NBC Action Communities

Gary,

How much rain do you think right now for Lee's Summit?  I can't believe how much this is like the January storm!  We should have known.  I just have a feeling that it's going to do what it did in January...and leave us with little to nothing.  Just my gut feeling, and it has been for about 4-5 days.  I think we will get between .15"-.25" and south will get way too much to handle.

------------------

Jacob,

The only way you will get .25" of rain is if the comma forms farther north.  It is going to be a struggle.  By late this afternoon it may just make a northwest run at us.  Otherwise, this is the May version of that January storm.

And, anyone else wondering about 50 and 150 days ago, there are also valid comparisons, but this is most similar to that late January part of the LRC.

Gary

I like the comparison maps with numbers and all for us non-educated weather people, like myself! You pointing out the features helps me see it better. Even though the rain did not make it to KC last night at least you have more examples to show to the not so ready to believe LRC critics....on repeat set ups and all. That should put a half smile on your face. Well my day of rain has begun..I am sure hoping this thing shuts off sooner than expected. What can ya do....it is mother nature we are talking about. I will let you know my rain total before the news this evening....if it is a good one that is!
Monica
Pleasanton, KS

-------------------

Monica,

Keep us updated. 

Gary

Gary....This blog is fascinating. And I appreciate when your team admits to an error in judgment. I think you do a tremendous service here educating us on the complex weather in the Midwest. Keep up the great work. And I am never disappointed when we don't have severe weather.

hi gary, team... i'm in dallas and they're expecting some nasty stuff in later today. but i'm due to leave at about 4:30 if there are no delays. ha... so can you give me any idea if i might get delayed because of weather in KC or along the flight path through OK? thanks! - mike

----------------

Mike,

Have a safe trip back.  Kansas City won't have any delays.

Gary

Gary - I am reposting from the previous blog upon request.  I will add additional thoughts based on this blog in a few...

I know this one will leave a mark, and I expect some will not like my thoughts.

First, shame on you Gary for this remark:

“If I were a genius, then I would have used the LRC.”  

For as much as the LRC is attributed to your forecast accuracy, to discount using it to not being smart enough is silly.

I think you didn’t trust it.  And shame on you again for that.  In times where you will tout an upcoming storm because of the LRC, and at times even become frustrated where others don’t believe, for you now to come and say that you yourself didn’t trust it is even more frustrating.

So, before I get killed on this, I have trusted the LRC and the subsequent surface analysis all along with this storm.  I think folks can clearly note a difference in my participation and analysis from the storm last week to what was discussed for this storm.  I didn’t see it based on the trends and really paid it little attention.

I used the LRC/surface trending.  The Discovery Channel folks did not.  I would have expected the LRC creator to.  He did not.  That is what is most frustrating.  Not missing the forecast, but not using the tools available to make the best forecast.

For a forecaster that did not know about the LRC, it would be like forming a forecasting without model input.  It would be like nowcasting without looking out the window first.

Arrgh.  

Ok…done with that thought.  The other is this.  I appreciate admitting the error.  That is a stand up move.  I am somewhat curious about the rest asking “Try not to bash us if the rain misses your location.  Remember, we already feel pretty bad about this forecast as we continue to wait for our first real good rain shower of the week.”

Sounds like a pre-emptive strike.  Just admit the error, apologize and move on.  Further asking for no critique doesn’t seem fair.  If people made plans based on your forecast, and it busted..then folks are certainly justified to be frustrated..and it would be fair to voice it.  

As much as it is fair to promote weather accuracy, it is fair to hear the critique when you miss one.  

So, before the lynch mob comes, I will end with this.  I will continue supporting this team with my participation in the blog along with my viewership.  I believe this is the best team in town and understand that no one is perfect.  That said, anytime critique is offered, it should not be viewed as a personal attack and often can be used as a base in getting better.

Let’s think about the evolution of the LRC in the last two years and its subsequent use in long range forecasting as a perfect example.  It didn’t come from everyone saying how great it was.  It came from those that pushed and stretched the conversation to further growth.

Too bad it wasn’t used for this storm  ;-)

------------

Scott,

LOL......the lynch mob won't be after us.  If it were snow....well, it isn't.  As I said there is a factor that was into play.  We knew the storm, based on the LRC, could easily miss us just barely to the south, but the last 48 hours could have produced a bit more before the main storm missed us.  So, this was the part that left us dry.

And, I know you have already laid out your comparison.  I was just adding in that the events are also very similar.

Gary

thank you for the updates.

I'll be watching your blog later this afternoon. It's been 'dumping' down here in Joplin and I have to go out in it. :-( Glad it's not severe...yet.

Thanks for your wonderful blog, Gary and team. You do a great job. Just wish I could see you on TV. Doug Heady does a good job down here though.

Lorie

----------------

Lorie,

You can watch NBC Action Weather Plus on line.  Brett has it updated now, and I will be updating it around 3 PM.

Gary

Gary,
Good blog.

Scott,
Great comments.

Kristi

5 days after January 31st (Feb 5) there was a pretty significant severe weather outbreak in SE MO and Arkansas.  131 tornado reports with that outbreak.  Could be something to watch for later this weekend or early next week.

---------------

Yes, we have to watch the next few days.  Saturday has a system sliding by as well, so late Saturday into Sunday has to be watched, especially southeast of here.

Gary

The storms last night didn't fall apart for everyone.  Here between Warrensburg and Whiteman AFB at approximately 2 am today I was woken up by a fairly vigorous storm.  Pretty decent little storm for the middle of the night and I ended up losing a tree to it.  At least it was already dead and it just saved me the trouble of cutting it down :)  I would have a rainfall total for you, but my wife set some flowers out last night and covered my rain gauge with them--such is life.

Ok..take a deep breath, here we go...

Gary – Ok..here is the further thoughts based on this blog.

