Forecasting Skill going downhill ??? [Archive]

Billy Griffin

06-07-2005, 03:26 PM

Just curious for discussion... after seeing the big "screw up" today on OUN's 10:37am forecast discussion calling for Armageddon, how do the rest of you feel on SPC's and Norman's seemingly "lack of" ability to forecast this year.

Yeah, in their defense, I do understand weather is no "exact" science, and it never will be perfect, but the episode that happened earlier was uncalled for. If you're not aware of what happened and the wording issued earlier, go to the TARGET thread and read on 6/10 "talk".

Just in my opinion, that was very unprofessional and of poor taste. To emphasize the "end of the world" is just stupid.

To me, it appears our forecasters are "crying wolf" a great deal this year. No excuse to me, they've got the tools to forecast this stuff correctly... that HIGH RISK day on Sat... NEVER should have been HIGH... Moderate only. They have the tools for soundings, obs, etc. - I think they're jumping the gun way too much and you know what... THE PUBLIC ARE THE ONES WHO WILL SUFFER. It's human nature to become unattentive when it keeps turning up false positives.

For example... how often do we worry about our Homeland Security and whether it's orange or yellow? Does anyone know what it is today? Doubt it (don't cheat).

We grow complacent. That's just human nature. But to contribute to it by making rediculous forecasts... I just don't understand.

Any thoughts? And please, please, please oh please, don't take this as an insult to those of you who have a much deeper meteorology education and background than I. I'm only trying to say that perhaps, they should exercise more caution before trying to create a panic. For example, for those of you in OKC area, look at how the media covers weather now. It's almost got to the point where it's too much. Come on, admit it.

nickgrillo

06-07-2005, 03:46 PM

Billy, as for today, AFDs change as forecasters change and focuses change. I wouldn't worry about it...

As for SAT, where do you get that it didn't require a HIGH risk? Almost everything that day supported a widespread tornado outbreak, although I guess those few factors that didn't, surpressed the rest of the threat... But I don't know why you would say that...

Andrew Francis

06-07-2005, 03:48 PM

I enjoy the hardcore coverage of the OKC metropolitan area media. Sometimes they blow it out of proportion and such, but at least they cover it, i was in St. Louis once and there were warnings all over the area, and not even close to the coverage as OKC..etc...some may find this good, some may not. Anyways, I just put myself in their situation...if a high risk threat appear possible on a certain day and you don't mention any of it in your forcast - say on that day of risk, a major outbreak occurs and you left the public uninformed...I think forecasters that often "expect the worse" are some of the best. I certainly would not want to say its going to be sunny and no storms, and then see three supercells blow up on the radar. Just because there is a slim chance, doesn't mean there is no chance.

But whatever, I love storms and stuff like all of you here, so I too, often "hope for the worst" (in weather sense).

Jeff Snyder

06-07-2005, 04:06 PM

Originally posted by Billy Griffin
Just curious for discussion... after seeing the big \"screw up\" today on OUN's 10:37am forecast discussion calling for Armageddon, how do the rest of you feel on SPC's and Norman's seemingly \"lack of\" ability to forecast this year.

Yeah, in their defense, I do understand weather is no \"exact\" science, and it never will be perfect, but the episode that happened earlier was uncalled for. If you're not aware of what happened and the wording issued earlier, go to the TARGET thread and read on 6/10 \"talk\".

Just in my opinion, that was very unprofessional and of poor taste. To emphasize the \"end of the world\" is just stupid.

To me, it appears our forecasters are \"crying wolf\" a great deal this year. No excuse to me, they've got the tools to forecast this stuff correctly... that HIGH RISK day on Sat... NEVER should have been HIGH... Moderate only. They have the tools for soundings, obs, etc. - I think they're jumping the gun way too much and you know what... THE PUBLIC ARE THE ONES WHO WILL SUFFER. It's human nature to become unattentive when it keeps turning up false positives.

For example... how often do we worry about our Homeland Security and whether it's orange or yellow? Does anyone know what it is today? Doubt it (don't cheat).

We grow complacent. That's just human nature. But to contribute to it by making rediculous forecasts... I just don't understand.

Any thoughts? And please, please, please oh please, don't take this as an insult to those of you who have a much deeper meteorology education and background than I. I'm only trying to say that perhaps, they should exercise more caution before trying to create a panic. For example, for those of you in OKC area, look at how the media covers weather now. It's almost got to the point where it's too much. Come on, admit it.

First off, AFDs are intented for other WFOs and meteorologically-minded folks -- they are NOT intended for the general public. Additionally, just because a pm AFD from OUN DOESN'T mention a huge event doesn't mean forecast thinking has changed that much. Some AFDs are very detailed and in-depth (many long paragraphcs), while others are simple and general (one short paragraph). I caution reading into the details of AFDs too much, as each forecaster writes things his/her own way. IMO, the best (more detailed) AFDs from OUN come from Miller and James.

Convective forecasting is anything but perfect. Models bust, forecasters bust -- nobody forecasts perfectly. There are days in which I have disagreed with particular forecasts (e.g. SPC forecasts), but that's the deal with forecasting -- it IS subjective (interpretation of models, weighing of model output, utilization of observations to verify validity of models, pattern recognition, etc). SPC forecasters (particularly on significant severe weather days) spend a LOT of time preparing forecasts, so I certainly respect their forecasts (though that doesn't mean that my forecasts always align with theirs). If I were much better I'd have bagged every signficant tornado in the plains so far this year...

Forecasts (NWS, SPC, etc) are people too; as such, they can't always be 100% objective. I don't fault some forecasts for seeming to be 'jumping the gun' or whatnot. Just go back to Feb/March threads on here and read about how excited folks get about 1000-1500 CAPE...

Regarding the comment of "the public are the one who will suffer" -- believe me, the SPC forecasters know this as well as anyone. To think that SPC and NWS forecasters and mets don't care about false alarms is ludicris. But, they shouldn't be expected to answer to you, me, or anyone other than those who deal with official verifications. If so, I'll ask you to justify every time one of your forecasts busts.

While the particular am AFD from OUN was strongly-worded, nowhere in there did it say the "end of the world" was coming or that this was armageddon. And, contrary to the title of your thread, severe convective forecasting has greatly improved in the past couple of decades (as I'm sure you are aware). I don' thtink there have been any more 'busts' this year than in previous years.

Billy Griffin

06-07-2005, 04:12 PM

Why does every post always turn into a debate, then the next thing, an argument? Can't we all just love one another> LOL :D

Okay, first off... why I (just me personally) do not think Saturday warranted a HIGH was simply because I could see the CAP was basically gone. I just felt everything was going to go up all at once, which it basically did. Sure, winds and instability were right, but I had a feeling it was going to be a big "cluster" or MCS thing. Further south, where I should have stayed to begin with, it was better capped but probably still didn't warrant a "high" because of the scattered nature.

I'm only going on the meteorological definition of HIGH and just in my thinking, even though we did have a few good tornadoes, it wasn't a widespread outbreak. Not a 5/3/99, Not a 5/4, etc. etc. - that's all I'm trying to say. Nothing meant to offend anyone, nothing meant to get anyone mad, just me thinking out loud.

As far as media coverage of weather, yes... I do believe that coverage is done and done well. Again, I'm just saying that things could, perhaps, be toned down a little.

We must remember that "most" of the public do not share our enthusiasm for severe weather. When we have AFDs going out calling for the Rapture, I'm afraid it just creates more panic. I know, here in the office for example, the first thing people did after that discussion was out was to come running down to my office and asking how bad it really was going to be. One lady even commented on how she might leave Oklahoma for the weekend. Face it, it does sound silly, but some folks are just terrified of weather. Yet again, I'm only saying that it did seem a little (a lot) inappropriate to use wording like that so far out.

