87storms Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 48 minutes ago, Chris78 said: I see whitetail is closed again. They opened briefly but there website says temporarily closed. Local ski resorts are hurting badly. Yea, I don't like seeing that. I'd be ok if only the higher elevations score with this next system, though for now it's looking like even lower elevations could get in on the action. It's all TBD when it's 5+ days out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxUSAF Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 22 minutes ago, WxUSAF said: GFS trending to the icon But bad trends on D11-13. BAMwx got their finger in the flame emoji 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 1 hour ago, WesternFringe said: Say it more. You have proven your point (at least to your self-satisfaction) literally hundreds of times. We all come here to talk about how it might snow and to have fun with it. What is the actual f-ing utility of saying the same thing over and over and over? At a certain point, who cares if this used to be a snowier set-up? What we all care about is snow chances for next week. We don’t need an incessant and never-ending dissertation why it would have been a better set-up 20 years ago. Who fucking cares? Jesus christ. Most of us just care about the fun of snow chances next week, and really don’t care where you think it fits historically at all or in the least little bit. This hobby is supposed to be fun and you are a kill joy at times. It’s that simple. 1) I was responding to someone else who asked me a question 2) you took issue with it for some reason which I think you just made evident by the bolder part above. 3)Every post after my initial one is your fault. Don’t start a conversation then say “why are we discussing this”. 4) This isn’t a fight about climate change but now I think I understand your issue. You think it is. 5) I’m not talking about our snow chances if it was 20 years ago. I’m taking about what would help this week. And that’s a colder airmass. That’s the trend we need. That’s what was asked to me. 6) We need the same thermals we needed 50 years ago. The temperature water becomes solid hasn’t changed! I DGAF about 20 years ago except to examine what setups we need to get snow NOW! 7) How you gonna objectively assess a snow threat and ignore temperatures? This became a drawn out thing because of you. You injected yourself into a reply to someone else. That’s fine it’s a public discussion thread. But you took one of the most ridiculous stances I’ve ever come across and kept doubling down on it and now that you have nothing left you turned to a personal attack and some silly “why you going on and on about this” argument when you’re the reason for the whole back and forth. This is the silliest most illogical argument I’ve ever come across on here. And frankly I think we’re arguing two different things. I’m addressing what we need to snow next weekend and you’re having some anti CC crusade. I’m not cluttering up the main thread anymore with this nonsense. If you want to reply please do it here but I’m done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesternFringe Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 15 minutes ago, psuhoffman said: 1) I was responding to someone else who asked me a question 2) you took issue with it for some reason which I think you just made evident by the bolder part above. 3)Every post after my initial one is your fault. Don’t start a conversation then say “why are we discussing this”. 4) This isn’t a fight about climate change but now I think I understand your issue. You think it is. 5) I’m not talking about our snow chances if it was 20 years ago. I’m taking about what would help this week. And that’s a colder airmass. That’s the trend we need. That’s what was asked to me. 6) We need the same thermals we needed 50 years ago. The temperature water becomes solid hasn’t changed! I DGAF about 20 years ago except to examine what setups we need to get snow NOW! 7) How you gonna objectively assess a snow threat and ignore temperatures? This became a drawn out thing because of you. You injected yourself into a reply to someone else. That’s fine it’s a public discussion thread. But you took one of the most ridiculous stances I’ve ever come across and kept doubling down on it and now that you have nothing left you turned to a personal attack and some silly “why you going on and on about this” argument when you’re the reason for the whole back and forth. This is the silliest most illogical argument I’ve ever come across on here. And frankly I think we’re arguing two different things. I’m addressing what we need to snow next weekend and you’re having some anti CC crusade. I’m not cluttering up the main thread anymore with this nonsense. If you want to reply please do it here but I’m done. Okay, man. You literally direct quoted me two times. I am not talking climate change, I am talking about your contributions to the mid range discussions and how they are super super repetitive and wear on everybody. And who cares if you are done? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxWatcher007 Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 Happy New Year, weenies! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasnow215 Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 8 hours ago, H2O said: Commanders suck so bad. But the eagles. Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha If you’re a Washington fan it means your team has sucked for 3 decades lol 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now