What is the future of this season?

[ConvergenceZone]

One thing that is interesting to do is to go back to prior threads from earlier in the season---there were so many folks doubting we would even have an average # of storms as late as July.

I guess it comes down to this - even a guess can prove to be correct, but if someone's prediction for a season can't be backed up by science, have they really shown anything except that they happened to luck out and guess right?

I was one of those that was wrong about the TOTAL storms for the year, and I openly admit it.
I was thinking maybe 12 at the most. That really active couple of weeks allowed us to pass that number.

With that said, I was also skeptical about the season remaining really active through December. You probably
remember that there were many folks stating that because it's La Nina that it would be really active.

I think the main reason I didn't think it would be really active through December was because of how difficult
it's been for systems to get going(outside of those 2 reallly hyper active weeks). It just seemed to be a struggle due
to troughs, shear, dry air etc.... So my thinking was that, there's no way it's going to be really active through
December.... Perhaps a storm or two from here on out, but that's it (in my opinion).

[dwsqos2]

Given that Otto's a hurricane, and given that it's extraordinarily common to see a hurricane in the Atlantic in or after late October (i.e. after the 15th) with +AMO and-ENSO, I am increasing my post-October 1 call from 3/1/0 to 3/2/0.

And, sorry but 1981 is not a good analog for this season. Basically nothing occurred in the extreme western portion of the basin that year. This year we had Alex, Karl, Hermine, and Matthew, all of which had tropical origins. Actually, that's another gripe with the 1981 analog. Emily, Bret, Cindy, and subtropical storm 3 had non-tropical origins. That's a hefty percentage of the seasonal total produced by higher latitude features. This season we have seen only one named storm and a TD produced by non-tropical entities: Tropical Depression 5 and Otto. 33% (4 of 12 in 1981) vs. ~7% (1 of 15 in 2010)

[HurrMark]

We need to all accept the fact that
even with today's science it
is still VERY VERY difficult to predict
the weather. I just don't understand how
anyone can predict that an area in particular
is more likely to have a tropical system then another
3-4 months out. Heck the NWS and others have
hard time predicting the weather 1 week out.

And that's why the NHC/HRD Directors of the 1980's did not want to follow the CSU way of starting to write hurricane forecasts months in advance, since the Directors of that time correctly believed that it served no purpose - other than to give the media a reason (as they do) to sensationalize a press release...

Some say the long-range forecasts help Governments prepare for a busy season, but again the NHC/HRD thinking of the 1980's said that preparation should be a constant - not just when a busy season is forecast...

As said many weeks ago, this season is very similar to 1981:

http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atl ... index.html

as compared to this year's map:

http://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/at2010.asp

when the subtropical ridge was mostly an Azores high, instead of a Bermuda high - and is a blessing to us all...

My advice - stop listening to the University research crowd and instead follow the operational crowd, since operational meteorologists, unlike the "publish or perish" University crowd, are there to forecast what is "on the map", as they used to say at the NHC, and are not dependant on a computer model that spits out disaster scenarios weeks in advance - only to be wrong...

Frank

1981 is a decent analog, but I think 1990 is better simply because of Diana and the higher storm total.

[StormClouds63]

My guess prior to June 1 was 13/7/3 ... so no trophies for me, either. However, the re-curve scenario in the Atlantic and the hostile conditions in the GOM were talked about by many of us as being signatures of this season. There were really no changes to those trends once the season got started. I'm not complaining, since Rita and Ike were a handful.

I do have concerns regarding the seasonal forecasts and potential apathy among the general public. On June 1, 2010, everyone was prepared for a busy season. The media hammered the message over and over. I hope on June 1, 2011, as many, if not more people, are prepared as well. However, some will look back on this season, and may be reluctant to buy supplies and protect property, especially with the bad economy.

[Steve]

>>My advice - stop listening to the University research crowd and instead follow the operational crowd, since operational meteorologists, unlike the "publish or perish" University crowd, are there to forecast what is "on the map", as they used to say at the NHC, and are not dependant on a computer model that spits out disaster scenarios weeks in advance - only to be wrong.

