Western Railroad Discussion > The Implications of Weather Forecasting and the Storm Now Winding

While this is a bit off-topic, I hope you will take a moment to read this:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/03/14/weather-forecasts-likely-saved-hundreds-lives-bomb-cyclone-ignore-storm-warnings-your-peril/?noredirect=on

 

A lot of people don't listen to news radio stations, or news TV channels.   All they listen to is music and are totally not aware of storm warnings.  Or, many of them also have been in Tornado watch and warning areas and see little if any bad  weather.  So they don't bother to break their daily routeens.   In addition forecasts of possible tornados that don't occur again convince people "not to worry".

As forcasting continues in improve people will take notice. But there will forever be those who spin in their own little orbit totally oblivious to the world surrounding them. Can’t really help those folks.

The weather media's never ending quest to turn every single atmospheric event into a potential life altering crisis does not help the cause of those that are SERIOUSLY interested in informing the public.  A steady breeze and a crack of thunder is now turned into damaging winds, dangerous lightning and the potential of SEVERE weather.   Like the boy who cried wolf, after a while you just stop listening.  I'll freely admit to being in that camp much of the time.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/14/19 18:22 by junctiontower.

That’s when you go to weather.gov (NOT .com), punch in your zip code and see your NWS forecast. TV weather has to keep people watching by any means. The NWS doesn’t have to scare people when they don’t need it. On the other hand, when a NWS forecaster is scared, you ought to be.

By the way, SKYWARN classes, live or online, are in season. You can find the schedules on your NWS office page. There’s also Jetstream, “online weather school for everyone,” which is free and excellent for BS detection.

Rebecca Morgan
Jacobsburg, OH

You know, I keep hearing about all this but I've never been in a TV market where it is true. 

In what televison market do you live?


Use the AccuWeather app and turn on location services. It is a fantastic storm warning tool with very minimal false alarms. 



junctiontower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The weather media's never ending quest to turn
> every single atmospheric event into a potential
> life altering crisis does not help the cause of
> those that are SERIOUSLY interested in informing
> the public.  A steady breeze and a crack of
> thunder is now turned into damaging winds,
> dangerous lightning and the potential of SEVERE
> weather.   Like the boy who cried wolf, after a
> while you just stop listening.  I'll freely admit
> to being in that camp much of the time.

The Weather Channel tends toward sensationalism and has to fill the time with something. So far as local channels go, the bigger the market, the more superficial and hyper. The apps I like are NOAA and Weatherunderground. The latter has a data point on a cell tower on the edge of the metro area of our village of a few hundred.

MSE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You know, I keep hearing about all this but I've
> never been in a TV market where it is true. 
>
> In what televison market do you live?
>
>
> Use the AccuWeather app and turn on location
> services. It is a fantastic storm warning tool
> with very minimal false alarms.

I live in Fort Wayne Indiana, a nice mid sized market, and while not as over the top as the Weather Channel gets, they still get all breathless with excitement over ANY little storm, trying to offer the worst possible case scenario EVERY TIME, partly because they want eyes on their screen, but also because they are scared to death of the criticism if a storm actually turns out to be worse than expected.  Frankly, other than REAL blizzards or a tornado WARNING, my life has to and does go on regardless of what the weather is doing, so I don't pay all that much attention to it. I get up in the morning, check the current radar and temp conditions, dress accordingly and head to work.  Only one time in 33 years has the weather altered operations at my job, so it doesn't really matter how bad it is or might be, life goes on.

junctiontower, you hit it right on the head.  The TV hype is trying to sell news, but its all false most of the time.

Yes, their are some good sources for weather news, but the common person does not have the info on the site, nor the time to find it, then look at it.  Folks today are just too busy to brother, but who raises hell when conditions  effect them ?

I have a couple of weather channels right on my Desk Top Sbhort cuts.

If you think the weather media is overdoing the drama of weather these days, just read EVERY DAY, the convective forecasts put out by the NOAA/NWS Storm Prediction Center.  They show a map of the entire country and where (and what levels) of severe weather can be expected for the current day, and the next two days out. The maps are accompanied by detailed forecasts, and while some of it is in technical language, the basic information is understandable by any reasonably intelligent lay person.

  I also follow Weather.com (often criticized for hyping bad weather), and find their predictions normally totally in line with the official ones put out by the Storm Prediction Center.

Art House



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/15/19 08:02 by aehouse.

