Quantcast

A great start to the week

Good morning,

The weather will be nearly perfect today with light winds and a high near 77°.  The EOI (Eat Outside Index) will be a perfect 10 this afternoon and evening.  A huge warm-up will arrive on Tuesday with a high expected in the lower 90s, and then a weakening cold front will approach the area Wednesday.

days_since_TO_WClick on this map for a larger view, as it shows the number of days since each National Weather Service office has issued a tornado warning.  For Pleasant Hill and Topeka, the two NWS offices that service our viewing area, it has been a record long time.  It has been 380 days since Topeka issued a tornado warning, and 371 days since Pleasant Hill issued one. Do you remember that day last year?  It was on May 6th when two small tornadoes touched down with no damage reported in Olathe and Raytown.  Here is a picture taken by Brandon Stafford in Olathe:

funnel-brandon

 

We caught this tornado developing live on Skytracker, but even though it touched down we had not even one report of a branch broken off of a tree.  This was the last tornado warning from the Pleasant Hill office.

The flow aloft this week will likely be too weak for any serious tornado risk, but as we move through this month we are expecting the flow aloft to strengthen and storm chasers will be paying close attention.  But before we have any severe weather risk it is the warm up that has our attention on Tuesday.

Have a great start to the week and we will look ahead to Wednesday’s chance of thunderstorms on 41 Action News.

Gary

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks

31 comments to A great start to the week

  • yewtrees

    NWS: From a record cold Sunday morning to possible record high
    temperatures on Tuesday, what happened to Spring?

  • Curiosity

    Gary – I appreciate the accountability that comes from putting forecasts out there based on the LRC. But I haven’t seen you respond to some of the questions that have been posed lately. Below are the two different forecasts weather2020 has made for this week. The first was made Feb. 1, and the second was an update made 43 days later on March 15. I’m not trying to hate on you or start an argument among trolls, just wondering if you could comment on how the interpretation of the LRC was so far off:

    “Forecast made February 1st (We don’t usually have to change the forecast much because we have a special forecast formula that allows this forecast to initially be accurate): Severe thunderstorms are possible early in the week, or perhaps on the weekend before this week. Expect near average temperatures. A fairly strong May cold front will make it’s way through this entire region with cooler weather likely with dry weather on the weekend of May 18th in northern areas around Kansas City to Omaha. Farther south the front may stall with daily strong thunderstorms that may be severe closer to the Oklahoma border. The weather looks nice on this weekend for Kansas City, Omaha, Des Moines, Wichita, and across Missouri to St. Louis.”

    “Forecast Update March 15th: Severe thunderstorms are Likely between the 12th and 16th of May. An outbreak of severe weather will happen on two consecutive days as a storm moves out of the Rockies and into the plains. A fairly strong May cold front will make it’s way through this entire region with cooler weather likely with dry weather on the weekend of May 18th in northern areas around Kansas City to Omaha. Farther south the front may stall with daily strong thunderstorms that may be severe closer to the Oklahoma border. The weather looks nice on this weekend for Kansas City, Omaha, Des Moines, Wichita, and across Missouri to St. Louis.”

    • Curiosity,

      When I get it down, and really have this site humming, which I hope for later this year, we will update them a bit more often. These forecasts are not going to be 100% accurate. I am hoping for 60% to 65%, which means 35 to 40% of the time they may be inaccurate. For this week, I am doing analysis on where we are within the cycling pattern. When we make a forecast 50 to 100 days out, which is one to two cycles out, then being off by two or three days could throw one week’s forecast into the next week, if that makes sense. There are two strong systems approaching this week, one of them appears it will track way farther north and the second one, this weekend, appears it will be tracking farther south. This is the part of the pattern I expected to see the severe weather outbreak. It still may happen, so let’s see how it sets up. Does this make sense?

      Okay trolls, come on in and blast the “experimental” forecast made 50 to 100 days ago. I would recommend just letting it go, and let’s see what happens this week. Yes, we put our neck on the line with these forecasts, and there have been many successful ones. We learn more every year. I will hopefully be able to spend more time on making these forecasts as I may be a bit off on the exact days. But, the pattern is still cycling according to the LRC. We just have to make good forecasts on what we have learned.

      Gary

      • yewtrees

        Gary, there are my questions to you:
        1. Why do you label someone who questions your forecast as trolls?
        2. How did you come up with 60 to 65% accuracy? Have you done a student t-test or p-value to determine if it is statistically significant?
        3. When you are right, you like to praise yourself. But, when the forecast is wrong, you are no where to be found. People like me wanted to reach out your expertise to explain what went wrong on the forecast. Off forecast, No explanation, Bad science!!!

        • Yewtrees,

          I must disagree with that statement. If we are wrong we often point out where it went wrong. I would love to discuss where the forecast went wrong, right, etc….. Let’s have a healthy discussion.

