Statement from NOAA

NOAA ^ | 6SEP2019 | Unknown NOAA Spokesperson

[NELSON111]

>>>I only hear about Tweets second hand and certainly don’t get my gov’t NWS info there

That says more about you than anything. Many people do.

It's obvious you have never worked at this level. You've never worked with local and state EM's...given them an all clear and then had them freak out because a NATIONAL leader is telling them something different. If you HAD - you would see this differently.

[NELSON111]

Sorry - you do NOT know what you are looking at....LOL. That "sliver" of forecasted winds is NOT a forecast for actual tropical winds. That is a hypothetical worst case scenario.

See - you don't know what you are doing. When you look at the TRACK from Sept 1 - and then you look at the wind field from the wind field from the 15z forecast advisory - you will see that the MOST the winds EVER extend out to the SW is 70NM...and the most the EVER extend out to the NW is 100NM.

And you CANNOT say "who cares about CUba" - because if you think your interpretation of the map means what you believe it means - then Cuba must still be under threat from tropical storm force winds at 11 am on 1 Sept - which is most certainly is not. That's because that is not what the ERA map is for.

GO ahead...look at your little map there and see if 70-100NM from the center reaches to ALabama...lol! Go ahead.

For the Record, this is the OFFICIAL wid forecast field from Dorian when he was at his closest approach to Alabama. You will see that the winds are still VERY far away from Alabama.
FORECAST VALID 04/1200Z 29.7N 80.2W
MAX WIND 100 KT...GUSTS 120 KT.
50 KT... 70NE 60SE 40SW 50NW.
34 KT...140NE 150SE 70SW 100NW.

Go ahead and measure yourself. You will see the distance is actually about 200-211 miles, depending on how you measure.

[NELSON111]

>>>All contradicted by an *official* NOAA statement, including contemporaneous predicted storm impact forecasts to backup the statement

That "official" is full of crap. Go look at the OFFICIAL track...the computer models at the time...and overlay the forecasted wind field that are in the OFFICIAL NHC advisory (specifically advisory #33 - showing Dorian moving 300 miles EAST of Alabama with tropical storm-force winds ONLY 100 WEST of the center at the time of closet approach to Alabama.

Now - if yo ucan do some simple math...300 - 100 = 200. That means that tropical storm force winds are going to be 200 miles away from your state at the closest approach according to OFFICIAL NHC FORECASTS at the time of the tweet.

I DO NOT CARE what ANY official says. If I a desk forecaster who has to coordinate with local emergency management officials...and the hurricane center puts out an OFFICIAL product that takes the track of the storm 300 miles EAST of y state with tropical storm-force winds 200 miles EAST of my state...I am telling my people "DO NOT WORRY.

And so yould you. You would do your job and not be a yes man.

[NELSON111]

>>>And in your previous post you claim Alabama was 200 miles outside the wind probability map. Who cares about Cuba. Give it up

Thought I would help you with some simple math.

On advisory #33, the closest approach to Alabama was 300 miles.
The TS force winds, according to the forecast advisory only extended out 100 miles in the NW quad.

300-100=200.

And, you may or may NOT know - the forecast advisory for winds is for winds over WATER (not land). Those winds very rarely extend over land. Most experienced forecasters know this. For example, even though Dorian's hurricane wind field went well inland over SC and NC, nobody really saw sustained hurricane winds as it went by. Some gusts, yes, but the only sustained winds were right at the coasts and those were few and far between.

[Paladin2]

Tweets seem to be a very unsecure channel if you are wanting to send official though apparently non-tranparent [to the general public] info to other public entities.

[NELSON111]

>>>Tweets seem to be a very unsecure channel if you are wanting to send official though apparently non-tranparent [to the general public] info to other public entities.

Tell that to Trump

If you have never worked with state and local EM's during an event like this - then you cannot IMAGINE what the Birmingham office was facing or what they were going through. What likely happened is they "broadcasted on all frequencies" in response to false information.

One of the biggest problems my bosses faced was interfacing with state and local EM. Why? Because 1) They want support and info but 2) They don't want to be told what to do because they want to be left alone. When they are given an "all-clear" by national and state officials - then they hear something else - it causes problems. And rumors fly around ANYWAY - just like war. That was always a problem. But when you have misleading Tweets - that is NOT helpful. There are certain checklists that are followed, CAT's are created ETC. I had to deal with that before but under different circumstances (usually, track changes). The state and local politicians hate it.

