Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Not one of NOAA's, NWS, or any other agencies models can pass empirical evaluation. There is currently a 100% failure rate of all models. Outside 12 hours, it's a coin toss. The only reason the farmer's almanac gets it right 80% of the time is due to pattern identification.
The current state of the modeling demonstrates our understanding of the climatic system. We don't know squat! Your average farmer can predict better than any of the fancy computer generated fiction.
They do not use models... They use pattern identification.Their models are okay?
If you're trusting anything beyond 12 hours, this is an accurate assessment..and may God have mercy on your soul
Their models are okay?
That's okay ... the computer runs don't have to be accurate ... they just need to be useful ... it's a meteorologist who sits down with all this computer output and interprets the data ... from this he can write a good forecast ... at your location, this is accurate out 48 hours ... and may God have mercy on your soul ...
Try forecasting on top of the great divide. Now that is challenging.No forecast is accurate past 24 hours. Here in the mountains they aren't even good for more than 8 hours.
A 2010 study of Almanac forecasts for 32 cities by the University of Illinois (at Animated Infrared Satellite Imagery for the Northern Hemisphere but behind a paywall) found it to be 52% accurate which is essentially the same results you'd get with random guesses. So much for "pattern recognition". Modern meteorologists can do much better.Not one of NOAA's, NWS, or any other agencies models can pass empirical evaluation. There is currently a 100% failure rate of all models. Outside 12 hours, it's a coin toss. The only reason the farmer's almanac gets it right 80% of the time is due to pattern identification.
The current state of the modeling demonstrates our understanding of the climatic system. We don't know squat! Your average farmer can predict better than any of the fancy computer generated fiction.
Try forecasting on top of the great divide. Now that is challenging.
No forecast is accurate past 24 hours. Here in the mountains they aren't even good for more than 8 hours.
Coming into this winter, California was mired in a three-year drought, with forecasts offering little hope of relief anytime soon. Fast forward to today, and the state is waterlogged with as much as 10 to 20 inches of rain and up to 200 inches of snow that have fallen in some locations in the past three weeks. The drought isn’t over, but parched farmland and declining reservoir levels have been supplanted by raging rivers and deadly flooding.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Climate Prediction Center (CPC) issues seasonal forecasts of precipitation and temperature for one to 13 months into the future. The CPC’s initial outlook for this winter, issued on Oct. 20, favored below-normal precipitation in Southern California and did not lean toward either drier- or wetter-than-normal conditions in Northern California.
However, after a series of intense moisture-laden storms known as atmospheric rivers, most of California has seen rainfall totals 200 to 600 percent above normal over the past month, with 24 trillion gallons of water having fallen in the state since late December.
The stark contrast between the staggering amount of precipitation in recent weeks and the CPC’s seasonal precipitation outlook issued before the winter, which leaned toward below-normal precipitation for at least half of California, has water managers lamenting the unreliability of seasonal forecasts.
“You have no idea come Dec. 1 what your winter is going to look like because our seasonal forecasts are so bad,” said Jeffrey Mount, a senior fellow with the Public Policy Institute of California’s Water Policy Center, in an interview. “They are just not reliable enough to make definitive water supply decisions.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2023/01/15/california-seasonal-forecasts-noaa-missed/
But they know for dead certain that temperatures are rising 5 degrees in the next 100 years and the oceans are going to rise 10 to 20 feet by the end of the century.
We'll see ... I've noted the forecast at B'Bob's position ... tomorrow morning we'll see what's happening ...
ETA: My apologies ... the forecast from 24 hours ago is still available at the NWS ... it's spot on ... will it snow tonight through tomorrow morning? ... if so, picture perfect forecast to 48 hours ...
[sticks tongue out at B'Bob and W'Wall] ...
Not really. The forecast here was 1 to 3 inches of snow.
We got 10.
We'll see ... I've noted the forecast at B'Bob's position ... tomorrow morning we'll see what's happening ...
ETA: My apologies ... the forecast from 24 hours ago is still available at the NWS ... it's spot on ... will it snow tonight through tomorrow morning? ... if so, picture perfect forecast to 48 hours ...
[sticks tongue out at B'Bob and W'Wall] ...
Despite improvements in weather models it’s still a complex system and their ability to predict the future becomes cloudy the further out in time.Snowing like hell ... just like they said it would 48 hours ago ... you people should be embarrassed ... the NWS was SPOT ON CORRECT HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW ...
Now for the punchline ... that same forecast said the 72-hour forecast was unclear ... either more snow or not ... the computer models diverged after 48 hours ...
"Reply hazy, ask again later" ... is this a "wrong" forecast? ...
Despite improvements in weather models it’s still a complex system and their ability to predict the future becomes cloudy the further out in time.
Computers aren’t to blame it’s our understanding of the very complex system that’s to blame. That and their preference for an outcome. I’ve never had the dt’s. I never drank enough to get them. Maybe if I had been a climate modeler.Weather models were in place by the mid-19th Century ... it's the climate models that are subject to debate ...
It is a very complex system ... and computers may not provide the answers we want no matter how fast they become ... weather forecasting past 72 hours may never be possible ... just count up how many dt's there are in that amount of time, there's three times as many ∂t's ...
Computers aren’t to blame it’s our understanding of the very complex system that’s to blame. That and their preference for an outcome. I’ve never had the dt’s. I never drank enough to get them. Maybe if I had been a climate modeler.
I’ve tried that before. It didn’t help.BUZZZZ ... wrong ... it's our LACK of understanding of the very very very complex system that's to blame, if blame need be assigned ... I've told you before, I'll tell you again, drop some acid, you'll be a better person for it ... (1st offense is not a crime in Oregon, your results may differ) ...
