Dang Weatherman!

[Recoveryhill]

With all of their sophisticated equipment they still manage to be correct on a five day forecast just a whisker over 50% of the time. Yet, they can guarantee, without any question, that the earth will be two degrees warmer 40 years from now. The climate predictors should share their much more advanced computer equipment with the National Weather Service. Then, we could get the five day forecast from that 50% accuracy up to 100%.

Don't confuse short term weather forecasts with long term climate study. The science of pinpoint weather predictions, 24, 48, 96 hours or more in advance is a study in variables. Relatively minor shifts in key steering or pressure components will result in a forecast being correct, or not.

The science of weather patterns over centuries or more is an entirely different ball of wax and looks at completely different things to evidence what the weather was, say 5,000 years ago or what it is likely to be 100, 500, or 1,000 years from now.

Around here, especially this time of year, we depend heavily on the services provided by the National Hurricane Center, the National Weather Service, the Hurricane Hunters and more. Yes, they predicted showers yesterday afternoon and none occurred, but when you have a fire breathing monster approaching out of the South Atlantic, their information is worth its weight in Gold. An amazingly good source of weather information, in the private sector is: Hurricanes & Tropical Cyclones | Weather Underground They of course use data generated by public sector entities such as those previously mentioned. The link is to the Tropical Weather portion of the website but weather for the continent and more is available on the main site.

 

[Ken45101]

The weather bureau hires fiction writers!

This reminds me, many years ago there was a contest between the weather bureau and a herd of cows for predicting the weather. The cows did a better job.

 

[smstonypoint]

Don't know of any other profession where one can be wrong 50% of the time and still keep a job.

Tv sportscasters when they give their prediction on games. It seems the football guys, college and pro, are the worse. I have been wanting that job for years. Sit around, make predictions, and never held accountable. Just laugh it off or never bring it up that you were wrong.

I read (or heard) that the "Boys in Vegas" average being correct 54% of the time against the general betting public. If true, that 4% translates into serious money when you take into account the amounts that are alleged to be wagered on college and professional sports, especially football.

Steve

 

[Wagtail]

This reminds me, many years ago there was a contest between the weather bureau and a herd of cows for predicting the weather. The cows did a better job.

Yep... the sheep are half way up the hill and facing WSW = there'll be a Nor'Easter tomorrow with 2.3 inches of rain!

Oh, and my right knee is aching so it'll last for a couple of days. ath:

 

[ArmyPair2]

If I want it to rain all I have to do is wash and polish the truck that day.

 

[oosik]

WTF - a politician can be never correct and he keeps his job. And we keep electing him - time after time.

 

[ncridgerunner1]

If I want it to rain all I have to do is wash and polish the truck that day.

I believe I have cured some droughts by washing and waxing my vehicles.

 

[TCowner]

My response was not intended to debate climate study. That has been done on this site a number times. And I do agree that when hurricanes and tornadoes approach the radar and satellite images are invaluable. But when it comes to five day forecasts there has been little progress in 40 years.

 

[Recoveryhill]

My point was not to confuse climate study with short term forecasting. Climate study is just that, study. It's the different conclusions reached that are debated.

The reason five day forecasts are "uneven" is due to the random nature of normal weather events. The bigger the event, the more powerful the forces that create them and the easier they are to predict. The smaller the event, "likelihood of showers" the more difficult they are to predict.

No progress in forty years? I would think most folks in tornado ally might not feel that way. Even though tornados are sudden events, the understanding of how and how likely and where they will form is well advanced since the 1970's, to the benefit of all concerned. Unfortunately, given the nature of weather, we still have tragedies but ignorance of what might occur is not bliss. Having it not happen, in spite of a warning, is bliss and in most cases today, the likelihood of weather that "could" produce tornados is now forecast days in advance.

 

[Hiltz]

Please don't defend weathermen. I agree with the original poster. Little progress has happened in the prediction of weather. Weathermen are good at predicting out to 24 hours but after that they are just guessing.

My point was not to confuse climate study with short term forecasting. Climate study is just that, study. It's the different conclusions reached that are debated.

The reason five day forecasts are "uneven" is due to the random nature of normal weather events. The bigger the event, the more powerful the forces that create them and the easier they are to predict. The smaller the event, "likelihood of showers" the more difficult they are to predict.

No progress in forty years? I would think most folks in tornado ally might not feel that way. Even though tornados are sudden events, the understanding of how and how likely and where they will form is well advanced since the 1970's, to the benefit of all concerned. Unfortunately, given the nature of weather, we still have tragedies but ignorance of what might occur is not bliss. Having it not happen, in spite of a warning, is bliss and in most cases today, the likelihood of weather that "could" produce tornados is now forecast days in advance.