[NELSON111]

Let’s settle this once and for all. I have access to a program that only emergency managers, the government and meteorologists have access to. The Birmingham office uses it. It's called Hurrevac. I will show you EXACTLY what they were looking at when they tweeted and why it was a reasonable forecast.

This is the location of Dorian (with the track it has made since overlayed) for advisory #33 on 1 Sept, at 11 AM EDT.

This is the FORECASTED wind field straight from the OFFICIAL NHC advisory at it's closest approach to Alabama - in 72 hours - valid for 4 Sept at 11 AM EDT -

As you can clearly see - the tropical storm winds are BARELY touching the coasts of Florida and Georgia and TS winds are well away from Alabama....187 miles to be exact. HOWEVER - that would only the case over water - and in reality, they would never really extend that far overland.

So - as the OFFICIAL NHC forecast products show on intra-governmental programs available to NOAA weather offices and emergency managers PROVE - Alabama was never under any threat.

That's the facts - according to the data.

[NELSON111]

Let’s settle this once and for all. I have access to a program that only emergency managers, the government and meteorologists have access to. The Birmingham office uses it. It's called Hurrevac. I will show you EXACTLY what they were looking at when they tweeted and why it was a reasonable forecast.

This is the location of Dorian (with the track it has made since overlayed) for advisory #33 on 1 Sept, at 11 AM EDT.

This is the FORECASTED wind field straight from the OFFICIAL NHC advisory at it's closest approach to Alabama - in 72 hours - valid for 4 Sept at 11 AM EDT -

As you can clearly see - the tropical storm winds are BARELY touching the coasts of Florida and Georgia and TS winds are well away from Alabama....187 miles to be exact. HOWEVER - that would only the case over water - and in reality, they would never really extend that far overland.

So - as the OFFICIAL NHC forecast products show on intra-governmental programs available to NOAA weather offices and emergency managers PROVE - Alabama was never under any threat.

That's the facts - according to the data.

[NELSON111]

>>>All contradicted by an *official* NOAA statement, including contemporaneous predicted storm impact forecasts to backup the statement

And BTW - those very same "officials" are the enemy. THEY are the ones who push the AGW agenda...not your local WFOs. You ought to be ashamed of yourself for even supporting ANYTHING they say - every stinking one of them is an enemy of the US. Ask someone who works for a regional HQ that is a conservative - or someone who works for a WFO about what they spend their a LOT time on: Writing worthless reports on climate change for NOAA.

I have two friends who work for southern region HQ, one for the ROC and NOAA HQ makes them search for climate change-related garbage all the time to push the agenda.

A big failure of Trump has been a failure to purge NOAA of the AGW crowd which is KILLING real science in meteorology. Do NOT give these people ANY credit. IF they do something to help Trump - it is because they have an agenda. They are politicians FIRST AND FOREMOST - NOT great meteorologists who have a clue about real forecasting. They are the SAME people who say the world as we know it will end in <12 years if we don't stop CO2...and they are working with AOC and her ilk.

KNOW your real enemy.

[elpadre]

it’s a matter of record; there was early on TV broadcasts showing the eye of the storm crossing Florida into the Gulf of Mexico and a projected cone into the Alabama/Mississippi area. Look it up!!!

[Some Fat Guy in L.A.]

This is the stupidest “controversy” I’ve ever seen. The initial projections, when the storm was still off Puerto Rico, showed several models taking it across Florida and into the Gulf, where it would have hooked right and up through the Panhandle and Alabama. Even when the path shifted east there were still projections that took it right up the middle of Florida, which would still have impacted southeast Alabama. The President’s words at the time were accurate and meant to warn people to stay alert. Anyone who says differently is a partisan butthole.

[palmer]

Let’s settle this once and for all. I have access to a program that only emergency managers, the government and meteorologists have access to.

You do understand that's still arbitrary right? Before Sunday the Euro and GFS were worlds apart. The GFS had the track across Florida and Euro had the turn, then they switched although the Euro was still off the Florida coast. The NHC had to guess at the track you displayed and they made the correct decision in hindsight. That doesn't mean the forecast was going to be correct. On the contrary the Bermuda high could have strengthened a bit and caused the hurricane to meander west over Florida and eventually enter the gulf.

