Accuweather's Comments on Ernesto and NHC!

[Blown Away]

Accuweather very critical of the NHC and its Ernesto predictions. Their criticism I think is weak and pretty friggen lousy. The article is a series of low blows, sounds like a politician. IMO
http://headlines.accuweather.com/news-s ... ?article=9

[WxGuy1]

Accuweather very critical of the NHC and its Ernesto predictions. Their criticism I think is weak and pretty friggen lousy. The article is a series of low blows, sounds like a politician. IMO
http://headlines.accuweather.com/news-s ... ?article=9

Is that surprising? Accuweather has been known to do such things in the past, which is part of the reason why I despise that company. JB and the AccuWx crew (nothing personal) tend to be quite aggressive yet general for most tropical activity, always leaving the door open for many, many different possibilities/outcomes. This way, no matter what happens, they can say "we told you this was a possibility". Of course, they NEVER mention things like their Ophelia forecast that mentioned a New Orleans hit, or other such severely bad forecasts.

Every year, I tell myself to save all the AccuWx forecast graphics so I can compare them with NHC graphics at the end of the season (or after a storm). Alas, I forget to do such things, so any consistent verification by me is not possible. Too bad the NHC can't bash AccuWx sometimes... I do wonder why AccuWx doesn't bash almost all the TV stations that forecast something very similar to the NHC. TWC seems to have much better tact in this regard, since I don't think I've heard an NHC-bashing statement from TWC. Oh wait, that's because I find TWC many times more professional than AccuWx.

Was that article written by Sen. Santorum?

If AccuWx had their way, they'd get rid of the NWS and NHC, and force people to pay for all forecasts... They want the govt (and tax-payers) to provide all measurement equipment (ROABs, radars, etc) to them for free use, but then not allow govt agencies to use this data to make forecasts for the general public. Don't get me wrong -- private sector certainly has a space and market in weather information systems and dissemination, but I'm sick of the ruthless NHC bashing they do year after year.

The NHC forecast was, obviously, not particularly good. But then again, I don't know of anyone's forecast that nailed the intensity and landfall location. It's interesting that the article mentions them not upgrading the hurricane watch to a warning. Oh wait, all data that we have to verify from tells us that hurricane conditions were NOT met at the coast. Therefore, a hurricane warning, which tells the public that hurricane conditions are imminent or occurring, would not have verified. In that case, this was a good forecast. The NHC mentioned numerous times that stronger winds would be felt in the northeastern US and over the waters owing to the presence of the High pressure system over the same area.

[linkerweather]

From the article...This caught my attention...

The Hurricane Center downgraded Ernesto to a tropical depression at 11 a.m. EDT on Friday, September 1. An hour later buoys in Chesapeake Bay measured sustained winds of 52 and 56 mph, well above the threshold of 39 mph sustained winds that define a Tropical Storm.

Lets remember that this was becoming extratropical at that time as a strong high was off the northeast coast. A strong pressure gradient along with a becoming mid-latitude almost frontal low was forming.


From the 11 am advisory in question on Friday Sept 1....

...ERNESTO BECOMES A TROPICAL DEPRESSION...

AT 11 AM EDT...1200 UTC...THE TROPICAL STORM WARNING FROM CURRITUCK
BEACH LIGHT SOUTHWARD INCLUDING THE PAMLICO AND ALBEMARLE SOUNDS
HAS BEEN DISCONTINUED. GALE WARNINGS ARE NOW EFFECT FOR THE
ATLANTIC COAST AND THE CHESAPEAKE BAY FROM SURF CITY NORTH
CAROLINA NORTHWARD INTO NEW ENGLAND COASTAL WATERS. SEE PRODUCTS
ISSUED BY YOUR LOCAL NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE FORECAST OFFICE.
FOR STORM INFORMATION SPECIFIC TO YOUR AREA...INCLUDING POSSIBLE
INLAND WATCHES AND WARNINGS...PLEASE MONITOR PRODUCTS ISSUED
BY YOUR LOCAL WEATHER OFFICE.


It seems that accuwx did some very selective reporting.

As far as the watch being dropped when Ernesto was over Florida, so they dropped it, and responsibly re-issued it when it emerged a bit farther south along Florida's east coast.

This was a very difficult storm to forecast and I think that the NHC did an adequate job with the advisories. My only critique was that the NHC could have dropped the hurricane advisories for south florida one or 2 advisories earlier than they did.

