       1.4                                           11.1                                         -87%
Cincinnati                          8.0                                          15.3                                          -48%
Chicago                            18.3                                         24.6                                          -26%
Minneapolis                       26.8                                        37.2                                          -28%
Salt Lake City                     40.0                                       39.4                                            +2%

I wonder how their precip totals are compared to normal vs their snowfall.... i.e. Is total precip down or is it just the % of frozen precip that's down?

[sroc4]

Was wondering how much snow has fallen so far in Central Park this season?  Where can you find that stat for all cities?

Compliments of Tom Downs.  Those poor DC bastards


City                          Snowfall-to-Date(As of Feb 12th)  Normal-to-Date                          % Departure
Red Sox Suck                    32.4                                         27.8                                        +16%
Providence                        38.2                                         22.9                                       +67%
Syracuse                          89.7                                         88.0                                        +2%
Buffalo                             45.3                                         69.4                                        -35%
New York                           20.5                                        16.0                                        +28%
Philadelphia                       8.0                                          14.3                                          -44%
Washington                       1.4                                           11.1                                         -87%
Cincinnati                          8.0                                          15.3                                          -48%
Chicago                            18.3                                         24.6                                          -26%
Minneapolis                       26.8                                        37.2                                          -28%
Salt Lake City                     40.0                                       39.4                                            +2%

I wonder how their precip totals are compared to normal vs their snowfall.... i.e. Is total precip down or is it just the % of frozen precip that's down?

Thats a good question. I know there are maps for the departure from normal but im at work so cant access them now. Here is however the total QPF for DC since Dec 15th through Feb 13th. I would have to imagine that 4.2-4.4" ish of QPF is well below normal. NYC below that for comparison

[CPcantmeasuresnow]

So the Big Blizzard TWC and other outlets forecast for Red Sox Suck bypassed Red Sox Suck.

Beantown reported a storm total for both days combined of a whooping 3.7 inches of snow It looks like this is another in a long history of major busts, by the weather channel and Red Sox Suck.

And the moral of the story is don't look at the maps forecasting ridiculous amounts, look at the end result. If you don't you'll always think their making out on these storm when more often then not they aren't.

I got 3.8 inches TWC should have been at my house.

[Guest]

Now if TWC wanted to do something interesting, they could take the time to explain to their viewers why Red Sox Suck didn't get the snow that was predicted. Of course, they won't because that would interfere with something far more useful like "When Weather Changed History".  /s

[billg315]

I sort of miss the days when the Weather Channel alternated between a purple screen with a text version of the NWS local forecast and computerized voice reading it, and an in-studio meteorologist showing the current conditions map, explaining it, then the 36 hour forecast and precipitation forecast, and then giving you the five day extended national forecast. Before going back to a text version of your local forecast with classical music in the background.

[jmanley32]

I sort of miss the days when the Weather Channel alternated between a purple screen with a text version of the NWS local forecast and computerized voice reading it, and an in-studio meteorologist showing the current conditions map, explaining it, then the 36 hour forecast and precipitation forecast, and then giving you the five day extended national forecast. Before going back to a text version of your local forecast with classical music in the background.

Boy, I remember before it became so comercialized but all that, I am only 35, I do not recall it being that symplistic.

[billg315]

I sort of miss the days when the Weather Channel alternated between a purple screen with a text version of the NWS local forecast and computerized voice reading it, and an in-studio meteorologist showing the current conditions map, explaining it, then the 36 hour forecast and precipitation forecast, and then giving you the five day extended national forecast. Before going back to a text version of your local forecast with classical music in the background.

Boy, I remember before it became so comercialized but all that, I am only 35, I do not recall it being that symplistic.

That's about what it was in the mid-late 1980s. The local forecast was just the same text as what you'd hear read on your NOAA WeatherRadio (if you had one). If there was a warning the screen would turn red, an alarm would sound, and the NWS warning would scroll up the screen. I'm oversimplifying the in -studio stuff a bit (they did do a travel forecast, once an hour a Winter Weather update, or Tropical update in summer), but it was really just bare bones weather forecasting. No fancy graphics, no reality TV shows. They didn't even do that many live remotes during storms as I recall. It was really in-studio based mostly.

[Math23x7]

You guys might like this clip I came across featuring a Weather channel local forecast (or Local on the 8s) every year from 1983 to 2017:

[RJB8525]

That was cool Math

[Frank_Wx]

No storms on the horizon. Very tranquil times ahead

[Radz]

I sort of miss the days when the Weather Channel alternated between a purple screen with a text version of the NWS local forecast and computerized voice reading it, and an in-studio meteorologist showing the current conditions map, explaining it, then the 36 hour forecast and precipitation forecast, and then giving you the five day extended national forecast. Before going back to a text version of your local forecast with classical music in the background.

Boy, I remember before it became so comercialized but all that, I am only 35, I do not recall it being that symplistic.

That's about what it was in the mid-late 1980s. The local forecast was just the same text as what you'd hear read on your NOAA WeatherRadio (if you had one). If there was a warning the screen would turn red, an alarm would sound, and the NWS warning would scroll up the screen. I'm oversimplifying the in -studio stuff a bit (they did do a travel forecast, once an hour a Winter Weather update, or Tropical update in summer), but it was really just bare bones weather forecasting. No fancy graphics, no reality TV shows. They didn't even do that many live remotes during storms as I recall. It was really in-studio based mostly.

I still have my NOAA weather radio, used to wait in anticipation for the next update (listening to the same repeating forecast) my parents thought i was nuts We didn't have cable back in the day, but my sister moved to New Windsor when she got married and man was i in my glory one day in 1983 when i stumbled upon "THE WEATHER CHANNEL"!!!

[docstox12]

Yep, my NOOA Weather Radio was a little cube with an antenna sticking out,lol.I think they changed the forecast every 15 minutes or so.Before that, in the early 60's, you used to be able to telephone a number, WEather 6-1212 or something like that, and for 5 cents, you could hear the latest forecast,LOL.No computers, this was it, save for the evening news with weather icons like Gloria Okon on WPIX and the classic  Tex Antoine,"Uncle Weatherby", on Channel 5 I think.You could tune in the radio news every half hour to get their forecast.They would vary greatly on snow predictions.

The Weather Channel was truly an amazing thing in hose pre-computer days.It was a major leap from the earlier stuff I mentioned.The early 80's and the advent of cable tv brought this plus for my stock trading operations, FNN, later CNBC, put an actual TICKER crawl at the bottom of the page!Before that, you had to call a broker, hope he wasn't busy and put you on hold, just to get a quote,lol.Now, I have instant quotes and trade on a computer versus calling a broker to put in a trade at 42 1978 dollars.Now, 7 bucks,LOL.

[essexcountypete]

Wow, those bad Weather Channel graphics bring back great memories.

As a kid, I remember Tex Antoine was the fun weatherman, and Frank Field was the serious weatherman.

[Sponsored content]