I've noticed the Weather Channel has decided winter storms need names. I was a little surprised, at first, since I don't watch the Weather Channel, except a few seconds at a time, with the hope they'll actually have the real time radar on, instead of some show about AGW or people chasing tornadoes. The National Weather Service doesn't do this, so I'm wondering if there's some big power play between the two giants of meteorological wizardry?
Why would anyone want to name a winter storm...or any storm? Why not give it a numerical classification, such as 2013 WS-1 or 2....whatever. It's easy to determine the type of storm and when it happened. There's no confusion during conversations, such as one where the name Sandy is brought up. Nobody will have flashbacks to the storm, while other's think of a close friend, or like me: fond memories of a lovely, petite, blond comedic actress that warmed our hearts in the 70's.
Bleh. Life's confusing enough without adding more confusion. Don't meteorologists have something better to do? How about showing the weather instead of reality shows? How about drawing some isobars?
I was listening to a meteorologist talking about "Charlie" and I asked Stud: "They're expecting a hurricane?" I was shocked to hear they are naming snow storms. Sounds like Congress took a vote.
ReplyDeleteAll I could think of was a "Saturday Night Live" skit. I don't think it will last.
DeleteOooooh. Isobars. Now I'm hungry.
ReplyDeleteOh, wait. That's something else.
At one time, weather maps had isobars. The closer the isobar, the greater the pressure gradient and the higher the wind.
DeleteNow, weather maps have happy faces, clouds and other strange symbols that are not official meteorological symbols.