Yes, warn the public, make them aware and diligent... but don't scare them to death and don't call for "women and children first" until all the facts are there. That's all I'm trying to say folks.

One more thing, not picking at you Nick, but honest... how many MAJOR severe weather reports came out of Saturday? I lost count, but in comparison to other high risk days that have verified, looks pretty slim.
I know, sounds like "Monday morning quarterback forecasting", but I did honestly see this a bit over-forecast as some others did too.

Finally folks, I just wanted to start a discussion, not a war. :wink:

mikegeukes

06-07-2005, 04:15 PM

Here is a part of the AFD, that Billy was talking about:
REGARDING LATE WEEK...HAVE A VERY STRONG FEELING THAT SOMETHING BIG IS BREWING. LOOKING AT PROGGED LONGWAVE PATTERN - WITHOUT GETTING BOGGED DOWN IN DETAILS - THE SETUP LOOKS ABOUT AS POTENT FOR WIDESPREAD/SIGNIFICANT SEVERE WX IN THE CENTRAL U.S. AS THIS FORECASTER HAS SEEN IN NEARLY 25 YEARS OF OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCE.

SCREAMING MESSAGE IS THAT POTENTIAL WILL EXIST FOR 1 OR MORE SIGNIFICANT CENTRAL-U.S. SEVERE WX OUTBREAKS...BEGINNING AS EARLY AS THU BUT MORE LIKELY IN THE FRI-SAT-SUN PERIOD. PLAN TO HIT THIS HARD IN THE NOON HWO.
Mike

Billy Griffin

06-07-2005, 04:19 PM

Caviat to the last comment Jeff... a lot of the public do read the forecast discussion. Yes, I know it's for more of a meteorological reading and interpretation, but it's also right there on their webpage, so folks do read it.

Case in point, a lot of folks here at the Postal center read it and then I'm inundated with questions on how bad the weather's going to get.
See how it states "screaming message"... it's words like that which do create quite an emphasis, if not panic, in a lot of people and then it gets the local media around here all in a "tither".

It wasn't five minutes past that discussion appearing until I get bombarded with questions from other staff here, plus my phone rings from the TV station, and I hear, quote: "get ready for tragic stuff this weekend." (name withheld)

Shouldn't we calm down and say, "whoa... looks like we'd better be ready for some potential severe weather this weekend?"

Anyway, interesting discussions. Perhaps I should rename the title though. What I really meant was instead of skill going downhill is that I think we're pressing the red button a little too quickly on occasion.

In other words, creating panic is not a good thing. To me, if we spent more focus on educating, rather than alarming, that's a good approach.

Mike Parker

06-07-2005, 05:09 PM

Gary Lezak (the NBC meteorologist in KC) has chimed in on the OUN comments.
http://blogs.scripps.com/kshb/weather/

IMO I believe the comments were a little pre-mature. If this person ends up being correct then I will eat my words but come on, 4 and 5 days out and implying as good as or better set up than May 3, 1999. I totally respect the job those guys and gals do and realize they are so much more educated in the science of weather than I am but look at what one comment can do. My question is why would a trained professional with obviously at least 25 years experience say that in a public setting? Would they not know the implications of their actions? It just seemed a little strange to see that excited of wordage so far out from an event.

David Drummond

06-07-2005, 05:36 PM

One thing I think you guys are missing though that sticks in my mind. The forecaster has 25 YEARS of experience forecasting. I would have to think you log a lot of pattern recognition in that period of time.

Whether or not he should have said it publicly this far out or not remains to be seen when the event gets here. But when ANYONE with 25 years of experience says something like that about something in their profession, I am darn sure going to perk up my ears and pay attention.

Who posts on StormTrack with that much experience forecasting storms?

Again, whether he's right or not will remain to be seen, but he obviously saw some sort of pattern emerging that alarmed him even with all of his years of seasoning.

Billy Griffin

06-07-2005, 05:41 PM

All I can say is that "if" he was so right... WHY DID THEY TOTALLY CHANGE THE DISCUSSION JUST A FEW HOURS LATER ???

Not trying to continue or get a heated argument started, and sure, in his/her statement it basically says they have 25+ years forecasting experience.

Totally uncalled for this far in advance. Now, come Thursday if things start shaping up, then I'd say mention that in the HWO... alert the public that severe weather is likely over the weekend, and do everything you can to emphasize the importance of that.

When I read wording like that, and quote: 25 years !!! - makes me think we should all prepare for a tri-state tornado. That kind of outbreak would be relative to the Ohio Valley outbreak in 1974... let's see, that's about 25 years ago (or so), correct?

I mean, come on, how can you predict or even "assume" something like that this far in advance ????

Jason A.C. Brock

06-07-2005, 05:51 PM

Chill dude. Take your Xanax. Id rather be overly prepared for the chance of severe weather and it not happen then to be unprepared for it and it does ANY day. Most people are not chasers...... They need all the preparedness they can get.

Billy Griffin

06-07-2005, 05:51 PM

Yeah, and don't get me wrong... sure would like to see something like that, I'll admit it. LET'S JUST KEEP ALL THE TORNADOES IN OPEN COUNTRY = EMPHASIS !!

I'm just saying that kind of outbreak, a "most potent in over 25 years" means something like 4/3-4/4, 1974, or 4/11, 1965 !!!!!

IF he was going to use strong wording... how 'bout, "current models are indicating a potent weather system capable of producing significant severe weather over the weekend." "All interests should stay informed on the latest HWOs and AFDs throughout the central US on this potentially significant severe weather weekend." ??????????

I guess I'm having a problem with the guy saying 25+ years. That takes us back past some rather major tornado outbreaks, some of even recent decades. Anyone remember 4/23/1991 - Andover, KS? How 'bout '95 and the Pampa / TX panhandle stuff? Some of those days are even historic or eventful, but saying "over 25 years" just beats all.

Sure, he may see something amazing, but let the models and forecasts come into better perspective BEFORE saying something like that.

PS: took the Xanax. :wink:
You guys are taking this all wrong. I'm not mad. I just hate to see the public getting alarmed like this way too soon... because, if it doesn't happen, you're wrong. What'll happen is most will say "here we go again", and unfortunately the next time it does verify, then we'll hear all these folks claim they "had no warning".

Now, I'm done with this thread. Everyone have a great evening.

Jeff Lawson

06-07-2005, 05:53 PM

All things considered, it is rather strange to see that sort of content in a discussion attached to a morning update. All the more strange is that neither the 12Z GFS or ECMWF suggest the sky is falling, continued active pattern aside. Given the timing of the update, I assume the forecaster had just finished processing those particular model solutions.

So, yeah, it is kind of weird.

Kiel Ortega

06-07-2005, 06:02 PM

First, remember what Jeff said...AFDs are written by different people...they don't have to have continuity.

Next, 25 years only takes us to 1980...so the outbreaks mentioned above are out.

Next, the models have been in perspective and consistent (FINALLY!)...last week I noticed the GFS setting the situation up with its forecasts for today and tomorrow. A friend of mine has been trying to get his dad to come down so he could chase because of how persistant the GFS has been. I haven't paid much attention to the GFS runs since last week (not for late this week anyways), but what it has progged for tomorrow is what it had progged for tomorrow nearly a week ago. It's not the exact same (I think the UA speeds are a little slower), but it's similar enough for my eyebrows to raise a little. Further, looking at the handling the GFS has of the shortwave, it's movement seems similar to May 4, 2003...real quick through the Plains and towards to the NE over a good, moist surface, IMO (but that's for the forecast thread).

