I know someone has mentioned this comment before, but I really want to emphasize how much this bothers me as a scientist. In Lawrence's 5 am discussion, he said:
"THE OFFICIAL FORECAST TRACK IS SHIFTED ABOUT 60 N MI LEFT OF THE PREVIOUS ADVISORY AT 72 HOURS AND IS STILL TO THE RIGHT OF ALL GUIDANCE EXCEPT FOR THE GFS. IF I DID NOT HAVE A PREVIOUS FORECAST TO MAINTAIN SOME CONTINUITY WITH...I WOULD HAVE SHIFTED THE TRACK EVEN FURTHER TO THE LEFT. MEANWHILE...SINCE THE MOTION IS STILL WEST-NORTHWESTWARD..."

Great, they've shifted left.... I think that's prudent. However, to say that you would have shifted more, but you wanted to be more consistent with the guidance bothers me. If the current data projects a particular path, that's the path you need to take. If I am analyzing snow samples for HCHO and then are all very close to each other and then I get one that is a little off.... I cannot say, we'll all the other ones say this, so I am going to interpret this data to be in line with the previous data.

I really appreciate and respect the hard work of the NHC, but that comment should not have been made.