New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy blamed “lousy” weather forecasts in response to criticisms of his administration’s handling of the chaos that ensued during Thursday’s sleet and snow.
“It came much stronger and hit us harder than any organization had forecasted, and that is a fact,” Murphy, a Democrat, said during a press conference Friday morning.
Murphy did say his administration “could have done better,” but put most of the blame on weather forecasters. New Jersey and New York City got more snow than expected, but for days, weather forecasts projected plenty of snow covering the region.
“Part of it is the forecasts were lousy and I’m not going to let the forecasters off the hook,” the governor said. “This whole region got crushed.”
The northeastern U.S. got its first taste of wintry weather Thursday as heavier-than-expected snowfall ground traffic to a halt in the greater New York City area.
Thousands lost power, buses were delayed and, by the evening, authorities had responded to more than 500 car accidents.
New Jersey transportation officials began salting roads early Thursday, but were prevented from plowing them by commuters leaving work early, Transportation Commissioner Diane Gutierrez-Scaccetti said at the press conference, who apologized to commuters for the delays.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo also claimed state officials were caught off guard by the snowstorm.
“I think the snowfall was higher in Jersey and New York City than they were anticipating and I think it came down faster,” the Democrat said, according to the North Jersey Record.
Meteorologists fired back at Murphy’s comments. NBC News broadcast meteorologist Bill Karins said state officials “should have been prepared anyways” for snowfall.
@govmurphy much of NJ was in 2-4” forecast range for a burst of heavy snow right before rush hour then sleet on top. State should have been prepared anyways. Most NJ ended in 4-8” range.
NYC went 1” forecast to 6”. That is different. https://t.co/WPNQVaE4aA— Bill Karins 💧 (@BillKarins) November 16, 2018
News 12 meteorologist Mike Rizzo called Murphy’s blaming of weather forecasters “a very strawman argument.”
It's a very strawman argument. We got it wrong – and that's that. Now we learn and move forward. Fund numerical weather prediction better, and modelling will improve. What else are we supposed to do? Make magic? We try our best. 💯💯
— Mike Rizzo (@Meteor_Mike) November 16, 2018
Democratic New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio also faced criticism for chaos in the streets as the snow came down Thursday, including from Democrats and liberal pundits.
Read more at Daily Caller
Of all the political animals the Democratic remains as the Stupidist’s of them all
Weather forecasters are generally contrite when they get it wrong.
Al Gore, et al, never.
“Climate is what you expect – weather is what you get.” Old saying for folks who are moving to a different part of the country. Also old: Boy Scout motto – “Be Prepared”…..
“It’s a very strawman argument. We got it wrong – and that’s that. Now we learn and move forward. Fund numerical weather prediction better, and modelling will improve. What else are we supposed to do? Make magic? We try our best.”
News 12 meteorologist Mike Rizzo called Murphy’s blaming of weather forecasters “a very strawman argument.” when “New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy blamed “lousy” weather forecasts “It came much stronger and hit us harder than any organization had forecasted, and that is a fact.”
New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy is correct and there is no Strawman argument here. Expected outcomes are dependent upon detail and credibility of data provided in order to produce a desirable outcome.
And News 12 meteorologist Mike Rizzo actually discounted his own strawman argument with his admission, “We got it wrong – and that’s that.”
But Rizzo created his own “strawman” when he went on to say “Fund numerical weather prediction better, and modelling will improve. What else are we supposed to do? Make magic? We try our best.”
Money. The lack of “More money” for want of a better numerical weather predictive model caused weather forecasters to make a lousy forecast!
Or is the real culprit incorporating scientific theoretical perspective with Empirical data in the Numerical weather prediction modelling method and expecting REAL PREDICTIVE DATA??? Garbage in, garbage out.
“Manipulating the vast datasets and performing the complex calculations necessary to modern numerical weather prediction requires some of the most powerful supercomputers in the world. Even with the increasing power of supercomputers, the forecast skill of numerical weather models extends to only about six days. Factors affecting the accuracy of numerical predictions include the density and quality of observations used as input to the forecasts, along with deficiencies in the numerical models themselves. Post-processing techniques such as model output statistics (MOS) have been developed to improve the handling of errors in numerical predictions.”
“A FAR MORE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM lies in the chaotic nature of the partial differential equations that govern the atmosphere. It is impossible to solve these equations exactly, and small errors grow with time (doubling about every five days). Present understanding is that this chaotic behavior limits accurate forecasts to about 14 days even with perfectly accurate input data and a flawless model.”
BE THAT AS IT MAY… numerical weather predictive modelling is used to generate BOTH short-term weather forecasts AND longer-term climate predictions; the latter (LONGER-TERM CLIMATE PREDICTIONS) are widely applied for understanding and PROJECTING CLIMATE CHANGE.
And still we get another…Modeling predicts Armageddon ahead …. Again
“Now researchers led by Arizona State University have completed some of the most sophisticated modeling of the effects of climate change and urban centers in the U.S., and are finding that some of today’s proposed solutions will provide only a fraction of relief from the projected heat.”
Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-11-reveals-dynamics-climate-urbanization-heat-mitigating.html#jCp