Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,890
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    WichitaChiefSam
    Newest Member
    WichitaChiefSam
    Joined

December Banter Thread


H2O

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  On 12/5/2013 at 9:25 PM, Aviationdave said:

:lol:  Well played Don.

 

I'll probably be to busy to use my phone. Besides that my  IPhone is crap and the battery dies so quickly, so yall have to do with out me this storm :(

Get the mophie, it is the greatest invention since sliced bread for the Iphone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 12/5/2013 at 8:47 PM, UVVmet84 said:

I guess in the end you have that point, and I have mine about the simple necessity of making an actual forecast. I mean for some ice is the one that has the predominant impact in our area. However, risk/reward factor isnt as big for CWG. Tv stations will have weather regardless, so they have more leeway to put something out there.

 

This is ridiculous. By establishing a general risk and the most probabilistic outcomes, you are going to prepare more appropriately than if you just had 1 deterministic forecast that constantly alters day-to-day. The NWS has long established this method of forecasting for a reason.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes%27_theorem

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 12/5/2013 at 10:16 PM, HM said:

This is ridiculous. By establishing a general risk and the most probabilistic outcomes, you are going to prepare more appropriately than if you just had 1 deterministic forecast that constantly alters day-to-day. The NWS has long established this method of forecasting for a reason.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes%27_theorem

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 12/5/2013 at 10:16 PM, HM said:

This is ridiculous. By establishing a general risk and the most probabilistic outcomes, you are going to prepare more appropriately than if you just had 1 deterministic forecast that constantly alters day-to-day. The NWS has long established this method of forecasting for a reason.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes%27_theorem

HM I think you have me misunderstood. I thinl probabilities are good. However, at a range like 48 hours an appropriate range does not harm your method or reputation. I like CWG's methodology as I said, I just think the public, as unfortunate as it is, wants to know the real straightforward details. We live in an immediate gratification era of society, therefore disallowing any true patience cor probabilties when someone is just trying to catch the forecast before work. Chaos dominates unfortunately. Scenarios being laid out and choosing one you favor works as well. My apologies for the misunderstanding.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 12/5/2013 at 10:52 PM, mitchnick said:

I wouldn't know but apparently you do

come on man, find somebody younger or lose the Oedipus thingy

sure they got money, but the lint filled baggy stockings are just not worth it

Im just funning with you because you are the oldest regular poster. If it bothers you let me know and i will stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 12/5/2013 at 10:59 PM, mitchnick said:

of course not

I've just been in enough nursing homes over the years in my business and have seen a few things I wish I hadn't    :yikes:

They are nasty places, as a kid i used to go with my mother all the time to visit people who had no one visiting them and it was so sad.

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...