Winter Banter

[Rjay]

It's possible I'm taking the gag reflex thing out of context but if I'm not, jfc...

[Rjay]

Just now, CPcantmeasuresnow said:

I agree to a degree. 
 

However his sole purpose is to rile up others and that’s disturbing. He would downplay the blizzard of 1888 were he alive then. “ I told you no one was getting over five feet, highest accumulation in the HV was 58 inches”. 
 

Also the vile private messages he sends at will are just antagonistic, juvenile rantings. I’m assuming there is no five limit postings there. I received one several weeks ago, no I didn’t save it just deleted it the moment I saw it, and just decided to block him although I still see everyone replying to him. 
 

He reminds me of old Pamela. Obviously intelligent but very disturbed.

My two cents. 

You have good reason with the PM nonsense.  If he's sending vile PMs you need to show me and/or Bx or report them using the report button.  

[forkyfork]

20 minutes ago, Rjay said:

If you saw some of the responses he routinely gets before they get deleted you'd probably be appalled.  

i can see why he trolls the snow crowd. a lot of them are completely out of their minds

[SnoSki14]

Just now, forkyfork said:

i can see why he trolls the snow crowd. a lot of them are completely out of their minds

They also always answer him. You don't feed a troll. 

It's not hard to ignore and move on. 

[forkyfork]

2 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

They also always answer him. You don't feed a troll. 

It's not hard to ignore and move on. 

they can't because they're not well

[LibertyBell]

12 minutes ago, Rjay said:

You have good reason with the PM nonsense.  If he's sending vile PMs you need to show me and/or Bx or report them using the report button.  

He sent those to me too dude (last year- as you know)-- in all fairness if a guy is 5 posted he shouldn't be allowed to participate in any way on the forum after the 5 posts are up.

He is a menace who sends threatening messages.  Someone needs to take this up with Randy.

I dont even give a shit about snow lol, I love summer heat  a lot more because I'm pretty sure I've seen the best snowstorm this area is ever likely to see, his personality just rubs people the wrong way and he has a lot of paranoid tendencies that need to be addressed by a professional.

 

[Rjay]

6 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

He sent those to me too dude (last year- as you know)-- in all fairness if a guy is 5 posted he shouldn't be allowed to participate in any way on the forum after the 5 posts are up.

He is a menace who sends threatening messages.  Someone needs to take this up with Randy.

I dont even give a shit about snow lol, I love summer heat  a lot more because I'm pretty sure I've seen the best snowstorm this area is ever likely to see, his personality just rubs people the wrong way and he has a lot of paranoid tendencies that need to be addressed by a professional.

 

If this is happening then people need to send screenshots or hit the report button. It's pretty simple.  

[LibertyBell]

4 minutes ago, Rjay said:

If this is happening then people need to send screenshots or hit the report button. It's pretty simple.  

You should remember it because you were involved in it last year.  So basically he said I was someone else and even said it in public and he sent me a message making the same allegation.  You told him that I am not that person lol.

Also, in all due respect, you're a very good mod, but you have a soft spot for him....perhaps if people stopped defending him he would modify his behavior.  I've found weenieing people who weenie a good deterrent to make them think twice about that behavior but in all honesty 5 posting should also limit all other behavior on the forum.

edit-- He claimed I was some guy named "Mersky" and I told him I'm not and I don't even know who that is, and he kept on about it.  This was from Jan 28, 2021.  I think he said it in public too and you told him I wasn't that person (whomever that is.)  I still have the message and I called him paranoid even back then.

 

[rclab]

1 minute ago, Rjay said:

If this is happening then people need to send screenshots or hit the report button. It's pretty simple.  

I believe S19 is very sad. I believe, rather than ecstatic, he must be and feel very lonely during the warm season. May he and all of us eventually find peace. As always ….

[LibertyBell]

2 minutes ago, rclab said:

I believe S19 is very sad. I believe, rather than ecstatic, he must be and feel very lonely during the warm season. May he and all of us eventually find peace. As always ….

I actually agree with you.  Which is why we must temper anger with sympathy.

 

[Rjay]

7 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

You should remember it because you were involved in it last year.  So basically he said I was someone else and even said it in public and he sent me a message making the same allegation.  You told him that I am not that person lol.

