psuhoffman

Sorry if I can't articulate this clearly and concisely enough. I've been thinking about whether and how to say this for a while. This winter there have been several examples of posters screaming "bullying" anytime someone says something they don't like. I am neurodivergent. As an adult I'm able to mask it well enough that it's not as socially crippling as it once was. But I am intimately familiar with what bullying is. No one on here is being bullied! No one is being doxxed. No one is being threatened. No one is being personally mocked or ridiculed for who they are or their preferences. No one is being cruelly made fun of for being weird or different. Calling out bad behavior or criticizing someone's actions is NOT BULLYING. Especially when it's done in a non threatening, and often only half serious, way in an online forum. I know the internet is generally a cruel harsh place, but this forum is one of the most positive communities I am a part of. Even when we are fighting and criticizing it is mostly done in a non threatening way. I don't know if the bullying thing was thrown around as a calculated effort to deflect or mute criticism knowing the weight of that word...or if some people are confused about what real bullying actually is. But I wanted to say this because bullying is a serious thing, and something I am very conscious of, and I wanted to make it clear what goes on in here when we banter with one another, is not bullying in my opinion, and saying it is minimizes real bullying.

1) IAD has had accumulating snowfall after March 10th 38 times in the last 63 years. 60% of the time. 2) Change your screen name, if you're going to be this big of a douche shit poster at least don't associate it with Eagles fans, we have enough bad press (often deserved) without you piling on! 3)STFU

That was a monumentally shitty post, and we've had enough shitty posts in here over the years to be able to spot them!

We have this debate EVERY TIME there is a projected snow after a cold front and its exhausting. I've been out west and seen snow accumulate after an 80 degree day multiple times! It doesn't happen here as often for several reasons but that doesn't mean it can't. Unlikely and impossible are two very different things. And just because something has not happened does not mean it can not happen. One thing that has to be factored in, is it does not get to 80 that often during the winter, so the opportunity for this to happen would be limited so the fact it has not happened might just be limited sample size not a function of it being impossible. As we see more extreme temperature swings happening this kind of thing might become more common. It matters what the temperature is WHEN it's snowing...not the day before!

if we have an east based super nino heading into fall...then yea best to just assume the winter is going to be a dead ratter. I know you were joking but some do just automatically assume Nino=Snow. Which is funny because I remember after we had 3 dead ratter nino's in a row, 1992, 1995, and 1998, the prevailing thought before 2003 was Nino=warm snowless winter lol. Then we had a run of extremely snowy nino's and it flipped the other way. The truth is somewhere in between and that it depends on the details.

I don't get excited about enso before the summer, but if that is real...well if that is real and we don't break out of this snow funk I give up.

There were several other reports from near 3k feet in that area and none were close to that total until you got west of the Allegheny front from upslope. As a skier I am well aware of how EVERY ski resort inflates snowfall. Not some. Not sometimes. Every single one every single time! Some do it by making their official measurement spot a bowl location that they know is a local max zone on the mountain. Others just flat out make up a number. But in 30 years of skiing having been in at least 30 snow events at 20 different resorts not once did any of them report the snowfall honestly. I was just at Killington last weekend and they got about 6” and reported 11. It’s just what they do.

Thanks "Mostly" Nostradamus

I have no idea what you're upset about... I was just pointing out how lucky it was that right after there was a dispute about it...that there just happened to be a new member who just joined who also just happened to be at Wintergreen so they could use their first posts ever to verify the ski resorts claim of an anomalously high amount of snow compared to everything around them even at similar elevations. What's controversial about those facts?

Wow kinda crazy how someone that just happened to be at WIntergreen just happened to join right now and their first post is about this. Crazy huh

thanks, and what would you suggest?

I meant the GFS. You said it’s not…ugh never mind

Yes I discovered it’s getting warmer. Right after Al Gore invented the internet.

It was south

No wait a minute… if he wants to give me credit for discovering it’s getting warmer…

I know it’s facetious but that 2014 storm it was in the mid 20s and it’s only warmed like 1/2 a degree since then. And the 2018 storm was even more recent and not really that borderline when the snow was falling.

Thanks Nostradamus

I wish that’s all that was wrong with him.

Right but the point is it was LESS WRONG then all the other models day 5-8 and so on a chart of verification scores it would look good.

But this point is actually a great example of what I meant by "when all we care about is how much snow falls in our yard it might not align with verification scores". Yes the AIFS had multiple runs in the day 5-8 range with HECS snowfall results for our area. But, those results were real, just displaced about 150 miles to the northeast. And no other model, at those ranges, were even close...the GFS didn't start showing those crazy snow totals until like day 4 out. So when compared to all the other models, which didn't have an HECS anywhere at all...the AIFS which had it but displaced a small amount too far southwest, the AIFS was by far the closest to the truth (the less wrong) model in the day 5-8 period. We look at them all wrong, in that we expect them to be exactly right at a range that there is almost no chance they will be. The AIFS showing a HECS somewhere in the northeast at all day 5-8 was a win for it...but we think it was wrong because the big snow ended up not over us.

Verification scores don't lie. However, when all we care about is how much snow ends up on our lawn, that doesn't always necessarily correlate to some hemispheric h5 or MSLP verification score! Also, sometimes we see a model leading the scores chart and think "that means it's right" when it really means it's slightly less wrong than the others.

This definitely has merit, thinking back in the late 90's and early 2000's stuff at day 3-5 was treated like we look at stuff day 7-10 now. We didn't even try to look at a specific storm threat past day 5, most of the models didn't even run past 144 hours and it was a complete waste of time. Usually by 72 hours we have pretty good idea what the major features will be, but now we also expect meso scale things to be right and that was never a thing in the past. And in marginal setups where a 1-2 degree difference is huge, expecting models to nail that is crazy. But some people do now. So maybe it's also a case of expectations increasing faster than the actual improvements which gives the perception things are worse. I do think there is some truth the the decreased consistency of bias errors but it's likely not as bad as I am perceiving it.

@Terpeast @WxUSAF Was the Palm Sunday blizzard of 1942 one of the HECS storms that would likely not have happened today? I know when this was a topic and that regression study was done Feb 1987 was a lost one and one other was mentioned, was it 1942? Baltimore got 22" but the temperature never got below 33 degrees the whole storm. Seems unlikely that would have worked out today with the roughly 3.5F increase in temps since then. That's kinda depressing...one of Baltimores biggest snowstorms ever would probably just have been a dismal rainy spring day if that same exact thing happened again today.

It really dampens the wave around 90-96 hours. It doesn't eject enough energy, most of it hangs back, the wave dies with no mid and upper level support at all as it slides east.

RGEM did not look like it was going to be suppressed at 84 hours. Guess we will see with the GGEM soon