• Member Statistics

    15,694
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    snowmaker
    Newest Member
    snowmaker
    Joined
Jtm12180

Hurricane Dorian Banter Thread

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, f2tornado said:

This will not be a popular opinion here. The BMX tweet would have been the end of it however ABC Nightly News turned the tweet into a hit piece on the President in an effort to stick him with a gaff. The President then lashed out at the reporter and the pile on began. I have rarely seen this kind of media passion to turn a nontroversy into a controversy.

Consider the following published from BMX seven years ago

AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION 
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE BIRMINGHAM AL 
626 PM CDT THU AUG 23 2012

TROPICAL SYSTEMS ARE NEVER BORING OR EASY TO FORECAST AS ISAAC
CONTINUES TO CHALLENGE.

Kudos to the BMX forecaster who had the utmost confidence to publish an effective 0% forecast "no impacts... felt across Alabama"  via Twitter in spite of the same office previously noting forecast difficulty with tropical systems. This conflicted, albeit slightly, with the NHC published probability distribution of TS winds covering a portion of AL. Further, it was somewhat inconsistent with the morning 9/1 Tallahassee AFD which covers southeast AL and stated, "The latest forecast for Hurricane Dorian from the National Hurricane Center continues to keep it east of the local area. While we still shouldn't let our guard completely down, the chance of impactful weather from Dorian occurring in our forecast area remains low".

BMX should be no stranger to forecast uncertainty. Take a look at the forecast cone for Hurricane Isaac (2012) that at one time was nearly centered over BMX. In fact, the entire state of Alabama was enveloped within the cone before none of the state was in the cone. It should be noted, even though the entire state of Alabama was outside the forecast cone toward landfall, the Mobile area did experience some TS force gusts and impact from surge. The cone only represents the storm center forecast track. This is why NHC storm wind probabilities are smeared well outside the cone with time and why forecasters should be cautious speaking in absolute terms, particularly when the average error for a tropical system is about 200 miles on day 5. 

ts.jpg

you're a joke dude.  what is this nonsense?

  • Thanks 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, f2tornado said:

This will not be a popular opinion here. The BMX tweet would have been the end of it however ABC Nightly News turned the tweet into a hit piece on the President in an effort to stick him with a gaff. The President then lashed out at the reporter and the pile on began. I have rarely seen this kind of media passion to turn a nontroversy into a controversy.

Consider the following published from BMX seven years ago

AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION 
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE BIRMINGHAM AL 
626 PM CDT THU AUG 23 2012

TROPICAL SYSTEMS ARE NEVER BORING OR EASY TO FORECAST AS ISAAC
CONTINUES TO CHALLENGE.

Kudos to the BMX forecaster who had the utmost confidence to publish an effective 0% forecast "no impacts... felt across Alabama"  via Twitter in spite of the same office previously noting forecast difficulty with tropical systems. This conflicted, albeit slightly, with the NHC published probability distribution of TS winds covering a portion of AL. Further, it was somewhat inconsistent with the morning 9/1 Tallahassee AFD which covers southeast AL and stated, "The latest forecast for Hurricane Dorian from the National Hurricane Center continues to keep it east of the local area. While we still shouldn't let our guard completely down, the chance of impactful weather from Dorian occurring in our forecast area remains low".

BMX should be no stranger to forecast uncertainty. Take a look at the forecast cone for Hurricane Isaac (2012) that at one time was nearly centered over BMX. In fact, the entire state of Alabama was enveloped within the cone before none of the state was in the cone. It should be noted, even though the entire state of Alabama was outside the forecast cone toward landfall, the Mobile area did experience some TS force gusts and impact from surge. The cone only represents the storm center forecast track. This is why NHC storm wind probabilities are smeared well outside the cone with time and why forecasters should be cautious speaking in absolute terms, particularly when the average error for a tropical system is about 200 miles on day 5. 

ts.jpg

 

Oh FFS, President Sharpie didn't just say that there was a chance of Alabama getting hit, he specifically said they were going to be hit "harder than expected", something no weather map or model was indicating at the time, in fact the trend was exactly the opposite. After a presidential statement like that, BMX was absolutely correct in setting the record straight. And you know it.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ct_yankee said:

 

Oh FFS, President Sharpie didn't just say that there was a chance of Alabama getting hit, he specifically said they were going to be hit "harder than expected", something no weather map or model was indicating at the time, in fact the trend was exactly the opposite. After a presidential statement like that, BMX was absolutely correct in setting the record straight. And you know it.

