Possible development in the Gulf of Mexico (Is Invest 92L)

[SFLcane]

 https://x.com/tmainolfiwesh/status/1840845728463065435

[SFLcane]

[mpic]

The county to my east, Liberty, went under a burn ban today. Too bad we can't control the weather sometimes.

[HurricaneBelle]

 https://x.com/tmainolfiwesh/status/1840845728463065435

I mean right now the models indicate it will be weak but to say so definitively this far ahead of time seems kind of irresponsible.

[ConvergenceZone]

 https://x.com/tmainolfiwesh/status/1840845728463065435

I mean right now the models indicate it will be weak but to say so definitively this far ahead of time seems kind of irresponsible.

Not really, they are seeing all of the dry air and shear in the gulf that all of the models are seeing. The shear and dry air just won't vanish into thin air. Meteorologist WXMAN mentioned this morning the shear and dry air in the gulf which is why he's also forecasting weak. So weak sounds about right to me. Again, you can never be 100% for sure, but you've got to go with the highest probabilities at this point and there is nothing that suggests the contrary.

[Hammy]

 https://x.com/tmainolfiwesh/status/1840845728463065435

I mean right now the models indicate it will be weak but to say so definitively this far ahead of time seems kind of irresponsible.

Not really, they are seeing all of the dry air and shear in the gulf that all of the models are seeing. The shear and dry air just won't vanish into thin air. Meteorologist WXMAN mentioned this morning the shear and dry air in the gulf which is why he's also forecasting weak. So weak sounds about right to me. Again, you can never be 100% for sure, but you've got to go with the highest probabilities at this point and there is nothing that suggests the contrary.

Treating non-development or weak intensity as set in stone is dangerous, the models had days of runs of a weak non-developing trough with Helene as well after initially showing a stronger system (so playing out somewhat similarly)

People shouldn't be letting their guards down at all after what just happened, and it's beyond irresponsible for allegedly trusted sources to dismiss this as a non-event.

[ConvergenceZone]

I mean right now the models indicate it will be weak but to say so definitively this far ahead of time seems kind of irresponsible.

Not really, they are seeing all of the dry air and shear in the gulf that all of the models are seeing. The shear and dry air just won't vanish into thin air. Meteorologist WXMAN mentioned this morning the shear and dry air in the gulf which is why he's also forecasting weak. So weak sounds about right to me. Again, you can never be 100% for sure, but you've got to go with the highest probabilities at this point and there is nothing that suggests the contrary.

Treating non-development or weak intensity as set in stone is dangerous, the models had days of runs of a weak non-developing trough with Helene as well after initially showing a stronger system (so playing out somewhat similarly)

People shouldn't be letting their guards down at all after what just happened, and it's beyond irresponsible for allegedly trusted sources to dismiss this as a non-event.

Well, he didn't really say it would be a non-event, he mentioned that it could bring alot of rain, and that can be bad. The reason I think it's okay is because we have the data showing that. Now if the data changes that's when calling it weak becomes more irresponsible. I mean landfall is only about 6 to 7 days out. But thinking there is going to be a hurricane in the gulf when there is no model data that currently supports that just doesn't make sense at this point. If you go back and look at the Helene thread, you'll see that when Helene was where this future storm is, at the very least it looked like a minimal hurricane, and some models were showing that, just not all of them. Plus the conditions in the gulf looked MUCH better. But to be fair, the tweet could have been better worded better, such as "at this point it appears it will be weak" as opposed to saying "it will be weak". They also mentioned it looking "weak" on the weather channel, because that's what the data is showing them.

[cycloneye]

8 PM.

Northwestern Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico:
Disorganized showers and thunderstorms located over the southwestern
Caribbean Sea are associated with a trough of low pressure.
Environmental conditions could support some gradual development of
this system, and a tropical depression could form over the next
several days while it moves generally northwestward over the
northwestern Caribbean Sea and the southern Gulf of Mexico.
Interests along the U.S. Gulf Coast should continue to monitor the
progress of this system.
* Formation chance through 48 hours...low...10 percent.
* Formation chance through 7 days...medium...40 percent.

[Hammy]

Not really, they are seeing all of the dry air and shear in the gulf that all of the models are seeing. The shear and dry air just won't vanish into thin air. Meteorologist WXMAN mentioned this morning the shear and dry air in the gulf which is why he's also forecasting weak. So weak sounds about right to me. Again, you can never be 100% for sure, but you've got to go with the highest probabilities at this point and there is nothing that suggests the contrary.

