I'm just going to reply to @RobBucksPA's comments here, since he posted his thoughts in this thread. I carefully read, and now reread, the posts, because I was intrigued as always by his writing, but was somewhat confused by the message. I hesitated responding, because I sure as s don't want to get into a climate discussion here, or have anyone misconstrue what I'm trying to say and accuse me of disparaging any group of people.
I feel much of the misinformation that is distributed these days is due to premature dispensing of "news" of ANY sort, because we now live in a world where many people expect a constant barrage of media alerts 24/7. News outlets, be they weather, sports, politics, want /NEED to be first with "Breaking News"...doesn't matter if it's fake news or not, whether it can be verified or not, just that they broke it. Again, without being political at all, greed is the driving factor...more clicks, retweets, shares, means more $$$ for someone, including sites like AW now.
As far as Rob's questioning the accuracy, or lack thereof, of the NWS's forecasts, I get that, to a certain extent. But it's kind of a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation, IMO only! How many times have they been berated for both underplaying AND overplaying a weather forecast? It's a fine line, a blurred line...these days people see a "warning" or "alert', and that's all they see. It's too much ag to actually do a radar search, or to follow a local forecast in real time. I would probably be more in sync with Rob's way of thinking a year ago, but having experienced TWO separate excessive rainfall events here last summer, both over 7" in less than 24 hours, I'm a little more apt to forgive the mets for "blown" forecasts. We had heavy rain forecast for those events, but no where NEAR what we actually received was mentioned. In circumstances like that, while they are relying on models for forecasting, I don't believe the models can handle those kinds of anomalies, which there seem to be more of in recent years.
You know I'm just an amateur here, and I tend to oversimplify things, but I kinda feel like we might need to rely on now-casting more. I don't follow the models all that closely, but it just seems that trying to predict amounts/types/location of precip more than 24 hours out has become a bit of a bug-a-boo. That's all I wanted to say...I always enjoy Rob's posts, he gets me thinking. Which may, or may NOT be a good thing?!?
Oh, just one other thought...we are all weather geeks here, let's face it. MOST OTHER PEOPLE IN THE WORLD ARE NOT!!! They get their weather info from some unknown phone app, and believe whatever they see on there. I can't say how many times someone has looked at their phone and said, "Oh, it's going to get cold next week!" NOOO!!! No it's NOT! So you also have the instant gratification expectations to deal with if you are a legitimate weather outlet.