Forum:2010 Atlantic hurricane season

96L.INVEST
Just coming off of Africa, NHC has it at 10% and it's already invested... I'm interested in seeing what the models think of this. --Patteroast 16:37, August 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a very good-looking wave for a storm just emerging off the coast, but models predict it could follow Danielle and cut through the ridge, but storms after this could make it all the way across the Atlantic as the Bermuda-Azores high builds back in. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 17:33, August 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * GFS suggests otherwise. C'mon becoem a fish. YE Tropical Cyclone
 * 40% from NHC!!! atomic 77 32 22:45, August 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * 60% now. YE Tropical Cyclone
 * I think it's safe to say the party has officially started. The Cape Verde season has begun. This storm looks just as good as Danielle did. GFDL, ECMWF, GFS, HWRF and SHIPS all make it a hurricane. Curiously, NOGAPS doesn't develop it at all and CMC is surprisingly unenthusiastic with it, keeping it below hurricane strength throughout the period. All that said, it looks like it's going to follow in the footsteps of Danielle and stay out to sea. -- SkyFury 00:28, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Eric, to tell the truth, I am getting bored of 2010 so far. Frank is dying out there, Danielle won't affect land, and this wave probrably won't either. I am very upset with the season's forecasts. Even though this season is forecast to be above average, if all of the storms miss land this year, I don't give an honest damn. Unless this season can produce a storm worthy of my attention, I don't think there is any point of this season even "being". August is a week from being wraped up and we haven't even gotten to Earl in the Atlantic, just 6 storms in the East Pac, and 5 in the West Pac? The tropics know better than to be this inactive at this time, especially the West Pac. Ryan1000 01:00, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * BTW, Frank is not dying. It has an outside chace of Cat 2. Now I now who wrote on my blog. YE Tropical Cyclone  01:21, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

Yikes, GFDL develops this fast enough to make it already a tropical storm while hitting Cape Verde directly. --Patteroast 02:38, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well Ryan, then maybe you're on the wrong forum. Apparently it takes 2004/05 to pique your interest. I don't need enormous Cat 4s demolishing cities to keep me interested. All this bitching about the season forecasts is really starting to get old. We've got ten weeks until Halloween. That's a long f-ing time but whatever. I'm sorry the season's not living up to your lofty expectations. Nature doesn't perform on que. I'm sorry to get snippy like this but I'm really just flat out sick of the complaining. I think there will be plenty to watch this season, including at least one significant US landfalling hurricane. I also think that part of the reason for the tropical power outage may be the solar minimum we're currently experiencing. I believe sunspot activity hit a 30-year low last year. -- SkyFury 04:56, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's up to 90% now on NHC, and it hasn't even gotten past Cape Verde yet! It will follow Danielle, but its track could be west of the Bermuda High to east of Danielle. However, the wave after this one, is the one worth watching. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 12:55, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sky, i'm not on the wrong forum; i'm just getting a little impatient of the tropics; we aren't putting up 2005 numbers, but 2004 had 8 storms in august, making it the most active August on record. We will NOT have 6 more named storms in the last week of August, let alone at least two. 2008 had Gustav at this time, just two storms ahead of us, but Hanna, Ike, and Josephine were coming in just one week from today, 5 storms ahead of 2010. We have plenty of time to watch the tropics, but we probrably won't even pull a 2004 or 2008 from where we are at right now, my final seasonal forecast is 13-6-3, which won't be a 2004, or 2008 even. Trust me, when we get something out there that actually threatens land (particularly the U.S.), I will go downright nuts over it here. We have 3 more months, but I can't see us getting a 2004 or 2008 unless the Atlantic goes f-ing crazy in September and October, I mean 2007 crazy, but with less fails. Ryan1000 13:16, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * 90%? Is that REALLY necessary NHC? And, quit it about the boring season, the tropics in the 3 major NHEM basins have begun forming cyclones again, so this needs to stop, reflect over it when it's done. atomic 77 32 13:59, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * I was just getting a bit bored so far, and IMO we won't quite get 2004 or 2008's numbers, but may have the "powers" (notability) of those years. And NHC, 90%? Are you shitting me? It's a tropical depression and you know it. Just give the storm the f-ing number so you can move on with your predictions for this thing. This is just what you said about Colin, Eric. It pisses me off when the NHC has to wait until they actually see the LLC on sattelite imagery, why not just number it anyways so you can move on with it? Ryan1000 00:39, August 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * Because it it not technically tropical unless it has a closed LLCC. BTW, some models see a storm spree, so watch what you say first, we might have an unbelievable number of storms in the next, lets say 15 days? Darren 23 Edits 00:54, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * Darren, I'm just thinking we will be a little less active than 2004 or 2008 because at this time in those two years, they were one or two storms ahead of us now, and assuming we get the same activity as 2004 and 2008 for the rest of the season (that would a lot of activity), we should end up one or two storms behind them as well. But, of course, mother nature does what she wants; only time will tell. About the 90% thing again? I mean, it's so close to being a depression why not just call it one anyways? I personally don't think there is a big difference between calling it a depression 3 hours before the NHC actually says it's one, but I prefer not to go days out in the future. Anyways, this season-and this storm-are unpredictable as of now. We must wait. Ryan1000 01:34, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ryan, maybe now you appreciate just how rare 2004, 2005 and 2008 were. -- SkyFury 14:53, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Tropical Depression Seven
So here it is. NHC, are you crazy? Near 100%?? atomic 77 32 14:35, August 25, 2010 (UTC) Up on NHC just seconds later. <font color="#ff7f00" family="Nyala">atomic <font color="#0000ff" family="Nyala">77 <font color="#00FF00" family="Nyala">32 14:36, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a boy! I think we should name him Earl! I think he's gonna follow in his sister's footsteps, grow up to be a modest hurricane and probably not affect land. -- SkyFury 14:53, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * They don't hold off on declaring systems tropical systems just for fun... they have strict criteria that must be met. Just because they know that it's all but certain that it WILL become a depression doesn't make it one any sooner. But now it is, and the initial forecast track does not recurve as quickly as Danielle... which is worrying. --Patteroast 16:22, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * (Earl) makes me worry greatly more than Danielle because it is much farther south and much more westwrd-moving. Oh, and Eric, It's not that a season has to be like 2004, 2005, or 2008 to grab my attention; it's just that those three years were the top three costliest tropical cyclone seasons in history, so I condone them as "very exeptional". A 1992 would be good enough for me, but a 2005 would make me go downright berserk. Heck, even if I saw 1977 again, I would even consider that year twice. Every basin worldwide in 1977 produced at least one storm of note. In the Atlantic, that was Anita, a cat. 5 from Mexico's gulf coast is notable enough for me, and the only category 5 worldwide in 1977. In the Epac, it was Heather, 14 inches of rain in the southwest is special for a Pacific hurricane, IMO. It's not every day you don't see a category 5 in the West Pac. as what happened in 1977, or a storm as erratic as Babe was, let alone an Atlantic hurricane of the same name, same time. And one of India's worst storms on record occured in 1977. I'm not sure what special note the SHem had that year, but they were probrably special in some way, too. I'm sorry if I offended you, but that's my true opinion; I didn't fully explain myself. Still, stay tuned on future Earl. Ryan1000 17:55, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * BTW, you forgot Doreen. It re-damaged roads. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  18:47, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * At the current rate, this storm could pass just east of Bermuda as a weak cat. 4. It's on track to strengthening to a major hurricane in six days OR it might not become a hurricane at all. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 20:06, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * I can't tell where Earl will go from now; it's way too early. And YE, Doreen wasn't that bad for Baja, but it might have had the lowest pressure from any non-category 2 in the eastern Pacific. Also, Mary was a rare year-crosser in the WPac, Dec 20 to Jan 2. I didn't mention everything notable; rather just some notable features in 1977. Ryan1000 20:18, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Tropical Storm Earl
Huh, NRL's calling it Earl before NHC. --Patteroast 20:28, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, there we go. Hi Earl! --Patteroast 20:37, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * <tt>THE FIFTH TROPICAL STORM OF THE SEASON...TROPICAL STORM EARL...HAS </tt>
 * <tt>FORMED IN THE EASTERN ATLANTIC...ONE WEEK EARLIER THAN CLIMATOLOGY.</tt>
 * Huh, and people were calling this a dead season? 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 23:49, August 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * It made me laugh when i saw that and then remebered the message on the 2010 AHS talk page about NOAA predicting far too many systems and not being reliable anymore.JasonRees 00:08, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * To silence the bust casters,and warn humans to prepare. That is why they wrote that. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  00:02, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

No more bustcasting, we are coming on track with the hot streak now. However, we can't know what Earl will do until we wait a week or so. Only time will tell for sure. Danielle is probrably going to recurve away from land, and I would expect Earl to do so as well, but it all depends on how strong it gets, and how much it goes north of west. The Carribean is not out of the question for sure. I'm waiting for now. Just waiting. Also, not to peer into the future by any means, but I just have a bad feeling about Earl... A bad feeling... Ryan1000 00:31, August 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * I am feeling Earl might be interested in looking into New England. --88.102.101.245 09:28, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * 88, that isn't my bad feeling-my bad feeling is something much, much worse. Only time will tell if my bad feeling becomes a nightmare, and for all intents and purposes, I hope it doesn't happen, but... Ryan1000 13:46, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * Earl, Please go to Fishpinner University like your brother Colin, and your sister Danielle is applying for. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  14:47, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * Latest GFS brings this just off the US East Coast, and gives a storm following right behind it. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 17:32, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think my fear will be to come soon. The NHC says... EARL HAS NOT BECOME ANY BETTER ORGANIZED SINCE THE LAST ADVISORY. Also, they said if Earl fails to organize itself signifigantly, and Danielle turns out to sea fast enough, then the Bermuda-Azores ridge of high pressure could rebuild and force Earl more West than North, swinging it into the Carribean and then the Gulf of Mexico, rather than north and out to sea(this could be a week or two from now, but i'm just saying, it's not a good thing at all). Ryan1000 18:27, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * Latest from NHC has Earl at category three by the end of the forecast period. --Patteroast 22:44, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Earl is starting to make me nervous. It's a very patient storm that's ever so slowly getting better organized and it's got a nice, healthy anticyclone waiting for it in a few days. I know a mid-latitude trough is probably going to limit its US landfall options to North Carolina or New England and the likelihood of it hitting either of those is not especially high, but I don't know. There's something about it I don't like. I feel like I'm watching a fox start to drift over toward the hen house. For the record, I also think Bermuda should be watching Earl more closely than Danielle. And who the hell knows what 97L is gonna do. -- SkyFury 05:08, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * It could hit Bermuda, or Newfoundland. However, some historical storms entered the Gulf as a major, and that would be bad as this reminds me of Ike. Beware the first storm of September? 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 14:17, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