          For example, where is this week’s severe weather set up that I talked about 50 to 100 days ago on Weather 2020? I believe it is there, with one wave going way north, and the second wave coming south this weekend. The set-up is likely happening, but off two or three days from my original forecast. I can show you where this storm was in previous cycles. And, remember we are in a roughly 50-55 day cycle. If I made that forecast based on 51 days in the last cycle, then if it is 55 days in this cycle can you see how my forecast could still verify, but miss by three or four days?

          And, one last thing Yewtrees. There are many times that I just don’t have the time to monitor the blog every minute. So, hours can go by and I may miss a question or two. It isn’t something I purposely try to do. Again, let’s have a healthy discussion. And, I call them trolls if they get an answer, then ask the exact same question the next day, and the day after.

          Gary

          • Curiosity

            Gary – thanks for the explanation. I’m willing to buy the notion that two waves are going to come one right after another, with one going further north and the next going further south, so we get missed. The forecast may not have panned out, but the general concept of storms cycling through in a recurring pattern still appears to hold.

      • nofluer

        I have nothing to say about your 50 to 100 day forecast since I didn’t see it.

        What I will say though is after planting broccoli and tomatoes (30 tomatoes plants) yesterday, I was out there this afternoon hoping to keep them alive. Hot (80+/-)and DRY was wilting them pretty badly. And tomorrow is supposed to be in the ninties, with a return to mid to late-spring temps after that… but I have my doubts. (With the jet stream trying to spend a couple of weeks vacation at the North pole, it could get really warm and toasty down here!)

        And the two new fruit trees we planted (to replace the two that died in last year’s drought) are already showing danger signs with the ground already cracking. So this evening I shift back into my drought watering cycle (4 gallons of water per tree every other day) probably for at least two weeks (as I don’t expect any rain for that period.) I’ll have to wait to see what’s coming beyond that…

        BUT – all that said, if you know any weather vendors who have some spare rain to hand out, we’ll take it! (Last measurable rain on the 4th, 11.7″ on the year.)

  • davidmcg

    Gary, while all of you in and around KC, Lawrence and Topeka all had record lows and frost yesterday morning, we never got close here in McLouth to any of that. Our morning low was 41 and that was really odd. We didn’t plant anything yet because of what was due in this past weekend, but we will now. Drought monitor has this are in a moderate state right now. I think its wishful thinking. The ground is still super dry. No increase in ponds or wells yet around here, and there are cracks in the dirt still very wide everywhere. The wind is so strong here that what ever ground moisture there is, the wind just strips it away. We are far from drought recovery here.

  • smiley10

    Looking forward to throwing the windows open this week!

  • Farmgirl

    Why does one warm day in May have your attention tomorrow?

  • Marebear05

    Gary,
    I saw that there is a 60% chance of storms on Sunday… We are planning on having an outside party around 2pm that day and wanted to know if you have any idea when these storms would roll in? I didn’t know if you were thinking early Sunday morning or more towards the evening. I would just like to know your thoughts on this weekends rainfall chances. My family and I are faithful viewers of 41 and my husband and I even won the Hottest Day of the Year contest last summer (Hooray!) Thanks for all your hard work.

  • Henley

    Prepare for continuation of the drought

  • mukustink

    Here is the definition of accurate:

    ac·cu·rate

    /ˈakyərit/
    Adjective
    1.(of information, measurements, statistics, etc.) Correct in all details; exact.
    2.(of an instrument or method) Capable of giving such information.

    Synonyms
    exact – precise – correct – true – strict – punctual

    Gary my question is if you are hoping for 60% of your orecas to be correct then how can you call that accurate? Are you not misstateing the truth when you say you can provide accurate long range forecast? Are you not providing false information by saying you can provide accurate long range forecast?

    I think you should be up front and honest on your website and say that it’s a work in progress and that you are hoping for a 60 % success rate. To say you can predict the future is well just a lie isn’t it?

    • Muku,

      Then there is no such thing as an accurate forecast if you take the definition as is. We forecasted 77 for today. If it isn’t exactly 77 at every location, then it would not satisfy that definition. When I say 60% is accurate, then I am saying that those forecasts are accurate, not the wrong ones.

      And, we are forecasting near 90 degrees tomorrow. So, yes, we can predict the future if that forecast is correct. Yes, every forecast is going for near 90, but that still says the future can be predicted. And, we have a system too make these predictions 100 days or longer into the future. We use the LRC and we are having success, maybe not by your definition.

      Gary

  • PILOT MISER

    I would recommend learning the difference between accurate and precise. How you can be one or the other or both.

  • Drought Miser

    Drought Miser says “4.2 months till Fall begins and 1.3 months till days give way to night” not precision but close to accurate!!

  • mgsports

    Saturday, May 18

    Isolated to scattered severe thunderstorms in southwest MN, northwest IA, east NE, central and northeast KS.

