Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Exactly what is subject to micro-climates? Not sure what you mean by, right?
A person can really experience the micro-climates in the Bay Area if they ride a motorcycle or are distant bicycle riders of which I do both.
I meant that our weather is subject to microclimates and thus, not uniform. By “right?” I was suggesting that your attempt to characterize SF’s climate in a single, blanket description was ignoring that truth.
As I mentioned earlier, I believe opinions of places are more valid coming from people who actually live in the places they are talking about. It doesn’t completely invalidate anyone’s take on either side, of course, but if we’re being honest in our conversation, I’m sure you’ll agree we should be transparent on this point.
After all, you quickly asked if I lived in SF, attempting to discredit my opinion of its weather in favor of your own, when you are on record as not living in the City.
Do you even live in SF? To say there is not much moisture in the air tells me that you really don't live in SF.
The reason people feel chilled to the bone on a 55° day in SF is due to the humidity.
San Francisco's air is typically damp and sticky with an average humidity of 75% as moisture sweeps in from the Pacific Ocean.
To be fair, I moved here from the South and the humidity is much less obvious. I wouldn't call it damp or sticky. 65/70 F can be completely bearable, but part of what makes SF proper so cold is the wind chill. I usually have to wear a fall coat year-round in the city.
By “right?” I was suggesting that your attempt to characterize SF’s climate in a single, blanket description was ignoring that truth.
The problem with this is I never attempted what you are claiming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeanoSF
As I mentioned earlier, I believe opinions of places are more valid coming from people who actually live in the places they are talking about.
That's a very narrow point of view.
I don't have to live in SF to know what the weather is like. I am in the city 5 or 6 days a week at various hours...it's were I work. I know what the weather is like in SF over the past 9 years of working in the city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeanoSF
After all, you quickly asked if I lived in SF, attempting to discredit my opinion of its weather in favor of your own, when you are on record as not living in the City.
And you wonder why several posters have pointed out your snarky posts.
I have other reasons for discrediting you. Your view that SF is some sort of "Baghdad by the Bay" is the obvious reason.
I don't have to live in SF to know what the weather is like. I am in the city 5 or 6 days a week at various hours...it's were I work.
I know what the weather is like in SF over the past 9 years of working in the city.
Ah, but the nature of microclimates isn't dependent upon "various hours." it's dependent upon where you are. Based on how you describe the weather, you seem to be describing being in the western (foggy and windier) part of the City, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matadora
And you wonder why several posters have pointed out your snarky posts.
I have other reasons for discrediting you. Your view that SF is some sort of "Baghdad by the Bay" is the obvious reason.
I have no idea what this means. Please explain.
Two posters have seemed to be triggered (rather lightly, in my opinion) by my posts, of which you are one. I've been nothing but respectful in addressing you both.
In any case, as I stated before, I agree that you don't have to live here to have an idea what the weather is like. But, given that SF is subject to microclimates (a point you acknowledge), opinions of people who don't live in the City and thus, may only experience one part of it on a regular basis, should be qualified as such. In other words, if your work is, in fact, in the western part of the City, you and I would be in agreement on the point of how microclimates behave here, which would clarify this discussion for people unfamiliar with the weather here.
To the OP's topic of whether or not the Bay Area in general (or SF specifically, as the thread has progressed) is "overrated" in terms of weather, I think it is accurately rated as maybe the best weather in the country.
I think it is accurately rated as maybe the best weather in the country.
Accurately rated by who? The weather a person likes is subjective. If someone like the weather in San Francisco, then they like temperatures that range from the mid 40's to low 70's. If someone likes it warmer, they are not going to like it. I have a friend that lives in Austin now (used to live in San Francisco). He says he will trade 3 1/2 months of unfavorable weather for 8 1/2 months of what he calls "perfect" weather any day of the week. A perfect day for him is in the high 70s to low 80s (Austin ranges from 64 to 95).
Again, it's a difference of opinion. Why there has to be some absolute on these things is beyond me. The thread is right back to the "intolerance" for others viewpoints mode.
Yeah, I bet you melt in warm weather, don't you? I've always noticed people in San Francisco are the first ones to complain when the weather tops 80. Oh gee, it's so hot. Those are the wimps in my opinion.
To each their own. They complain because they like mild temperatures. Others like it warmer and complain about the San Francisco weather. It's all subjective.
Accurately rated by who? The weather a person likes is subjective. If someone like the weather in San Francisco, then they like temperatures that range from the mid 40's to low 70's. If someone likes it warmer, they are not going to like it. I have a friend that lives in Austin now (used to live in San Francisco). He says he will trade 3 1/2 months of unfavorable weather for 8 1/2 months of what he calls "perfect" weather any day of the week. A perfect day for him is in the high 70s to low 80s (Austin ranges from 64 to 95).
Again, it's a difference of opinion. Why there has to be some absolute on these things is beyond me. The thread is right back to the "intolerance" for others viewpoints mode.
I totally agree that it's subjective!
I'm from Houston and hated the weather there. Not only the heat and humidity, but the storms, insects and smog. Austin is a bit better than Houston, in my opinion. Dallas is even worse.
I believe that, if you took a poll on any site or among any people with any knowledge of the subject, the results would favor (by a huge margin) Bay Area weather over any place in Texas and virtually anywhere else in the country.
