Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,576
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    BlueSkyGA
    Newest Member
    BlueSkyGA
    Joined

2012 Winter Banter Thread #3


yoda

Recommended Posts

Nobody who isn't a met should pay any attention to the NAM at this range unless it is merely for fun..It has inferior skill to the globals

But that's all most people are doing is doing it for fun. We're a weather board...why not discuss it? This is exactly what I said. When did this place become so GD authoritarian where you can't even enjoy what you came here for? Nobody, and I mean NOBODY is saying the NAM is great and that we should buy it lock, stock and barrel. It's fun to look at and discuss. We're all information hungry and want to talk about weather. It's just another tool to look at and discuss. If you see arguments about the 2m line on the NAM at 84, 60 hours or stuff like that, then YES...that's silly. There can be some balance here, geez.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

What is that supposed to mean?

We're weather enthusiasts on a weather board talking about a model that involves a potential event. So what people talk about the NAM...it's a model. That's what we do here. As long as there is no extrapolating or using it to be definitive, what's the issue? You want us to wait until we're 6 hours out to talk about the NAM?

just like Ian didnt want us to talk about the October snowstorm event on the weather board lolz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just like Ian didnt want us to talk about the October snowstorm event on the weather board lolz

not true.. i think i didnt want it having its own thread at like 10 days out. who cares. let's drop it. i know im outnumbered by the snow faithful here anyway. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

remember when the nam had a phased super qpf event for us 24 hours out and got it like 95% wrong? that's all im saying. the whole "it's a model" thing doesnt hold weight when you pit the nam at 84 on a storm that's at 100 v the euro. but carry on.. it's all good.

But you're missing my point I think.

I'm not saying let weenie fights over the 2m line or 850 low at 84 hours run rampant. But simply discussing the output shouldn't even be an issue. There are features on the field, so why not simply discuss it? Saying the NAM looks good for 84 hours isn't the same as saying...well, we're done...the 2m line moved 2.5 miles on a storm 84 hours out. There can be some balance here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not true.. i think i didnt want it having its own thread at like 10 days out. who cares. let's drop it. i know im outnumbered by the snow faithful here anyway. ;)

dont worry bro..I'll talk about the JMA and 84 hour NAM on my guitar forum which is more appropriate place

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you're missing my point I think.

I'm not saying let weenie fights over the 2m line or 850 low at 84 hours run rampant. But simply discussing the output shouldn't even be an issue. There are features on the field, so why not simply discuss it? Saying the NAM looks good for 84 hours isn't the same as saying...well, we're done...the 2m line moved 2.5 miles on a storm 84 hours out. There can be some balance here.

i've already dropped it.. we're all good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's all most people are doing is doing it for fun. We're a weather board...why not discuss it? This is exactly what I said. When did this place become so GD authoritarian where you can't even enjoy what you came here for? Nobody, and I mean NOBODY is saying the NAM is great and that we should buy it lock, stock and barrel. It's fun to look at and discuss. We're all information hungry and want to talk about weather. It's just another tool to look at and discuss. If you see arguments about the 2m line on the NAM at 84, 60 hours or stuff like that, then YES...that's silly. There can be some balance here, geez.

Amen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

remember when the nam had a phased super qpf event for us 24 hours out and got it like 95% wrong? that's all im saying. the whole "it's a model" thing doesnt hold weight when you pit the nam at 84 on a storm that's at 100 v the euro. but carry on.. it's all good.

since all of us do this as a hobby, we must be doing it because we have nothing else better to do with our extra time, so how serious are any of us supposed to take it?

I thought, because it's a hobby, that we were supposed to have some fun with this stuff

if we can speculate on what a result would be if a model handled a feature differently (and that's done by mets all the time), I don't think there should be an issue with speculating on what would happen in the future with the set up the model has provided at the end of its run

I agree NAM is cr@p at this range, but it is still fun to play with and consistent with this hobby that we analyze model runs

I'm not picking a fight or trying to be a smart azz with you in particular Ian, but wondering out loud (so to speak) why anyone on this hobby wx board have such a problem with it

and frankly, and I know I may piss off some mets, some of the stuff us weenies post may be wrong and/or laughable at times, but if you guys and gals have all the answers, then all forecasts should always be right, right?

rant over....on with the GFS

EDIT: I just saw Ian's post above, mods delete if u want

Link to comment
Share on other sites

since all of us do this as a hobby, we must be doing it because we have nothing else better to do with our extra time, so how serious are any of us supposed to take it?