    TORCON -

    IA northwest – 3
    MN southwest – 2
    NE east – 3
    KS central, northeast – 5 but could change so we need to what out
    other areas – less than 2

  • Hockeynut69

    Come on to make a forecast 50 or even 100 days out and it be a week off is not bad in my book. It’s like flying a plane on a heading of 090°. If you were off by one radial degree and only flying 5 miles, you could likely still find your destination flying VFR and not using a GPS. However if you maintained a 1-2° variance for a 500 mile flight, you would likely get lost. My point is the LRC has a cycle to it, could be 50-55 days. If one cycle it is 52 days and another cycle happens to go 56 days, that could throw off the timing of a 100 day forecast by a handful of days. I would scrutinize a forecast of 1-2 days moreso than 1-2 months out.

    Everyone take a deep breath, get away from your keyboards, and go outside to enjoy this beautiful weather we have all been craving. Well everyone but FreezeMister!

  • blueskies

    The pioneers get the arrows. The silent majority value your insights and don’t expect perfection. We are content with excellence.

  • PILOT MISER

    Throw 3 darts at the 20 point and all three hit the 1 point shows accuracy but not precision.

    Throw 3 darts at the 20 point and one hits the 1 point, 1 hits the 15 point , and one hits the 3 point shows neither accuracy or precision.

    Throw 3 darts at the 20 point and all three hit the 20 points is both accurate and precise.

    I will contend that the forecast falls more along the first line of measurement. It can be accurate but off by a few degrees a couple of hours, or a couple of days. This makes it by a degree of accuracy and rarely are you ping to be both accurate and precise and nail every single aspect of a forecast. So saying 69% accurate on a forecast gives a probability of accuracy and ability to be more accurate and this increase precision.

    It is all in how you use measurements I determine accuracy an precision. Of course anyone knows you can use any set of variables to increase % of accuracy and leave out variables that decrease accuracy. It is all in how you present the data.

  • sedsinkc

    I’ve said for years that the LRC is useful for seeing cyclicity in the general weather patterns, but very spotty in its accuracy when used for long range sensible weather forecasting at specific locations. I also fail to understand how Gary can tout the LRC as a great forecasting tool when the entire LRC concept has not passed scientific muster via thorough peer review in a recognized atmospheric science journal.

    On a brighter subject, today was so nice I took a sick day and enjoyed the five star weather. IMO, 75 degrees is far nicer than 90 degrees.

    • sedsinkc

      To be clear, this is not a personal attack on you, Gary. I consider you an excellent meteorologist and am still a loyal reader of your wonderful blog, though with work my available time to chime in on here has been limited for a couple of months. Should be done with work in a month or perhaps less.

  • shawnee75

    Thought muku was banned…
    He starts more drama then high school girls…
    LOSER!!!

    • mukustink

      Shawnee 75 go back in your hole. I never was banned. You can try but it’s impossible. Thanks for your kind remarks. Tell your mom thanks for a great evening!

  • mukustink

    Try to have a nice and open discussion with all points of views and you have trolls like shawnee75 spouting hatred. What a tool!

  • tushchaser1

    I have read with great interest the comments posted today. For most parts, it has been a nice discussion.

    Throughout all conversations, both current and past, it is very evident that there are people who take everything Gary says with 100% conviction and there are those who ask questions 100% of the time. I happen to believe that these two types of people are found throughout weather communities nationwide. Often times, people are quick to fall in love with a weatherman, regardless of their sometimes shoddy work forecasting.

    For example, my godfather loves his local weatherman, and believes that no one else comes close to his “accuracy” in predicting the weather. Now, if anyone says anything about his “shortcomings” in predicting the weather, my godfather quickly rushes to weatherguys defense and makes excuses. That is exactly what we have here on this blog.

    Now, in my honest opinion, I believe Gary has a difficult time spinning his LRC idea to others who ask the questions. Those people (Jerry, RDub, Yewtrees, Seds, MUKU) often look for concrete data to back up the sometimes outlandish assertions made by Gary. I think those people (myself included) find it hard to believe that Gary can claim accuracy when he touts that a weather system “going to the north of us and/or to the south of us” demonstrates the validity of his theory, as he “predicted it 100 days ago.” In all honesty, most don’t care if it snows in Fargo, ND or rains in Shreveport, LA, we want to know about the weather here, in Kansas City. Some of us also struggle when Gary says “I predicted a severe weather set-up and look, it snowed.” That is huge stretch by anyone’s calculation.

    Now, there are certain things about Gary’s “cycling” theory that are interesting, however, without peer review and empirical data to back up all claims and assertions, Gary could be considered nothing more than a snake-oil salesman claiming he can cure the diseases of society. Until the time where Gary allows research to be conducted and refuses to stand behind “weatherate” as a method to tout his accuracy will the LRC truly be determined.

    Further, asking questions is how people have learned throughout history. By calling people “trolls” who ask questions (albeit repeatedly) it casts a different shadow on the blog and the LRC in general. It almost appeared that Gary is done with people questioning his theory and wishes we all take him at his word. Unfortunately, that will more than likely never be the case, because people have an innate desire to learn, understand, and grasp concepts that interest them.

    That’s it…by the way, fantastic weather today, could take a few more days like today!