No way. Let’s go back 7 years to pick one line of an AFD to make some bullshit argument that BMX was wrong to say Dorian wasn’t coming 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, f2tornado said:

This will not be a popular opinion here. The BMX tweet would have been the end of it however ABC Nightly News turned the tweet into a hit piece on the President in an effort to stick him with a gaff. The President then lashed out at the reporter and the pile on began. I have rarely seen this kind of media passion to turn a nontroversy into a controversy.

Consider the following published from BMX seven years ago

AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION 
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE BIRMINGHAM AL 
626 PM CDT THU AUG 23 2012

TROPICAL SYSTEMS ARE NEVER BORING OR EASY TO FORECAST AS ISAAC
CONTINUES TO CHALLENGE.

Kudos to the BMX forecaster who had the utmost confidence to publish an effective 0% forecast "no impacts... felt across Alabama"  via Twitter in spite of the same office previously noting forecast difficulty with tropical systems. This conflicted, albeit slightly, with the NHC published probability distribution of TS winds covering a portion of AL. Further, it was somewhat inconsistent with the morning 9/1 Tallahassee AFD which covers southeast AL and stated, "The latest forecast for Hurricane Dorian from the National Hurricane Center continues to keep it east of the local area. While we still shouldn't let our guard completely down, the chance of impactful weather from Dorian occurring in our forecast area remains low".

BMX should be no stranger to forecast uncertainty. Take a look at the forecast cone for Hurricane Isaac (2012) that at one time was nearly centered over BMX. In fact, the entire state of Alabama was enveloped within the cone before none of the state was in the cone. It should be noted, even though the entire state of Alabama was outside the forecast cone toward landfall, the Mobile area did experience some TS force gusts and impact from surge. The cone only represents the storm center forecast track. This is why NHC storm wind probabilities are smeared well outside the cone with time and why forecasters should be cautious speaking in absolute terms, particularly when the average error for a tropical system is about 200 miles on day 5. 

ts.jpg

Hey dude it's really cool that you have an eidetic knowledge of long-tail events in Alabama but in the middle of your myopia you missed like twenty of the president's tweets where he was goading the media and sowing distrust in the NWS.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, f2tornado said:

This will not be a popular opinion here.

Hey dude it's really cool that you have an eidetic knowledge of long-tail events in Alabama but in the middle of your myopia you missed like twenty of the president's tweets where he was goading the media and sowing distrust in the NWS.

Anyway, if you have a better way to convey impacts in a tweet in response to the president's overblown impact assessment to Alabama that accurately conveys long-tail distribution outcomes to the general populace, I'd love to hear them!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Hurricane Agnes said:

:thumbsdown:  :facepalm:

If politics can be permitted to supplant science when it comes to weather forecasting, it is or should be an open question whether politics will be permitted to displace unfavorable economic data at some future point in time. This is a bad and damaging precedent, not just for the scientists/meteorologists who have been adversely impacted, but for the U.S. public who relies on them.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, f2tornado said:

This will not be a popular opinion here. The BMX tweet would have been the end of it however ABC Nightly News turned the tweet into a hit piece on the President in an effort to sti

How embarrassing for you to contort logic and language into an attempt to justify actions that are both authoritarian and unhinged. What hilarious is that you frame anticipated objections to your utter nonsense as an issue of “popularity,” as if you’re a brave truth teller instead of a coward who is willing to bend reality to the fantasies of a very powerful and very unstable man.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, f2tornado said:

This will not be a popular opinion here. The BMX tweet would have been the end of it however ABC Nightly News turned the tweet into a hit piece on the President in an effort to stick him with a gaff. The President then lashed out at the reporter and the pile on began. I have rarely seen this kind of media passion to turn a nontroversy into a controversy.