Eric, as I mentioned, the track Earl takes all depends on how fast Danielle veers out to sea and how strong Earl gets. If Danielle can turn out right now, and Earl doesn't signifigantly organize now, then the ridge of high pressure will force Earl farther westward and that trough wont be able to push it out to sea, but rather northward into New England. I am fearing Earl will pull a Carol or a Gloria, or worst of all, the 1938 monster. It's way too early to tell, but Earl isn't so promising to turn out to sea, IMO. Ryan1000 14:41, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Astro, the first storm of September adage refers to the first storm to form in September, not the first to exist in September. That will probably be either Fiona or Gaston, depending on what 97L does. Ryan, I think the residents of the US east coast can take comfort in the fact that the stronger Earl gets (and right now, prospects are looking good for a major hurricane, despite the storm's very slow rate of intensification), the more it's going to want to turn out to sea and that if it does head for land, it's unlikely to be stronger than a modest Cat 2. -- SkyFury 17:18, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Earl is moving WSW, and soon to arrive at 15N, clearly off the forecast cone. 18z GFS hints at major trouble for Nova Scotia, and I'm talking about a possible cat. 3 landfall near Cape Breton. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 02:20, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * What is Earl doing? Someone ever saw something like that? No word by the NHC on this. --88.102.101.245
 * Eric, Earl is very ominous(and somewhat scary) to me. On the track it's going on, it will go west, but then north as it deepens, but my worst fear for Earl may come true. My fear is, on the track it's going, it will intensify into a minimal major hurricane, but then it will get caught between the Bermuda high and the trough off the East coast and skyrocket into New York City as a very strong hurricane. On the path the NHC says it's going on, it could easily do just that. If the current track keeps up, it will be the first major hurricane to do that on record. The only other hurricane known to directly hit New York City was the fourth hurricane of 1893, and that storm only hit the city with 85 mph winds, and thus wasn't a very destructive storm for the area. But Earl is a whole new ball game. The problem with hurricanes in New York or the rest of the northeast is they move so fast, there is hardly any time to get out of the way before they make landfall, which is how the 1938 hurricane turned out to be so bad, because it caught the area by surprise, moving at 70+ mph. We really should stay tuned on this one. It could be very bad. And even if it doesn't become a major hurricane, it doesn't mean it won't be bad; tell that to Ike, Eric. A category 2 is bad enough. Ryan1000 14:22, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like it's splitting in two and doing Fujiwara with itself. Could potentially shift the storm's track farther south. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 14:52, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * That could hinder it's progress a bit. NGDFL and NOGAPS take Earl into Atlantic Canada or Maine, UKMET takes it toward the Carolinas, but HWRF and GDFL take it toward my worst fear location, the New York area, and the NHC's path follows those models. I'm fearing Earl will pull one of those. And Eric, the only big computer model that takes Earl away from land completly is the GFS, and I can't feel certain that that one model will be right. The other models contradict that. Stay tuned. Ryan1000 14:57, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Do remember, back in 1938, they didn't have TV, and communications didn't move around much. Especially because they aren't familiar with hurricanes up north, definitely in 1938. <font color="#ff7f00" family="Nyala">atomic <font color="#0000ff" family="Nyala">77 <font color="#00FF00" family="Nyala">32 16:18, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * I have a feeling this will fail miserably again. I am sorry. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  16:33, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * GET RID OF THE BUST ATTITUDE!!! YE, if you think Earl will be a fail, think it to yourself; don't post it here. I'm getting really sick and tired of all your whining and crying about you thinking every storm will be a fail. I happen to trust the NHC in this case, and Earl will definitely not be a fail. New England must watch out. And Atomic7732, I'm sorry, but I must correct you in some way. Yes, we didn't have TV's in the 30's, and the 1938 storm was the worst to hit New England since 1815 and the first major since 1869, but even with all of the technology we have today, if a hurricane is racing North at 70 miles an hour, use some common sense. At 70 mph, in only, say, 6 hours it'll be walking onto New York's doorsteps. There isn't any way to evacuate all of New York City in just 6 hours. That's another thing i'm fearing-last minute panic. I can't tell if New York will be in Earl's gunsight's, but if the current track keeps up, it will be. For now, i'm waiting, though... Ryan1000 19:55, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * A major hurricane hitting New York would be the worst-case scenario for the US. However, the 12z GFS makes a direct hit on HALIFAX, NOVA SCOTIA as a category three hurricane! This is going to be a bad season, especially since it's a post-Modoki like 2003, which produced Juan. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 20:23, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * All attention goes to Earl as the recon data gives 70 kt winds and a pressure of 983. <font color="#ff7f00" family="Nyala">atomic <font color="#0000ff" family="Nyala">77 <font color="#00FF00" family="Nyala">32 22:19, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Great news! Earl is no longer failing! YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  22:35, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * That's what I thought, YE. And Astro, I don't completly trust GFS; I'm more worried about the HWRF and GDFL models, as well as the official NHC forecast. GFS is somewhat errornous to me, and I'm worried about the New York City scenario more than the Hallifax scenario simply because New York is much more vulnerable to storm surge and much more built up than Hallifax is. It won't be good if Hallifax gets a direct hit, but it's a helluva lot better than NEW YORK CITY getting one. Stay tuned. Ryan1000 00:23, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

Hurricane Earl
And we have our third hurricane of 2010. The NHC has put up warnings for the north-easternmost lesser antillies, and watches for the Virgins and Puerto Rico. They also slightly adjusted their track; they are expecting Earl to be a strong hurricane as it passes the east coast, but miss New York City a little bit to the east. However, that worst-case scenario is definitely not out of the question. Stay tuned, everyone. Ryan1000 12:58, August 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * Earl may not hit us, but it'll be exhilarating, that's for sure. Surfers, have your boards and wetsuits at the ready, you will not want to miss this. -- SkyFury 04:48, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Category 2 now. Regardless of what effects it has on the US, it's definitely already having effects on Antigua and Barbuda and other nearby islands. I hope they're holding up okay... because Earl might hit category three before heading away. Yikes. --Patteroast 07:59, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * This thing could be the worst hit there since Georges or Lenny, or at worst, Hugo. The official NHC forecast brings it up to category 4, paralleling the East coast, then turning away, paralleling Nova Scotia, too, and lastly, hitting Newfoundland as a weakening hurricane. It appears it could turn out better than what I thought it would be, but anything could change. Ryan1000 11:31, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * The margin of error contains some really nasty possibilities... also, it looks like Anguilla just got hit by the southern eyewall. --Patteroast 13:30, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Added to Wikipedia article. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  13:35, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

Major Hurricane Earl
Up on RBT. I will guarantee it will pass well offshore the USA. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  13:35, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think a 'guarantee' is a bit premature. It looks like it'll stay offshore, and it is forecast to, but a small unexpected turn at this point could change that very quickly. The US East Coast should watch this very carefully. --Patteroast 14:58, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

Uh oh. This could be a big storm. The official NHC forecast pulls it off of the east coast, but runs it right into Hallifax as a category 2. In fact, if the forecast is correct, it could be worse than Juan. Stay tuned. Ryan1000 16:08, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ryan, I have to agree with you this time. Earl is one happy hurricane. From what I can see on the satellite imagery, it is completely unimpeded. Outflow is excellent in all quadrants. That eye is a perfect sphere. Unless it runs into something, I don't think Earl's gonna stop strengthening for at least the next couple of days. Given the gorgeous, stable eye that seems to be present, I'd be surprised if it undergoes an ERC sooner than 24 hours from now, and even that soon is unlikely. If it keeps strengthening at the rate it has been for the past 12-24 hours, Category 5 is not out of the question. The forecast peak intensity has jumped 20 knots since yesterday morning. And if anybody has noticed, the forecast track has continued to shift westward... For their sake, New England, and for that matter the entire mid-Atlantic, better hope that trough arrives on time. This is starting to become a much more serious situation for the US east coast. If the track shifts any further west, we could be looking at a dangerous hurricane bearing down on North Carolina by Thursday and then raking up the rest of the East Coast. It's gonna be hairy enough as it is. -- SkyFury 18:47, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

