Winter 2025/26 Banter Thread

[nvck]

1 hour ago, Chicago Storm said:

ready for spc outlooks to be the most confusing thing ever?

https://www.spc.noaa.gov/exper/conditional-intensity-information/

Probably a good way to communicate probability as well as intensity, but what about areas w/o the shading, in, say the 5% tor? is the shading just different "levels" of the previous sig shading? so 1 would be equivalent to the existing sig dashed lines, and then 2 and 3 are "levels" on top of that?

[Chicago916]

1 hour ago, Chicago Storm said:

ready for spc outlooks to be the most confusing thing ever?

https://www.spc.noaa.gov/exper/conditional-intensity-information/

Good luck to Nadocast in coding all of that in

[Stevo6899]

47 minutes ago, Chicago Storm said:

i think it's common knowledge here that many winter threads will go off the rails at some point with some mi winter weather history or some other back-and-forth.

...which is why it's a running joke.

Im glad we can entertain y'all. With there being so many of us, that seems normal that everyday there's something to learn about Michigan weather history. It is a weather board. Blame Josh with all his stats n shit.

[Harry Perry]

6 hours ago, nvck said:

Probably a good way to communicate probability as well as intensity, but what about areas w/o the shading, in, say the 5% tor? is the shading just different "levels" of the previous sig shading? so 1 would be equivalent to the existing sig dashed lines, and then 2 and 3 are "levels" on top of that?

Yeah, pretty much emphasizing how severe the storms are expected to be in a given area.

[roardog]

10 hours ago, Chicago Storm said:

ready for spc outlooks to be the most confusing thing ever?

https://www.spc.noaa.gov/exper/conditional-intensity-information/

I guess it makes sense to a weather weenie but this is way too much for the general public that still don’t even know the difference between a watch and warning. 

[KeenerWx]

10 hours ago, Chicago Storm said:

ready for spc outlooks to be the most confusing thing ever?

https://www.spc.noaa.gov/exper/conditional-intensity-information/

What’s the point? A large population cannot even comprehend probabilities at their most simple application. Weather based probabilities already introduce a different dimension where product/forecast type and area coverage muddy how one would interpret the chance that x outcome happens specifically at their location. Ask a person what a 60% probability of an event happening within 25 miles of them means. Not a damn clue. This added level of complexity, then, cannot be for the benefit of the public. Suppose it’s a more hyper specific mode of grading forecasts internally?