Consider the following published from BMX seven years ago

AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION 
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE BIRMINGHAM AL 
626 PM CDT THU AUG 23 2012

TROPICAL SYSTEMS ARE NEVER BORING OR EASY TO FORECAST AS ISAAC
CONTINUES TO CHALLENGE.

Kudos to the BMX forecaster who had the utmost confidence to publish an effective 0% forecast "no impacts... felt across Alabama"  via Twitter in spite of the same office previously noting forecast difficulty with tropical systems. This conflicted, albeit slightly, with the NHC published probability distribution of TS winds covering a portion of AL. Further, it was somewhat inconsistent with the morning 9/1 Tallahassee AFD which covers southeast AL and stated, "The latest forecast for Hurricane Dorian from the National Hurricane Center continues to keep it east of the local area. While we still shouldn't let our guard completely down, the chance of impactful weather from Dorian occurring in our forecast area remains low".

BMX should be no stranger to forecast uncertainty. Take a look at the forecast cone for Hurricane Isaac (2012) that at one time was nearly centered over BMX. In fact, the entire state of Alabama was enveloped within the cone before none of the state was in the cone. It should be noted, even though the entire state of Alabama was outside the forecast cone toward landfall, the Mobile area did experience some TS force gusts and impact from surge. The cone only represents the storm center forecast track. This is why NHC storm wind probabilities are smeared well outside the cone with time and why forecasters should be cautious speaking in absolute terms, particularly when the average error for a tropical system is about 200 miles on day 5. 

ts.jpg

There are two big issues with the above commentary:

1. A 5%-10% probability of tropical storm-force winds in the far southeast portion of Alabama is far from a "most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated" scenario.

2. Had the President simply acknowledged that he misspoke (an issue that was corrected by BMX in a timely and sufficiently forceful fashion to regain control over sentiment as the Office was being bombarded by calls from worried Alabama residents) or refrained from commenting on the issue, the matter would never have spiraled to its present state. However, he took a different approach and, IMO, the worst possible one.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hurricane Agnes said:

:thumbsdown:  :facepalm:

well, Dr. Neil Jacobs, current acting head of NOAA, will be speaking a keynote address tomorrow morning at 8am CT at the NWA Annual meeting in Huntsville. how do you think that will go? especially any Q&A after the speech?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Jim Marusak said:

well, Dr. Neil Jacobs, current acting head of NOAA, will be speaking a keynote address tomorrow morning at 8am CT at the NWA Annual meeting in Huntsville. how do you think that will go? especially any Q&A after the speech?

The agenda for Tuesday is here - https://nwas.org/annual-meeting-events/annual-meeting/meeting-agenda/#tuesday-glance

Quote

Tuesday, September 10

07:45 AM – 08:00 AM Student Map Briefing
08:00 AM – 08:30 AM Keynote - Dr. Neil Jacobs
08:30 AM – 09:30 AM G1 - Winter
08:30 AM – 09:30 AM G2 - Social Science and Vulnerable Populations
09:30 AM – 11:00 AM Networking Break with Exhibitors and Poster Session #1
11:00 AM – 11:30 AM Keynote - Janice Huff
11:30 AM – 12:00 PM Keynote - Angela Lese
12:00 PM – 01:30 PM Supporting Women in Meteorology Luncheon (Any attendee may register to attend. Seating is limited.)
12:00 PM – 01:30 PM Lunch
01:30 PM – 03:00 PM H1 - Health and Wellness
01:30 PM – 03:00 PM H2 - DSS
03:00 PM – 04:30 PM Networking Break with Exhibitors and Poster Session #2
04:30 PM – 05:30 PM I1 - Fire Weather
04:30 PM – 05:30 PM I2 - Tropical
05:30 PM – 06:30 PM NWS Employee Engagement
05:30 PM AMWRO
05:30 PM NWA Committee Chair Dinner Meeting with Board