The nature of rating (or "overrating") a place is to compare it to other places and gauge the opinions of enough people to form a consensus. Of course there are those who prefer the other places. My comments were not directed at specific preferences.
I'm from Houston and hated the weather there. Not only the heat and humidity, but the storms, insects and smog. Austin is a bit better than Houston, in my opinion. Dallas is even worse.
I believe that, if you took a poll on any site or among any people with any knowledge of the subject, the results would favor (by a huge margin) Bay Area weather over any place in Texas and virtually anywhere else in the country.
The nature of rating (or "overrating") a place is to compare it to other places and gauge the opinions of enough people to form a consensus. Of course there are those who prefer the other places. My comments were not directed at specific preferences.
It's not in this case. In particular, it's about the OP's preferences and him hearing comments so he can get a feeling of what aligns with his preferences. If everyone here says it's not overrated because they love weather in the mid 40 to low 70s range and the OP thinks weather like that sucks, then he knows this isn't the place for him and that it is overrated by his standards.
I love the "if you took a poll on any site or among any people with any knowledge of the subject"...back to the group think, intolerance for others viewpoints, and snarkiness...but yeah, you don't mean to come across that way (you just keep doing it though, lol). So anyone with a difference of opinion is not knowledgeable. Got it
Yeah, you're from Houston and hated the weather there. So what. That's you. I'm from San Francisco and don't like the weather here. That's me. You obviously prefer it milder and I obviously would like it warmer. Big deal. Clearly if you like milder temperatures than you're going to like San Francisco more than Houston. This isn't rocket science.
If it's subjective and people have specific preferences, then polls don't matter (I can find plenty of polls that wouldn't put SF as #1 and would have places that are warmer rated much higher...probably more in that mid 70's range on average). This one has Santa Barbara as #1 and yet has SF tied with San Jose. That's pretty funny when you think about how hot San Jose gets in the summer (polar opposite from SF and yet it's tied).
There's nothing accurate about it. This isn't a math equation where 2 +2 is absolutely 4. It's subjective. Stop trying to make it about absolutes. No one should care about a poll, they should care about what they like.
If you think SF is not overrated for whatever reasons, that's your opinion. If someone else thinks it is, that's their opinion. Both can co-exist. Really, it's OK for people to have a difference of opinion.
Last edited by JJonesIII; 12-08-2018 at 06:05 AM..
I visited SF and went through the entire city, plus Oakland & Berkeley. It's nice out there but not worth what people now pay to live there. The "sweet spot" areas (not too fancy & expensive but not complete dumps) are all better in Chicago where I'm from. Plus, I'm liberal but I don't care to live where people try to make it a way of life.
It's not in this case. In particular, it's about the OP's preferences and him hearing comments so he can get a feeling of what aligns with his preferences. If everyone here says it's not overrated because they love weather in the mid 40 to low 70s range and the OP thinks weather like that sucks, then he knows this isn't the place for him and that it is overrated by his standards.
I love the "if you took a poll on any site or among any people with any knowledge of the subject"...back to the group think, intolerance for others viewpoints, and snarkiness...but yeah, you don't mean to come across that way (you just keep doing it though, lol). So anyone with a difference of opinion is not knowledgeable. Got it
Yeah, you're from Houston and hated the weather there. So what. That's you. I'm from San Francisco and don't like the weather here. That's me. You obviously prefer it milder and I obviously would like it warmer. Big deal. Clearly if you like milder temperatures than you're going to like San Francisco more than Houston. This isn't rocket science.
If it's subjective and people have specific preferences, then polls don't matter (I can find plenty of polls that wouldn't put SF as #1 and would have places that are warmer rated much higher...probably more in that mid 70's range on average). This one has Santa Barbara as #1 and yet has SF tied with San Jose. That's pretty funny when you think about how hot San Jose gets in the summer (polar opposite from SF and yet it's tied).
There's nothing accurate about it. This isn't a math equation where 2 +2 is absolutely 4. It's subjective. Stop trying to make it about absolutes. No one should care about a poll, they should care about what they like.
If you think SF is not overrated for whatever reasons, that's your opinion. If someone else thinks it is, that's their opinion. Both can co-exist. Really, it's OK for people to have a difference of opinion.
I don't understand why my opinion upsets you so. I'm answering the question of whether it's "overrated," in my opinion. I even stated it as such, when I said that I believe it to be accurately rated as having among the best weather in the country.
That's what I mean when I say that the nature of rating things is to compare them and collect opinions. If the OP is actually interested in determining whether or not the Bay Area is "overrated" on various criteria, (s)he is interested in hearing people "rate" it.
That's what happened. I'm perfectly tolerant of yours and any other opinions, as they are absolutely relevant to this discussion. I never once said you or Matadora were wrong. I only clarified that on the topic of weather, specific to SF and with the understanding that you made clear (and I echoed) that this particular point is very subjective, the BAY AREA IN GENERAL AND TO ME, SF IN PARTICULAR, is accurate to its reputation of enjoying excellent weather.
I believe you and Matadora are being willfully antagonistic toward me over innocuous statements and I'm not sure why. I don't really care, but I do find it curious. Of course people have other opinions. Mine is one. Discussion of opinions is a good thing in a forum like this, wouldn't you agree?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