Where describing the LRC, you indicate it is a repetitive pattern, yet when you post comparisons, often you will skip or omit other cycle matches which can cause a bit of uneasiness.

Why not post this as well which would have been right in between the Jan and May cycle in March?

http://www.spc.noaa.gov/cgi-bin-spc/getuadata.spc?MyDate1=080507&Time1=12&MyDate2=080318&Time2=12&Align=V&Levels=500

I think this shows it very well..however, based on the analysis you posted comparing the other two, there is something missing in the March version.  Perhaps this is why you didn’t choose it.  Because feature recognition is somewhat subjective, I found that the ridging in the east coast was as big of a feature as the others.

The March version and the May version are very similar based on location and ridging.  The March version does not show well the energy moving in, but does show it coming in for the map on March 19th.

So…I agree with you, the maps for Jan and May look similar as does the March version.  

Even the December 10th version looks good as well as the October 22nd.

Because the cycle is fluid and has a variable of 50-56 days, without following the whole cycle as a whole, trying to randomly pick one day and assign it to another is tough to do.  Even this example does not do the full justice as it would be to watch the whole week in motion and compare it to the prior cycle’s week in motion.

That is the best way to see the LRC I think.

So…I went back and looked at some of the thoughts in the blog on March 17/18.  I think most remember St. Patrick’s Day.  This would have matched that storm.

Here is Gary’s comments leading a blog that day – “We had snow on Saturday morning, sleet on Sunday, and heavy rain & thunderstorms today.  This is a strong storm still forming near the Mexican border south of New Mexico.   The main storm will eject out into southern Missouri and Arkansas on Tuesday.  We will have to watch this closely a it ejects out.”

Folks..look at the path of this storm’s upper low.  Look at where it is and its projected track.  It is the same storm!

How about this from Jan 30?

http://community.nbcactionnews.com/blogs/weatherblog/archive/2008/01/30/2456405.aspx

This next one makes it baffling based on this being the same storm…Here is the comments from Gary from Jan 31st  - the last time this storm came through…

“This storm went farther south, as some of the computer models were screaming at us to see.  And, so we blew the forecast for the first time this season.  I am sure we will take the heat and get blasted on our forecasting.  And, we deserve it this time.  Please try to be nice and understand that we just missed it.  We aren't perfect, but I know we have a reputation to live up to.  So, expect us to get the next storm right.  We will do our best to get back on track.  This was not an easy day for our meteorologists in our viewing area.  When you are on the northern edge of a storm just a few counties makes a huge difference.”

http://community.nbcactionnews.com/blogs/weatherblog/archive/2008/01/31/2467441.aspx

Deja Vu.

Wow.  Those that don’t learn from the past are destined to repeat it.

Last thought -  for the December storm that matched this cycle, the blog on December 8th, leaves the bloggers with this thought – “And, Jeremy and I just discussed next weeks storm.  It is a wet one. “

This is the same thing we have heard in the last day or two about the upcoming wet or signature part of the pattern next week.  And as shown in the blog in the last day or two, the models have it.

The LRC LIVES and is very healthy.  TRUST IT!

;-)

---------------------

Scott,

I was counting on you to come up with this.  Thanks. I only have so much time, and I actually thought, Scott will do this.  :)

Gary

Gary - are Holden and Kingsville in line with the deluge expected to hit Warrensburg?  Our basement floods with 2" - I NEED to know what you think please!

-------------------

I think you will get around 1 inch, maybe a bit more out of this.  Hopefully it will stay below flooding criteria for you.

Gary

Man Scott...you are a typing/research junky. I love reading your entries. Glad you reposted for everyone else to see. :o)
Monica

So based on the current analysis, is La Cygne still on track for 2+ inches this evening and overnight?

I do find it somewhat interesting that this reference to the cycling theory is only made after the fact.  Why wasn't a *forecast* made based on this?  Hindsight is 20/20...what about foresight?

I find it amusing that since it fits now, it is touted and some graphics are shown in an attempt to prove a correlation.  But when it misses, people are asked to look past that and that "well, it isn't perfect" and so on.  The "blizzard the last week of March" is a classic example.  A massive miss... yet people were told that doesn't weaken the cycle theory.  If such a huge event would miss in so many ways, how can that NOT be seen as weakening the theory?

If the comparison between this week and the end of January is this remarkable, I'd be curious to see those that believe in this theory to put their money where their mouth is and forecast instead of just looking back and making things fit.  98 days for two rounds...so that's around 48 days each.  Some parts have been 54 or 55 days apart.  A 5-7 day (up to a week!) leeway is pretty generous, in my view.  I guess that's why there has never been an attempt to use this to forecast longer than a month or a month and a half.  If this thing persists through the end of the summer, why can't one put out a 6-month forecast in January?!?

Why only, as Scott has commented, "CPC-type" generalized "colder than normal" or "wetter than normal" forecasts...that's a 50/50 any given year.  If the theory is as sound as one claims, why not tell me what it'll be like the first week of June...second week...etc...  Why not give a long range outlook for the week of the 4th of July based on this theory.  After all, plenty of people would find great value in knowing some specifics about that week given the abundance of vacations, outdoor activities, etc...  

I agree with Scott - asking people to not critique a busted forecast is a weak move.  If we all want to improve, the best way is often to listen to our detractors, pinpoint the weaknesses, and zero in our attention on improving our abilities in those areas.  

I continue to assert that I can make any map or situation fit if given that kind of leeway.  Tell me a date and I'll show you maps that line up for a 30 day cycle, a 50 day cycle, a 74 day cycle, etc... as long as I get a 6 or 8 or 10+ day cushion.

-------------------

Notes,

But, remember Notes, no one is trying to make this fit.  I am just pointing out the comparison.  We knew it was this part of the cycle, but when forecasting this week, I didn't use it enough in forecasting this storm. There are other factors that are in play in May, that weren't there in January, one of which was the high low level moisture availability for yesterday's pre-storm environment.

