A-L-E-X Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 Shocking. It seems to be going around..... TWC has been fabricating weather data for YEARS.... I wonder why they all just don't use legit data from the airports..... besides snowfall, they're accurate. And we have plenty of airports around here, which is why it makes me chuckle when TWC reports the temp in Hempstead is 107 degrees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunnyFL Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 Speaking of for profit weather service, I compare the HGX NWS forecasts informally against the TWC local on the 8s, and our local NWS forecasters who live in the area and specialize in our weather beat some guy or woman in a cubicle in Atlanta forecasting for several states easily. TWC is especially bad in nowcast situations. Our local non-met weather readers on the ABC affiliate pay for AccuWx, and they could hand wave in front of a green screen, parrot the AFD, and mimic the NWS forecast and save whatever money they send to State College. Ed, most of the time, no human at TWC looks at the local forecast being put out, it is all done by computer. In an extreme wx event, some of the forecasters at TWC might look at the computer output for some regions or adjust it (similar to the NWS's NDFD) but there's no one in a cubicle in Atlanta looking at your forecast most of the time. Yes, I'm a huge believer in a local met actually doing the forecast. But, I don't think KTRK there in Houston uses Accu-Wx for their forecast. I know Tim as a very good met with 25 years experience and Travis has a degree from A&M and knows his stuff. I don't know anyone else on the staff, but I think you need to give them more credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Ed, most of the time, no human at TWC looks at the local forecast being put out, it is all done by computer. In an extreme wx event, some of the forecasters at TWC might look at the computer output for some regions or adjust it (similar to the NWS's NDFD) but there's no one in a cubicle in Atlanta looking at your forecast most of the time. Yes, I'm a huge believer in a local met actually doing the forecast. But, I don't think KTRK there in Houston uses Accu-Wx for their forecast. I know Tim as a very good met with 25 years experience and Travis has a degree from A&M and knows his stuff. I don't know anyone else on the staff, but I think you need to give them more credit. And this is exactly why no one should take TWC seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadgerWXman Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 This highlights a key problem with mixing the private sector with science. The private sector has one goal, and that's making money. Scientific integrity is a secondary concern. lol whaaaat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtticaFanatica Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 lol whaaaat? it's overstated but the statement I quoted highlights a real problem with the mix of for-profit enterprises and legitimate weather information Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 it's overstated but the statement I quoted highlights a real problem with the mix of for-profit enterprises and legitimate weather information I agree and I think it actually applies to all the sciences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowman21 Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 it's overstated but the statement I quoted highlights a real problem with the mix of for-profit enterprises and legitimate weather information Taking this example a step further, what if NOAA agencies were forced to scale back the products and services they offer? This is exactly what Accu-Weather claims those agencies should do on the basis that NOAA agencies have overstepped the bounds of their mission statements and have become bloated and more costly to tax payers. I disagree with Accu-Weather's stance on this, because we'd be left with products and services that are ROI driven instead of by necessity or for the common good of the nation's citizens. Something like a fire weather forecast which is critical in sparsely populated areas most commonly affected by wild fires would probably be eliminated because they wouldn't bring in enough money to support the cost to produce them. Or they'd become very expensive and marketed towards those that need them (park and fire services) where they could gouge government entities like many government contractors do. Can you just picture these types of watches: A Dura-Flame Fire Weather Watch brought to you by Kingsford Charcoal is in effect for Western New Mexico, The Land of Enchantment...Be Enchanted, Visit New Mexico!, and includes the following counties. I view Accu-Weather as a media company, no more, no less. They are not about advancing science, they are about selling advertising with some "close enough" weather information thrown in for good measure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadgerWXman Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 it's overstated but the statement I quoted highlights a real problem with the mix of for-profit enterprises and legitimate weather information I would tend to disagree quite strongly with the the premise of stacking "private business" against "legitimate weather info." Just because one company did something unethical and stupid, you can't just translate that into a massive over-generalization along the lines of "omg private businesses are so bad and just out for profit so we can't ever trust them and the only legitimate info is from the government/non-profits." What accuweather did here is not acceptable and now