Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts
nytimes.com
Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts
1–10 of 112 posts
Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts
#2The bottom line of the article is that we should use better and more understandable metrics about a hurricanes path, like https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at5+shtml/174008.s..., which was referenced in the article
Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts
#3For this exact reason, the image of the cone on the NHC website [0] has the following disclaimer on the top:
"Note: The cone contains the probable path of the storm center but does not show the size of the storm. Hazardous conditions can occur outside of the cone."
But apparently media organisations repost that image without the added disclaimer.
[0]: https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at5+shtml/144746.s...
Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts
#4The bottom line of the article is that we should use better and more understandable metrics about a hurricanes path, like https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at5+shtml/174008.s... , which was referenced in the article
Now go to the NYT main hurricane article and what do you see? The same misleading map that this article says people don't understand instead of the better wind speed probability alternative:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/29/us/hurricane-dorian-flori...
Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts
#5The bottom line of the article is that we should use better and more understandable metrics about a hurricanes path, like https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at5+shtml/174008.s... , which was referenced in the article
Yes, that one is a good one to monitor, because even Tropical Force Storm winds, when sustained long enough, can wreak significant havoc.
This one is also quite informative. It gives you a better idea of when you should have your house ready: https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at5+shtml/144746.s...
Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts
#6Wow, this is fascinating. I had no idea, either. I def always thought what they showed people thought wrongly. Granted, I don't live anywhere near these areas so it's never anything I have had to worry about in real life, but still fascinating and interesting to learn about it more. Very useful to know.
Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts
#7The bottom line of the article is that we should use better and more understandable metrics about a hurricanes path, like https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at5+shtml/174008.s... , which was referenced in the article
IMO this chart still doesn't adequately explain the data. That color scale reads to me like storm intensity.
The crux of the problem is that visualizing uncertainty is hard (remember the NYT 2016 election needles?) especially in a geospatial context where screen X and Y are meaningful. Animation can certainly help but interaction is even better.
Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts
#8I live in a hurricane area. We don't use the news for any information other than watching the weatherman stand in the storm and film, and satellite imagery while it's going on. We use noaa.gov, it has all those prediction maps. It's very good.
Here's Dorian's maps:
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at5+shtml/144923.s...
For those that haven't been through these, the predictions do shift up to the last minute, so we'll check the maps every few hours just to see where it's headed. They update more frequently the closer it gets. Dorian's path seems to have moved a little south since this morning. Also, most areas aren't what you see on the news; they like to show the exception areas as the norm (shocker).
Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts
#9"Graphics like these need to be read closely and carefully. Only then can we grasp what they're really saying."
A cone showing the likely paths of the storm's eye seems like the incorrect graphic to communicate to the public. The public cares about how much rain and wind they are going to get. The take-away to me is that maybe we should just emphasize maps of expected cumulative rainfall and wind speed, and not present something that is uninformative (or prone to misinterpretation) to begin with.
Re: Misinterpreting hurricane forecasts
#10"The National Hurricane Center says cones will contain the path of the storm center only 60 to 70 percent of the time"
Sounds like the communications fix is easy. Increase the uncertainty to 90-95% which also increases the cone size. And make it blood red and tell anyone inside the red that they need to be prepared.
"Hurricanes are also hundreds of miles wide, and the cone shows only the possible path of the storm’s center"
Add an additional yellow area around it. This makes it extra clear visually that the red zone is quite bad.