[sounding]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

Data is one thing. HOW that data is described, can be quite another.

Back in the day, living as a lad and young adult in the wilds of Northern Minnesota, we experienced a weather phenomenon called a “Canadian High”. Canadian highs usually followed a blizzard or a period of heavy snow. They were characterized by clear, bright blue skies, falling temperatures, and intermittent wind. Canadian highs were welcome; there was always cleanup after a heavy snow; plowing, shoveling, sometimes chainsaw work because of fallen trees and limbs, etc. Plus, the falling temps made icy roads better to drive on: anyone who has experienced a northern Minnesota winter can vouch firsthand for the fact that ice-covered roads at -30 degrees have MUCH better traction than those at, say, +30.

Then, one day, we no longer had “Canadian Highs”. They were instead called “Polar Vortexes”, with all the sinister connotations one could derive from the name. Meteorologists from Duluth to International Falls solemnly warned mothers of young children that the approaching polar vortex could contain GAWDawfully dangerous cold temps, to keep the tykes bundled up, don’t let ‘em outside alone, etc. etc., as well as depending on the depth of cold and velocity of expected wind, warnings about EXPOSED FLESH CAN FREEZE IN _____ MINUTES!!! Gone we’re the days of the welcome Canadian highs, being replaced instead by the apocalyptic warnings and admonishments regarding the upcoming polar vortex.

Some years after the name change, one of the meteorologists up there admitted that the name change was to make the event “more newsworthy”. Says a lot, perhaps too much, not about WHAT we are being told but WHY. Is panic more newsworthy? Apparently so.

So…yeah. Present the data. But keep the unnecessary flourishes out of it.

Ditto. With the media, it's all about sensationalism -- because it sells. All this verbiage about Polar Vortex, Atmospheric Rivers ... and no doubt more to come ... are nothing new -- just flowery labels for atmospheric characteristics that have been going on for millions of years. But in the Weather Club, hype and consensus are replaced by data.