MSE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> While this is a bit off-topic, I hope you will
> take a moment to read this:
>  https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/03/1
> 4/weather-forecasts-likely-saved-hundreds-lives-bo
> mb-cyclone-ignore-storm-warnings-your-peril/?nored
> irect=on

While weather forecasting has undoubtedly improved through the years, the operative word in that title is "likely," and is another example of the kind of hype forecasters and their supporters like to shovel out. Fist off, saying "likely" means "we believe this or that but we're not really sure." Or "we believe this or that but it's not completely factual or provable." All of this actually sounds like a typical weather forecast. Then you have the statement that these particular forecasts saved hundreds of lives. How does anyone know that? Why not say tens or thousands? There's clearly no way of ever knowing, just guesses that can't be proved. This guessing, this likelihood of this or that, may or may not, is what causes people to dismiss the warnings. After all these years and advances, people still don't get accurate warnings, in time, to react like those poor folks who died a couple weeks back in the Alabama tornadoes.

This isn't to knock skilled and diligent individuals who do their best, but it seems there's too many other factors and challenges to this scientific discipline for people to always take seriously, such as lack of technology, understanding, human error, hype and greed, etc. As far as inaccuracy and hype, the local stations where I'ved lived have been notorious (MI, NY, PA, TX) for building up something that doesn't happen. Overly cautious because of the serious threat? Perhaps, but it works against them as people, after years of conditioning from something that doesn't happen, dismiss warnings that really could affect them. As for examples, this storm Ulmer was predicted to cause rain on both Monday and Tuesday, with high chances 80-100% being predicted a couple of days before and even still on the same days. Result? Very little rain, not all-day events like predicted, and only small patches of thunderstorms. This happens all the time where I live, rains when they don't forecast it and doesn't rain when they do. Another: Back in December, 1-3" of snow was predicted overnight on a Friday, which subsequently was downgraded by several stations during the day on Friday only to drop 10.5" overnight! Terrible forecasting. I would've stayed home from work that night if I'd known since they don't plow around here, but I live pretty close to work and was able to follow the ruts to get back. Of course, there's almost limitless examples from folks everywhere, and I hope the folks who work outside (like railroaders) and whose lives really depend on knowing the weather can get the info they need when they need it. The rest of us will get by. Maybe one day the few good forecasters will somehow overcome or throw out all the bad forecasters??

JG

How about this new phenomenon of naming non-tropical storms?  That serves ZERO purpose other than to increase the hype.  In other news, it was announced that California is officially out of drought for the first time since 2011.  Just a year ago, the climate "specialists' saw no end to the drought, some saying it might be permanent.

I had taken a six month leave of absence from Trainorders because I had gotten tired of the nonsense. Ridiculous statements statements like the ones below make me want to leave permanently. 

How Do We Know These Particular Forecasts Saved Hundreds of Lives?
Simple: In spite of gigantic population increases since the years of the "Children's Blizzard," per CNN, the direct deaths from the blizzard, the rash of tornadoes, the wind storm, etc., etc., is in the single digits (I do expect the numbers to rise). To what else do you attribute that wonderful result? Magic? Witchcraft? It is due to excellent forecasts and warnings that allowed most people to mitigate the effects of the storm. 

How Do We Know Tornado Warnings Save Thousands of Lives?
Nearby is a graph of the death rate from tornadoes from the last decade without any warnings (the 1930's) to the present. The death rate has been cut by 95+%. Again, to what do you attribute that wonderful result? Voodoo?

How Do We Know Tornado Warnings Came in Time for the People in Alabama To Save Their Lives on March 3?
Easy. Watch the coverage. http://www.mikesmithenterprisesblog.com/2019/03/a-superb-example-of-television-weather.html  The tragic fact people who lived in unanchored mobiles homes chose not to evacuate is not a fault of the storm warnings. As you see if you watch, the warnings were timely and excellent. 

When a physican successfully removes a malignant tumor and saves your life, you know who to thank. The problem weather science has in demonstrating its value is that when we do our usual good job nothing happens. The airliners don't crash. The children in the Kentucky day care center yesterday didn't die. The package is re-routed and arrives on time. Want to learn more? Read this: https://www.amazon.com/Warnings-Story-Science-Tamed-Weather/dp/1608320340/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

Also, nearby is a photo of a young man who was one of the victims of the horrible Alabama tornadoes. Meteorologists work 24/7/365 to do everything we can to prevent deaths like his. Your absurd comments about the warning system serve no one. 

If you wish to ignore the warnings when tornadoes approach, be my guest. But, undermining the warning system might sometime prompt someone not to take shelter when they should and that could cause a very bad outcome. 

