WunderBlog Archive » Category 6™

Category 6 has moved! See the latest from Dr. Jeff Masters and Bob Henson here.

Hurricane season is here!

By: Dr. Jeff Masters, 2:18 PM GMT on June 01, 2006

The hurricane season of 2006 is here! The date June 1 has taken on a notoriety second only to 9/11 in the consciousness of many of us, and the arrival of summer now has an ominous flavor--thanks to the unbelievable Hurricane Season of 2005. As I sat at my desk back on New Year's Day this year writing a blog on Zeta, the 28th named storm of that season, I wondered if the Hurricane Season of 2005 would ever end. Would an endless series of tropical storms develop through the winter, making the traditional June 1 start of hurricane season seem meaningless? Well, I am happy to report that the atmosphere sometimes does behave in a logical and predictable way. We've had a normal five straight months of no tropical storm activity in the Atlantic, leading up to today's official start to the season. And if you're not ready for hurricane season yet, then the Atlantic Hurricane Gods have benevolently granted you an extension to your preparation period--this year's season will have a slow start.

Figure 1.Graph of hurricane frequency for the Atlantic Ocean hurricane season. Image credit: NOAA.

What is typical for June?
June is normally the least active month of hurricane season (Figure 1). There have been 32 named storms in June since reliable records began in the Atlantic in 1944--an average of one every two years. There have been 10 June hurricanes (one every six years), and only two June major hurricanes. One of these major hurricanes was the notorious Hurricane Audrey, a Category 4 monster that killed 550 when it slammed into the Texas/Louisiana border on June 27, 1957. The only other June major hurricane was Hurricane Alma, which struck Cuba on June 8, 1966. Alma moved just offshore Florida's west coast as a Category 3 hurricane before weakening to a Category 2 hurricane and striking the Big Bend region of Florida's Panhandle. Alma killed 90.

Last year, June was four times more active than normal. Two June storms formed--Tropical Storm Arlene, which formed on June 8 and hit Alabama on June 11 as a 70 mph tropical storm, and Tropical Storm Bret, which formed June 28 and hit Mexico the next day as a minimal 40 mph tropical storm. The record for most named storms in June occurred in 1936 and 1968, when three storms formed.

What areas are at risk in June?
As we can see from examining the plots for 1936 and 1968, the Gulf of Mexico and the western Caribbean are the primary regions of formation for June tropical storms. The Gulf Coast, Cuba, and Mexico's Yucatan are the primary targets for these systems. June systems typically form from the remains of a cold front or trough of low pressure that moves out over the Gulf of Mexico or western Caribbean. These systems typically are slow to form, and require two to four days of "festering" before they acquire enough thunderstorm activity and spin to make it to depression stage. The tropical waves coming off of Africa this time of year are too far south to make it into the Caribbean sea, so we shouldn't expect any tropical storms to form in the central or eastern Caribbean.

What about SSTs?
Sea surface temperatures (SSTs) last year at this time were about 2 - 3.5 degrees C above normal, and were the highest ever measured in late May. This year, SSTs are about 1 - 1.5 degrees cooler, but are still above the 80 F threshold needed to get a tropical storm going. All we need is an initial disturbance to start with, and plenty of low wind shear to allow the convection to grow around it. SSTs will not be a limiting factor this June for hurricane development.

Figure 2. The GFS model forecast for June 11, 2006, shows a strong subtropical jet stream continuing to blow over the Gulf of Mexico. The strong winds of this jet will likely create too much shear for any tropical storms to form in the Gulf.

What about wind shear?
High wind shear is going to be a severe impediment to tropical storm formation for at least the first two weeks of June. The jet stream has split into two branches--the polar jet, located over the northern U.S., and the subtropical jet, which is blowing over the Gulf of Mexico. As long as the subtropical jet is blowing over the Gulf of Mexico with 30 - 50 knots of wind like it is now, no tropical storm formation is likely in the Gulf. If we do get Tropical Storm Alberto in the next two weeks, it will have to form in the western Caribbean south of Cuba. Steering currents would then likely take the storm north across Cuba and then northeastward across the Bahamas and out to sea. The Gulf Coast from Texas to the Florida Panhandle will be protected from any tropical storms by the strong subtropical jet steam. I'm predicting only a 10% chance of a tropical storm in the Atlantic by June 15 this year.

The GFS model predicts that the subtropical jet will continue to generate high levels of wind shear over the prime June breeding grounds for hurricanes for at least the next 12 days. After that, I suspect the subtropical jet will weaken, and we will get one tropical storm forming in late June over the western Caribbean or Gulf of Mexico.

Given that the next two weeks are likely to be the quietest time in what promises otherwise to be another long and busy hurricane season, I'm outta here. This will be my final "live" blog until June 13, as I'm taking my main summer vacation early. I plan to spend some time at Cape Hatteras before any hurricanes threaten! I've prepared a series of "canned" blogs, mainly Q and A from a newspaper interview I did last Sunday for a Florida newspaper. If Alberto does surprise us while I'm gone, the other meteorologists at wunderground will post the latest analysis here for you.

So long!
Jeff Masters

The views of the author are his/her own and do not necessarily represent the position of The Weather Company or its parent, IBM.

