Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    16,800
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Doug747
    Newest Member
    Doug747
    Joined

February Banter 2021


George BM
 Share

Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, Wetbulbs88 said:

What are you talking about? I'm responding to posts. Plain and simple. I don't see you stepping into the darkness when someone debates with you. The double standard is incredible. And you betray your own ego by thinking I'm taking a 'victory lap'. If you're a true forecaster, being right shouldn't be the goal. It should be finding out the truth. And people are still coming after me for stating facts. It's plain childish. Look at the posts last night. I was on an island, and I happened to be on to something. Now I'm taking heat. 

It's happened several times in the short time I've been back in this sub, and quite frankly, I'm not going to just take crap if it continues. It's frustrating that I'm actually providing some foresight and it's being twisted, not to mention with bitterness. I don't give a sh*t if I'm right or wrong. It's that there's an exclusive culture here, and it's clear as day. 

You are responding to what you created.  People aren't coming at you for no reason unprovoked so stop it with the persecution complex nonsense.  That post I responded to was just picked at random.  I was worried about the warm layer too but I'm not going all over the board this morning while people are disappointed and frustrated saying basically "I told ya so" over and over and over again.   And I am probably guilty of doing some of that in frustration sometimes and I should try to cut it out and tone it down and I admit I have faults but "two wrongs make a right" is a crappy justification.  Lastly, for the record, your NAM comments are a bit much.  The NAM did see the idea of a mid level warm layer first...but it was also WAY WAY WAY off synpitically at range too.  And frankly all the CAM's saw the warm layer the NAM is simply the only one that goes out to 84 hours so yea it "saw it first" I guess.  And the NAM got some stuff way wrong, like the placement of the precip banding...had that super band set up over 95 like the NAM thought last night at 0z DC to Baltimore would have done a LOT better...even if that was all sleet it would have been 3" of sleet!  But we saw that at times it mixed with snow when heavy banding did get east so it would have had some snow...and probably been 4-5" and a win.  But that banding set up NW of 95 and there wasnt steady enough heavy precip for a long enough period to mix out the warm layer...and there wasn't enough precip for sleet to really pile up and accumulate...and so total fail.  But the NAM didnt NAIL it...it was right about the mid level warm layer and wrong about almost everything else!  

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

I measured 5.5" of pretty much all snow when I first got up and shoveled off my "measuring spot".  Since then I got 2.5" of half snow/sleet mix for a total of 8" of frozen that fell but the depth everywhere is still only 6.5" due to compacting from the weight of the ice on top of the snow.    But lets assume the 5.5" had higher ratios so is like .45 qpf.  But the 2.5" since is VERY low ratio lets say 5-1 so best guess I was close to 1" qpf up here under that banding...which makes sense because that is what all the guidance said the qpf would be only they had that band along 95 near DC not up here.  

Big surprise that the best banding ended up over fringe land! That never happens!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, RevWarReenactor said:

I am so glad I don't do this to myself anymore. Not going to lie though I had a moment. Just a short one right now.

 

But really you can't make it up. Just unbelievable bad luck we've had. At some point this bad luck has to end, right? Please PSU, make it stop?

 

 

IMG_6830.jpg

Hey man how you been?  Was wondering what happened to you this year.  Hope all is well.  

ETA:  It is SOME bad luck...and I also think some of its the pac base state and some of it is AGW.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

You are responding to what you created.  People aren't coming at you for no reason unprovoked so stop it with the persecution complex nonsense.  That post I responded to was just picked at random.  I was worried about the warm layer too but I'm not going all over the board this morning while people are disappointed and frustrated saying basically "I told ya so" over and over and over again.   And I am probably guilty of doing some of that in frustration sometimes and I should try to cut it out and tone it down and I admit I have faults but "two wrongs make a right" is a crappy justification.  Lastly, for the record, your NAM comments are a bit much.  The NAM did see the idea of a mid level warm layer first...but it was also WAY WAY WAY off synpitically at range too.  And frankly all the CAM's saw the warm layer the NAM is simply the only one that goes out to 84 hours so yea it "saw it first" I guess.  And the NAM got some stuff way wrong, like the placement of the precip banding...had that super band set up over 95 like the NAM thought last night at 0z DC to Baltimore would have done a LOT better...even if that was all sleet it would have been 3" of sleet!  But we saw that at times it mixed with snow when heavy banding did get east so it would have had some snow...and probably been 4-5" and a win.  But that banding set up NW of 95 and there wasnt steady enough heavy precip for a long enough period to mix out the warm layer...and there wasn't enough precip for sleet to really pile up and accumulate...and so total fail.  But the NAM didnt NAIL it...it was right about the mid level warm layer and wrong about almost everything else!  

i could stop reading after the first sentence. Patently false. I haven't created anything. Show me the post where I created the argument. I'll be waiting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

You are responding to what you created.  People aren't coming at you for no reason unprovoked so stop it with the persecution complex nonsense.  That post I responded to was just picked at random.  I was worried about the warm layer too but I'm not going all over the board this morning while people are disappointed and frustrated saying basically "I told ya so" over and over and over again.   And I am probably guilty of doing some of that in frustration sometimes and I should try to cut it out and tone it down and I admit I have faults but "two wrongs make a right" is a crappy justification.  Lastly, for the record, your NAM comments are a bit much.  The NAM did see the idea of a mid level warm layer first...but it was also WAY WAY WAY off synpitically at range too.  And frankly all the CAM's saw the warm layer the NAM is simply the only one that goes out to 84 hours so yea it "saw it first" I guess.  And the NAM got some stuff way wrong, like the placement of the precip banding...had that super band set up over 95 like the NAM thought last night at 0z DC to Baltimore would have done a LOT better...even if that was all sleet it would have been 3" of sleet!  But we saw that at times it mixed with snow when heavy banding did get east so it would have had some snow...and probably been 4-5" and a win.  But that banding set up NW of 95 and there wasnt steady enough heavy precip for a long enough period to mix out the warm layer...and there wasn't enough precip for sleet to really pile up and accumulate...and so total fail.  But the NAM didnt NAIL it...it was right about the mid level warm layer and wrong about almost everything else!  