Everyone once in awhile uses strong language in their forecasts, amatuer and professional alike (see this board's forecast threads on certain days for example).

David Drummond

06-07-2005, 06:02 PM

Billy, I have to ask...

IF he turns out to be right and this turns out to be the mother-of-all-outbreaks......

Are you going to be just as vehement about how he was right about that outbreak, that far in advance?

Mike Johnson

06-07-2005, 06:21 PM

I have to agree with Billy to a point. I only made it out a few
times this year. The SPC forecasting and risk issuance was below
par. I think the SPC's biggest problem is there is never an accounting
for what happens. I've always thought there should be a "day after"
discussion noting why a watch or risk area busted.

Mike

Jeff Miller

06-07-2005, 06:28 PM

Not to be critical, but I always thought there were policies in place to make case studies out of strongly failed forecasts. I know on April 20, 2004, with the Mini-Sup surprise outbreak there were many case studies presented... I cant even imagine that SPC wouldn't have a meeting with forecasters and senior forecasters and at least a written log of some sort categorizing what the mets were thinking and what actually transpired. I would be VERY surprised if there was not some sort of accountability system in place.... Mike, perhaps you are aware of something I don't know being I have no clue of the bearaucracy [sic] within the Storm Prediction Center.

I have to agree with Billy to a point. I only made it out a few
times this year. The SPC forecasting and risk issuance was below
par. I think the SPC's biggest problem is there is never an accounting
for what happens. I've always thought there should be a \"day after\"
discussion noting why a watch or risk area busted.

Billy Griffin

06-07-2005, 06:42 PM

Thanks guys, glad for understanding I was only stating my feeling.
Nothing critical was ever meant, only suggest SPC / OUN, etc. etc. use better scrutiny in their wording before creating panic.

Billy Griffin

06-07-2005, 06:45 PM

Weather Synopsis...A dry line moving east into the central TX panhandle may kick off isolated thunderstorms as it approaches western sections of Oklahoma this evening. Although widespread thunderstorms are not expected, any storms that form will be capable of producing large hail and damaging winds. Severe weather potential will increase each day through the weekend, and there is a possibility of significant and/or widespread severe thunderstorms between Friday and Sunday.

This is the latest OUN public discussion / forecast. Wouldn't you agree this is more on the order than saying something like what was distributed earlier today? Just my 2 cents.

Aaron Kennedy

06-07-2005, 06:52 PM

You know... it's funny. I saw the GFS model run last night and the first thing i thought was tornado outbreak. Large negatively tilted trough.... ample moisture, solid dryline, and strong flow from the sfc up to 300mb. Best looking setup IMHO I have seen this year (if it pans out).

So I see the OUN discussion and it really didn't surprise me. Based off pattern recognition... it does look like great potential exists for some seriously good setups within the next week.

Now a few specific comments/questions I have for the thread author:

how do the rest of you feel on SPC's and Norman's seemingly \"lack of\" ability to forecast this year

It's been a tough year. Anyone can forecast outbreak events... Andover and the events last year were seen days in advance. Have we even had any tornado outbreaks this year?

that HIGH RISK day on Sat... NEVER should have been HIGH... Moderate only. They have the tools for soundings, obs, etc. - I think they're jumping the gun way too much and you know what... THE PUBLIC ARE THE ONES WHO WILL SUFFER.

Only one model I know of forecasted the massive breakout of precip along the dryline (WRF). If we had an ounce bit more of cap... I think you wouldn't be commenting like this. Even with the 18z soundings, I didn't think the storms would be that widespread.

Second of all... it doesn't really matter if SPC goes high/mdt... because outside of chasers, EMs, and mets... few of the public know about the risks. Public do realize when watches bust, however.

I'm only trying to say that perhaps, they should exercise more caution before trying to create a panic. For example, for those of you in OKC area, look at how the media covers weather now.

SPC/NWS aren't going to cause a panic, but I agree with you on the news media.

And please, please, please oh please, don't take this as an insult to those of you who have a much deeper meteorology education and background than I.
Not taking it as an insult.... just responding.

Why does every post always turn into a debate, then the next thing, an argument? Can't we all just love one another> LOL
No... not when we disagree ;)

but I had a feeling it was going to be a big \"cluster\"
*sigh*
but probably still didn't warrant a \"high\" because of the scattered nature.

Uh... do you know what scattered tornadic supercells do? They verify a high risk. Second of all... it is a risk... not a guarenteed thing.

When we have AFDs going out calling for the Rapture, I'm afraid it just creates more panic. I know, here in the office for example, the first thing people did after that discussion was out was to come running down to my office and asking how bad it really was going to be.

This surprises me.... 99% of the people I know not involved with meteorology have no clue what an AFD is or even where their closest NWS office is located. And Oklahomans running from tornadoes? Wow.

All I can say is that \"if\" he was so right... WHY DID THEY TOTALLY CHANGE THE DISCUSSION JUST A FEW HOURS LATER ???

Maybe because someone else wrote it and that the AFD is also open to opinions from the forecaster?

Totally uncalled for this far in advance. Now, come Thursday if things start shaping up, then I'd say mention that in the HWO... alert the public that severe weather is likely over the weekend, and do everything you can to emphasize the importance of that.

That's right lets.. start mentioning a threat for severe weather only a day or two in advance...

I mean, come on, how can you predict or even \"assume\" something like that this far in advance ????
Digging your self into a hole buddy. Many outbreaks are forecasted well in advance quite well because of the general synoptic pattern.
*Note this is not intended as an insult! I simply disagree with many of Billy's points.*

Andrew Geil

06-07-2005, 06:58 PM

The problem is the nature of the beast. Forecasting is just a educated guessing game. We have models, skew-t's, guidance, and forecaster experience to go off of. Often times, the later is the best tool we have.

I don't think I can ever fault a forecast. The key here is FORECAST. Sure, the SPC has made a lot of wrong guesses this year.

But then again, hasn't a lot of this forum?

Aaron Kennedy

06-07-2005, 07:06 PM

From what I gather... the main point Billy was trying to make was that the AFD scared the public. My disagreement is that the majority of the public I know have no clue what is going on... up till a watch box comes out or they hear something on the news the day of or day before. Billy mentioned he works at the postal facility, so it is understandable that many of the carriers would be more in the savvy of the NWS. That said, there should be an awareness that the AFD is simply a look into the forecasters mind and they should be paying more attention to the HWO.

Aaron

Ryan McGinnis

06-07-2005, 07:10 PM

Originally posted by Billy Griffin
Weather Synopsis...A dry line moving east into the central TX panhandle may kick off isolated thunderstorms as it approaches western sections of Oklahoma this evening. Although widespread thunderstorms are not expected, any storms that form will be capable of producing large hail and damaging winds. Severe weather potential will increase each day through the weekend, and there is a possibility of significant and/or widespread severe thunderstorms between Friday and Sunday.

This is the latest OUN public discussion / forecast. Wouldn't you agree this is more on the order than saying something like what was distributed earlier today? Just my 2 cents.

