April 16, 2014 WA Cascades Extended Outlook

Updated 4-16-2014
Latest forecast models runs from the Climate Prediction Center (US) and the European Forecast (ECMWF)  model runs indicate normal temperatures with above normal precipitation through the end of April, 2014. This forecast should not erode the current snow on the ground: 72% of normal at White Pass to 102% of normal at Stevens. These numbers are as of 4-15-2014 and taken from the NORTHWEST AVALANCHE CENTER.

Updated 4-16-2014
Latest forecast models runs from the Climate Prediction Center (US) and the European Forecast (ECMWF)  model runs indicate normal temperatures with above normal precipitation through the end of April, 2014. This forecast should not erode the current snow on the ground: 72% of normal at White Pass to 102% of normal at Stevens. These numbers are as of 4-15-2014 and taken from the NORTHWEST AVALANCHE CENTER.

You can view extended maps at. 
www.faginweatherworld.blogspot.com/2014/...scades-extended.html

---

[size=small] Michael Fagin, West Coast Weather , LLC and Washington Online Weather. Providing weather forecasts for short term and extended outlooks for mountaineers. From the Washington Cascades to Mt. Everest and points in between.[/size]

I rarely post anything negative about others' posts, but "WOW", Michael, this is one of the spammiest posts on TAY in a long time. Is it really necessary for you to do this? I think the long-standing standards on TAY are higher than this, and you should strive to adhere to them.

Your entire signature is pure commercial spam (manually copied into the quote above for permanence), and the content in your spammy link is minimal at best and useless practically: "view extended maps"?? Which actually links to only a single 500 mb plot which 90% of readers are unlikely to understand or gain any benefit from viewing, along with a large advertisement for your commercial $$ weather services.

And its not even the right 500 mb plot! You've hotlinked the file from NOAA, so every day the plot gets updated and it no longer matches what you've written in your blog post. All of your previous weekly "Weather Washington Cascades- Extended" blog posts are also broken, because of this same flaw: the map shown no longer matches the written text. As of right now, every single 500 mb plot in every single post is for April 24-30, 2014!

I'm not even sure why I'm trying to help you fix these errors, but here goes. To avoid this type of error, you need to grab the current map from NOAA and upload it to Blogspot just like any other picture in your blog posts, not merely hotlink it directly. That way all of your future blog posts (advertisements) will retain the correct plot which matches the dates and description in your written text. You're welcome!

Dear Amar;
Thanks for your comments. This was my first post so I will make some adjustments.
Michael

Unless Mr. Fagin truly came here to spam.. this reads really harshly (even if factually correct). I'd just like to say that while it has been at least a few years since I checked out Mr. Fagin's weather world blog--at one time it had helpful information for me for trip planning. I actually checked it for months after that hoping for updates and finding a 'gem' of information like I did that first time. I've found other web resources for weather since then. But thank you for that information at one time back when.

Mr. Fagin, maybe a post with full disclosure of your business interests, but also explaining how you've aided climb teams or other outdoors people with your services would be helpful for anyone here. Sure, some people are weather experts and don't need to hire someone, but, one can still be very weather knowledgeable but supplement or enhance information with consultation from an expert.

cheers

Unless Mr. Fagin truly came here to spam.. this reads really harshly (even if factually correct).

Well, it's hard to convey tone in online communication, and I can see how someone else could read my reply as overly harsh. But perhaps you're not seeing it from my perspective as a reader of the original post:

I clicked on the post expecting to find some useful content, perhaps even some unusual or unexpected insight into the extended weather outlook, and instead was disappointed to find very minimal content at all. A single sentence which reflects exactly what can be found in better detail on the Climate Prediction Center's 6-10 and 8-14 Day Outlooks . A restatement of a tiny fraction of the NWAC's April 15 CLISNO data. A misleading blog link promising "extended maps", but which contains only a single map of limited utility for most readers and a large advertisement for commercial weather services. Along with a signature line containing a similar advertisement. All from a new account just registered on TAY a few days ago.

