Human qualities of tropical cyclones

[MiamiensisWx]

Do you think tropical cyclones should be referred as "he", "she", or "it"?

Personally, here are my thoughts. I removed this post from another thread.

People sound very silly when they applaud a TC, regardless of their enthusiasm.

I'm not irritated about -removed-.

I'm irritated with the notion that tropical cyclones are humans.

They do not have a nerve system. They can't control their environment. They are not inherently good or evil. They should not be referred as "she" or "he" in the meteorological process.

This false premise leads to many busted forecasts. For example, some people assume a weak TC will overcome a hostile environment because of "persistence" and "the will to fight". That's false. Some factors (i.e. baroclinic influence and shallow structure) favored the formation and survival of Zeta, Epsilon, and Vince in an unfavorable UL shear regime. These tropical cyclones would have been short-lived (i.e. ~24-36 hours) without these conducive variables.

Storms do NOT fight against their environment.

I do not prefer TC monikers (i.e. Ivan the Terrible). I do not utilize "he" or "she". It disregards the fact that tropical cyclones are natural byproducts of their environment.

I apologize if this post sounds brash, but I was just offering some advice for TC forecasts.

[Cyclone1]

But you gotta admit, they DO have human qualities.

(eyes, arms, names, individuality, lifespan... )

[MiamiensisWx]

But you gotta admit, they DO have human qualities.

(eyes, arms, names, individuality, lifespan... )

Well, I would appreciate a serious response to this thread.

Many people think a storm will survive because of an internal "will to survive". One poster thought that was the case with Ingrid, thus leading to his call for regeneration in the Bahamas. That scenario did not materialize because the person failed to consider the hostile environment. Meteorology suffers when people refer to tropical cyclones as "he" or "she". I think too many people joke about tropical cyclones; the actual forecasting business is a serious procedure.

[Cyclone1]

I know people say that, but I don't think people actually believe it.

[MiamiensisWx]

I know people say that, but I don't think people actually believe it.

I disagree. Some personal forecasts told another tale. People tended to bend a TC toward land (or their home town) when it was blatantly obvious that a fish was inevitable. People erroneously overestimated (and overforecasted) the intensity of several storms because they assumed a TC would "overcome" unfavorable factors. Most forecasts are wishcasts, in my opinion. That diminishes the value of meteorology. People should tone down the hype and focus on reality.

Obviously, tropical cyclones are unpredictable, but I think you understand my side of the story.

[Cyclone1]

I know people say that, but I don't think people actually believe it.

I disagree. Some personal forecasts told another tale. People tended to bend a TC toward land (or their home town) when it was blatantly obvious that a fish was inevitable. People erroneously overestimated (and overforecasted) the intensity of several storms because they assumed a TC would "overcome" unfavorable factors. Most forecasts are wishcasts, in my opinion. That diminishes the value of meteorology. People should tone down the hype and focus on reality.

Obviously, tropical cyclones are unpredictable, but I think you understand my side of the story.

I understand totally, but that honestly has nothing to do with giving storms human qualities, that's just average -removed-.

[MiamiensisWx]

I understand totally, but that honestly has nothing to do with giving storms human qualities, that's just average -removed-.

Well, many of those people I disagree with give storms an equivalent status to humans. We saw numerous posts where people gave TC monikers. People hyped Dean when it was ~1,000 miles east of the Antilles. For example, one poster said Dean would likely enter the Gulf of Mexico as a major hurricane and pose a threat to the United States. That person did not provide any solid meteorological data to support his/her gut feeling (yes, I'll be blunt and call it a spade). Later, when that scenario did not materialize, the poster essentially declared the season as a "dud" for the United States. That person was probably sleeping when Wilma struck the United States in LATE OCTOBER and a Category 2 hurricane struck Miami, FL on November 4, 1935.

The personification of storms contributes to frivolous hype and premature "season cancel" posts because of long-range wishcasts and unreasonable expectations.

[Ed Mahmoud]

Of course its all just a big and complicated process that can ultimately be explained, if one knew every variable and every process involved, by physics, thermodynamics and chemistry.


But as long as they are assigned alternating male and female names due to the PC police, it is natural to refer to them as he or she.