And this is the HWO issued earlier:

THUNDERSTORM OUTLOOK...
THUNDERSTORM CHANCES...AND THE POTENTIAL FOR SEVERE WEATHER...WILL
INCREASE EACH DAY FROM WEDNESDAY THROUGH THE WEEKEND. CURRENT
FORECASTS INDICATE THAT THE GENERAL WEATHER PATTERN MAY SUPPORT THE
POTENTIAL FOR WIDESPREAD OR SIGNIFICANT SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS OVER
OKLAHOMA AND NORTH TEXAS LATE THIS WEEK...PERHAPS AS EARLY AS
THURSDAY OR FRIDAY BUT MORE LIKELY ON SATURDAY OR SUNDAY. THERE ARE
TOO MANY UNCERTAINTIES AT THIS TIME TO SAY WHICH DAY AND WHICH PARTS
OF THE AREA WILL HAVE THE GREATEST RISK. EMERGENCY MANAGERS AND
STORM SPOTTER GROUPS...AS WELL AS ALL INDIVIDUALS AND AGENCIES WITH
PLANS THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED MOST BY SEVERE WEATHER THIS WEEKEND...
ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE LATEST WEATHER
INFORMATION THIS WEEK...AND TO BE PREPARED FOR AN INCREASING SEVERE
WEATHER POTENTIAL EACH DAY THROUGH SUNDAY.

Clearly, they're still quite interested in this setup. I mean, look -- I LIKE it when the old hats chime in and give us a heads up. This guy has been doing this for a quarter century. If he sees something coming down the pipe that isn't immediately apparent in the models, by all means, I want to hear about it. If we bitch about this kind of stuff, the forecasters are just going to keep their mouths shut in the public discussion when their spidersense tingles.

Billy Griffin

06-07-2005, 07:23 PM

Please folks, listen to me... please?

I "AM NOT" in disagreement for the forecaster doing his/her best in trying to get the public/media/chaser/spotter/Emergency Manager, whoever's attention by making a forecast.

THE ONLY THING I WAS CRITICAL OF IS HIM USING THE WORDS, QUOTE: "most potent in over 25 years". That's all I'm saying.

Yeah, 25 yrs only takes us back to '80, sorry my math was never a strong point. :D

That's all I'm saying... why shouldn't it have read as I posted earlier, or as the forecast on the enhanced web page of OUN says now... basically, "significant severe weather possible."

I not only received phone calls from the TV station I chase for, but also from friends all over Oklahoma who had also read the discussion. I thiink we're assuming no one reads that, but many of the folks I know play around with the internet and navigate through their page.

After reading that, plus the other part of his comment about the "screaming" thing, just (to me) put quite a bit of worry into those that I spoke to. Also, I just watched the evening news and one local forecaster commented "we could see a great deal of devastation over the weekend." Gees... I just think that's awful strong wording and what about these poor folks who may have lost a loved one in recent weather-related disasters? Even though '99 has been six years now, it still bears an ugly scar for the folks in Moore and OKC.

I have a co-worker and close friend who lost his son that day. Since '99, he is terrified of storms and reads ALL discussions. Before all of you keep on bashing me, put yourself in his shoes and ask yourself how you'd feel or what would be on your mind when you read that something even worse than that could occur this weekend ??? Folks, I didn't mention this earlier, but this guy came to me asking what was going to happen, then he broke down later today and was CRYING in remembering that day and losing his son !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How do you think that makes me feel and how do you explain the rationale behind the wording?

I hope this clarifies why I was aggravated initially at the discussion, it's not the fact of the warning. To be honest, the more timely warning, the better. But for the 15th time, all I'm saying is the "WORDING" should (IMO) have been done differently. And now, the local media, at least the station I was watching at six, is going crazy over this.

I deeply apologize for making anyone mad, angry, upset, offended, whatever... and if you want to talk with me, a lot of you are here in Norman and I'd be glad to actually meet you guys.

My intentions were not to come across as putting down the upcoming forecast, or even downplay the potential... it's only the wording and being tactful. And believe it or not folks, a lot of people DO read just about everything on the web. If it's there, someone can read it, and that's exactly what happened today. Even the Kansas City folks picked up on it, and I just talked to a former chase partner living in NYC and even they have read it.

Some of you guys criticise every little thing about a posting. I simply asked for your thoughts. I didn't anticipate your insults or PMs to me. It's like I'm making a comment directly at chasers. Hell, I'm a chaser myself guys and ladies. I hope now you understand why I said what I did and hey, I still stand behind my feelings. If you would have been there and had seen a 44 year old man break down in tears and show me a photo of his 2 year old dead son, you would have lost it too !!!

Mike Hardiman

06-07-2005, 07:28 PM

All I can say is that \"if\" he was so right... WHY DID THEY TOTALLY CHANGE THE DISCUSSION JUST A FEW HOURS LATER ???

As previous posters have already pointed out, it was likely a different forecaster authoring the later AFD. Depending on current weather and other deadlines, software crashes, etc... the amount of time one has to work on an AFD is highly variable and the content therefore varies as well. The "long term/public" day shift forecaster putting out the the 2:50pm AFD quite likely did not have as much time as the earlier "update" AFD (the so-called "Doomsday AFD") author had or simply chose not to highlight or repeat what was already said. Every forecaster has their own style to writing AFDs. Some put more emphasis in them than others. They can be as short as three sentences... or as long as three pages.

While I'd tend to think that perhaps the wording was a bit much for this far out... I'll digress since the forecaster in question apparently has over 25 years+ experience, and likely has seen and forgotten far more weather than I, a mere "puppy" has ever experienced... clearly this also applies to students and quite likely even some sheltered PhDs out there!

This forecaster apparently sees a pattern evolving that is ringing a well-tuned alarm bell in his own mind, and he chose to highlight this in their AFD and HWO. Assuming that this person is not just prone to crying wolf with every other model run (I simply don't know as I don't follow OUN's AFDs regularly), then I give the forecaster credit for not simply doing the old "wait and see and bump the POPs up another 10%." It's one thing to cry wolf, and another to go out on a limb and possibly add some value to a forecast over what model guidance suggests.

I am desperately trying to bite my tongue on this one. I'll say this though: whether I agree with this forecaster's enhanced wording or not, I hope he absolutely nails the forecast!

Ryan McGinnis

06-07-2005, 08:02 PM

Originally posted by Billy Griffin
Please folks, listen to me... please?

I think that they are -- you're just not listening to them. Your original beef, that forecasting skill is sucking this year and that forecasters are "hypeing things" makes very little sense and a few people have tried to point that out to you. I mean, look -- that's what the forecaster thought. FDs are for the forecaster to lay out their thoughts. If the media wants to work itself up into a froth over it, well, that's their choice.

I \"AM NOT\" in disagreement for the forecaster doing his/her best in trying to get the public/media/chaser/spotter/Emergency Manager, whoever's attention by making a forecast.

THE ONLY THING I WAS CRITICAL OF IS HIM USING THE WORDS, QUOTE: \"most potent in over 25 years\". That's all I'm saying.

Yeah, but why? That's the big question here. The forecaster clearly is trying to get a message out to weather/EMS/media types by mentioning that he has a lot of experience and that in all of his experience, this is the worst he's seen it this far out. It's not like he held a live press conference and hid under the podium while crying, he just gave chasers, EMTs, and media types a heads up that something big -- bigger than he's ever seen -- might be coming down the pipe. What they do with that info is up to them. Of course in Oklahoma, you can't hardly mutter the word "tornado" in a forecast without having a whole newsroom full of people fall to the floor in exctasy.

I not only received phone calls from the TV station I chase for, but also from friends all over Oklahoma who had also read the discussion. I thiink we're assuming no one reads that, but many of the folks I know play around with the internet and navigate through their page.

Yeah, so? Now they're clued in about something big maybe happening this weekend. Doesn't sound too terrible to me. If they do something rash and sell all of their worldy posessions and cower in a bunker expecting the rapture, well, that's hardly the forecaster's fault.

After reading that, plus the other part of his comment about the \"screaming\" thing, just (to me) put quite a bit of worry into those that I spoke to. Also, I just watched the evening news and one local forecaster commented \"we could see a great deal of devastation over the weekend.\" Gees... I just think that's awful strong wording and what about these poor folks who may have lost a loved one in recent weather-related disasters? Even though '99 has been six years now, it still bears an ugly scar for the folks in Moore and OKC.