Reader Comments

Buster... interesting article.
Hey buster.... how do you read those charts on the meteor site????
Fshhead, you vist space.com often? I go there all the time...love it! I highly recommend it for anyone who loves astronomy, is interested in the new mission to the moon and on to mars, the new rocket plane racing league, or the commercialization of space flight led by Virgin Galactic Spacelines and the new Spaceport being built in New Mexico. They have lots of cool info about all sorts of things. It won't be too long before we're skiing the slopes of the moon either, or hitching a ride aboard Virgin Galactic to visit orbiting sports areans to catch a game of Paraball. Fun stuff! Being 21, I hope to retire amonst the stars.
yea acduke I go to space.com quite often actually. Like you I love it & recommend it also!!!!!!!!!!!!!
yea i saw the pings a minute ago.
but what is the difference between 1st chart & second??? What do all the numbers along the bottom mean???
Cyclonebuster, it's 73P/Schwassmann-Wachmann that is causing the shower, right? That's the comet we got to view out at Baker Obervatory in astronomy lab about a month or so ago. It was breaking apart and pretty cool to view. We imaged it with the CCD on the telescope but I don't have a copy of it. We tried to do a spectral analysis on it, but it was just pretty dusty so we couldn't get a definite lock on the composition since the emission lines just kinda blended together. It was pretty fun to work with though.
Hey everyone,

This has become one of my least favorite subjects to discuss since so many get pretty argumentative about Global warming so I have personally stayed clear of this topic for a long time on here.

However, I feel the need to respond to all the theories between human induced global warming and hurricanes.

First, the real answer cannot truthfully and fairly be discovered in our lifetimes if it were determined scientifically rather than determined politically based on a rush judgement since it has become too much of a political debate in my humble opinion.

Why do I say that?

In the idea of fairness, we need to compare apples with apples rather than apples and oranges.

Specifically, we need to compare one full active or warm phase of the AMO cycle with another one where things are fairly equal relative to being able to properly identify the number and intensity of each storm reviewed.

In other words, it is unfair and unreasonable in my opinion to say that global warming is responsible for a supposed upswing in tropical cyclone activity and very intense hurricanes when it is all occurring during the warm phase of the current AMO (1995-2005).

The only fair way to make a fair judgement is to compare this active phase of the AMO with the previous active or warm phase of the AMO cycle which can't be done fairly because it ran from 1926 through 1969.

The big problems in such a comparison is that there was not even the most primitive satellite technology to even discover many storms over the Atlantic Basin until 1960 and even then, forecasters at that time didn't have the means to estimate a storms real intensity more than using their best educated GUESS based on satellite appearances alone when they had a much more limited understanding of these storms.

Before then, the only way a storm was even detectable was if it made a landfall somewhere or if a ship unintentionally encounter the storm and relayed such information onto the forecasters. Even then, there was no way to know if the ship encountered the very heart of the storm to accurately gauge its true intensity.

Moreover, it is fair to assume many storms were encountered, but not recorded as tropical cyclones because such ship captains would have just assumed it was a strong ocean storm like they had encountered numerous times since most ocean storms are not tropical in nature (i.e. extra-tropical storms).

More troubling in such a comparison is the fact that flights into storms were not performed to accurately gauge their intensity until one was randomly done in 1944.

Likewise, very primitive radar to detect these storms wasn't done before 1955 and only was land based obviously and could only see a storm less than 100 miles from the radar sites.

In short, these are HUGE discrepancies and can't be fairly and objectively theorized after the fact exactly how many storms definitely did develop during this time period much less how truly intense these storms truly were.

That being said, during this 44 year period coinciding with the previous active or warm phase of the AMO cycle where there were zero satellites to detect storms over the ocean until 1960 when the only means was the hopes a ship may unintentionally encounter the storm (most, certainly didn't measure the absolute lowest pressure), zero recon flights to accurately guage a storms strength if one was even actually detected by such a fairly random precedure until 1944.

It is also important to consider that our curent technology and understanding has helped us learn about eyewall replacement cycles and how dry air entrainment and friction from land on a storms circulation can cause one to weaken fairly substantially.

With that in mind, many storms could only be detected and their intensity estimated by a landfall when many such storms naturally could've weakened before reaching land so their peak intensity was never accurately guaged even then.

See you all in a week.
Taking all of the aforementioned into consideration, what I find even more astounding than the supposed theorized major increases in Atlantic Basin hurricane activity and number of intense storms at a time we do have the actual ability to detect all storms and realistically guage their true intensities is the remarkable number of tropical storms and intense hurricanes during a time none of this was possible for all the aforementioned reasons.


1) Number of named storms:

1887= 19 (Who knows just how many went undetected way back then).

1933= 21 (no doubts more existed here as well reducing the discrepancy of 7 storm difference between this hyperactive season and 2005).

2) Number of intense hurricanes in one season:

1950= 8 (this is still the record holder and even exceed the 7 recorded in 2005 at a time there were no satellites).

1916= 6 (only 2 short of the record and only 1 shy of 2005's remarkable total at a time there had to be others).

1926= 6 (the same reasoning applies here as well to 1916)

3) Number of hurricanes in one season:

1870, 1878, 1886, 1893, and 1933= 10 (Wonder how many more went undetected during each of these 4 amazing seasons?).