And, we took a stab at making more specific forecasts in January and February, which mostly came out rather accurately, with a couple of exceptions.  So, we will go forward as we learn more.   At the very least, the seasonal forecasts based on the LRC are far outperforming any other forecast I have seen.

Gary

 

 

I just have to say that I am relatively new to all of this...I've always been fascinated by meteorology and am just now trying to learn more about it.  This is the perfect place!  I appreciate the blogs and all of the input from readers...I am learning more and more each day!  Gary, you and your team are the best!
Sara

----------------

Sara,

We are so glad that you are enjoying the blog.  As we go through the next few seasons together hopefully you will learn a lot more!

Gary

Is the ULL spinning over Amarillo right now or is that a problem with the radar imagery?  Also, do you believe in the latest NAM pulling this a little more north?

http://radar.weather.gov/radar.php?rid=ama&product=N0R&overlay=11101111&loop=no

    ****** Nasty, That's it.  We don't buy the NAM solution, this is, for the most part staying south,  north of KC no rain, south of KC lots of rain.  Brett

Not to come across negative, but with this being one of the 2 wettest months of the year (climatologically speaking) isn't this a bad thing for this storm to slide by to the south?  I know we are still above normal year-to-date but not nearly as much as the areas south and east of the Kansas City metro.

----------------

It is bad for the fact that flooding may occur again in the same spots as earlier in the year. But, we will continue to have rain chances through the month and in the end we should be near or above average in most spots.  The wetter areas south and east will continue to be a bit wetter than us.

Gary

So this part of the cycle should repeat pretty close to the 4th of July??

----------------------

Yes, but what will it look like in the very weak summer state?  This is what I am trying to figure out for my summer forecast.  I could take a stab at the 4th of July forecast, this early, but only if I have time to pour over the maps and come up with a logical forecast.  I will make an attempt at doing this.

Gary

Hey Scott - are you a meteorologist or one in training?  I DON'T mean that to sound like a smarta*** -- you just seem to be really knowledgeable (or at least make it sound good) - sometimes when Gary and Brett and Jeremy are busy with stuff and can't answer questions in the blog I think about asking you -- do you know a bunch about all this and the maps and all?  Officially?  I do like to read your posts!  Don't know where you find the time to do all the research, but it's a help to those of us who don't or can't do it!

And Gary -- thank you for all your patient answers to our questions!  Your input is great - even if things are 100% accurate, they are very nearly so - I would so much rather that you err on the side of caution.  You don't seem to be afraid to put your neck out on a limb, even if your forecast is different from the other stations -- and yours most of the time is right!  Thanks for your hard work (and all of y'all at Action Weather!)

------------------------

Thanks, and you have noticed that we don't hold back.  I will forecast what I think will happen.  There is never any hype, etc. involved.  Although, I may get a bit too excited at times.

Gary

Oh yea -- all you LRC people -- (I forgot why I was doing all that sucking up!  JUST kidding!) -- I'm flying out of KCI on May 16 early in the morning -- are any of those cycles gonna be here around then?  I have a 4 hour layover in Cleveland so I think even with a late start I'll be covered, but just wondered!  Thanks!

Monica,

I have a knack for remembering things – especially things I am interested in.  When discussing the LRC or forecasting based on it, it is near photographic.  If I cannot remember exactly what was said, something weird in my brain allows me to index where sources are and allows me to quickly find what I am looking for.

I find it amusing that the perception is that I put so much time into analysis, when in fact..I really don’t.  The last entry took me all of ten minutes to write, but likely was aided because I knew where to find and locate my supporting documentation.

Yes, I love analysis and to research.  I love to learn.  It’s a shame I didn’t have this ability/passion earlier in my life as I likely would have been a degreed meteorologist by now.  

Just a quick thought for Gary – I remember noting earlier this week that these MCS type of storms really should be tracked via mesoscale analysis vs. model guidance.  Last night was a perfect example why.  In a brief look at the environment as storms were forming in Nebraska and in Western Kansas, on first glance, it would have appeared that they may hold their form, but in looking deeper, while moisture was plentiful, the lift [lapse rates] was very weak in this area.  

Without the upper level storm being close by to force, it didn’t seem that it would continue into the area with the same zest.  

As mentioned above, this looks very similar to the past cycle events.

Notes,

As far as long range forecasting and the LRC – Spring and summer time is a curious time for using this type of forecasting.  I think while the patterns are still very clear, the surface impact is a bit tougher.  This is a reason why I have held out on long range forecast for deep into Spring.  There is one single facet that makes it very difficult.

Convection.  Storms can pop up now and into the summer with almost pure convection alone.  Even if the upper air shows that a significant storm is not nearby, a quick pulse storm dropping an inch of rain over an area will greatly affect accuracy.

Winter is much easier.  Less moisture, more upper air reliance, and a stronger jet stream which will amplify the pattern making it very easy to see.  

I think the LRC/surface analysis can still be very valuable in Spring and Summer as it relates to upper air driven events, and normally these will be the news makers, but day to day forecasting is a bear right now.

I don’t blame Gary for the generic forecasts, as I know why based on seeing the same issues trying to do it now, but the only critique I have for Gary has been not the forecasts themselves, but a similar explanation as I have provided why I think late Spring/Summer LRC forecasting can be problematic.

As far as the leeway of the LRC cycle, I greatly struggled with this myself.  I am looking at it a different way now.  I allow for some leeway as it pertains to longer durations of the cycle in relation to the other – and only one cycle to the previous cycle.  So, I can accept the deviation if the pattern proceeding and the pattern following align with the next cycle.  

Because of the sequence of events in the same general cycle of time occur, I can proceed.  I believe there is a way to statistically show this based on standard deviation.  I am working on this.  Like most things, I am learning as I go..so it takes a bit of time to learn statistics to prove out my thoughts on this cycle.