You make it seem like local television forecasters crawl off the street, comb their hair, listen to the NWS FD, and begin mumbling into the camera. I'm sure that most TV mets in Oklahoma actually do their own forecasts. If they're talking devestation, well, it might be sweeps week, or they might just be seeing the same stuff as Mr. NWS Forecaster. Either way, it's not like there is some rule that TV mets have to regurigitate whatever the HWO or the FD says for the day... they do their own forecasts, and if they blow them, it's on them, not the NWS.

I have a co-worker and close friend who lost his son that day. Since '99, he is terrified of storms and reads ALL discussions. Before all of you keep on bashing me, put yourself in his shoes and ask yourself how you'd feel or what would be on your mind when you read that something even worse than that could occur this weekend ??? Folks, I didn't mention this earlier, but this guy came to me asking what was going to happen, then he broke down later today and was CRYING in remembering that day and losing his son !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You've used up all the available exclaimation points for this thread, but I ask again: how is that the NWS forecaster's fault? I mean, for example, I'm not a big fan of lightning. I have to tackle the fear every time I get out of the car on a chase. That doesn't mean that the SPC should stop drawing the thunder line. If your friend is severe weather phobic, then perhaps Oklahoma isn't the best place for him or her to live. I, for one, however, would like to know if the local Ahab at the NWS smells a white whale.

I hope this clarifies why I was aggravated initially at the discussion, it's not the fact of the warning. To be honest, the more timely warning, the better. But for the 15th time, all I'm saying is the \"WORDING\" should (IMO) have been done differently. And now, the local media, at least the station I was watching at six, is going crazy over this.

The media will do what the media will do. Hell, they go crazy over run-away brides these days. The NWS just keeps cranking out good info. It's not their problem.

I deeply apologize for making anyone mad, angry, upset, offended, whatever... and if you want to talk with me, a lot of you are here in Norman and I'd be glad to actually meet you guys.

Nah, it's cool -- I doubt anyone here is actually upset with you, except for maybe the NWS forecaster who wrote that report, if he ends up reading this thread (and they do visit this site, BTW.) I like how pretty much everyone stays civil on Stormtrack, compared to most of the internet. :) Noone here is anonymous, and we usually end up meeting each other, sooner or later.

My intentions were not to come across as putting down the upcoming forecast, or even downplay the potential... it's only the wording and being tactful.

Just a heads up then... you might want to change the Topic you picked for this thread. It doesn't exactly convey the message you're indicating above.

Anyhow, though we disagree on this one, I'd still buy ya a beer if I ran into out on the plains. Good luck chasing this weekend, Armageddeon or not. :wink:

Joe Nield

06-07-2005, 08:15 PM

A forecaster has an obligation and a duty to explain his forecast reasoning in the AFD, and to be honest about what he expects will occur. I'd much rather he truthfully say that clues are telling him there is a significant severe weather potential rather than bite his tongue about it.

George Tincher

06-07-2005, 08:18 PM

From what I have seen and learned trying to forecast as an amateur, it's tough. Therefore I am not critical of those who know far more than me. But I must say, I admire a forecaster who's willing to go out on a limb from time to time if he/she sees something they think will be big. Sure, it may not always verify. But sometimes forecasts made the day of an event doesn't either.

Either way, if a man of 25 years experience sees something he views as one of the more favorable setups he has seen in 25 years, I'll take him at his word and want to know about it. Afterall, I certainly have far less than 25 years experience. And if he's wrong? Big deal. That's why they do updates. There's plenty of time for revision as we move closer to the event. Outside of people such as other forecasters, chasers, spotters, etc, few people look at those outlooks anyway.

Bryan Burkholder

06-07-2005, 08:19 PM

I can see your point, Billy. That strong of wording catches people's attention. It has been the first thing mentioned to me today whenever I see someone; if I have read the Norman AFD from this morning. But maybe it is a good thing that it catches people's attention, at least giving them a heads up to pay attention to the weather this weekend.

I agree with Ryan, that I want to hear the opinion of someone with 25 years of experience, not in overused garble, but what he thinks. Though, I do admit, it could be toned down a bit from using such active verbs this far ahead of time. The synoptic pattern does look very good, and hopefully there does not have to be widespread busting chasers on the plains.

The SPC does their job to the best of their ability, and none of us can deny that; and I am happy with the job that they do. Sure, when they bust they get egg on the face, but show me someone in high standing in any field that doesn't get egg on their face for being wrong. This year has been a difficult one to forecast severe weather on the southern plains, and difficult to chase. Some ill-timed cirrus decks and stronger than expected caps, with many days being disjointed in where the best helicity, CAPE, etc. are located. Also, you have online boards full of storm chasers waiting for your outlooks, watches, and discussions. There were quite a few severe weather reports in the high risk area for June 4th, just not the type of reports everyone expected...

As a side note, not everyone who has the opposite opinions that you do is insulting you or criticizing you. I'm sure I will see you around in Norman sometime in the next 2 years or so. If you want to see some really active language and insults, you can refer to the 5/21/05 posts or some of the other threads that became locked early.

Robert Dewey

06-07-2005, 08:20 PM

Originally posted by Joe Nield
A forecaster has an obligation and a duty to explain his forecast reasoning in the AFD, and to be honest about what he expects will occur. I'd much rather he truthfully say that clues are telling him there is a significant severe weather potential rather than bite his tongue about it.

Dang, I'm once again in agreement with you! Are you sure you're not a republican now? :lol:

Anyway, I agree that the AFD is a compilation of the forecasters opinions - so I'm not understanding why the forecaster should change his opinion simply because a select few people from the public might be scared, or disagree with his thoughts...

Glen Romine

06-07-2005, 09:04 PM

As was pointed out earlier by Aaron, when you see a negatively tilted trough embedded within a very strong upper level system emerging out onto the Great Plains with tropical surface moisture - you are darn right it will get the attention of forecasters. If in this guy's opinion this is the most impressive model forecast - that's information I'd want to read about because frankly I don't have 25 years of experience watching storm systems. As for your post-event critique of SPC - step up and start posting your forecasts BEFORE events and prove that you really know what your talking about - otherwise please follow the advice posted earlier by Shane in the other thread. While I'm sure training postal workers is tough work -what with Oklahoma having such open gun laws and all - but I doubt your job has even the slightest comparitive level of stress to that of SPC and NWS forecasters. Not only are their careers on the line, so are the lives, business and government operations of millions dependent on their forecasts being as inclusive as possible. They must fail on the side of caution - the worst case scenario. If you don't like that forecast method - you are welcome to stick your hand out the window and wait for winds to pick up to know when to take cover. Several forecasters, both NWS and SPC, browse through here, and I'm sure that don't appreciate someone slamming their forecasts - or even their comments about the basis of their forecasts (AFD). Amazes me how frequently folks seem to think they are "experts" at forecasting events after an event has already occurred.

Glen

Dustin Wilcox

06-07-2005, 09:12 PM

Jeez man, everywhere I look Billy, you are involved in a conflict. I believe the SPC forecasters are doing their job, they are not creating panic the general public does generally not read the SPC outlooks in anything they are just getting us chasers blood flowing then sending us home dissapointed. I guess if you are lossing faith or are dissapointed with the SPC then refrain from reading or viewing their outlooks that should solve your problem!

Joe Nield

06-07-2005, 09:57 PM

Originally posted by George Tincher
But I must say, I admire a forecaster who's willing to go out on a limb from time to time if he/she sees something they think will be big.