My initial conclusion, that the post was primarily intended to link to and advertise his commercial weather services, seems entirely reasonable given those facts. And seen in that light, my response was reasonable and measured. I certainly could have left out the last short sentence of my reply.

I subscribed long ago to Mr. Fagin's weekly emailed "Weekend Outlooks", and did find them useful perhaps a decade or more ago, but have not read them for many years. I too found other (and for me better) sources of weather information. Out of curiosity, I did a quick search of my Gmail back-inbox now to see if I was still getting them, which reveals about 150 of them sitting there since I began using Gmail in 2007, with over 95% of those unread and not ever clicked on, formerly arriving weekly or twice-weekly but much less regularly since 2010, the latest in January 2014. A former history of providing some useful weather content to the outdoor community for free (although always linked to and promoting his commercial weather services) should not rosily color one's view of the appropriateness of the content and link in the original post above.

Amar is good here.

Well, it's hard to convey tone in online communication, and I can see how someone else could read my reply as overly harsh. But perhaps you're not seeing it from my perspective as a reader of the original post:

I clicked on the post expecting to find some useful content, perhaps even some unusual or unexpected insight into the extended weather outlook, and instead was disappointed to find very minimal content at all. A single sentence which reflects exactly what can be found in better detail on the Climate Prediction Center's 6-10 and 8-14 Day Outlooks . A restatement of a tiny fraction of the NWAC's April 15 CLISNO data. A misleading blog link promising "extended maps", but which contains only a single map of limited utility for most readers and a large advertisement for commercial weather services. Along with a signature line containing a similar advertisement. All from a new account just registered on TAY a few days ago.

My initial conclusion, that the post was primarily intended to link to and advertise his commercial weather services, seems entirely reasonable given those facts. And seen in that light, my response was reasonable and measured. I certainly could have left out the last short sentence of my reply.

I subscribed long ago to Mr. Fagin's weekly emailed "Weekend Outlooks", and did find them useful perhaps a decade or more ago, but have not read them for many years. I too found other (and for me better) sources of weather information. Out of curiosity, I did a quick search of my Gmail back-inbox now to see if I was still getting them, which reveals about 150 of them sitting there since I began using Gmail in 2007, with over 95% of those unread and not ever clicked on, formerly arriving weekly or twice-weekly but much less regularly since 2010, the latest in January 2014. A former history of providing some useful weather content to the outdoor community for free (although always linked to and promoting his commercial weather services) should not rosily color one's view of the appropriateness of the content and link in the original post above.

Pretty much, first post, link to commercial site. Whether intended or not, or ignornace of appearance, spam by all accounts.

You had a bit of my interest, although unless you are spewing keywords like; GFS, PNA, MJO, NOAA or Euro forecast....I kinda lose focus.

Yes, the ridge is supposed to set up in favorable west coast position.....although it is Spring now, not December so the storms lack fruition.

I am ready for swerving Lake Sammamish. Skiing pow is done(??)

Ed

Mmmmm...hotlinks and spam. I'm now hungry for some BBQ.

You can be factually correct and still be unnecessarily harsh. In fact, let's take a look at the first two points that appear in the post form on this site:

•Be civil and respectful, avoid personal attacks - that is the norm here;
•Alternate viewpoints are welcome: debate the viewpoint, not the person;

Amar, you seem to have clearly violated both of them in your quest to be right.

Michael is a long-standing member of the Northwest outdoor community. Long before anyone else was paying any attention to mountain weather, Michael helped many of us plan trips, myself included.

Perhaps it's worth noting that some folks here are friends with and/or work for the same institution as Cliff Mass. Michael, in part, replaced Cliff on KUOW after Cliff was fired for not staying on the topic of weather. Let's make sure we aren't taking out personal grudges here.