Treating non-development or weak intensity as set in stone is dangerous, the models had days of runs of a weak non-developing trough with Helene as well after initially showing a stronger system (so playing out somewhat similarly)

People shouldn't be letting their guards down at all after what just happened, and it's beyond irresponsible for allegedly trusted sources to dismiss this as a non-event.

Well, he didn't really say it would be a non-event, he mentioned that it could bring alot of rain, and that can be bad. The reason I think it's okay is because we have the data showing that. Now if the data changes that's when calling it weak becomes more irresponsible. I mean landfall is only about 6 to 7 days out. But thinking there is going to be a hurricane in the gulf when there is no model data that currently supports that just doesn't make sense at this point. If you go back and look at the Helene thread, you'll see that when Helene was where this future storm is, at the very least it looked like a minimal hurricane, and some models were showing that, just not all of them. Plus the conditions in the gulf looked MUCH better. But to be fair, the tweet could have been better worded better, such as "at this point it appears it will be weak" as opposed to saying "it will be weak". They also mentioned it looking "weak" on the weather channel, because that's what the data is showing them.

The data had three days of showing Helene not developing. It is never responsible to treat the models as set in stone, and tell people who you are supposed to be keeping warned and up to date, that you know it will stay weak, because you really don't--so if something stronger forms, people aren't going to be paying attention by then.

[otowntiger]

 https://x.com/tmainolfiwesh/status/1840845728463065435

I mean right now the models indicate it will be weak but to say so definitively this far ahead of time seems kind of irresponsible.

Oh come on! He’s basically just stating what is being said by the dynamics,climo, and science. Of course it’s not 100%, never is.

[ConvergenceZone]

Treating non-development or weak intensity as set in stone is dangerous, the models had days of runs of a weak non-developing trough with Helene as well after initially showing a stronger system (so playing out somewhat similarly)

People shouldn't be letting their guards down at all after what just happened, and it's beyond irresponsible for allegedly trusted sources to dismiss this as a non-event.

Well, he didn't really say it would be a non-event, he mentioned that it could bring alot of rain, and that can be bad. The reason I think it's okay is because we have the data showing that. Now if the data changes that's when calling it weak becomes more irresponsible. I mean landfall is only about 6 to 7 days out. But thinking there is going to be a hurricane in the gulf when there is no model data that currently supports that just doesn't make sense at this point. If you go back and look at the Helene thread, you'll see that when Helene was where this future storm is, at the very least it looked like a minimal hurricane, and some models were showing that, just not all of them. Plus the conditions in the gulf looked MUCH better. But to be fair, the tweet could have been better worded better, such as "at this point it appears it will be weak" as opposed to saying "it will be weak". They also mentioned it looking "weak" on the weather channel, because that's what the data is showing them.

The data had three days of showing Helene not developing. It is never responsible to treat the models as set in stone, and tell people who you are supposed to be keeping warned and up to date, that you know it will stay weak, because you really don't--so if something stronger forms, people aren't going to be paying attention by then.

Yea I get where you are coming from. Just so nobody looks down on him it's better for him to say," right now it's looking like it could be weak, but it's POSSIBLE that may change, so stay tuned". If he says that, problem solved. But hey I'm still calling for weak, just more of a gut feeling based on what I'm seeing. But I'm not a meteorologist, so it's fine

*** but again just my opinion, not to be construed as advice or an official forecast ***

[eastcoastFL]

 https://x.com/tmainolfiwesh/status/1840845728463065435

I mean right now the models indicate it will be weak but to say so definitively this far ahead of time seems kind of irresponsible.

Not really, they are seeing all of the dry air and shear in the gulf that all of the models are seeing. The shear and dry air just won't vanish into thin air. Meteorologist WXMAN mentioned this morning the shear and dry air in the gulf which is why he's also forecasting weak. So weak sounds about right to me. Again, you can never be 100% for sure, but you've got to go with the highest probabilities at this point and there is nothing that suggests the contrary.

I don’t know about the dry air but the shear has been known to come and go on a whim.