[Frank2]

I won't say whether the NHC did right or wrong, since Ernesto was very difficult for anyone to forecast throughout it's lifespan, but, once again, AccuWeather is beating the "National Weather Service Reform Act" drum.

Unfortunately for their sour-grapes organization, I had recently received two e-mails from my State representatives in Congress, who both said that they do not plan to vote for this bill, since they feel it would deprive the public of weather information that can now be obtained for free.

Those at AccuWeather seem to enjoy sitting in their blue-blood Penn State judgement seats, only to throw darts at NOAA and/or the NHC whenever the opportunistic moment presents itself - perhaps they should move their operation to South Florida - they might sing a different tune if they endured what the hard-working folks at the NHC must endure...

Frank

[TampaSteve]

Joe Bastardi is a legend in his own mind.

I'll stick with the NHC...they don't have an agenda...

[flair]

Though I can't stand AccuWeather, they make some valid points here. Virginia was hit the hardest with Ernesto, but the TS warnings never made it past Currituck Beach Light, NC. There were sustained TS winds with gusts to around hurricane force on the VA coastline. This wasn't a "gale" or a "nor'easter" in VA, it was a tropical storm.

[tomboudreau]

Though I can't stand AccuWeather, they make some valid points here. Virginia was hit the hardest with Ernesto, but the TS warnings never made it past Currituck Beach Light, NC. There were sustained TS winds with gusts to around hurricane force on the VA coastline. This wasn't a "gale" or a "nor'easter" in VA, it was a tropical storm.

Most of those winds that were occuring up there where during the transition phase of the system. There was a large area of high pressure to the north of this system and as the storm was morning north, it was creating a very tight pressure gradiant. This was resulting in very strong winds. If I remember correctly, in the advisories for Erensto, NHC mentioned these winds and they said they were not directly part of the system because of this gradiant. I dont have any of the advisories on hand right now, but I believe I read this somewhere. I also believe these winds were the winds I was feeling right on the immediate coast, some 6 to 8 hours before the system made landfall, when I was on the coastline of the Outer Banks.

[Frank2]

Sure, some errors were made, but, with Ernesto, EVERYONE made errors in trying to predict it, from the very beginning...

What a bunch of dumb clucks up there - hopefully not everyone who lives in Pennsylvania is as critical...

Frank

[Okibeach]

"As forecast by the AccuWeather.com Hurricane Center, Tropical Storm Ernesto was a powerful and dangerous storm right through the Labor Day weekend, long after it made its second landfall near Long Beach NC, late on Thursday August 31"



Strange coincidence, or Accuweather quotes from the NHC. In the NHC landfall statement, they had originally stated that "E" made landfall near Long Beach NC. I wrote to the NHC and informed them that Long Beach became Oak Island back in 1999 when the towns of Long Beach and Yaupon Beach merged. They wrote me back and said they had been working from an outdated map and would correct it, which they have since done. In this article Accuweather makes the same incorrect statement, so either they both had very old maps, or Accuweather used that information from the NHC.

[CrazyC83]

While I hate their NHC-bashing, they do have a point here. I do believe that Ernesto was a hurricane at final landfall, and it was likely stronger than the NHC said after that landfall. However, they are wrong about one thing regarding the warnings: tropical storm and hurricane warnings only have meaning for the shorelines and coastal waters technically. Inland wind warnings cover the land areas.

[Frank2]

I think TampaSteve is onto something there - AccuWeather has been known to sensationalize everything since their begining almost 40 years ago - not a very professional organization (it's no wonder he's usually on the "pundit" news shows)...

[artist]

GALE WARNINGS ARE NOW EFFECT FOR THE
ATLANTIC COAST AND THE CHESAPEAKE BAY FROM SURF CITY NORTH
CAROLINA NORTHWARD INTO NEW ENGLAND COASTAL WATERS. SEE PRODUCTS
ISSUED BY YOUR LOCAL NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE FORECAST OFFICE.
FOR STORM INFORMATION SPECIFIC TO YOUR AREA...INCLUDING POSSIBLE
INLAND WATCHES AND WARNINGS...PLEASE MONITOR PRODUCTS ISSUED
BY YOUR LOCAL WEATHER OFFICE.

Does this not show the NHC covered it??? If the winds were being produced by the other system- not Ernesto- then that would be the responsibility of the local weather office as stated here!

[mitchell]

Most of those winds that were occuring up there where during the transition phase of the system. There was a large area of high pressure to the north of this system and as the storm was morning north, it was creating a very tight pressure gradiant. This was resulting in very strong winds.