Exactly, Eric. Earl looks like an epic win right now, and it still could get stronger. This is just what you said about Hurricane Ida last year. If Earl beats the trough, which Ida failed to do, then it will be a signifigant storm for the east coast, which, for the record, hasn't seen a U.S. landfalling hurricane in 5 years; the last one to hit was Ophelia in 2005. Typically the east coast sees a hurricane once every two years, but the last time we had a 5 year-streak for the east coast was from 1979 to 1984. I have a feeling Earl will pull a Bob or Carol, approaching the Bahamas and then racing past the east coast until it hits eastern Long Island and Rhode Island. Stay tuned. This could be a very bad storm. JSYK, Eric, Earl is strengthening, now it's at 125 mph and 955 mbars, that's a strong category 3. Category 5 definitely seems possible at this point. Ryan1000 19:41, August 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Um, Houston, we have a problem. Earl is a category 4 hurricane right now, and Fiona is behind it? What's up with the Atlantic now? After going for 2 months dead, this basin is in an outrage right now. 3 storms in less than a week. We are rolling in this basin big time, and it's just not stopping. The oficial NHC forecast calls for a 150 mph hurricane, but at the rate Earl is going, I would be surprised if this storm doesn't become a category 5 hurricane by tonight or tomorrow morning. I can tell this thing is undrgoing rapid intensification. This is a Wilma-type explosion, it's just going on and on and on. This is not going to be good at all. The East coast must watch out. Now. Ryan1000 21:14, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ryan, had Ida missed Central America, which it almost did, I shudder to think how very different things would've been. It probably would've hit very close to where I go to school as at least a Cat 2. Hitting land slowed it down and kept it from exploding in the northwest Caribbean. As for Earl, it's not so much whether it beats the trough period, which isn't going to happen, it's whether it beats it to North Carolina. If it does, all the trough's going to do is take it on a destructive tour of the upper east coast a la 1944. Early on, that trough was forecast to arrive in plenty of time, but Earl has not slowed down nearly as much as the models were anticipating and now it's going to be a lot more nerve wracking than we were hoping for. -- SkyFury 21:54, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Eric, Ida formed a little too close to land and moved toward land like Beta did in 2005. Had Ida formed in the same area where Mitch or Paloma did, then things would've gotten really nasty. This storm is also not turning northwest either, Eric, it's still heading west-northwest. I thought Earl would change direction to the Northwest in this new advisory, which is also what the NHC anticipated, but apparently I was wrong. It's still heading in the same direction at the same speed as it was when it was a category 3 in the last advisory. Since Earl is not turning northwest or slowing down right now, it seems far more likely that it beat the trough to North Carolina and thus it is much more likely to make landfall in the United States. This is no longer fun and games anymore; this thing is now starting to get very scary. It's just not slowing down. To Earl, it's like a race to the finish line as fast as you can, not slow and steady wins the race. Everyone must stay tuned on Earl. This storm could be very bad. Ryan1000 22:21, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Earl is definitley going to hit the east coast. I'm thinking a touch and go on North Carolina category 4? <font color="#ff7f00" family="Nyala">atomic <font color="#0000ff" family="Nyala">77 <font color="#00FF00" family="Nyala">32 22:51, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * The latest NHC info on Earl is out. They still have it going WNW at 15 mph, and the pressure is now 939 mbars, making it the strongest storm of the season. This storm is ever so more likely to hit the east coast with every advisory it moves WNW. Stay tuned, everyone. Ryan1000 23:13, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, the official forecast brings Earl five knots shy of Category 5. People better watch out in the Outer Banks, New England, and the Canadian Maritimes. Even if Earl stays offshore, there will be some major impacts in those regions. --Patteroast 23:58, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, Earl may be about to make me eat my words: this looks like concentric eyewalls. Look you can see the right side of the eyewall already beginning to erode. I began to wonder when the rapid intensification cooled off. After a storm goes on one of those binges, a hangover often follows. I'm surprised it's happening this soon though. The conditions are such that Earl should bounce right back but this may put an end to a bid for Category 5. -- SkyFury 01:48, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * All that said, the pressure continues to fall. It's down to 933mb now. That is intense, sir. For comparison, Hurricane Ike, which peaked at 125 knots, never dropped below 935mb. 933 does not sound like a hurricane that's going through an eyewall replacement cycle. *Sigh* I hate conflicting data. -- SkyFury 05:10, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * Eric, I don'y know if it's an eyewall cycle that's weakening it a bit; on the sattelites, there is a little bit of shear in his face. Earl is more than strong enough to fight it, though, and I strongly believe this strom is only temporarily weakening. Also, category 5 is still not out of the question; the pressure is actually dropping with the new advisory, it's now 931 mbars, but the winds remain unchanged. By comparison, Felix of 2007 was a strong category 5 but peaked only 2 mbars below where Earl is now. AND IT'S STILL NOT TURNING NORTHWEST! It slowed down to 13 mph, but that's not enough to hinder a U.S. landfall at all. We must stay tuned on Earl. Ryan1000 12:56, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * Up, latest advisory, and yes, Eric, it's weakening, back up to 939 mbars, but it picked up speed again, 14 mph to the same direction, WNW! The NHC now says it's South-Southeast from North Carolina. In order for Earl to evade a U.S. landfall at this time, it would have to go due north or north-northeast right now, and I just cannot see that happening. If Earl goes due northwest by the next advisory, it will end up at the border of South and North Carolina, which means it will be all but certain to ravage the East coast. If it still goes west-northwest, it will end up turning north-northeast when it's off of the coast of Florida, so it will still ravage the east coast. This storm is now guranteed to make landfall somewhere in the United States; it's just north of the Dominican Republic, and North Carolina will get bombed by this thing 3-4 days from now. Stay tuned. Ryan1000 16:21, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * Now 941 mb, a weakening category four and fighting dry air. The forecast and models now bring this farther and farther west, and it could well ride up the Gulf Stream (only four major hurricanes have done that since 1990). One model brings it just off Cape Cod as a cat. 4 (!), and all models except HWRF on 00-06z moe.met bring it to a landfall on Nova Scotia. The 12z GFS brings it very close to NYC, enough to spawn storm surge, heavy surf and rip tides, and heavy rain and flooding, while it makes a direct hit on Halifax. It could undergo extratropical transition as soon as it exits the Gulf Stream and loses major hurricane intensity, but it could maintain much of its windspeed while dumping its rainfall as it makes landfall in Nova Scotia. In fact, I cannot help but look at the remarkable similarity between Earl's forecast track and that of the 1938 Long Island Express, both September storms. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 16:46, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * Earl will hit the east coast at some point. All but one of the models, including the latest NHC forecast, at least take it into Cape Hatteras briefly, but I think this storm will rake up the east coast and crash into New England as at least a category 3 or 2 storm. And Astro, the 1938 storm hit at the worst possible timing. In 1938, the Bermuda High was located off of Atlantic Canada, rather than the East coast of the U.S. Also, the trough off of the East coast was one of those once in 100 years troughs', it pulled the storm north rather than eastward, and the jet stream rocketed the storm northward at 70 miles an hour, so the storm couldn't be grabbed by wind shear or weakened over colder waters. Worse still, it struck at high tide, so the storm surge was over 20 feet high, and the storm was hundreds of miles wide, too. What could be worse? Had it struck only 75 to 80 miles farther west, it would have made a direct hit to New York City with all of these bad conditions to fuel it. It would have been much, much worse had that happened. Earl probrably won't do just that, but it still bears watching. Ryan1000 19:22, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * Define 'hit'. I don't think it'll make landfall but it might get close enough to make the exact terminology irrelevant. The storm is starting to bear an uncanny resemblance to the Great Atlantic Hurricane of 1944 (although fortunately we wouldn't see any of the terrible maritime disasters that accompanied that storm in any case.) Keep in mind, Earl is a large hurricane. Hurricane-force winds extend 90 miles out from the center. It doesn't even have to come all that close to cause a serious problem for the East Coast. -- SkyFury 22:03, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * I normally would define a hit as a landfall, Eric. And it's finally going northwest, after defying that expected turn for quite some time; since at least yesterday. Also, Earl needs to slow down a bit if it want's miss the U.S. If it keeps up that 14 mph, it probrably will beat that trough to NC and rake up the east coast. If it slows to 10 mph or so, then the trough will beat it. Earl is far enough west and large enough as to where the NHC has issued hurricane watches for North Carolina. I don't think it will miss the east coast, but it all depends on what Earl does. Also, Earl is one sad excuse for a category 4 right now. Look at it. The entire northeastern eyewall has been eroded away. For all intents and purposes, it should be downgraded to a category 3 at the next advisory. I'd be stunned if it wasn't. Ryan1000 22:37, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * Satellite estimates are down a bit but, knowing NHC, they'll be reluctant to weaken it without recon confirmation. I'm surprised the Hurricane Hunters found such strong winds this afternoon. I fully expected it to be down to 105 knots or weaker by now. It really has been pretty remarkable how Earl's been able to maintain its strength. All the more reason for NHC to be cautious when judging intensity. The worst storms aren't always the prettiest. -- SkyFury 23:20, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree, Eric. I mean, not all storms must be strong to be deadly. Some good examples include Agatha of this year's Pacific season, Allison of 2001, and Agnes of 1972. Earl is being rather defiant right now; it just doesn't want to weaken. It isn't the best example of a defiant storm, however. If anything, that's Hurricane Mitch. I would be surprised if it doesn't weaken soon, but the problem with this weakening is it could pick up speed and hit the U.S. sooner than otherwise thought possible. I'm just waiting and watching right now, looking at every possible trick Earl has up his outflow. Stay tuned. Ryan1000 23:47, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

AoI: Southwest of the Azores
GFS has been consistently developing a possible subtropical storm heading toward the Azores in a few days from this partially frontal system. I've been calling this one future Fiona. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 12:55, August 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * Models take this into an extratropical low after becoming subtropical, and GFS and especially CMC bomb this out near the Azores. It could really have an effect on sea surface temperatures potentially opening the door to late-season subtropical and tropical storms in the NE Atlantic (think Vince). 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 21:17, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

(merged)Not noted anywhere, but a few models make it symmetric warm core, more north than any tropical cyclone ever. So, I call it Gaston. Interesting to note, last year, a similar storm occured, also with a G... (Grace if for some reason you don't know). <font color="#ff7f00" family="Nyala">atomic <font color="#0000ff" family="Nyala">77 <font color="#00FF00" family="Nyala">32 01:37, August 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * It's now an extratropical storm, and GFS hints at subtropical development. However NHC is extremely biased against any and all subtropical systems this year and we could already have had up to 10 such storms this year that were unmentioned. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 17:36, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

AoI: Offshore Veracruz
Currently on NHC at 10%. Possible circulation. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 20:08, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

its intresting to note that this AOI was only put on after Recon (NASA) had gone into it.JasonRees 00:09, August 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * A burst of convection in the Bay of Campeche for a while now. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 14:18, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

AoI: Behind Earl
New wave coming off of Africa... some models seem interested, and Jeff Masters over on Wunderground is already talking about it developing. --Patteroast 20:35, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