Also, in all due respect, you're a very good mod, but you have a soft spot for him....perhaps if people stopped defending him he would modify his behavior.  I've found weenieing people who weenie a good deterrent to make them think twice about that behavior but in all honesty 5 posting should also limit all other behavior on the forum.

edit-- He claimed I was some guy named "Mersky" and I told him I'm not and I don't even know who that is, and he kept on about it.  This was from Jan 28, 2021.  I think he said it in public too and you told him I wasn't that person (whomever that is.)  I still have the message and I called him paranoid even back then.

 

There is no soft spot.  We love you guys but half the subforum is insane and we're sick of babysitting.

[BxEngine]

4 minutes ago, Rjay said:

There is no soft spot.  We love you guys but half the subforum is insane and we're sick of babysitting.

Yup

[Rjay]

Soooo, someone seems to be on the verge busting pretty badly right now.....

[BxEngine]

1 minute ago, Rjay said:

Soooo, someone seems to be on the verge busting pretty badly right now.....

Im gonna go with just about everyone busting. The warmistas and the snowmongers. 
 

less than what we should have probably gotten, but enough that roads have been plowed. 

[LibertyBell]

6 minutes ago, Rjay said:

There is no soft spot.  We love you guys but half the subforum is insane and we're sick of babysitting.

I think that might be a prerequisite to being obsessed with the weather.

Exhibit One of a sane person:

My sister, who measures rainfall with a bucket, doesn't care about rain gages because why would it matter to measure rainfall to the nearest .01 inch?

She measures snow by sticking a ruler in the ground, just once.  That's it.

She watches weather reports on WABC and TWC.  Doesn't care about weather models, because they are all wrong anyway, so might as well look at the most convenient way to access the weather as possible instead of scanning through a dozen different weather models through multiple runs.

I told her about the forums and what you guys do.  Her first question was....do they get paid for this kind of work?  I said no.  She shook her head....I believe she thinks we're all insane lmao.

She's wayyyyy smarter than the average person, but she isn't obsessed so she sees meteorology as being inexact and just not worth trying to microanalyze every detail or worrying about a week in advance because no one and no model truly knows what the outcome will be.  But with no knowledge of indices or any of that stuff, she did say that using analogs may no longer be that useful because with the changing climate weather is becoming less predictable.  And weather is very important to her because she's an avid gardener, she just knows not to get obsessed with it because the outcome is still unknown days in advance no matter how much tech we have to throw at it.

[Rjay]

We have a guy who used to measure puddles and then would report his rain totals via ruler.  

[Rjay]

4 minutes ago, BxEngine said:

Im gonna go with just about everyone busting. The warmistas and the snowmongers. 
 

less than what we should have probably gotten, but enough that roads have been plowed. 

By "someone" I meant lots of people lol

[LibertyBell]

Just now, Rjay said:

We have a guy who used to measure puddles and then would report his rain totals via ruler.  

lmaoooo do you remember the guy who measured snow by sticking his ruler in the ground upside down and then actually took a picture of it like that and reported the observed "snowfall total"?

 

[Rjay]

Just now, LibertyBell said:

lmaoooo do you remember the guy who measured snow by sticking his ruler in the ground upside down and then actually took a picture of it like that and reported the observed "snowfall total"?

 

Yes

[LibertyBell]

4 minutes ago, BxEngine said:

Im gonna go with just about everyone busting. The warmistas and the snowmongers. 
 

less than what we should have probably gotten, but enough that roads have been plowed. 

Looks like taking an average of both extremes works out the best in most cases.

 

[BxEngine]

4 minutes ago, Rjay said:

By "someone" I meant lots of people lol

I know. Im not the guy who measured in the puddle. 
 

im just pointing out the obvious before the bickering restarts

[IrishRob17]

1 minute ago, BxEngine said:

I know. Im not the guy who measured in the puddle. 
 

im just pointing out the obvious before the bickering restarts

Any minute now

[LibertyBell]

1 minute ago, bluewave said:

If people showed more restraint in posting those model snowfall forecast charts, then most of the conflicts in the threads would probably go away. 

https://weather.com/storms/winter/news/social-media-bad-snow-forecasts

If you're a weather enthusiast or a user of social media, your list of New Year's resolutions could use one more addition.

When you see a wild, overblown winter weather forecast on Facebook or Twitter, and the source looks sketchy, don't just blindly share it. It leads to the spread of misinformation, and, in a worst-case scenario, could incite an uproar that forces meteorologists to take time issuing a response.