That's kind of an ignorant approach. It's not that far off from assuming the world is flat because it looks that way. Science and humanity progress by reaching beyond the known limits. Let's look at a severe weather threat for instance. You're in Oklahoma, it's May in the morning, the sky is blue. That's what's right there in front of you. But if there's a chance that you could be impacted by severe weather that afternoon, you're going to want to know so that you can stay on top of things. Take it a step further. Say you're leaving town for a few days and wonder the best way to deal with your property or livestock for the duration. You'll want some type of head's up on what might happen while you're gone. Again, some severe cell is not on the map 3, 5 or 10 days out. But if the threat is there, anyone with any common sense would want to know. Same goes for winter. You're leaving town. Cold air is up in Canada, you're in North Florida. Low pressure hasn't formed yet to drag down the teens into Tallahassee. But if the threat is there, and you're going out of town, maybe you drip the faucets or make arrangements to get a key to someone to run them for you while you're away to prevent your pipes from bursting. Now take it out a little further. Why would you not want to speculate on whether it's potentially a severe thunderstorm season or whether record cold might affect your area in wintertime? How is this any different from the steadily progressing science of seasonal forecasts? Obviously we don't know where landfall will be months out, but I want to know the threat. I'm not going to wait until the day before landfall to pay attention. I want to be keyed in. And while the science itself may be two steps forward, one step back, you have progression. I defy you to find any of the credible numbers forecasts from this year that ended up bunk (and wait to do that until the season is officially over). But for my money, Accuweather, CSU, NOAA/NHC and others have put out very credible work that most likely will come close to verifying. Why would anyone with any interest in hurricanes or meteorology not have an interest in this? I think you are giving people terrible advice. If some can't handle the truth, then they should watch sensationalism or 24 hour news channels. For the rest of us, we'll appreciate the efforts of those reaching to further our understanding. If it hurts your feelings that the material is out there, too bad. You don't read it.

[Ivanhater]

>>My advice - stop listening to the University research crowd and instead follow the operational crowd, since operational meteorologists, unlike the "publish or perish" University crowd, are there to forecast what is "on the map", as they used to say at the NHC, and are not dependant on a computer model that spits out disaster scenarios weeks in advance - only to be wrong.

That's kind of an ignorant approach. It's not that far off from assuming the world is flat because it looks that way. Science and humanity progress by reaching beyond the known limits. Let's look at a severe weather threat for instance. You're in Oklahoma, it's May in the morning, the sky is blue. That's what's right there in front of you. But if there's a chance that you could be impacted by severe weather that afternoon, you're going to want to know so that you can stay on top of things. Take it a step further. Say you're leaving town for a few days and wonder the best way to deal with your property or livestock for the duration. You'll want some type of head's up on what might happen while you're gone. Again, some severe cell is not on the map 3, 5 or 10 days out. But if the threat is there, anyone with any common sense would want to know. Same goes for winter. You're leaving town. Cold air is up in Canada, you're in North Florida. Low pressure hasn't formed yet to drag down the teens into Tallahassee. But if the threat is there, and you're going out of town, maybe you drip the faucets or make arrangements to get a key to someone to run them for you while you're away to prevent your pipes from bursting. Now take it out a little further. Why would you not want to speculate on whether it's potentially a severe thunderstorm season or whether record cold might affect your area in wintertime? How is this any different from the steadily progressing science of seasonal forecasts? Obviously we don't know where landfall will be months out, but I want to know the threat. I'm not going to wait until the day before landfall to pay attention. I want to be keyed in. And while the science itself may be two steps forward, one step back, you have progression. I defy you to find any of the credible numbers forecasts from this year that ended up bunk (and wait to do that until the season is officially over). But for my money, Accuweather, CSU, NOAA/NHC and others have put out very credible work that most likely will come close to verifying. Why would anyone with any interest in hurricanes or meteorology not have an interest in this? I think you are giving people terrible advice. If some can't handle the truth, then they should watch sensationalism or 24 hour news channels. For the rest of us, we'll appreciate the efforts of those reaching to further our understanding. If it hurts your feelings that the material is out there, too bad. You don't read it.