97L.INVEST
Looks fairly well developed already, and could be rapidly developing a circulation. Most models develop this, meaning the Cape Verde season has officially started, and those saying this season is a bust are just stupid. Hurray! 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 17:34, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * Up to 20% on NHC. The models are all taking 97L seriously... and CMC's showing it going into the Caribbean. Yeesh. Eventually one of these is going to hit land... 97L seems to have the best chance yet. (Although that same CMC run has Earl hitting Bermuda.) --Patteroast 22:48, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * 60% now <font color="#ff7f00" family="Nyala">atomic <font color="#0000ff" family="Nyala">77 <font color="#00FF00" family="Nyala">32 23:46, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * Another one? God, shades of 1995. And this one looks good too. It got organized in a hurry. I see no reason why it shouldn't develop except maybe some dry air. HWRF fluctuates between a high-end Cat 1 and a low-end Cat. 2. GFS also develops it, but isn't quite as enthusiastic. Most models have it breathing down Earl's neck by the end of the forecast period. I'm not quite ready to deem this the Parade of Storms 2.0, but this is getting pretty ridiculous. We haven't had three hurricanes active at once since late on September 8, 2005, and it was barely achieved then. It would be awesome if the Atlantic could turn the trick this time. If HWRF is right, it might just happen. -- SkyFury 01:59, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * And then some. http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/tropic2/real-time/europe/images/xxirbbmm7.jpg <font color="#ff7f00" family="Nyala">atomic <font color="#0000ff" family="Nyala">77 <font color="#00FF00" family="Nyala">32 03:51, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I noticed that wave over Burkina Faso (the one closest to the Atlantic) when I was checking up on 97L. To be honest with you, I'm trying not to think about it. -- SkyFury 05:13, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Up to 70% risk now. --Patteroast 11:54, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * It organized, fell apart and started to organize again. Once this storm clears the path for the ridge to build, and storms are directed westward with highs drifting off Quebec and Maine, watch out. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 14:21, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think this will be a fish, but I am scared of the wave behind it. And I am rarely scared of Atlantic storms (I live on the West Coast which I say why i am scared of the Nicaragua Aoi). Back on topic, I say ANOTHER Major hurricane for this. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  15:46, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Some models suggest Danielle 2.0 for this one. --88.102.101.245 01:42, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

Whoever can explain the complete vaporization of the convection in this thing wins the grand prize. 97L just has me scratching my head right now. -- SkyFury 04:46, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hm. NHC has it all the way up to 90% risk now, but it sure doesn't look like much. I have to say that I expect the risk to be lower at the next update, unless it bursts back up overnight. --Patteroast 08:01, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

If anything, it's probrably from Earl's outflow. It's providing wind shear over the invest, and that's weakening it. This is exactly what happened to Iris in 1989, when she got torn up by Hugo, and Frederic in 1979, when David's outflow stopped him in his tracks, until he hit the Gulf. Eric, usually if two storms are close to each other, one rips the other apart. Earlier this year, Darby suffered that fate from the depression that would become Alex; even though TD one was much weaker than Darby, it was downright enormous, which is why it absorbed him. Ivan and Joan in 1997 are exeptional, they were a brother and sister that were close, but didn't kill each other. Ryan1000 11:36, August 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * That's actual the same what made Earl struggle such long – only when Danielle went away Earl was able to intensify. --88.102.101.245 15:54, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * The circulation is very well organized but it still has almost a complete dearth of deep convection. I was very surprised to hear NHC say recon has found tropical storm force winds. Where? You could almost stand under this thing and not even need an umbrella right now. I don't think shear is the issue. Earl's outflow is still to its west and 97L doesn't look sheared. I think it's dealing with a bit of dry air right now. That could explain why convection has had a hard time persisting. -- SkyFury 19:51, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

Tropical Storm Fiona
Skipped depression stage? Well, anyways we are on storm number 6 so far. This basin is going downright nuts right now. I don't know what's happening here, but this basin just WOKE UP a week ago, after going asleep for two months. I just can't believe this. Well, Fiona isn't expected to become much due to Earl's outflow, but I wasn't expecting us to get Fiona before September. Eric, would you agree with me? Are you just stunned at this, too? Ryan1000 21:19, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not all that surprised. It was pretty obvious the season had kicked into gear. For the record, Fiona looks like sh!t. If it makes it to 50 knots, I'll be very impressed. -- SkyFury 22:41, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I know, Fiona is nothing more than Colin. This storm is going to probrably be another epic fail, and I don't give an honest f**k about Fiona. I'm just worried about Earl right now. Also for the record, it's moving west at 24 mph. At the rate she's going, she could wind up in the Carribean rather than follow her successful brother. That's all I can fear from her, but I personally don't see her doing that. Ryan1000 22:56, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * A lot of the models seem to think that Earl will absorb Fiona. Still, any system that far out is worth keeping an eye out, because there are a LOT of possibilities still open. --Patteroast 23:49, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

AoI: South of Louisiana
This could eventually stall in the Gulf, move ashore, or develop in the Gulf Stream. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 14:21, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Not with 30 knots of shear in its face it won't. -- SkyFury 00:19, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

AoI: South of the Cape Verdes
There's another good looking wave that's come off of Africa. The models don't think much of it, but I think it bears watching. Beware the first storm of September! -- SkyFury 22:49, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe shear is higher than was over the past two systems. IMO, Fiona was the end of this round, but could it become Howard? YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  23:38, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

98L.INVEST
Invest'd and up on NHC at 10%. --Patteroast 06:42, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * The Cape Verde train continues. I'm just waiting for the carnival music to kick in. Watch out for this one! While we're all busy with Earl, 98L is just patiently getting its act together. The models take it more to the south, generally making it a weak tropical storm/developing tropical depression headed for the Caribbean by the end of the period and it's got all the time in the world to develop. Stay tuned. Need I repeat myself? BEWARE THE FIRST STORM OF SEPTEMBER! -- SkyFury 00:10, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

Official Atlantic prediction
NHC still predicts active hurricane season. Atomic7732 03:04, August 6, 2010 (UTC)

Dead basin thing
I don't have a clue why all of you are like, "Why are there so many duds?". While doing a classification of hurricane tracks, I noticed on all seasons that had a timeline, they all started booming up near early or mid August. It seems like what happens is, a few storms pop up... then it starts going in August till September... Then slows down in October... And dwindles off by November. Maybe it was because Alex was a cat 2 (which made Bonnie and Colin seem like duds), and because the EPac started booming earlier and then abruptly stopped. I don't know, and I really would like to. Atomic7732 01:41, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * The only year I can remember where people weren't saying things were dead over and over was 2005 in the Atlantic. It doesn't seem like it can be helped. --Patteroast 02:16, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Lol hahaha! I see. Atomic7732 02:39, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * La Nina seasons are usually late activity starters, actually, I am not at all surprised we still at Colin. The surprising thing about Colin is that it formed during Downward MJO, so if storms can form during that, what would this season bring? <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 03:51, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * La Nina can be fickle. Most active years start kicking it up a notch right about now. 2004's Charley formed August 10 so we did get to the 'C' storm first but our 'C' is gonna be a lot less interesting than Charley. In the last La Nina (2008), we'd had five storms, two hurricanes and one major hurricane by this point in the season, including Dolly, which hit south Texas as a Cat 2 on July 23. I still think this season's total is gonna be on the low end of the official forecast. Ever since Alex, the worldwide tropics have been quiet as a graveyard. I've never seen the West Pacific as dead as it's been, but they did pretty much have all the fun in July with two 75 kt typhoons. As I've said before, the epic silence in the Pacific does not bode well for the Atlantic. -- SkyFury 05:55, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm very surprised we've only had 3 storms in the WPac. The EPac has been the most active NHEM basin this year! I have a feeling this years Atlantic is gonna be as weird, if not weirder than 2009's. Atomic7732 06:08, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Colin is a dud like ever other storms since Alex. Rick on the other hand, is probably the best example of an epcic win. Extremely cold cloud tops, eye in a perfect circle, perfectly symmetrical, perfectly round, outflow even and extremely impressive on all quadrants. i agree,d with 78 the active cycle has ended or ending. But again, this is the time of year we get active, about one year ago the EPAC exploded. Storms just formed one after another after another. The ALT got active on August 15. YE 14:03, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think people are calling this basin dead because we were expecting a 2005-type season. Well, this year, we are probably still gonna get the predicted numbers, like CSU's 18 and NOAA's average of 17. We should see a bunch of storms in a few weeks because as I said earlier, we are currently in downward MJO. EPAC is currently upward, and thats probably why you saw Estelle. The point is, just because this basin has been average so far, doesn't mean its dead at all. Remember, 16 storms is normal for EPAC, so don't also think EPAC will have an above average season (last year was near normal, to give you some prespective). One more thing, the chances for a below normal season in ATL is 0% according to TSR and NOAA. There is about a 90% chance of an active season, and the predicted ACE numbers are leaning towards a hyperactive season, so don't count ATL out yet. <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 20:28, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, last year's PHS was above normal (13.4 vs. 17, 3, vs. 6). Stop this, is it not going to be a hyperactive season, period, just 11 named storms. YE 20:39, August 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * 1- This states that last year was near normal. #2- I never said it was, I just said forecasters are leaning towards it. #3- Most, if not all indications lead to an above normal season, and as I said, its just early August. I'm just trying to make sure people don't get their guard down. I will be happy if this season will not be destructive, but claiming that this season will be a bust with all the evidence presented is outrageous. I'm not saying its not possible that this season will be a bust, but I'm just trying to put some sense into some people who claim this basin is dead. <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 21:14, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 1. It depends which average you use. 2. Ok 3. we just slightly below average so thats why i predcit 11 named storms. BTW, the EPAC will be similar (maybe identical) to 2004. YE