1887, 1916, and 1950= 11 (Once again, no doubts 1887 for example had far more unrecorded and 1916 as well which greatly decreases the difference of just 4 major storms with the record setting 2005 season).

1969= 12 (still number two on list behind the unbelievable total from 2005 which may have possibly been equaled by the other seasons listed above besides 1950 when recon did exist but could have had one go unnoticed to tie this season at 12).

4) Number of category fives in a two consecutive period:

1960 and 1961= 4 (this remarkable total is overshadowed by the fact 2005 five had 4 in one season, if there are no category fives this season, this two season total equals the number from 2005 and it is also important to note that these two seasons held the record for most in one season before 2005).

5) Most intense hurricane ever recorded:

1935= 892 mb (Although just recently surpassed by Gilbert in 1988 with 888 mb, and the new record holder in Wilma at 882 mb in 2005, there is realistic debate that this is still the most intense in Atlantic Basin history and had a pressure measured below 26.00 inches of mercury when the local weather forecaster in the keys showed witnesses the reading and afraid to watch it drop any further tossed it into the violent winds of this truly remarkable storm).

In Conclusion:

All of the aforementioned provides a vivid example as to why it is both unfair and unreasonable to declare that global warming has been responsible for both increased tropical cyclone activity as well as more intense storms because this active phase of the NATUAL active and warm phase of the AMO cycle can't be fairly and logically compared with the previous active phase of the AMO that ran from 1926-1969 with all the incredible limitations involved in detecting and accurately measuring tropical cyclones during this period that was also remarkable in both these two categories.

Naturally, this new active phase of the AMO cycle will greatly surpass the inactive and cool phase of the AMO cycle that preceded it from 1970-1994 and most certainly is not relevant to this debate to prove global warming is responsible rather than the active phase of the AMO cycle and if so, just how little difference it has made if any in these supposed upswings.

In short, we will have to wait until this active phase of the AMO concludes which may even last another 20-30 years then go through the inactive phase of the AMO cycle which could take another 25 years and then compare this current active phase of the AMO cycle with the one that follows the end of the next cool phase and can be done only after the next warm phase cycle has ended.

In other words, it could literally be another 100 years on this realistic historical time-line before we could fairly and reasonably compare this active AMO with the next.

This is the only fair and truly accurate way to determine IF global warming is the cause or the NATURAL active phase of the AMO.

Otherwise, we are left theorizing and coming to an unavoidable subjective analysis which most likely will be flawed that amounts to comparing apples to oranges instead of apples with apples.

I Need to repost the end of the last post to correct the inaccurate wording on my part.

"In other words, it could literally be another 100 years on this realistic historical time-line before we could fairly and reasonably compare this active AMO with the next.

This is the only fair and truly accurate way to determine IF global warming is the cause of the supposed upswing in both the number and intensity of these storms and if so, how significant if any the impact truly is.

Otherwise, we are left theorizing and coming to an unavoidable subjective analysis which most likely will be flawed that amounts to comparing apples to oranges instead of apples with apples".

This is why I stated we would never know truthfully the answer in our lifetimes and possibly not in our lifetimes and maybe not in our children's either.

Regardless, there is no way that a political determination will not be made before then whether it is completely accurate or not.

To clarify, I am not saying global warming is not a factor, but it most certainly is not the factor many want to believe in my humble opinion and it appears logically to be comparatively inconsequential in light of the far more influential active and warm phase of the AMO cycles based even on the historical data we do have taking all things into consideration.


First, I didn't anticipate this being so extensive and thereby consisting of so many posts. Otherwise, I would've simply saved my personal opinion on this subject matter for a future blog entry which I may still do at some point.

Most important of all, I want everyone to understand that my own personal opinion on the correlations between global warming and hurricanes is simply that (just my own personal opinion no more and certainly no less) and is not at all meant to suggest I don't respect those opinions that differ from my own.

To reiterate, I believe all of our collective opinions are honestly fairly subjective in nature at this point for all the reasons I stated and it would be unfair for either side to say one is absolutely wrong in their particular view point under such circumstances.

That being said, I do believe I have made a strong case in support of my own reasoning for my position on this issue and simply wanted to share it as one other opinion among many others.:)

Furthermore, this is not even a debate about what is the DIRECT cause of the global warming which also has many discrepancies that make it too difficult to accurately compare with a century ago in my opinion.

On that specific topic, I personally believe human activities have had some actual effect on global warming (how couldn't we really) but is not the direct cause of it which are two very entirely different things.

Since the debate over human induced global warming has become such a polarizing political issue in support of finding alternative forms of energy, I want to add that I too desire to see us get away from our reliance on oil (especially foreign oil) as soon as it is both reasonably possible and truly feasible to do so.

Obviously, my support of finding feasible alternative forms of energy if they do exist (honestly not too familiar with that part of the debate and have read differing opinions on that particular subject matter) has nothing to do with my personal point of view on global warming and this is why it is not a political issue for me whatsoever to make certain that no one mistakenly confuses my position on that issue.

In short, this is simply my own personal opinion and I most certainly recognize that it is way too soon for any of us to know the real answer for sure and it is why I personally don't enjoy this discussion in general because too many debate it as if their own personal view is an absolute and an undeniable fact.

