# Why Do We Need Groundhogs When We Also Cast Shadows?

For this Groundhog Day, I ask this question.

Why do we need groundhogs when we also cast shadows?

Moment of enlightenment… when you step outside on February 2nd, you will be able to get the same results as a groundhog for predicting an early spring or long winter!

Better yet, you’d get a localized results for where you are, not wherever that groundhog people around you watching. Localization is SO important in weather forecasts considering how weather can be rather different only miles away pending the terrain of an area, that why would you want to get a forecast from tens or hundreds of miles away?

Just make sure you interpret the results of your shadow, or lack thereof correctly. That, as it turns out, is the opposite of what people interpret from the groundhog since they’re right only 37% of the time in the past 30 years. Interpreting things the other way will get you a 63% correct rate. That may not sound great but it’s better than what many people get in school and tests who out there doing all kinds of jobs and practicing all kinds of trades that impact you and I! It’s probably better than the forecast you usually get. And it’s DEFINITELY better than 37% the groundhog gets!

# Groundhogs Only Right 37% of the Time, So Reverse Interpretation of their Results!

Another Groundhog Day has passed. With this year comes news of a study by Environment Canada that over the past 30 years (CBC story), groundhogs have only been correct 37% of the time in terms of being able to predict an early spring or long winter based on whether or not they see their shadows. For something that is a dichotomy like a coin flip, if you were wrong more than half the time, then flipping the interpretation of the outcomes means you’d be right more than half of the time! With that logic, I propose we reverse the interpretation of results whether or not they see their shadow.