Re to #1- Um, ok, but that was a credible and direct source which disagrees whith you, and would you please give me a link to your average? Re to #2- [http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2010/tws/MIATWSAT_jul.shtml? Please check all your facts]. And 1 more thing, 2004 was El Nino, and is not a good analogue, and coincidences do happen. <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 21:59, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Darren, it is in the EPAC book which could be downloaded here. it gives both averages 1971-2006 and 1949-2006. I like to use the 1949 one. Actually, many people are comparing this year to 2004 in both basins. YE 23:20, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2 people does not count as many BTW :P Also, both can be used, but the latest one is always better because it is the most accurate total average.
 * The only reason I'm thinking the basins are dead is, the atlantic has had no interest since Alex - and it's August. The Eastern Pacific has had their hot streak in June with the record highest ACE for that month, but followed that up by being the first season in 44 years with no tropical storms in July, and Estelle isn't so interesting either. The West Pacific had only THREE named storms so far - 2009 was much worse at this time of their year. I don't think that this season is dead, but worldwide, this season is actually less active than, say last year. The East Pacific is two storms ahead of the West Pacific (I only count JMA named storms), and the Atlantic ties the basin as of now.At this rate August won't look any different than July, and I just don't see anything forming in the basins in the next week or so, and I don't give that newly - named West Pacific PAGASA named storm much of a chance either. What I mentined last year was probrably right, we are in another deadened basin period like 1977 was. I'm actually shocked, at this time. I just can't look forward to NOAA's predictions coming true, this year isn't anywhere close to active - 2009 was well ahead of this, exept in the Atlantic. However, I can't assume I'll be right on this dead streak here. 2004 and 1988 didn't start until August and everyone knows how well they went. Even if we aren't active, it doesn't mean we won't be notable. 1992, 1983, and 1930 were three of the least active, yet most notable, atlantic seasons on record. It took just Hurricane Andrew to turn 1992 from a season of nothing to a season of something. 1983 was the 4th or 3rd least active season on record (excluding ties), but Hurricane Alicia made the billion $ mark in Texas, and still remains the most recent major hurricane to hit Galveston/Houston, Although Hurricane Ike certainly had the impacts of one, and for a season with just two storms (1930), the Dominican Republic hurricane really made 1930 a notable season. I guess a saying that should be considered in the Atlantic is: don't judge June or July, judge the peak of the season, okaye?. Ryan1000 02:21, August 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, worldwide, this is gonna be a down year, but that's because the Pacific usually accounts for the bulk of the activity. As far as the Atlantic is concerned, this season so far is actually reminding me a bit of 2007: a lot of snub storms but when they do intensify, look out. That's kind of what I'm expecting to see, with maybe a couple of Cat 2s sprinkled in. It's still too early to rule out the official forecast verifying. 1999 had five Cat 4s, the first of which wasn't named until August 19. 1985, which saw six hurricanes make landfall in the US, didn't get to the 'C' storm until August 11. That said, the ATL, with apologies to 93L, doesn't exactly seem primed to explode. The next two weeks will give us a good indication of what kind of season we're looking at. If it doesn't get noticably livelier out there by August 20, I think it'll be extremely unlikely that this season exceeds 12 storms, 4 hurricanes and 2 major hurricanes. And remember what Andrew taught us: it only takes one bad hurricane to make it a bad season. 1992 had just six storms, but one caused over $20 billion in damage. -- SkyFury 08:15, August 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sky, I was sorta expecting a 2007 AHS-type year as well. I know what got us Estelle in the EPAC an anticyclone, and whats been shearing all the invests there is a trough. That trough is staring to lift, so we can get some storms. Last year around, this time the EPAC literally exploded. YE 13:39, August 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with you, SkyFury. We must wait until the heart of the season comes until we draw conclusions. If the next three or four weeks go dormant, by then i'm gonna be thinking there's something wrong with the tropics. That's not so likely, but if it does happen, then we are on a dead streak season. Only time will tell for the season. We shouldn't continue this discussion until we don't get any storms for some time. By then, we can pull up some record-dead records for the season, both here and worldwide. Ryan1000 15:50, August 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * West Pacific now has had five named storms and eleven depressions. The longer that a basin holds without any activity, the more that its waters will heat up. I expect a surge in activity in the Western Hemisphere around mid-to-late August. Some forecasts are predicting a strong La Nina lower than -3.0C, which would make it like 1998 in terms of the rapid fall from a strong El Nino to a strong La Nina. Upward MJO could also get into the Atlantic in a few weeks. Here are my own revised predictions for Northern Hemisphere seasons this year:


 * West Pacific: 42 depressions, 25 named storms, 14 typhoons, 7 "major" typhoons, 1 cat. 5, $6 billion in damage.
 * Central Pacific: 2 depressions, 1 named storm, 1 hurricane, no major hurricanes, no damage.
 * East Pacific: 17 depressions, 14 named storms, 8 hurricanes, 6 major hurricanes, 2 cat. 5s, $4 billion in damage.
 * Atlantic: 19 depressions, 15 named storms, 10 hurricanes, 6 major hurricanes, 2 cat. 5s, $60 billion in damage.
 * North Indian: 11 depressions, 5 named storms, 3 hurricane-strength severe cyclonic storms, 2 "major"-strength very severe cyclonic storms, no cat. 5, $3 billion in damage.


 * 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 20:43, August 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Speaking of predictions... I'll make mine for the Atlantic now...
 * 15 storms (TD's included), 9 hurricanes, 3 major. I haven't predicted much, so it just my guess. Atomic7732 21:23, August 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Considering how weve only had 3 deps so far i think 11 deps in total for the NIO wont happen. However if youre NS prediction came true it would be the most active season in terms of NS since names were introduced, and the most amount of NS since 2000.JasonRees 00:58, August 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I will hold off on making my final predictions for this season until the end of August. This has been the slowest start in the West Pacific since 1998, when the first named storm didn't form until July 8 and the first typhoon didn't form until August 3 (I'm pretty sure that's a record). If you remember, the Atlantic wasn't so quiet that year. When the Pacific is quiet, 9 times out of 10, the Atlantic is active and usually destructive. In 1998, Georges killed 600 people and Mitch killed over 18,000 and was the deadliest Atlantic hurricane since the Revolutionary War. -- SkyFury 04:03, August 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe we can't really assume anything about us being so quiet right now; that 1008 mbar low in the Keys looks pretty ominous to me. I would think that the AHS will have 13 storms, 6 hurricanes, and 3 majors, with zero or one category 5(s), only slightly above average. About damages? 60 billion seems a little too high for an AHS, Astro. At best I would think that the AHS would have 20 to 30 billion in damage, but it's very hard for a season to make over 40 billion in damage alone, and only 2004, 2005, and 2008 have done that. I do think this season will be destructive to some extent, but not "over 60 billion dollars" destructive. I think we should keep an eye on that Gulf low, however. Ryan1000 16:34, August 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, I have raised my ALT prediction to 12-6-3. However, i don think we will see many catastrophic storms this year, though we might have an Ida-type storm or two this year. However, I think the damages will be under $10 billion ( know people on WU call me wishcasters and downcasters for this, but I have a good accuracy). YE
 * Ok, I have raised my ALT prediction to 12-6-3. However, i don think we will see many catastrophic storms this year, though we might have an Ida-type storm or two this year. However, I think the damages will be under $10 billion ( know people on WU call me wishcasters and downcasters for this, but I have a good accuracy). YE

I do believe that ATL will eventually become more active, and here are my predictions for the basins (NS-Cane-MH-C5): And YE, I think there is a good reason they call you that. I am not saying that is 100% impossible, but a near normal/below normal season forecast is wishful thinking and not backed by current evidence, hence thats why they call you that. <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 16:51, August 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * WPAC: 22-12-6-1
 * EPAC: 13-6-4-1
 * ATL: 16-8-4-0


 * Then why are all the storms these year since Alex have been epic fails. YE 17:12, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

Like I said, YE, don't judge June or July, judge the peak of the season, okaye? June/July aren't supposed to be active; 2002 only had 12 total storms, 8 of which were in September. 2004 had 15 storms, 8 of them in August. Give the basin time. It'll get rollin' at some point. It slowly rises from June to July, skyrockets in August, peaks at september 10, then downturns in October; there is a brief secondary peak by October 19 when the East Pacific monsoon trough extends into the Carribean, and lastly, slows down to the end of November. I think this season will be somewhat destructive, but nowhere close to 2008, even. Just be patient, everyone; this season will get rolling by late August into September. Now is not the time to let up, but NOAA's predictions aren't looking so true, I agree. Ryan1000 23:48, August 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * GFS is forecasting something nasty to come off Africa in five days. Multiple models also forecast something to form in the northern Gulf around the 4-5 day mark. -- SkyFury 06:36, August 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Guess what, 91E has died. Another epic fail. YE 12:49, August 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * Does anyone else think that the silence in the Atlantic is getting rather ominous? All the models whose long range forecast I have access to develop something big off Africa in 3-4 days (although GFS and NOGAPS appear to take it out to sea). They also all develop something out of the remnants of TD 5 in the northern Gulf in about 2-3 days. Things may be about to get a little interesting. -- SkyFury 06:16, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * I have seen the GFS predicting two fishes next week. However, I have a felling they are going to epic fails an get torn apart by upper-level low. I also cant see ex-Five regenerating in the Gulf. YE 14:23, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't count your epic fails before they hatch. The entire Northern Hemisphere is quiet and since most of the heat is focused on the Atlantic, when the MJO gets back here we can expect an absolute explosion of activity. The second storm on GFS doesn't look like a fail, in fact it might even head into the Carolinas or New England and end up like a Hugo or a Floyd. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 15:04, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that silence is rather ominous to me, but after all of the epic fails we've had (Bonnie, Colin, and #5), I just can't see this season producing a monster storm like Andrew or Hugo. The conditions in the open tropical Atlantic are no different, or not a lot different, than when Colin was out there now. From all of the deadened activity weve had so far, I don't see anything big going on out there, or coming out there. We're halfway through August and the tropics still look like a wasteland. I don't think we'll pull a 1992 or 1988; this season will be a dead one, just like it was last year. Ryan1000 17:31, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * I still think ATL will be active and will produce ~15 storms because it is La Nina. People are saying that this season is a bust because they think that ATL has been below average. Well, guess what, it is very near average. And Ryan, last year was a strong El Nino, and this year is a La Nina, and has a potential for a very strong La Nina. The basin is not dead yet, and anything is possible. This season has the capabilities of potentially producing an extremely dangerous hurricane, it just takes conditions to align right. Do not let your guard down, and if some Cape-Verde type Major Hurricanes come along, well, that would be no surprise. <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 18:04, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Daren, no. In fact, I am not 100% convinced that there is a a La Nina. we are below the 1995-20009 average of 14 named storms. Again, we will end up being 12-6-3 IMO, and I think my prediction is generous. But again the activity cycle is ending. You might want to check out my blog and do not call me crazy, I disagree with experts 100%. It should be noted that there is a similar dissipation at Strom2k. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  19:04, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Then please see the definition of La Nina, and all 4 Nino regions indicate La Nina. And No, we are at average. The Average is 11-6-2 per last year's TWS.. And what evidence do you have? Give me credible expert evidence, as no offence, clearly, you are not an expert. If you disagree with experts, then you better have a very, very good argument against the expert consensus. I'm sorry, but what your're saying cannot be taken with credit. <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 19:57, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Darren, clam down. All I am saying is the IMO we are in a weak El Nino. i have the right to my opinon. But again, SST's suggest otherwise saying that there is a weak to moderate La Nina. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  20:21, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

YE, it's hard enough for guys with doctorates to figure out ENSO. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say you're somewhat short of a doctorate in meteorology. I often disagree with season predictions but when it comes to ENSO, I defer to the experts. Ryan, for the record, there were only six storms in 1992 (seven if you count STS 1) and only one major hurricane. That one major hurricane just happened to cause $26 bil in damage. While I don't think this will be a "dead year," I do think 18 storms is a little aggressive. Forecasters have warned that synoptic scale patterns look like they could be about to change with a more stable Azores High providing a lower-shear environment over the open Atlantic. -- SkyFury 05:00, August 16, 2010 (UTC)