In reality, it simply can't be proven in a fair, objective, and completely accurate way at this time but basically relies on how one interprets the data and comes to their own subjective point of view.

As a result, this post or I guess I should say series of posts on the subject is done to share my own personal view and why I feel that way and please know that I also respect any persons views that disagree with my own on this issue.

Since I believe I have clearly stated my personal opinion and based on my belief that the jury is still very much out on out on this issue and will be for another century or so, I personally see no reason for me to debate this issue and why I have not in a very long time after taking all of the aforementioned into perspective.

In short, thank you so much for reading my own personal opinion on this subject matter and understanding that that is all that it is to me at this point.:)

I hope everyone has a truly blessed weekend,:)

Most sincerely,

518. IKE
Global warming.....snooze, snooze. It's been debated over and over and over again on here. I believe it's true...the earth is warmer. Everyone else is entitled to their opinion. Beyond that...snooze, snooze.

The 06Z GFS has backed on some on the carribean low.

Still no rain here in Defuniak Springs, Fl...dammit we needed it...and dry for the next week.

This blog is overloaded.
519. IKE
I checked the buoys out in the gulf....260 miles south of Panama City....EIGHT-FOUR degrees, ALREADY! Last year on June 3rd it was 80. Must be a warm pool of water out there? Thought the water temps were cooler? Around the Keys it's in the mid-upper 80's. It's not even summer yet!!! Looks like the water is warmer in the eastern gulf. Off Texas its close to 80.
Good morning everyone! We need to start thinking about a couple back-up blogs for Dr. Jeff until he comes back from vacation. This blog is going over 3000 posts if we don't move soon. The poor 56k modems are having heart attacks right now lol.
521. IKE
Dr. Jeff has some "canned" blogs. Hopefully one will appear soon.
Ike, check out the maps that I have posted in my blog of year to year SST comparisons. Note that the previous year maps are from June 14. It looks to me like many areas are warmer then last year and that several other areas will be warmer by the 14th.

Let me know what you think.


For anyone who may be able to help me out here:

I really would like to get some XML feeds up on my site, but I have zero understanding of how to implement them in to the page? Please help if you can.

523. IKE
Apppers warmer off of the east coast of the US. The gulf actually appears cooler this year.

There's so much fuel out in the gulf already though...rather ominous. Experts say the east coast of the USA is in for it in 2006, but you know the gulf is going to have storms. Maybe they'll all go west into Mexico.
Texas is going to have some storms this year. They are way over due for some hurricanes and this year the western gulf is supposed to be active.
525. IKE
Of course, this is June 3rd and those maps are 11 days later.

Hate that you can't edit on here.

Post above should say *appears*
526. IKE
Correction...post below....ugh.........
Lol that's ok I hate that too. Also I always forget something I was about to say and then end up posting 4 or 5 comments.
528. IKE
And if Texas gets a major hurricane, there go gas prices up again. I'm not knowledgable on where storms have a greater chance of hitting...maybe the law of averages catches up eventually.

I live in the Florida panhandle..have for 40 years. Storms didn't hit around here much when I was a kid...we had Eloise...Opal was bad. We've been lucky here...hopefully it continues.

Unfortunately Florida has taken so many hits, our homeowners insurance is $1200 a year now...was $400-$500 3 or 4 years ago.
Where storms are going to make landfall is always a tricky question. I am just going by what I have read and excepted as sensible.

Wow that is quite a price jump over there. It's too bad the hurricanes down on the peninsula have to have an affect on you as well.
The maps in my blog do show the Gulf being cooler in most areas right now, but I forsee the Gulf being warmer then it was last year by the 14th. Just look at all the heat in the W Carib. You can see it in the Gulf maps on my blog. Where do you think all of that heat is going? Yep you geussed it. Right up in to the Gulf.

531. IKE
Boy that is warm in the Carribean...that's not good...not good at all..and with so many places to hit...yucatan...cuba...bahamas....florida...

If Florida gets another major hit I may not can get homeowners insurance.
That is bad news. The Caribbean is going to be very active again this season.
Looks like we'll have our second depression of the E. Pac season. Navy has upgraded it to a 'noname' rather then an 'invest'.
we now have Tropical Depression Two-E
536. IKE
Water temps at the buoy in the Carribean are at 82 degrees...plenty warm enough.
537. MZT
The extent of warming becomes more understandible when you are given local references.

During the American revolution, soldiers remarked about the difficulties of travelling through North Carolina due to the melting snows in March that muddeyd the primitive roads of the time. Pioneers would cut trees in February for firewood, then noting later in the year how high up the tree they'd cut, to get clear of the snow.

Nowadays, a March snow is a fairly unusual event around here. And if it happens, will just be a wet snow of a few inches that dries away the next day.

We still get some healthy February snows every few years, but the snow does not accumulate between storms.
538. Alec
Some places such as off Caymon Brac have water temps near 86 degrees 50 feet below the surface! Got a diver(hurricanecrab) that gave me those readings there!
539. Alec
I largely agree with chaser regarding the global warming-intense hurricane connection, or lack thereof. Intense hurricanes have been forming in the Atlantic throughout history. The 2005 season was truly exceptional because several of the incredients needed for intense hurricane formation were exceptional and came together to form a perfect storm, so to speak.