Great post Steve. I'll add a little if I may. How do you think the "Operational crowd" got here? The NHC Operational products we use today were once experimental. Even the NHC is using experimental products currently that the public has access to. These current experimental products will soon become operational. The notion that the Operational NHC is completely detached from the "University experimental crowd" is a complete misstatement. They go hand in hand and if a portion of the public wants access to it, they should.

[hurricaneCW]

Well I think it's pretty safe to say that the U.S. has been spared from a major landfall, which is quite shocking due to the high level of activity this year and the forecasts that had a very high likelihood of a hurricane making landfall in the U.S. Now it's not over just yet, but with the increased troughiness, more dry air, and stronger shear, it will be difficult for a big storm to impact the U.S. from this point on, and no model shows anything remotely dangerous for the U.S.

The problem now is that the public will become much more complacent due to the high expectation of a strong hurricane impact this season. We all know that it's been an active season, but the public only measures activity based on U.S. impacts. So, it wouldn't matter if we had 10 majors, if none of them affected the U.S., then the public would see it as a quiet season. However, due to the crazy hype of this season, the complacency factor will be very high for future seasons.

This is why I hate the hype, it's so dangerous because of the whole "the boy who cried wolf" theory. Next time an active hurricane threat is issued (which will probably be the 2011 season considering the probable weakening la nina/neutral signal, no el nino signs), the public will pay very little attention to it, and when a big storm does really threaten, many people may ignore the warnings causing a lot of death and destruction.

[Ivanhater]

Well I think it's pretty safe to say that the U.S. has been spared from a major landfall, which is quite shocking due to the high level of activity this year and the forecasts that had a very high likelihood of a hurricane making landfall in the U.S. Now it's not over just yet, but with the increased troughiness, more dry air, and stronger shear, it will be difficult for a big storm to impact the U.S. from this point on, and no model shows anything remotely dangerous for the U.S.

The problem now is that the public will become much more complacent due to the high expectation of a strong hurricane impact this season. We all know that it's been an active season, but the public only measures activity based on U.S. impacts. So, it wouldn't matter if we had 10 majors, if none of them affected the U.S., then the public would see it as a quiet season. However, due to the crazy hype of this season, the complacency factor will be very high for future seasons.

This is why I hate the hype, it's so dangerous because of the whole "the boy who cried wolf" theory. Next time an active hurricane threat is issued (which will probably be the 2011 season considering the probable weakening la nina/neutral signal, no el nino signs), the public will pay very little attention to it, and when a big storm does really threaten, many people may ignore the warnings causing a lot of death and destruction.

I don't think we give enough credit to the "joe blow public". The very active forecasts were spot on. We got lucky as for no U.S hurricane hits. I don't think because of getting lucky even with all the activity that the public becomes complacent. Most of the public knows weather is fickle. They only need to turn to the local 3 day forecast to know that. Most of the public who lives in a hurricane zone know when it comes to hurricanes, there is a threat. I don't buy the argument that the public is as stupid as is sometimes portrayed.

[ConvergenceZone]

Well I think it's pretty safe to say that the U.S. has been spared from a major landfall, which is quite shocking due to the high level of activity this year and the forecasts that had a very high likelihood of a hurricane making landfall in the U.S. Now it's not over just yet, but with the increased troughiness, more dry air, and stronger shear, it will be difficult for a big storm to impact the U.S. from this point on, and no model shows anything remotely dangerous for the U.S.

The problem now is that the public will become much more complacent due to the high expectation of a strong hurricane impact this season. We all know that it's been an active season, but the public only measures activity based on U.S. impacts. So, it wouldn't matter if we had 10 majors, if none of them affected the U.S., then the public would see it as a quiet season. However, due to the crazy hype of this season, the complacency factor will be very high for future seasons.

