NECT Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 I concur but he had the balls to lay his thoughts out while the peanut gallery takes pot shots. It's always the non main streamers who get the potshots, you know like the ones who claimed in the 70' s that the Solar influence was much greater than thought. Yea they were considered wackos too. Exactly. He made an observation though, not a forecast. The folks who are conservative about forecasts will also admit that they can't predict everything. Don't get me wrong. I get what you're saying. We could be in a pattern that in conducive to landfalling canes...or we could see nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 I'm not big into arguing about the weather. IMHO, honest mets admit that they can't make a call when they can't make a call. What's the point of making a forecast if you can cite 5 reasons why it might fail? When the weenies/hypsters are right, sometimes they are just lucky.Most of my references are to media mets, not ours FYI, the best mets of our generation are retiring or retired they often said if needed this is a tough forecast. I see mets today change every z6 hours with every model run. I think this winter was the worst, guys like Bouchard were horrendous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Exactly. He made an observation though, not a forecast. The folks who are conservative about forecasts will also admit that they can't predict everything. Don't get me wrong. I get what you're saying. We could be in a pattern that in conducive to landfalling canes...or we could see nothing.So he took it to a place he thought logically and scientifically would fit his assumptions, one being an active year, two being an East coast year and three being analogged to previos years. Good for him,balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N. OF PIKE Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Most of my references are to media mets, not ours FYI, the best mets of our generation are retiring or retired they often said if needed this is a tough forecast. I see mets today change every z6 hours with every model run. I think this winter was the worst, guys like Bouchard were horrendous. he still is and should be doing forecasts for caribou Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NECT Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 So he took it to a place he thought logically and scientifically would fit his assumptions, one being an active year, two being an East coast year and three being analogged to previos years. Good for him,balls. Balls does not equal accurate. What I'm saying is that I lurk and read here to get an idea of what's going on. If someone says that the pattern looks good for landfall, then I think just that, and I think that's what we're talking about. Nobody knows for sure though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Balls does not equal accurate. What I'm saying is that I lurk and read here to get an idea of what's going on. If someone says that the pattern looks good for landfall, then I think just that, and I think that's what we're talking about. Nobody knows for sure though.Agree and said it in a couple of posts. No need to bash him, good for him if he is right if not lesson learned. Some folks go on a limb others stay in the warm safe house. That's life in a nutshell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N. OF PIKE Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 So he took it to a place he thought logically and scientifically would fit his assumptions, one being an active year, two being an East coast year and three being analogged to previos years. Good for him,balls. i would bet if you sit down with tim kelly and press him he will say "look this is not a high confidence forecast" so i do hear what your saying about having balls and i would say there are plenty of times wxman have them, i recall on here PHIL was the first to claim he was "buying a ticket" on the (i think "fujiwhara sniw storm firehose") and that sure fired up the weenies and when everyone on local weather was underforecasting snow amounts severely! A few here put some decent numbers forecast and not just for ORH. Point is we rrspect thise calls alot, and i think tim is someone who will lay it on the line in winter. But to me this call by him was somewhat low risk and he sort of put out a low confidence forecast knowing if be hits it will be look'd back at as an epic call by some but not an epic bust if it happens bc like i said i dont think it is a stretch of logic to say tim would not bet with even close to 50/50 odds that this "forecast verify" but that my assumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NECT Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 i would bet if you sit down with tim kelly and press him he will say "look this is not a high confidence forecast" so i do hear what your saying about having balls and i would say there are plenty of times wxman have them, i recall on here PHIL was the first to claim he was "buying a ticket" on the (i think "fujiwhara sniw storm firehose") and that sure fired up the weenies and when everyone on local weather was underforecasting snow amounts severely! A few here put some decent numbers forecast and not just for ORH. Point is we rrspect thise calls alot, and i think tim is someone who will lay it on the line in winter. But to me this call by him was somewhat low risk and he sort of put out a low confidence forecast knowing if be hits it will be look'd back at as an epic call by some but not an epic bust if it happens bc like i said i dont think it is a stretch of logic to say tim would not bet with even close to 50/50 odds that this "forecast verify" but that my assumption. And for me, this is a place to get thoughts from mets. I'm not going to bash them for being conservative or for making low confidence observations. I like to read both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typhoon Tip Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 This is what happens out in