The posts in this forum are NOT official forecast and should not be used as such. They are just the opinion of the poster and may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. They are NOT endorsed by any professional institution or 
orangeblood wrote:The goal post moving on this thread is something else…..the entire discussion last week was which model picked up on the Arctic Outbreak in the longer range sooner than the others, 7-10 days out. It was never about the 3-5 day range. The GFS was last to see it by far and that was our entire point about it being a poor performer outside of 6-7 plus days. It almost always place catch up. It’s due to its well documented low resolution outside of 7 days, it’s usually always late to the party and it was no different this time around. It had a high of 50F at DFW from 8 days out for this Thursday, Euro had 28F. NWS office currently has a forecast high of 32F. Pretty clear which one will be more accurate from that range and picked up on the pattern change way before the other, regardless of whether it “warms” a little from where it was in long range.
The GFS is a decent model from 4-5 days out but outside of that it doesn’t perform as well compared to the Euro and even CMC during Arctic Outbreaks. The skill scores in the 7–10 day range and even the physics of the model bear this out, I’m not just making this up out of thin air.
Not really interested in the nuances of a few degrees here or there in the 3-5 day range, all globals get fairly accurate and converge at that range. My comments are strictly for the medium to longer range and stand by them regarding the GFS. Haven’t seen much to change my mind this time around either, it was lost until just a couple of days ago
Sorry but this is an example of some revisionist history if I've ever seen it. The discussion led by you was the GFS was a "garbage model" because it wasn't showing the colder solution that the other models had at that range (didn't have a good handle in the medium range on the "hazardous/blockbuster" cold that you told us then was coming). I mean let's be clear, I didn't get on here and say that about the GFS or hype blockbuster cold.... you did? So, let's at least keep it real here. It's not as if the GFS was blowtorching or didn't have a cold shot into Texas next week (it did). The difference is it wasn't going full blown siberian express deep into Texas like the other models were indicating at the time.
Fast forward to today/tonight and now that the Euro and ICON have trended much warmer, you now say "oh well we weren't talking about the 3–5-day range"? (Lol) Talk about goal post moving.... it doesn't matter my friend that the Euro was "the first" to see insane arctic cold 7-8 days out if guess what.... that cold doesn't end up verifying for the actual target period, we're all focused on??? You want to call one model garbage but give the other "credit" because it saw the type of cold that now doesn't look like it will verify? I mean seriously? All that means to me when it's 46 degrees instead of 28 is boy that Euro, CMC and ICON sure were overdone again (this isn't that bad after all).
Another example...Euro in January had a foot of snow over DFW when certain areas barely got a trace? But man, I tell ya, I remember a certain someone coming on here bashing those other models then as well (including his local NWS) simply because "that individual" got on here and proclaimed the Euro was to be trusted the most and handled "these upper-level systems the best" and anyone who didn't agree was off their rocker including professional metrologist "who were going to end up having to play catch up" to that model. Lol Hello pot meet kettle moment? Did that ever happen? Of course it didn't....guess those NWS folks know a thing or two about forecasting.
You know, It's one thing to come on here and discuss weather and even get into a little healthy debate over the various model solutions which is why I love this forum because everyone offers/brings something to the table and we learn from each other, but when you start bashing the local NWS or calling models "garbage" (GFS for this event), the cold event prior I believe it was the Euro and GFS that were wrong over the CMC and in January it was the ICON and GFS that "shouldn't be trusted"" simply because they didn't have a foot of snowfall like the Euro did (which of course was the most extreme solution in your backyard). With all that history in mind and your own previous comments on this forum, I have to wonder how you can come on here and literally talk about "goal post moving" my friend when you have a history of doing exactly that? Not every extreme solution is going to verify.... especially when we're talking 7-10 days out. Take the hint.... It's Texas after all. Maybe wait just a little longer before you start labeling models trash at that range and give mother nature credit for surprising us all.