[eastcoastFL]

Treating non-development or weak intensity as set in stone is dangerous, the models had days of runs of a weak non-developing trough with Helene as well after initially showing a stronger system (so playing out somewhat similarly)

People shouldn't be letting their guards down at all after what just happened, and it's beyond irresponsible for allegedly trusted sources to dismiss this as a non-event.

Well, he didn't really say it would be a non-event, he mentioned that it could bring alot of rain, and that can be bad. The reason I think it's okay is because we have the data showing that. Now if the data changes that's when calling it weak becomes more irresponsible. I mean landfall is only about 6 to 7 days out. But thinking there is going to be a hurricane in the gulf when there is no model data that currently supports that just doesn't make sense at this point. If you go back and look at the Helene thread, you'll see that when Helene was where this future storm is, at the very least it looked like a minimal hurricane, and some models were showing that, just not all of them. Plus the conditions in the gulf looked MUCH better. But to be fair, the tweet could have been better worded better, such as "at this point it appears it will be weak" as opposed to saying "it will be weak". They also mentioned it looking "weak" on the weather channel, because that's what the data is showing them.

The data had three days of showing Helene not developing. It is never responsible to treat the models as set in stone, and tell people who you are supposed to be keeping warned and up to date, that you know it will stay weak, because you really don't--so if something stronger forms, people aren't going to be paying attention by then.

No matter how you look at it, this is a bad look for a pro met. Especially one with an audience. If he Said “it looks like it might be weak” it would be one thing, but this guy I saying it as if it were gospel.

[ConvergenceZone]

Well, he didn't really say it would be a non-event, he mentioned that it could bring alot of rain, and that can be bad. The reason I think it's okay is because we have the data showing that. Now if the data changes that's when calling it weak becomes more irresponsible. I mean landfall is only about 6 to 7 days out. But thinking there is going to be a hurricane in the gulf when there is no model data that currently supports that just doesn't make sense at this point. If you go back and look at the Helene thread, you'll see that when Helene was where this future storm is, at the very least it looked like a minimal hurricane, and some models were showing that, just not all of them. Plus the conditions in the gulf looked MUCH better. But to be fair, the tweet could have been better worded better, such as "at this point it appears it will be weak" as opposed to saying "it will be weak". They also mentioned it looking "weak" on the weather channel, because that's what the data is showing them.

The data had three days of showing Helene not developing. It is never responsible to treat the models as set in stone, and tell people who you are supposed to be keeping warned and up to date, that you know it will stay weak, because you really don't--so if something stronger forms, people aren't going to be paying attention by then.

No matter how you look at it, this is a bad look for a pro met. Especially one with an audience. If he Said “it looks like it might be weak” it would be one thing, but this guy I saying it as if it were gospel.

Yea I agree, his choice of wording is poor, no matter how he truly feels inside. It's his responsibility as a meteorologist to never talk in absolutes when communicating with the public. If he feels one way, it doesn't mean he should share it with the public. That I agree is irresponsible.

[cycloneye]

Ok, let's discuss about the area that NHC is watching.

[ConvergenceZone]

Ok, let's discuss about the area that NHC is watching.

Good call. It' easy to get carried away sometimes. I'll take the discussion to private messages. In the meantime keep posting the models when you get a chance. It will be interesting to see what the next few days brings.

[eastcoastFL]

18z ICON is spinning something up in the BOC. It also has a low south of PR.

https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysi ... atl_39.png

[wzrgirl1]

18z ICON is spinning something up in the BOC. It also has a low south of PR.

https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysi ... atl_39.png

I am glad I chose 6 storms to form in the October poll. I actually think it could be more. It will be a very active October. At what point do the storms count towards our numbers? Is it when it becomes a TD? Or when it has an actual name?

[cycloneye]

18z ICON is spinning something up in the BOC. It also has a low south of PR.

https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysi ... atl_39.png

I am glad I chose 6 storms to form in the October poll. I actually think it could be more. It will be a very active October. At what point do the storms count towards our numbers? Is it when it becomes a TD? Or when it has an actual name?

When it has a name.

[wzrgirl1]

18z ICON is spinning something up in the BOC. It also has a low south of PR.

https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysi ... atl_39.png

I am glad I chose 6 storms to form in the October poll. I actually think it could be more. It will be a very active October. At what point do the storms count towards our numbers? Is it when it becomes a TD? Or when it has an actual name?

When it has a name.

Thanks Cycloneye!