Attention media hounds, pseudo weather men/women, and numbnut meteorologists:
Someone’s roof, and the seas of the Gulf, don’t give a rat’s ass if the winds in a storm are glorified by being called a Category 5 as the winds howl at 155 mph, or if the winds clock in at a less glorious 150 mph…and the storm is ‘weakened’ or ‘downgraded’.
Let me slam into you at 155 mph… and then get up and let me run you over going 150. Let me know how fast you are willing to call that weakened or downgraded.
Oh, you can’t get your rocks off calling Rita a Category 5…you have to settle for saying she is weakened to a 4, or she has been downgraded. Your ass has been downgraded.
Like Katrina, Rita lived as a Cat 5 a about as long as possible (storms don’t maintain 175 mph winds for much more than 36 hours). However, by living as a 4, then a 5, then a 4, the damn storm already raised a storm surge of 15-20 feet. It DOES NOT MATTER ONE FRIGGIN IOTA THAT THE STORM WINDS DROP FROM 160 TO 150.
Dang, I hit submit too soon.
The Saffir-Simpson scale sucks, and the overuse of it makes it extra sucky. It’s too vague, and with five categories, hardly represents the progressive power of these storms.
Katrina, Andrew, Camille, Rita: They are in the 98th percentile for destructive power. They are all class A dangerous.
Go downgrade your sister’s tomato, you friggin dimwitted, fucknut weather whores.
At least it is a linear scale. People can understand that. It could be like the Richter Scale where a jump of 1 point is an increase of 10 times the previous one. “Oh, I’ve been through a 6.0 earthquake, how bad can a 7 be?” Yeah, like ten times worse.
I suppose you are right. Even that seems a little hard to explain to people though. We really need some kind of power graph for hurricanes with little color gradients and everything.
I agree it’s difficult to explain, but honestly I can’t come up with a better scale, except possibly by choping up the existing categories into smaller chunks. I’m not sure that would really make anything clearer, anyway. The big problem is that nature just isn’t linear across the board, but our brains seem to built to think in linear terms.
Not only that, saying "downgraded"when it just goes down from 5 to 4 lends itself to giving people the wrong message. 3, 4 and 5 are ALL ranked as “severe”. Heck, 1 and 2, and even Tropical Storm if you get the direct hit, are a bitch and a half (basic difference being your house is likely to still be mostly standing if it was built to code). Downgraded, schmowngraded.
Another thing – the ranking is by wind speed, but as has been often mentioned, the real big killers in the 'canes are storm surge AND plain old rain-caused flooding. The latter can be way disproportional in lethality to the Saf-Simp scale number
May I make a secondary pit? I’ve now seen about three anchors (two on CNN) confuse the cone of uncertainty with a swath of destruction attributable to the size of the storm. Kelly Wallace, looking at the cone of uncertainty, exclaims (a rough paraphrase): “wow you can see from that how much of an area will be affected and just how big the storm must be.”
It hurts my brain.
But actually they really do need to change the way they represent these storms. There’s way too much talk about Houston possibly “dodging a bullet” right now because of that uncertainty cone - which I think people are still (even for those that know better) conflating with a swath of destruction, and thinking the left half of the “swath” doesn’t matter because those are the lower force winds. It’s idiotic. It’s a probability map.
They should just show who has a >10% chance of >cat 3 winds, then >cat 1-2 winds, then tropical storm conditions. Forget the forcast track.
Or as JRDelirious mentioned, show storm surge and flooding potential equally much.
Well, I actually heard someone this evening – I wasn’t paying attention to the channel, although it might have been CNN – did point out that the drop from Cat 5 to Cat 4 was a difference for only a tiny section of winds directly around the eye, whereas the whole storm is still just as big and just as damaging.
It was actually rather refreshing to hear someone stating what I would have thought was fairly obvious to anyone with half a brain.