This is another reason you are referred to as #.s Good job. However numbers
can be misleading take away the one storm and there really wasn't really
much snow this winter, YET!. And even that storm was not forecasted to
be that deep with snow. No ?
OT - After the Feb snow bust, is winter over?
- Thread starter T2Kplus10
- Start date
can be misleading take away the one storm and there really wasn't really
much snow this winter, YET!. And even that storm was not forecasted to
be that deep with snow. No ?
No link, but I remember hearing the same in advance of the winter. "Will be one of the coldest on record". Maybe something like the Farmers' Almanac. Not saying it came from somewhere reputable but definitely remember the headlines months back.
Weather folks need to pay the bills, so they hype the news of everything - storms, winter, summer, snow, rain, droughts, hurricanes, tornadoes, etc. That's how Big Weather rolls.
there was a lot of hype about a backloaded winter from late January to March with tons of snow chances and lots of cold...and that fizzled. Yes we got a blizzard and yes we got to 0 degrees but February still finished above normal and after the blizzard the snow events were smaller nuisance types..even the 2-3 incher disappeared by the end of the day in early February.
Of course! There's no debate about this: it's settled science. And if you can't accept that then that makes you a denier.
Thanks. This winter was kind of like a typical Dave Kingman double-header: 7 whiffs and a grand-slam. We basically had one huge snowstorm and one cold weekend amidst spring conditions much of the time. But like you can't discount the grand-slam, you can't discount the blizzard. I have 31" at my house this winter and most locations in the Philly to NYC corridor are at or above seasonal levels, which is highly unusual for such a warm winter: in NYC, out of the 5 winters that averaged >40F, this is the only one with above normal snowfall - the other 4 had <10" for the winter, each. However, places like the Poconos, Catskills and interior New England are all well below normal this winter. I've had more snow in Metuchen than they've had in Albany, NY or Burlington, VT - that's extremely rare (although winter's not over yet, for snowfall).
With regard to the blizzard forecast, it was always forecast to be major, i.e., in the 6-12" range, by most models (with exceptions - a few showed less and a few showed a lot more) for days before the event, but the night before the event and the morning of the event saw significant increases in model forecasts, such that by Friday afternoon, forecasts had increased to a general 12-20" of snow (for a storm starting around 11 pm Friday) and snowfall forecasts were upped a couple times more during the storm.
Weather does not equal climate in any way, shape or form and predicting the two uses completely different methods/models. This doesn't mean the global warming predictions are correct (I believe they're at least in the ballpark and seeing how much we've warmed in the past 100 years is at the very least disconcerting), but what it does mean is you can't use the difficulty in predicting weather a few days out to say that the climate models (which look at global averages, not what the weather will be like on a specific day in 75 years) are wrong. And implying the two are related in some way betrays a complete lack of understanding of even the most fundamental scientific principles.
T once again entering fantasy land. I didn't think it was possible for you to appear dumber than you have most of this winter, but congratulations on doing so. Big Weather? You have got to be kidding me. The people who tend to hype events are some (not nearly all) in the news media - the kind of capitalists you love - it's in their self-interest to get eyeballs to increase advertising rates. The folks who tend to hype the least are those government guys you seem to despise so much. For them it's all about accuracy, since, Lord knows they aren't being paid that well compared to private sector services. They do it for the love of the science. Kind of like most government-funded climatologists.
So I gather you love snow, so now I'll tell something you that will
make you jealous. In 1966 and 1967 for two years
I was stationed at a radar site 17 miles from a Siberian
peninsula. The average snow fall from Dec thru end of Feb
was 260 feet of snow. In that 90 day period it would
snow on 80 days. Even so when we went out I
would ask if it snowing because of the strong winds
you couldn't really tell.
My point is that understanding global climate is an immensely complicated proposition. To think that all of these self proclaimed experts have nailed it with their models is incredibly naïve. I think their absolute confidence in their models, their measurements and their overall knowledge of factors that influence climate betrays a complete lack of understanding of fundamental scientific principles.
Then you're not reading the right sources. If you read the IPCC or any reputable climate source, the inherent uncertainty in the models and predictions are clearly laid out. That's why you'll see them report relatively wide ranges of mean global temperature and sea level rise increases, depending on the scenario/assumptions. But the direction of the change (modest to significant increases in each) is not really in doubt, absent some unknown factor, so the question becomes what to do with the information. Now that's a tougher question.
https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/spmsspm-projections-of.html
Wrong again. Spot on forecast by the NWS. A general 0.5-1.5" in Central Jersey and even into NYC/NENJ, with close to 2" towards 195 and 2-3" south of 195 and east of the Delaware, which is why those folks had advisories up, which are verifying.
Doesn't look like it to me:
The forecast was spot on.
The scarlet nation board jinx is something else!
Similar threads
