Ed Mahmoud wrote:It was a fluke...
King Arthur: [after Arthur's cut off both of the Black Knight's arms] Look, you stupid Bastard. You've got no arms left.
Black Knight: Yes I have.
King Arthur: *Look*!
Black Knight: It's just a flesh wound.
Moderator: S2k Moderators
Ed Mahmoud wrote:It was a fluke...
Ed Mahmoud wrote:It was a fluke...
Ed Mahmoud wrote:It was a fluke...
jinftl wrote:Murphy's Law would have said that evacuations should have started in coastal tx when this 'very unofficial' post was written!
Please...anyone in florida...don't make the same mistake!!! PLease....begging you!
MiamiensisWx wrote:Ed Mahmoud wrote:It was a fluke...
You can't exclusively rely on the most recent two decades to conclusively state that an early/mid/late September TC in Texas is a "fluke." It is a common fallacy that is made by many contributors here: according to their calculations, based on recent history, a particular track/general movement, landfall location, etc. is (or is not) a "fluke." History indicates the Texas "fluke" statement is far from the case; in fact, in addition to Rita/Ike, two of the most devastating Texas TCs were Carla 1961 and the 1900 Galveston hurricane. These tropical cyclones affected the state on September 12 and 8, respectively. Other examples of Texas September strikes include 1910 #3 (September 14/Cat 2), 1919 #2 (September 14/Cat 3), 1933 #11 (September 5/Cat 3), Cindy 1963 (Cat 1), Beulah 1967 (Cat 3), Fern 1971 (Cat 1), Humberto 2007 (Cat 1), and others.
However, October strikes represent a very different situation, and you're correct in regards to the rarity of October strikes (compared to preceding months).
Ed Mahmoud wrote:MiamiensisWx wrote:Ed Mahmoud wrote:It was a fluke...
You can't exclusively rely on the most recent two decades to conclusively state that an early/mid/late September TC in Texas is a "fluke." It is a common fallacy that is made by many contributors here: according to their calculations, based on recent history, a particular track/general movement, landfall location, etc. is (or is not) a "fluke." History indicates the Texas "fluke" statement is far from the case; in fact, in addition to Rita/Ike, two of the most devastating Texas TCs were Carla 1961 and the 1900 Galveston hurricane. These tropical cyclones affected the state on September 12 and 8, respectively. Other examples of Texas September strikes include 1910 #3 (September 14/Cat 2), 1919 #2 (September 14/Cat 3), 1933 #11 (September 5/Cat 3), Cindy 1963 (Cat 1), Beulah 1967 (Cat 3), Fern 1971 (Cat 1), Humberto 2007 (Cat 1), and others.
However, October strikes represent a very different situation, and you're correct in regards to the rarity of October strikes (compared to preceding months).
BTW, I know a normal September the season isn't over, but Autumn set in early, for the most part, this year.
Portastorm wrote:Yes and I will respectfully disagree as well and my problem is with the "for the most part" language. If Ed wants to define "Autumn" as the westerlies being over most of the state ... fine. But to say that Fall weather is predominant over Central and Southern Texas is just flat out incorrect. We continue to see temperatures, namely highs, above normal. Here in Austin, we're back in the low to middle 90s consistently.
Traditionally, central and south Texas start to experience significant cold fronts (temperature drops into the low to middle 80s) by the third week of September. Take a look at the last week of temps in Texas in the graphic below ... you see basically normal to above-normal temps. Fall has NOT come early this year IMHO.
wayne56 wrote:Bonehead forecasts of the year award goes to...you and that guy who forecast the season shutting down when October started. Compare notes guys. At least you had the guts to speak out.
Users browsing this forum: 7cardinal, AnnularCane, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], jgh, Kennethb, NotSparta, StormWeather, TampaWxLurker, TomballEd and 99 guests