DoctorHurricane2003 wrote:Whether they modify them or not is unimportant in reference to what I was pointing out. They also modify their outlooks throughout the whole season now with these monthly late season updates. Is their June 1st outlook unimportant or unreliable then?
I am sorry but if they thought their December outlooks were unimportant they would not be givng one out.
Look I would hate to ruin everyone's perception but forecasting teleconnections patterns well out in advance is not exactly a hard thing to do if you understand how the dice can get loaded by way of the feedbacks.
Jim
I think part of the problem is that there are a slim number of people out there who get terribly upset if some evidence comes out that it won't go the way they would like it to go. It's sad, but unfortunately true.
Perhaps you should be aware of where your foot is now my friend. I'll give you a hint, your mouth.
Where you not the one debating the lowering SSTA's approach when Mets showed it was clearly a circumstantial method of determining activity in a hurricane season?
If you ask my opinion, your clearly terribly upset we all don't agree that SSTA's don't clearly point to any sort of conclusion in activity next season.
Now that we have established that, i'd like to give a little word on Windrunner's post.
Clearly your not accepting an obvious truth about the NHC. They do their job because WE fund them and they get the gadgets to do their job. I accept all that and i'm not necessarly downing their work so far but if you ask me their performance this season has been hardly average.
When it boils down to it, the entire basis of tracking hurricanes is nothing more than a educated GUESS. From the 3 day track to the model runs every bit of info is concluded to find a base average. Seriously it's like the forecasters aren't even using the old noodles anymore. But of course assuming they were, it's no different then talking about computers. It's all about equations, guesswork and technology.
There is nothing about the approaching outlook that isn't gonna be guesswork. They'll make it clear that ASSUMING this won't be an El Nino year such and such SHOULD occur which SHOULD cause the following which SHOULD give us around blank TS's,Minors and Majors.
Also to conclude, the fact that you'd say the media would "have better things to cover" then the NHC's outlook is probably more insulting then the comments I made beforehand. I mean, it's not like we'd be following after arguably the worst hurricane season ever you know.
I think I have made my opinion very clear and easy to understand, and i'm not gonna continue to argue it. If you think i'm a jerk for bashing the NHC then fine.
My point was to say that given the fact that we should have a weak La Nina next year, the SSTAs should not allow for as active as a season next year, given current trends. The SSTAs are a good factor to use but it is NOT the only factor, that is correct. However, given the status of OTHER factors, the SSTAs should do what I described.