Mike Smith
Proud Meteorologist 




jgilmore Wrote:

> actually sounds like a typical weather forecast.
> Then you have the statement that these particular
> forecasts saved hundreds of lives. How does anyone
> know that? Why not say tens or thousands? There's
> clearly no way of ever knowing, just guesses that
> can't be proved. This guessing, this likelihood of
> this or that, may or may not, is what causes
> people to dismiss the warnings. After all these
> years and advances, people still don't get
> accurate warnings, in time, to react like those
> poor folks who died a couple weeks back in the
> Alabama tornadoes.
>

> JG



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/15/19 10:43 by MSE.

---

---

Agree. It is The Weather Channel that names non-tropical storms. Don't watch them!

You obviously have not read my blog, WattsUpWithThat, or any of the dozens of sources written by genuine atmospheric scientists who convincingly refuted the "California Permadrought" silliness. 

One nice thing about this country: You have choices. Watch the great meteorologists. Ignore the rest. 


junctiontower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How about this new phenomenon of naming
> non-tropical storms?  That serves ZERO purpose
> other than to increase the hype.  In other news,
> it was announced that California is officially out
> of drought for the first time since 2011.  Just a
> year ago, the climate "specialists' saw no end to
> the drought, some saying it might be permanent.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/15/19 10:40 by MSE.

MSE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I had taken a six month leave of absence from
> Trainorders because I had gotten tired of the
> nonsense. Ridiculous statements statements like
> the ones below make me want to leave
> permanently. 
>
> How Do We Know These Particular Forecasts Saved
> Hundreds of Lives?
> Simple: In spite of gigantic population increases
> since the years of the "Children's Blizzard," per
> CNN, the direct deaths from the blizzard, the
> rash of tornadoes, the wind storm, etc., etc., is
> in the single digits (I do expect the numbers to
> rise). To what else do you attribute that
> wonderful result? Magic? Witchcraft? It is due to
> excellent forecasts and warnings that allowed most
> people to mitigate the effects of the storm. 
>
> How Do We Know Tornado Warnings Save Thousands of
> Lives?
> Nearby is a graph of the death rate from tornadoes
> from the last decade without any warnings (the
> 1930's) to the present. The death rate has been
> cut by 95+%. Again, to what do you attribute that
> wonderful result? Voodoo?
>
> How Do We Know Tornado Warnings Came in Time for
> the People in Alabama To Save Their Lives on March
> 3?
> Easy. Watch the
> coverage. http://www.mikesmithenterprisesblog.com
> /2019/03/a-superb-example-of-television-weather.ht
> ml  The tragic fact people who lived in
> unanchored mobiles homes chose not to evacuate is
> not a fault of the storm warnings. As you see if
> you watch, the warnings were timely and
> excellent. 
>
> When a physican successfully removes a malignant
> tumor and saves your life, you know who to thank.
> The problem weather science has in demonstrating
> its value is that when we do our usual good
> job nothing happens. The airliners don't crash.
> The children in the Kentucky day care center
> yesterday didn't die. The package is re-routed
> and arrives on time. Want to learn more? Read
> this: https://www.amazon.com/Warnings-Story-Scien
> ce-Tamed-Weather/dp/1608320340/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_
> 0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=
>
> Also, nearby is a photo of a young man who was one
> of the victims of the horrible Alabama tornadoes.
> Meteorologists work 24/7/365 to do everything we
> can to prevent deaths like his. Your absurd
> comments about the warning system serve no one. 
>
> If you wish to ignore the warnings when tornadoes
> approach, be my guest. But, undermining the
> warning system might sometime prompt someone not
> to take shelter when they should and that could
> cause a very bad outcome.

Interesting speculation


> Mike Smith
> Proud Meteorologist 

Well, that's a fact that can't be disputed.
 

MSE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Agree. It is The Weather Channel that names
> non-tropical storms. Don't watch them!
>
> You obviously have not read my blog,
> WattsUpWithThat, or any of the dozens of sources
> written by genuine atmospheric scientists who
> convincingly refuted the "California Permadrought"
> silliness. 
>
> One nice thing about this country: You have
> choices. Watch the great meteorologists. Ignore
> the rest. 


It's nice to see some sanity out there. Sadly, very little of the population as a whole is exposed to a non-sensational viewpoint about our weather, and I don't want to go there, but it's not exactly a secret how political the whole profession has gotten.

There are still folks who believe the earth is flat, and the moon landings were faked.

There are still folks who believe vaccines are killing kids, or creating autism.  Folks in Pakistan are killing doctors administering the polio vaccine

There are still folks who believe the CIA uses lasers to control the weather. Dr Kaku is well known for that.

MSE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I had taken a six month leave of absence from
> Trainorders because I had gotten tired of the
> nonsense. Ridiculous statements statements like
> the ones below make me want to leave
> permanently. 

