Since this has been brought up in the last two named tropical systems, I thought this would be a good thread in which to discuss such things.
For the record, I will say (purely my own opinion) that I would be very shocked indeed if in fact the highly seasoned meteorologists at the National Hurricane Center is pocketing money from any insurance companies or politicians in exchange for giving names for tropical systems. Certainly scandals do happen and on one is immune to shenanigans, but I would be beyond shocked if there was any solid data to indicate that anyone at the NHC was taking money from anyone in exchange for naming storms.
"Let's work the problem, people; don't make things worse by guessing!"
Post by thermalwind - Touro on Jun 28, 2021 17:37:30 GMT -6
I don't think they are either. I do think there can sometimes be a bias towards naming in terms of messaging about a storm system, but honestly it's only one or two at the most that are borderline each year. Like whats her name a week or two ago, borderline on if it hit the technical definition but also brought some significant impacts to some folks. Probably worth the name.
I've gotta say that, in general, folks are seeing a whole lot more conspiracies in everything. Despite, you know, any conspiracy involving two or more people being incredibly hard to pull off.
Post by HarahanTim - Now in Covington! on Jun 28, 2021 17:39:02 GMT -6
I think it would go a long way, to for public as well as professional perception, to not put their head in the sand, when something has folks scratching their heads. Claudette was a great example. So many of their professional peers, questioned why the wait, to name her...and since it didn't happen sooner, why now? If there was sound reasoning, as to the timing of naming her, they sure missed the boat, in communicating the whys. That only fuels the conspiracy theories.
Post by thermalwind - Touro on Jun 28, 2021 17:46:49 GMT -6
They'll explain a lot of the reasoning in the post season report as well, along with the meteorological reasonings as to what happened with the storm.
I don't think a public forecast is the place to really have the discussion either. Just nobody (me included) ever goes back to read the reports on the debatable storm classification decisions, especially for a just above minimum TS.
I think it would go a long way, to for public as well as professional perception, to not put their head in the sand, when something has folks scratching their heads. Claudette was a great example. So many of their professional peers, questioned why the wait, to name her...and since it didn't happen sooner, why now? If there was sound reasoning, as to the timing of naming her, they sure missed the boat, in communicating the whys. That only fuels the conspiracy theories.
My reasoning for Claudette is this: when you look at the pictures of the meteorologists at the NHC (in the link I posted under Claudette), the meteorologist who ultimately named the storm in the wee hours is very young. It could very well be that he was trained in updated scientific meteorological reasoning that the older meteorologists were not?
I bring this up because from 2007-2020, I had a very excellent primary care physician who retired last year largely because her daughter had passed away. Twice a year she insisted in shoving a gloved finger up my bum. Hey, she's the doctor, who am I to argue? The new primary care physician that I chose is also a female but much younger, a graduate of Tulane University School of Medicine, and she stated that the latest research indicates that the anal exams are not indicated on an annual basis unless there is some data (blood work, patient complaint) to deem it necessary. My point being that perhaps the younger folks are privy to better research-based practices, and this stretches across many disciplines?
"Let's work the problem, people; don't make things worse by guessing!"
Post by thermalwind - Touro on Jun 28, 2021 17:59:03 GMT -6
I get where you're coming from but being at the NHC means being up on the state of the science. Plus, it's rarely just one forecaster making the decision but a discussion.
The naming process on Claudette was probably just where the state of the science is, combined with the data available. I'm saying this with my own questions about if that was really a tropical system, but I'll wait for the post season report to bitch too much.
I get where you're coming from but being at the NHC means being up on the state of the science. Plus, it's rarely just one forecaster making the decision but a discussion.
The naming process on Claudette was probably just where the state of the science is, combined with the data available. I'm saying this with my own questions about if that was really a tropical system, but I'll wait for the post season report to bitch too much.
You brought up a question that I brought up during Claudette that no one seemed to know the answer to: do the mets at the NHC indeed collaborate on naming a storm, or is it the met who is on the clock so to speak at that timeframe?
"Let's work the problem, people; don't make things worse by guessing!"
Post by thermalwind - Touro on Jun 28, 2021 18:35:54 GMT -6
There's never just one on the clock. Even if it's just someone on the EPac desk, there's a discussion. There's also a lot of discussions at the shift handoffs too.
My understanding is the forecaster on duty makes the final call, but they typically don't go rouge.
Post by Shibumi-Mandeville I-12/Hwy59 on Jun 28, 2021 19:23:20 GMT -6
My ¢2?
I guess I don't really care as long as it doesn't affect me....that being said weren't there homes flooded in Slidell? Or was that a different weather day?
So many fish storms are now named in the Atlantic based on satellite that weren't bothered with in the past. It's one reason I look at decadal storm trends with a bit of a grain of salt.....its not comparing apples to apples.
This past system that started the discussion here....I have no clue what went on and why. The timing is the strangest part IMO....
The definition of a tropical cyclone to my knowledge hasn't changed so I'm not sure what happened here
As far as young professionals, I find their unfaltering trust in establishment unnerving. Its not natural. Young people question establishment. When they don't , I think "indoctrination."
I guess I don't really care as long as it doesn't affect me....that being said weren't there homes flooded in Slidell? Or was that a different weather day?
So many fish storms are now named in the Atlantic based on satellite that weren't bothered with in the past. It's one reason I look at decadal storm trends with a bit of a grain of salt.....its not comparing apples to apples.
This past system that started the discussion here....I have no clue what went on and why. The timing is the strangest part IMO....
The definition of a tropical cyclone to my knowledge hasn't changed so I'm not sure what happened here
I don't care to use number of storms as a measure in terms of climate stuff. ACE or total integrated kinetic energy (I like the integration method better, since it can account better for big storms with lower max winds) is more objective. All the research on storm activity uses ACE vs just number of names storms.
I guess I don't really care as long as it doesn't affect me....that being said weren't there homes flooded in Slidell? Or was that a different weather day?
So many fish storms are now named in the Atlantic based on satellite that weren't bothered with in the past. It's one reason I look at decadal storm trends with a bit of a grain of salt.....its not comparing apples to apples.
This past system that started the discussion here....I have no clue what went on and why. The timing is the strangest part IMO....
The definition of a tropical cyclone to my knowledge hasn't changed so I'm not sure what happened here
I don't care to use number of storms as a measure in terms of climate stuff. ACE or total integrated kinetic energy (I like the integration method better, since it can account better for big storms with lower max winds) is more objective. All the research on storm activity uses ACE vs just number of names storms.
Yup..the ACE score makes much more sense......William Gray is sorely missed....
Times have changed so much. Be it the NHC or The Weather Channel. After Katrina (I was 17 years old), nothing really was the same. Most of the stuff I did as far as videos was actually few and far between in the mid-2000s. Now you have kids born after Katrina with their own hurricane websites, analyzing stuff on twitter. The President of the United States posting spaghetti model plots. Many forecasters, professional and amateur, lost their notoriety after Katrina.