It looks to me like the water temps in the eastern half of the Gulf of Mexico have caught up to last year, and even surpassed last year near the coast of Florida. The west Gulf water has been held back the last couple weeks by clouds and rain from some stubborn mid/upper lows.
541. Alec
part of the western Gulf has caught up because we've been in a 90+ temp routine for 2 weeks!
542. MZT
The GFS and NOGAPS are indicating that after that cold front passes through the eastern US, a cyclonic system will develop over Cuba and drift northeast. Not much warm-core attribute shown to it, though.
1) Latest Quikscat on 2E:

Looks like it is coming along nicely.

2) This is my opinion only, and you are free to disagree, but I think the numerous GW posts I am seeing here, interesting though they may be, are getting a bit tangential and off-topic in the context of this blog. There are more suitable places to post this material (e.g. Fshhead's blog).
Hey guys....long time lurker, occasional poster since Charley. Please pass on to anyone who lives in a hurricane zone.......Host....Buddy...or both.
Soory for this long post...

My wife and friend had an idea for an evacuation and shelter alternative. It is a website that matches members based on their likes and dislikes..pets, and what not. We launch sometime in the next week or so! Please pass this on to whomever: HurricaneBuddy.com Here is there press release in the paper today!News Release Hurricane Buddy

Naples, FL June 2 2006, Hurricane Buddy, LLC.SM pp is a new pioneering service mark and patent pending company that plans on launching for the 2006 Hurricane Season June 15th. This web based company www.hurricanebuddy.com is a cost-effective hurricane preparedness plan that will enable families and/or individuals to search for others before an impending hurricane or other natural or man-made disasters. This new service will be available to people everywhere that need a place to go during an emergency event, a hurricane, or want to offer their home to others.

The site is designed to assist people in their evacuation plans and provide a safe haven outside the area of a predicted hurricane landfall, Sedgewick said Thursday the first day of the new hurricane season. News-Press June 2, 2006 article by Mark Krzos.

Kelly Sedgewick and Melanie DeStout Co-Presidents/Founders of the company, realized during Hurricane Frances in 2004 that families were desperate for help. Evacuees from the East Coast of Florida were driving to Southwest Florida to get out of harms way of Frances. DeStout and Sedgewick were watching and listening to the local news that described people and families sitting in parking lots, rest stops, and on the side of the roads with their kids, pets and family belonging with no place to go. Sedgewick and DeStout then formed the company, Hurricane Buddy.

After witnessing and experiencing the effects of the 2004-2005 hurricane seasons the two realized that all the efforts to move the company forward needed to continue no matter what. We want to make sure that every individual/family that wants to leave can leave during a hurricane. By matching people together, we can make an unbearable experience tolerable by human kindness. We continue to believe that when we launch shortly, people will do the right thing. Leave their home to get out of harms way or offer their home to another. Neighbors helping Neighbors weather the storm

We are extremely pleased with the development progress we are making with the site. We look forward to having members sign up and be able to search for their buddies or be able to seek out a host. Members can sign up and register for no charge. The only cost associated with the site comes once you ready to search and/or select a host family. The cost is expected to be about $79.95 for the first year. When the site is up and running we can look ahead, not too far after June 15th, offering other benefits to our buddies such as geo-marketing advertisers to them. We are creating a directory of local/ regional information on companies and vendors of interest that would benefit our members. We are in hopes of attracting the attention of the larger companies for support as well.

www.hurricanebuddy.com COMING SOON!

More information about us Please write hb@hurricanebuddy.com

Thanx guys...good luck to all of us we stay storm free!


Guys look at this. We could have two seperate systems to watch in the Caribbean. The one which the GFS is forecasting to develop will do its thing, while at the other end of the trough the low north of Panama is working mischief. The ascending and descending QuikScat passes show the low north of Panama with a weak circulation. Now look at the IR satellite loop. There is convection popping right over top of this low. We could be dealing with two seperate disturbances. This southern one has the best chance do develop since it is in much lower shear than the northern one.
You can see the low spinning north of panama quite well on this page. Click "100% quality", "10 images", and "animation", then click on the low. You will see it spinning as the convection starts to fire up.
whats the ch of TD 1 and TD 2
I am not sure yet. Have to see something more organized get going before forecasting a TD yet. I do think there is a chance over the next week for the Caribbean to generate a depression with all the disturbed weather.
Awsome site idea Buhdog. It will be greatly appreciated by many

Wow what a difference David! You know we really have to find a back-up blog now. I can't hardly load this page anymore. We need another blog to post in that the owner can refresh every now and then while Dr. Masters is away.
552. WSI
Levi, you all can have my blog if you want.
Thanx SJ.....Weird because I am the hurricane junkie always on this site and others. She would tease me all the time. Lo and behold she dreams up,service marks, patent pends this great idea!
Levi32 well i can start up a new blog and evere one can move in there in tell me get a new blog i do not no what i put in there but be some in fun to talk about
Hey Levi, you must be on dial up? If so can you check my site and let me know how long it takes to navigate? Help me out if you can or anyone else on dial up.

and you all can move in too my blog if you want as well i start a new one for you all
Check your mail Buhdog

558. WSI
Levi, set my blog up for the overflow. Drop in there if you want...
Ok WSI thank you. Spread the word we need to move now.
560. WSI
Puts traffic suit on....