This is why I hate the hype, it's so dangerous because of the whole "the boy who cried wolf" theory. Next time an active hurricane threat is issued (which will probably be the 2011 season considering the probable weakening la nina/neutral signal, no el nino signs), the public will pay very little attention to it, and when a big storm does really threaten, many people may ignore the warnings causing a lot of death and destruction.

I agree, the hype from the media regarding such a horrible and violent hurricane season was laughable........I've never going to listen to it again, that's for sure!!!!!
I'm just going to pay attention to the numbers they are predicting, and ignore any landfall predictions they make, because they will only be wrong.

[vbhoutex]

Well I think it's pretty safe to say that the U.S. has been spared from a major landfall, which is quite shocking due to the high level of activity this year and the forecasts that had a very high likelihood of a hurricane making landfall in the U.S. Now it's not over just yet, but with the increased troughiness, more dry air, and stronger shear, it will be difficult for a big storm to impact the U.S. from this point on, and no model shows anything remotely dangerous for the U.S.

The problem now is that the public will become much more complacent due to the high expectation of a strong hurricane impact this season. We all know that it's been an active season, but the public only measures activity based on U.S. impacts. So, it wouldn't matter if we had 10 majors, if none of them affected the U.S., then the public would see it as a quiet season. However, due to the crazy hype of this season, the complacency factor will be very high for future seasons.

This is why I hate the hype, it's so dangerous because of the whole "the boy who cried wolf" theory. Next time an active hurricane threat is issued (which will probably be the 2011 season considering the probable weakening la nina/neutral signal, no el nino signs), the public will pay very little attention to it, and when a big storm does really threaten, many people may ignore the warnings causing a lot of death and destruction.

I don't think we give enough credit to the "joe blow public". The very active forecasts were spot on. We got lucky as for no U.S hurricane hits. I don't think because of getting lucky even with all the activity that the public becomes complacent. Most of the public knows weather is fickle. They only need to turn to the local 3 day forecast to know that. Most of the public who lives in a hurricane zone know when it comes to hurricanes, there is a threat. I don't buy the argument that the public is as stupid as is sometimes portrayed.

I have to disagree with you Michael and I think I know why. Your area has been hit more than we have here in the Houston/Galveston area even though we have had a more recent devastating strike. I still see/hear people here that have no idea what is going on in the tropics and I think it is more prevalent than it isn't prevalent. Sad, but true. I don't understand why either. And to top it off when I do hear someone in public talking about the tropics they think they are experts because they went through Ike, yet they are giving out false or unverifiable information just trying to look like they know what they are talking about. I usually don't try to correct these people because it isn't worth my time generally and hopefully people do listen to the news/weather at least once a day(yeah, stupid assumption). I hope you are right and I am wrong, but...????

[Ivanhater]

Well I think it's pretty safe to say that the U.S. has been spared from a major landfall, which is quite shocking due to the high level of activity this year and the forecasts that had a very high likelihood of a hurricane making landfall in the U.S. Now it's not over just yet, but with the increased troughiness, more dry air, and stronger shear, it will be difficult for a big storm to impact the U.S. from this point on, and no model shows anything remotely dangerous for the U.S.

The problem now is that the public will become much more complacent due to the high expectation of a strong hurricane impact this season. We all know that it's been an active season, but the public only measures activity based on U.S. impacts. So, it wouldn't matter if we had 10 majors, if none of them affected the U.S., then the public would see it as a quiet season. However, due to the crazy hype of this season, the complacency factor will be very high for future seasons.

This is why I hate the hype, it's so dangerous because of the whole "the boy who cried wolf" theory. Next time an active hurricane threat is issued (which will probably be the 2011 season considering the probable weakening la nina/neutral signal, no el nino signs), the public will pay very little attention to it, and when a big storm does really threaten, many people may ignore the warnings causing a lot of death and destruction.

I don't think we give enough credit to the "joe blow public". The very active forecasts were spot on. We got lucky as for no U.S hurricane hits. I don't think because of getting lucky even with all the activity that the public becomes complacent. Most of the public knows weather is fickle. They only need to turn to the local 3 day forecast to know that. Most of the public who lives in a hurricane zone know when it comes to hurricanes, there is a threat. I don't buy the argument that the public is as stupid as is sometimes portrayed.

