While human forecasters might be able to better predict the weather over a short period of time, I think that benefit diminishes the longer you look into the future. Of course, models are going to have their biases which are going to be more magnified the longer you go out - look at some of the global warming models to see examples.

I’m not so sure how useful it would be to correlate Lake Lanier levels with La Nina, primarily because the La Nina didn’t by itself cause the drought. The La Nina started in the fall of 2007, and perhaps prolonged its effects. Last year, we were in a El Nino, which in theory should bring more than usual rain, but where did that get us?

Climatologists pretty much know the typical effects of changes in SSTs on weather patterns in the United States, and there’s lots of informatoin available on this. I don’t know if someone has ever done a true statistical correlation coefficient on the relastionship between SSTs and weather patterns, though.

The CPC link to the maps jive pretty much with the CPC long term precipitation maps that I refer to often. What’s the most accurate representation, in your opinion of the CPC maps?

I notice now that Lanier is up to levels last seen in early November 2007. I think you’re right - we dodged a bullet.

Talking to a coworker the other day, about la Nina, Lake Lanier Levels, long term forecasts, and the like, and got an idea — has anyone ever correlated Lake Lanier levels with la Nina sea temperature observations? Seems like, if la Nina caused the drought, then there would be some correlation. Or, probably a better comparison might be rainfall. But rainfall might be skewed by tropical storms and hurricanes in the summer. Ever thought of doing something like that?