20/80 hindsight....



  • I thought that the weather man's predictions were usually pretty bad. I have no confidence, nor any hope, after seeing this (twice in one screenshot, nonetheless).

     

    How can someone tell the future if they can't even tell the past or present?

     

    Hint: look at the current temperature... 



  •  You shouldn't be surprised, they warned you the software had bugs right in the name!



  •  I don't see the WTF.

     

    If you mean that the low temperature is higher than the current, that's because the "hi/lo" statistics are just that, the highest and lowest temperatures recorded under those conditions in the past. The current teperature won't be factored in until they add that day's high and low to the system, the next day. This would therefore be a new low temperature.

     

    I think the real WTF is that you don't understand weather statistics. 



  • @NerfTW said:

     I don't see the WTF.

     

    If you mean that the low temperature is higher than the current, that's because the "hi/lo" statistics are just that, the highest and lowest temperatures recorded under those conditions in the past. The current teperature won't be factored in until they add that day's high and low to the system, the next day. This would therefore be a new low temperature.

     

    I think the real WTF is that you don't understand weather statistics. 

     

    Agreed. I nominate this thread for the mug.



  • @NerfTW said:

    If you mean that the low temperature is higher than the current, that's because the "hi/lo" statistics are just that, the highest and lowest temperatures recorded under those conditions in the past. The current teperature won't be factored in until they add that day's high and low to the system, the next day. This would therefore be a new low temperature.

     

    I think the real WTF is that you don't understand weather statistics. 

     

    I was under the impression that the "low" temperature was the projected low temperature for the day, something that is definitely not based exclusively on historical data.  I Am Not A Meteorologist, however.



  • @NerfTW said:

    This would therefore be a new low temperature.

    I think the real WTF is that you don't understand weather statistics. 

     

    No, the real WTF is that you're mis-reading those numbers. Those aren't the historical record highs and lows, those are the forecast hi/lo values for that day. Record values aren't going to be included in a terse report like that. Most people don't care that it was 110F twenty years ago on this, but they will want to know what the the weather's like today.

     

    And of course, as to the original post... OMG WTFBBQZORZZZzzzZZZz!!!111! Weather Forecast isn't 100% accurate! Paging Ric Romero! Ric Romero to the news room, stat! 



  • Those aren't the record temperatures, those are the forecasts. They predicted a low of 46, and have not updated that forecast since the temperature dropped all the way to 33.

    On the one hand, it's nice to see that they haven't covered up that they were way off on their forecasts, but I'd rather have the most up to date forecast when I check it. It should
    be a simple matter to update the forecast when the current temperature moves out of the forecast range.



  • @SuperousOxide said:

    Those aren't the record temperatures, those are the forecasts. They predicted a low of 46, and have not updated that forecast since the temperature dropped all the way to 33.

    On the one hand, it's nice to see that they haven't covered up that they were way off on their forecasts, but I'd rather have the most up to date forecast when I check it. It should
    be a simple matter to update the forecast when the current temperature moves out of the forecast range.

     

    So you want them to 'forecast' the current weather?

    Wow.



  • Once again: Weather forcasts ARE the historical records.

     

    How do you think forcasts are made? They jot down every bit of information they can get thier hands on, and see how similar it is to current conditions. For instance, a 30% chance of rain means that under the current conditions, it rained 30% of the time since they started thier records. It's not by day, it's by all sorts of things like atmospheric pressure, wind speed, humidity, etc. That's what all this "doppler radar" crap is about. They can measure more things, and hopefully provide more accurate statistics.



  • @NerfTW said:

    Once again: Weather forcasts ARE the historical records.

     

    How do you think forcasts are made? They jot down every bit of information they can get thier hands on, and see how similar it is to current conditions. For instance, a 30% chance of rain means that under the current conditions, it rained 30% of the time since they started thier records. It's not by day, it's by all sorts of things like atmospheric pressure, wind speed, humidity, etc. That's what all this "doppler radar" crap is about. They can measure more things, and never provide more accurate statistics.


    Fixed that for you.



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @NerfTW said:

    Once again: Weather forcasts ARE the historical records.

     

    How do you think forcasts are made? They jot down every bit of information they can get thier hands on, and see how similar it is to current conditions. For instance, a 30% chance of rain means that under the current conditions, it rained 30% of the time since they started thier records. It's not by day, it's by all sorts of things like atmospheric pressure, wind speed, humidity, etc. That's what all this "doppler radar" crap is about. They can measure more things, and never provide more accurate statistics.


    Fixed that for you.
     

     

    Weather forecasts are, by definition, never wrong. They are simply a statement of past conditions. As such, they are always 100% correct. By measuring more conditions, they can get a better idea of what affects the weather.



  • @NerfTW said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @NerfTW said:

    Once again: Weather forcasts ARE the historical records.