ABSOLUTELY! It takes guts to stick your neck out, even in those situations where all the guidance points towards a record event. I applaud anyone with the boldness to do that, even if they turn out to be wrong.

Pete Johnson

06-07-2005, 11:29 PM

In my 5+ years of forecasting, Sunday looks awesome.

In addition, forecasting is not an exact science. The forecaster in the discussion say in the 25 yrs. of 'this forecaster's' experience, not anyone else's. And if the media does want to blow this up based on the discussion, it is their own fault for not making a better forecast.

twarner

06-07-2005, 11:32 PM

Originally posted by Billy Griffin

To me, it appears our forecasters are \"crying wolf\" a great deal this year. No excuse to me, they've got the tools to forecast this stuff correctly... that HIGH RISK day on Sat... NEVER should have been HIGH... Moderate only.

Here is what occurred on Saturday

http://www.spc.noaa.gov/climo/reports/050604_rpts.gif

Doesn't this meet the guidance that SPC has provided on what type of evensts to expect on a High Risk Day?

A SLGT risk implies well-organized severe thunderstorms are expected but in small numbers and/or low coverage. Within a slight risk area, 5-29 reports of 1 inch of larger hail, and/or 3-5 tornadoes, and/or 5-29 wind events are forecast.

MDT risks imply a greater concentration of severe thunderstorms, and in most situations, greater magnitude of severe weather. Within a moderate risk area, at least 30 reports of hail 1 inch or larger, or 6-19 tornadoes, or numerous wind events (30 that might be associated with a squall line, bow echo or derecho) are forecast.

The HIGH risk area almost always means a major severe weather outbreak is expected, with great coverage of severe weather and enhanced likelihood of extreme severe (i.e., violent tornadoes or extreme convective wind events over a large area). Within a high risk area, expect at least 20 tornadoes with at least 2 of them rated F3+, or an extreme derecho causing 50+ widespread wind events (50+) with numerous higher end wind (80+ mph) and structural damage reports.

Mike Johnston

06-07-2005, 11:50 PM

As I understand, these AFD's do not actually represent the work product of the NWS forecasters - their work product is the forecast itself. The AFD's are kind of like workpapers, notes, etc. that give insight into the forecaster's thinking. The wording can be more liberal and colorful so as to convey the thinking process of the individual forecaster, which is appropriate in such a format. Personally, I find perusing these AFD's to be very educational and, at times, entertaining. However, being open to public viewing (as well as reviewed by the forecaster's boss, I assume), I agree with Billy that it seems the forecasters would be at least sensitive to the magnitude of the message being conveyed.

Now, if for some as yet unknown reason, this forecaster used wording that was flagrantly overstating the professional judgement reasonably expected of someone in his position - then the incident should be a very important component of his next performance review by his superiors. However, none of us are in a position to make such a judgement based on the information currently available. For the time being, you have to give this forecaster the benefit of the doubt and respect this as a valuable, professional opinion. I don't observe this as part of a growing, general "cry wolf" trend of the Norman office or the NWS. If it were, I don't think this particular AFD would have stood out like it has. For now, I think interested parties should respect this as a "canary in a coal mine" alert and be attentive.

Another subtle point - his statement was in the context of his 25 years of experience. That doesn't necessarily mean he was openly predicting an event as severe as any event in the past 25 years - he may or may not have had a forecast role in some of the more significant events over the past 25 years. Obviously, though, his statement carries some serious weight - it will be of more than passing interest to see what he has to say tomorrow!

Chris Sokol

06-08-2005, 02:17 AM

Originally posted by Billy Griffin+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Billy Griffin)</div>Nothing critical was ever meant, only suggest SPC / OUN, etc. etc. use better scrutiny in their wording before creating panic.[/b]

Are you kidding me?

<!--QuoteBegin-Billy Griffin
after seeing the big \"screw up\" today on OUN's 10:37am forecast discussion calling for Armageddon, how do the rest of you feel on SPC's and Norman's seemingly \"lack of\" ability to forecast this year.

To emphasize the \"end of the world\" is just stupid.

To me, it appears our forecasters are \"crying wolf\" a great deal this year. No excuse to me, they've got the tools to forecast this stuff correctly...

Nothing critical was ever meant....uh huh.

John MacKay

06-08-2005, 03:21 AM

I used to remember when I was better at forecasting with my weather knowledge than the TV meteorologists in Wichita. Then I went to college and didn't go outside as much. The meteorologists have seemingly gotten better in the overall picture even though they aren't great in forecasting a period 3-4 days away.

Today, they look at more than I do, but look at the same things I do as well. They have done a very good job ever since 5/3/99 (remember the Wichita metro had an F4 that killed six that day/evening as well). They also have learned of ways to get information to the public before the event happens, especially on Saturdays here since most stations around here don't get to tell you something until 6 PM when the storms are already going.

Meterologists have become better in preparing the public. This year has humbled everyone and their mother. That being said, the Day 3 outlooks for the May 29th and June 12th events hinted at a very dangerous situation with long-track tornadoes.

I agree that the SPC has busted more than usual, but it happens. We will catch it more than anyone else. I agree with Billy on airing on the side of caution, but I still think the forecaster did the honorable thing and said what he felt on the situation. Sometimes, people just get a hunch, and my hunch is we'll see some maddening weather starting Wed.-Thu. do to the instability present. All that needs to happen to duplicate an event like the two aforementioned events from last year is a strong low to come with the right shear and we have long-lived tornadic supercells.

Making the public aware is what has contributed to less deaths occuring in these more violent tornadoes. It never hurts to be overly concerned, even though it could desensitize the public in the long run. That is another point Billy may be making.

Billy Griffin

06-08-2005, 03:33 PM

All comments taken. And I understand everyone's desire for this weekend to be a once in 25 year event.

While I do not agree with the forecaster, and I do not appreciate some of the comments fired back and the language, if you want to say I was insulting or criticising the forecaster, so be it. If he nails it, I'm happy. If not, I'm happy. It doesn't matter. I did not mean for it to sound that way. All I see is a "potential", but a lot of things look to make this just an average chase weekend and nothing to evacuate Oklahoma over.

I understand some of you took it that way, but I will not apologize for simply posting my thoughts. However, I never cursed at the man, called him names, etc. on a public webpage or sent threatening private messages. And if that's your way of "wishing" this forecaster were right and that some disastrous event will occur and it makes you feel better by insulting me, I'm happy for you. Hope many of you feel better now!

Regarding the AFD in controversy... Heck, I'd like that too, but I still think we have to use good judgement in our wording before we issue things that folks can read and start putting more into it and I still think you have to wait and see before issuing words like that 3 to 5 days in advance. If I'm wrong, well, that too so be it. But in reading the newest AFD out of OUN... almost sounds like this forecaster is apologetic or emphasizing that although severe weather is possible, there are still MANY factors to work out in the models and even things that may influence a favorable pattern on a mesoscale level...

