3 ms·

Hi Jsight, Alberto Cairo here. I wrote the piece, but didn't design the maps, so I'll ask. In any case, even if there's an inconsistency between the maps in th

Hi Jsight, Alberto Cairo here. I wrote the piece, but didn't design the maps, so I'll ask. In any case, even if there's an inconsistency between the maps in the piece—which are intended to be illustrative, I guess—and the NHC ones, it doesn't undermine, I think, the overall message, which is that, regardless of whether you are inside of the cone or outside and close to it, it's safer to prepare just in case. People should pay less attention to the center dots or line of the cone (many do that) and focus more on facts such as that (a) the cone is essentially tons of possible positions of the center of the storm in the next few days, (b) the storm may end up going outside of the cone 1/3 of the time (so I'd say it doesn't matter much that, say, Naples is outside of the cone, but very close to it on the map.) I've been in Miami since 2012 and lived through Irma, so I remember what I wrote in the piece well. When the central line of the cone was running over Miami, people over here got crazy, and people on the West coast of Florida were watchful, but a bit less concerned (there's a link to an LATimes article in the piece that describes that), again likely because some folks tend to focus too much on the center line and dots inside the cone. There's tons of evidence for this kind of misinterpretation (one academic paper is linked from the piece). The piece was reviewed by scientists at UM's School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences; I won't say it's 100% correct, but I'm relatively confident the description, albeit simplified (I didn't explain what that "uncertainty" is for, instance!), is sound.

albertocairo 7y ago
By the way, thank you for being so thorough and attentive.
hnburnsy 7y ago
Truly nice of you to comment but did you not review the graphics and the source of them to make sure they matched your narrative? Seems important considering it is a piece about graphics and interpretation. Again appreciate you taking the time to join the discussion.
- albertocairo 7y ago
  Apparently it was an oversight (moving the cone slightly to the right or left on the map) and will be corrected.
Retric 7y ago
Risks are higher at the center of the cone. A hypothetical 100 mile wide storm that’s 40 miles west of the centerline still covers the centerline, but likely misses the eastern edge. Also, staggered evacuation is a good thing, you don’t want everyone in a city to decide to leave at the same time.
- albertocairo 7y ago
  That might be true mathematically but talking to forecasters who work on this, they greatly de-emphasize the center line. Instead, they do emphasize that the forecast is the cone, not the center line alone. They direct your attention away from the center line (readers tend to stick too much to it), and say something similar to what is in the article: areas outside will be likely affected, everyone should take precautions and prepare regardless of where we are — and we should read other graphics and messages that can tell us, for instance, whether there may be storm surge, flooding, or whether we need to evacuate or not; the cone tells us nothing about any of that.
  - albertocairo 7y ago
    One last thing: risks aren't necessarily higher on the center line. Just to give you an example: if you live in a low-level region far from the center line but that is prone to flooding, risks may be higher than if you are by the line but your house is on high ground (again, the cone says nothing about hazards, as pointed out). Thanks for the comment!
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
chrisco255 7y ago
Having been raised in Florida, you live through so many which are hyped up and so many of them end up missing or diverting away from the state altogether that people get cocky about it. Getting hit by the eye of the hurricane is much different than getting hit by the outer bands or even the middle core of it. The strongest winds are near the eye. The rest of the storm can still do rain and wind damage but it's nowhere near as bad, so it's easy to fall in to false sense of security. That being said, it's also easy to over-worry.
- paulddraper 7y ago
  Cocky Floridian here. Having lived in Florida for many year, I'll say hurricanes are terribly destructive but in most* cases, the risk to humans is minimal. Stay in your house (unless it's a prefab), or go down the local shelter. The worst parts of a hurricane are property damage, lost power, no gas, etc. It's much different than a wildfire or a tornado. Call me an idiot, but risk vs reward...I'm gonna stay put. I've saved thousands in property damage that way too. --- * If you build a city below sea level, that can turn out pretty bad. Also, if you are in poor health, live directly on the beach, or live somewhere without shelters or robust infrastructure.

albertocairo 7y ago

By the way, thank you for being so thorough and attentive.

hnburnsy 7y ago

Truly nice of you to comment but did you not review the graphics and the source of them to make sure they matched your narrative? Seems important considering it is a piece about graphics and interpretation. Again appreciate you taking the time to join the discussion.

albertocairo 7y ago
Apparently it was an oversight (moving the cone slightly to the right or left on the map) and will be corrected.

Retric 7y ago

Risks are higher at the center of the cone. A hypothetical 100 mile wide storm that’s 40 miles west of the centerline still covers the centerline, but likely misses the eastern edge. Also, staggered evacuation is a good thing, you don’t want everyone in a city to decide to leave at the same time.

albertocairo 7y ago
That might be true mathematically but talking to forecasters who work on this, they greatly de-emphasize the center line. Instead, they do emphasize that the forecast is the cone, not the center line alone. They direct your attention away from the center line (readers tend to stick too much to it), and say something similar to what is in the article: areas outside will be likely affected, everyone should take precautions and prepare regardless of where we are — and we should read other graphics and messages that can tell us, for instance, whether there may be storm surge, flooding, or whether we need to evacuate or not; the cone tells us nothing about any of that.
- albertocairo 7y ago
  One last thing: risks aren't necessarily higher on the center line. Just to give you an example: if you live in a low-level region far from the center line but that is prone to flooding, risks may be higher than if you are by the line but your house is on high ground (again, the cone says nothing about hazards, as pointed out). Thanks for the comment!
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

chrisco255 7y ago

Having been raised in Florida, you live through so many which are hyped up and so many of them end up missing or diverting away from the state altogether that people get cocky about it. Getting hit by the eye of the hurricane is much different than getting hit by the outer bands or even the middle core of it. The strongest winds are near the eye. The rest of the storm can still do rain and wind damage but it's nowhere near as bad, so it's easy to fall in to false sense of security. That being said, it's also easy to over-worry.

paulddraper 7y ago
Cocky Floridian here. Having lived in Florida for many year, I'll say hurricanes are terribly destructive but in most* cases, the risk to humans is minimal. Stay in your house (unless it's a prefab), or go down the local shelter. The worst parts of a hurricane are property damage, lost power, no gas, etc. It's much different than a wildfire or a tornado. Call me an idiot, but risk vs reward...I'm gonna stay put. I've saved thousands in property damage that way too. --- * If you build a city below sea level, that can turn out pretty bad. Also, if you are in poor health, live directly on the beach, or live somewhere without shelters or robust infrastructure.