Reading the rest of the post, it only gets worse. Moderators of this sub chastised me for being gloomy about last night's NAM. One of which said, and I quote, "Is there another side to this record?" So now you're twisting my assertion that those criticisms are totally baseless. Is it not possible that you're lacking context? So yes, when you respond saying that I'm gloating, it's simply ridiculous. Meanwhile, you're doing your best to cover your own *ss about your own calls last night. How do I respond? Politely, mentioning that you were letting your hope for us getting snow influence your decision, which I would hardly call a bitter criticism. What did I do after that? I suggested that I don't care who's right. What did you do? Double down that I was posting everywhere gloating. Again, show me where I've been 'gloating' and I'll be happy to reflect further. On the contrary, I was pointing out that people within the culture of exclusivity treat others differently.  

Now you're going on and on about your own call, which is 100% irrelevant, and proving my point about your projection. I don't care about that. I made one simple point that was somewhat tongue in cheek because you were rooting for us to get snow. 

You're digging yourself a deeper hole, and there's absolutely no way you're going to bully me into silence. You're simply treating me different than you would treat 'original' members. It's clear. If you maintain the culture of exclusivity, I will push back against it. It provides a disincentive for people to participate. That's why you have trolls, and furthermore, accuse people of being a troll who might not be--which was precisely how I was treated the very minute I stepped in here upon moving back to this area. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jebman said:

27 degrees with moderate to heavy snow here. Big big aggregates! Picked up another inch on top of the ice on the old snowpack. That's 9.5 inches snow on the season which puts us at something like ~ 1600 percent of normal.

How you been holding up over there Jeb? I know this stretch has been one for the record books to the northwest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Wetbulbs88 said:

Reading the rest of the post, it only gets worse. Moderators of this sub chastised me for being gloomy about last night's NAM. One of which said, and I quote, "Is there another side to this record?" So now you're twisting my assertion that those criticisms are totally baseless. Is it not possible that you're lacking context? So yes, when you respond saying that I'm gloating, it's simply ridiculous. Meanwhile, you're doing your best to cover your own *ss about your own calls last night. How do I respond? Politely, mentioning that you were letting your hope for us getting snow influence your decision, which I would hardly call a bitter criticism. What did I do after that? I suggested that I don't care who's right. What did you do? Double down that I was posting everywhere gloating. Again, show me where I've been 'gloating' and I'll be happy to reflect further. On the contrary, I was pointing out that people within the culture of exclusivity treat others differently.  

Now you're going on and on about your own call, which is 100% irrelevant, and proving my point about your projection. I don't care about that. I made one simple point that was somewhat tongue in cheek because you were rooting for us to get snow. 

You're digging yourself a deeper hole, and there's absolutely no way you're going to bully me into silence. You're simply treating me different than you would treat 'original' members. It's clear. If you maintain the culture of exclusivity, I will push back against it. It provides a disincentive for people to participate. That's why you have trolls, and furthermore, accuse people of being a troll who might not be--which was precisely how I was treated the very minute I stepped in here upon moving back to this area. 

I said I was wrong.  I was being optimistic.  Oh well.  You were right...now move on.  Or continue to post again and again and again about it, it's not like your popularity can go down much so what's it matter.  I am done.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Wetbulbs88 said:

Reading the rest of the post, it only gets worse. Moderators of this sub chastised me for being gloomy about last night's NAM. One of which said, and I quote, "Is there another side to this record?" So now you're twisting my assertion that those criticisms are totally baseless. Is it not possible that you're lacking context? So yes, when you respond saying that I'm gloating, it's simply ridiculous. Meanwhile, you're doing your best to cover your own *ss about your own calls last night. How do I respond? Politely, mentioning that you were letting your hope for us getting snow influence your decision, which I would hardly call a bitter criticism. What did I do after that? I suggested that I don't care who's right. What did you do? Double down that I was posting everywhere gloating. Again, show me where I've been 'gloating' and I'll be happy to reflect further. On the contrary, I was pointing out that people within the culture of exclusivity treat others differently.  

Now you're going on and on about your own call, which is 100% irrelevant, and proving my point about your projection. I don't care about that. I made one simple point that was somewhat tongue in cheek because you were rooting for us to get snow. 

You're digging yourself a deeper hole, and there's absolutely no way you're going to bully me into silence. You're simply treating me different than you would treat 'original' members. It's clear. If you maintain the culture of exclusivity, I will push back against it. It provides a disincentive for people to participate. That's why you have trolls, and furthermore, accuse people of being a troll who might not be--which was precisely how I was treated the very minute I stepped in here upon moving back to this area. 

 

you got pushback last night because you post waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much because it's the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • WxUSAF unpinned this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...