Notes, I agree, you can take any map with any duration with that cushion and make it fit, but as I just mentioned…I think there is more to it than just that.

I appreciate your continued interest in the LRC.  I am not sure why you still have it other than the curiosity or the interest in how it is communicated.  It seems you are just interested enough to critique it at the surface but not to actually study it and find flaws in the depth of the concept itself based on your own analysis.  

Either way, I certainly respect your comments and thoughts and look forward to learning more from you and Gary…

;-)

I remember that storm where we were in the northern part of the comma head. But we only got 5 inches of snow, which would be .5 rain. This storm is a lot wetter.

Gary and  team,
We just laid 110 yards of sod in our back yard.  How much is mother nature going to contribute toward our water bill in the next few weeks?  I was hoping for rain today, but it's not looking very promising for Overland Park...

Kurt, we are not even close to worrying about drought if a storm goes by the south. All of the state of missouri and all of eastern kansas are still wetter than normal, and in most places by quite a bit.

Short term drought-indicator map...
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions/tools/edb/sbfinal.gif

I just wanted to say that I love this blog!  I have been reading for qutie a few months now, and I add a comment or two in occassionally.  I am sad that Platte City will not get any storms this evening as I love falling asleep to them!  
I wanted to thank Scott for his continual analysis and opinions about the LRC.  I have believed in the LRC since I head Gary mention it; it just made so much sense to me!  Scott, I can surely say that I used to get very frustrated reading your entries as I thought you were simply trying to prove Gary wrong...now, the more I read the more I understand you were simply tryng to understand and justify within your own mind.  Because you have done this, I am able to not only understand the LRC, but also explain it to anyone who is willing to have a conversation with me about it.  So, I thank you for that!  Gary and team thank you for such detailed forcasts!
Now, I do have to put in something that really bugs me...I do not know why people cannot except that there is no such thing as perfection...ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO WEATHER!  I think some of the people on this blog believe that every forecast should be 100% correct.  Did they seem to forget about mother nature and the fact that in all actuality the weather team has no control over what happens!  The team is simply using information and theories they have formed to try and help US go through our day.  I would like to see anyone that complains and an "inaccurate" forecast do any better.  My bet is they would fail miserably.  So, with that said...I am sorry about my rant!  Gary and team you are amazing and I will only watch you...
Please try to send some rain my way! :)  
ROCK CHALK JAYHAWK!!!

Scott...you have a gift!! I only wish my brain worked like that but it does not. :o(  School sure would of been easier for me if it did. But just think....if you had become a meterologist then you would not be able to nor have the time to communicate with all of us the way you do. It is amazing to me that you wrote that whole entry up in about 10 minutes. That just blows my mind.  Have a great day.
Monica

Scott said:  "I appreciate your continued interest in the LRC.  I am not sure why you still have it other than the curiosity or the interest in how it is communicated.  It seems you are just interested enough to critique it at the surface but not to actually study it and find flaws in the depth of the concept itself based on your own analysis. "

When one doesn't agree with or a better way of putting would be when one doesn't *believe* in the theory, there isn't much in the way of "depth of concept" analysis, as you put it.

I've examined this concept for a couple of years now and no matter how it is communicated (500mb flow, surface events, individual events [as is claimed with this storm] versus patterns or flows over stretches of days or weeks, precip trends, active verus inactive, etc...)

I have not found any convincing arguement that what is displayed is anything more than coincidence and a molding of the data to fit a percieved "pattern".  I'd say that is fairly "deep" if you ask me.  You and Gary still claim this "I can see why you don't see it this way, but I've got another way of looking at it - it would take too long/it isn't done yet/I don't have time/I can't communicate it on a message board/graphs don't work/500mb maps don't work/surface events don't work/the jet moves/convection messes it up..."  There are a dozen+ built-in safeguards to explain away any inconsistency or any time when the theory falls apart (ie: the late March "Blizzard", etc...).  

My education in meteorology and subsequent degree in it have imparted on me that this form of pattern recognition simply isn't rigorous scientific analysis, in my experience.  I think it is harmful to spread such thoughts if they aren't backed up scientifically (this happens with increasing frequency in science...and as a student and teacher of science, it pains me).   That is part of my reason that I stay involved in the discussion.  I want to see some true, scientific analysis...I'm so painfully eager for that...and it still isn't here.  

I'm hoping it shows up some time.

Gary I know this LRC s a great model to follow.  It definitely seems to be a better judge in the long range than the other models.  Not sure about last year but this forecast year the LRC is pretty much right on in any 72 to 96 hour period.  Thats outstanding and fascinating at the same time.  You stumbled on this with a lot of trial and error.  I know a lot of other meteorolgists since you made your presentation have picked up on and tried the ways to tweak like you have.  After about 5 years of playing with it, tweaking here tweaking there you will probably really have a extremely valid and proven tool to put a name on.  With all the new tech stuff out in the last year and what is due to come on line in the next 2 years it will be very interesting to see where the LRC takes us.  I mean the level of tracking and predicitng tornado tracks in the last 3 years alone has grown enormously and proven so accurate alone that everybody is paying attention.  I can't wait until the day comes when something like powercast is available online for us laymen to go to and get info for our area.  The lives and property you all are protecting and saving each year is just fantastic.  I can see why so many of you spend so much time at the station and conferences playing with the toys.

Notes-personally for someone without a meteorology degree I have seen proof by watching the weather.  Have you tried that?  Gary is able to accurately predict the forecast a good majority of the time...he would not be able to do this if he had not found some pattern to follow.  Both Gary and Scott have given many different reasons and "proof" for you...maybe you are just not accepting it because you personally do not believe in it.  