the main forum with Tropic threads. It's happening here, in this thread, albeit in a tamer form. Someone makes a contrarian and/or bold statement, and summarily, people flame throw, or just in general make for an uncomfortable atmosphere. For some weird reason, merely throwing out conjecture conjures up resent. Why? What is it about the tropics that drives people mad? Just stop. Don't say anything contrarian if you are not trained in meteorology -- because, sorry to push this across this way, you don't know what you are talking about. NO, you don't. You may think you do because of x, y, z paper read, or enthusiasm for the art of weather over the years, or statistical obsession. But those talents do not necessitate an adversarial anything. If you disagree with something, ASK. Politely. If you are a Met and you know your stuff, why not find a diplomatic way to deliver any disagreements, that doesn't require the poster be backed into some corner of self-defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbutts Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Same as it ever was.. "there was a lone voice in the wilderness of the New York meteorological offices crying out a warning of hurricane for Long Island. In Professor Mandia's words, "Charlie Pierce, a young research forecaster for the Bureau concluded that the storm would not continue to move northeast and curve out to sea but would instead track due north. He was overruled by more senior meteorologists and the official forecast was for cloudy skies and gusty conditions – but no hurricane " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Yea cover all bases, cover your ass, can never be wrong, those forecasts are the easy way out and seem prevelant. Lots of scared mets afraid to make a blown call. It has gotten worse than ever as bad as the hypsters are the wishy washy guys make me sick. Jesus make a damn forecast right or wrong. What the hell kind of person wants to hear a forecast that states, heavy snow tomorrow 6-12 but it might not snow, could be dry, could turn to rain, maybe it is heavier if this happens but then again if this happens, meh, cover your ass then you never get critiqued. I call BS on your weenies to the rescue too. You called him out for him making a call I thought it took guts, you respond by using a demeaning tone. Bob added a another dig by saying it was all hype for his Twitter account. Pretty insulting if you ask me. Yea Phil I said it. You are a weenie and have no clue what you are saying, congrats. Come into the real world of forecasting with clients on your azz and then get back to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 And just so you know moon man, in the aviation world there is no wishy-washy...it's here and now to the hour of cigs,vis, wx, wind....etc. Of all fields, that is the least wishy washy. You fail to see the point. You can make any call, but back it up with better science then comparing records lows for Kansas City from 1944. Oh and Greenland is warm with a ridge not cold, he seemed wrong on that....the cold is displaced. I like Tim, but the science behind it is semi voodoo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 1954 So one year in recorded history had 2 storms significantly impact New England. Wow that's a lot. Good thing Tim went on record than. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HalloweenGale Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Now they're saying Chantal prob. won't affect SNE directly. Looking this morning, Chantal looks pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 And just so you know moon man, in the aviation world there is no wishy-washy...it's here and now to the hour of cigs,vis, wx, wind....etc. Of all fields, that is the least wishy washy. You fail to see the point. You can make any call, but back it up with better science then comparing records lows for Kansas City from 1944. Oh and Greenland is warm with a ridge not cold, he seemed wrong on that....the cold is displaced. I like Tim, but the science behind it is semi voodoo. So i guess you missed the post where I told NECT I was talking about media mets, not here FYI, nice. As far as the moon goes check your facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Yea cover all bases, cover your ass, can never be wrong, those forecasts are the easy way out and seem prevelant. Lots of scared mets afraid to make a blown call. It has gotten worse than ever as bad as the hypsters are the wishy washy guys make me sick. Jesus make a damn forecast right or wrong. What the hell kind of person wants to hear a forecast that states, heavy snow tomorrow 6-12 but it might not snow, could be dry, could turn to rain, maybe it is heavier if this happens but then again if this happens, meh, cover your ass then you never get critiqued. I call BS on your weenies to the rescue too. You called him out for him making a call I thought it took guts, you respond by using a demeaning tone. Bob added a another dig by saying it was all hype for his Twitter account. Pretty insulting if you ask me. Yea Phil I said it. What a meltdown. 100% off base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Most of my references are to media mets, not ours FYI, the best mets of our generation are retiring or retired they often said if needed this is a tough forecast. I see mets today change every z6 hours with every model run. I think this winter was the worst, guys like Bouchard were horrendous.Bump for Mr Sensitive, aviation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Bump for Mr Sensitive, aviation? Well using my quote and posting about wishy washy and tone certainly looks like it was a reference to me. The ironic thing was that I simply respectfully disagreed and yet was called out. It's certainly not me that had a tone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 What a meltdown. 