SPC

[BKRPDM]

Now that we are a number of years into the SPC storm color-coding system, is it useful?

*We still get the watches and warnings when things get severe.
*From my experience, reaction to the SPC colors usually evokes one of three reactions:
- “We’re yellow today! I cannot leave the house. We’re gonna die!”
- “Every other day we have one of the SPC warnings - I could care less.”
- “Huh”?

[MWmetalhead]

The labels they devised are completely stupid. To the untrained observer, "marginal" and "slight" mean almost the same thing. The difference between "enhanced" and "moderate" is difficult to discern, too.

The numeric scale of 1 to 5 that some media organizations use on-air is far more useful! Various local NWS offices also supplement the text labels with a numeric ranking.

Thanks to television newsrooms being infiltrated by various pieces of shit who are more interested in alarming the audience than informing the audience, on-air news & weather personalities commonly distort the outlook. Examples include usage of misleading threat level meters, using flashing colors on map graphics, and using adjectives designed to evoke panic. It's not just news organizations who engage in such tactics. A number of YouTubers engage in similar or worse tactics for click bait purposes.

[Rate This]

The labels they devised are completely stupid. To the untrained observer, "marginal" and "slight" mean almost the same thing. The difference between "enhanced" and "moderate" is difficult to discern, too.

The numeric scale of 1 to 5 that some media organizations use on-air is far more useful! Various local NWS offices also supplement the text labels with a numeric ranking.

Thanks to television newsrooms being infiltrated by various pieces of shit who are more interested in alarming the audience than informing the audience, on-air news & weather personalities commonly distort the outlook. Examples include usage of misleading threat level meters, using flashing colors on map graphics, and using adjectives designed to evoke panic. It's not just news organizations who engage in such tactics. A number of YouTubers engage in similar or worse tactics for click bait purposes.

Apparently the folks who try to get more people to watch had previous employment where upselling was a big thing. It’s like they think nobody will care about news or weather unless it’s big and scary.

[bmw]

To add to this, the way they use percentages (for example, a 5 percent tornado risk being a 5 percent change that a tornado forms within 25 miles of any random point within a shaded area) is too convoluted for most people to understand. I think a much more useful way to present this data would be a probability graph for the expected number of tornadoes to form within the entire shaded region.

EXAMPLE: Let's say we have a 5% zone shaded over a region the size of about 40,000 square miles (ie, the size of the state of Kentucky). That is roughly 20x independent regions the size of 25 square miles. What the SPC should include on their graphics is clickable zones that pop up a probability distribution graph showing the odds of each specific outcome within that zone.

In my example (5 percent chance over 40,000 square mile area), the math breaks down to:
36% chance of no tornadoes
37% chance of 1 tornado
19% chance of 2 tornadoes
6% chance of 3 tornadoes
2% chance of 4 or more tornadoes

I think that's way easier to understand than simply 5% chance of tornado within 25 mile radius.

[MWmetalhead]

That's a great idea conceptually. AccuWeather follows a similar concept for rainfall totals and snowfall totals. I'm skeptical that the SPC's analytical modeling is capable of generating probability strata of that nature with any acceptable degree of reliability, though, when it comes to tornadoes.

In terms of overall risk assessment, I'd offer a severe weather probability forecast, and separately, I'd offer a damage forecast.

My proposal would replace the goofy five-level risk assessment and weird hatch patterns used today. Whoever runs the SPC must be a real rocket scientist to have devised such a moronic, difficult to understand system.

The probability categories would range from immaterial (I.e. statistically zero risk), low, medium, high, and very high.

A damage risk forecast would be offered for any area outlooked for a low probability of severe weather or greater.

The damage categories would include minor, medium, major and catastrophic.

[bmw]

That's a great idea conceptually. AccuWeather follows a similar concept for rainfall totals and snowfall totals. I'm skeptical that the SPC's analytical modeling is capable of generating probability strata of that nature with any acceptable degree of reliability, though, when it comes to tornadoes.

Assuming that the 5 percent within 25 mile radius is accurate, then the probability curve I posted can be directly mathematically extrapolated from that as it follows a binomial distribution. And if the distribution curve is not reliably accurate, then either is the underlying 5%/25 mile probability.

I think most humans could conceptualize something like "there's a 30 percent chance of at least one tornado forming in southern Michigan today" as opposed to "there's a 5 percent chance of a tornado forming within 25 miles of any random point in southern Michigan"

And yeah, I agree that the hatched areas are equally confusing. Those should also, in theory, be able to be converted to probability curves along the lines of odds of the number of tornadoes in the region that reach each EFx strength level.

[BKRPDM]

Good god, Rexroth and Bajjey are really talented guys; but both really like to hype the storms…I prefer Luterman’s style - inform me but don’t go for the dramatics.

[DefendTheDen]

I think 5% should have remained general thunderstorms in my opinion. I don't like 3 or higher and always hope that is dead or epic fail on those days like on Monday.

[MotorCityRadioFreak]

The labels they devised are completely stupid. To the untrained observer, "marginal" and "slight" mean almost the same thing. The difference between "enhanced" and "moderate" is difficult to discern, too.

The numeric scale of 1 to 5 that some media organizations use on-air is far more useful! Various local NWS offices also supplement the text labels with a numeric ranking.

Thanks to television newsrooms being infiltrated by various pieces of shit who are more interested in alarming the audience than informing the audience, on-air news & weather personalities commonly distort the outlook. Examples include usage of misleading threat level meters, using flashing colors on map graphics, and using adjectives designed to evoke panic. It's not just news organizations who engage in such tactics. A number of YouTubers engage in similar or worse tactics for click bait purposes.