I have to disagree with you Michael and I think I know why. Your area has been hit more than we have here in the Houston/Galveston area even though we have had a more recent devastating strike. I still see/hear people here that have no idea what is going on in the tropics and I think it is more prevalent than it isn't prevalent. Sad, but true. I don't understand why either. And to top it off when I do hear someone in public talking about the tropics they think they are experts because they went through Ike, yet they are giving out false or unverifiable information just trying to look like they know what they are talking about. I usually don't try to correct these people because it isn't worth my time generally and hopefully people do listen to the news/weather at least once a day(yeah, stupid assumption). I hope you are right and I am wrong, but...????

Great points David and I think the answer may be somewhere in the middle? There will probably always be a certain percentage of the population that just "don't get it". You can insert any issue for that certain group, outside of the tropical issue

I do think a larger portion of the population that lives in a threat zone are well aware of the danger that exists for them, no matter what the forecast shows for that year. Even if the forecast is for a slow year, those that have lived in a hurricane zone for a while, know they can easily be hit.

I will differ to your point about those people that have and never will get it. If anyone has a solution to get the message through to these people, please let me know

[hurricaneCW]

The people that have an idea of the danger are usually the ones that have been through some kind of a storm and it really hit them hard. Still, there a many people who have been affected by a hurricane but the damage was rather minimal so they act similar to the people that live in the threat zone that have never been affected.

The people that live in the danger zone, which is in the millions of course and a huge chunk of the U.S. population, don't really know too much about the tropics. They think they know, but they really don't. Having someone someone say that they've been through a major hurricane but barely had any damage and then tell others that it's no big deal, is a very hazardous train of thought. Plus, people think that just because they had a hit by a Cat 3 or something but have endured little damage believe that a major in not that big of a deal.

They don't realize that only a very small area is ever directly impacted by Cat 3 winds and generally only the immediate coast is impacted by the surge. There is also this assumption that if a storm is weaker than a Cat 3 then it's nothing more than a windy rainstorm that blows the leaves around. Hopefully storms like Ike have changed some of that way of thinking, but I highly doubt it.

The coastal population will only continue to grow and expand yet the majority of people will remain clueless about the tropics, and one day it will lead to a disaster that extends far and beyond Katrina's reign in both lives and cost.

[gatorcane]

Great discussions in this thread. But it seems that many are claiming the season is over for the united states?

October is typically the most active months for hurricanes in south Florida than any other month.

Not only that, but while discussions have been ongoing this week in this thread, we have been discussing the possibility of development in the western Caribbean.

Come join us in the active systems thread as we now have an invest. Cuba, the Bahamas, and/or South Florida would be at risk if this develops.

[Florida1118]

Well I think it's pretty safe to say that the U.S. has been spared from a major landfall, which is quite shocking due to the high level of activity this year and the forecasts that had a very high likelihood of a hurricane making landfall in the U.S. Now it's not over just yet, but with the increased troughiness, more dry air, and stronger shear, it will be difficult for a big storm to impact the U.S. from this point on, and no model shows anything remotely dangerous for the U.S.

The problem now is that the public will become much more complacent due to the high expectation of a strong hurricane impact this season. We all know that it's been an active season, but the public only measures activity based on U.S. impacts. So, it wouldn't matter if we had 10 majors, if none of them affected the U.S., then the public would see it as a quiet season. However, due to the crazy hype of this season, the complacency factor will be very high for future seasons.

This is why I hate the hype, it's so dangerous because of the whole "the boy who cried wolf" theory. Next time an active hurricane threat is issued (which will probably be the 2011 season considering the probable weakening la nina/neutral signal, no el nino signs), the public will pay very little attention to it, and when a big storm does really threaten, many people may ignore the warnings causing a lot of death and destruction.