Seems to me that most all winds are the result of pressure differential. As tropical systems move into the mid latitude, they almost always interact with high pressure systems and if the winds created by this gradiant are = or greater than TS velocity then i would think the downgrading would not be called for. The States of VA, MD, DE, and NJ all experienced sustained winds over 39 MPH and gusts in the 60-75 mph range after Ernesto was a tropical deperssion.

[weatherwoman]

I do enjoy reading Accuweather and I also have a lot of faith in what JB says. He did call Erni even told for days before where and how strong he though it would be when it hit. I dont like the bashing of any one so I wont do that. We all have our openion and listen to who we want. I also follow the nhc and the twc. we should not bash anyone, for their forecast. Hats off to all our pro mets!

[Fego]

From USA Today (AP):

... At least nine deaths have been attributed to Ernesto, and the after effects were still being felt Tuesday with about 60,000 people — some 15,000 homes and businesses — remaining without power in New York's Westchester County.

In Huntington, N.Y., a tree that was believed to be about 550 years old was weakened by the storm and fell Sunday. It was believed to be the oldest black oak in North America and once stood 90 feet high.

In North Carolina, the overflowing Northeast Cape Fear River began to recede Monday, although forecasters said it probably would not be back to its normal level until the end of the week. About 140 people were evacuated in Duplin and Pender counties.

The bottom line is that after arguments, explanations and opinions, Ernesto was indeed dangerous and destructive.

[tomboudreau]

Most of those winds that were occuring up there where during the transition phase of the system. There was a large area of high pressure to the north of this system and as the storm was morning north, it was creating a very tight pressure gradiant. This was resulting in very strong winds.

Seems to me that most all winds are the result of pressure differential. As tropical systems move into the mid latitude, they almost always interact with high pressure systems and if the winds created by this gradiant are = or greater than TS velocity then i would think the downgrading would not be called for. The States of VA, MD, DE, and NJ all experienced sustained winds over 39 MPH and gusts in the 60-75 mph range after Ernesto was a tropical deperssion.

By the time the system got well inland, the system had lost or was in the process of loosing all of its characterists. By loosing these, this system was no longer considered tropical and hence why the National Hurricane Center stopped issueing advisories on this system.

[Frank2]

A good point - the NHC did their duty until it moved inland, and passed it's forecasting responsibility to the NMC, which continued to issue various watches and warnings until the remnants finally dissipated over New York State...

As usual, AccuWeather gets the award for geing an armchair quaterback...

Frank

P.S. I once thought about employment there - glad it didn't go any further than that...

[brunota2003]

Here is a definition of libel, I find it an interesting read...to bad the NHC is gov't...

libel 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact, and is not clearly identified as an opinion. While it is sometimes said that the person making the libelous statement must have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious that the statement would do harm and is untrue. Proof of malice, however, does allow a party defamed to sue for "general damages" for damage to reputation, while an inadvertent libel limits the damages to actual harm (such as loss of business) called "special damages." "Libel per se" involves statements so vicious that malice is assumed and does not require a proof of intent to get an award of general damages. Libel against the reputation of a person who has died will allow surviving members of the family to bring an action for damages. Most states provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a lawsuit. Governmental bodies are supposedly immune for actions for libel on the basis that there could be no intent by a non-personal entity, and further, public records are exempt from claims of libel. However, there is at least one known case in which there was a financial settlement as well as a published correction when a state government newsletter incorrectly stated that a dentist had been disciplined for illegal conduct. The rules covering libel against a "public figure" (particularly a political or governmental person) are special, based on U. S. Supreme Court decisions. The key is that to uphold the right to express opinions or fair comment on public figures, the libel must be malicious to constitute grounds for a lawsuit for damages. Minor errors in reporting are not libel, such as saying Mrs. Jones was 55 when she was only 48, or getting an address or title incorrect. 2) v. to broadcast or publish a written defamatory statement.

Source: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/libel

[conestogo_flood]

You can't win em' all. This is just one small blunder out of several decades. Everything can't be perfect, and it's not like Ernesto was a category 3.

[Aquawind]

Reminder!


12. Storm2K.org does not allow personal attacks and/or personal insults of any kind directed to The National Hurricane Center, it’s staff or any other professional weather organization for that matter. While one may disagree it is very important we keep respecting the weather professionals and their opinions. We are expecting all members to act professionally at all times.

Please let's avoid the sarcastic insults. Let's be constructive and let the facts speak for themselves.