At least one meteorologist is already trying to calm a city after a picture spread across Facebook. Meteorologist Brad Nitz, who works for WSB-TV in Atlanta, has been fielding questions after an old snowfall forecast image was posted to Facebook Sunday, and read over 250,000 times in just a few hours. The maps were from WSB, so fans hounded Nitz, looking for the truth.

The problem was that the story they were sharing was a year old. There is currently no threat of a major winter storm for Atlanta in the immediate future.

 

(MORE: 10 Things the NWS Wants You to Know about Winter Weather Forecasts)

It's not just Atlanta that falls victim to these bad forecasts that go viral. All over the country, forecasters are hounded all winter by concerned citizens who saw a forecast on Facebook or Twitter that called for historic snow or ice and want to know if it's true.

Here's how it usually starts. It'll almost always initiate from a "forecast" two or three weeks into the future, because that's when the forecast models tend to give the wildest data. As the event draws nearer, the model skill tends to, but not always, increase for a given storm. Most of the time, that historic blizzard you saw three weeks out is no longer showing up on the models, and before social media, you never heard about these wild forecasts because the experts know how unlikely they are.

It's a little bit like the "telephone" game we all played in elementary school, only with a lot more panic.

"There are many bogus hurricanes, winter storms and severe weather outbreaks numerical models spin up beyond five days out," said weather.com meteorologist Jon Erdman. "Experienced meteorologists know which forecast models tend to do this, and play any potential high-impact event that far out carefully, unless it's of unusually high confidence. Take any social media post saying 'Model X says this over a week out' with skepticism. A 'model saying this' post should never be a substitute for a forecast."

 

These days, it's a different animal, and it's not an easy beast for the experts to contain. Amateurs have access to these forecast models, and they can put some pretty crazy stuff on social media. They share these blockbuster "forecasts" for one reason: because it will get a ton of shares and help build their following.

From there, the consequences of these posts get a lot more frustrating for meteorologists. The social shares spiral out of control, and before long, a large chunk of a city has seen the forecast. They start talking with their friends, and the long-shot weather event suddenly has turned into a slam-dunk historic blizzard. There's just one problem: it'll never happen.

"Most of the 2-3 week 'forecasts' are done by people not qualified to forecast the weather 2-3 days in advance," said Birmingham, Alabama, meteorologist James Spann in a recent blog on the topic, never one to mince words. "Most are young weather enthusiasts that, in their love for ice, snow, or severe weather, just 'wishcast' by throwing out model maps they have pulled down on various sites promoting the weather they love and desire without understanding the limitations of using those products, or the science behind them."

(MORE: The 10 Worst Ice Storms in U.S. History)

Although it's unlikely the "wishcasting" will be completely eradicated from social media in the near future, there are a few things you can do to make sure you don't get duped. First of all, examine the map. If they're trying to fool you, they might lazily post a map from last year's big storm in your area. If they didn't crop out the date, it might still be on the image, and that's the easiest way to spot a fake.

Also, consider the source. If the person who posted the image isn't a familiar face that you've seen on TV, a trained meteorologist from the National Weather Service or private forecast company such as The Weather Channel, a quick Google search of their name will almost always tell you in less than 30 seconds if this a reputable source. Certified meteorologists should not be sharing a wild forecast for three weeks into the future, and if you can't find the person's portfolio and credentials in a web search, that's a red flag.

Finally, if it seems too good to be true, it probably is. If you've lived in the same place your entire life, and you've never seen 20 inches of snow from a single event before, what are the odds that this will be the time it actually happens? Tune in or log on to check your local forecast to see if they're discussing anything similar, and if they're not, it's probably a good idea to stay away from the "share" button.

Social media has added a lot of noise to the meteorology world, and we'll need to work together on silencing some of the incorrect chatter.

Do you think we could fix these problems by not making models accessible to the general public and only make them accessible to mets with 4 year degrees in meteorology (I dont like the fake mets with degrees in other things or fly by night diplomas either)

Also, I see that even our heralded TV mets (real mets) got this one wrong....Lee Goldberg had the entire NYC area and western LI in 1-3" of snow and showed an output of 2.8" at NYC....obviously that's not going to happen.

 

[rclab]

25 minutes ago, Rjay said:

There is no soft spot.  We love you guys but half the subforum is insane and we're sick of babysitting.

