[sac-forum] Re: weather
- From: "Dan Gruber" <dgruber@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <sac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 16:41:15 -0700
I'm planning to go on Saturday. The ability of meteorologists to
forecast the weather accurately even 24 hours in advance is refuted
regularly by reality. And it often seems to clear up in the wee hours,
particularly if most people have left!
It would be nice if anybody who's out there already could text a report
to the forum on Sat.
Clear skies,
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: sac-forum-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:sac-forum-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 4:10 PM
To: sac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [sac-forum] Re: weather
OK,
I for one am going. I took a vacation day tomorrow and by God, I'm
going to
have a vacation!
Here is the NWS discussion:
MODELS ARE STILL FORECASTING THE LOW
PRESSURE SYSTEM...CURRENTLY 400 MILES WEST OF LOS ANGELES...TO MOVE
INTO ARIZONA IN SOME FASHION OR ANOTHER. THIS IS BECAUSE THE MODELS
ARE STILL VERY INCONSISTENT ON THE DEPTH...INTENSITY...AND EVEN
AMOUNT OF MOISTURE WITH THIS SYSTEM FOR SUNDAY. OUR INCLINATION IS
TO GO WITH THE EUROPEAN MODEL...WHICH FORECASTS BACK TO BACK
SYSTEMS...I.E... A TROF MOVING THROUGH AZ SATURDAY AFTERNOON
FOLLOWED BY A STRONGER SYSTEM SUNDAY NIGHT.
SO I will have a short vacation based on the "European Model."
If I get some observing in, so much the better.
Matt
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.26/1119 - Release Date:
11/8/2007
5:55 PM
- Follow-Ups:
- [sac-forum] Re: weather
- From: Richard Harshaw
- References:
- [sac-forum] Re: weather
- From: Matt
Other related posts:
- » [sac-forum] weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- » [sac-forum] Re: weather
- [sac-forum] Re: weather
- From: Richard Harshaw
- [sac-forum] Re: weather
- From: Matt