KillingtonZone.com

DrJeff wrote: ↑Oct 28th, '21, 20:51 So one of my favorite Skiology Matt interactions was last January. A 2 phase storm with predicted 50+mph summit winds out of the South (mainly phase 2) was moving in.

From first chair on, Mount Snow had their backside of the mountain Sunbrook quad listed as on wind hold.... (more like lack of staff after the phase 1 foot or so of snow MLK Weekend Friday night storm) access from literally the no wind at the Summit and ZERO signs of drifting from any wind angle in the Sunbrook area that morning...

Online, Matt, who wasn't there that day, or apparently any days at Mount Snow last year, was adamant that his prediction of wind holds at Mount Snow that day was accurate and backed up by his "sources"...

The fact that me and my wife were actually there, and not experiencing anything more than a slight breeze firsthand, which I told him, meant absolutely nothing to his insistence on his wind hold prediction.....

I will give him credit that he often, even though he doesn't have much more than a semester of formal meteorology education, he very often does a good job at breaking down storms on a very specific geographical basis, however having a relative who is on the high functioning aspergers spectrum, I see a ton of similarities, which are so often based on the social inability to acknowledge that they might (and are) actually wrong about some things, since their often incredible ability to analyze data, lacks the ability to comprehend that at times the data just simply can't account for all the variables that real life brings....

JaqueLeCoque wrote: ↑Oct 28th, '21, 21:54 I appreciate what you're doing here. You're painting this in the best light (you seem to always find a way to do that). But unfortunately that's not the reality here. He's not some Hollywood movie weather savant with an intolerance for failed data. He's a narcissistic egomaniac with major insecurities that people will realize that he doesn't know what he's taking about (which he doesn't). This would all be funny at best and sad at worst, if he wasn't actually harming real people in the process. His attacks on people who are just trying to get by in the industry are not OK.

JaqueLeCoque wrote: ↑Oct 28th, '21, 21:54

DrJeff wrote: ↑Oct 28th, '21, 20:51 So one of my favorite Skiology Matt interactions was last January. A 2 phase storm with predicted 50+mph summit winds out of the South (mainly phase 2) was moving in.

From first chair on, Mount Snow had their backside of the mountain Sunbrook quad listed as on wind hold.... (more like lack of staff after the phase 1 foot or so of snow MLK Weekend Friday night storm) access from literally the no wind at the Summit and ZERO signs of drifting from any wind angle in the Sunbrook area that morning...

Online, Matt, who wasn't there that day, or apparently any days at Mount Snow last year, was adamant that his prediction of wind holds at Mount Snow that day was accurate and backed up by his "sources"...

The fact that me and my wife were actually there, and not experiencing anything more than a slight breeze firsthand, which I told him, meant absolutely nothing to his insistence on his wind hold prediction.....

I will give him credit that he often, even though he doesn't have much more than a semester of formal meteorology education, he very often does a good job at breaking down storms on a very specific geographical basis, however having a relative who is on the high functioning aspergers spectrum, I see a ton of similarities, which are so often based on the social inability to acknowledge that they might (and are) actually wrong about some things, since their often incredible ability to analyze data, lacks the ability to comprehend that at times the data just simply can't account for all the variables that real life brings....

I appreciate what you're doing here. You're painting this in the best light (you seem to always find a way to do that). But unfortunately that's not the reality here. He's not some Hollywood movie weather savant with an intolerance for failed data. He's a narcissistic egomaniac with major insecurities that people will realize that he doesn't know what he's taking about (which he doesn't). This would all be funny at best and sad at worst, if he wasn't actually harming real people in the process. His attacks on people who are just trying to get by in the industry are not OK.

Bubba wrote: ↑Oct 29th, '21, 10:55

JaqueLeCoque wrote: ↑Oct 28th, '21, 21:54

DrJeff wrote: ↑Oct 28th, '21, 20:51 So one of my favorite Skiology Matt interactions was last January. A 2 phase storm with predicted 50+mph summit winds out of the South (mainly phase 2) was moving in.

From first chair on, Mount Snow had their backside of the mountain Sunbrook quad listed as on wind hold.... (more like lack of staff after the phase 1 foot or so of snow MLK Weekend Friday night storm) access from literally the no wind at the Summit and ZERO signs of drifting from any wind angle in the Sunbrook area that morning...

Online, Matt, who wasn't there that day, or apparently any days at Mount Snow last year, was adamant that his prediction of wind holds at Mount Snow that day was accurate and backed up by his "sources"...

The fact that me and my wife were actually there, and not experiencing anything more than a slight breeze firsthand, which I told him, meant absolutely nothing to his insistence on his wind hold prediction.....

I will give him credit that he often, even though he doesn't have much more than a semester of formal meteorology education, he very often does a good job at breaking down storms on a very specific geographical basis, however having a relative who is on the high functioning aspergers spectrum, I see a ton of similarities, which are so often based on the social inability to acknowledge that they might (and are) actually wrong about some things, since their often incredible ability to analyze data, lacks the ability to comprehend that at times the data just simply can't account for all the variables that real life brings....

I appreciate what you're doing here. You're painting this in the best light (you seem to always find a way to do that). But unfortunately that's not the reality here. He's not some Hollywood movie weather savant with an intolerance for failed data. He's a narcissistic egomaniac with major insecurities that people will realize that he doesn't know what he's taking about (which he doesn't). This would all be funny at best and sad at worst, if he wasn't actually harming real people in the process. His attacks on people who are just trying to get by in the industry are not OK.

Gee...for someone who just got here (registered just the other day) you sure seem to know a lot of history.

Bubba wrote: ↑Oct 29th, '21, 10:55

Gee...for someone who just got here (registered just the other day) you sure seem to know a lot of history.

SnowMonkey wrote: ↑Oct 29th, '21, 19:54 The problem with Skiology is that the moderator often posts inaccurate information as facts and will never admit when he is wrong. Take a look at the credentials of members of Northeast Clownology: some of the top weather forecasters, backcountry skiers, ski patrollers, guides ... all folks who tried early on to gently steer a newbie (Matt Bramble) in the right direction only to be told he knew better and banned.