The Weatherman’s Excuse: 'We Have No Stations on the Ocean'
Seattle's official meteorologist defends his inaccurate forecasts by blaming the lack of coastal observation posts and the unpredictable nature of Pacific storms.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
A TWINKLER CALLS UP ON THE OBSERVER
Concerning the Forecast Bulletin in Seattle — New Predictions Are Made.
Weather forecast for Seattle and vicinity — Tonight and Thursday, fair, warmer; winds north east to north.
Has seen the announcement made yesterday morning by Observer Ballinger on his daily weather chart. In the afternoon the Star fired it. And, behold, even then the angry clouds were massed in the Olympic horizon, and at 1 p.m. waters lashed barring the berth with a protesting flood of rain. At the same time a few Arctic shivers slid down from Alaska and queered the "warmer" part of the forecast.
This morning a Twinkler called up on the observer to ask a few respectful questions.
Said the Twinkler: "Mr. Ballinger, how does it happen that the weather so often and so obstinately refuses to coincide with the official prognostications issued by your office?"
"It doesn't refuse. This weather and myself agree. True, the prediction of yesterday was a complete failure, but that was an exceptional case. Partial failures do frequently occur, which are understood by all persons who are familiar with the operations of the weather bureau upon this coast. Let me tell you that there is but one point of observation in the west of us, and that is at Noah Bay. Observations made at one isolated point and telegraphed to the stations here indicate the drift of the storms in the great northwest. The Pacific brings us many wind and rain storms. We have no stations out on the bosom of the ocean to send in warnings. Hence I am limited to prognosticate the best I can.
"Suppose, for instance, that observations to the east of Seattle show low barometric pressure, while an observation taken at Noah Bay reveals a high pressure. There is no way of telling in what direction that northern area of high pressure is moving. Hence all that I can do is to predict. I do that. In this case it is interesting to note that my predictions for yesterday are identical with those for today, and yet, what a difference in the weather!"
Mr. Ballinger hopes to set up two more stations for observations located north of Seattle in the near future, so that more comprehensive and valuable forecasts can be made of our storms. He has furnished the Star with the following interesting data regarding the weather during July of each year since 1892, inclusive.
The mean, or normal temperature during these seven July months was 61 degrees. The warmest July was in 1894, with an average temperature of 71.1 degrees. The coldest July was in 1895, with an average of 51 degrees. The highest temperature recorded was 96 degrees, on July 11, 1892. The lowest July temperature was 31 degrees, on the seventh day of the month in 1894.
Mr. Ballinger then lays up the question of rainfall during these seven Julys, as follows:
The average for all of the months was 0.65 of an inch per month. The greatest monthly precipitation was 2.50 inches, in 1897. Not a drop fell during July 1893.
In an era before satellite imagery and sophisticated computer modeling, local weather forecasting was a gamble based on sparse data points. This humorous exchange highlights the frustration residents felt when predictions failed—a relatable struggle that persists today as climate patterns become increasingly volatile and harder to predict with precision.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.