I thought, because it's a hobby, that we were supposed to have some fun with this stuff

if we can speculate on what a result would be if a model handled a feature differently (and that's done by mets all the time), I don't think there should be an issue with speculating on what would happen in the future with the set up the model has provided at the end of its run

I agree NAM is cr@p at this range, but it is still fun to play with and consistent with this hobby that we analyze model runs

I'm not picking a fight or trying to be a smart azz with you in particular Ian, but wondering out loud (so to speak) why anyone on this hobby wx board have such a problem with it

and frankly, and I know I may piss off some mets, some of the stuff us weenies post may be wrong and/or laughable at times, but if you guys and gals have all the answers, then all forecasts should always be right, right?

rant over....on with the GFS

EDIT: I just saw Ian's post above, mods delete if u want

it's cool.. i know im a pain in the ass sometimes. i guess with a steadfast belief that it's pointless (specifically the nam stuff) it frustrates me to log into a forum i run and have to see it. but it's certainly not worth fighting over or have people turn against eachother for. i appreciate your viewpoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's all most people are doing is doing it for fun. We're a weather board...why not discuss it? This is exactly what I said. When did this place become so GD authoritarian where you can't even enjoy what you came here for? Nobody, and I mean NOBODY is saying the NAM is great and that we should buy it lock, stock and barrel. It's fun to look at and discuss. We're all information hungry and want to talk about weather. It's just another tool to look at and discuss. If you see arguments about the 2m line on the NAM at 84, 60 hours or stuff like that, then YES...that's silly. There can be some balance here, geez.

It's nice to see an administrator with the right idea about why people are here in the first place. Fun. If it was only about weather, we could just look out the window. Some of us are curious about the science of weather forecasting. Then if you ask a question, and not some stupid question like how much does it show for Winchester, but an actual question about a weather pattern, you get slapped with the "its a crap model and you shouldn't even be looking at it" bs. Maybe next time someone has a question about weather, they should just take a crayon and draw a map on paper unlike anything any model is showing for the next 600 hours, scan it into the computer, and then ask the question. Probably be met with "that's the wrong crayon color to be using...read more, post less". And these are the same people that put faith in 15 day ensemble forecasts. Yeah, those are money.

Anyway, I'm glad we have this forum, I hope it snows, and I hope others will start to realize that this is supposed to be fun and educational AT THE SAME TIME.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's all most people are doing is doing it for fun. We're a weather board...why not discuss it? This is exactly what I said. When did this place become so GD authoritarian where you can't even enjoy what you came here for? Nobody, and I mean NOBODY is saying the NAM is great and that we should buy it lock, stock and barrel. It's fun to look at and discuss. We're all information hungry and want to talk about weather. It's just another tool to look at and discuss. If you see arguments about the 2m line on the NAM at 84, 60 hours or stuff like that, then YES...that's silly. There can be some balance here, geez.

I dont get that sense at all....I get the impression many posters give the NAM, JMA and Canadian the same respect as the GFS/EURO...probably the most annoying latest trait is the constant posting of the ensemble mean...It's fine..I think the fact that people are excited about snow is cool....It is just that before potential events, the "takers" seem to far outweigh the "givers"....which makes for crappy threads