Exactly. Lets see....1992? Oh well. The media sucks and we don't control it. Personally, i only listen to crtain news channels because many National ones lie all the time and it makes me really ticked off. One day Mama Nature's gonna rest each city (ie. Miami-1992, NO-2005...), It just depends on how each city prepares. If the Public wants to ignore Mets. and stay home and drown or be crushed, be my guest. I dont think areas are a good idea either. I believe this years was...High risk from Brownsville to NY? Wow helpful. Oh well. All I can say is that if the public is gonna say Agency's were cryin Wolf, oh well. There the ones that are gonna get eaten per say.

[FireRat]

Yep Gatorcane, October is the biggest month for landfalls here, notoriously October 17-18 and near the 25th. Until we pass these dates I would not call the season off by any means!!

[Steve]

The immediate future of the season looks like 1 or 2 threats to Cuba, maybe Florida and the Bahamas. There are solutions ranging from a slow moving system up toward the Bahamas to a GEM/CMC solution which brings a much stronger second system up toward Central Cuba. This is from one of today's runs.

http://raleighwx.easternuswx.com/models ... MLoop.html

[WeatherGuesser]

Anybody fined it odd that Newfoundland has gotten it worse than Florida so far this year?

[tolakram]

The average "John Doe" probably thinks the 2010 season was inactive since no storms affected the U.S. A case can be made that seasonal forecasts themselves aren't terribly relevant.

When the media trumps a season as big for the US and few systems hit the US then John Doe is right, it was inactive. Such is the clear danger of trying to predict landfalls. I don't mind seasonal forecasts at all, but landfall predictions have NO SKILL WHATSOEVER and quantifying them is not science. I have the same beef with counting number of systems, but at least those do show some skill (verifiable results).

There are many ways landfall risks can be discussed in a hurricane prediction report without placing specific percentages on them. Now that this season is nearing an end any ounce of skill that might have been shown in landfall predictions, and I claim there is none, is certainly reduced to near zero now.

[dwsqos2]

If you think about it, landfall forecasts should have some skill. A landfall forecast for hurricane season is pretty much a long-range 500 mb forecast for the Atlantic Basin and U.S. during the months of July, August, September, and October. Considering that some have some success in forecasting long-range long wave patters during the winter months, and considering that long wave patterns are more stable during the summer months (July, August, early-mid September) (i.e. wavelength is longer and has lower amplitude), it follows that this skill should translate into a decent landfall forecast.

IMO, the incredible push toward a raging Nina really ruined the landfall prognostications. The MEI is currently -1.99; it hasn't been near that value since the 1970s.

EDIT-Since TS Paula appears imminent, I am bumping up my post-October 1 call to 4/2/0. I have a chance to bust on the no majors post-Oct. 1 call if the gfs upper-level winds verify in the longer range, but I will remain stubborn for now.

[Ptarmigan]

Well I think it's pretty safe to say that the U.S. has been spared from a major landfall, which is quite shocking due to the high level of activity this year and the forecasts that had a very high likelihood of a hurricane making landfall in the U.S. Now it's not over just yet, but with the increased troughiness, more dry air, and stronger shear, it will be difficult for a big storm to impact the U.S. from this point on, and no model shows anything remotely dangerous for the U.S.

The problem now is that the public will become much more complacent due to the high expectation of a strong hurricane impact this season. We all know that it's been an active season, but the public only measures activity based on U.S. impacts. So, it wouldn't matter if we had 10 majors, if none of them affected the U.S., then the public would see it as a quiet season. However, due to the crazy hype of this season, the complacency factor will be very high for future seasons.

This is why I hate the hype, it's so dangerous because of the whole "the boy who cried wolf" theory. Next time an active hurricane threat is issued (which will probably be the 2011 season considering the probable weakening la nina/neutral signal, no el nino signs), the public will pay very little attention to it, and when a big storm does really threaten, many people may ignore the warnings causing a lot of death and destruction.

Well said! This could lead to complacency and that is what I fear the most. I do wonder about 2011 season. Could 2011 have just as warm waters as this year?