xsledder
Active member
Glad to hear there is some sorta model adjustments going on. It appears from your statement that the forecasting industry, like others, need to be a little more prudent in their messaging. Trust me, the phrase "100-year event" often gets interrupted the wrong way, and it is our fault.
John, I read your prediction for the season and I also read your preface about taking a prediction with a grain of salt, so I am not explicitly or implicitly including you in with the bunch of chicken littles. But I also have to agree with toddpolaris to some extent that with today's computing power, why can't the industry get forecasting a little closer? How often are these models updated and new, more sophisticated models are released?
Okay, so yes, maybe the total amount of precipitation was there, but we as humans generally handle rain and snow completely different. (For everyone reading this, please don't bring up the flooding in floodplains or other crazy, extreme situations in response to the next couple of statements. Trust me, I heard them all. But if snobuilder can't resist to being witty, go right ahead snobuilder. I would love to see where your imagination goes.) For most rain events, unless it is a "Noah" type event, it really doesn't affect our everyday lives. Yes, we might have to reroute our way to a destination because of road flooding, or have a saturated yard, but within a few days in the worst case scenario we are back to business as usual. (Yes, it impacts the farmers more.)
However, if there is going to be say 6+ inches or more snow, it starts impacting peoples lives depending on the person's circumstances. (Too numerous to list so I will let your imagination have at it.) Not to mention the crazies out there using these types of events and results to their benefit for advancing public policy, which in the end might be detrimental to society. So back to one of my earlier statements, maybe the industry needs to be more prudent in their messaging. I would settle for objectivity and less emotion in their reporting.
John, I read your prediction for the season and I also read your preface about taking a prediction with a grain of salt, so I am not explicitly or implicitly including you in with the bunch of chicken littles. But I also have to agree with toddpolaris to some extent that with today's computing power, why can't the industry get forecasting a little closer? How often are these models updated and new, more sophisticated models are released?
Okay, so yes, maybe the total amount of precipitation was there, but we as humans generally handle rain and snow completely different. (For everyone reading this, please don't bring up the flooding in floodplains or other crazy, extreme situations in response to the next couple of statements. Trust me, I heard them all. But if snobuilder can't resist to being witty, go right ahead snobuilder. I would love to see where your imagination goes.) For most rain events, unless it is a "Noah" type event, it really doesn't affect our everyday lives. Yes, we might have to reroute our way to a destination because of road flooding, or have a saturated yard, but within a few days in the worst case scenario we are back to business as usual. (Yes, it impacts the farmers more.)
However, if there is going to be say 6+ inches or more snow, it starts impacting peoples lives depending on the person's circumstances. (Too numerous to list so I will let your imagination have at it.) Not to mention the crazies out there using these types of events and results to their benefit for advancing public policy, which in the end might be detrimental to society. So back to one of my earlier statements, maybe the industry needs to be more prudent in their messaging. I would settle for objectivity and less emotion in their reporting.