PATTERN FOR FRI-MON TIME PERIOD REMAINS FAVORABLE FOR SVR STORM
CHANCES SOMEWHERE IN THE PLAINS. HOWEVER..THERE ARE SEVERAL
CAVEATS TO WIDESPREAD HIGH-END SVR POTENTIAL IN THE OUN CWA.
FIRST.. ALTHOUGH MID/UPPER FLOW WILL GENERALLY INCREASE.. DEEP
LAYER SHEAR VECTORS REMAIN SOMEWHAT MARGINAL THE FARTHER S/E ONE
GOES ACROSS OK/NTEXAS..AND THIS CUD END UP BEING A LIMITING FACTOR
FOR HIGHLY ORGANIZED LONG-LIVED SUPERCELLS. IN ADDITION..
DEVELOPING TROPICAL SYSTEM PROGGED TO COME ASHORE NEAR NEW ORLEANS
OVER THE WEEKEND MAY END UP SEVERELY IMPACTING THE QUALITY AND/OR
DEPTH OF LOW LEVEL MOISTURE OVER OK/NTEXAS DUE TO PERIPHERAL
SUBSIDENCE EFFECTS..AND MAY ALSO HAVE ADDITIONAL EFFECTS ON
LOW/DEEP LAYER SHEAR AS WELL. FINALLY..AS IS COMMON FOR THE LATE
SPRING..THERE WILL BE POTENTIAL FOR LARGE SCALE TSTORM COMPLEX
OUTFLOW BOUNDARIES TO SEVERELY COMPLICATE THE SFC PATTERN EACH
NIGHT/MORNING. SINCE THESE FEATURES ARE RARELY FORECASTED WELL BY
THE SYNOPTIC SCALE MODELS..OBSERVATIONAL TRENDS ON EACH SUCCESSIVE
DAY WILL BE KEY TO PINPOINTING AREAS OF MAX THREATS.

All in all, Sounds like OUN is back-pedaling, and very wise (and much more professional) in their "more cautious" approach to the AFD as opposed to earlier... that's all I'll say on this.

Ryan McGinnis

06-08-2005, 04:32 PM

Originally posted by Billy Griffin
All comments taken. And I understand everyone's desire for this weekend to be a once in 25 year event.

While I do not agree with some of the comments fired back and the language, if you want to say I was insulting or criticising the forecaster, so be it. I did not mean for it to sound that way. I understand some of you took it that way, and I'm sorry, but I will not apologize for simply posting my thoughts.

Uh... er... look, Billy. Here's the thing. The plain language interpretation of your words, including the big blaring topic title you picked out for this thread, suggest that you're criticising both the forecaster and the general quality of recent NWS forecasts. If, indeed, you didn't mean to be taken that way, then your fingers have have apparently declared autonomy from your brain. ;) People are not misinterpreting what you wrote... if anything, you are misinterpreting what you wrote. You don't have to apologize (though it's generally a good idea when you regret having said something wrong and offensive), but it's bordering on an insult to say "I'm sorry you all misunderstood what I wrote" when indeed everyone here understood exactly what you wrote. Just bite the bullet and admit that either you temporarily had a brainfart and forgot how to make your fingers type what you were thinking or that you got a little ahead of yourself and said some things you didn't really mean and that you wish you hadn't said them. Trust me, people will forgive ya, it's just a freakin' weather board for crying out loud. ;)

FYI, I don't think anyone here was offended by your suggestion that forecasters be conservative in their forecasting language (though I'm sure many disagreed with you), I think those that were offended were put off by your demeaning language in regards to both the forecaster in question (whom you don't even know) and NWS forecasts in general (again, SEE THE TOPIC THAT YOU PICKED FOR THIS THREAD), and the overall tone of your posts, which to my eyes came off as a bit on the arrogant side -- especially considering that your counterargument to the AFD in question was not your own detailed forecast discussion. I think if you offered your own detailed forecast discussion, people would've cut you more slack... unless, of course, your forecast didn't verify and Captain Ahab's did. :D

Joe Nield

06-08-2005, 06:11 PM

Originally posted by Billy Griffin
While I do not agree with the forecaster, and I do not appreciate some of the comments fired back and the language, if you want to say I was insulting or criticising the forecaster, so be it.

If you just wanted everyone to agree with you, you picked the wrong place to sign up. You have to roll with the punches, buddy. What language? Maybe I missed a post where someone got out of line, but there's no need to take offense because people disagree with you.

Hell, I'm a democrat in Indiana. If anyone knows that, it's me. ;)

Carrie Halliday

06-08-2005, 07:17 PM

Originally posted by Joe Nield+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Joe Nield)</div><!--QuoteBegin-Billy Griffin
While I do not agree with the forecaster, and I do not appreciate some of the comments fired back and the language, if you want to say I was insulting or criticising the forecaster, so be it.

If you just wanted everyone to agree with you, you picked the wrong place to sign up. You have to roll with the punches, buddy. What language? Maybe I missed a post where someone got out of line, but there's no need to take offense because people disagree with you.

Hell, I'm a democrat in Indiana. If anyone knows that, it's me. ;)[/b]

Most play well together here on Stormtrack. I enjoy Joe's insight and knowledge of weather, even though he is a dem and a Colts fan. *nudges Joe* LOL!

Everyone on this board knows that meteorology is not an exact science. If you think otherwise, you have no business here. This site talks about REAL weather, forecasting and chasing. Remember, a majority of the public looks upon us weather folks as 'odd' or 'nerdy' until a storm cloud rolls in...then they want us to read the sky for their fate in life, like tea leaves. Or, be in my position.
My husband talks me up as a 'weather whore', so some people laugh AT me for my love of weather and poke some mean-spirited fun at me in general. When the wind starts to blow or clouds darken, my email and PM light up like Dec 25th, all asking if they are about to be taken off the face of the earth. I give them what I interpret NWS and what little models I understand, in my own words (they know I am not a pro, just a person who loves weather and chasing). When nothing (or little) happens, are they thankful? Noooo, they are mad because nothing happend. I am about as green of a hobbyist forecaster as you can get (far from a degreed pro), but even I get tired of the "weather guessers are the only people who keep their jobs after being wrong most of the time" BS too.

Meteorology is the Rodney Dangerfield (RIP) of careers and hobbys.

The folks at the SPC (like the TPC guys who are in their 'season' now too) work hard to keep the masses safe and those with an ounce of weather savvy informed. Hats off to the job these folks do day in and day out.
Analyzing and dissecting a professional forecast here is expected, attacking a forecaster (one who does this for a living, the degreed professional)....not cool at all.
Last time I checked, a watch meant conditions were ripe (not guaranteed) for severe weather in a boxed area. Forecast discussions are just as has been stated before...one forecaster's take on the dynamics of the atmosphere at one point in time, and projecting their thoughts on where those same dynamics will be in the near future.

My advice to those whom don't like what the pros are anticipating...learn to read the data and forecast for your own bad self.

Scott Olson

06-08-2005, 07:46 PM

One of the things I like about storm chasing is you have to do your own forecasting and mesoanaylsis in order to be really succesful. The high risk on Saturday actually verified. Since the SPC's job is to help protect the public there are always going to be a bit conservative same with the NWS forecast offices. I saw a beautiful supercell in Nebraska and really enjoyed it.

Alex Lamers

06-09-2005, 08:56 AM

AFDs were meant for inter-office coordination and to let surrounding offices know what you are thinking. The general public, if you told them about this, would probably immediately say "What is an Area Forecast Discussion"? Most of the general public watches the 10 pm news or the Weather Channel anyways. So basically, the only ones who read them are degreed types and weenies like us.

I think the wording was reflected in the HWO. Remember, not everyone types out an AFD the same (as many people have said). Unless the next forecaster said "THE LAST FORECASTER WAS TOTALLY WRONG", then you can generally assume that the same line of thinking was factored into his forecast.

Bottom line? Its an AFD, and this thread has had a surprising amount of bickering (or debate...whatever floats your boat) over a couple lines in it. Chill out people...what happens happens. :D

And finally, I think what got a lot of people perturbed (at least me anyways) is the thread title "Forecasting Skill Going Downhill?". ABSOLUTELY not. :)

...Alex Lamers...

nickgrillo

06-09-2005, 09:30 AM

Wow, in the past couple days, this thread has really gotten alot of attention!

