pazzo83 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Link us up You first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxEngine Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 No, I would say that the occurrence of rain in this one particular instance doesn't change the fact that rain is rare in the desert. And the next model prediction for rain days out, I would still say it's unlikely to come to fruition due to this fact. The rarity of any given system isnt whats being debated, its THIS system. Which is why the climo argument for specific storms doesnt work 100%. Climo argues for snow here to be exceedingly rare this time of year, no one is disputing that. But for the storm to hit in an area even rarer climo region means that climo didnt argue for this to miss us, the pv, track of the storm, etc, caused the miss. Not our avg temp of 50 and 10% chance of snow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxEngine Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 You first. To? You made the claim, post it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 The rarity of any given system isnt whats being debated, its THIS system. Which is why the climo argument for specific storms doesnt work 100%. Climo argues for snow here to be exceedingly rare this time of year, no one is disputing that. But for the storm to hit in an area even rarer climo region means that climo didnt argue for this to miss us, the pv, track of the storm, etc, caused the miss. Not our avg temp of 50 and 10% chance of snow. Once you get within 96 hrs or so, I agree. A week+ out, I disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Wait, is Spring not coming? That will suck for baseball... The algo comment, that was referring to a map of 2m temps that had NYC not only the coldest area in the region but BELOW ZERO a couple weeks back. You don't think that's ridiculous? Those temps were >4 sigma, and of course, did not occur. What point were you making? If I had all day here to go back and sift through your posts I could find dozens which make you look silly, but you're doing a well enough job on your own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnoSki14 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Bottom line there's nothing climo about being -4 or lower this month which could get even colder with the incoming cold next week. I could see major departures that week close to -20 for the day. We got screwed over with timing, not because it wasn't cold enough for the past two storms, the pattern will continue to feature a much greater than normal chance of snow heading into late March. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 To? You made the claim, post it. You guys are claiming I said climo said it couldn't snow in March. Links please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 If I had all day here to go back and sift through your posts I could find dozens which make you look silly, but you're doing a well enough job on your own. If there was ever a pot-kettle-black post.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 You guys are claiming I said climo said it couldn't snow in March. Links please. All of us know that you're entire argument was based off of temperatures, not overall probability. The overall probability of any event on any given day is relatively low. Just admit that you were wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 If there was ever a pot-kettle-black post.... Please....anyone on this forum with half a brain knows that you're wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxEngine Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Once you get within 96 hrs or so, I agree. A week+ out, I disagree. You know 96 hrs ago this was modeled to be snow for us, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxEngine Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 You guys are claiming I said climo said it couldn't snow in March. Links please. I didnt once say that. You buying stock in straw today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 You know 96 hrs ago this was modeled to be snow for us, right? Yea, and you noticed I stopped bouncing on my "climo" talk right about then. A week+ out in mid-March though, sorry, I'm going with stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I didnt once say that. You buying stock in straw today? You said my argument was wrong. Well, you have my argument wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxEngine Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 You said my argument was wrong. Well, you have my argument wrong. So, the fact that you " stopped" discussing climo at 96 hours means were we supposed to interpret that as an admission of being wrong , and that this storm could happen? Are you my wife? Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Yea, and you noticed I stopped bouncing on my "climo" talk right about then. A week+ out in mid-March though, sorry, I'm going with stats. Not a single serious poster was bouncing on the snow ball either more than five days out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEG NAO Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 isn't it time to lock this thread up already ? the nonsense and fighting here is ridicoulus already - now we know why the reputation of this sub forum suffers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxEngine Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 isn't it time to lock this thread up already ? the nonsense and fighting here is ridicoulus already Fighting? I think my discussion with pazzo has been rather courteous and informative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 isn't it time to lock this thread up already ? the nonsense and fighting here is ridicoulus already - now we know why the reputation of this sub forum suffers Nobody here is fighting, we're having a serious discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEG NAO Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Nobody here is fighting, we're having a serious discussion. IMO its fighting plus anyone notice the dates of the storm ended up being wrong ??? its 3/17 A.M and the storm is over already Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Fighting? I think my discussion with pazzo has been rather courteous and informative. Yea, we aren't attacking each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 IMO its fighting plus anyone notice the dates of the storm ended up being wrong ??? its 3/17 A.M and the storm is over already Have you looked at the radar recently? http://radar.weather.gov/radar.php?product=NCR&rid=dix&loop=yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 So, the fact that you " stopped" discussing climo at 96 hours means were we supposed to interpret that as an admission of being wrong , and that this storm could happen? Are you my wife? Lol I think it's good to incorporate climo/probability/stats to a point until the storm is well modeled and in the short-medium run. If it appears likely that the storm will be something like a 2+sigma event (which IMO you can only ascertain within a few days of 0hr), then I agree it's pretty stupid to continue to ride climo. However, 7+ days out, I don't see the problem with using probability analysis to say that said event isn't likely regardless of what's modeled (given models' tendencies to be highly inaccurate at that range). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Not a single serious poster was bouncing on the snow ball either more than five days out. Well I think that's part of the problem, who falls under that category? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEG NAO Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Have you looked at the radar recently? http://radar.weather.gov/radar.php?product=NCR&rid=dix&loop=yes why are you using that radar ? This is the most accurate radar and that blob as its moving east its going to fall apart http://www.wunderground.com/radar/radblast.asp?zoommode=pan&prevzoom=zoom&num=6&frame=0&delay=15&scale=1.000&noclutter=0&ID=DIX&type=N0R&showstorms=0&lat=0&lon=0&label=you&map.x=400&map.y=240&scale=1.000¢erx=400¢ery=240&showlabels=1&rainsnow=0&lightning=0&lerror=20&num_stns_min=2&num_stns_max=9999&avg_off=9999&smooth=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxEngine Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I think it's good to incorporate climo/probability/stats to a point where the storm is well modeled and in the short-medium run. If it appears likely that the storm will be something like a 2+sigma event (which IMO you can only ascertain within a few days of 0hr), then I agree it's pretty stupid to continue to ride climo. However, 7+ days out, I don't see the problem with using probability analysis to say that said event isn't likely regardless of what's modeled (given models' tendencies to be highly inaccurate at that range). Well wtf dude, now you went and posted this and ended the debate, i have nothing else to do today (besides avoid the city like the plague). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxEngine Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Well I think that's part of the problem, who falls under that category? Mikehobbyist, don sutherland, Wes, coastalwx, and ji. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Well wtf dude, now you went and posted this and ended the debate, i have nothing else to do today (besides avoid the city like the plague). Haha, well in the longest-winded way possible, that's what I've been trying to say. If you come to me and say, this storm at 240hr looks like a MECS in (now late) March, I'm going to tell you good luck with that. If it's 3 days out, I'm going to privately b*tch about it but begrudgingly accept that it could actually happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Well I think that's part of the problem, who falls under that category? If you're starting a discussion thread about a storm on day 8 then you fall under the weenie category. If you post about the possibility of a storm in the long range on a general discussion thread or in the banter thread I see no problem with that. The New England forum keeps two general discussion threads, one heavily moderated scientific discussion thread and one thread for the weenies. That way the two types of posts don't become intertwined. We need more moderators in this sub forum, pure and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Mikehobbyist, don sutherland, Wes, coastalwx, and ji. sferic for up-to-date school closing information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.