 

21 minutes ago, BxEngine said:

Yup

Good, some flakes still falling on the postage stamp, afternoon BxE, Rjay. I prefer to think of us as half crocked/cracked but as that cracked crock is half full I think we’ll collectively make it. I will never envy you or any other mods/admins. As always …

[LibertyBell]

2 minutes ago, bluewave said:

I think we need AI and machine learning to generate realistic model snowfall output. These various snowfall algorithms that the model sites use don’t work well with marginal temperatures. Even when it’s a 100% snowfall event, banding often renders those snowfall outputs less accurate. So it’s something that the people making these charts available on their sites need to think about.

We actually need AI to run our governments instead of dumb politicians who are beholden to corporations, but thats another story.

I would support AI running everything over any human.

In regards to banding, I find that really annoying because for some reason (I'm sure it's not chance because it happens EVERY TIME) the south shore here is always in the sucker zone for snow.

The ONLY time it doesn't happen is when we have moderate or stronger el ninos and a big coastal storm (not necessarily strong) hitting an arctic front.... aka, Feb 1983, PD2 and Jan 2016.

It also happened one time in a la nina.... Jan 1996.

Are those the only storms where you found that banding wasn't important and the whole area (meaning our local area) was buried with 20"+ of snow?

 

[LibertyBell]

https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2022/03/russia-economic-sanctions-wheat-oil/627004/?utm_source=pocket-newtab

 

1) The Green-Energy Revolution Goes Into Warp Speed Tech revolutions in the 21st century tend to be very fast. It took about a decade for the share of Americans with a smartphone to go from zero to 80 percent. But energy revolutions are lazier affairs, and the green-energy transition in particular has been torpid in the U.S. and Europe, which is perhaps surprising given the declining price of solar energy. The West has simply refused to build green-energy projects fast enough to decarbonize the grid.

Russia’s war could accelerate the green revolution in two big ways. First, it will increase political pressure on the U.S. and European governments to reduce reliance on Russian oil and gas. (The U.S. has already said it will stop importing Russian energy, and Europe is considering a similar ban.) In the short term, countries will lean harder on spare oil and gas sources to keep prices down. But over time, the boycott of Russian energy could raise the price of thermal energy enough that it compels countries to deploy significantly more wind and solar projects. For years, anti-growth fears, antinuclear sentiment, and vague NIMBYism have stood in the way of green-energy construction. The urgency of an external threat could melt away some of those anxieties. “We can not talk about renewables revolution if getting a permit to build a wind park takes seven years,” said Kadri Simson, the European commissioner for energy. “It is time to treat these projects as being in the overriding public interest, because they are.”

Second, rising energy prices will change consumer preferences, nudging more consumers away from gas-powered cars. Today less than 5 percent of the U.S. car market is fully electric. But the industry is pushing electric vehicles hard; nearly every automotive ad in the Super Bowl was for an EV. This marketing shift could combine with a painful spike in gas prices in a way that gets more Americans to buy EVs, which will encourage more automotive companies to invest in EV production, which could bring down the cost of EVs, which will increase demand. This possible shift from energy pain to energy progress has a historical precedent. In 1973, OPEC cut off the U.S. and other countries from access to its oil, raising gas prices. Although most Americans associate that period with economic stagnation, the crisis also led American car manufacturers to become more energy efficient. Actual fuel economy as measured in miles per gallon took off in 1973. Fifty years later, we could see the same dynamic play out: the shock of energy pain leading to decades of progress.

[uncle W]

5 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2022/03/russia-economic-sanctions-wheat-oil/627004/?utm_source=pocket-newtab

 

1) The Green-Energy Revolution Goes Into Warp Speed Tech revolutions in the 21st century tend to be very fast. It took about a decade for the share of Americans with a smartphone to go from zero to 80 percent. But energy revolutions are lazier affairs, and the green-energy transition in particular has been torpid in the U.S. and Europe, which is perhaps surprising given the declining price of solar energy. The West has simply refused to build green-energy projects fast enough to decarbonize the grid.

Russia’s war could accelerate the green revolution in two big ways. First, it will increase political pressure on the U.S. and European governments to reduce reliance on Russian oil and gas. (The U.S. has already said it will stop importing Russian energy, and Europe is considering a similar ban.) In the short term, countries will lean harder on spare oil and gas sources to keep prices down. But over time, the boycott of Russian energy could raise the price of thermal energy enough that it compels countries to deploy significantly more wind and solar projects. For years, anti-growth fears, antinuclear sentiment, and vague NIMBYism have stood in the way of green-energy construction. The urgency of an external threat could melt away some of those anxieties. “We can not talk about renewables revolution if getting a permit to build a wind park takes seven years,” said Kadri Simson, the European commissioner for energy. “It is time to treat these projects as being in the overriding public interest, because they are.”