This is exactly why I follow Michigan Storm Chasers. Just the facts. And when the storm is cleared, they tell you when you can go to bed.

[MWmetalhead]

Their live storm coverage is good (if not overkill at times).

The last time I paid attention to their forecasting ability, I was not terribly impressed. It's been a while, though. Perhaps they've gotten better.

If a forecasting source presents a severe weather forecast that is never less ominous than that of the SPC and is frequently more ominous, the credibility of that forecasting source should be questioned.

[MotorCityRadioFreak]

Their live storm coverage is good (if not overkill at times).

The last time I paid attention to their forecasting ability, I was not terribly impressed. It's been a while, though. Perhaps they've gotten better.

If a forecasting source presents a severe weather forecast that is never less ominous than that of the SPC and is frequently more ominous, the credibility of that forecasting source should be questioned.

They have literally been on air and been like "Wouldm't be surprised if this storm cell is warned." One minute later, there it is....

[Rate This]

Their live storm coverage is good (if not overkill at times).

The last time I paid attention to their forecasting ability, I was not terribly impressed. It's been a while, though. Perhaps they've gotten better.

If a forecasting source presents a severe weather forecast that is never less ominous than that of the SPC and is frequently more ominous, the credibility of that forecasting source should be questioned.

They have literally been on air and been like "Wouldm't be surprised if this storm cell is warned." One minute later, there it is....

That’s very different then hyping “FOUR DAYS OF SEVERE WEATHER AHEAD!!!!” And nothing happens… they do that on a weekly basis.

Looking at a radar return and going “gee that looks bad, maybe it’ll get a warning” is something I could do when I was 11.

[MotorCityRadioFreak]

Their live storm coverage is good (if not overkill at times).

The last time I paid attention to their forecasting ability, I was not terribly impressed. It's been a while, though. Perhaps they've gotten better.

If a forecasting source presents a severe weather forecast that is never less ominous than that of the SPC and is frequently more ominous, the credibility of that forecasting source should be questioned.

They have literally been on air and been like "Wouldm't be surprised if this storm cell is warned." One minute later, there it is....

That’s very different then hyping “FOUR DAYS OF SEVERE WEATHER AHEAD!!!!” And nothing happens… they do that on a weekly basis.

Looking at a radar return and going “gee that looks bad, maybe it’ll get a warning” is something I could do when I was 11.

Not Michigan Storm Chasers. They literally send across the SPC warnings. It's the same information any forecaster can access. And no, it's not. They look at hook echoes and can see whether it is a 40 mph special bulletin storm and an outright thunderstorm/tornado warning. They literally went to school for it, several from Central Michigan. That's like saying "Now, bmw with the weather..." Ridiculous. Joel works his ass off.

[Rate This]

Their live storm coverage is good (if not overkill at times).

The last time I paid attention to their forecasting ability, I was not terribly impressed. It's been a while, though. Perhaps they've gotten better.

If a forecasting source presents a severe weather forecast that is never less ominous than that of the SPC and is frequently more ominous, the credibility of that forecasting source should be questioned.

They have literally been on air and been like "Wouldm't be surprised if this storm cell is warned." One minute later, there it is....

That’s very different then hyping “FOUR DAYS OF SEVERE WEATHER AHEAD!!!!” And nothing happens… they do that on a weekly basis.

Looking at a radar return and going “gee that looks bad, maybe it’ll get a warning” is something I could do when I was 11.

Not Michigan Storm Chasers. They literally send across the SPC warnings. It's the same information any forecaster can access. And no, it's not. They look at hook echoes and can see whether it is a 40 mph special bulletin storm and an outright thunderstorm/tornado warning. They literally went to school for it, several from Central Michigan. That's like saying "Now, bmw with the weather..." Ridiculous. Joel works his ass off.

I’m sure he does. That doesn’t excuse the forecasts at the beginning of the week with the large amount of hype and scary charts and graphs that have repeatedly been busts lately. I’d rather listen to MW by far. Hype is for losers.

[MotorCityRadioFreak]

Their live storm coverage is good (if not overkill at times).

The last time I paid attention to their forecasting ability, I was not terribly impressed. It's been a while, though. Perhaps they've gotten better.

If a forecasting source presents a severe weather forecast that is never less ominous than that of the SPC and is frequently more ominous, the credibility of that forecasting source should be questioned.

They have literally been on air and been like "Wouldm't be surprised if this storm cell is warned." One minute later, there it is....

That’s very different then hyping “FOUR DAYS OF SEVERE WEATHER AHEAD!!!!” And nothing happens… they do that on a weekly basis.

Looking at a radar return and going “gee that looks bad, maybe it’ll get a warning” is something I could do when I was 11.

Not Michigan Storm Chasers. They literally send across the SPC warnings. It's the same information any forecaster can access. And no, it's not. They look at hook echoes and can see whether it is a 40 mph special bulletin storm and an outright thunderstorm/tornado warning. They literally went to school for it, several from Central Michigan. That's like saying "Now, bmw with the weather..." Ridiculous. Joel works his ass off.

I’m sure he does. That doesn’t excuse the forecasts at the beginning of the week with the large amount of hype and scary charts and graphs that have repeatedly been busts lately. I’d rather listen to MW by far. Hype is for losers.

MW is smart, but he didn't go to school for weather. Education still means something.