AccuWX Paints...

[Air Force Met]

AFM.. your right he wasn't the only one .that wasn't my point either lol... Anyways, people will always criticize.. its as simple as that,,, If you a pro met I am sure you take offense when an amateur( like myself) criticizes a forecast. Just like a ball player or a politician or a general etc... may take offense when someone who isnt a pro in that area criticizes something they do or say.. we all do it:):) anyways.... back to following storms ,I have given my 2 cents;):)

Let me tell ya...as far as pro-mets go...you don't criticize a busted forecast near as bad as the met who busts it. When I blow a forecast, the other mets may acknowledge it (as a joke) and then move on. Sometimes they don't because it was difficult. BUT...I always criticize myself a lot more than anyone else. Every met I know does the same thing. The hardest scrutiny of a forecast usually comes from the person who issued it (if they are worth anything, that is). You may not be able to tell it by the way they act...but I guarantee that it eats them up inside. We do that so that we may learn to not make the same mistake next time.

[ameriwx2003]

AFM.... yes.. your correct:):)..a few met friends of mine are really hard on themselves when they miss a forecast.:).. Oh well, like I said I respect anyone who is willing to put there forecast out in the public for scrutiny:):):)

[goodlife]

Bottom line on forecasting...
Anyone who accurately predicts where a storm will make landfall just made a lucky guess.....that's it..they got lucky...nothing more nothing less..
We will NEVER be able to predict with 100% certainty exactly where a storm will go...
They can predict..they can make scientific guesses and they do very well within their strike cone usually...but more specific than that....it's NEVER going to happen.
No blame anywhere as far as I'm concerned.

[PurdueWx80]

Bottom line on forecasting...
Anyone who accurately predicts where a storm will make landfall just made a lucky guess.....that's it..they got lucky...nothing more nothing less..
We will NEVER be able to predict with 100% certainty exactly where a storm will go...
They can predict..they can make scientific guesses and they do very well within their strike cone usually...but more specific than that....it's NEVER going to happen.
No blame anywhere as far as I'm concerned.

I disagree with you actually. All it will take is another 5-10 years of improvements in observations over oceans and the introduction of very high resoultion models that can run real-time at the operational forecast centers. The 4-km WRF model did an excellent job with Isabel last summer, and it will be interesting to see if post-runs of Charley, Bonnie and/or Alex will do as well. The assimilation of radar data into this model is most likely where the greatest improvements can be made, but so will other mesoscale features that control the storm's movements (and intensity).

[goodlife]

I disagree...
Mother Nature is just that...Mother Nature....
Like I said...predictions...scientific guesses which will undoubtedly become more and more accurate...but never with 100% certainty. That is Mother Nature's Way.

[rainstorm]

jb got floyd right, and his seasonal forecast the past 2 years was almost perfect

[Air Force Met]

I disagree...
Mother Nature is just that...Mother Nature....
Like I said...predictions...scientific guesses which will undoubtedly become more and more accurate...but never with 100% certainty. That is Mother Nature's Way.

You are both right. There is no way in the near future we will be 100% accurate. That will only come when we figure out how to modify the weather...maybe centuries from now. But...we will approach 100% once we can get data over the oceans via satellite and the models improve. The models are good...but they are only as good as the data. Unfortunately...70% of our planet is dataless. Once we solve that problem...forecast accuracy will improve dramtically. We will then move from synoptic and mesoscale forecasting to microscale forecasting.

As far as hurricane prediction...well...tracks will improve over the next 20 years and the track error will almost be eliminated. What has to be researched is intensity...especially eyewall cycles and what clues are given out that it will happen. SOme systems are in a perfect environment and only gradually strengthen. Some are in a less favorable environment and explode due to an eyewall cycle. What is the real cause? Intensity forecast is where the real challenge lies. Track forecasting is not a guess...but a decision based on certain factors and summations. Intenisty on the other hand is more guesswork. In that game...sometimes you get the bear and sometimes it gets you.

[rbaker]

i agree models, tracks will get better as time goes on, however like Charley, can something as a north jog of 15 miles at 20 mph storm be forecasted, I doubt it. I will say we've come along ways since even the 80's.

