Brief summaries of JB's thoughts

[Extremeweatherguy]

JB thinks the Gulf may really heat up next week! He says the wave train through Aug. 5th should be aimed toward the Gulf (including the strong wave in the Atlantic). This will lead to another western Gulf threat next week at this time, but instead of a "near land" trough split situation, he expects a longer tracked system from the ESE toward the western gulf (which means it would have more time to strengthen).

The only catch to this though is that this really hinges on if the current Atlantic tropical waves survive.

[Rainband]

I have been really busy so I forget. Has he verified anything so far this season?? I am not bashing him but I am just curious. Thanks Daniel. Figures you are in Florida and there [b]may[/] be action in the western GOM.

[Aquawind]

Listening to the interview Mike Watkins had with JB earlier this year should be interesting as the season progresses.. DT is on IPR NOW if you wanna listen to another character.

http://ipr365.com


http://www.tropicalupdate.com/talkintropics.htm

[Extremeweatherguy]

I have been really busy so I forget. Has he verified anything so far this season?? I am not bashing him but I am just curious. Thanks Daniel. Figures you are in Florida and there [b]may[/] be action in the western GOM.

lol, yes I know. However, if his threat for next week pans out then I will be back in TX to see it. As for him verifying...yes he has, and here are a few examples:

-He called for something to develop in the general area of Alberto over 7 days out. He also got the general track of Alberto correct.

-He has correctly called the many TX "disturbances" so far this year. None of them have actually gone the extra step and developed, but some have come quite close (and the current one may actually do so).

-He called for Beryl in Advance and correctly predicted the general path. The only issues he had with Beryl were the fact that it did not get quite as strong as he thought it might of, and it was a little further offshore the coast of NJ then he expected.

[Derecho]

-He has correctly called the many TX "disturbances" so far this year. None of them have actually gone the extra step and developed, but some have come quite close (and the current one may actually do so).

[/i]

Note that when one is "verifying" forecasts, it must be done in a careful, rigorous, statistical way - not individual anecdotes.

And it must be understand that continously forecasting the same thing over and over again needs to be taken into account when assessing "verification" - an event is forecasted for a given week and it happens that week, but the same thing was forecast for the 8 preceeding weeks and the 8 following weeks and it didn't happen in those weeks, that's not exactly impressive.

I'm of course not a current JB subscriber but I did subscribe for a couple of months during 2004 to conduct a systematic analysis of his forecasting ability for tropical cyclogenesis (something that he has a great reputation for - forecasting development.)

During June and July 2004, JB forecasted tropical development over 29 times - I went through every column and cut and pasted all the forecasts of development in a Word file, which I still have.

During June and July 2004, no tropical systems formed in the Tropical Atlantic till July 31st. (As a side note, he rather famously forecast a GOM INVEST, 90L, to possibly strike Texas at 115 kts - it never even became a TD.)

I'd love for a current subscriber to check the archives for 2006 - I suspect you'll find what I did from my 2004 test and from what I remember when JB was free...

There will essentially be a continous outstanding forecast for tropical development for the next week in the most likely areas..that is, every week in June and July, at some point in one or more of the columns for that week, there will be a "watch the Gulf next week for development" comment.

Thus, it will have been impossible for anything to have formed without it being predicted. On the other hand, you end up with a lot of predictions that never happen.

Correctly evaluating predictive skill in a rational and logical manner is an important life tool and I hope people understand a bit more about it now.

[Extremeweatherguy]

-He has correctly called the many TX "disturbances" so far this year. None of them have actually gone the extra step and developed, but some have come quite close (and the current one may actually do so).

[/i]

Note that when one is "verifying" forecasts, it must be done in a careful, rigorous, statistical way - not individual anecdotes.

And it must be understand that continously forecasting the same thing over and over again needs to be taken into account when assessing "verification" - an event is forecasted for a given week and it happens that week, but the same thing was forecast for the 8 preceeding weeks and the 8 following weeks and it didn't happen in those weeks, that's not exactly impressive.

I'm of course not a current JB subscriber but I did subscribe for a couple of months during 2004 to conduct a systematic analysis of his forecasting ability for tropical cyclogenesis (something that he has a great reputation for - forecasting development.)