 * I still think this season will be less active than what it was forecast; even 15 storms seems a little nasty for the AHS now. I still think it will be 12-6-3, but as you mentioned, Sky, it just takes only one bad storm to make it a bad season. Activity and notability have no direct correlation, exept in a few years like 2005. 1887 was one of the most active seasons on record, but there were hardly any signifigant storms in that season. And 1992 was one of the least active seasons, but one of the most notable, too. All in all, I do think this will be a slightly above average, though less than forecast, season, but I completly agree with the fact that it just takes one bad storm to make a season memorable for a long time to come. TD 5 looks like it wants to make a comeback, but I highly doubt it will turn into a monster for the gulf coast; category 1 or 2 is what I would call "exeptional" for that storm. It's August 16, and we still haven't had any ominous areas of development in the Atlantic, let alone the rest of the northern hemisphere. In short, this season will probrably not get to 20 storms, but still can produce at least one bad storm. We should wait for another 2 or 3 weeks until we really come into the heart of the season. By then, we could have some trouble out there. It wouldn't surprise me if we get one or two more August storms, but the most active August on record was 2004, with 8 storms in that year's August. We will NOT get 7 more named storms in the last two weeks in this August. 2002 and 2007 tie for the most active September, but all of the September storms in '07 were short-lived epic fails, exept for Felix.(Humberto, and Lorenzo weren't very signifigant other than the fact of how fast they boomed up). I can't assume this September could tie 2002 and 2007, but it will not have enough storms to catch up to 2005. We can still get just one bad storm this year, but we won't have a 2005-like season. My only fear for this season is we will have an inactive season for the most part, so people on the Gulf and east coasts will let their guard down, but then we get just one bad storm that catches them off guard and causes a great number of damages and deaths. I hope no bad storms form during this season; I mean, no one wants a bad storm to come, but I fear there will be something coming. Only time will tell what will happen this year.And by the way, Darren, not all La Nina events signify a bad season. 2007 was a La Nina, but it wasn't that bad of a season; the following year was far more destructive and deadly. 1973 was also a La Nina, but it wasn't much of a season in the Atlantic. We probrably will heat up by September, but we are coming to the end of the 1995-now hot streak in the Atlantic. When this active period ends, the Pacific will start rollin' for some time. Ryan1000 14:47, August 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * The question is when will the activity cycle end? As side note, the SST in the EPAC are expected be a little cooler in the ATL so expect 10 2009 type years. Here is my basin prediction

ATL 12-6-3-0

EPAC 12-6-4-1

WPAC 25-10-6-3

YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  17:24, August 16, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, 2007 was La Nina, and yes, it was below average. But 2004 is El Nino, but was hyperactive. It is true that La Nina conditions don't guarantee an active season. And about the 2005 thing, when did experts say that? No one was expecting a 2005-type season, and it is impossible as 2005 had absolute perfect conditions. But, they did and still do predict an active season, and if you think that you can just disagree with their statements and say "I think this season will be a bust" is absolutely wrong (I'm not talking about you Ryan, I'm talking to anyone who has said this statement). They went to college studying this, and I expect most of us here did not. Yes, some forecasts have been way off, but stating that these will is just absurd. You don't now that. I know for a fact that people in the meteorological society have been angry at the people bustcasters right now. The public were angry at them for "scaring them" because of the ominous forecast, but the real dangers are the people who spread news that this season will be a bust. So I do suggest that this topic should stop, and we should wait until the end of September. And to the 2nd part: we are in moderate La Nina, and I'm expecting a long-lasting La Nina that will extend to next year and maybe until May/June/July, so don't count on the activity cycle to end just yet. And I really wan't a source on the end of the activity cycle? Did experts expect the activity cycle in 1995 to start? No. Can we predict it with accuracy? Absolutely not. So, I do not think the activity cycle will end within the next 2 years. If it does, great, no more 2005's. <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 17:34, August 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * No, this season is a bust. SINCE WHEN DO STORMS DIE IN THE GULF. I am not expect no more than a weak La Nina and that is if we are even a weak La Nina. This is not Wikipedia, we dont need source for every stupid fact. Also, 2004 was not hyperactive, unless you mean ACE. If you are asking for a source, give me a source that says the that there are angry because this season is a bust thus far. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  17:58, August 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * We are already in moderate La Nina. And I never said people were angry this season has been a bust, people are angry because of the high forecast numbers and as a result scaring them. And we do need a source if we are making statements to make them credible. And Bonnie died because it speeded up to the ULL, Five died because of poor organization, Two didn't become a TS because of Alex. Those are the explanations. And hyperactiveness is determined by ACE, and 2004 is in the top 10. Happy? And as I said, earlier, I believe this topic should stop, because of the reasons I said earlier. <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 18:29, August 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * The question is are the ULL's are going to go bye-by. Also, how can a storm die because of poor organization? I still say but consertivly 12-6-3 which is not all that inactive at all. We could have a Gustav-type storm. And what in the heck is happening to the EPAC. They make high predilections, so that people prepare. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  18:50, August 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * If nothing else in teh EPAC forms this month, shut up about the Atlantic please? lol SOmething would be wrong.<font color="#ff7f00" family="Nyala">atomic <font color="#0000ff" family="Nyala">77 <font color="#00FF00" family="Nyala">32 22:32, August 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Um, there is nothing wrong with EPAC, it's just that conditions aren't favorable there because of La Nina. <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 23:20, August 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Darren, I hate to break it to you, but despite what you're thinking about the heart being three weeks away, chances are, from where we are now, we won't have even a 2008 type-season; however, I completly agree with your point. It's not the forecaster's fault that they made the very active, scary prediction, it's when all these other people come in and say we'll be dead for good that kills the preperations people make for the season. Truth is, we probrably will be less active than forecast, it's just that, these people think we will have a completly dead season. SkyFury and I mentioned that it doesn't take an active season to get a notable season. Andrew permanently taught us that lesson. Every storm other than Andrew was an epic fail in 1992, but when he came along, he was at the time the costliest hurricane in U.S. history. I do not think we will get the forecasts NOAA was predicting, but I never said we won't get any notable storms this year. I'm fearing something big is lurking in the tropics this season, and no one should let their guard down just because it's mid-August. September, October, and November are yet to come, and all three months are capable of producing severe hurricanes. We shouldn't assume that this season will be dead until the season actually ends. Activity and notability rarely have any direct correlation; some exeptions are '05', '04', and '08. We need to be patient for the time being, as this season is far from over. About the active hurricane cycle, Darren? It had begun in 1995, and I had heard from climate experts that they were expecting it to last for 15-20 years from 1995, so it will probrably close up anytime from this year to 5 years from now in 2015. The reason why the mid to late 1970's, 1980's, and early 1990's were quiet was because the Cape Verde season in Africa basically shut down. From the 1970's to 1987, there was a severe drought over the Saharan desert, which sent a lot of dry air to stop any African waves from developing in that time period (The inactivity would continue until 1994 due to continued El nino events), but that drought killed all the hurricane seasons in the Atlantic ocean, and meant booming business for the Pacific ocean. From 1970 to 1994, exactly 9 major hurricanes made landfall in the United States:Celia, Carmen, Eloise, Frederic, Allen, Alicia, Elena, Hugo, and Andrew, but from 1995 until now, we have had Opal, Fran, Bret, Charley, Ivan, Jeanne, Dennis, Katrina, Rita, and Wilma-10 U.S. landfalling major hurricanes in 15 years-that averages to 2 every 3 years, but from 1970 to 1994, we had an average of one major hurricane every 2 years. One half vs. two-thirds. It's a big thing, and we might get another one of these dead periods in the near future. Also of note, the total number of hurricanes to hit the U.S. in the 1970 to 1994 period was 29 (6 from 1985 alone), but as of now, we have had 25 from '95 onward (forgive me if i'm off by one or so), but still, that is quite remarkable. Ryan1000 02:05, August 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * The conditions of the EPAC have still not been explain, arent post-El Nino EPAC suppose to be years interesting. i agree ,t will be LESS ACTIVE in the forecast, but not saying we could have a Gustav type storm. I have a felling we will have a rapid flip to EL Nino in a year or so, but the SST's are expected to be a little cooler than last time, but we will probably have about 15 named storms. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  14:04, August 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * Remember, the real Cape Verde season hasn't even begun yet. We got an early taste of a Cape Verde wave developing into a storm in the western Caribbean, and that became Alex. Bonnie and Colin after that were duds, but only because they started out as Cape Verde waves but only barely became tropical storms. The lid on the Cape Verde season is going to come off in about a week. The continuous wave activity will banish some of the dry air, and we'll have one storm after another. A late start to the season does not imply low activity, and in fact most of the late starting seasons in recent years have become monster hurricane seasons, just look at 2004 for example. We've gone from a strong El Nino to a strong La Nina, so this could easily end up like 1998. All it takes is one storm to devastate an entire country. Cape Verde storms are dangerous, as they could hit the Caribbean Countries, the Gulf or the East Coast. The Cape Verde train this year starts in late August and probably will not stop until late November, and since the ENTIRE Northern Hemisphere has been quiet and again, most of the extra heat, moisture and energy is right in the Atlantic, once that cap comes off we'll have a freight train of storms. Not only could this storm season end up like 2008, when all of its category four storms formed after this date, but even a 1998 or a 2005 is not out of the question. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 23:07, August 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * Astro, this year's Cape Verde season is starting a little later than those other years, but the lid won't come off enough for us to have 28 named storms, yes, this season probrably will be slightly above average; I still hold my 12-6-3 prediction, but we are definitely not going to pull a 2005. 2005 had 7 named storms before August, 5 more in August, and 16 more from September to December. We will NOT have a 2005, but I can't really see even a 2008. 2008's Cape Verde season kicked off in July with Bertha and later-forming Dolly, just like 2005's. If this season's Cape Verde begun in July, then we probrably would have a 2008 or 2005 like season, too. The season generally has to start early to show a bad sign for future activity, because the contitions are favorable for a longer time period. Also, 2004, as I mentioned above, had 8 named storms in August, making it the most active August on record, and we will NOT have enough activity in the next two weeks for 7 more August storms. We will probrably get one or two more storms, but we won't have a 2004 August. Trust me, Astro, that won't happen. But September, October, and November are after that, and they could all be pretty nasty. Just be patient for now. Time will tell what will happen in the Atlantic, and worldwide, too. The Eastern and Western Pacific basins still haven't had their boom yet, either. The final predictions I'll make for the worldwide tropics are as follows:




 * WPAC:15-19 storms, 4-10 "phoons", 2-7 majors, and 1 cat. 5.


