nvck Posted 13 hours ago Share Posted 13 hours ago 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? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago916 Posted 13 hours ago Share Posted 13 hours ago 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo6899 Posted 13 hours ago Share Posted 13 hours ago 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Perry Posted 7 hours ago Share Posted 7 hours ago 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roardog Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeenerWx Posted 3 hours ago Share Posted 3 hours ago 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roardog Posted 1 hour ago Share Posted 1 hour ago 2 hours ago, KeenerWx said: 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? It seems like they just make things more difficult for the general population. It’s like when they simplified winter weather headlines. Now, a winter weather advisory can mean anything from 5 inches of snow to a little bit of freezing drizzle to .2 inches of ice or anything in between. Also, why does a winter storm watch precede an ice storm warning? Why not just have an ice storm watch? For the general public, I think the headline should tell you what to expect and not make you guess or dig deeper to figure out what a winter weather advisory means on a particular day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King James Posted 1 hour ago Share Posted 1 hour ago Don't blame/take it out on us for the weather boredom in your area and for the cold stretch. You don't see us ever bitching and moaning about Chicago's lake effect shit.That’s the stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King James Posted 1 hour ago Share Posted 1 hour ago Guess it's only fitting for a guy named king James to be whining and complaining.lol so good. Like moths to the light 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