Lastly, who the heck cares if Michael posts a URL to his web site? Amar, myself, and many, many other do the same thing. As long as there is a tangible connection between the information and/or site linked and the purpose of this site, I really don't see the problem. Sure, if someone shows up and posts links to male-enhancement drugs, blast away, but this is not that. Yes, Michael runs a business that is partially supported by his site, but then again, so does anyone whose site hosts ads or, perhaps, is touting an upcoming book about skiing volcanoes.

Be nice.

Be nice.

+1.
We all start out new. 'wowweather' already has toned down his sig. There seems to be room on TAY for multiple perspectives on snowpack. I appreciate his brevity.

FWIW: I've used Michael's custom forecasts for a number of years. I find the custom forecasts amazingly accurate. While I can gather similar forecast info by scouring NOAA and UW sites and digesting a number of charts and tables, but I find it much more convenient and accurate to subscribe to Michael’s service and get a custom forecast. Michael is able to analyze and concisely summarize the wealth of weather data available into easy to understand forecasts.

•Be civil and respectful, avoid personal attacks - that is the norm here;
•Alternate viewpoints are welcome: debate the viewpoint, not the person;

Amar, you seem to have clearly violated both of them in your quest to be right.

Where is Amarr personally attacking? Amarr made an observation and provided an opinion. I don't see any character attacks in his posts. Can you quote a specific line?

Michael is a long-standing member of the Northwest outdoor community. Long before anyone else was paying any attention to mountain weather, Michael helped many of us plan trips, myself included.

That is truly wonderful but unfortunately irrelevant. The original post superficially appears spammy and the link provided offers no useful information for anyone.

FWIW: I've used Michael's custom forecasts for a number of years.   I find the custom forecasts amazingly accurate.   While I can gather similar forecast info by scouring NOAA and UW sites and digesting a number of charts and tables,  but I find it much more convenient and accurate to subscribe to Michael’s service and get a custom forecast.  Michael is able to analyze and concisely summarize the wealth of weather data available into easy to understand forecasts.

You mean better than Larry Poobah's forecast?!? (whose snow levels are never right....but the product placement of K2 and OR are always just fine)

Ed

You can be factually correct and still be unnecessarily harsh.

I'm guilty of this plenty in life so maybe thats why I interpreted it that way. I don't mean to make a case justifying 'links' or whatever but frankly that original sig line didn't bother me at all. As well I hope I didn't sound like I was 'attacking' you Amar for your response. To me it read kind of harsh--but it is so hard to tell tone and inflection on the internet. Maybe was coming from a place of exasperation at the post given you have known of Mr. Fagin's involvement in weather related things for such a long time.

Matt

You mean better than Larry Poobah's forecast?!? (whose snow levels are never right....but the product placement of K2 and OR are always just fine)

Ed

No Larry and Michael are not at all the same guy.

When I get a custom forecast with Michael -- I'll give him a specific location and he will give me his assessment of what the temps, winds and amounts of precipatation will be over a four day period. I have also given him a location and asked him to alert me when a stretch of favorable weather is coming in.

No Larry and Michael are not at all the same guy.

Yes, Randy....I know. It supported my hypothesis, because their names are different. Just kidding d00d.

I was speaking to Larry's inability to provide accurate information and/or any insight to weather....effective to our pursuits.
He does market well, for which certain TAYers seem to take offense.

To clarify, we should all be offended by inaccurate information.....not by marketing plugs.

No worries Amar, well spoken. It was actually nice to see white pass mentioned in a post, who knows maybe someone will actually head into the bc there with me sometime.

Amar has always been cool here, he's our weather guy and i'm not going to change that.

Okay, so let's talk weather for end of April.....

MJO is heading negative
NOAA projects below normal temps and above normal precip
PNA is forecasted to drop to around -0-

Will we see some "Wow"weather or not??

Amar, where are those fancy GFS loops when you need them?