And it looks like a pretty tight schedule.  Dr. Jacobs has a 30 minute slot and then someone else is on at 8:30 am (someone presenting a research paper), so I doubt there will be any Q&A associated with his remarks. Usually keynotes at professional meetings don't have Q&As and tend to run 45 minutes or more (and often occur in a "prime time" morning slot or as part of a dinner), so this seems pretty "short" to be considered "keynote" outside of them calling it that due to his position in public service... and they have other folks scheduled to give "keynotes" after him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In reference to the NWAS meeting going on - some tweets of note -

The above in reference to NWS head Dr. Uccellini's remarks this morning regarding his public support of the Birmingham FO (video of those remarks in the tweet below and he got a standing ovation near the end of his speech when he explicitly praised the staff for doing the right thing) -

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hurricane Agnes said:

Most likely because what they do involves monitoring conditions that might impact movement of goods - i.e., shipping (whether over land, in the air, or at sea).

I'm answering my own question. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/01/why-noaa-commerce-department

We should create a cabinet level department that houses Climatology, Geology and Meteorology and move NOAA and the USGS there and create some kind of new organization that deals with climate change.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TriPol said:

I'm answering my own question. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/01/why-noaa-commerce-department

We should create a cabinet level department that houses Climatology, Geology and Meteorology and move NOAA and the USGS there and create some kind of new organization that deals with climate change.

I agree we probably should but it will be doubtful that it would be done.  If anything, they might consider going as far as making it a "standalone" (like EPA) or even like FEMA, particularly after the fiasco of FEMA when it was neutered after being shoved under DHS, later prompting Congress to make them a standalone agency again.  In fact, since I mention EPA, they should probably be included in some standalone grouping with NOAA and USGS as you suggest.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TriPol said:

I'm answering my own question. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/01/why-noaa-commerce-department

We should create a cabinet level department that houses Climatology, Geology and Meteorology and move NOAA and the USGS there and create some kind of new organization that deals with climate change.

No rational, logical, science-related or based US government policies will be possible until the place is cleaned up, reformed, until the 'swamp' is truly drained out.

It's currently mostly controlled by and for anti-science, anti-factual, cultist grifters who act on a far different plane than a patriotic 'for the good of the nation' basis; when not acting on behalf of foreign interests [like RU, MbS, DPRK, etc].

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TriPol said:

I'm answering my own question. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/01/why-noaa-commerce-department

We should create a cabinet level department that houses Climatology, Geology and Meteorology and move NOAA and the USGS there and create some kind of new organization that deals with climate change.

Lol. We can’t even come to a political consensus that climate change is real. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, the ghost of leroy said:

Lol. We can’t even come to a political consensus that climate change is real. 

We also can't create a consensus that the world isn't flat or evolution isn't real. We shouldn't let those that disagree with science hold back our progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a heartening response from the NOAA Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) group - https://www.research.noaa.gov/article/ArtMID/587/ArticleID/2489/A-Message-from-Craig-McLean-Hurricane-Dorian-and-Exceptional-Service

Quote
 
Tuesday, September 10, 2019

A Message from Craig McLean: Hurricane Dorian and Exceptional Service

Dear Colleagues,

The fierce storm we know as Hurricane Dorian has concluded its ferocious path through the Bahamas and along the U.S. East Coast. Many of you have contributed to the excellent science that has underpinned the forecasts and current understanding of storms such as this one, which accelerated quite rapidly in intensity. The storm also presented challenges in track which improved with enhanced observations. We know that our collective work, from the scientists in the aircraft penetrating the storm, to the scientists deploying the glider picket line, to the modelers and folks working the physics of the storms, across OAR and in our CI's, and across all NOAA Lines, we are working the problem in order to give the NWS forecasters the best tools we possibly can to keep America and our neighbors safe. Thank you. 

