1. ok so I didnt use the skip feature. Of course I was never able to find out what the skip feature 
is and how to use it cause its so late in the day on Mon and youve left and everyone else in the 
metlab. To answer the question, the observed winds appear to be similar in certain areas of the 
country such as in the western US. In the center of the country, however, it looks as if the 
observed winds are different from the model initialized winds.

2. Yes, there are differences in the actual winds and the geostrophic winds for this time period.
If you look at the area immediately around Las Vegas, NV. You will see that the 250mb winds for the 
initialized 250mb surface show a low while the 250mb geostrophic winds do not. Another difference is 
in Nevada where 250mb winds are northerly where as the 250mb geostrophic winds are westerly. As a 
whole I would have to say that the greatest differnce is in the west.

3. Geostrophic winds by definition follow the isobars. With that in mind, I would say that 
regions/areas on the third plot where this definition held would be the Northern Plains and  the 
eastern US (east of the Mississippi). Surface winds cross the isobars due to surface friction. Well 
that contradicts my observation of the plot in which I mentioned areas where surface winds did not 
cross isobars. Regions in which surface friction does not hold and surface winds are geostrophic 
would mean that one of the forces is stronger than the other (Coriolis force or PGF).