Rush Limbaugh blasts National Geographic hurricane report

[HurricaneJoe22]

http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/we ... ional.html

National Geographic is finally reporting what the rest of the country knew three weeks ago: This might be an active storm season.

The magazine, known for pretty pictures of exotic places, went a step farther, however.

It said this season is “shaping up” to be as bad as 2005.

“Ominous Pre-Katrina Conditions Now in Atlantic,” is the headline over an online story.

“It's already been forecast to be ‘extremely active,’ but the 2010 Atlantic hurricane season may be shaping up to be something even worse: a replay of 2005, the most active and destructive Atlantic basin hurricane season in history,” the story begins.

This didn’t escape the watchful eye of Rush Limbaugh, the conservative radio host, who criticized National Geographic for going over the top.

“Okay, folks, it's suicide time,” he said. “I mean, you got the oil out there in the Gulf, you got Katrina type conditions, you got an economic disaster … what’s the point in living?”


The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in late May released a seasonal outlook calling for up to 23 named storms, including up to 14 hurricanes.

At that time, several media outlets, the Sun Sentinel included, reported those numbers would approach those of the 2005 hurricane season.

Tropical update: The National Hurricane Center continues to monitor a strong tropical wave now moving into the Caribbean.

Forecasters say it still has a 10 percent chance of developing over the next two days. As of 8 a.m. today, it was near Puerto Rico, moving northwest at 10 to 15 mph.

The wave could bring heavy rains and possibly produce dangerous mud slides in Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, the Leeward Islands, the Dominican Republic and Haiti, forecasters said.

[Weatherfreak000]

This is totally a say no more situation: if you needed any further proof Rush doesn't ever know what he's talking about, there you are.

[Recurve]

I'll say nothing here re: RL's political stance, but I do hate the casual way that any media outlet reporting anything about tropical weather or hurricanes gets bashed, the "conventional wisdom" that the media is always trying to scare everyone, or that "no one knows what's going to happen" so there should be no seasonal outlooks -- or stories about them.

I wonder if people ever consider the opposite of reporting all this stuff: Not reporting it, and then leaving everything to rumors and charges of coverups.
Even when scientists disagree with other scientists' findings or theories, they know that free exchange of ideas is how science arrives at the truth.

Disclaimer: I work in media (newspapers) and I'm biased against media bashing. If we didn't have newspapers, what would people wrap their fish in?

[jasons2k]

This is totally a say no more situation: if you needed any further proof Rush doesn't ever know what he's talking about, there you are.

Without getting political....I'll agree that he has said some incredibly dumb things, especially with regard to the environment and this oil spill. He has no credentials whatsoever in the scientific community so when he wades into such subjects with a political agenda...I just cringe.

But to use a blanket statement to say he doesn't ever know what he's talking about...sorry, I disagree and I'll leave it at that.

[Hybridstorm_November2001]

.....“Ominous Pre-Katrina Conditions Now in Atlantic,” is the headline over an online story.....

That is not a responsible way to phrase the situation. National Geographic should be ashamed of themselves.

[wxman57]

.....“Ominous Pre-Katrina Conditions Now in Atlantic,” is the headline over an online story.....

That is not a responsible way to phrase the situation. National Geographic should be ashamed of themselves.

Technically, they're quite correct that the signs are ominous, though. That's what every forecast group is saying (except Weather Research which uses solar cycles). Ominous and foreboding fit precisely when describing the forecasts from Colorado State and NOAA (and JB). So is it wrong to say so? Now, invoking the "K" word and suggesting this season might bring another storm similar to Katrina may be a bit much. But that may not be too far from the truth, either.

[KWT]

Yeah I have to agree with wxman57, the only thing I'll say is you get a storm like Katrina in any year be it slow or active, so that is indeed a bit too far personally.

[Ptarmigan]

A Katrina type storm could happen in any season, active or not.

[jasons2k]

A Katrina type storm could happen in any season, active or not.

Good reminder! Andrew comes to mind...

[somethingfunny]

Can't believe I'm saying it, but I agree with Rush on this. There's a fine line to walk when making a responsible forecast for public consumption.

