4 ms·

* A tsunami was generated by this event, but no longer poses a threat. * This will be the final U.S. National Tsunami Warning Center message issued for

* A tsunami was generated by this event, but no longer poses a threat. * This will be the final U.S. National Tsunami Warning Center message issued for this event. I'm in danger of being "Warning-ed" out. Watches are different and will always get my attention. Especially after the recent overreaction to sending out way more flood warnings even when it is not any where near me is just getting me to not bother with them. I know this is the danger the forecasters face. I can appreciate how they clearly stated the issue was now over in a very quick time though.

op00to 1y ago
How would you handle the situation differently?
- dylan604 1y ago
  I don't think what tsunami.gov did is bad. It was an event that requires immediate notifications. They did. It also was quickly de-escalated and updated that it was no longer a threat. Great. It's the knee jerk reaction to now over-notifying flood warnings in Texas that has me numb now. The entire Texas government should be embarrassed by the whole thing, but I know they are not which makes me even more embarrassed for them. So to look like they are doing something they've overreacted and now made it annoying instead of actually useful. So, I guess if I had my druthers, I'd replace the Texas government with competent people. Instead, maybe for the better, I'm not in charge and we have gerrymandered elections. I'm avoiding using the word rigged elections to avoid getting lumped in with the 2020 crowd, but when you draw the districts in such a way, what else do you call it?
  - op00to 1y ago
    Right, it’s more that you don’t trust the existing alerts because morons are issuing them than that there are too many. I totally get that! If you knew the alerts were coming from someone who knew what they were doing, you’d tolerate them. They do the same thing with Amber Alerts in my area. It got to a point where it was multiple times a week, it’s common sense to tune it out or turn ‘em off.
    - dylan604 1y ago
      In this case, the local morons didn't do anything with the notices they were provided, so even the phone alerts did not go out. This was then a double whammy because it was deep night when most people are in their deepest sleep. It's also the fact that the moron's past decisions specifically about this have come to light where they decided to spend money elsewhere. That never looks good. So unless that money cured cancer or something in that realm, it won't be any less horrible than if it was used to pay for upgrading government offices.
- lazide 1y ago
  Not the poster, but I’m definitely starting to understand those old folks that say ‘fuck it, if the hurricane gets me it gets me’.
porkloin 1y ago
I grew up in coastal AK and I can't remember more than one time that we faced evacuation orders. We had weekly tests of our tsunami alarm system, but I only ever heard them operated in a non-test that one time. I still keep a close eye on it every time there is an earthquake in the area that triggers a warning because I have family there. In the last few years there has been a significant uptick in the number of alerts that trigger sirens, orders to evacuate to higher ground, etc. Talking to people back home, it seems like they're "warning-ed out" as you say and are beginning to tune it out. A 7.3 magnitude quake absolutely can trigger a tsunami big enough to threaten your life, so the NTWC is 100% doing the right thing. I also agree that they need to be careful about perception, and careful about stoking panic. A few years ago, a pedestrian in my home town was struck and killed by a car driving to higher ground during a tsunami warning. There wasn't any tsunami activity that day, but the pedestrian is still dead. It's impossible to completely attribute the death to the state of alarm/evacuation, but it's not hard to see how a driver and a pedestrian in that situation might be less than completely attentive due to the loud sirens, increased traffic to unusual areas, etc.
chrbr 1y ago
Aren't warnings always positioned as being a more immediate threat than watches? https://www.weather.gov/safety/tsunami-alerts https://www.weather.gov/safety/tsunami-alerts
- senkora 1y ago
  +1. We really need better words for this because I have to look up which is worse every time.
  - cj 1y ago
    A little trick: If you think of both words as verbs, one is intuitively worse than the other. (I agree thinking of them as nouns is confusing)
    - sejje 1y ago
      Right, so: Warning, tornadoes might occur. Watch out, we saw a tornado!
      - dylan604 1y ago
        No. You've reversed them. We're watching out for a tornado because the conditions are right for them. You're now warned a tornado is coming after it is confirmed.
        sejje 1y ago
        Yes, I did it on purpose to show that the words used make them easy to reverse. I think one word should be stronger, or unambiguous. Tornado sighting Tornado alarm Tornado touchdown Tornado lookout Tornado conditions Tornado possibility I go by Elk crossing warning signs a lot. They display all the time, giving their warning, not just when there's a recent sighting. It's like saying the "red/black" rhyme about coral snakes is fine. It is, if you remember it exactly. And it's also incredibly easy to mix it up.
      - 1y ago

op00to 1y ago

How would you handle the situation differently?