Second, rising energy prices will change consumer preferences, nudging more consumers away from gas-powered cars. Today less than 5 percent of the U.S. car market is fully electric. But the industry is pushing electric vehicles hard; nearly every automotive ad in the Super Bowl was for an EV. This marketing shift could combine with a painful spike in gas prices in a way that gets more Americans to buy EVs, which will encourage more automotive companies to invest in EV production, which could bring down the cost of EVs, which will increase demand. This possible shift from energy pain to energy progress has a historical precedent. In 1973, OPEC cut off the U.S. and other countries from access to its oil, raising gas prices. Although most Americans associate that period with economic stagnation, the crisis also led American car manufacturers to become more energy efficient. Actual fuel economy as measured in miles per gallon took off in 1973. Fifty years later, we could see the same dynamic play out: the shock of energy pain leading to decades of progress.

green energy means more money for the politicians...if you want everyone to have electric cars you better have the infrastructure to make electricity and a power grid that can take all the recharging...we are lucky to get through a summer without power failures...hybrid cars are the way to go now...I don't see all electric in the near future...

[MJO812]

Depressing to think winter is over

 

[rclab]

25 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

Depressing to think winter is over

 

Good morning Anthony. Your a very good person. On a sunny, beautiful, albeit cold, Sunday morning you gave S19 an early smile/laugh. No matter the extreme of the approaching warm season, the cold will return and open up its seasonal playpen for all of us again. Stay well and dream of May. As always …..

[rclab]

16 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2022/03/russia-economic-sanctions-wheat-oil/627004/?utm_source=pocket-newtab

 

1) The Green-Energy Revolution Goes Into Warp Speed Tech revolutions in the 21st century tend to be very fast. It took about a decade for the share of Americans with a smartphone to go from zero to 80 percent. But energy revolutions are lazier affairs, and the green-energy transition in particular has been torpid in the U.S. and Europe, which is perhaps surprising given the declining price of solar energy. The West has simply refused to build green-energy projects fast enough to decarbonize the grid.

Russia’s war could accelerate the green revolution in two big ways. First, it will increase political pressure on the U.S. and European governments to reduce reliance on Russian oil and gas. (The U.S. has already said it will stop importing Russian energy, and Europe is considering a similar ban.) In the short term, countries will lean harder on spare oil and gas sources to keep prices down. But over time, the boycott of Russian energy could raise the price of thermal energy enough that it compels countries to deploy significantly more wind and solar projects. For years, anti-growth fears, antinuclear sentiment, and vague NIMBYism have stood in the way of green-energy construction. The urgency of an external threat could melt away some of those anxieties. “We can not talk about renewables revolution if getting a permit to build a wind park takes seven years,” said Kadri Simson, the European commissioner for energy. “It is time to treat these projects as being in the overriding public interest, because they are.”

Second, rising energy prices will change consumer preferences, nudging more consumers away from gas-powered cars. Today less than 5 percent of the U.S. car market is fully electric. But the industry is pushing electric vehicles hard; nearly every automotive ad in the Super Bowl was for an EV. This marketing shift could combine with a painful spike in gas prices in a way that gets more Americans to buy EVs, which will encourage more automotive companies to invest in EV production, which could bring down the cost of EVs, which will increase demand. This possible shift from energy pain to energy progress has a historical precedent. In 1973, OPEC cut off the U.S. and other countries from access to its oil, raising gas prices. Although most Americans associate that period with economic stagnation, the crisis also led American car manufacturers to become more energy efficient. Actual fuel economy as measured in miles per gallon took off in 1973. Fifty years later, we could see the same dynamic play out: the shock of energy pain leading to decades of progress.

 

11 hours ago, uncle W said:

green energy means more money for the politicians...if you want everyone to have electric cars you better have the infrastructure to make electricity and a power grid that can take all the recharging...we are lucky to get through a summer without power failures...hybrid cars are the way to go now...I don't see all electric in the near future...

Good morning Liberty, Unc. A good point has been made. It may be wise to explore the need in certain areas for a transition via the hybrid. The grid must be able to support the demand. With an all electric future we should be cautious/thorough as to the results/consequences of jumping without seeing clearly our landing spot. I also believe for work related commutes in dense megalopolis areas thought should be given to continued development of one or two person vehicles. Transformation periods can be fascinating, rather than contentious. Be well all, I just remembered to change my clocks. As always …