Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,609
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

Summer of 2012 BANTER thread...


ag3

Recommended Posts

I feel the same way as you and Sundog. Quite frankly, I thought those on our side of the argument handled the discussion with respect, and class. We were only trying to have an honest, intellectual discussion of what went wrong, and as Sundog said, a general admittance that things didn't transpire as planned for NJ/NYC/LI. However, some seemed to take offense to this (which I'm not sure why). Even if they disagreed with what we were saying, a few were not going about it professionally; I don't need to say names. If some people don't return b/c of that thread, then honestly, I'm not sure how they get through life. There was nothing wrong with the discussion and the questions were fair and asked in a respectful manner.

still none of them have answered my question and I never even said it was a bust, lol. Not sure why people can't just talk about stuff instead of saying if you don't agree with me you are being a bad poster and I hate you, lol.

The definition of severe clearly qualifies wind with structural damage. If a tree limb report is not structural damage, you can delete 2/3's of those dots and things look a lot different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

and then of course we have to have the regional wars on top of that....drama drama drama

this. They were up in SNE last week and set their sites on us this week. Its LOL.

I think everyone here knows how awesome Isotherm is, and yet somehow he was vilanized. Tisk tisk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Patrick

This kind of "stuff" always happens as we get halfway through any season...considering we are past the halfway point, let's enjoy the last days of summer, and look forward to a fun winter (well, at least until we get beyond the halfway mark of winter) =)

From wikipedia:

The Romans referred to the dog days as diēs caniculārēs and associated the hot weather with the star Sirius. They considered Sirius to be the "Dog Star" because it is the brightest star in the constellation Canis Major (Large Dog). Sirius is also the brightest star in the night sky. The term "Dog Days" was used earlier by the Greeks (see, e.g., Aristotle's Physics, 199a2).

The Dog Days originally were the days when Sirius rose just before or at the same time as sunrise (heliacal rising), which is no longer true, owing to precession of the equinoxes. The Romans sacrificed a brown dog at the beginning of the Dog Days to appease the rage of Sirius, believing that the star was the cause of the hot, sultry weather.

Dog Days were popularly believed to be an evil time "the Sea boiled, the Wine turned sour, Dogs grew mad, and all other creatures became languid; causing to man, among other diseases, burning fevers, hysterics, and phrensies." according to Brady’s Clavis Calendaria, 1813.[1]

The modern French term for both this summer period (and for heat waves in general) "canicule", derives from this same term. It means "little dog", again referring to Sirius.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mapgirl thought he won that thread, lolol

In all honesty, the graphic of storm reports and 25 mile radii suggested SPC might have been a tad too far East w/ the moderate risk, but didn't "bust" the forecast most places. NYC might be most populous, but it is still only one place.

She is part of a group that is too cool for school, smarter than everyone else (in their minds, anyway), that enjoys trolling, even in other subforums, but her graphic was pretty illustrative.

IMHO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all honesty, the graphic of storm reports and 25 mile radii suggested SPC might have been a tad too far East w/ the moderate risk, but didn't "bust" the forecast most places. NYC might be most populous, but it is still only one place.

She is part of a group that is too cool for school, smarter than everyone else (in their minds, anyway), that enjoys trolling, even in other subforums, but her graphic was pretty illustrative.

IMHO

lol, if people think they are a boss on the internet its usually the opposite of their real life persona.

The graphic was BS. We didnt even get half the storms Pennsylvania got. The line weakened below severe limits well before NYC. I wont say the SPC busted because I want to avoid WW3 but I was pretty dissapointed that day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lastly I always tell the Mets I respect them and their analysis. That's why I come to this board. To boycott is childish. Cannot get through life that way.

why tell us that probability based forecasting "seems like the easy way out"? As if mets forecasts that way so that don't have to answer to weenies like yourself? Is that what you think of this profession? That single line was incredibly disrespectful of the entire profession and shows a lack of understanding of the limits of our current scientific knowledge in this field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why tell us that probability based forecasting "seems like the easy way out"? As if mets forecasts that way so that don't have to answer to weenies like yourself? Is that what you think of this profession? That single line was incredibly disrespectful of the entire profession and shows a lack of understanding of the limits of our current scientific knowledge in this field.

were you this outraged last year when posters in SNE were telling the mets who actually surveyed the MA tornado damage last year that they were wrong as it was really an EF4 and not an EF3. One weenie actually said they did their own survey, as if to say the NWS didn't do it right. LOL.

Can't think of anything more dis-respectful than telling people with actual met degrees and skill in surveying this type of damage who spent hours if not days putting together a report only to be told minutes after its posted that they are wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

were you this outraged last year when posters in SNE were telling the mets who actually surveyed the MA tornado damage last year that they were wrong as it was really an EF4 and not an EF3. One weenie actually said they did their own survey, as if to say the NWS didn't do it right. LOL.

Can't think of anything more dis-respectful than telling people with actual met degrees and skill in surveying this type of damage who spent hours if not days putting together a report only to be told minutes after its posted that they are wrong.

I'm not outraged. How does the fact that some other weenies are disrespectful justify another weenie being disrespectful? There was a debate of whether it was high end EF3 or a low end EF4 between people who actually did the survey anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not outraged. How does the fact that some other weenies are disrespectful justify another weenie being disrespectful? There was a debate of whether it was high end EF3 or a low end EF4 between people who actually did the survey anyway.

nice cop out. Give me a break, it wasn't debate, it was you guys are wrong, and its going to be changed, etc. I wouldn't bring it up if it was actual scientific debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Pamela

As if mets forecasts that way so that don't have to answer to weenies like yourself?

Dispense with your condescending characterizations; it is arrogant comments such as those that breed hostility...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol bs...there's a cultural of weenies on american and eastern for years that have actually no respect for science or mets in general. There's way too much whining.

yeah, because the whining is confined to that. Give it a rest, if you wanna start this type of disco, start it in your own subforum before coming in here. Its all over SNE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Pamela

projecting, its epidemic on this board.

For the record, I am generally in agreement with those who claimed that the event from a couple of days ago was *not* incorrectly forecast (colloquially a "bust"). Placing the area under a "moderate risk" for severe weather was entirely appropriate.. just because severe weather does not take place in one's backyard does not invalidate the validity of the forecast...and an understanding of probabilities associated with the issuance of a severe weather watch box is generally lacking among those who called the event a bust and were highly critical of government forecasters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, I am generally in agreement with those who claimed that the event from a couple of days ago was *not* incorrectly forecast (colloquially a "bust"). Placing the area under a "moderate risk" for severe weather was entirely appropriate.. just because severe weather does not take place in one's backyard does not invalidate the validity of the forecast...and an understanding of probabilities associated with the issuance of a severe weather watch box is generally lacking among those who called the event a bust and were highly critical of government forecasters.

thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Pamela

thank you

Would prefer you refer to non-mets as amateurs...restrict your use of the term "weenie" to the know-nothings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...