During June and July 2004, JB forecasted tropical development over 29 times - I went through every column and cut and pasted all the forecasts of development in a Word file, which I still have.

During June and July 2004, no tropical systems formed in the Tropical Atlantic till July 31st. (As a side note, he rather famously forecast a GOM INVEST, 90L, to possibly strike Texas at 115 kts - it never even became a TD.)

I'd love for a current subscriber to check the archives for 2006 - I suspect you'll find what I did from my 2004 test and from what I remember when JB was free...

There will essentially be a continous outstanding forecast for tropical development for the next week in the most likely areas..that is, every week in June and July, at some point in one or more of the columns for that week, there will be a "watch the Gulf next week for development" comment.

Thus, it will have been impossible for anything to have formed without it being predicted. On the other hand, you end up with a lot of predictions that never happen.

Correctly evaluating predictive skill in a rational and logical manner is an important life tool and I hope people understand a bit more about it now.

Now when you say "forecasted" tropical development 29 times, does that include when he said it was "possible" or are those times when he blatantly said..."this will develop". Because so far this season he never has said that any of the the W. Gulf disturbances WOULD develop, only that there was a chance. He also said that they would all mainly be heavy rain events...which they were. I think, overall, he has done a pretty good job so far and has had meteorological reasoning behind all of his predictions. No big mistakes yet.

[ROCK]

I agree.....he is a good forecaster of tropical development eventhough he doesnt get it right all the time. Who does?

[Derecho]

I agree.....he is a good forecaster of tropical development eventhough he doesnt get it right all the time. Who does?

I think you're missing the point. If you continuously forecast tropical development, it's impossible for anything to develop that you haven't forecasted.

However, the price to be paid for that is a lot of failed predictions of development.

If every week I state there's a possibility of a traffic accident at the intersection nearest my house, and 8 weeks go by, and there's finally an accident that week, have I demonstrated skill at forecasting traffic accidents? No.

[Derecho]

Now when you say "forecasted" tropical development 29 times, does that include when he said it was "possible" or are those times when he blatantly said..."this will develop". Because so far this season he never has said that any of the the W. Gulf disturbances WOULD develop, only that there was a chance. He also said that they would all mainly be heavy rain events...which they were. I think, overall, he has done a pretty good job so far and has had meteorological reasoning behind all of his predictions. No big mistakes yet.

He actually basically never makes blatant "this well develop" forecasts.

There were none in the time period in 2004 I studied.

Overwhelmingly, they were:

1) "Watch the (Gulf, usually) for development next week."

2) "Possible tropical trouble in (insert location here) next week."

3) "I'm worried about (insert wave, location, etc.) next week."

I doubt that in the last two years his forecasts of development have changed much in format.

You seem to want to have your cake and eat it too. If he says "Watch the Gulf for possible tropical trouble" next week, and a TD forms that week, you clearly want to give him great credit for that (well, actually, you seem to be willing to give credit for even an INVEST forming.)

However, if nothing forms, you want it not to be considered a forecast failure because he inserted the word "possible."

You can't have it both ways.

[ROCK]

I agree.....he is a good forecaster of tropical development even though he doesn't get it right all the time. Who does?

I think you're missing the point. If you continuously forecast tropical development, it's impossible for anything to develop that you haven't forecasted.

However, the price to be paid for that is a lot of failed predictions of development.

If every week I state there's a possibility of a traffic accident at the intersection nearest my house, and 8 weeks go by, and there's finally an accident that week, have I demonstrated skill at forecasting traffic accidents? No.

So your whole premise is that JB is forecasting tropical development continuously (everywhere) in hopes it comes to fruition (somewhere)? I don't know about you that is genius. That would mean never missing a forecast.

I got your point BTW.....

[GeneratorPower]

I agree.....he is a good forecaster of tropical development eventhough he doesnt get it right all the time. Who does?

I think you're missing the point. If you continuously forecast tropical development, it's impossible for anything to develop that you haven't forecasted.

However, the price to be paid for that is a lot of failed predictions of development.

If every week I state there's a possibility of a traffic accident at the intersection nearest my house, and 8 weeks go by, and there's finally an accident that week, have I demonstrated skill at forecasting traffic accidents? No.

