I walked outside on Friday morning around 7 AM to pick up my Seattle Times.
What did I find? A totally, sodden mess. A hulk of wet pulp. No plastic bag around it.
The same thing happened a few weeks ago.
The same thing happened several times last year.
Was this a surprise rain event?
No. Totally predictable.
Typically, newspapers are delivered around 4-5 AM. Here is the radar around 3 AM that morning. Heavy precipitation was moving in. One could have known this by using a free weather radar app.
The National Weather Service forecast had predicted the rain on Friday for DAYS (see forecast on Wednesday).
And the UW forecast model was essentially perfect the day before:
It is perhaps ironic that a newspaper that claims, with great authority, the ability to predict the climate decades ahead, can't use basic weather information in its distribution of newspapers.
As I will describe in detail in a future blog, the poor use of highly skillful weather forecasts is a major societal issue.
Not using forecasts properly led to the Maui wildfire disaster, severe wildfire death tolls in California, and most recently, the extraordinary loss of life in western North Carolina with Hurricane Helene.
I look forward to that future post. You're right that willful ignorance of weather forecasts is a problem. Currently I'm trying to remedy that on a small scale with a class project. Last year I tried on a bigger scale with my blog, and although it's my most-read post in the last year, it wasn't much read.
ReplyDeleteThe Seattle Times is of no value anyway, so nothing was lost.
ReplyDeletePossibly, the ST staff told their delivery person who you are. ;)
ReplyDeleteSeems the old rag was useful at least this one time, prompting your post about the cluelessness of its publishers....
ReplyDeleteI guess the question is: why does Cliff bother subscribing to the Seattle Times?
ReplyDeleteDid someone pass a law about single-use plastic bags? ðŸ¤
ReplyDeleteThe Seattle Times has been having this problem for at least the last 30 years. I'm sure they will offload responsibilities on to the delivery drivers but it seems they must have some level of culpability. Did they ever fix the problem with the drying agent in the inks? A friend of mine was part of the ecological team that tested those inks and found that there was a potential allergic response to them. It bothered me for years. If the ink cannot dry in time in gets on your fingers and white countertops.
ReplyDeleteI'm surprised Cliff continues his subscription! Many of us quit long ago.
ReplyDeleteTime was, the Seattle Times, like other newspapers, had their own circulation and delivery. Those days are long gone. The newspaper is thrown in your yard by a contractor who couldn't care less if it's late, wet or if you even get it. Like the American auto industry, the print media cries that we're destroying journalism by not subscribing, wheras the bean counters have done that all by themselves.
ReplyDeleteTechnically, the Seattle Times doesn’t “predict the climate”. Climate scientists do that, and they’ve mostly gotten it right. The Times reports the consensus on that topic.
ReplyDeleteJerry.... will have to disagree. The ST is constantly providing climate predictions and information, much of it demonstrably wrong. For example, on the front page of yesterday's paper there was a story that the top of Mt. Rainier is melting from climate change. Totally wrong. The top is too cold for climate change to reducing snow accumulation. In fact, it would go the other way....a moister atmosphere would produce more snow. There story was not reporting a consensus...but non-factual, error-filled information..cliff
DeleteCliff - yes, we'll have to disagree, at least until we see some evidence to support your assertions about Mt. Rainier glaciers. Published observations to date have pointed the other way. According to a June 2023 report from NPS: "Our data shows a gradual yet accelerating loss of glacial ice at Mount Rainier, resulting in significant changes in regional ice volume over the last century."
DeleteI read that article (see link below) I’d be interested in your opinion as to why these measurements are showing many major peaks in the area have lost so much snow at their summits in the last years.
Deletehttps://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/climate-lab/mount-rainier-is-shrinking-and-now-has-a-new-summit/
Jerry...you are making the same mistake as the Seattle Times.... the glaciers at LOWER ELEVATIONS are losing ice from warming, but that is NOT TRUE at the top of the mountain. Please read my blog more carefully before you leave comments..cliff
DeleteIt's impressive that Jerry is able to leave comments at all, what with his head being buried in the sand.
DeleteCliff, I think you need to explain your comment about the top of Mt. Rainier not losing ice from climate change, but should be increasing. The photos clearly show the dome has shrunk since 2009. Is this just a short term shrinking that occurred this summer or has it been shrinking steadily since 2009? If your assertion is correct, and this is a short term shrinking, then we should start seeing it building back up in the future.
DeleteFor some reason, weather forecasts exemplify idiocracy in this part of the world. If you use the available information, know it's going to rain or whatever it's going to do, and prepare for it, a fair number of people look at you like you just fell out of a flying saucer.
ReplyDeleteBut it you know nothing, do nothing, and then walk around looking like a drowned rat -- hey, no problemo! And you've got plenty of company.
Annoying? Yes, sometimes. But it still beats joining the idiots.