Alby21, that is simply not the way serious science works. Neither Gary nor Scott has presented anything that even approaches scientific proof for this theory.  Now, Gary is a good forecaster, but that also does not prove his theory, because there are other accurate forecasters in the world who do not use this theory.

What is needed is a systematic, rigorous examination of flow patters, using statistical methods. That has not been presented. All we see are occasional anecdotal pieces like what was posted today. Interesting, but not proof.

Even the simple maps posted by Gary today leave many questions. For example, why did Gary choose January 31, which is 2 "cycles" ago, instead of choosing March 21, or whatever day was 1 cycle ago? Is it because the March 21 maps do not fit the theory?

FWIW, March 20 - 22 were mild and sunny in both KC and Springfield...that is about 48 days ago. There was no storm "sliding by" the area.

Notes – Excellent entry.  Thank you for your comments.  I clearly understand your motive now.  It really has nothing to do with the actually theory, other than a coincidental or topical idea near to your education base.  

No, it really seems to be more interest of the promotion of the theory without basis of truth.  And that is fair.  That is what first got my attention as well.  That is what had me critiquing blog entries that would expand on the LRC.  I did the same thing.

But something happened with me…perhaps it is just my own internal wiring.  I stopped critiquing the LRC purely triggered by my emotional response of “how can this claim be made without evidence!”  Instead, I packed up the emotional and intellectual baggage and took a trip down a long and windy trail to the innards of the LRC.

Not satisfied with the answers I got back, I decided to figure it out myself.  Not satisfied with the same critique I would offer to the same LRC blog entries, I took my own path.

It did not make sense to me, so I learned all I could about the claim, took some time, and studied it…deeply, and in great detail.  Based on this analysis, I  - speaking for myself – can see the validity of the claim.

I still struggle with how it is communicated and promoted, and do critique based on these points, but I believe the theory is valid based on my OWN analysis, not analysis of SOMEONE else’s analysis.

So, if this were a peer review process, the onus of proof belongs to the person with the assertion, so you are likely correct in your approach in a standard approach.  I think we both can agree, nothing is standard with the LRC, its process for consensus or communication.

I decided to step outside of the spoon fed analysis and subsequent predictable critique I provided and chose to expand on questions or analysis that I had not yet seen, heard or otherwise discussed.  This is why I have a comfort with this.

Have you thought about this approach?  

And to touch on one other piece.  I agree spreading ideas without proof is dangerous.  We both can point to many current science issues where this runs rampid.  Conversely, I can think of some very impactful discoveries that also proved out after initial communication – eg. “the world is flat” and other significant discoveries.

I am not writing this to point out errors or say you are wrong, but hoping for you to consider another path of analysis.  Clearly, you have the interest, discipline, background, and intelligence to provide something extremely important in this analysis beyond  the standard “this map doesn’t match this map”.  

Lastly, while I appreciate your frustration with what you consider “built in excuses”, I find that amusing considering the part of science in which you relate this to.  Meteorology.  The imperfect sciences.  No other science am I aware of where anomalies are most accepted.  Models shouldn’t have names in meteorology.  They should be named “the new model is in”, or “the models changed”, or even better “the models have biases”.  My point is, with this stuff and such rapidly expanding and changing field that is meteorology, it is more than fair to factor in these anomalies or deviations considering what it is that is trying to be quantified.

;-)

Oh yes,. I almost forgot.  JOHNSON COUNTY DOME!!!

Very LOOOOOOOOOOOOONG entries today. I love it!

If I remember correctly, Gary just revealed this LRC not too long ago.  With all sciences, theories have to be tested and tried for many months and tweaked along the way.  There are not many things that are just stumbled upon.  Gary has been doing work with the LRC for years and is still doing work and tweaking his theory.  However, the pattern the weather follows is 'proof' that there is truth to his theory.   Gary has given many different examples of how the weather is fitting into his LRC pattern this year (and the end of 2007). Maybe using the Jan comparison and not the March comparision was because it showed more clearly what he was trying to show...remember not everyone on here has a degree in meteorology and the team is trying to cater to everyone! But, like Scott said, Meteorology is an inexact science...the sciene where instances outside the norm are actually accepted.  With that said, how you can expect the LRC to fit in 100% perfectly when mother nature doesn't have any intention of following the theory.  There are too many outside forces, but the LRC used as a tool to help predict is excellent.  Used as gospel, it is not.  However, anyone who takes ANYONE's forecast or theories about the weather as 'gospel' doesn't really understand how weather works.  

----------

Exactly, it is not 100% the same.  It can't be.  Every day has a different amount of energy in the flow.  But, there is organization, tremendous organization to what most meteorologist think is just chaos.

Gary

OOoops...I said RLC, and I meant LRC!  Sorry!

Gary...  I am supposed to host a pool party for a bunch of 6 year olds on May 17th.  Do you anticipate it warming up at all?  High 70's... or let's dream big, 80's would be awesome!  The water is heated, but I don't want the kids to freeze.  Thanks!!!

-------------

It is a struggle.  I see another big cool spell between now and then, so it may not quite warm up. 

Gary

Scott, by far, has the best analysis.  You all with meteorology degrees are way too quick to judge without ever analyzing things.

Brian1234,
You are totally rude!

Kristi

Kristi,
he always has been!

actually someone else did log in under my username over the winter, but no this time that was all me.

I do take weather very serious, as I am a storm spotter and chaser. Second, I do find it entertaining reading what some of these people write. While I respect other's thoughts and opinions, I still find humor in those who take this very seriously. Expecially when that person is not a professional or expert in the field in which he is giving critisisim. If two brain Dr.'s wanna go at it and aruge over the best procedure for a patient, great.  They are educated enough to make those decisions.  The problem I have is the guy who steps in between the two and thinks he knows what he is talking about becuase he stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night, watching the Discovery Channel.  Get it!!