[Derecho]

Note that the AccuWeather forecast track and whatever long discussion JB has is not necessarily the same thing at all times.

The AccuWeather forecast track shown on their website on the day before landfall had a Cedar Key Landfall. I have a GIF of it saved. This track was heavily emphasized by local Accuweather TV station subscribers.

AccuWeather wouldn't get the abuse they take if they didn't spend so much time in unjustified abuse of NWS, and if they didn't have such a maniacal cult of worshipful fanboys.

If they dish it out, they have to take it as well.

[Derecho]

If it was any other model but the Euro...I would have written it off...but because it was the Euro...it was something that had to be considered before writing it off as bogus.

If the GFS had failed to init the storm for about a dozen runs, then showed it hitting Texas and then hitting Florida 12 hours later, the amount of unholy abuse and mockery it would have gotten here and on other boards would have been off the charts.

I wonder if the EC will gradually lose the somewhat undeserved esteem it has now that it comes out twice a day.

It had always been the fav of the "cool" people for quite a while, based on largely psychological reasons:

1) Hard to find, esp. by newbies

2) Came out only once a day, so that's 1/4th the opportunities to have a screwy run like the GFS, and a run-to-run flip-flop was less noticeable

3) Lack of public data in it made it sort of like the girl you can't have, and even more attractive

4) Came out at an odd time so it was eagerly anticipated and perhaps got more attention than it derserved

5) Because of the data thing, it tended to be ignored for short-term forecasting and therefore wasn't held to account for a blown short term forecast the way a 4 times a day/6 increment model was.

[Air Force Met]

If they dish it out, they have to take it as well.

I don't disagree with that at all. Those who dish it out better be prepared to take it...but those who are dishing it out better be dishing it out themselves. Pretty easy to play the critic when one doesn't leave themselves open to be critiqued because they don't put anything out there to be critiqued.

[Guest]

If they dish it out, they have to take it as well.

I don't disagree with that at all. Those who dish it out better be prepared to take it...but those who are dishing it out better be dishing it out themselves. Pretty easy to play the critic when one doesn't leave themselves open to be critiqued because they don't put anything out there to be critiqued.

Not neccessarily,there are people out there that get paid good $$$ to criticize movies.Many of those critics don't make any movies.The same can be said for music,sports,books,etc...Why should weather be any different.Who says that you have to be such & such in order to criticize it.

[x-y-no]

Not neccessarily,there are people out there that get paid good $$$ to criticize movies.Many of those critics don't make any movies.The same can be said for music,sports,books,etc...Why should weather be any different.Who says that you have to be such & such in order to criticize it.

Ooohh! I see a new profession in my future ... "weather critic!" Now how am I going to convince someone to pay me for that ...

Sort of a "those who can't do, criticize" kind of thing ... LOL

[vbhoutex]

AFM.. your right he wasn't the only one .that wasn't my point either lol... Anyways, people will always criticize.. its as simple as that,,, If you a pro met I am sure you take offense when an amateur( like myself) criticizes a forecast. Just like a ball player or a politician or a general etc... may take offense when someone who isnt a pro in that area criticizes something they do or say.. we all do it:):) anyways.... back to following storms ,I have given my 2 cents;):)

Let me tell ya...as far as pro-mets go...you don't criticize a busted forecast near as bad as the met who busts it. When I blow a forecast, the other mets may acknowledge it (as a joke) and then move on. Sometimes they don't because it was difficult. BUT...I always criticize myself a lot more than anyone else. Every met I know does the same thing. The hardest scrutiny of a forecast usually comes from the person who issued it (if they are worth anything, that is). You may not be able to tell it by the way they act...but I guarantee that it eats them up inside. We do that so that we may learn to not make the same mistake next time.

Joe Bastardi is one I know who really gets upset if he is off with his forecasts. He is very hard on himself about busted forecasts. In fact if you heard him on the BarometerBob show last week he even mentioned how he had blown part of the forecast on one of the systems(can't remember which one). but how many do you know that will do that publicly?

