Hurricane Irene

[Shrink]

Another take on the "over-hyped" coverage:

The mantra of many elected officials and forecasters was "Plan for the worst, and hope for the best". That's a very prudent approach with something that is very unpredictable. Forecasters say they've figured out timing much better than years ago, but have not made much progress on predicting the intensity levels as a storm progresses.

So, what if they're off in the other direction? That is, if the storm turns out to be worse than the models predict. Then what would the "Monday morning quarterbacks" be saying?

What would you ask of forecasters if you were charged with the safety of millions of people? I'd ask for the worst case scenario within the realm of reality based on past data and present measurements. That's what you should plan for, just in case. There's no time to adjust. The preparations have to be made days in advance.

So some prepared for the worst, hoped or prayed for the best, and got something in between. (The best would be the storm got lost in the Bermuda Triangle and was never heard from again.) Far better than not preparing at all and losing your life, I'd say. Maybe some disagree...

Well said! Possibly the most rational post in the thread.

 

[reedomann]

Vermont got hit the worst probably..

 

[Gregg2]

Vermont had terrible flooding. Crops as far as 75 miles from the coast* are a total loss. The economic impact is mostly from water, not wind.

Lee might do as much damage as Irene, even though he(?) is "just" a tropical storm.

*specifically in North Carolina (...an article I read in the paper today)

 

[iJohnHenry]

Lee might do as much damage as Irene, even though he(?) is "just" a tropical storm.

Lee is a boy, in the hurricane naming scheme anyway.

 

[Gregg2]

Lee is a boy, in the hurricane naming scheme anyway.

Actually, I was torn between using "he" or "it".