Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The thing is, with every blown forecast filled with hype (like this one), people will put less trust in the forecast the next time. And yeah, you never know which one WILL be the big one, but when they tell you this one will "rival Sandy" or be the "Sandy of South Jersey" and then it goes out to sea, and when nearly EVERY one MAY be the big one... well, people may not listen so hard next time. Forecasts without the hype and without weathermen and reporters standing near the rough waves when the storm is still days out would be fine, but unfortunately nowadays the media likes hyping things and harping on them.
Part of the problem with Sandy was the shore didn't see much damage during Irene, even though they were told they would. So a lot of locals didn't believe it when they were told, again, it would be very bad. It's a fine line between warning people about possible dangers and warning AND hyping, but I think that line is crossed far too often. It's clearly at the point where it's become a joke. Remember that huge blizzard that never was a couple winters ago? When they were saying we were going to get slammed and it was going to be awful and this and that for DAYS... and then it missed us and slammed New England? We got maybe 6 inches that storm, maybe. We were supposed to get feet and feet (like we got in this past January's storm). Remember the hurricane that they thought was going to hit us last fall? I forget the name but it was like this, it was supposed to be like Sandy... but it went out to sea. I can do objective reporting and forecasts without all the hype and dramatic footage and trying to scare people.
The problem is the only weather outlet that should matter in these things is NOAA. They put out hurricane casts every few hours, and they tend to be less flashy and more conservative. Put then people see things like "there could be significant flooding" and suddenly everyone on social media is an arm chair meteorologist and they hype it up, and like the telephone game it becomes "bigger than sandy". NOAA never said that. On friday and Saturday morning they said it could potentially be very bad or not. If you look at their actual forecasts they never compared it to Sandy except specifically for extreme South Jersey, where the Sandy flooding was not nearly as big as it was up in ocean and monmouth counties and it was similar.
So no, I don't think "they" blew it, well not the actual meteorlogists. That is why I think it is so important to differentiate between various "weather sources"
there is one born every minute. the weather people will try to string it along as much as possible and blue biker will eat it up. this storm was never a threat to us.
Well that's just not true. Post tropical cyclones are getting harder to model due to changes like extreme warmth in the gulf stream and their interactions with the jet stream.
I agree completely that it was overblown by the media rather than actual meterologists, but on Friday when forecasts were being made it was certainly a potential threat. I believe NOAA had coastal NJ at 40% chance of seeing tropical storm force winds, which means it was a threat, not a certainty.
Perhaps, but welcome to the world now. If you're over a certain age you probably wouldn't understand. While social media sucks and can be very annoying for various reasons, it's also very good for various reasons.
I've never been one of the idiots who believes everything I read or see, and those existed long before social media became a thing.
Social media has its uses. Weather forecasting should not be one of them.I tried to point out errors several citizen reporting sites were doing reading tide charts in making surge predictions, and they literally just deleted my comments.
I actually find social media to be much worse than the regular television news when it comes to over hyping these stories.
i clicked and it seemed to be suggesting a 90 degree turn was possible and then we would be in trouble. its ridiculous. as the storm follows its expected track of not hitting nj, they keep concocting potential scenarios where it still may hit us.
NOAA/NWS (the ones quoted in that link) have never said this storm was going to "hit" us which mean the storm wall would come ashore. NOT DONE.
But as it move westward as the gulf stream jogs in, we may see more wind and rain bands.
As for "90 degree turn" Sandy did just about that so if you have a blocking high it is absolutely possible. It is just not more likely than not. And they have to run the probabilities, that is literally their job, and NWS/NOAA does not overstate for ratings. There is no reason to, they are a npo.
NOAA/NWS (the ones quoted in that link) have never said this storm was going to "hit" us which mean the storm wall would come ashore. NOT DONE.
But as it move westward as the gulf stream jogs in, we may see more wind and rain bands.
As for "90 degree turn" Sandy did just about that so if you have a blocking high it is absolutely possible. It is just not more likely than not. And they have to run the probabilities, that is literally their job, and NWS/NOAA does not overstate for ratings. There is no reason to, they are a npo.
there is always a probability that anything can happen. the chances of this storm causing us harm was low enough to dismiss it a week ago.
i was actually in the bahamas and was watching this storm when it was "invest 99" or something like that. i think it was the same storm. it followed the expected path and was never a threat to where i was or back up in nj and the models never actually said it would be. but hey there was always a chance something worse could happen. so lets be hysterical.
For anyone wondering this popped up on my Facebook feed because I follow CBS New York. This is what I mean when I say I come across things on social media - yes from reputable news sources, not random weather fanboys.
there is always a probability that anything can happen. the chances of this storm causing us harm was low enough to dismiss it a week ago.
We all know you think you know everything but you are incorrect. As of 2 days ago it was a 40% chance of causing significant flooding and TS force winds for much of the Jersey Shore.
Quote:
i was actually in the bahamas and was watching this storm when it was "invest 99" or something like that. i think it was the same storm. it followed the expected path and was never a threat to where i was or back up in nj and the models never actually said it would be. but hey there was always a chance something worse could happen. so lets be hysterical.
You are wrong, again. How refreshing.
GFGL brought it much closer in all of its forecasts until yesterday. Same with CMC2. Even BAMS is still bringing it in as if it were a noreaster.
And while there was certainly misinformation going around, the only one harping on hysteria is you.
Shall we discuss how you are the opposite of the boy who cried wolf? especially as it came to Sandy? It is as irresponsible to downplay a potential storm as it is to overplay it. You are the exact same thing as the people who were freaking out, just in the other direction. You think your uninformed opinion is as valuable as people who study these things day in and day out. You were wrong during Sandy when you said the following things right BEFORE Sandy:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ
...nj will have some problems but people arent going to die or lose their homes ...
or this one
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ
so is it time to start saying "we dodged a bullet" and me to start saying "i told you so" yet?
We all know you think you know everything but you are incorrect. As of 2 days ago it was a 40% chance of causing significant flooding and TS force winds for much of the Jersey Shore.
40% chance of "significant" flooding? is "significant" a scientific term? what is the exact point that it goes from being insignificant to significant?
there was no 40% chance. i appreciate the research that you have done to come up with responses that are meaningless.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