During the course of the storm, as I am sure you are aware, there were routine and exceptional expert forecasts, the best possible, issued by the NWS Forecasters. These are remarkable colleagues of ours, who receive our products, use them well, and provide the benefit of their own experience in announcing accurate forecasts accompanied by the distinction of all credible scientists—they sign their work. As I'm sure you also know, there was a complex issue involving the President commenting on the path of the hurricane. The NWS Forecaster(s) corrected any public misunderstanding in an expert and timely way, as they should. There followed, last Friday, an unsigned press release from "NOAA" that inappropriately and incorrectly contradicted the NWS forecaster. My understanding is that this intervention to contradict the forecaster was not based on science but on external factors including reputation and appearance, or simply put, political. Our NOAA Scientific Integrity Policy and Code of Scientific Conduct make clear that all NOAA employees shall approach all scientific activities with honesty, objectively, and completely, without allegiance to individuals, organizations, or ideology. The content of this press release is very concerning as it compromises the ability of NOAA to convey life-saving information necessary to avoid substantial and specific danger to public health and safety. If the public cannot trust our information, or we debase our forecaster's warnings and products, that specific danger arises. 

You know that the value of our science is in the complexity of our understanding, our ability to convey that understanding to a wide audience of users of this information, and to establish and sustain the public trust in the truth and legitimacy of that information. Unfortunately, the press release of last Friday violated this trust and violated NOAA's policies of scientific integrity. In my role as Assistant Administrator for Research, and as I continue to administratively serve as Acting Chief Scientist, I am pursuing the potential violations of our NOAA Administrative Order on Scientific Integrity. Thankfully, we have such policies that are independently cited as among the best in the federal community, if not the best. Your NOAA and OAR management and leadership team believes in these policies and principles. I have a responsibility to pursue these truths. I will.

Thank you for your continued excellent work, and your trust. Carry on.

Craig McLean, NOAA Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Assistant AdministratorCraig N. McLean
Assistant Administrator 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Research
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most dangerous aspect of this all is the forcing of government agencies to cover for Trump and his narcissistic personality disorder no matter how unhinged he is. A complete disregard for the truth propagated by agencies charged with protecting life and property is horrifying.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, eyewall said:

The most dangerous aspect of this all is the forcing of government agencies to cover for Trump and his narcissistic personality disorder no matter how unhinged he is. A complete disregard for the truth propagated by agencies charged with protecting life and property is horrifying.

Definitely. It's actually scary that so many people will distort reality in favor of anything the president says. These things have been happening to other communities and areas of the country since this administration took office. It's only when he targeted meteorologists, NWS and the weather community that some people finally realized what Trump and his administration have been doing. For anyone complaining why everyone is making a big deal about this...if we sit idly by and say and do nothing then this will become the norm.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another very respected scientist and leader stands up for the good people of NOAA, and [too, imo] politely excoriates the incompetent, and sycophantic, who cravenly interfere with the scientists and technicians of NOAA.   

From the "Scientific American" * :

Observations - Leadership In The Age Of The Surreal

"Leadership in the Age of the Surreal
The professionals at the National Weather Service deserve political leadership that will stand up for them—even when that puts the leaders’ own jobs in jeopardy.

.Over the past two weeks, Hurricane Dorian destroyed portions of the Bahamas and posed a major threat to the southeastern U.S., before eventually making landfall in North Carolina. Given that we are in peak hurricane season, this is not an unprecedented story. In today’s age, however, the devastating hurricane became a backdrop to a political farce that, even in retrospect, seems unbelievable.

... [read the whole article at the link]
ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)
David Titley
David Titley is an affiliate professor of meteorology at Penn State University; Rear Admiral, U.S. Navy (retired); former oceanographer of the navy; former Chief Operating Officer for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; and a member of the Governing Board at the Center for Climate and Security.

 

[ * The "Scientific American", I began subscribing to it ~c. 1968 ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.