     

    How do you think forcasts are made? They jot down every bit of information they can get thier hands on, and see how similar it is to current conditions. For instance, a 30% chance of rain means that under the current conditions, it rained 30% of the time since they started thier records. It's not by day, it's by all sorts of things like atmospheric pressure, wind speed, humidity, etc. That's what all this "doppler radar" crap is about. They can measure more things, and never provide more accurate statistics.


    Fixed that for you.
     

     

    Weather forecasts are, by definition, never wrong. They are simply a statement of past conditions. As such, they are always 100% correct. By measuring more conditions, they can get a better idea of what affects the weather.

     

    It was a joke. Relax. Breath.

     

    Feel better?



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    So you want them to 'forecast' the current weather?

    Wow.

    No, I want them to take the current temperature into account when forecasting the day's low.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @NerfTW said:

    Weather forecasts are, by definition, never wrong. They are simply a statement of past conditions. As such, they are always 100% correct.
    Poppycock. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Storm_of_1987#Criticism_of_the_Met_Office



  • @SuperousOxide said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    So you want them to 'forecast' the current weather?

    Wow.

    something about suing for bad forecast that was edited as I quoted
     

    Damnit where is dlikhten when you need him!?



  • @SuperousOxide said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    So you want them to 'forecast' the current weather?

    Wow.

    No, I want them to take the current temperature into account when forecasting the day's low.

     

    ...Right. That would be retarded. They predicted a temperature. They were wrong. They display the accurate current temperature, they shouldn't change their prediction.



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    It was a joke. Relax. Breath.

     

    Feel better?

     

     

    I actually meant that as interesting trivia, not as an argument. :)



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    They predicted a temperature. They were wrong.

    IIRC, this was the entire point of the thread, right?  Then someone thought they should cover their asses by changing their predictions.  

    That's like, in the middle of the Super Bowl, persuading the bookie that you he should let you change your bet because Tom Brady broke his pelvis.

    @paradochs said:

    I have no confidence, nor any hope, after seeing this

    I wouldn't trust Weatherbug either (I don't -- I use Weather.com's Desktop app).  Much like I wouldn't trust someone who bet on the Giants.   



  • @NerfTW said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @NerfTW said:

    Once again: Weather forcasts ARE the historical records.

     

    How do you think forcasts are made? They jot down every bit of information they can get thier hands on, and see how similar it is to current conditions. For instance, a 30% chance of rain means that under the current conditions, it rained 30% of the time since they started thier records. It's not by day, it's by all sorts of things like atmospheric pressure, wind speed, humidity, etc. That's what all this "doppler radar" crap is about. They can measure more things, and never provide more accurate statistics.


    Fixed that for you.
     

     

    Weather forecasts are, by definition, never wrong. They are simply a statement of past conditions. As such, they are always 100% correct. By measuring more conditions, they can get a better idea of what affects the weather.

    Wrong. Maybe that's how they did the forecasting 50 years ago, maybe that's how some amateurs do their forecasts nowadays. But most weather forecasting is based on computer simulations of the atmosphere (which are physical models, not just statistics). You tell it the present situation (readings of wind velocity, temperature, relative humidty, etc etc at loads of stations and from satellites), and the computer crunches the numbers and tells you what it expects to happen next. They're not always right because 1) the models may not be completely accurate 2) there's never enough data 3) the computer simulation is too low a spatial resolution and 4) chaotic dynamics.

    These forecasts can take many hours to run. The forecasters will have taken into account that the temperature actually dropped to 33, and put that reading into their next simulation run. But that run hasn't finished yet. The latest forecast is normally going to have been produced some time ago (I think the UK Met Office does one every six hours or something), and based on data from even more time ago.

    And in any case, @Oxford English Dictionary said:

    Forecast: A forecasting
    or anticipation; a conjectural estimate or account, based on present
    indications, of the course of events or state of things in the future, esp. with regard to the weather.
    Any reasonable person considers the word 'forecast' to mean a prediction about the future, not a "statement of past events".



  • @NerfTW said:

    How do you think forcasts are made?
     

    Read a little before you start spouting garbage. You're describe forecasting in "ancient" times, the Farmer's Almanac, and what's essentially baseball "statistics". "This batter has a X% success rate against right-handed pitchers whose mothers-in-law have 3rd story condos in Florida and have ingrown big toenails". Weather's ever so slightly more complicated, and somewhat more accurate than your trivia. 30% chance of rain does not mean it was raining 30% of the time on this same day in the past. Unless you live in a tropical rainforest, that kind of percentage chance will NEVER get that high.

    The simulations they use ain't perfect, they're always being adjusted,
    they'll use "historical data", but they ain't going to be pulling
    numbers out of their ass the way you claim.

    However, I can predict that, based on historical records, there will be a 99.999% chance of the sun rising in the morning, and then setting in the evening for all locations between the arctic and antarctic circles. 



  • Wow. I just thought that it was funny that the current temperature was less than the predicted, and that it hadn't changed. Didn't mean to start a debate on the issue.

