LVwxHistorian

Just a HORRIBLE contamination of the record -- I'm getting back on NCEI to do something about it once and for all!!

way too variable!! because of that drunk guy early in the record!

I knew I felt my ears ringing!! I've missed all of you as well and our harmless banter that got so blown out of proportion!

Well, I don't really care about your other posts - you're being very rude to me now. I'm very knowledgeable in weather history having studied it for 30 years and am doing a graduate degree in ATMO right now. What are your credentials??

Rude!!

Then which stations should I compare it to sir, if not the ones closest to it?!!!! I see the intelligence level here hasn't increased at all in my absence!

We've already discussed this at length in Old Crappy Coatesville Snowfall Records! and I made my point there many times over!! Don't upset me - I don't want to get banned again, LOL!! But i like the lat/lon info and I suspect he was at a significantly higher elevation that what he wrote

yes exactly what I was thinking!!

This observer was having a MAJOR problem correctly measuring snowfall. here's some of his other obs compared to the 2 closest stations, West chester and kennet square: April 10-12, 1894: 29.2" KS - 8.8" and WC - 7.8" Feb. 1899: 69.8" KS -- 46", WC - 38" Jan 25, 1905: 29" KS - 18", WC - 14.3" Dec 25-26, 1909: 38" KS -- 23" and at WC -- 21"

NCDC: IPS Your publication | IPS | National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) (noaa.gov) IPS-7EED8214-582F-4EFF-99F6-C48A66B83184.pdf I can't believe nobody missed me!!!!!

Oh gosh, you mean the thing on the right side?! He probably just misread that in his drunken stupor! And what, no "welcome back", "we missed you", nothing?!!

Hey I'm back!! Did you miss me?! lol

Uhh ... so what's wrong with saying "It's still too early to tell if this will go out to sea or head up the coast"?!! It seems like a no-brainer to me!!

I could say the same thing based on your picture!!