The lovely Mrs. Koplien was summarily unimpressed with the spectacular-ness of the picture quality that I had bestowed upon her.

Are women unable to see in HD?

A few months ago, I finally took the plunge and bought a big screen, HDTV. It seemed like my family was the last on Earth still watching TV in muddy, standard definition. No more! I brought crisp, clear television viewing to my family. And there was much rejoicing!

Here's the thing, though: I was the only one rejoicing.

The lovely Mrs. Koplien was summarily unimpressed with the spectacular-ness of the picture quality that I had bestowed upon her. Even after a few months of having 46" of LCD technology in our family room, my bride of 19+ years continues make a declaration that I find incomprehensible:

"I can't really tell the difference."

What?

Huh??

Each time she drops that little nugget on me, I am rendered speechless. I am without speech.

As most of you with Time Warner Cable know, when you subscribe to the HD channels, the standard def version of each channel is still available. In the months since we started receiving the HD channels, there have been countless times that I've found my wife watching the standard def version of an HD channel.  "Holy crap hun...why are you watching TBS on channel 3 when it's in HD on channel 1202?" I say.

"I can't really tell the difference," she says.

Arghhhh!

This is a woman who can't go to sleep in our dark bedroom when one (one!) of the slats in our window mini-blinds is just slightly askew. But she can't tell the difference between HD and SD.

Until recently, I chalked this up to having married someone whose rods and cones were out of whack. But a recent Craig-Koplien-investigation has uncovered that my wife is not alone. My sources indicate that at least one of our female friends also claims to not really notice much glorious-ness in glorious HD.

So, with a survey sample size of two women, I am compelled to wonder the following:

Are women unable to see in HD?

I realize the female anatomy is different than that of males in so many ways. I didn't realize, however, that one of those ways may be how o…

Snow is coming, but not much

Snow is the one the way for tonight, but not much. It looks like we'll pick up an inch or two. Just a little more is possible well north of Milwaukee and Waukesha. For example, areas from Port Washington north to Sheboygan and West Bend north to Fond du Lac, could pick up 3 inches.

Start time on the snow will be 4-7 p.m. this evening. The snow will end between 12 a.m. and 3 a.m. Tuesday morning, but will be followed by periods of freezing drizzle. That could lead to slippery spots on roads and sidewalks for Tuesday morning rush hour. The temperature is expected to get above freezing by about 9 a.m. or so on Tuesday ending the threat for icing.

Another threat for snow is exists for Thursday Night and Friday. So far, though, there's no reason to believe this will be a big deal.

I'll keep an eye on it.

Permalink

Print

Talkback

There's some degree of uncertainty with every snowstorm. But the degree of uncertainty this time around is nearly unprecedented.

Saturday's snowfalls, predicted

Unprecedented is a pretty strong word. Yet, I tend to think it applies to the dramatic shifts in the information meteorologists have been receiving this week. The multiple computer projections of the track of the storm system that will affect us tomorrow have shown unusually wild swings.

Compounding the trouble is that the multiple computer projections have been unusually divergent. That is, they haven't been agreeing with each other. Even less than 24 hours prior to the start of the precipitation, these projections failed to come to a consensus.

With that as background, here is my county-by-county snow forecast based on the data available mid-day on Friday: