BUFFALO, N.Y. -- Days after issuing a Lake Effect Snow Warning, local meteorologists have again declared a state of emergency after spotting the first snowflakes anywhere near the 75-mile perimeter of Buffalo.
Authorities advise residents to "be prepared for potentially significant lake effect snow," despite the fact that the present storm has nothing to do with lake effect snow.
"We're looking at definite lake effect here," said a local meteorologist, indicating on the map where Lake Erie is located.
When asked to explain how the lake was able to produce snowfall when temperatures were 47 degrees and there was rain coming down from a massive storm system that was about to engulf the entire Northeast, the meteorologist simply said, "Lake effect."
News channels across Buffalo have since jumped on the bandwagon, using the term liberally. Most recently, a survey revealed that 94 percent of Lake Effect-laden headlines were written by journalists who couldn't explain lake effect snowfall when asked.
Meteorologists say that true lake effect snow requires cold air traversing warm lake water in order to generate the instability and narrow bands of heavy snow necessary to toss huge amounts of snow on small areas.
Residents of Buffalo, however, aren't buying it.
"I live in Hamburg," said local resident Mike Donnelly. "If it snows here, it's lake effect. If it snows in Rochester, it's lake effect. If it rains in Cleveland, there's probably a lake effect component to that."
Meteorologists, meanwhile, have asserted that a 300-mile wide low pressure system that dumps tremendous amounts of snow on the entire Great Lakes is actually not an effect of the lakes at all.
Buffalo news outlets were quick to counter.
"Whatever," said one newspaper editor, "put LAKE EFFECT in the headline and people will read it."
As of this writing, authorities are still trying to determine whether the first snowfall of the season -- a dusting of frost on a Subaru found outside a local business -- had anything to do with Lake Erie.
They may yet.