24 Hours out, models trend closer to Galveston.

[HouTXmetro]

Several mets were discussing the slight westward trend of the models this morning putting Galveston under a greater threat.

[dwg71]

Several mets were discussing the slight westward trend of the models this morning putting Galveston under a greater threat.

I was watching channel two and Wes H showed 5 models two to galveston and two to border. Well one of the two the GFDL has moved to TX/LA border, per later run. Others should update in the next 15 minutes.

[HouTXmetro]

Well isn't the GFDL the most accurate model? If so TX/LA border landfall is more probable.

[Mac]

Several mets were discussing the slight westward trend of the models this morning putting Galveston under a greater threat.

I was watching channel two and Wes H showed 5 models two to galveston and two to border. Well one of the two the GFDL has moved to TX/LA border, per later run. Others should update in the next 15 minutes.

You're seriously taking the art of selective reasoning to a whole new level. For the past 2 days now you've been cherry-picking whatever information supports your predictions. Don't you see the inherent flaw in that?

[dwg71]

Several mets were discussing the slight westward trend of the models this morning putting Galveston under a greater threat.

I was watching channel two and Wes H showed 5 models two to galveston and two to border. Well one of the two the GFDL has moved to TX/LA border, per later run. Others should update in the next 15 minutes.

You're seriously taking the art of selective reasoning to a whole new level. For the past 2 days now you've been cherry-picking whatever information supports your predictions. Don't you see the inherent flaw in that?

Very productive Mac, GFDL (the only model updated since 1AM) has moved 100+ miles East. I will post others when updated.

[ALhurricane]

I am plotting the storm here at work. IF the storm maintains its current 310-315 heading up until landfall, then it will come in just north of Galveston. Too close for comfort...

[Mac]

I'm sorry, DWG, I'm not meaning to attack you personally. It just seems that some people on the forums are so dead set in their reasoning regarding where they think this storm is going to go that they continuously spout whatever information supports their predictions, while completely ignorning any information that contradicts their predictions. Trust me, it's not hard to spot. When you've got 6 pieces of information--2 pointing to one thing, 2 pointing to another, and 2 pointing in between--and a person ONLY focuses upon the 2 pieces of information that support their theories, it's called selective reasoning. Occassionally a person might get lucky and have things pan out the way they want. But more times than not, they're just going to end up looking silly. These storms don't care about people's personal biases. They'll go where the atmosphere allows them to go. Period.

[Stratosphere747]

I am plotting the storm here at work. IF the storm maintains its current 310-315 heading up until landfall, then it will come in just north of Galveston. Too close for comfort...

Good point. I've been trying to get across to everyone that it has to take a more northerly turn. Otherwise it is still coming right at Galveston.

Somewhat disconcerting is that it seems to have slowed down.

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/ridge/lch_long.shtml

[dwg71]

I'm sorry, DWG, I'm not meaning to attack you personally. It just seems that some people on the forums are so dead set in their reasoning regarding where they think this storm is going to go that they continuously spout whatever information supports their predictions, while completely ignorning any information that contradicts their predictions. Trust me, it's not hard to spot. When you've got 6 pieces of information--2 pointing to one thing, 2 pointing to another, and 2 pointing in between--and a person ONLY focuses upon the 2 pieces of information that support their theories, it's called selective reasoning. Occassionally a person might get lucky and have things pan out the way they want. But more times than not, they're just going to end up looking silly. These storms don't care about people's personal biases. They'll go where the atmosphere allows them to go. Period.

Well also the other two to Galveston, are of the BAM suite and are not as reliable as the GFDL and UKMET. Which have same exact landfall point.

[Mac]

I'm sorry, DWG, I'm not meaning to attack you personally. It just seems that some people on the forums are so dead set in their reasoning regarding where they think this storm is going to go that they continuously spout whatever information supports their predictions, while completely ignorning any information that contradicts their predictions. Trust me, it's not hard to spot. When you've got 6 pieces of information--2 pointing to one thing, 2 pointing to another, and 2 pointing in between--and a person ONLY focuses upon the 2 pieces of information that support their theories, it's called selective reasoning. Occassionally a person might get lucky and have things pan out the way they want. But more times than not, they're just going to end up looking silly. These storms don't care about people's personal biases. They'll go where the atmosphere allows them to go. Period.

Well also the other two to Galveston, are of the BAM suite and are not as reliable as the GFDL and UKMET. Which have same exact landfall point.

Well, it's settled then. Since the GFDL and UKMET are so unquestionably reliable, we should be able to now say definitively where landfall will occur. Hurry, Batman, use the Batphone to call Commissioner Gordon at the NHC so he can alert the people of Metropolis.

[BamaMan]

Still say this will be a SW-LA - Central -LA landfall . JMHO

[HouTXmetro]

I am plotting the storm here at work. IF the storm maintains its current 310-315 heading up until landfall, then it will come in just north of Galveston. Too close for comfort...

Good point. I've been trying to get across to everyone that it has to take a more northerly turn. Otherwise it is still coming right at Galveston.

Somewhat disconcerting is that it seems to have slowed down.

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/ridge/lch_long.shtml

Well if it slows that increases the LA threat right?

[dwg71]

I'm sorry, DWG, I'm not meaning to attack you personally. It just seems that some people on the forums are so dead set in their reasoning regarding where they think this storm is going to go that they continuously spout whatever information supports their predictions, while completely ignorning any information that contradicts their predictions. Trust me, it's not hard to spot. When you've got 6 pieces of information--2 pointing to one thing, 2 pointing to another, and 2 pointing in between--and a person ONLY focuses upon the 2 pieces of information that support their theories, it's called selective reasoning. Occassionally a person might get lucky and have things pan out the way they want. But more times than not, they're just going to end up looking silly. These storms don't care about people's personal biases. They'll go where the atmosphere allows them to go. Period.

