Monthly Archives: January 2016

SKYWARN

Has technology led people to believe storm spotters are no longer necessary?

5 Comments

Storm spotter capturing image of developing tornado with cell phonesIt’s amazing how much information I can get on my smartphone, especially weather information. The app stores have dozens — maybe hundreds — of weather apps. They offer much more than today’s forecast. Some even claim to tell users when it will start raining at their locations.

Regardless of how valid or accurate is the information such apps provide, I wonder if they’ve led people to (incorrectly) believe that technology has the weather covered — that there’s little need anymore for human input, such as that provided by trained, SKYWARN® storm spotters.

Do people assume that the same technology that tells them what time the rain will begin can also automatically sense such hazards as tornadoes and severe thunderstorms?

If so, that could help explain why registration is down this year for free National Weather Service storm spotter classes in northern Indiana, northwestern Ohio and southern Lower Michigan.

For example, as of Jan. 25, fewer than 10 people had registered for spotter classes scheduled in Columbia City, Ind. and Glandorf, Ohio. This, despite frequent promotion on social media and other channels by the northern Indiana NWS office and others.

The entire severe weather warning system continues to rely heavily on the first-hand reports of trained spotters.

The truth — as any meteorologist will tell you — is that the entire severe weather warning system continues to rely heavily on the first-hand reports of trained spotters. Why? Because they can see things that radar and other technology cannot.

Radar, for example, can detect rotation in a storm, hundreds to thousands of feet above the ground. But it cannot tell meteorologists whether a funnel cloud has formed or whether a tornado is on the ground. Also, technology cannot tell meteorologists what damage a storm is doing. The NWS needs eye-witness reports from trained spotters for that.

If you’ve ever looked up a scary-looking cloud and wondered if you should worry;

If you’d like a better understand of severe weather to help allay fears;

If you’re a weather enthusiast and would like to apply that interest in a way that provides a life-saving service to your community;

Consider taking the free storm spotter training. You can find a session near you on the website of your local NWS office (type in your ZIP code at www.weather.gov and then look for the link on the forecast page that follows the phrase, “Your local forecast office is”). Some sessions begin as early as next week, so don’t put it off until storm season begins!

As good as weather technology is, it has not replaced they eyes of trained, volunteer storm spotters. Your community needs you!

SKYWARN

What’s the #1 source for national weather?

Leave a comment

Amateur-run Facebook pages should not mislead readers into believing that their information is better than that of the National Weather ServiceShould a Facebook page run by amateur storm chasers promote itself as the best source for weather information? I can’t help but wonder how many (if any) naïve Facebook users foolishly rely on such pages for time-critical safety information, in lieu of the National Weather Service (NWS).

Recently, a Facebook page distributed the graphic above. I’ve blurred out identifying information, because who it was doesn’t matter to the point of this article. But the headline, “The #1 Source for National Weather” certainly caught my eye.

I’ve tried multiple times to contact the owners of the Facebook page that published that graphic. I sent a Facebook message and sent an email message to the email address on their website. I’ve received no response. So, all I know about them is what I see online.

From what I see, both the Facebook page and associated website are published by a group of amateur storm chasers, none of whom appear to have a meteorology degree.

In the U.S., only one source of weather information has the authority to issue the official watches and warnings that trigger weather radios, etc.

Don’t read what I’m not writing! There’s nothing wrong with an amateur-run Facebook page or website distributing interesting or important weather information. I do it all the time on Facebook, this blog, Twitter, etc. What I don’t do, however, is claim that my information is any better than others’.

Why? Because I don’t want anyone to assume that my blog, Facebook page or Twitter feed (or anyone’s for that matter) is a safe and reliable way to get timely, live-saving weather alerts, especially NWS warnings. Not even the NWS’ own Facebook and Twitter feeds are timely enough for that (yet).

That’s also why I consistently encourage readers – for their safety – to maintain timely access to NWS products (e.g. via NOAA Weather Radio, smartphone apps triggered by NWS products, Wireless Emergency Alerts, etc.).

All of us who publish weather information on social media and other Internet channels have a responsibility to inform and remind readers that in the U.S., only one source of weather information has the authority to issue the official watches and warnings that trigger weather radios, etc.: The National Weather Service. Likewise, we must not publish anything that could potentially mislead readers into believing that our social media feeds can keep them as safe as do directly received NWS warnings.