 * EPAC:9-14 storms, 4-6 'canes, 3-4 majors, and 1 cat. 5 (Celia)


 * Atlantic:8-13 storms, 3-6 'canes, 1 or 2 majors, and 0 cat. 5's.


 * SHem:24-31 storms, 14-18 cyclones, 6-12 cat. 3's, and 3 cat. 5's (by the SSHS)




 * Ryan1000 02:48, August 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * The thing about this season is that the air off the African coast has been just dry as a frickin' bone. The Saharan Air Layer is really thick this year. Look at this: . There is a huge cloud of dust sprawled way out across the Atlantic as far west as 40W, and this is not even as bad as it's been. That's what's killing your Cape Verde season right there. The cloud has spread so far south that it covers the Cape Verde Islands, the heart of Hurricane Alley. And this makes me think of an interesting theory that some scientist has come out with: that global warming may in fact hinder hurricane development as much as promote it. While the warming of the Earth's surface may make the ocean water warmer, it can also affect atmospheric patterns in ways that don't necessarily promote tropical cyclone development. One of those atmospheric wild cards is the Saharan Air Layer. A lot of scientists think that global warming may be enhancing the SAL. I found that to be a very interesting theory. Just because the oceans are getting warmer doesn't mean hurricanes are gonna have a field day. There's a lot more at play than just the temperature of the water. -- SkyFury 07:34, August 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * I mentioned that special fact above because some people in the U.S. are wondering why the 80's were so dead in the Atlantic. 2006 had very warm sea surface temps that weren't that much colder than 2005, but the atmospheric conditions were so unfavorable in 2006, we got nothing but a pretty average year. In the 1980's, during the Saharan drought, every African wave, or most of them, anyways, died out while crossing the Atlantic, but got going in the Eastern Pacific. In fact, all of 1990's storms in the Eastern Pacific came from westward moving African waves. If the Saharan Desert did not have their drought in the 70's to '87, then the AHS's in the 80's would look just like they were in today's active period. The truth is, the number of tropical waves to cross the Atlantic in the 80's wasn't that much lower than where it was from 1995 until now, but the African dust was nothing from 1995 until now, wheras in the 80's, it was so dense that almost all of the African waves died in the Atlantic, and redeveloped in the Eastern Pacific. If we have sea surface temps that are 1000 degrees, but crazy as shit shear and stable air, we can't really have a nasty season. In the same way, if there isn't an ounce of shear and freezing sea surface temps, then we still can't have a season. The 2005 season is a case where both factors came together, which explains the immense activity in that season. 2006 had very warm temps but very unfavorable wind shear and dry air, which corresponded to such a dead season in that year. We can't assume that the sea surface temps are the solemn reason for so many storms in 2005; if the atmospheric conditions don't correspond, then we can't have a season. In such a case, if we get knocked into an inactive period again, we might be less active then the 80's were because back in the 1980's, Global warming was not a very severe issue in the world. Now that it is, more dust will cross Africa's Saharan layer, which will kill more tropical waves. In the same way, during our next active period, 30 to 40 years from now, we could have more storms than during the one we're in now. I think the graph for hurricane activity will get steeper over time if this trend keeps up, in such a way as to where we are really quiet during our next cycle-quieter than the 80's, explosive in our next active cycle, more active than this one, then quieter than the previous quiet cycle, and more explosive than the last explosive cycle. Would you agree with this, SkyFury? I think this is a pretty decent theory for future hurricanes in the Atlantic, but patterns for seasons in the NIO and southern hemisphere have yet to be tested and figured out. The Pacific is supposed to contradict the Atlantic by most means. Ryan1000 18:32, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

Well, keep in mind that SSTs in the Atlantic were much lower in the 1980s than they are now. Remember in the early '80s, the east coast was getting slammed by massive blizzards. Record or near-record low temps were being set right and left across North America. This marked three-year dip in temps over North America corresponded with a dip in the jetstream that resulted in a harsh, almost winter-like environment over the Atlantic, with troughs (and therewith severe wind shear) extending deep into the tropics. At the same time, one of the strongest El Ninos in recorded history hit. But you brought up an interesting caveat in that the severe drought in Africa during the 1980s (very dry conditions prevailed worldwide throughout much of the 80s) would've enhanced the SAL. I think these three factors combined to cause near-record low activity in the Atlantic in the early 1980s. This, however, does not explain the inactivity in 1986-87. I think the big culprit there was another strong El Nino. The thick SAL may be partly responsible for '86, but most of the seven storms in '87 formed east of the Lesser Antilles. The SAL generally only affects areas east of 40W, not the entire basin, so I don't think it'll lead to a downswing in activity. However, I do think that it could lead to a pronounced westward shift in activity and fewer long-track Cape Verde hurricanes, or at least cause them to struggle until they emerge from the cloud at points westward. Look at 2005. Not one storm of tropical origin formed east of 40W. Vince was the only hurricane to form east of 55W, despite the fact that 2005 had more hurricanes than any other season in recorded history. All major storms except Maria did their business in the Caribbean or Gulf of Mexico. That's hardly encouraging to any of us on the Gulf Coast, but that's the kind of activity that we may be looking at in the near future. (Although note that 2004 did not have this problem) -- SkyFury 08:34, August 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sky, keep in mind that the Saharan drought lasted until 1987, so '86 and '87 were probrably hindered from that, too. Also, '88 and '89 were more than exeptional for AHS's, and 1990 was very active but only Diana was rather exeptional that year. And from '91 to '94, we had a last-ditch strong El Nino before the 1995 to now hot streak in the Atlantic. When I realized how quiet 2009 was, and how quiet we are so far in 2010, i've been thinking we are falling into a dead period again. Worldwide, this will be a down year, but I can't be certain when that dead streak will come, but hopefully it will be soon. However, as you mentioned, hurricane activity can be hindered as much as promoted with the SAL. We'll have to wait and see what mother nature really does to us. Ryan1000 16:31, August 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, there was a lot of rain was a lot of rain in the SW US, but at the same time cool weather. Wind shear was also lower than they are today in the EPAC, but the winters were slighlty warmer in the SW today. The smae shoudl apply for th next activty cycle, whcih should begin soon. The ATL will see about 8 storms per year and the EPAC will likely see about 20 named storms per year. Becuase i live in Nevada, i will look foward to both. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  22:40, August 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Of course it is. Wind shear varies from time to time, and just because it is low today doesnt mean it will 5 days from now, and I'm sure you know that (actually, I'm not). And what's the basis to your activity cycle thing. How on earth would you know what's coming. I would like it to end and to end the misery in all the destructive ATL storms, but I believe that the only reason your saying that is because you love EPAC and you hate the inactive cycle. Well, guess what, the cycle aint gonna change only because you want it. Its gonna change eventually, but where's the proof that it will change this year? 2006 was a dead year too. 2007 was a fail year. But 2008 was an active year. What I'm trying to say is, don't make predictins which motivated only by your bias for EPAC. I think it might happen in this decade, but it also might not. <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 23:00, August 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Darren, climate experts have been studying the pattern for the active Atlantic seasons since 1995, and I read and saw that they were expecting it to last for 15 to 20 years from 1995, but it's hard to pinpoint direct accuracy for this fact. I mean, you and I, and everyone else on the Wikia, want the basins to switch around as soon as this year, but we can't tell if that'll happen for sure. We've had enough bad seasons, but if it doesn't end this year, then it will probrably end in any year from 2011 to 2015, based on what climatologists have been studying. You say we can't assume when it will end, but we want it to end ASAP. SkyFury, I can tell you want the West Pacific to be active again in hopes of seeing another Tip over open waters, but a Tip would be unlikely to see in the cycle we're in. And Sky, following what you mentioned with Rick of 2009, Tip would look beautiful on the sattelites with today's technology. Ryan1000 23:14, August 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Syper Typhoon Nida last fall in the West Pacific was quite a storm, and almost as large as Tip. It stalled for days and pumped out lows that injected themselves into the subtropical jet before bombing themselves out at 950mb until the typhhon dissipated. Those lows eventually stroked the Hudson low and brought the jet stream south to set up a snowy winter in the US but a warm and dry one in Canada. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 17:37, August 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ryan, I know the SAL was thick in 86/87, but in 1987, most of the storms that year formed in the eastern Atlantic, which would seem counterintuitive if you're looking at the SAL as a major cause of inactivity. In 1986, there was a strong El Nino. Only one storm formed after September 10, signifying the onset of El Nino. In 1987, the first storm didn't form until August 9, signifying the departure of El Nino. I think ENSO was the primary cause of inactivity in those two years. SAL increase alone cannot bring an end to an active cycle. A dramatic shift in large scale weather patterns would have to occur. That hasn't happened yet. We were on the 'D' storm at this point in 2000 and 2001, and were on the 'E' storm in 2004. I don't want to hear about the active cycle being over just because we're not putting up 2005-like numbers. We're actually running at about the average active cycle pace. In nine out of the past fifteen seasons, including this season, the 'D' storm formed between August 19 and August 29. Of the other eight seasons, six had at least twelve storms and five had at least eight hurricanes. -- SkyFury 01:26, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Then, please explain why the EPAC went nuts during the 80's. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  01:57, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Two of the strongest El Ninos in recorded history. Also the multi-decadal cycle was in favor of the Pacific during the 1980's. -- SkyFury 04:22, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Eric, in 1987, the Saharan air layer didn't dip south over Cape verde, but rather west across the Atlantic, so we had some Cape verde storms in that year, but they ran into the air layer after developing(exept for Emily, it was a rather ravenous storm that year). And the following two years, '88 and '89 were two years in the 80's that just woke up. We had a last ditch el nino in the early 90's, and in 1995, we just exploded. Since then, the Atlantic was on a roll, but we want this "roll" to end ASAP. I don't want any more terrifying atlantic seasons; when can the 80's come back to us again? I missed the quiet cycle and I want it to happen again. Ryan1000 13:40, August 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * You know, there's a reason they call it the "multi-decadal cycle;" because each cycle, active and inactive, lasts multiple decades. And didn't you just say you're not interested unless the Atlantic is losing its mind? -- SkyFury 15:01, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * Wel,l this is when Wikipedia come into play. The peak of AMO is 2020. But the Pacific page (which is call the dedcadal oscillation noted that 2008 was the mist of the cycle. So in about 2012-2015 the activity cycle /could/ change. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  16:03, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * According to climatology, the season should be really picking up right about now. And it is! 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 17:37, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Astro! Also, everyone keep in mind that seasons immediately following an El Nino year often peak late. -- SkyFury 00:24, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * New research suggests recent El Nino Modokis occurred in 1991-92, 1994-95, 2002-03, 2004-05 and 2009-2010. Since this is a year following a Modoki ("Modoki", similar, but different, is the type on El Nino that does not supress Atlantic hurricane activity) and all of those other seasons had notorious storms (Andrew, Luis, Marilyn, Opal, Roxanne, Fabian, Isabel, Juan, Dennis, Katrina, Rita, Stan, Wilma), we should still expect this to be a late-starting, hyperactive season with notorious names and notorious tracks. 2007Astro&#39;sHurricane 02:32, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * That's what i'm fearing, Astro and Eric. My fear for Earl could turn out to be a nightmare, the first bad storm of this year. Stay tuned on Earl. I typed my fear above. Unfortunately, it very well might happen. Ryan1000 14:36, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