they've been exposed and deserve to lose a lot of business as a result of their crappy, illegitimate product. This should allow for more legitimate companies to provide higher quality services/products/information and in turn create profit for themselves by offering legitimate info and using good business practices. This is how the free market works. We all saw what accuweather did, now let's spit roast them and make sure that they rightfully lose the business they deserve to. No matter how much you want to believe emotionally that everyone who provides weather information is doing it for the greater good etc... private businesses will always offer a better product and it's because they have incentive... profit!! There's the big bad word again!! /libertarianrant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isohume Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Taking this example a step further, what if NOAA agencies were forced to scale back the products and services they offer? This is exactly what Accu-Weather claims those agencies should do on the basis that NOAA agencies have overstepped the bounds of their mission statements and have become bloated and more costly to tax payers. I disagree with Accu-Weather's stance on this, because we'd be left with products and services that are ROI driven instead of by necessity or for the common good of the nation's citizens. Something like a fire weather forecast which is critical in sparsely populated areas most commonly affected by wild fires would probably be eliminated because they wouldn't bring in enough money to support the cost to produce them. Or they'd become very expensive and marketed towards those that need them (park and fire services) where they could gouge government entities like many government contractors do. Can you just picture these types of watches: A Dura-Flame Fire Weather Watch brought to you by Kingsford Charcoal is in effect for Western New Mexico, The Land of Enchantment...Be Enchanted, Visit New Mexico!, and includes the following counties. I view Accu-Weather as a media company, no more, no less. They are not about advancing science, they are about selling advertising with some "close enough" weather information thrown in for good measure. I don't think a private enterprise could afford the liability of taking on watches and warnings for fire, aviation, svr, marine, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtticaFanatica Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 I would tend to disagree quite strongly with the the premise of stacking "private business" against "legitimate weather info." Just because one company did something unethical and stupid, you can't just translate that into a massive over-generalization along the lines of "omg private businesses are so bad and just out for profit so we can't ever trust them and the only legitimate info is from the government/non-profits." What accuweather did here is not acceptable and now they've been exposed and deserve to lose a lot of business as a result of their crappy, illegitimate product. This should allow for more legitimate companies to provide higher quality services/products/information and in turn create profit for themselves by offering legitimate info and using good business practices. This is how the free market works. We all saw what accuweather did, now let's spit roast them and make sure that they rightfully lose the business they deserve to. No matter how much you want to believe emotionally that everyone who provides weather information is doing it for the greater good etc... private businesses will always offer a better product and it's because they have incentive... profit!! There's the big bad word again!! /libertarianrant I agree, it's something to watch out for, but certainly not an indictment of all private companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LehighValleyBlizzard Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 That's funny, right now on AccWx site I saw 95 in San Diego with a real feel of 73?!! I'm in San Diego and it's definitely not 95 but it feels like 73! Currently Sunny95° RealFeel® 73° Hourly Forecast TodaySat, Jun 18Partly sunnyHi 95°RealFeel® °more TonightSat, Jun 18Increasing cloudinessLo 61°RealFeel® 60°more TomorrowSun, Jun 19Low clouds breakingHi 63°RealFeel® 67°more The risk of weather-related migraines is lowered today. more > Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBG Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Of course...the one incident by itself really isn't a huge deal...no body should be using stats out of a newspaper for any official purpose...but it just reinforces the pattern of questionable conduct by the business. It's all about maximizing profit...nothing else. It's interesting but even some Central Park figures seem made up. I compared so-called "records" for 1953 at 100+ with contemporary media reports. The reports did not match apparently later-created "official" readings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mello Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 I don't think a private enterprise could afford the liability of taking on watches and warnings for fire, aviation, svr, marine, etc. Has anyone successfully sued the NOAA for a bad forecast? If not, why would a private enterprise be any different? Also, I would think whatever law limited the NWS so that private companies could take over warnings could easily be written exempting them from liability. BTW, I'd be against this for many other reasons already said here. Just playing devil's advocate because I hadn't thought about liability before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.