Haven't we heard that the last two years? That's how people get caught being inadequately prepared. Too many cries of wolf will get you eaten.

Didn't they lose most of their credibility last year. I think by seasons end they had adjusted their numbers 4 times. As someone who studied climatology and weather systems as a minor in college and major in Computer Science, I can tell you for certain that you can not model on information you do not have. Things like the current flow of the Jet stream and the natural wobble that occurs in the currents of the Gulf stream currently can't be predicted and since they have a major influence on the formation of storms in the altantic, how can you predict storms.

YAWN.....

For what it's worth, the researchers talk about the value of these forecasts and why they issue them on page 2 of the document linked to in the first paragraph of the post above ("their prediction").

Two wild and crazy guys!!!

PS, nice short-sleeve shirt and tie look.

It's been interesting on here the past couple days to see the high number of comments that are dismissive of predictions based on mathematical (computer) models. I recognize that many of the comments of this nature on Andrew's post from Monday are from people simply being obtuse, but I wonder if there are some larger underlying misgivings.

I mean, it's clear to me (in a scientific sense) why a research group would put their predictions out there before the hurricane season starts. It's also clear to me from a policy/safety sense of why having an idea of the possible number of hurricanes is important, even if that number is eventually wrong. Some number is better than no number, so long as the method is transparent.

It's not the model's fault if the media treats a number as gospel, and most of the time it's not the scientists fault either. Error bars are included in published papers, but often not in the reports about them. Would a better option be that no results are discussed?

I guess where I'm going is that I don't get where the passionate criticism and outright dismissal of scientists, models, and the modelling process comes from when a model misses it's exact prediction, but was still within the stated range of possible outcomes. I guess I'm more about living and learning. But I'd like to learn where other people are coming from.

Sorry if that came out a bit disjointed. I haven't quite put my finger on what exactly I'm finding the problem to be.

Where're their pocket protectors?

thank you...I wanted to put in a comment that some of us appreciate getting a little bit more technical information related to weather and climate - regardless of what we might believe is the validity - despite some of the other comments sent to you

I agree with most of the posts above. This guy is never right, so therefore, I couldn't care less about what he predicts this hurricane season will look like. Might as well ask my neighbor, the architect.

FYI. William Gray is also an outspoken opponent of the science of global warming.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301305_pf.html

Yeah, right, sure....From a Muppets movie :

Get a crystal ball. It'll be as accurate.

Anyone can say that now. Whenever a La Nina extends into summer you get increased Atlantic/Caribbean activity, but the East Pacific hurricane season may be diminished. The La Nina could have an effect on this summer's Arizona monsoon.

Regarding modeling issues:
If you look at the methodology, Dr. Gray's prediction is based strictly on statistical correlations. It's not a model in the deterministic sense of the physical models used in daily weather forecasting. That means it can only be accurate to the extent that it includes enough of the many factors which can explain the variability of seasonal hurricane activity.

I sure hope the experts are wrong. My picture windows (big, expensive, ouch!) face south. Hurricanes are not among my favorite things.

@akmzrazor

Regarding the updating of the forecasts "4 times":

The crew of scientists have a set schedule of releases (late year, April, June, and finally in August) that stays the same regardless of the season. While they have been less than accurate the past few years, their numbers should be taken as a fairly sophisticated estimate of possibilities for the upcoming year (but again, just an estimate).

Regarding the accuracy of the predictions:
"Although our seasonal hurricane forecast scheme has shown significant real time skill for our early June and early August predictions, we have yet to demonstrate realtime forecast skill for our early April forecasts that have been issued for the last 13 years (1995-2007)."
(from the latest prediction)

what is wrong with that guys head. it seems to be lopsided to the right. the gieco cavemen have better heads.