Calm down dude. I was not attacking you personally. Pride of craft is understandable and even commendable, but a dose of realism doesn't hurt either. You seem to be oblivious (or just don't want to acknowledge) the errors or problems with weather forecasting, as if none exist. I was commenting on, not when the system works, but when it doesn't work. Which apparently doesn't happen according to everything you post. And doctors still mis-diagnose problems with all their advancements, something I'm sure they'd wish to avoid and hopefully are willing to discuss.

> How Do We Know These Particular Forecasts Saved
> Hundreds of Lives?
> Simple: In spite of gigantic population increases
> since the years of the "Children's Blizzard," per
> CNN, the direct deaths from the blizzard, the
> rash of tornadoes, the wind storm, etc., etc., is
> in the single digits (I do expect the numbers to
> rise). To what else do you attribute that
> wonderful result? Magic? Witchcraft? It is due to
> excellent forecasts and warnings that allowed most
> people to mitigate the effects of the storm. 

I did have an issue with the article and title, and your reply does not convince me one bit that anyone truly knows how many lives were saved by the forecasts. I'm sure many were, but knowing that hundreds or any large or exact number is not humanly possible, thus the correct usage of the word "likely." Did the weather people vist every person in the storm zone to know they watched and heeded the warnings? Totally impossible.

> How Do We Know Tornado Warnings Save Thousands of
> Lives?
> Nearby is a graph of the death rate from tornadoes
> from the last decade without any warnings (the
> 1930's) to the present. The death rate has been
> cut by 95+%. Again, to what do you attribute that
> wonderful result? Voodoo?

I did not ask about this generalization, but a common sense guess would be that forecasting was a big part of it, but other factors could be as well. Were there less tornadoes historically? What was the location of the storms? Definitely more population to water down the numbers. To me, more context and data is needed to fully understand.

> How Do We Know Tornado Warnings Came in Time for
> the People in Alabama To Save Their Lives on March
> 3?
> Easy. Watch the
> coverage. http://www.mikesmithenterprisesblog.com
> /2019/03/a-superb-example-of-television-weather.ht
> ml  The tragic fact people who lived in
> unanchored mobiles homes chose not to evacuate is
> not a fault of the storm warnings. 

I did not say this, the people and news outlets in those areas said so. Individuals interviewed said the sirens were not going off until the tornadoes were bearing down. Maybe some of those folks felt that the warning info available to them personally at the time it was happening was not sufficient, but since I don't live there I don't know. 

> When a physican successfully removes a malignant
> tumor and saves your life, you know who to thank.
> The problem weather science has in demonstrating
> its value is that when we do our usual good
> job nothing happens. The airliners don't crash.
> The children in the Kentucky day care center
> yesterday didn't die. The package is re-routed
> and arrives on time. Want to learn more? Read
> this: https://www.amazon.com/Warnings-Story-Scien
> ce-Tamed-Weather/dp/1608320340/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_
> 0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

Good points, but again no one here is saying NONE of it works, but we are discussing when it does and when it DOESN'T. Why do people often become numb to forecasts and warnings, because they work all the time? No, they do so because often times it doesn't. It's better, but like economic forecasting, or all forecasting for that matter, it's still a work in progress. Let the reader use discernment...

> Also, nearby is a photo of a young man who was one
> of the victims of the horrible Alabama tornadoes.
> Meteorologists work 24/7/365 to do everything we
> can to prevent deaths like his. Your absurd
> comments about the warning system serve no one. 

Your adsurd comments leave me wondering if your head is in the sand. Where I work, we always talk about problems and what didn't work so we can do better, as I'm sure you and others do in your profession. Acting here on TO as if they don't exist and regularly begging people to believe you defies common sense to me...

> If you wish to ignore the warnings when tornadoes
> approach, be my guest. But, undermining the
> warning system might sometime prompt someone not
> to take shelter when they should and that could
> cause a very bad outcome. 

I don't ignore warnings at all, in fact I've worked for years to help community members and groups to execute a disaster-preparedness plan and subsequently follow-up after events to try to protect and help people. I've engaged in serious disaster relief on the ground, and while I do believe (and did state, which you totally ignored) forecasting and warning systems have come a long way, I feel much still needs to be learned and done. Maybe your expertise can rub off on more of your colleagues. But people aren't oblivious to the limitations in the current system, as noted above by many others. The worst would be for the forecasters themselves to be oblivious...

JG



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/15/19 19:37 by jgilmore.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There are still folks who believe the CIA uses
> lasers to control the weather. Dr Kaku is well
> known for that.

Well, if they are, they should at least learn to it CORRECTLY.  :)

Mike,
You do a great job. keep it up and don't mind what those far West coasters say. upkpfan