Our readers’ lives could depend on it!

What do you think? Use this blog’s comment function to let us know.

SKYWARN

Irresponsible social media weather hype has real consequences

3 Comments
(Jan. 4, I edited the post below — which originally appeared Jan. 2 — to include a citation of an excellent blog post by well-known, Alabama broadcast meteorologist James Spann)
Distributing weather hype -- long-range forecasts of storms based only on model data -- is irresponsible
As a follow-up to a Facebook post I shared earlier today on the “Radio W9LW Weather” Facebook page, I want to make a few things clear to the readers of this blog, the Facebook page and the RadioW9LW Twitter feed.
 

I consider it irresponsible to publish long-range forecasts of storms on social media. It doesn’t matter what some computer-driven, numeric model of the atmosphere says might happen two or more weeks from now. It doesn’t even matter if more than one model agree.  All that matters to me are the forecasts of highly trained meteorologists, who combine information gleaned from models with other knowledge to responsibly forecast the weather over a reasonable period (I consider anything specific more than seven days from now to be unreasonable). Yes, it might turn out that some weather enthusiast’s favorite model was “right” to forecast a heavy snow event four weeks from now. So what? That doesn’t make that enthusiast’s distribution of that model’s data responsible.

Alabama broadcast meteorologist James Spann
Spann

As well-known, Alabama broadcast meteorologist James Spann writes in his blog, “Most of the 2-3 week ‘forecasts’ are done by people not qualified to forecast the weather 2-3 days in advance. Most are young weather enthusiasts that, in their love for ice, snow, or severe weather, just ‘wishcast’ by throwing out model maps they have pulled down on various sites promoting the weather they love and desire without understanding the limitations of using those products, or the science behind them” (italicized emphasis added by me).

What’s the harm? As Spann puts it, “a banner headline about a snow storm in three weeks in the southern U.S. can create a societal impact.” For example, people unnecessarily reschedule needed medical treatments or important travel. These things really happen, because members of the general public don’t know how to distinguish reliable, science-based forecasts from the “wishcasts” Span describes above.

Plus, people deluge professional meteorologists (like Spann and National Weather Service staff members) with messages asking whether the irresponsible social media forecast is valid, wasting valuable time.

We are blessed in the United States, however, with the rights of free speech and freedom of the press. Therefore, I do not support any form of regulation that would restrict people from irresponsibly publishing long-range, model-based forecasts on social media. Nor would I support any attempt to restrict access to model data, to make it more difficult for people to share it irresponsibly. The best ways to reduce such irresponsible use of social media are to a.) refuse to share it and b.) attempt to help members of the general public understand the limits of the science.

Now, a little about me, my social media posts and why I do what I do:

I am not a meteorologist. If you’ve paid close attention to the weather information I’ve shared, you’ll see that anything related to forecasts is attributed to very reliable sources, most often the National Weather Service (NWS). I do not create my own forecasts and I refrain from commenting on the likelihood of some weather phenomena occurring, except to relay confidence levels of NWS meteorologists and probabilities published by, for example, NWS Storm Prediction Center (SPC) meteorologists. For example, you won’t see me publish anything like, “The SPC has this area under a moderate risk, but I’m not impressed by (enter some atmospheric measure here).”

I consider myself a journalist. I have worked in the past as a professional journalist and continue to use the skills I gained in that career in my current career as a public relations consultant. That’s why you’ll see attributions in my posts, so you’ll know who created the information I share. It’s also why you might recognize the use of Associate Press style in my posts.

I am a trained, volunteer SKYWARN storm spotter for the National Weather Service. In addition to the basic training that the NWS provides annually, I attend a wide variety of other seminars, at my personal expense, to learn more about meteorology. The knowledge I’ve gained helps me be a more effective storm spotter and it helps me better interpret meteorological information. It does not, however, qualify me to forecast the weather. Forecasting requires much more than knowing where to find map graphics based on computer-run numeric models of the atmosphere.

I am all about weather safety. It’s why I invest so much of my life in storm spotting, weather education and writing about weather. I want to do what I can to help protect my neighbors and others from severe weather and to help the NWS issue effective warnings.

Are you with me? Post a comment, and/or use the sharing buttons to share this “manifesto” with others.