Well also the other two to Galveston, are of the BAM suite and are not as reliable as the GFDL and UKMET. Which have same exact landfall point.

Well, it's settled then. Since the GFDL and UKMET are so unquestionably reliable, we should be able to now say definitively where landfall will occur. Hurry, Batman, use the Batphone to call Commissioner Gordon at the NHC so he can alert the people of Metropolis.

Mac find another thread.

[ROCK]

I'm sorry, DWG, I'm not meaning to attack you personally. It just seems that some people on the forums are so dead set in their reasoning regarding where they think this storm is going to go that they continuously spout whatever information supports their predictions, while completely ignorning any information that contradicts their predictions. Trust me, it's not hard to spot. When you've got 6 pieces of information--2 pointing to one thing, 2 pointing to another, and 2 pointing in between--and a person ONLY focuses upon the 2 pieces of information that support their theories, it's called selective reasoning. Occassionally a person might get lucky and have things pan out the way they want. But more times than not, they're just going to end up looking silly. These storms don't care about people's personal biases. They'll go where the atmosphere allows them to go. Period.

this will be the only time I jump to DWG's aid here because well me and him have had our quabbles in the past.....

Does it really make matter what reasoning he uses. We have our opinions and personally the farther east this goes the better. he support his opinion with facts. So whats your beef. LOOK, I have a house full of freaking out people and I am the only one here calming these people down. We couldnt make it out. We tried. If DWG, would like to speculate on a landfall further east and support it with facts....DWG you go right ahead.......brother I got your back this time....

[Mac]

I'm sorry, DWG, I'm not meaning to attack you personally. It just seems that some people on the forums are so dead set in their reasoning regarding where they think this storm is going to go that they continuously spout whatever information supports their predictions, while completely ignorning any information that contradicts their predictions. Trust me, it's not hard to spot. When you've got 6 pieces of information--2 pointing to one thing, 2 pointing to another, and 2 pointing in between--and a person ONLY focuses upon the 2 pieces of information that support their theories, it's called selective reasoning. Occassionally a person might get lucky and have things pan out the way they want. But more times than not, they're just going to end up looking silly. These storms don't care about people's personal biases. They'll go where the atmosphere allows them to go. Period.

Well also the other two to Galveston, are of the BAM suite and are not as reliable as the GFDL and UKMET. Which have same exact landfall point.

Well, it's settled then. Since the GFDL and UKMET are so unquestionably reliable, we should be able to now say definitively where landfall will occur. Hurry, Batman, use the Batphone to call Commissioner Gordon at the NHC so he can alert the people of Metropolis.

Mac find another thread.

Geeze, DWG, if I tried to find a thread that didn't contain your apocalyptic predictions of a LA landfall I could be searching for days.

[dwg71]

I'm sorry, DWG, I'm not meaning to attack you personally. It just seems that some people on the forums are so dead set in their reasoning regarding where they think this storm is going to go that they continuously spout whatever information supports their predictions, while completely ignorning any information that contradicts their predictions. Trust me, it's not hard to spot. When you've got 6 pieces of information--2 pointing to one thing, 2 pointing to another, and 2 pointing in between--and a person ONLY focuses upon the 2 pieces of information that support their theories, it's called selective reasoning. Occassionally a person might get lucky and have things pan out the way they want. But more times than not, they're just going to end up looking silly. These storms don't care about people's personal biases. They'll go where the atmosphere allows them to go. Period.

this will be the only time I jump to DWG's aid here because well me and him have had our quabbles in the past.....

Does it really make matter what reasoning he uses. We have our opinions and personally the farther east this goes the better. he support his opinion with facts. So whats your beef. LOOK, I have a house full of freaking out people and I am the only one here calming these people down. We couldnt make it out. We tried. If DWG, would like to speculate on a landfall further east and support it with facts....DWG you go right ahead.......brother I got your back this time....

I smell what the Rock's got cooking

[Stratosphere747]

I am plotting the storm here at work. IF the storm maintains its current 310-315 heading up until landfall, then it will come in just north of Galveston. Too close for comfort...

Good point. I've been trying to get across to everyone that it has to take a more northerly turn. Otherwise it is still coming right at Galveston.

Somewhat disconcerting is that it seems to have slowed down.

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/ridge/lch_long.shtml

Well if it slows that increases the LA threat right?

A slowdown could indicate a true turn to the north..

Or that the High may have exited to quickly, leaving weaker steering currents.

Though the last two frames it is showing movement. The eye is clearly visable now.

[ROCK]

I am plotting the storm here at work. IF the storm maintains its current 310-315 heading up until landfall, then it will come in just north of Galveston. Too close for comfort...

Good point. I've been trying to get across to everyone that it has to take a more northerly turn. Otherwise it is still coming right at Galveston.

Somewhat disconcerting is that it seems to have slowed down.

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/ridge/lch_long.shtml

Well if it slows that increases the LA threat right?

A slowdown could indicate a true turn to the north..

Or that the High may have exited to quickly, leaving weaker steering currents.

Though the last two frames it is showing movement. The eye is clearly visable now.

turn baby turn......

[inotherwords]

Rock, if you've returned to Pearland, with all due respect are you prepared to ride this out with enough supplies for all those people? Don't forget, you could be without power and water for up to a couple of weeks.

[HouTXmetro]

turn baby turn......

Lol, replaces words of the song burn baby burn.