Predicting the weather is a tough job, and it's good to voice an opinion. However when you insult the intelligence of an expert and a proven leader in their profession, yeah I'm gonna call that person out for what they are.  A poser, wannabe and someone who just needs to get a life.  So put that in your pipe and smoke it.  I know I'm not alone in here on this one.  The problem is too many people just don't have the guts to say what they really feel anymore.

----------------

Good points, but we should all just read the comments and try to take emotion out.  It is difficult.  But, I understand what you are saying.  I haven't been able to keep up with the blog this afternoon until now.

Gary

Yes Brian, we would all rather hear your usual way of forecasting... Calling for the JC Dome.    Seems to me you could skip over the long, but very informative posts, and that way you dont have to bash our best bloggers.    

It shows alot about a person when they personally attack someone in the fashion you did.    Perhaps one only needs to look in the mirror when making statements like these!

this is when i don't want anything to do with this blog.  when things like that are being thrown around.  R-E-S-P-E-C-T.  Brian1234 what you are doing is not that.

--------------

I will have to go back and look through the comments.  Let's all get this kind of stuff out of the blog.

Gary

NO brian, the problem is people are learning to take respect for what people believe in, which leaves their angry opinions to themselves.  They dont take things to the pipe and smoke it. This blog has become a place where people have great respect for each other, not only in weather, but personal life as well. I'll take this to a lower level, If you dont have anything nice to say, just dont say anything at all. Period.

Is it not what this blog is all about Brian?    This is to share your ideas, predictions, and nowcasting.     Only a few really distract from the blog.   The rest have their own personal style and it makes each one unique.     I think Gary can hold his own against these "attacks" and he enjoys showing us novices his way.   Gary, Scott, and Notes make for some very interesting discussions.    

Again, you can skip over those who you dont like and not have to bring your comments to such a low level.    

I have not the proper education or experience to make an analysis of the LRC and decide if it is true or not.  Yes, many things in this world work in cycles so it should be no shocker if the weather patterns do the same.  To show us maps on various days which only support Gary's point isn't overly helpful to a critical mind and, in fact, probably leads some to be more skeptical.  Why not show us days where the pattern doesn't align as expected and explain to us to why it doesn't align visually, but yet does somehow align in another manner consistent with the LRC?  The problem with this is there aren't a lot of people on this blog who could understand the explanation.

Science is essentially a collection of facts built over time.  As those facts are disapproved, or supported by further peer analysis, the collection changes.  Gary admits he doesn't have the time to do the critical analysis necessary for acceptance within the scientific community.  While that's fine, without this analysis and publication in a respected journal, it's little more than his theory.  If you can't and/or won't take the time to do some type of quantitative analysis that others can review, then the theory will always remain heavily contested.  There are tons of people on this blog who claim the LRC works and they believe in it.  Unfortunately, from a scientific point of view, this is analogous to claiming your belief in Jesus Christ.

I've always wondered if I were to be born say, 100 generations from now, would evolution have bred people like Brian1234 out of the gene pool?  ~ Dave

 

"Maybe using the Jan comparison and not the March comparision was because it showed more clearly what he was trying to show"

This is known as "cherry picking" data. It may be acceptable for the purposes of communicating an idea, but it does not provide proof of a theory. To provide proof, we need to see all of the data, not just the part that most clearly shows what the author is trying to prove.

Scott, you clearly have dived into this so deep that most bloggers don't understand it.  Even Gary L is relying on your thoughts .  
You have somewhat the same fault Gary has with the LRC on your blog, as being vague.  You could and should take it a step futher and come up with a real long range forecast to nearly the day.
Notes.. I side with you as all I've read are people patting theirselves on the back for a cycle theory.   Yes, 50 days ago today, KC did have thunderstorms.  We've had some kind of precip every 4-5 days since Dec. 1st.  Unless one believed we would be in a drought, it would be hard to get it wrong.  
Like Scott said in a previous blog, " you could predict the summer to be hot with occasional thunderstorms"

Yes, that's my forcast, JC Dome,. lol, I did read the posts. I love it when everyone gangs up on me..lol ,..Some of you are like a bunch of sheep, did you bother to even digest what I said? Or were you too busy finding ways to attack me?

I'm expecting bewild to break into song any minute and start singing. R-E-S-P-E-C-T,, sock it to me,.. sock it to me.....

DREXEL since midnight 0.44 and counting.

Excellent post Zazel.

only attacking you the way you attack people

two wrongs don't make a right be wild.  lol

on a serious note all you weather geeks, take a look at the radar in Oklahoma. It's rotating pulling in ans wrapping around, almost acting like a slingshot, and will project it right torwards us. pretty cool. It's combining with gulf moisture, there are several storms popping up from this down there, many have rotation. Pretty cool.

Well since I had a break in the rain I checked it. I have 1.2 since the start of it last night. I am sure their is alittle more to come though.
Monica
Pleasanton,KS

Ahhh…very good stuff.

While sifting through Brian’s synopsis, I did find a nugget worthy of discussion.  

Granted, I am not a degreed meteorologist.  That is fact.  What is also fact is that there is a majority of the public that serves as contributors and experts in fields that they did not study in school.  

Should my analysis not be valued by Gary or Notes or other “degreed” folks regarding weather and the topics on this blog, it would have been clearly dismissed or otherwise not been responded to.

That said, if you do not find value in my posts, ignore.  If you dispute distinct points of my analysis, I am more than willing to see your point of view and battle the ideas and facts you bring to the table.  I await further detail and analysis on the “Johnson County Dome”

;-)

Zazel, your point is very valid.  This goes along with the critique I have with Gary regarding the method of analysis and how it is communicated.  It was this personal deficit that I had with the analysis that drove me to my own discoveries.  

There is a fine line between a belief, a theory, and the communication of such belief.  Because of this medium [as a blog], because of the forum [on a media site], and understanding the other facets in play with the business it supports, I think that fine line gets a bit fuzzy at times between education, public service, and entertainment.  I blogged on that thought a week or so ago.  