I understand your position, but I don't think JB is doing that, at least not precisely. JB has a niche because he actually talks about stuff that other outlets ignore. I find it refreshing to have someone say "maybe this" and "maybe that" and "might develop because of x".

If you're using JB as a source for hard, cold evidence and forecasts, look elsewhere. If you're looking for an enthusiastic and at least mildly scientific "what if" discussion, you're in the right place.

Take his discussions with a grain...no, make that a shaker...of salt, and just enjoy the offbeat personality.

Don't expect fresh water from a salt spring. The problem occurs when folks lump JB into the same category as Avila/Franklin/Stewart, etc. He's not the same.

He adds color to an otherwise black-and-white field dominated by engineering-types. Many of us here really enjoy what he has to say. I used to dislike him terribly because I saw him as a ratings artist who forecasted intense things that never came about.

But now that I have learned to appreciate him for who he is and not who he isn't, I don't start steaming as soon as I see his initials.

Hope this helps...

[GeneratorPower]

The man is an anecdotal kinda guy, not factual. Therefore his forecasts can and should be verified anecdotally, not factually.

The problem might be that we are too quick to devalue the anecdotal aspects of life. Science is not perfect and never will be.

(Edited to fix punctuaion and splelling) J/K -- Punctuation and spelling.

[jasons2k]

His discussion is just that, a discussion. Not a forecast. He has prefaced many of his discussions with that statement. Usually when he does get specific or make an actual forecast, he will say so and cite it specifically as such. Just an example in recent memory - with the blizzard of '06, a week beforehand, not a single source that I could find even mentioned a hint of a storm, nary a snowflake. JB was saying with phasing, the Asian connection, yada yada, he would look for the modelling to show a storm developing. The first one was the Japanese model and he showed it the next day, saying something like 'look folks, this does concern me because the setup will be there - this could be a major event'. Still thoughts, but not a real forecast. When I left Houston for New York on Wednesday AM, the NWS was still calling for a 20-30% chance of light snow. By Thursday everyone else came around and from what I recall Joe did issue numbers for snowfall, which would then fall under the definition of a forecast. I have no idea if his numbers verified, but his "thoughts" made me sure I packed my snow parka and gloves just in case. Little did I know the next Sunday we'd see the biggest snowfall yet in Central Park.

Also, FWIW, his pounding on an early/June TX or Mexico storm didn't come to pass. But he might be onto something with the EC this year. We had two 'almost Beryls' and the real Beryl already along the EC. We'll see....

[GeneratorPower]

That's what I mean by anecdotal evidence. You got something beneficial from his discussion. I think that has value.

What some folks are looking for is a "30%" or other numerical scientific evidence that is verifiable numerically or statistically. You obviously aren't saying that.

But the benefit you got, i.e., a call for a snowstorm days before anyone else, is valuable if you know how to use it right. Obviously you didn't go down and buy hundreds of dollars in snowshoes and winter gear because of his discussion.

But it did give you a mental idea that something might be cooking and a place to look for it, which is quite valuable.

[gulfcoastdave]

JB also works for a paysite...he has to make money. If people do not like JB then why do they spend so much time bashing the very thought that he speaks. Maybe the ones who dislike JB , should just NEVER read a post where JB is liked too.........but I guess that would be too easy

[GeneratorPower]

Well, I do like it when folks participate in the "arena of ideas". I know why JB irks people, but I would prefer to try and change their minds than have them go away. That's how great things are accomplished.

[gulfcoastdave]

the bashing post and all get old. People just need to leave it alone. It really turns people away from the site

[storm4u]

the bashing post and all get old. People just need to leave it alone. It really turns people away from the site

so true!!

[hurricanedude]

I have said it a million times, if all you people that talk bad about JB had even 1% of his knowlege...you would keep your mouths shut! The man has his degree and MANY years of experience....what do you JB bashers have? Think about it before you bash him, he is making a wonderful career at accuwx....and what is it you do? sit at home and bash.... Maybe if you put all that energy to use you might amount to something. now sit back and see if you like a bashing..if this offends you..this was meant to..if it didnt...either your not a basher or just plain anal!

Agian this is for all the JB bashers...not our good s2k members

[vbhoutex]

And now let's discuss JB's forecasts and not JB himself please. This thread is about JB's forecasts, not the man himself or what we think of him.