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont get that sense at all....I get the impression many posters give the NAM, JMA and Canadian the same respect as the GFS/EURO...probably the most annoying latest trait is the constant posting of the ensemble mean...It's fine..I think the fact that people are excited about snow is cool....It is just that before potential events, the "takers" seem to far outweigh the "givers"....which makes for crappy threads

no one will cop to this it seems even if it's true. it's cool that we have lots of levels of interested folks here probably weighted toward the understand enough to be sometimes annoying level. it's just harder and harder to see what's really in it for an "advanced amateur" other than "respect" or something. for me, someone with the track record in forecasting i have plus being an admin, im not that well liked/regarded by the group (particularly the winter group). that's probably a good sign that it's mainly my persona. im working on a new long-term project, so hopefully that will keep my quieter moving forward... i do want it to snows for everyones sake including mine lol!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's nice to see an administrator with the right idea about why people are here in the first place. Fun. If it was only about weather, we could just look out the window. Some of us are curious about the science of weather forecasting. Then if you ask a question, and not some stupid question like how much does it show for Winchester, but an actual question about a weather pattern, you get slapped with the "its a crap model and you shouldn't even be looking at it" bs. Maybe next time someone has a question about weather, they should just take a crayon and draw a map on paper unlike anything any model is showing for the next 600 hours, scan it into the computer, and then ask the question. Probably be met with "that's the wrong crayon color to be using...read more, post less". And these are the same people that put faith in 15 day ensemble forecasts. Yeah, those are money.

Anyway, I'm glad we have this forum, I hope it snows, and I hope others will start to realize that this is supposed to be fun and educational AT THE SAME TIME.

Read more, post less isn't really an insult. It's good advice in general. Reading what others are saying and waiting for the analysis before you post your own questions and thoughts will help you learn the science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont get that sense at all....I get the impression many posters give the NAM, JMA and Canadian the same respect as the GFS/EURO...probably the most annoying latest trait is the constant posting of the ensemble mean...It's fine..I think the fact that people are excited about snow is cool....It is just that before potential events, the "takers" seem to far outweigh the "givers"....which makes for crappy threads

I don't get that impression...except for perhaps Ji with the JMA. As for the ensemble mean in particular, it DOES have superior skill to the Op beyond ~72 hours, so what is the beef with it? I fully recognize (and I think many on the board do) that the mean can get artificially biased by outliers, which is why you have to look at the individual members as well. But lately, comment on the individual members has been getting the Weenie Smashers to sound general quarters as well (and no, I'm not talking about "P004 shows a HECS! It must be right!"). A bit confusing from my perspective...

As for the previous stuff...I fully agree with Randy's posts and thanks to him for articulating those thoughts well!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont get that sense at all....I get the impression many posters give the NAM, JMA and Canadian the same respect as the GFS/EURO...probably the most annoying latest trait is the constant posting of the ensemble mean...It's fine..I think the fact that people are excited about snow is cool....It is just that before potential events, the "takers" seem to far outweigh the "givers"....which makes for crappy threads

My main problem with people using the NAM is just because it comes out before the big willies people always try and use it to say that the main models will do so an so like the NAM. They are two different creatures. Comparing NAM run to NAM run is more practical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's nice to see an administrator with the right idea about why people are here in the first place. Fun. If it was only about weather, we could just look out the window. Some of us are curious about the science of weather forecasting. Then if you ask a question, and not some stupid question like how much does it show for Winchester, but an actual question about a weather pattern, you get slapped with the "its a crap model and you shouldn't even be looking at it" bs. Maybe next time someone has a question about weather, they should just take a crayon and draw a map on paper unlike anything any model is showing for the next 600 hours, scan it into the computer, and then ask the question. Probably be met with "that's the wrong crayon color to be using...read more, post less". And these are the same people that put faith in 15 day ensemble forecasts. Yeah, those are money.

Anyway, I'm glad we have this forum, I hope it snows, and I hope others will start to realize that this is supposed to be fun and educational AT THE SAME TIME.

You mention learning and I think that is what many try and do here(yes even me) but it is what people SHOULD be learning that seems to be the difference. Everyone knows the CRAS is a crap model and it is justifiably mocked and seldom posted for that reason...it sucks. Anyone who has been here for any length of time know the limitations of the NAM. That is part of the learning. But there are some that continue to post about it as if it is one of the better models for 48hr on. That is not learning. It is selfish but it is frustrating to waste my time sifting through posts from those who should know better in order to get the answers that usually get answered if we just wait a few more minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...