Ok people, right this way. Move it on this way. Too much to load here, move it on this way.

Last year this blog had at one time over 1,000 post.
Yeah that's the way WSI lol. Everyone cease to post in this blog it is way too big. Everyone who wants to post in Dr. Master's blog post in WSI's instead. He is the big cheese now lol.
ok my blog is new it is up move on in there as well ok move it on in
HK don't post here! This blog is off limits until further notice lol. I know we had 1000 posts at one time but 563 is still too much. Even my DSL is slowing down on this page.
Ok start posting in here now. NO more posts in this blog!
Hey, have any of you guys seen the latest hype about using 747's to fight forest fires? They are outfitting the biggest, clumsiest, most fuel guzzling jetliner ever made because it can carry a few more gallons of water to a fire. Wow, 20,000 gallons of water. That's impressive. Know what kind of runway a 747 requires? Let's see, considering the super long runways needed, average distance from a fire might be a thousand miles or so, especially in the west. A 747 gets 5 gal/mile, that's maybe 10,000 gallons of fuel/trip, plus cost of water, plus cost of lease/maintenance, plus pilot and crew cost, plus 50% contractor's markup. Bim, boom, zing! Where are the guys with that contract? Can I buy stock? Sing along now in a slightly nasal chorus, "We're in the money...we're in the money...tata tatatata tatatatata".
Yes, I know, the 747 has a good safety record, and no, I wouldn't just want the forests to burn. But it would be laughable, if it weren't so tragic.
What are you talking about too much to load??? At the bottom of the blog area hit the Show last 50 comments and you will only have to reload the 50 most recent posts!

That's a lot of gas. 10,000Gal @ 2.75/Gal = $27,500 at your local gas station. Just pull up in your 747 and fill er up. lol.

Showing 50 Comments does not work unless you have Newest First enabled; however, I don't like reading backwards (bottom to top).
Stormjunkie..don't worry about that, and I wish you hadn't posted the actual fuel cost. But do you know the rest of the words to 'We're in the Money'?
Why didn't you wanna see the cost, and mind you that is not jet fuel.

Found the words to 'We're in the Money'-1933 by the Golddiggers. Dare not post them. I would, but Turtlehurricane already posted a book by mistake.
Did you see my post about Showing 50 Comments? That is why a new blog was set up.
I think I know what turtlehurricane did - he clicked on "select all" instead of "copy" and copied everything instead of just one post.
Stormjunkie..meant that jokingly about cost. Glad you posted it. And the total cost would be several times that.
One song ain't going to kill us WWW. Again if they would just use the show 50 comments then everything would be fine. They think this is bad, wait until the season gets kicking. lol. You will have 600 post in 8 hrs easy some days.

Do you like reading backwards?
What are you talking about backwards...I don't start reading from the bottom of the page. I use Newest first. Which allows me to view the most recent 50.

It is a useless point, you need to get used to it as it will be the only way the blog is practical once we have a system out there.

Don't you ever look at older posts to see what others are saying? Admin should have fixed it by now (showing 50 comments only works with newest first and it should work either way).
That's a big area of convection in the eastern Pacific. One would think the recent storm there for so many days would have cooled the waters a bit. But probalbly not, since it was never strong enough to upwell much ocean water. The hot water seems to be the key ingredient these systems require. That, and the absence of shear. Looks like the US coast will be well protected by shear for the next several days.
I always look at previous posts to find out what is being discussed. I personally don't have any trouble loading all comments.
Why is it that TD-2E is not expected to strengthen to a tropical storm?
583. IKE
TD-2E...per the NHC..."Upper-level winds are not conducive for significant additional
development and since a portion of the circulation is already
interacting with land...no significant intensification is
anticipated. However...a small decrease in the wind shear could
bring the depression to tropical storm status."
I see. Alright, thanks.
585. IKE
louastu...I see where your next post/blog is on Opal. I live in the panhandle of Florida, northeast of Fort Walton Beach. She was a monster in the gulf. Thank God she weakened before landfall. Did a lot of damage, but could have been so much worse. I left town and went east about 80 miles for a day. Glad I left.

Will be interested in reading what you say about her.
This blog is obscene (I Googled the word neuken)!
Stormjunkie..some blogs back were you the one theorizing about the 'heat island' effect protecting city centers from strong storms?
That was very interesting.
Hey guys just popping in and out to see how things are going. Have you all seen the latest NHC discussion? It is getting more focused on the Caribbean disturbance:


Louastu..Ike..some of Opal's little daughters came straight up into Alabama. Took out one of my Dad's two warehouses in the middle of the night, the one which had no insurance!! If you're in Ft Walton, I'm due north about 200 miles.
I was noticing that this morning, but if it were to drift north, shear should chew it up.
For my area, the heat island does the exact opposite - storms get up to 300% stronger! I have observed storms blowing up and intensifying as they get close to me, most recently on June 1st.
More focused?..LOL This thing will have a quick death as soon as it encounters that trough pushing off Florida. Shear will kill it off quickly.
I am having all kinds of trouble getting the report on Opal finished.

