Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,584
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

2014/2015 New England Snowfall Predictions


HoarfrostHubb

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 186
  • Created
  • Last Reply

with incomplete data and variance in location unless you kept data at your house it's an assumption, simple science really. Yes I believe you average 58-65 per year but unless you can show me hard data your 1-2 range is an assumption

5 miles is close enough for everyone but you. There is no reason why Reading should differ from me....it's one town away and the same elevation. I def. don't average less because I'm a bit further inland. Your stance on this is silly because Reading is a viable coop.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 miles is close enough for everyone but you. There is no reason why Reading should differ from me....it's one town away and the same elevation. I def. don't average less because I'm a bit further inland. Your stance on this is silly because Reading is a viable coop.

yeah pretty lucky to have that close by but science is based on real data not assumed data, stating something as fact means there is concrete data to back it up. Reading is one of the few with solid data albeit missing several critical years which may indeed have increased your average beyond your 1-2 dead band.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah pretty lucky to have that close by but science is based on real data not assumed data, stating something as fact means there is concrete data to back it up. Reading is one of the few with solid data albeit missing several critical years which may indeed have increased your average beyond your 1-2 dead band.

 

 

Seems like you are really nitpicking...a reliable coop within 5 miles and very few topographic features around seems pretty solid. Especially when another reliable coop like Bedford to his south-southwest is at 58" average. (we should expect Bedford to be a bit less).

 

 

I dunno, I guess unless you are arguing maybe a 3" margin of error vs 1.5". (but that's my definition of nitpicking on this context...but to each his own)

 

 

The data looks pretty concrete to me in his region with those two coops. I would probably say the area that is the weakest for data is SE MA...there just isn't very good data there. The best site is by far the East Wareham coop...but there is not much to the north of them until you get to Walpole which is iffy these days...the old Walpole coop was more reliable. Plymouth-Kingston is okay...not great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like you are really nitpicking...a reliable coop within 5 miles and very few topographic features around seems pretty solid. Especially when another reliable coop like Bedford to his south-southwest is at 58" average. (we should expect Bedford to be a bit less).

I dunno, I guess unless you are arguing maybe a 3" margin of error vs 1.5". (but that's my definition of nitpicking on this context...but to each his own)

The data looks pretty concrete to me in his region with those two coops. I would probably say the area that is the weakest for data is SE MA...there just isn't very good data there. The best site is by far the East Wareham coop...but there is not much to the north of them until you get to Walpole which is iffy these days...the old Walpole coop was more reliable. Plymouth-Kingston is okay...not great.

probably, just saying 1-2 is a tight band with data being missed in critical times, but there is no doubt he's in the 58-65 range. What I did find out during my sick time long hours of research is that accurate consistent snow data is very hard to find, small distances vary greatly, elevation,longitude,latitude play a much greater role than I imagined.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

probably, just saying 1-2 is a tight band with data being missed in critical times, but there is no doubt he's in the 58-65 range. What I did find out during my sick time long hours of research is that accurate consistent snow data is very hard to find, small distances vary greatly, elevation,longitude,latitude play a much greater role than I imagined.

I do not average less than 62", unless you can give me a reason why Id average less than a town closer to the ocean. Complete nitpicking.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

#PF 227

#Flag 78

#Gay 98

#Willy 87

#Garth 71

#Ryanswiz 68

#Jeffaffa 114

#CongratsDendrite 111

#Hype 88

#Nutmegfrier 67

#Statler 76

#Roosta 79

#LEKRIversion 54

#Forky 48

#DrJ 75

#Bobalouie 64

#Accordion 80

#EeK 89

#OceanStatenomore 88

#Hunchie 99

#Philomenia 51

#Grinch 74

#Newguy 67

#MiamiTip 89

#QPF 100

#MetMitch 90

#Radarlove 83

#Scoobydo 73

#Bobbybutts 93

#Jayssheep 69

 

 

Steve, that is uncanny.....I agree with your number just about exactly for my area.

I can guess which two analogs you are wighting most heavily.

We...might...go...all...the...........WAY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...