(Registered User)
Wed Dec 21 2005 12:52 PM
Re: graycast

As a relative newcomer to this whole debate, I wonder if someone can help me with a question. Has anyone put any serious thought into deciding which of the professional, or semi-professional, forecasters is generally the most reliable/accurate? I see a huge amount of discussion and prediction, but I can't find anywhere or anyone that tries to bring together all the science or all the forecasts into a consensus theory or a definitive view.

Or would this be to attempt the impossible...?

different groups win out from year to year. some years like last nobody really gets it right. the forecast schemes are different from group to group, so that's sort of an apples/oranges issue. not everybody is doing a raw storm number forecast either, such as the coastal impact forecasts bastardi does. usually when you read the post-season reports things referred to will not have been predicted by anybody (i.e. the central pacific ridge/upstream west u.s. trough pattern that persisted 2004-2005). so no, there isn't really a consensus view, outside of maybe everybody predicting above or below average activity. -HF

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 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