Rdub, I agree as well.  I think the point should be for illustration purposes only, but sometimes seems we get the “see its there” along with it.  

This blog has a very diverse audience from the novice to the advanced.  The idea of this blog as I understand it is to try to provide a bit to each.  It will never be enough for any one segment.  This is a reason why I started my own blog to facilitate discussions that I further wanted to explore.  Oddly, I do more blogging here than my own site…LOL

Anyway, everyone is entitled to their thoughts..even Brian [though he doesn’t share that idea himself]  It is this type of discussion and exploration that helped facilitate my learning in this forum over the last three or four years – I expect it has done the same for countless others.

;-)

I told you, everybody told you, could you at least consider what the bloggers say if they all keep saying the same thing!?

Rdub, I completely respect and understand what you are saying about cherry picking data.  I think the point I was trying to make is that not many things ALWAY fall into the pattern, whether you are looking at weather or any other type of science.  I accept that it is 'normal' for something to follow a pattern, yet have an anomaly(for example...take the English language....one of the most common rules that people can recite would be to 'use i before e except after c, or when sounding like 'ay' as in neighbor and weigh'  Right there shows a pattern that has anamolies...now please don't blast me for comparing forecasting to the english language as I am well aware they are completely different.  I just wanted to show a pattern that has been accepted to have exceptions)...I personally believe that is where the LRC is currently sitting.  The pattern fits most of the time, but yet has its times of anamoly.  Why is it not accepted to have these anamolies?  As for scientificly proving it with data, I am not a scientist (and I will never claim to be) and so I think I accept things much quicker...however I do like examples to show to me why one is thinking this way.  To me, Gary (and team) provide those examples...as well as Scott and even Notes sometimes.  The LRC is something that national meteorologists are starting to recognize, and I believe with a few years of this scientific research some form of the LRC will eventually be proven to scientific standards.  Until then, I think we are Gary's guinnea pigs testing his theory...posters like Scott help Gary to know where the flaws are and what to focus on to improve upon and prove his theory.

Although I do get frustrated sometimes with some comments, I love this blog for the learning purposes.  I do not mean to ever attack anyone, and if I do I apologize.  This is a learning blog, and I think that everyone who reads this learns something everytime they read it.  You do not have to be a meteorologist to form opinions and follow the weather.  I think this last statement is something that everyone reading the blog needs to accept and not look down upon someone because they chose another profession yet have a passion for weather as well.

1=1

Scott, you do an excellent job and by far and most importantly, an excellent communicator.  You certainly have that gift a lot of us wish we had- regardless of what you write, or if we agree or not.  And that's the purpose of this blog.  To communicate weather.

*sigh*  Which blog am I on today?

When it comes to learning, I've learned a lot from the other bloggers today and am glad for that.  My blog yesterday was pretty strong, and I wasn't kind to S _ _ _ _ at the same time I was saying "Be ye kind . . . ".  And so it is my turn to apologize, and I do.  I enjoy this blog so much, so I need to put a good slant on things that I may be interpreting wrongly.  I agree with one of the bloggers who said it was addictive!

Talk to you later, Friends!

323rd and hwy 7     .25 overnight + .75  during day   1" total so far.

Wow, 2 hours with no comments? Hey if anyone wants a large corner computer desk you can PM me. Then you can have all your weather things around while sitting all day on the blog :) It's big enough that you can eat a meal on it and still be at the computer.

I know not many are on here right now, but I read this comment from the NWS and just had to laugh and share it--it shows their frustration was as huge as Gary's about where rain was supposed to fall according to the models
------.DISCUSSION...

EXCEPT FOR THE TRACK OF THE UPPER LOW ITSELF...MODELS HAVE BEEN
USELESS THE LAST 24-48 HOURS IN REPRESENTING THE LOW LEVEL MASS
FIELDS AND SUBSEQUENT HEAVIEST PRECIPITATION AXIS.

I want to encourage Gary and all the awesome team--you did the very best you could with the info available!  I know I'd love to know exactly what's going to happen in my backyard, but that's SO crazy to even wish for!
Janet

Janet , that is too funny!

I think I'm going to get nailed tonight. :-P

I'm a little, actually VERY late on this topic now, but in regards to scotts first comment about trusting the LRC. I don't think you can fully put your trust in the LRC in a new season because due to warming and things like that surface features and things like that will be farther north, moving slower, things like that so what happened in the same cycle in winter could happen in a similar fashion but in a slightly different location or different result. how bout that for my 2 cents guys. PEACE LOVE AND WEATHER
HailJonathan

Just waiting out that band of storms to see if we get a tornado warning or not. TV keeps losing conection and lights are flickering. Raining pretty hard after raining most of day.

Scott,
You are tops in the analysis among the bloggers.  Not bad for someone who doesn't have a meteorology degree. :)  I don't care what anyone says.  My comment was not aimed at Gary or the team.  It's the people who come on this blog and just continuously criticize you and the team.  The day you leave this blog is the day I leave.

Kristi

Ok, our local forecaster says that he doesn't see rotation in the band of storms in NE OK. I thought I was seeing rotation. Guess I don't know what to look for. :-{

And Kristi, how are you holding up? My prayers are with you and your family.

Add .22 inches to the .21 inches I reported this morning for Emma, Mo.

why dont the nws blow the sirens if there is a bow echo that is producing 75mph plus since these winds can produce bodily damage, just a thought.

We've had 2.8 so far today and it's a delude right now down here in Joplin. I think the tornado warnings around us have died out and the red line looks to be dying as well. :-D

I love it when everyone gangs up on me..lol ,..Some of you are like a bunch of sheep, did you bother to even digest what I said? Or were you too busy finding ways to attack me?

How I feel About this blog. Everyone attacks me.

New blog soon?