The hardest part so far, has been that the two main sites I use to get information (the NHC, and Wikipedia) have conflicting information, especially when it comes to how soon it weakened after making landfall.

The other major problem, is that I am having trouble finding damage information for specific towns, which I think is important to put into a report like the one I am trying to put together.
MichaelStL..I clicked on the link. It's a Hollander saying something about Holland being in the soccer world championship. I don't read Dutch very well. Why were you saying it is obscene? It is strange though, a weather blogger talking about football. What did you actually think about it?
louastu..haven't visited your blog, but if you have little damage stats, it is probably because the storm came up through areas of little population. It mostly felled trees and took out the occasional chickenhouse.
This is why: Definition of neuken (see the link).
Opal caused $5 billion (2005 USD), and killed 59 people (only 9 in the U.S.).

I would think I should be able to find some reports of damage for the affected areas, but I can't.
Well I was going to show that the shear above cuba was only 5-20. The trough might not reach the blob. The trough is suposed to stall out on the east coast.
Oops, that should be:

Opal caused $5 billion (2005 USD) in damage
Here you go. I downsized it so it fits.

MichaelSTL..concerning the heat island effect I can only contribute from observing two cities, Birmingham and Atlanta. In areas northeast of Atlanta, I have heard smaller town and rural reports when people complain about storms increasing in strength over Atlanta, and then damaging areas to the east (most everything in the way of storms move west to east over Atlanta). Same is true for inhabitants to the east of Birmingham. But these storms hardly ever directly impact the cities themselves. Someone posted that there is evidence that heat from the cities lifts these storms over the cities. Seems viable from my observations.
Well, I don't know about that; maybe it is because my area is different.

Oh, it looks like others were offended by that blog as well because it has been removed (the link on it was to a porn site, based on the site's name).
MSTL..Oh yeah, neuken. It does mean that, but not in as crass, hardball way as our 'f' word. Sort of like 'shaggin', but even less offensive than that. If you had a verb form for our slang word 'nooky', you'd have it.

Just got on here and noticed that Turtlehurricane decided to post an entire archive. It's so great to see someone else does stuff like that. :-)

Fiancee and I are riding around discussing retirment areas. Obviously, one that came up was Florida. After Katrina/Rita though, we are trying to get the bullseye off our butts(I know, living in Florida probably won't fulfill that goal) .

Oh well, we have a couple of questions that I know someone on here can answer pretty quickly.

(1) Of all the hurricanes that have hit Florida, are they predominantly from the Atlantic side or the Gulf side?

(2) Are the hurricanes from Gulf side or the Atlantic side more intense?

Thanks for any reply.
I clicked on the link to be sure it truly was obscene before flagging it, and it went to a porn directory.
Looks like some Amsterdamer infiltrated the Weather Underground..for a few minutes at least.
Atlantic Tropical Weather Outlook

ABNT20 KNHC 031520
1130 AM EDT SAT JUN 03 2006






Haven't they learn anyhting......windsheer is nothing compared to sea surface temps........I wouldnt be suprise if tropical depression one forms in area of 30knots of sheer.
610. WSI
"windsheer is nothing compared to sea surface temps"

Umm, nothing can form if it is being blown apart.
wind sheer is on the downside and the gulf of mexico and caribbean sea is like a ticking time bomb, just waiting until we think that nothing is going to form.......

Thats what happen when TD 10 of last year died out......everyone thaught is was over and boom!!!! TD 12 formed.........
Yes, thats why last season was so active. It was from all of those systems forming with 30knot shear over them!!..LOL
Here is a respone that I posted for cyclonebuster when he said that we would have year-round hurricane seasons soon because of rising SSTs:

Posted By: MichaelSTL at 11:15 PM CDT on June 01, 2006.
cyclonebuster - Year long hurricane seasons? Do you know why we did not have a dozen storms in the last 5 months?

Wind shear.

There is plenty of warm water in the Caribbean and tropics during the winter and spring.
I give it a 5% chance of developing.
Some of the zeta like storms did start out in 30knots of shear.
my bad......what i meant to say was that the temperature of the sea surface nowadays is so warm that it will feed bigger, larger more emense storms that wind sheer would have little effect on them.....
Actually, the final report says that Zeta never had that much shear until it dissipated; models overestimated it and that is why they kept forcasting Zeta to dissipate in 2 days (same with Epsilon).
maybe in 10 years wind sheer might not be a factor to consider in tropical development....
I said like storms but thanks I didn't know that.
See all of that shear over North Florida and the Western Gulf....Link That will be moving eastward. This thing needs to get its act together today, for it to develop. Its not gonna happen. It will be swept away!! Bye, bye!
623. WSI
That is what people have to remember. Warm water is only part of the equation. A lot of other things have to come together for a storm to form. Warm water does not equal storm formation. Doesn't matter what temperature the water is.
Shear is one of the reasons why the North Indian Ocean, with its extremely high SSTs, does not have very many storms, much less many strong storms (although when they do occur, the results are often catastrophic, as in 1970 and 1991).
STL, does the shear in the North Indian Ocean come from the Monsoon?
That is very interesting to know about shear values in the Indian ocean. If the present shear conditions persist for the US, it may not be as ad a season as predicted. In any case, if the forecast for shear for the next week is true, nothing will affect the US coasts for a week or two.
Interesting thought, that disturbance in the Pacific. Say that it moves over mexico and into the Gulf. What are the chances of regeneration into a tropical system again?

