So please tell me why?

[Stormcenter]

Stormcenter where is the uproar?? I see NO uproar

O.K. maybe "uproar" is too strong of a word more like
"disagreement" with the NHC. I think the replies to this
post speak for themselves.

Ok. Show me the disagreements you speak of then

The response below is from a poster after reading that shear would
weaken Ivan in the GOM. Chad that does not sound like someone agreeing with the NHC. Do you want more?

Going by the data i have seen, i don't see the shear producing to the levels they believe. In the path of the storm on its way to cuba the shear has actually been decreasing in the past 24 hours.
-Eric

Thats a very CALM disagreement. I just dont see what your problem with it is?

Chad it's still a disgreement and that was my point. I was looking back
at past posts and a could not find one that disagreed with the NHC when they were predicting Ivan to rapidly intensify as it approache the GOM.
Everyone said it was likely. But turn it the other way around and the NHC
is wrong, clueless, etc. I think I've said enough concerning this post and I apologize for my poor choice of words to describe my point in my initial post.

[B-Bear]

I didn't make myself clear. I think that the NHC should discuss their reasoning for forecasting the shear so that meteorologists can decide whether or not they agree with the NHC's assessment and they can then discuss the possibilities with the public. If a local met says to the people, "The NHC is forecasting shear to weaken this storm in the Gulf of Mexico, but I'm not so sure that will happen. In the absence of shear this storm could very well make landfall as a cat 4 or 5 hurricane"--yeah, I think the public would then think twice about not evacuating.

I have seen SEVERAL professional mets on this board state that they do not fully understand why the NHC is forecasting so much shear. I think that's a problem.

[otowntiger]

Well here is why I personally had a problem with the NHC weakening Ivan to a cat 3 between Cuba and U.S. landfall: They are basing it on shear without mentioning anywhere that I can find where they expect this shear to come from. I personally don't see where it's coming from, and it has been speculated that they are forecasting the shear based upon faulty GFS model data. Perhaps that is not indeed the case, but, in the absence of some explanation from the NHC regarding WHY they think shear will become an issue, what are people to think? It's not exactly like the NHC has not relied upon questionable model data previously, despite the obviousness of the problem with the data.

In my opinion, they are potentially placing lives at risk by reducing Ivan's intensity to category 3 between Cuba and the U.S. if indeed they are not paying heed to faulty model predictions. There is already a general reluctance of Florida residents to evacuate--yet again--and if they are expecting a cat 3 storm rather than a strong cat 4/cat 5 storm, many of them may be less likely to evacuate. If that bears out, and the shear turns out to be some phantom speculation that doesn't materialize, how many people might be killed because of it?

That's why I personally am concerned about the NHC's reduction in intensity in the Gulf.

When have they ever explained where shear is coming from? Apparently they see it clearly as they have mentioned it in the last several discussions. Also why artificially keep it strong? Their job is to call it as they see it. It wouldn't make sense to say every hurricane was going to be stronger than it actually was (or predicted it to be) because their credibility would be ruined. They shouldn't try to get into the minds of people living on the coast and alter their forecast just to make sure they take it seriously. They deal in facts and the processing of scientific data.

[chadtm80]

and my point was no one said they were clueless..

[B-Bear]

I have seen them many times in the past discuss WHY they think a particular event is going to happen, such as shear, development of lows and highs, etc. We are apparently going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I think the purpose of their discussion is to relay the reasoning behind their forecasts, and not discussing their reasoning for forecasting such significant shear seems like a bit of an oversight to me. The bottom line to me is that if the professional mets don't understand WHY the NHC is forecasting what it is, they are then unable to make reasonable determinations regarding what they should and should not relay to the public.

[Lockhart]

Now that you explained in greater detail, I understand where you're coming from. I agree; it would have been nice if they'd mentioned what they were basing that comment on. I'll cut them slack because they have to issue tons of these warnings/discussions with little time to write/edit them. Still, it would have been nice if they'd included the basis.

[CFLCaneWatcher]

In my opinion, they are potentially placing lives at risk by reducing Ivan's intensity to category 3 between Cuba and the U.S. if indeed they are not paying heed to faulty model predictions. There is already a general reluctance of Florida residents to evacuate--yet again--and if they are expecting a cat 3 storm rather than a strong cat 4/cat 5 storm, many of them may be less likely to evacuate. If that bears out, and the shear turns out to be some phantom speculation that doesn't materialize, how many people might be killed because of it?

Very well said and I am unable as of yet to find the fanthom shear. I agree they shouldn't alarm people, however, under preparing them is just as bad or worse.