Meteorology is just a semi-educated guessing game. The only accurate forecast is that there will be weather all day long! For more info, my Rasta friend, you may care to join me and a few of my friends.... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Rollin_Stoners/
Only God knows for sure! Thank you, I send my blessings...... Johnnie sent me! ;-)
2006-06-25 09:08:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by doctor_johnnie_jointroller 4
·
3⤊
3⤋
Well, look on the other side. You can't predict exactly what will happen. They know if there is a cold front coming, there will most likely be rain. If there is warm moist air and cool dry air, there will most likely be tornadoes. If a hurricane is coming to land, they have where they think it will go. Nothing is ever 100% accurate. Just keep in mind the butterfly effect.
Also, weather is so hard to predict accurately, that people had to write a ton of mathematical equations just to get a 24 hour forcast. And, writing would take about an hour.
2006-06-25 10:03:43
·
answer #2
·
answered by Hurricanehunter 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I really do get tired of hearing people complain about it. I guarantee that people who complain about meteorologists being wrong "all" the time still watch the weather. I challenge someone to go two weeks without watching a single weather forecast or asking someone about the weather and try to figure out on their own what the weather will be like and how to plan your days around it. You wouldn't even know where to begin, what resources to look at, and so on.
Meteorologists do verify their forecasts, at least I did, so I know what days I was wrong and what days I was right.
The atmosphere is constantly changing, it's unpredicatble. We have to work with the current conditions, weather models, climatology and our knowledge of the atmosphere to try to predict what it's going to do next. It isn't easy, but I think meteorologists do a fine job considering the circumstances. Do you think some sportscaster would be able to, based on prior games and his knowledge of the players, predict accurately all the time what the final outcome of a game would be? And not only that, but what players would have how many runs/goals/points - and when?
So seriously, next time you try to put down someone who is looking at the chaos that is our atmosphere and is trying to make sense of it all and predict what is going to do so that people like you can decide what to wear and what to do that day, maybe you should think about how hard it is and what actually goes into a forecast before you spurt out insults about a very challenging and ever-changing science.
Oh, and isolated means a 10-20% chance of thunderstorms... whereas scattered means 30-50%. I'm sorry the terminology is so baffling!
2006-06-25 10:19:39
·
answer #3
·
answered by Bean 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I hesitate to defend anyone categorically based on the fact that I hold a degree in the same field they do. In this case however, the details you include with your question have no merit or substance.
Numerical model output, as well as text forecasts made by meteorologists get subjected to extensive verification and scrutiny.
Forecast errors abound. Large forecast errors get far more attention but occur far less often.
If you can't live with max. temperature forecasts errors of 3 degrees F or forecasts of scattered thunderstorms that yield rain in your bucket one out of 5 times....If you're disappointed that your flag flies toward the NNE instead of the NE as the forecast indicated...If the number of afternoon cumulus clouds exceeds you're expectations by several dozen and that disturbs your emotional balance....well...
I suggest you apply for a forecaster position (you might want to seek the appropriate education first) and take a stab at elevating the reliability of weather prediction to your standards.
2006-06-25 04:56:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by Ethan 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am afraid that I disagree with your observations. Weather patterns are very vast, affected by so many unpredictable things, that I am surprised they get it right as often as they do. Whether it rains tomorrow, is partly sunny/cloudy is of little consequence. BUT when life threatening forces are at work..Hurricanes, Tornados, NorEasters....they call it pretty well, and save 1000's of lives. IN days when we had no warning of Hurricanes, by the time people knew it was going to be bad, it was too late to run. In those days, Hurricanes were disasters to human life.
2006-06-25 05:38:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If meteorologists didn't exist, many people, including you, would be hurt in some way, physically, financially, or otherwise, by inclement weather.
Next time a hurricane or thunderstorm hits you, maybe you should think twice about narrow-minded questions based on things you don't know about.
What's next...gonna put down seismologists for not predicting earthquakes?
2006-06-25 10:00:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by Isles1015 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
good assertion -- and precise. The previous fashions possibly want updating by way of fact we do certainly have some bigger adjustments. seem, area of is may be (and advantageous is) by way of organic long term climate cycles. maximum is via worldwide warming. What --somewhat, scientists rfile is that the further warmth potential interior the ambience is inflicting extremes of temperature and different climate variables to oscillate extra advantageous than they used to. occasion: a month that could have shown some extra warm days and average rainfall impaired widespread now has many warm days and almost no rainfall in a undeniable section. this is an analogy. evaluate a baby on a swing, swinging back advert forth. in case you push the baby each time she swings in direction of you, yo upload extra potential and the swings become bigger and better. same difficulty here -- extra potential interior the device is inflicting widespread climate types to swing to extremes.
2016-12-09 01:21:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by shery 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Based on your comments, have you ever thought about the technology that predicts global warming from green house gases? If scientists can't get tomorrow's weather correct, how sure are we that their explanation for global warming is correct?
Maybe only a small portion is due to green house gases and the remainder is due to normal climate cycles.
2006-06-25 03:52:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by oil field trash 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yup, you are right. Meteorologist get paid to be wrong a great deal of the time.
The way I see it, the only job better then being a meteorologist is teaching one. You get summer and holidays off and you get paid to teach someone to be wrong. Just how difficult can that be?
2006-06-25 02:48:21
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The only reason they get it wrong cos they dont look out the window first and even if they did they needed to find out which way the clouds are going....Also no1 has a crystal ball.
2006-06-25 03:33:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by Star Z 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The predictions are highly accurate. You just have to take the opposite of what they predict! That way I am never disappointed.
2006-06-25 02:56:26
·
answer #11
·
answered by HeavenlyBull 2
·
0⤊
0⤋