100% off base.Of course gather round. If you pay attention even here fellow Mets have been posting how wishy washy guys like Bouchard are. I believe most if the GP has little faith in media mets. Thankfully we have some good one's here. Believe me if you did not check here this winter and just listened to local TV and radio you were clueless. I could even point to the recent Miller B, cripes 2 hours before the deform band blew up all we saw and heard was passing showers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Of course gather round. If you pay attention even here fellow Mets have been posting how wishy washy guys like Bouchard are. I believe most if the GP has little faith in media mets. Thankfully we have some good one's here. Believe me if you did not check here this winter and just listened to local TV and radio you were clueless. I could even point to the recent Miller B, cripes 2 hours before the deform band blew up all we saw and heard was passing showers. To be honest I don't really focus on what the other stations do. As for the initial topic - I like Tim a lot. I totally disagree with him on his global warming views and I don't really get his blog post and reasoning. He starts it off by pretty much saying it was a hunch but I think it's sort of foolish to put out there. He can write whatever he wants but people don't have to agree with it or think it's a good idea to put it out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 You are a weenie and have no clue what you are saying, congrats. Come into the real world of forecasting with clients on your azz and then get back to me.Lol I get it. My small world of decision making weather wise for large corporate and outside events does not compare to your responsibility, never said you. That being said a degree does not a good Met make. I know great computer scientists who are self taught and I know horrible ones who have Doctorates. Calling me a weenie is your way of demeaning my thoughts, I get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Scooter > weenies? Always has to throw digs out. Tim layed out thoughts without throwing caution flags everywhere, some have balls some don't. Well a post like this will certainly have me defending myself, Steve. We are all weenies..the point was that post will always have some weenie defenders and that's what happened. I simply don't agree with it and twitter doesn't give the excuse of just posting random thoughts with limited science to back it up. It's a weak sauce argument Correlation does not equal causation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Not sure what is transpiring here because I've been busy languishing in a sea of regret, but Chantal the Julio Lugo of trpical systems....except that Lugo was probably more symetrical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 John, that is a pretty pompus tone to have assumed.....I vehemently disagree with your assertion that you need a degree in meteorology to "know what you are talking about" because experience comprises such a large segment of the requisite knowledge base; sure, GENERALLY the degreed met commands more notoriety, and accordingly, deserves to be held in higher esteem......but I think the more prominent posters would agree that they hold certain prominent (undegreed) posters in higher regard than they do some other degreed mets. No offense, man.....I agree that there is a definitive correlation between level of education and of course, knowledge...but much like level of income and education, the correlation is not 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typhoon Tip Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 John, that is a pretty pompus tone to have assumed.....I vehemently disagree with your assertion that you need a degree in meteorology to "know what you are talking about" because experience comprises such a large segment of the requisite knowledge base; sure, GENERALLY the degreed met commands more notoriety, and accordingly, deserves to be held in higher esteem......but I think the more prominent posters would agree that they hold certain prominent (undegreed) posters in higher regard than they do some other degreed mets. No offense, man.....I agree that there is a definitive correlation between level of education and of course, knowledge...but much like level of income and education, the correlation is not 1. Ray, you missed the point entirely...again, going to an adversarial tone yourself in your reply. This is exactly what I am talking about, "just ask." I'm happy to re-phrase. Factually, I did not say that you have to be a Meteorologist to "know what you are talking about" -- I never ever said that. That is an engineered interpretation, born out of ...some kind of predisposition, rather than an honest read. Try again ... the point was, don't be adversarial toward any Met that makes mere conjecture. All it is is a point or opinion, and doesn't require degenerating the course of dialogue into a negative atmosphere. AND, yes! If you are not a Meteorologist, you are likely coming from a weaker preparation -- that's just fact. Not pomp! It may not be a reality one likes, well.... go sit through the blood sweat and tears of 4 years of Diff-Q and advanced application of principles of Physics to atmospheric problem solving, or prove some other course recouped the enlightenment -- either one -- then we'll talk. It just is what it is... But again...none of that was even relevant to the point: STOP THE F BADGERING AND ARGUING. Jesus! And by the way, I impugned the Mets, too - hello. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Analog96>Don Sutherland...gotcha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Analog96>Don Sutherland...gotcha. Piss poor analogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Believe it or not Meteorology is not the only field which requires the courses Tip talks about. It's best left alone but I reread his first post twice Ray and still do not understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Piss poor analogy.ETauntonMA > any weenie who lives in TAN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 ETauntonMA > any weenie who lives in TAN Tru Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.