dylan604 1y ago
I don't think what tsunami.gov did is bad. It was an event that requires immediate notifications. They did. It also was quickly de-escalated and updated that it was no longer a threat. Great. It's the knee jerk reaction to now over-notifying flood warnings in Texas that has me numb now. The entire Texas government should be embarrassed by the whole thing, but I know they are not which makes me even more embarrassed for them. So to look like they are doing something they've overreacted and now made it annoying instead of actually useful. So, I guess if I had my druthers, I'd replace the Texas government with competent people. Instead, maybe for the better, I'm not in charge and we have gerrymandered elections. I'm avoiding using the word rigged elections to avoid getting lumped in with the 2020 crowd, but when you draw the districts in such a way, what else do you call it?
- op00to 1y ago
  Right, it’s more that you don’t trust the existing alerts because morons are issuing them than that there are too many. I totally get that! If you knew the alerts were coming from someone who knew what they were doing, you’d tolerate them. They do the same thing with Amber Alerts in my area. It got to a point where it was multiple times a week, it’s common sense to tune it out or turn ‘em off.
  - dylan604 1y ago
    In this case, the local morons didn't do anything with the notices they were provided, so even the phone alerts did not go out. This was then a double whammy because it was deep night when most people are in their deepest sleep. It's also the fact that the moron's past decisions specifically about this have come to light where they decided to spend money elsewhere. That never looks good. So unless that money cured cancer or something in that realm, it won't be any less horrible than if it was used to pay for upgrading government offices.
lazide 1y ago
Not the poster, but I’m definitely starting to understand those old folks that say ‘fuck it, if the hurricane gets me it gets me’.

porkloin 1y ago

I grew up in coastal AK and I can't remember more than one time that we faced evacuation orders. We had weekly tests of our tsunami alarm system, but I only ever heard them operated in a non-test that one time. I still keep a close eye on it every time there is an earthquake in the area that triggers a warning because I have family there. In the last few years there has been a significant uptick in the number of alerts that trigger sirens, orders to evacuate to higher ground, etc. Talking to people back home, it seems like they're "warning-ed out" as you say and are beginning to tune it out. A 7.3 magnitude quake absolutely can trigger a tsunami big enough to threaten your life, so the NTWC is 100% doing the right thing. I also agree that they need to be careful about perception, and careful about stoking panic. A few years ago, a pedestrian in my home town was struck and killed by a car driving to higher ground during a tsunami warning. There wasn't any tsunami activity that day, but the pedestrian is still dead. It's impossible to completely attribute the death to the state of alarm/evacuation, but it's not hard to see how a driver and a pedestrian in that situation might be less than completely attentive due to the loud sirens, increased traffic to unusual areas, etc.

chrbr 1y ago

Aren't warnings always positioned as being a more immediate threat than watches? https://www.weather.gov/safety/tsunami-alerts https://www.weather.gov/safety/tsunami-alerts

senkora 1y ago
+1. We really need better words for this because I have to look up which is worse every time.
- cj 1y ago
  A little trick: If you think of both words as verbs, one is intuitively worse than the other. (I agree thinking of them as nouns is confusing)
  - sejje 1y ago
    Right, so: Warning, tornadoes might occur. Watch out, we saw a tornado!
    - dylan604 1y ago
      No. You've reversed them. We're watching out for a tornado because the conditions are right for them. You're now warned a tornado is coming after it is confirmed.
      - sejje 1y ago
        Yes, I did it on purpose to show that the words used make them easy to reverse. I think one word should be stronger, or unambiguous. Tornado sighting Tornado alarm Tornado touchdown Tornado lookout Tornado conditions Tornado possibility I go by Elk crossing warning signs a lot. They display all the time, giving their warning, not just when there's a recent sighting. It's like saying the "red/black" rhyme about coral snakes is fine. It is, if you remember it exactly. And it's also incredibly easy to mix it up.
    - 1y ago