[kearnyirish2]

I prefer that old way; that guy put his credibility on the line. Now we get a million excuses why they blow their calls, and even get varying forecasts from the same person (”The European model says 3”, the Australian model says 7”, and the Chilean model says 16” - so we can expect from 3 to 16 inches...”).

I believe a lot of it is competition with cable news/24 hour news cycles; that seems to be what drives reporters to sit in canoes in 6” of water and now we can expect “reporters” to stand in front of the highest snowdrifts they can find for the cameras.

[SamAdams76]

Correct. Meteorologists these days always blame their blown forecasts on "faulty" weather models like the GFS, NAM and the Euro, etc. There are even forums I follow where "weather weenies" (as I call them) obsess over these models and whose mental health seems to ebb and flow with every run of them.

There is too much reliance on computer generated weather models and not enough real-time analysis of observed data these days.

Sometimes nature can reveal when a big storm is on the way. For instance, seagulls leaving the beaches and flocking to rooftops of large building further inland is always a clear sign of a coming northeaster in New England.

I trust the seagulls more than I trust the Weather Channel.