A Look Back: The Winter Of 1998-99

[Snowstorms]

March 7-8, 2008 was a joke at Pearson. And that would have put us over the top for 2007-08. I don't think they're intentionally lowballing. I think they're measuring on an elevated surface which is prone to having snow blown away when it's really windy. When there's little wind and the snow is heavy and wet, their numbers are reasonable (maybe a bit high actually...look at April 2-3, 2005).

Interesting. Vaughan was off by 4cm though.

Hmm...look at da "Toronto" station;

http://www.climate.w...&Month=4&Day=01

IMO I think they do low ball Pearson at times when there numbers dont justify there predictions they called for, or its too much.

Here compare Vaughan and Toronto in Dec 2000; Look at how temps are below freezing at both stations.

http://www.climate.w...000&timeframe=2

http://www.climate.w...Month=12&Day=10

[snowstormcanuck]

Interesting. Vaughan was off by 4cm though.

Hmm...look at da "Toronto" station;

http://www.climate.w...&Month=4&Day=01

IMO I think they do low ball Pearson at times when there numbers dont justify there predictions they called for, or its too much.

Here compare Vaughan and Toronto in Dec 2000; Look at how temps are below freezing at both stations.

http://www.climate.w...000&timeframe=2

http://www.climate.w...Month=12&Day=10

Downtown Toronto got dryslotted even worse than Pearson in March 2008 but still ended up with 24cm. I measured 27cm. North York picked up 32cm! And remember, Buttonville isn't in Vaughan, it's in Markham, which is a bit further east. So, they also experienced a more aggressive dryslot in 03/2008, which may explain the 19cm. But there's no reason Pearson should have been in some sort of snow shadow, having avoided the heart of the dryslot. So I'm confident they mis-measured.

I can't go as far as you and say that EC manipulates the numbers to falsely verify their forecasts, because I don't have any evidence to that effect. And it's a fairly serious accusation to begin with. Although maybe you know something I don't.

http://www.climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/climateData/dailydata_e.html?timeframe=2&Prov=ONT&StationID=5051&dlyRange=1840-03-01|2011-12-09&Year=2008&Month=3&Day=01

http://www.climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/climateData/dailydata_e.html?timeframe=2&Prov=ONT&StationID=26953&dlyRange=1994-11-01|2011-12-07&Year=2008&Month=3&Day=01

[Snowstorms]

Downtown Toronto got dryslotted even worse than Pearson in March 2008 but still ended up with 24cm. I measured 27cm. North York picked up 32cm! And remember, Buttonville isn't in Vaughan, it's in Markham, which is a bit further east. So, they also experienced a more aggressive dryslot in 03/2008, which may explain the 19cm. But there's no reason Pearson should have been in some sort of snow shadow, having avoided the heart of the dryslot. So I'm confident they mis-measured.

I can't go as far as you and say that EC manipulates the numbers to falsely verify their forecasts, because I don't have any evidence to that effect. And it's a fairly serious accusation to begin with. Although maybe you know something I don't.

http://www.climate.w...&Month=3&Day=01

http://www.climate.w...&Month=3&Day=01

It just intrigues me, thats all.

i measured about 35-40cm with that March 2008 blizzard. I even took a photo. If I can find it, I can show you.

The thing with 2007-08 is that we were so close in breaking that record that they manipulated the numbers a bit in March 2008 so we wouldn't end up with a new snowfall record. I mean, YYZ only got 16cm with that March blizzard while stations surrounding it got double that. I dont get how stations surrounding yyz got 115-125cm in Jan 99 but YYZ got 75cm?

Why dont you ask David Phillips how they measure snow at Pearson haha..lol

[snowstormcanuck]

It just intrigues me, thats all.

i measured about 35-40cm with that March 2008 blizzard. I even took a photo. If I can find it, I can show you.

The thing with 2007-08 is that we were so close in breaking that record that they manipulated the numbers a bit in March 2008 so we wouldn't end up with a new snowfall record. I mean, YYZ only got 16cm with that March blizzard while stations surrounding it got double that. I dont get how stations surrounding yyz got 115-125cm in Jan 99 but YYZ got 75cm?

Why dont you ask David Phillips how they measure snow at Pearson haha..lol

I saw an interview with him where he called into question those March 2008 numbers, He didn't really speculate why they were so low at Pearson, but he at least brought up how curious it was that Pearson received so much lower snowfall than the surrounding observation locales.

I generally ignore Pearson's numbers. North York for me is most representative of mby. Thought about writing EC to inquire about this issue. It always slips my mind though.

[Geos]

I didn't find weather channel footage of the 99 Blizzard, but I did from CBS Chicago.

[michsnowfreak]

March 7-8, 2008 was a joke at Pearson. And that would have put us over the top for 2007-08. I don't think they're intentionally lowballing. I think they're measuring on an elevated surface which is prone to having snow blown away when it's really windy. When there's little wind and the snow is heavy and wet, their numbers are reasonable (maybe a bit high actually...look at April 2-3, 2005).

That is certainly possible, but then it is the observers job to estimate to their best knowledge. Snowboards are great, but when theres wind, they can be useless.

[buckeye]

I remember watching TWC and the Chicago news channels, which no one seemed to waver on that storm...from as far out as 6-7 days. It was incredible really. Of course then it got really cold a little while after that storm...and then just like that, torchiness and rains came and wiped it all away. It was kind of sad really.

That storm forecast is still TWC's crowning glory for winterstorm. TWC was my main forecasting info. The seven day planner had that "heavy snow" area over the chicago, the lower lakes and upper OV for seven days with only minor shifting back and forth from forecast to forecast. I assume the gfs must have also remained consistent as well.