Saturday 5am: "The track forecast becomes much more problematic after 48 h. The global models the NHC normally uses, along with the regional HWRF and HMON models, have made another shift to the east to the point where none of them forecast Dorian to make landfall in Florida. However, the UKMET ensemble mean still brings the hurricane over the Florida peninsula, as do several GFS and ECMWF ensemble members." So still a possibility of crossing into the Gulf of Mexico, in fact a distinct possibility on Saturday.

Sunday 5am: "By tonight, the global models show the ridge weakening, and this evolution should result in a slowing of the forward speed, with the hurricane becoming nearly stationary around 48 hours. In comparison to its earlier runs, the new ECMWF track forecast takes the system farther to the west during the next couple of days, and is the southwesternmost model through 48 hours."

So while still off the coast, still some uncertainty. Discussions archived at: https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2019/DORIAN.shtml?

You can't use that Sunday Sep 1 track diagram to describe that uncertainty, it's not displayed. The track is a decision based on a variety of track models and changes in those models. You certainly cannot use the fact that the track eventually verified to assume there was no uncertainty. If you want to display model runs or describe the uncertainty some other way, that's fine.

[NELSON111]

The tweet by the POTUS was from Sunday morning. The tweet by the NWS office was from 3 hours later. If you look at the 6z models on the 1st, they are clustered. But-my point on the post is very simple-the wind swath of the official forecast by the NHC along the official track misses Alabama by 200 miles. The TS winds only extend to the west by 100 miles. The track is 300 miles to the east. At the time of the tweet by the POTUS not one reliable model or the official forecast put the track close enough to Alabama to give them any realistic threat for EM planning purposes-which is probably the purpose of the tweet-because they had been given an all clear by the State EOC and now a tweet is causing their phones to blow up.

Stop being “of the body” and just do some logical thinking “FRiend.” I am “not of the body.” Lol. I call it like I see it.

[palmer]

But-my point on the post is very simple-the wind swath of the official forecast by the NHC along the official track misses Alabama by 200 miles. The TS winds only extend to the west by 100 miles. The track is 300 miles to the east. At the time of the tweet by the POTUS

The official track doesn't represent the possible tracks, that's why it is a line. The cone is not the "wind swath", it's a set of circles that depict the possible positions of the center of the hurricane: "The size of each circle is set so that two-thirds of historical official forecast errors over a 5-year sample fall within the circle." The possible tropical wind swath is what I showed above which included the edge of Alabama.

At the "time of the tweet" the POTUS was using older information. We don't know how old.

[NELSON111]

It also includes Cuba-which was totally unrealistic. That product isn’t what you think it is and unless you know how to use it-you probably shouldn’t.

[palmer]

And you probably shouldn’t use the cone since you called that a “wind swath”.

[NELSON111]

I have never called the cone a “wind swath” and never would. I know what the cone is. Do you? Apparently not. The wind swath I put on the charts was the actual forecast from the forecast advisory. The cone has ZERO to do with winds. DO you know the definition of the cone - without looking it up - and can you tell me if it changes from storm to storm (again - without looking it up)? IOW - Is the cone wider at 72 hours on an unpredictable storm such as Dorian than a predictable storm like Gabrielle is right now?

[Fledermaus]

On Fridays Mark Levin shoe he played CNN reporting it could go across Fla and effect Miss and A la. Don Lemon said so.

[palmer]

I quoted the definition of the cone. Do you read anything I write?

[NELSON111]

>>>I quoted the definition of the cone. Do you read anything I write?

Actually I didn't see it - my apologies. TRUE - HAND TO GOD story - I was at the VA in Houston and just had my eyes dilated - I'll even send you a copy of my appointment reminder if you think I'm putting you on...lol. I could barely see anything. The good news is even after 32 years - I've still got 20-20 and 20-15. I might be deaf and crippled - but I can see.

My point remains the same. As a professional forecaster who spent 32 years doing this for a living and working with EM's - this Tweet by them was right on track.

And as I mentioned numerous times - Trump was given BAD info - it wasn't his fault. It was Admiral Schultz who gave him the faulty info.

The state EOC of Alabama had already been told to stand down. Imagine their shock when all of sudden they are hearing something TOTALLY different. If you have never worked in this world, never been an Incident Commander, never worked in a JOC or an EOC - then you have ZERO idea the trouble such a confusing message can cause. IT was a mistake - pure and simple.

ANY forecaster who would say Alabama could even remotely be hit harder than though would be considered an idiot given all the evidence available at that time. It was not. The models had clustered by 00Z on the 1st.

Trump was given bad intel. The WFO made a good tweet to cam the waters. PERIOD.