i'm just concerned with facts. facts are hard to establish when we can't agree that if 2+2=4, then 2+2 will always =4. the nhc has a similar problem... they view tropical cyclone classification as a subjective matter. the simple solution would be to make a set of criteria that doesn't change with the wind and use it... that would be relatively easy. i would agree with the argument that they're avoiding objectivity because objectivity requires them to produce track/intensity numbers.. and that this is an especially difficult case that they're trying to dodge, since it will make their verification numbers less impressive. in spite of the improved convective signature this morning.. the low cloud movements have me thinking that the circulation is either further north in the convection or has opened up. recon may not find anything this afternoon. the surface circulation looked good mon-tue, but since yesterday it's gotten indistinct. HF 1440z18august
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
Thread views: 22060
Note: This is NOT an official page. It is run by weather hobbyists and should not be used as a replacement for official sources.
CFHC's main servers are currently located at Hostdime.com in Orlando, FL.
Image Server Network thanks to Mike Potts and Amazon Web Services. If you have static file hosting space that allows dns aliasing contact us to help out! Some Maps Provided by:
Great thanks to all who donated and everyone who uses the site as well.
Site designed for 800x600+ resolution
When in doubt, take the word of the National Hurricane Center