4 November 2010: More Paradise climax avalanches.

How would you forecast wind loading?

So, so you think you can tell?  Heaven from hell?  Blue skies from pain?  Can you tell a green field from a cold, steel rain?

(I want nothing to do with an internet avalanche argument, but I like your graphics.)

I believe it's "a cold, steel rail" but whatever. Carry on.

(I want nothing to do with an internet avalanche argument, but I like your graphics.)

Sky, I've got a treasure trove of graphics that are so bizarre they can induce hallucinations. Let me know if you want another hit from the GPU.

Strong absolute statements about anything related to snow science, where, in my experience, the authoritative answer to any specific question is "maybe", get my goat.

TrumperSailer, if this is true, my original statement: "aspect is in general a very poor predictor of avalanches" is exactly the kind of statement with which you should agree.

We differ, in part, in the meaning of the word "aspect".

Well I am using aspect in its usual definition: orientation to the sun.

Links posted by TrumpetSailer.

These links simply prove that avalanches happen on all aspects, and you still haven't provided any facts or research that contravenes my original statement: aspect is in general a poor predictor of avalanches.

But I'm hopeful...

I don't suppose you would be good enough to connect the dots from the research you provided ( as I often do in my posts here ) and present to us some rules about aspect that would be appropriate for new visitors to the site.

Or you can just say "CookieMonster, I agree with you, aspect is in general a very poor predictor of avalanches, and that's what new visitors should know."

I'm almost too intimidated by the academic slicing and dicing to post, but I do want to understand what is being said and it seems to me that the general message is: "aspect, BY ITSELF, is in general a very poor predictor of avalanches."  Am I correct in adding the modifier (shouted in bold), or should I cease to pay attention to which way I'm headed?  I know that backcountry skiing is dangerous, and CookieMonster, I appreciate your insightful (inciteful?) questions in this and other threads, but it almost seems that you are advocating for the dismissal of what may be very useful information based on the fact that it may paint an incomplete picture.  The fact is, we're always working with incomplete information, in skiing and in every other (bad pun alert) aspect of life.  Should we dismiss it all because we don't know for sure?

I'm almost too intimidated by the academic slicing and dicing to post, but I do want to understand what is being said and it seems to me that the general message is: "aspect, BY ITSELF, is in general a very poor predictor of avalanches." Am I correct in adding the modifier (shouted in bold), or should I cease to pay attention to which way I'm headed? I know that backcountry skiing is dangerous, and CookieMonster, I appreciate your insightful (inciteful?) questions in this and other threads, but it almost seems that you are advocating for the dismissal of what may be very useful information based on the fact that it may paint an incomplete picture. The fact is, we're always working with incomplete information, in skiing and in every other (bad pun alert) aspect of life. Should we dismiss it all because we don't know for sure?

I said aspect is in general a very poor predictor of avalanches. After TrumpetSailer disagreed, I posted some research and facts. If you read my posts, you'll notice that I haven't said that aspect is useless. It's just a very poor predictor of avalanches. I have a more professional background in this area; TrumpetSailer approaches this as a recreational skier. There's a big difference.

I feel so cheap - CookieMonster, I agree with you, aspect is a poor predictor of avalanches and that's what new visitors need to know.  However, my partners and I will continue to consider aspect an important factor when choosing which slopes to ski.