[Air Force Met]

Not neccessarily,there are people out there that get paid good $$$ to criticize movies.Many of those critics don't make any movies.The same can be said for music,sports,books,etc...Why should weather be any different.Who says that you have to be such & such in order to criticize it.

Oh brother. Well...you go right ahead and be a critic about a forecast. It if makes you happy to come on to a board and complain about forecasts without ever offering up anything constructive in return. Go for it. I'm sure your value to the discussion and learning curve will be without measure.

I guess everyone needs something to boast their self estime by critizing things they know nothing about or can't do themselves. Sounds like a lonely existance to me...but whatever makes ya happy. Of course...people will place the same value on your critique as they will your forecast: Nothing.

[Guest]

Arguably the STUPIDEST post you have ever made. Please stop talking to rainstorm / jx ...

The fact is derecho you dont have the foggiest clue what you are talking about. Your assertions are specious and irrational.

The fact si that for 10 years or more NCEP has kept track of the ECMWF model performance as well as the GFS caandian British and Navy models. While there are time when the ECMWF is NOT 1st those times are rare.

YOU know what those links are -- I have posted them HERE before and at WWBB. The fact that you ignore them or claim in your posts that in reality the ecmwf is NOT a better model shows you to be a fool.

Third you assertions on the GFS -- that it comes out 4 times a day and that is WHY the GS scometiems has screwy solutions and dlip flops shows the lack of any scientific basis in yoru knowledge and thinking.

The GFS is scrwey b/c the model is run at 3 DIFFERENT mdoel resolutions. And -- here the KEY PART--- THE GFS IS THE ONLY GLOBAL IN THE WORLD THAT IS RUN TO 16 DAYS AR 3 DIFFERENT RESOLUTIONS.

For anyone in the know the argument NCEP made back in the early 90s that model res does not make differnt is utter BS. From 0 to 84 hrs the GFS is run at 55 KM resolution... from 90 hrs to 168 hrs the model resoluton worsens to 75 KM ... and from 180 hrs to 384 hrs the resolution is well over 100 KM.

THAT is why the GFS model has the rep it does.

Now that you made your ill-infomned bombing throw posts please do what you usually do,.... and dont respond

If it was any other model but the Euro...I would have written it off...but because it was the Euro...it was something that had to be considered before writing it off as bogus.

If the GFS had failed to init the storm for about a dozen runs, then showed it hitting Texas and then hitting Florida 12 hours later, the amount of unholy abuse and mockery it would have gotten here and on other boards would have been off the charts.

I wonder if the EC will gradually lose the somewhat undeserved esteem it has now that it comes out twice a day.

It had always been the fav of the "cool" people for quite a while, based on largely psychological reasons:

1) Hard to find, esp. by newbies

2) Came out only once a day, so that's 1/4th the opportunities to have a screwy run like the GFS, and a run-to-run flip-flop was less noticeable

3) Lack of public data in it made it sort of like the girl you can't have, and even more attractive

4) Came out at an odd time so it was eagerly anticipated and perhaps got more attention than it derserved

5) Because of the data thing, it tended to be ignored for short-term forecasting and therefore wasn't held to account for a blown short term forecast the way a 4 times a day/6 increment model was.

[rainstorm]

no one gets talked about more than jb and accuweather. nuff said about their inpact in forecasting. maybe derek will top them one day though

[Guest]

You MUST be a very religious. Only religious folks could hold such a opinion based on NON science.

WHY do you take an interest in weather if nothing is predictable

I disagree...
Mother Nature is just that...Mother Nature....
Like I said...predictions...scientific guesses which will undoubtedly become more and more accurate...but never with 100% certainty. That is Mother Nature's Way.

[rainstorm]

the unpredictable is what makes life interesting. if we knew the weather 100% in advance, it would be rather dull i think

[Derek Ortt]

Religious people can still be in the field of science. I am VERY religious, its just that at work, I know that I have to prove things based upon science and not based upon the Bible. it is actually very easy to set my religious beliefs aside while doing my job