Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,607
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

March 20-21 Storm Banter and Party Thread


WxUSAF

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Maestrobjwa said:

Nah, they've hit on a few other things this year (got the first Nor'Easter thus month correct as well: "Another northeast snowstorm! 1-2 feet possible" 

That was correct...but just not for us, lol (but the zone is "Northeast" so it covers all of that).

They also accurately predicted the President's Day weekend snow we got (they were even specific and said "6 inches" we down here didn't get that much, but some folks further north did)

There were one or two other instances this year as well...Point is, sometimes they can hit it down to the day and it's quite amazing

Right, but I guess my point is, you keep using the word "sometimes".  I think most of us, if we wanted to put the effort in to write a book, could get some things right sometimes.  What would you say their accuracy rate is?  Edit: And keep in mind, if you want to talk about accuracy, it's not enough to get some things right this year.  They have to beat random chance year in and year out.

If it's good enough to bank on, why aren't we using it as a major forecasting tool?  If it's not, then it sounds like what happened is more or less random chance, maybe just slightly better than that.

I'm not meaning to make this a bigger issue than it is.  I have no interest in picking a meaningless internet argument.  I'm just sayin'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
4 minutes ago, Scraff said:

Ok. I’m torn.  Reason to stay up all night, or wake in the middle for rippage? I just want a reason to sled at 2am. Just pray @WxUSAFis stil not on top of his hill naked and afraid. I can’t see that again. Ever. :lol:

 

Eta: Let’s Gooooooo Caaaaaaaps!!! That Ovi guy. He’s pretty good. Boom!! 3-2!!

Lucky for you I need my sleep, but come tomorrow at 9am I make no promises.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

I have some snow pics. Do they go in the obs thread or here or should I not post at all if it woo irk people that haven't snowed yet?

Post them in the obs thread.  If people can’t get over the fact climo-favored areas got snow today, they should move.  And I say that as someone who has less than 0.1” of sleet and its been freezing drizzle for the last 2 hours here (and I’m not complaining).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, DSF said:

Right, but I guess my point is, you keep using the word "sometimes".  I think most of us, if we wanted to put the effort in to write a book, could get some things right sometimes.  What would you say their accuracy rate is?  Edit: And keep in mind, if you want to talk about accuracy, it's not enough to get some things right this year.  They have to beat random chance year in and year out.

If it's good enough to bank on, why aren't we using it as a major forecasting tool?  If it's not, then it sounds like what happened is more or less random chance, maybe just slightly better than that.

I'm not meaning to make this a bigger issue than it is.  I have no interest in picking a meaningless internet argument.  I'm just sayin'.

No issue at all, good sir!

I get your skepticism, acrually. But I've followed the Almanac for a few years now, and I've seen enough "hits" to be convinced that whatever formula they use...it can be accurate at times...I think the specific dates and type of storm they can mail down takes some of the "random chance" out of it. So perhaps not accurate enough to say "It's 100% accurate"

Now, I don't know enough math to score their accuracy rate, but...by observation, it's apparent that they have a formula of some sort that works some of the time. It's just something you can use to kind of...keep an eye on a certain period of time... Now, the Old Farmer's Almanac boasts a claim of like 80%, but the regular one isn't as bold, lol

I personally take all their predictions with a grain of salt. But when something pops up in the long range that corresponds to one of their dates, I watch with even more anticipation!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No issue at all, good sir!
I get your skepticism, acrually. But I've followed the Almanac for a few years now, and I've seen enough "hits" to be convinced that whatever formula they use...it can be accurate at times...I think the specific dates and type of storm they can mail down takes some of the "random chance" out of it. So perhaps not accurate enough to say "It's 100% accurate"
Now, I don't know enough math to score their accuracy rate, but...by observation, it's apparent that they have a formula of some sort that works some of the time. It's just something you can use to kind of...keep an eye on a certain period of time... Now, the Old Farmer's Almanac boasts a claim of like 80%, but the regular one isn't as bold, lol
I personally take all their predictions with a grain of salt. But when something pops up in the long range that corresponds to one of their dates, I watch with even more anticipation!
Lol

It's the same as astrology dude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jandurin said:

Lol

It's the same as astrology dude

I'm not so sure...(and astrology is based around star and such, right?) The Almanac has a formula of some sort. And again, it gets specifics right (and often the very date range (usually 3-5 days). So they must look at at a variety of things, but it's just amazing when they hit it right on the nose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Almanac I think matches a winter by solar and other factors then date-shifts an analogue or set of analogues from similar lunar dates.

For example, let's say you think this will be like the winter of 1913-14 for solar and whatever other reasons you based analogues on.

But 1914 has lunar dates that are (just looked this up) ten days later than this year. 

Then you just take the weather events from Jan 11 1914 for Jan 1 2018, etc etc. 

Not endorsing their method, but that's approximately what they do, maybe they have more than one analogue year and combine the records.

(this was a hypothetical example that I picked, not saying I know what analogue years they considered, because I don't, but 1914 relative to solar cycles about the same as 2018). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...