Dead basin thing (continued)

 * Our fist bad boy this year was Alex. You now what all of those years Asto mentioned expect for this year have in common, an active EPAC hurricane season. 1992 had 28 named storms, we have 6 thus far. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  15:09, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Not true, last year was average. The average is 16.3, and there were 17 named storms. <font color="#ff7f00" family="Nyala">atomic <font color="#0000ff" family="Nyala">77 <font color="#00FF00" family="Nyala">32 15:37, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Depends which average you use. the NHC site says 15, 13,4 and 15.5. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  16:12, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually 15.3 1 <font color="#ff7f00" family="Nyala">atomic <font color="#0000ff" family="Nyala">77 <font color="#00FF00" family="Nyala">32 16:43, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * No, there were 20 storms last year, I count CPac storms. The CPac is not it's own season, it is with the EPac. It was thus the most acive season since 1992, the most active on record. This year cannot truly be predicted from now. Ryan1000 18:56, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2009 PHS was 95% of the ACE median (AKA, near normal). I usually dont like using #of storms for activity, because for example 1950 AHS did not have many storms, but it had an epic amount of major hurricanes, making it the 2nd most active season in terms of ACE. Anyway, 2010 EPAC, unless it gets the occasional wave or trough or whatever is there, will not have many storms. We are well behind climatology (1 month) in the number of tropical storms, a month behind in hurricanes, so unless there will be an epic amount of storms like what will happen in ATL in the next month, we will probably not see a very active season. I'm sorry YE, but its gonna be hard for a near-normal season to happen. (BTW, I'm using the 71-09 Average because apparently, the NHC thinks its accurate enough, and I agree) Using a different average leads a different result, but for the most accurate average, you have to put the most amount of accurate years.) <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 19:09, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

Darren, to tell the truth, I actually think that a season should be ranked on notablility. ACE determines how much "energy" the cyclones have in a season, but what's the point of that energy if no storms affect land? The 1950 AHS had two or three notable storms, and that's it (King, and Dog, possibly Easy). The 1992 AHS was a below average ACE of a season, but Andrew made that year very notable. The 1990 PHS was second to 1992 as the highest ACE on record(although the average ACE per storm in '90 was higher than '92) but only TS Rachel made landfall in 1990. Everything else was a fishie. The 1996 PHS wasn't very active, but it is only second to 1971 as having the highest number of landfalls in an EPac season, and great impacts, especially from Alma. No offense, but I don't care about a season if there is nothing special about it. 1887 is an example. One of the most active seasons on record, but nothing special during that year. You think that the longer strong storms last and the higher ACE they have, the more notable the season. Your ACE does come into account with storms like Allen, the 1947 hurricane, and the 1893 Charleston Hurricane, but notability is what matters most. There is no big point of a season having any worth unless a storm makes landfall and causes a great impact in the area hit. In the same way, # of storms and notability don't correspond either, or with ACE. Right now, rather than talk about ACE and dead basins, continue with what I typed about Earl above. It could be a big threat to New England. Ryan1000 19:40, August 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, to a meteorological standpoint, a season which is active will be more notable than a basin which is deadly. If you dont give a damn about a very active season with fishies, then this aint the proper forum for you. So what if this season is not deadly? You're just gonna disregard it just because in your mind it ain't notable? This is a hurricane meteorology forum, not the hurricane deadliness or whatever you think it is forum. <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 19:53, August 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * I dotn see any reason why we cant get 12-15 named storms in the EPAC. I agree with Ryan, some years have lot's of storms, but no major impact such as 1990 PHS. On the other had 1996 PHS had a lot of impact but few storms. Darren, you just want to call 2009 "near normal" to silence EPAC lovers such as me who love last year. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  20:25, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * You don't see why? You don't see why? I give up in explaining stupid facts to you. EPAC will be inactive, whether you like it or not. And accept the fact that 2009 and the NHC calls it "Near-Normal" and the ACE is Near normal and the averages are near normal. Get over it! You just dont get it do you? <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 20:34, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2009 is just not "near-normal" in my book. I look at it this way "2009 had 20 EPAC/CPAC named cyclones the most since 1994" I have told you sevral times that post El Nino's are suppost to be at least somewhat active (12-15 NS). YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  20:47, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Your book isnt official. And this season is different. 1998 was in H by now, 2005 was in I right now, and I really don't care about the rest the post-El-Nino's. The point is, we've seen only 5 storms, and getting to double digits would be hard enough since June was an anomaly and that gave you 4 systems and 3 storms. <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 21:22, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Wrong, we have had 6 storm ths far. I don't think what hard about getting another 6 storms. EPAC storms coem in buches, so if we get a bunch of two or three more storms we are at 8 or 9. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  21:38, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * They sometimes form in bunches. But since the mighty ATL is now stealing all the tropical waves, that wont happen. Trust me YE, EPAC will be below average (I say that with 95% certainty), so do not get your hopes up. <font color="Blue">Darren 23 Edits 21:41, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thus far, I am sastfied with the year. Howevr, I need 11 more stroms to be happy. Odds of that happening=good IMO. YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  00:28, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Darren, I don't think that a season must be notable, but I view notability as more important for a season than ACE activity. It is fun to root for the big fishies to get very strong, but when it comes to things like the "Retirements at a glance" sections, I can't give these fishies any hope. I agree Darren, the EPac season will probrably be below average (no offense, YE), but again, notability and inactivity do not correlate all the time. 2002, for example, didn't turn out to be extremely active, although the ACE wasn't so far off, but when Hurricane Kenna came along, she became one of the strongest hurricanes to hit Mexico's Pacific coast, and by means of pressure, was the strongest. Let alone, 2002 was an el nino year, too. Darren, just one storm can make a bad season. We don't want any more bustcasting with fishies, and I fear something big is lurking in October of this year's Pacific season-but I just don't know what it will be. And as I mentioned, Darren, this discussion should stop. We should be paying attention to Hurricane Earl more than any "dead basin thing"s. It will be a bad storm, and it bears watching. Why don't you wan't to talk about him? If you want to talk about the EPac dead streak, go to that forum, this one isn't for the Eastern Pacific; it's for the Atlantic. Don't get me wrong, I don't want a bad season, but I don't want anyone to think there won't be any bad storms this year. If we don't lose the bust attitude or fishie attitude, it will just make things worse, trust me. I don't want anyone living in denial thinking it won't happen to them. Everyone must be prepared. Mother nature can throw anything at us at anytime. In short, my only fear is we will have a lot of fishie storms, but then we get something that isn't any fishie, and things will not look so good for those who were thinking this season was a fail. I DO NOT want this year to be like "the weatherman who cried hurricane" in which the forecasters say "get out" for the first several storms and they miss, but then a hurricane comes along and doesn't miss, but the people think it will, and bad things happen. That's what happened with Katrina. It's better to be safe than sorry. Ryan1000 01:18, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * To Ryan's post way above. ACE is a measure of activity and strength, not notability. You can't measure notability. You can't call 1992 "active", just because of Andrew. <font color="#ff7f00" family="Nyala">atomic <font color="#0000ff" family="Nyala">77 <font color="#00FF00" family="Nyala">32 02:55, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

Alive basin thing
The activity is much more alive again. I dont live in the East coast, so I not concerned for my sake. It reminds me of last year, exept the EPAC and ATL are opposites! YE <font color="#66666">Tropical <font color="#66666">Cyclone  02:29, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Though the basins are alive, that isn't the point of the discussion. <font color="#ff7f00" family="Nyala">atomic <font color="#0000ff" family="Nyala">77 <font color="#00FF00" family="Nyala">32 02:57, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ryan, why don't I just come out and say something like "Earl's gonna plow into NYC as a Cat 4!" That'll guarantee it comes nowhere near the coast. -- SkyFury 04:53, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * No. Eric, we can't assume what it'll do. I personally do not think New York will get a direct hit from Earl as of now, but it is not out of the question that it could hit eastern long Island or Rhode Island, ect. I'm just waiting. And Atomic, notability cannot be measured, but I view 1992 as "bad" not "active". I think that we as people should view storms that threaten land as more dangerous than those that don't affect land. Not to offend anyone by a meteorological standpoint, but it's what I think, overall, is true. Andrew was that kind of case. It wouldn't have been remembered for a long time to come had it not affected land. I think Earl will be something big to watch over the next few days. Also, I think you have noticed recently, the WPac is exploding right now. It's a good thing if storms don't affect land, but we are mainly worried about the storms that do threaten us, rather than the ones that don't. Ryan1000 11:18, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I was kidding. All of New England needs to be paying very close attention to this thing, but in the long run, I don't think NYC will be directly impacted. I doubt they'll be enjoying their weekend much, but I don't see any major impacts coming into the Five Boroughs. Cape Cod, eastern Long Island and Rhode Island may be a different story though. -- SkyFury 22:45, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, then all we can do is wait. Ryan1000 22:59, August 30, 2010 (UTC)