we also learned that the weather weenies need to alter their computer graphics. As the science has improved, the cone of uncertainty and spaghetti maps have gotten narrower, while the hurricanes have gotten wider. The narrow projected paths convinced east coast floridians that they could safely evacuate to Tampa; they then found themselves back in the crosshairs. If the cone of uncertainty was the width of the storm instead of the location of the eye, it would have have been apparent that the entire peninsula would be involved, whatever path the eye took.
I thought the graphics were pretty good, at least the ones I saw. NYT maps clearly showed previous path, width of both hurricane force winds and tropical storm force winds, latest location, and projected path with cone of uncertainty for that path. All the info anyone needed.
I suspect in many cases people read into those maps what they want to see. Add in a common lack of basic map reading and geographic literacy.
Finally, when it comes to weather, even smart educated people seem to completely forget the most elementary statistical concepts. I spent my career in the oil industry, working with smart, highly educated geologists, engineers, and geophysicists. I vividly recall one day when I was leaving the office, on a partly cloudy but otherwise pleasant afternoon. One of my co-workers grumbled "...the weatherman always gets it wrong!" I asked what was the problem? He replied "They said it was a 60% chance of rain today!" I said "Well yes, but that also means a 40% chance it won't rain." He gave me a dirty look and stomped off.
Previous Topic
Index
