Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,586
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Off we go, Tracking the Friday All In Storm/NADS


stormtracker

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 995
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Based on what? Gut feeling? Bad attitude? Psychic reading?

This is a storm thread. Post something that backs up your assertions. The NAM and now the GFS have both come in looking pretty darn good. If you're gonna throw them out, back it up.

Good point. OK, my reasoning basically comes down to climo, not to mention the cheat sheet Mother Nature has provided from the past 3 similar situations. Models will continue to get the overall picture correct from 3-5 days out, but when it comes to the fine details of jet interaction/phasing and secondary low placement, it will not. Models have consistently shown us getting in on Miller B action at this time frame, but anyone who has lived in the area knows that it is much more the exception than the norm. It is a model bias or error or just maybe expecting too much from the models from that far out. I actually think the models have been pretty impressive and valuable this winter, but they have been misused. People have been buying model output hook-line-and sinker and using it as THE FORECAST rather than using the output as just one data point to consider in an overall forecast. Applying the human elements of climatology, tendencies, lessons learned from past/recent storms, etc., makes meteorology METEOROLOGY and not just model regurgitation. So if the models are showing me very similar things to what they were showing before and we got screwed, I would expect nothing different this time. If someone can point out a specific feature that makes this event different, I am all ears. But even then, it could be just a model error.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IAN punted the ice storm incorrectly so I am getting more optimistic for the future events he is punting. All hail Yoda. King of Ice storm

i didnt punt it. i was off by like .05-.1" ice in some spots from my guess on friday or saturday that i never updated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's just annoying getting **** for being right more often than not

Welcome to meteorology.

If I had a nickel for everytime I heard the layman's (translation--"douchebag") joke about "weatherman are the only people who can be wrong 9 out of 10 times and still get paid", I'd be a very rich man. I've heard it so many motherf-cking times I just usually walk away from the conversation or ignore that person. I decided that was better than either:

1. Trying to explain the "selection effect bias" on human memory

2. Telling them to f-ck off

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ian, some of us genuinely appreciate your contributions no matter the results. I tend to prefer reasoned analysis and predictions over rash, illogical optimism or pessimism that seems to be determined solely by the poster's location relative to the QPF outputs/850 line.

Well done Sabre.

At least, going forward, we have some "threats". Keep the expectations low and anything better will be a bonus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to meteorology.

If I had a nickel for everytime I heard the layman's (translation--"douchebag") joke about "weatherman are the only people who can be wrong 9 out of 10 times and still get paid", I'd be a very rich man. I've heard it so many motherf-cking times I just usually walk away from the conversation or ignore that person. I decided that was better than either:

1. Trying to explain the "selection effect bias" on human memory

2. Telling them to f-ck off

yeah... probably good advice.

Ian, some of us genuinely appreciate your contributions no matter the results. I tend to prefer reasoned analysis and predictions over rash, illogical optimism or pessimism that seems to be determined solely by the poster's location relative to the QPF outputs/850 line.

im not looking for sympathy, but thx. i post too much in general so i end up with a lot of 'calls' that others never make to be graded on. and not to pat myself on the back but im pretty sure i was one of the first in this subforum to even pay attention to friday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to meteorology.

If I had a nickel for everytime I heard the layman's (translation--"douchebag") joke about "weatherman are the only people who can be wrong 9 out of 10 times and still get paid", I'd be a very rich man. I've heard it so many motherf-cking times I just usually walk away from the conversation or ignore that person. I decided that was better than either:

1. Trying to explain the "selection effect bias" on human memory

2. Telling them to f-ck off

Well said!

I heard a similar joke about baseball. Something to the effect of what other sport/occupation can you be successful a mere 30% of the time and be considered one of the greats?? (i.e., lifetime .300 hitter, making the Hall of Fame, or something like that). Actually, the comparison isn't bad here (baseball/weather). Anyone who can hit a small ball thrown at them at 90+MPH from 60'6" away at a .300 clip is amazing. Likewise, anyone who can make a reasonable assessment of significant weather events, taking in the wide range of data and model guidance is pretty amazing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im not looking for sympathy, but thx. i post too much in general so i end up with a lot of 'calls' that others never make to be graded on. and not to pat myself on the back but im pretty sure i was one of the first in this subforum to even pay attention to friday.

Not intended so much as sympathy as it is a statement on what the regional model threads have done. Much harder to sift through the crap to get to the quality. Still, I appreciate the quality posts you and some of the others consistently offer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a monster. :(

it's not that. but im not going to toss what i've learned over the yrs from numerous quality meteorologists like wes so people who want snow will be happier to read my posts. i know a good bit if just joking but from some people that's all i get -- oh you'r so negative, blah blah blah. more like a realist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to meteorology.

If I had a nickel for everytime I heard the layman's (translation--"douchebag") joke about "weatherman are the only people who can be wrong 9 out of 10 times and still get paid", I'd be a very rich man. I've heard it so many motherf-cking times I just usually walk away from the conversation or ignore that person. I decided that was better than either:

1. Trying to explain the "selection effect bias" on human memory

2. Telling them to f-ck off

Very true, I hear this many times myself...I usually try to explain number 1. but its getting redundant, I think ill try 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ian, some of us genuinely appreciate your contributions no matter the results. I tend to prefer reasoned analysis and predictions over rash, illogical optimism or pessimism that seems to be determined solely by the poster's location relative to the QPF outputs/850 line.

Nicely said.

Ian continue doing your thing... I'd rather listen to a realist like you or Wes than... well you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's not that. but im not going to toss what i've learned over the yrs from numerous quality meteorologists like wes so people who want snow will be happier to read my posts. i know a good bit if just joking but from some people that's all i get -- oh you'r so negative, blah blah blah. more like a realist.

You have a reputation to uphold now... you're a blogger. You HAVE changed since last year and that's why. I don't care but I do find it humorous at times. thumbsupsmileyanim.gif

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...