In their post touting their amazing snow predictions they use the same color shading on same areas of the maps comparing the predicted and actual snowfall numbers, I guess they are counting on their readers being too dumb to notice that the actual values on the maps were higher than predicted.

Hey we got it right, the dark purple areas are dark purple and the light purple areas are light purple.

Oh, and they "predicted" these ranges hours before the storm began. Very impressive, hours, with their usual liberal helping of qualifiers, caveats, and weasel words.

It's like The Naked Gun "Doctors say that Nordberg has a 50/50 chance of living, though there's only a 10 percent chance of that."
Attachments:

Hackers and Packers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In their post touting their amazing snow
> predictions they use the same color shading on
> same areas of the maps comparing the predicted and
> actual snowfall numbers, I guess they are counting
> on their readers being too dumb to notice that the
> actual values on the maps were higher than
> predicted.
>
> Hey we got it right, the dark purple areas are
> dark purple and the light purple areas are light
> purple.
>
> Oh, and they "predicted" these ranges hours before
> the storm began. Very impressive, hours, with
> their usual liberal helping of qualifiers,
> caveats, and weasel words.

You are an idiot. Learn some basic statistical theory (and learn something about the history of meteorology).

You calling them out for being off 2" in their accumulation prediction?

Go ahead and start your own website to predict snow accumulations across the DC region.

I'd say their modeling and predictions were pretty accurate. I don't see anything misleading at all with their maps. Everything presented on those maps is accurate.

And I should point out that prediction map came out around 1pm Wednesday which was about 18 hours before the first snowfall.

Explain in detail how they got it so wrong that it materially affected how people responded to the snow.

Love how "they" really means "we"

NWS was more accurate. CWG probably just copied them.
Attachments:

CWG is a group of neurotic shut ins who like to gather on the website and mentally masturbate each other about the possibility of a snow fall while they drink and sing songs. It's really hilarious to follow their conversations. They even go on outings together and talk about weather.

Geekdom at it's best.

Yes, watching others mentally masturbate is a much higher calling than participating. Voyeurism at its finest!

.
Attachments:

^^^^^put me in that sandwich! Hawwwwwtttttt!

^^^^^put me in that sandwich! Hawwwwwtttttt!

Throughout the day on 3/5, Weather on the 8s on the Weather Channel kept saying 1 to 3 inches for Washington (to *those* hackers and packers, that's the so-called metro area). Looks like CWG and other local sources were more accurate!

I like them - they are usually the most updated and accurate. Im amazed at how accurate they have become. they nailed the forecast pretty much down to the hour in Fairfax.

What is the beef?

Anti-intellectuals can't do, and can't stand those who can. It's all about the butthurt of the intellectually inferior classes.

The commenters at CWG are a pathetic bunch. Old crazy cat-ladys and other assorted losers who stand in the window and stroke their cunts as the snow falls.

The Gang does nice work but agree the commenters are insufferable. Narcissistic twits who are thrilled with every inane thing they post. Like me I guess

An hour or two after this thread they posted a poll to allow their fans to comment on what a fantastic job they do.

Now it looks like they are having a contest about who had the lowest temp last night! And they previously had a contest to guess how much snow would fall at specific locations.

I dont know who the bigger losers are.......CWG people or FU people?

> You are an idiot. Learn some basic statistical
> theory (and learn something about the history of
> meteorology).

your an idiot. those weather people add cut and paste the data from "higher sources". they aren't providing the weather software or the predictions - the tax dollars are - and too many

another cut and paste scam ?

.dem files

demography statistics. gov cuts and pastes there sources from (ie, colleges) and each agency claims they "created" the data

you have 100 fucking democrat agencies claiming they they "provided gov with a product" they completely plaguerized

as if no one knew

y3DnU Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > You are an idiot. Learn some basic statistical
> > theory (and learn something about the history
> of
> > meteorology).
>
> your an idiot. those weather people add cut and
> paste the data from "higher sources". they aren't
> providing the weather software or the predictions
> - the tax dollars are - and too many

You wouldn't know a fuckin' tax dollar if it shit on your head.