On the topic of the item in the caribbean, I do not think it is showing much chance of development as earlier thought. It appears to be getting pulled northward by the weather to the east of the bahamas.
One other thought, if the trough does not go far enough south so as to shear up the disturbance. What chance, small as it might be does our pacific system have of gathering up the remnants of the wave?
This low is not supposed to develop until it crosses Cuba, if ever. It will be around the Bahamas on Tuesday, not much supposed to happen till tomorrow, or Monday.
Man, everybody really thinks that nothing is going to develop. I wonder if this happened before Arlene developed last year?
If it did develop before crossing Cuba, Cuba itself would rip it apart. Very Mountainous area in the midsection of Cuba.
For pete's sake are there no encouraging comments to cheer this disturbance on? It has more of a chance then you all might think. The shear is clearing out to the north and will continue to do so. Also Cuba does not have a reputation of absolutely ripping apart and destroying tropical systems. That reputation is reserved for Haiti and the Yucatan Peninsula. Also this thing is forecasted to develop by the GFS before crossing Cuba. I don't know where you got after Cuba. The thing even sits there for a day and a half just south of Cuba.
I am not saying it won't develop, just saying that it is a little early is all.
How come I said "cheering the disturbance on"? I am not sure why I said that lol. They don't need cheering on. I guess no one wants the season to start anyway.
It's already trying to develop. It's getting more convection around the center. It aint nothing yet but it looks better.
Yes overall convection is increasing in that area and also directly over the low center.
Progressive...that's one notion I would argue. It one thing has been proven in the last several years about current tropical systems, it is that they can cross land masses, even with rough terrain, emerge on the other side and restrengthen.
By the way, even after a full day over the Yucatan Peninsula, Wilma was still a Category 2 hurricane.
639. Alec
Posted By: Levi32 at 5:03 PM EDT on June 03, 2006.
For pete's sake are there no encouraging comments to cheer this disturbance on?

I bet there are MANY who wish hurricane season was nonexistant. By the way, I don't think anything will develop for a while(in the Caribbean, Gulf, or Atlantic......Shear is way too high for decent development. Even if there was some type of development it would be slow to occur and the shear north of the disturbance in the Caribbean would tear it to shreds...
We'll have to wait and see. You'll have to remember Micheal, that close to half of Wilma's eye was off the coast of Mexico for most of that time and the near coast is rather flat. Also, it is one thing for a developed Hurricane to travel over land and surive but a different story of a developing low pressure to travel over land, weakens rather quickly.

Spelling police!
Sorry lol!
643. Alec
LOL Michael, just wait till they open up their mailboxes!LOL

I think since Wilma was traveling quite fast in the Shear above her(going pretting much in the same direction of the shear) after it emerged into the Gulf, it didn't have the huge effects on it...
Alec what was the rose for in my blog lol!
645. Alec
pretty* HA! I caught myself!LOL
Hey everyone,

I hope you all are having a great weekend thus far.:)

In regards to the low that everyone is focusing on, Alec said it very well to summarize my personal thoughts on it as well.

At this moment, I would personally place such odds of tropical storm development from this system (becoming Alberto) at no more than 20%

One additional note, I am still working on posting my June and July outlook (Part Two) where I will make my own forecast for each month at the conclusion of that blog entry.

I will simply say that I expect a relatively slow start to this season consistent with what we normally see when we get a strong Cape Verde season which I am expecting myself.:)

That being said, I still anticipate a 60% probability of one June tropical storm nonetheless.

I hope everyone has a truly blessed day and great weekend.:)

Most sincerely,

647. Alec
Have a great weekend as well Tony:)
Thank you for your update Tony. Have a great weekend yourself.
I really love the pictures on this site.

Hey guys. I just posted an update on the cape and Islands weather. It's just starting to rain and I also posted on the tropical disturbances in the Caribbean. Feel free to add any comments or constructive criticsm to my blog. Thank you!
i updated my blog a few minutes back
On this low in the sw caribbean. I looked at the models a little bit ago and all including the gfs have it developing after it passes over cuba. The phase for the gfs shows it developing as a cold core, and staying that way. Looks like we will be waiting awhile for our first.
I give the low a 25% beacause I notice after looking at some wind sheer maps for the past week the wind sheer is becoming concentrated in the gulf but decreasing in the caribbean......It is like there is a cut in the sub-tropical jet stream link
Look at Floater 1; it is now over the Caribbean instead of the Pacific depression.
655. IKE
According to the GFS last 4 or 5 model runs, they have backed off on a low forming/crossing Cuba and heading NE. Seems in the last 2 runs they have a piece of energy staying in the caribbean, heading west across the Yucatan and then going north toward the gulf states. Nothing to really jump on with it being so many days away.

The unreliable NAM is hinting at a piece of energy staying in the caribbean out at 84 hours.

Might be something to keep an eye on. The latest GFS is bold with something coming up in the gulf. Probably nothing, but worth watching.
That must have been Alberto!