[Stratosphere747]

Not sure if you pay attention to broadcasts when the NHC directors have been on. From Sheets to Frank to Mayfield, I've seen references to named storms by "he" or "she" by all of them. In fact Neil F. did it just this last year many a times during his local broadcasts.

The names are masculine/feminine in nature and as such will be used in that manner at times.

[Ed Mahmoud]

I do my best not to allow w!shcasting to affect my amateur opinions on how the weather is likely to turn out, but I do get excited when winter weather is predicted in Texas, or Southeast New York state, and they don't name winter storms or Arctic airmasses.

[MiamiensisWx]

Of course its all just a big and complicated process that can ultimately be explained, if one knew every variable and every process involved, by physics, thermodynamics and chemistry.


But as long as they are assigned alternating male and female names due to the PC police, it is natural to refer to them as he or she.

That does not imply people should encourage "human nature". Too many weenies allow personification and -removed- to affect their forecasts. I'll offer one classic example of hype that irritates me.

"After two straight seasons of the US being lucky,I believe the 2008 is going to be rockin' and rollin' We're likely to see a few hits from cat 2 to cat 5"

http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=99103&p=1669294&hilit=#p1669294

I wish people would stop posting these types of ****.

[Category 5]

I treat them almost human sometimes, but just for fun, I don't do it in serious conversation.

[Ed Mahmoud]

Of course its all just a big and complicated process that can ultimately be explained, if one knew every variable and every process involved, by physics, thermodynamics and chemistry.


But as long as they are assigned alternating male and female names due to the PC police, it is natural to refer to them as he or she.

That does not imply people should encourage "human nature". Too many weenies allow personification and -removed- to affect their forecasts. I'll offer one classic example of hype that irritates me.

"After two straight seasons of the US being lucky,I believe the 2008 is going to be rockin' and rollin' We're likely to see a few hits from cat 2 to cat 5"

http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=99103&p=1669294&hilit=#p1669294

I wish people would stop posting these types of ****.

I believe the more correct forecast was issued a few posts below that- I believe the US may, or may not, be hit, by one, or more, tropical cyclones between depression and Cat 5 strength.


Anyone who 'believes' anything about 2008 at this point is showing the same belief as one who believes in the Easter Bunny. Belief based on feelings, not scientific basis. I'll give limited credit to climatologists based on early signals, whether their forecasts turn out to be correct, or not, that they are at least looking at science.


For all we know, maybe the active phase of the Atlantic season is shorter this time than the last time, and we are about to enter a new quiet season or cycle, or maybe next year will be 1933 redux.


But hurricanes are sort of unique, they can last for days, even weeks, unlike a tornado or earthquake or most other natural disasters/phenomena, so it is natural that people will be interested in individual cyclone events. Speaking of tornadoes, I have seen descriptions of them that almost gives them human character, like 'capriciously' destroying one home while leaving a neighboring one undamaged. That kind of thing.

[Dionne]

I see no "human qualities" in tropical cyclones/hurricanes.

There is definitely no -removed- going on in this household.

Most folks around here don't even use the "Katrina" word......now it's simply "The Storm".

But now that I think about it......Katrina was a b*tch. Still is for a lot of folks.

[Ivanhater]

Who cares?...I think it is a rdiculous assumption that meteorology suffers when people give human atributes to storms...how?..There are things about storm intensity and movement that cannot be explained yet. I still refer to Ivan as a he and Ivan the terrible..why?..because "HE" was...the effects of storms in peoples lives are personal so that is why people make storms personable...so who cares?

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

I understand what you mean from a meteorological standpoint Miami,
but fail to see why amateurs deserve such harsh criticism.

[Squarethecircle]

I know several people (Cyclone1) who make a good case in stating that the quirks of TCs evoke thoughts of human nature*. One interesting example is a counter to your thoughts on "pulling through." People have similar wishes for their favorite sports teams or people with deadly diseases. When you make the comparisons, remarkably, while there is a percentage difference, an extraordinary amount of these predictions, hurricane and human, are incorrect.

*Some other good examples include the unpredictability of the complex system, the remarkable effect of environment on the system's travel, or how little control it really has over itself, the high moments and low moments of a storm, the ability to strengthen, and the fact that after it's prime, it quickly fades away, loses tropical characteristics, and often dissipates, or spins into the void.

Not to be offensive to humans, that is.