    I guess that I assumed that it would change if the temperature went outside of the range. I assumed that they would give the most accurate forecast they could, seeing as this may mean that it won't hit 60 today. I'd like to know that it's not going to hit 60 today. 

    I don't really care when/how often they change their forecast, I just always want it to be as accurate as possible.




  • @paradochs said:

    Wow. I just thought that it was funny that the current temperature was less than the predicted, and that it hadn't changed. Didn't mean to start a debate on the issue.

    I guess that I assumed that it would change if the temperature went outside of the range. I assumed that they would give the most accurate forecast they could, seeing as this may mean that it won't hit 60 today. I'd like to know that it's not going to hit 60 today. 

    I don't really care when/how often they change their forecast, I just always want it to be as accurate as possible.


     

    Would there really be anyone stupid enough to take the forecast over the current conditions?

    I completely disagree with your opinion. The forecast should stay the same, it should not be adjusted to make it correct.



  • @paradochs said:

    I don't really care when/how often they change their forecast, I just always want it to be as accurate as possible.
     

    Environment Canada on occasion won't issue a forecast for the day. They'll just put "temperature rising" or "temperature falling". Some days with quickly moving weather, it's just easier to say what the temp currently is, and which direction it's moving. Never seen this done for anything other than today/tomorrow, though. 



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    Would there really be anyone stupid enough to take the forecast over the current conditions?

    I completely disagree with your opinion. The forecast should stay the same, it should not be adjusted to make it correct.

     

     

    If I want to know what the new "predicted" or "planned" high is for today, what should I look at? Obviously the forecast was wrong, but why not update it to the best information possible? What is the damage in keeping it as accurate as possible?



  • @paradochs said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    Would there really be anyone stupid enough to take the forecast over the current conditions?

    I completely disagree with your opinion. The forecast should stay the same, it should not be adjusted to make it correct.

     

     

    If I want to know what the new "predicted" or "planned" high is for today, what should I look at? Obviously the forecast was wrong, but why not update it to the best information possible? What is the damage in keeping it as accurate as possible?

     

    I would walk outside.



  • @paradochs said:

    Wow. I just thought that it was funny that the current temperature was less than the predicted, and that it hadn't changed. Didn't mean to start a debate on the issue.

    Hey, this is The Daily WTF, after all...  If people can't agree on what compiler/OS/language/large multinational conglomerate is the best, they're certainly not going to agree on something so trivial as weather...


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @paradochs said:

    If I want to know what the new "predicted" or "planned" high is for today, what should I look at? Obviously the forecast was wrong, but why not update it to the best information possible? What is the damage in keeping it as accurate as possible?
    How frequently are you expecting them to re-run the simulation/have a human re-guestimate the weather forcast?

    Every 30 seconds? Every 5 minutes?

    I'm guessing they already update it every 3-6 hours already.



  • @PJH said:

    @paradochs said:

    If I want to know what the new "predicted" or "planned" high is for today, what should I look at? Obviously the forecast was wrong, but why not update it to the best information possible? What is the damage in keeping it as accurate as possible?
    How frequently are you expecting them to re-run the simulation/have a human re-guestimate the weather forcast?

    Every 30 seconds? Every 5 minutes?

    I'm guessing they already update it every 3-6 hours already.

    Keep in mind that Weatherbug has predictions for the whole US (if not world).  I don't know how much information one run gives you, but if it's anything less than an entire country, it's going to take a lot of concurrent runs to get an accurate forecast for the entire US.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @belgariontheking said:

    @PJH said:

    @paradochs said:

    If I want to know what the new "predicted" or "planned" high is for today, what should I look at? Obviously the forecast was wrong, but why not update it to the best information possible? What is the damage in keeping it as accurate as possible?
    How frequently are you expecting them to re-run the simulation/have a human re-guestimate the weather forcast?

    Every 30 seconds? Every 5 minutes?

    I'm guessing they already update it every 3-6 hours already.

    Keep in mind that Weatherbug has predictions for the whole US (if not world).  I don't know how much information one run gives you, but if it's anything less than an entire country, it's going to take a lot of concurrent runs to get an accurate forecast for the entire US.

    Rather than talking out of my arse about somthing I don't personally use, I did a bit of Googling - Weatherbug doesn't actually make predictions:

    http://ww3.weatherbug.com/AWS/default.asp?cid=228#q2

     

    <font color="#000080" face="Arial" size="2">2. Where do WeatherBug forecasts come from?



    Forecasts may come from a variety of local sources. These local sources
    dictate the format of the forecasts and may not be changed. Forecasts
    on the live WeatherBug window and the extended forecast may come from
    different sources and cover different geographical ranges and, therefore,
    may vary.</font>



  •  Mug time!


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

     Something I said?





  • @Cap'n Steve said:

     

     

    Awwww.

     

    MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG 



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    Awwww.

     

    MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG MUG 

    and that ends the thread 


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.