I agree with the forecaster writing the AFD about this whole weekend, it is supposed to be a bang, still IMO, and if he wanted to go out on a limb by saying what he said, then you gotta have respect for the guy. It's very hard to make a good forecast, and he was in total agreement with the SPC, because they had put a MDT out for their Day 3 outlook. Most of the time, the NWS downplays an event this far in advance, but that forecaster had an educated feeling about it, so he wrote about it, what's wrong with that?

Billy Griffin

06-09-2005, 10:14 AM

Since I lit the match, I'll try to extinguish it... I thought this would have died by now, and most would be focused more on the next three-four days. I'm anticipating some good stuff starting today through Sunday, as it looks like the "death ridge" is looming once we get into next week.

This horse is not only dead, but it's off to the glue factory. :wink:

Please, Let's move on to the enjoyable stuff... the next 4 days of chasing !!! :wink:

Rich Thompson

06-09-2005, 10:39 AM

I figure it's time for an SPC forecaster to chime in here. Personally, I don't take offense to the original comments because I'm used to criticism. Actually, I'd be more concerned if nobody even noticed the SPC outlooks!

SPC outlooks are a bit different than a typical "chase cast" in that we have to consider continuity with previous outlooks, and we're looking at the entire conus for an 18-24 hour period. Continuity can be a challenge because forecasters don't always agree with one another. Also, POD is naturally given a little more emphasis than FAR (with some forecasters moreso than others). If one forecaster in the outlook sequence believes an event warrants a MDT/HIGH risk, then the outlook tends to stay at that higher category. There's more to be lost from an erroneous downgrade than an unnecessary upgrade, so we've got to be awfully certain when we go to downgrade a MDT/HIGH risk for tornadoes.

I'll admit that we've had a subpar spring with too many over-forecasts of tornado potential, but that's to be somewhat expected in a very slow spring.

Rich T.

Billy Griffin

06-11-2005, 12:03 AM

Guess I don't have to add any comments on today, eh?
25-yr. event ??? Never saw it.

However, the caviat to this is that I'm happy for all those who did catch tornadoes Thursday.

This year has been really lousy, with some tough luck, so I guess I was just venting.

Hope we're all friends again. :wink:

John Farley

06-11-2005, 12:44 AM

All the debate in this thread has been about OVERforecasting severe weather. I have to think that someone in Wisconsin is either chuckling about that or scratching their heads, given that over the past week, that area has received limited attention in outlooks, watches, etc. yet has had among the most SVR reports.

Today is a prime example - although there was a MSD issued, they never had a watch, yet if you look at the storm reports map, the density of reports today there is as high as anywhere else, including all of the places that had watches, and 2 of the 4 tornadoes reported today occurred there. (And if you look at the SVS's out of Green Bay, there may have actually been more than that.)

As many have pointed out, severe weather forecasting is an inexact science (Don't I know it from my own lack of success in forecasting/chasing this year!), and before we jump to the conclusion that events are being played up too much, we might consider that sometimes the forecasts have been off the other direciton.

Chris Sokol

06-11-2005, 12:52 AM

Guess I don't have to add any comments on today, eh?
25-yr. event ??? Never saw it.

The message that you have such an issue with referred to the weekend...including Sunday. So you may want to "not add comments" until the period is over.

POTENTIAL WILL EXIST FOR 1 OR MORE SIGNIFICANT CENTRAL-U.S. SEVERE WX OUTBREAKS...BEGINNING AS EARLY AS THU BUT MORE LIKELY IN THE FRI-SAT-SUN PERIOD.

Trust me...I can beat this horse until it is labled "Elmers".

Andy Wehrle

06-11-2005, 02:09 AM

I have to think that someone in Wisconsin is either chuckling about that or scratching their heads, given that over the past week, that area has received limited attention in outlooks, watches, etc. yet has had among the most SVR reports.

Today is a prime example - although there was a MSD issued, they never had a watch, yet if you look at the storm reports map, the density of reports today there is as high as anywhere else, including all of the places that had watches, and 2 of the 4 tornadoes reported today occurred there. (And if you look at the SVS's out of Green Bay, there may have actually been more than that.)

:D

Next year on those days when there's just a marginal risk of tornadoes (2% according to SPC) I'm just going to drive up to Lake Winnebago and wait for the tornadic waterspout. :lol:

I find it highly ironic that even though nearly every textbook will tell you that southern Wisconsin has the most severe weather, nearly all the tornadoes this year have been in the GRB CWA, with only one in the MKX CWA (on March 30th). Looking back through the past few years, this also holds true. Only one tornado of F2 or greater intensity made it south of the Fond du Lac/Dodge County line in the last 5 years.

That aside, I did manage to get some decent storm pictures on Friday. I will have them up on the website in the next few days. :D

Back on topic, it seems they called for this event to start one day too late. They predicted a significant severe weather event in the Fri/Sat/Sun period, but how about Thursday eh? :D Besides, today and Sunday still hold potential for significant severe weather, and there could even be a few strong/violent tornadoes if everything goes right. 8)

Billy Griffin

06-11-2005, 09:30 AM

You're forgetting the main thing I was focusing on in the forecaster's statement.... which is where I goofed in the title of the thread... "in more than 25 years." Was Thursday the most potent, widespread outbreak we've seen in over 25 years? Huh-uh.

Will Sunday be? That's awful darn hard to forecast considering this statement was made last Tuesday. :?

Yesterday could have (could have) been the day we were all waiting for, but too many mesoscale factors came into play and screwed the whole day up (unless you like watching flooding rains).

Seems apparent that tomorrow will have the same potential to be a very good day with tornadoes likely in Oklahoma, but "but".... there could also be earlier convection to just blow the whole thing.

So with that said, all in all, after 743 miles yesterday and finally getting to see a few lightning strikes on the way back from the round trip drive of Norman to Elk City to Amarillo to Lubbock to Vernon to Lawton and back to Norman, ummm... it sure would be nice to see one more big event before all the wheat is cut.

Started the year three for three, now zero for the past five. :cry:

Guess we'll just have to hope and see what tomorrow brings. I hope today's convection is minimal at best and the atmosphere has a little more time to recover before tomorrow. :wink:

BTW: the dead horse is a lost cause. Besides, Elmers uses the COW photo, not the horse. LOL :D :D

Jeff Snyder

06-11-2005, 11:40 AM

You're forgetting the main thing I was focusing on in the forecaster's statement.... which is where I goofed in the title of the thread... "in more than 25 years." Was Thursday the most potent, widespread outbreak we've seen in over 25 years? Huh-uh.

Billy,

You are misquoting the original forecaster. He didn't say it'd be the most impressive outbreak in the US in the past 25 years, as you are implying (or directly stating)! He said that the upper-air pattern was AS potent as any he's seen in HIS 25-yr experience. This is NOT the same as saying the best outbreak "in more than 25 years" (as directly quoted above). From a synoptic standpoint, this pattern DOES look like a big tornado producer, but the mesoscale environment (which is not forecastable 3-5 days in advance) can really 'make or break' an event. We've seen this time and time again -- it's nothing new. So far, it's seems that the mesocale environment has been a "break" in the event. If convection had held off yesterday morning and waited until mid-late afternoon, I think there could have been significant tornadic supercells in the eastern Panhandles and western OK (low-level shear was very impressive, steep-lapse rates aloft, etc). Upper-level flow would have probably been sufficient as well.

The "First 10 Days of May" 2003 was as impressive SYNOPTIC environment as you really get. Strong western US trough, wide open Gulf, strong (but breakable) cap, etc etc etc. That said, some of those outbreaks during that time period could have turned out quite a bit differently if there had been widespread morning convection, etc.

Are you going to start a "Good Job NWS" for an event which they correctly forecast days ahead of time?