The predictions are ominous to be sure, but if we end up having a gangbusters 21/12/6 season and the vast majority of those storms avoid land, then people will look back and think that we were crying wolf even though the seasonal predictions might be accurate. I think it serves to undermine the credibility of meteorologists when it counts, sadly - which is why I don't like seasonal outlooks much. Some mets and climatologists are taking cracks at forecasting the primary storm track, but it's still a crapshoot and I don't think it serves any public safety purpose to publicize what's basically an academic exercize.

People need to be prepared on June 1st whether a 7/3/1 season is forecasted or a 27/15/8 season is forecasted. Keep those numbers in academic papers or else the public will start to treat them the same as they treat the three day cone when a storm does form -- with a grain of salt.

[HeeBGBz]

I'm sure I won't be tuning in for RL weather reports. Or anything else for that matter.

Funny. I can read "dire predictions" and take them with a grain of salt. Anyone who goes into a panic over pre-season estimates shouldn't be living on the coast anyway.

[OuterBanker]

The link:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... vironment/

Not a bad article and accurate.

[jinftl]

True that! Not quite sure why learning that this could be an active season has to necessarily result in mass panic....whatever happened to just being reminded that it is time to get prepared? No doubt there will be those who think a forecast for an active season is as un-patriotic as questioning anything less than 'drill baby drill'. What's next....evacuation orders being seen as 'too much government intervention'?

I'm sure I won't be tuning in for RL weather reports. Or anything else for that matter.

Funny. I can read "dire predictions" and take them with a grain of salt. Anyone who goes into a panic over pre-season estimates shouldn't be living on the coast anyway.

[perk]

Rush is totally off base on this one. Rush's distrust of big government has gotten the best of him once again. The forecast that Noaa prepares should not be politicized, it's prepared to inform everyone to get ready for what could be an active season, nothing more, nothing less.

[gulf701]

“Ominous Pre-Katrina Conditions Now in Atlantic,” is not a worthy headline for National Geographic. An article on the prime weather conditions of the tropics is what you would expect from the publication, not a tabloid type headline. Katrina is not a condition, only a result of conditions that came together at the right time for tropical cyclone development. Katrina was a very destructive and costly storm that has become a political pawn. I think that is Rush’s main point. Just think, if Opal had not weakened from dry air and hit FL as Cat 5, the potential human suffering from a botch evacuation could have surpassed Katrina.

[brunota2003]

Pre-Katrina Conditions? And just what might those conditions be defined as? I dont see any remnants of a TD out in the Atlantic, let alone one in the same location as the ill fated TD #10 (actually, come to think about it, I don't think we've even had a TD to date, unless someone identified one without letting the NHC know)...so doesn't that shoot that headline out of the water already?

Now maybe something like "Conditions are in place for a potentially busy hurricane season"...That I can believe. Little dry air, strong tropical waves in June, lower than normal pressures, higher than normal SSTs, lower than normal wind shear across the basin...all favorable of a potentially active hurricane season...but not necessarily an indicator of a "Katrina" storm.

[barometerJane61]

Can't believe I'm saying it, but I agree with Rush on this. There's a fine line to walk when making a responsible forecast for public consumption.

The predictions are ominous to be sure, but if we end up having a gangbusters 21/12/6 season and the vast majority of those storms avoid land, then people will look back and think that we were crying wolf even though the seasonal predictions might be accurate. I think it serves to undermine the credibility of meteorologists when it counts, sadly - which is why I don't like seasonal outlooks much. Some mets and climatologists are taking cracks at forecasting the primary storm track, but it's still a crapshoot and I don't think it serves any public safety purpose to publicize what's basically an academic exercize.

People need to be prepared on June 1st whether a 7/3/1 season is forecasted or a 27/15/8 season is forecasted. Keep those numbers in academic papers or else the public will start to treat them the same as they treat the three day cone when a storm does form -- with a grain of salt.

ITA .How many times have people on this forum gotten bashed for making statements such as NG did? You NEVER make sensational statements before a season has even started.Nature is so unpredictable.And this kind of talk can only serve to stir unneccessary fear into Gulf coast residents,especially those in NOLA