I wasn't criticizing scott or the team...back the truck up here...I love Gary and the weather team and don't trust and anyone and regardless of whether anyone leaves or not I'm staying until Gary Lezak leaves. i'm sorry if my comment came off wrong.

things that scott said the other day caught me off guard but you all explained to me the situation so I appologized for what I said. all I was doing today was just adding a thought to what Scott had already said I wasn't criticizing him at all and as far as The weather team goes I love them to death I don't watch anybody else I'm watching Gary RIGHT NOW. All I wanted to do when I joined this blog was to chat with people who loved weather and supported Gary and Jeremy, Brett, and Jeff and the LRC and loves weather. I don't have one friend who is interested in the weather and it's nice to come to a place where your accepted. That's all I wanted here. I didn't mean to come off strong in my commenting I'm sorry.

-----------------

It's great to apologize!  Don't worry about it, and now let's move on.  I love your statement about why you come to the blog. This is why we need to keep our emotions under control and just enjoy the weather, together.

Gary

thanks Gary

Lets all just drop the drama for crying out loud.  Lets talk about weather.  Thats what this is for anyway!

Well, I'm putting up the Radon test kit up right now, hope we don't have any dangerous levels!

chfs,
I only get irritated at you for making wild predictions.  Just make honest predictions and I will not be irritated.  I think that you could learn from what others are saying, including me.  I am a weather junkie...  I don't get into the science (the models and such).  I love photographing weather and learning about past events.  Look at Andrew...  He is always begging for a big snowstorm in the winter...  He is still waiting. :)  But he tries very hard to make a decent forecast on his blog.

Jonathan,
I was not talking about you.  I was talking about some of the others here.  Scott has been working hard to understand the LRC.  He is slowly learning how it works.  I have seen Scott's attitude toward the LRC slowly evolve since last year.  I commend all the work that Scott that does.  I've been around since April last year.

Lorie,
Thanks for the prayers.  How is the weather down there tonight?

For those of you are thinking about and/or praying for us,
My dad is being admitted to the hospital for pain management in the AM.  We have an appt. with the oncologist on Tues., May 13th.  I don't know how long they will keep Dad in the hospital.  Mom has an appt. with her internist tomorrow and I will go with her to that.  I will also probably go to her pulmonary specialist appt. on Friday AM.

Kristi

I thought I was talking about weather. I thought I made a good point...because when the jet stream weakens in late spring storm, systems move slower so they pull up more moisture making more thunderstorms or rain then they would in the winter also..since it's warmer the frontal positions would be a little farther west or north that's all I was saying, I think this is a good topic does anyone else agree with this?

Andrew,
I ordered a free radon test thru the state of MO.

Kristi

Gary I have a suggestion for the blog.  I have been following it for quite some time now.  My problem with following this blog is when somebody puts in their weather data but doesn't always input their location.  Is there some way to incorporate some kind of weather blogger map where we can all plot our location so we have a reference tool for these weather reports.  I have seen this done on other blogger pages, some use GOOGLE some use Frapper Maps.  But I do not know about Internet technology to know much more than it can be done.

-------------

This is a great idea. We will look into this great idea.

Gary

Kristi,

I know you can order for free in MO, but when you got a chance to go to your favorite tv station(I don't understand why Gary, jus doesn't live there, thats where I would live :) ) :D...

Yep, still waiting for that 2-3' Snowstorm!!

okay it's all starting to make sense....I used to blog on here when it was the old page set up....February 28th, 2007 I think it was I remember blogging on here when My place had 8 different hail events because a line of storms developed and it just bobbed and weaved back and forth along I-35 and that was when the first EF-4 Tornado hit Linn county KS.

I've been following the LRC for 3  years for sure and the last 2 I remember vividly beacause I've been making my own long range forecasts based on Gary's theory and they've been mostly correct. Last year's LRC was dead on but I remember it produced a different type a wintry event every cycle. a snow storm a sleet storm and then the February 28th severe weather outbreak.

-----------------

It is nice to see others using the LRC.  There are an increasing number of other on-air meteorologists around the nation using it as well.

Gary

Just popped in to say hi to everyone.  
Kristi, keep your head up with good thoughts.  Alot of people are praying for you and your family.
Scott,
I enjoy reading your comments.  You are very knowledged.
Gary and the Weather Team,  I don't go a day without watching you on TV or listening to you on KMBZ.  NBC TV and this blog are VERY addicting.  I don't always comment, I just like reading what everyone thnks is going to happen with the weather.  There were people in here that calmed my fears the night of the storms.  I am facinated to learn and watch the storms on TV but I don't want it at my back door.
Anyway, thanks to everyone that calmed me that night, and thank you to Gary and the team for being THE BEST weather team out there!!!!

------------

Thank you so much! 

Gary

In response to Scott's comments, which were very good reads by the way, I think the best way to show the cycle in not by matching up two maps, but if possible someday showing two "analog" weeks, maybe even three and Loop the upper air flow that actually happened over those weeks at the same time, I think that would cause the cycle to really pop out at a lot of people, now I could be wrong, but it looks like that would be a good way to show it.  As for today's system, yes it was a dry cloudy day here in St. Joe with the storm well to the south, the cold front did try to light up a few showers and the I saw the cumulus building but nothing here.  Well if next week is anything like what happened after the 31st storm, then it should get interesting.  One more thing that I find interesting, now I believe this is pure coincidence, but this one storm in the pattern brings back bad reminders of the old LRC from last year, a cut off from K.C. south, but with this LRC it seems that this is the only storm that does that to this extreme.   Well good night from St. Joe.
BTW cumulus clouds building under a thick cirrus deck are one of the neater looking cloud features to me, since they make what would normally be "fluffy" white clouds appear dark and ominous.

-----------------

Nick,

I agree with the looping of weeks.  I do it all of the time as we see the pattern go through the cycle.

Gary