Hurricane Francine Only Attained Cat 1 Status
 

Despite boiling oceans and epic heat waves, Francine only attained Cat 1 status and never had a chance of attaining the anticipated major hurricane status. Why? The Tonga volcano prevented the hurricane helper, called La Nina, from developing, and it made the tropical atmosphere more stable - thus inhibiting tropical activity.

Think some regular posters on here might be disappointed.

Same old thread. Different title. I wonder how many posts the same five people will make in this one. :1rotfl:

I'm never disappointed when things are better than expected.

Watching Fox 55 @ 5:00 news and Francine is a Cat 2 as it approaches Louisiana.

Please provide the actual data which says Cat 2.

FOX 55 @ 5.00. Call FOX. Their news. 😒😒😒

As of 6pm, as it comes ashore....

Fox 55 is insufficient for you? Somehow the data presented conflict with your fixed certainty?

I asked for "data" not media reports. During court cases, I never used "the news" as a data source.

"Maximum sustained winds of AROUND 100 ..." is not data. What piece of "data" says so?

Same thing was reported by both Lester Holt and Norah O’Donnell. Winds were measured at a consistent 100 mph, which makes it a Cat 2 storm.

Channel 9 WFTV
 

WFTV Orlando channel 9 @ 6:30 is reporting Francine strengthens to a Cat 2 as it made landfall near Morgan City Louisiana.

This is TOTV, not a court case. A "NEWS" report was sited.
We are not your minions to provide you with data or, bring you your slippers, just because our information differs from yours. If we can find it, I'm assuming you can too.
Sheesh! 🫤🤨

Hear-say is not evidence. If they were measured, then they were recorded. Where's the evidence of that measured report?

If you found it, then please present the evidence. Until then, it's just hear-say.

So correct me if I’m wrong, but are you implying that all four major networks, along with the National Hurricane Center, are reporting the storms Cat rating based on hearsay, without any supporting wind speed evidence? I’m inclined to go with what they are reporting.

CALL FOX! Maybe they can tell you! After all, it's not hear-say, it's FOX-say. Suppose you want someone here to provide their #. 😞😞😞

If Fox had that data point, they would have reported it -- just like video of the 1st moon landing -- otherwise it's just hear-say.

Really hope you're not disappointed. It's all in fun anyway.
Have a nice evening.
🙂

Interesting ... so far no one can find the "evidence" supporting a Cat 2 storm. When driving a car, we have evidence of speed through instrumentation ... likewise in hurricane science there is also evidence through instrumentation -- but when there's no evidence - then it's not science - it's something else.

where is your evidence that it ever reached 90? You seem to have posted a jpeg of a media report. Apparently that is good evidence when you post it, but worthless when I do. Mine is from the national hurricane center. Now you can accuse them of making it up if they don't give you the name of the scientist who produced the data and they don't send you a personal email... but NORMAL people find data from the National Hurricane Center to be reliable, even when it hasn't been cleared thru Sounding.

Heck! I'm not watching the news. I read what the others repeated. It's just a weather report, for gosh sakes. Yes, it is different from what you posted. So what? Hear-say, shmear-say, no big deal.

Such Fun! I guess I'm NORMAL! At least for today.
🙂🙃🫠😉

Normal has changed because of a new NHC philosophy, as described the longest serving Direction of the NHC ... start listening at 14 minutes ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzAQ6CIPqDI

The national weather service called it a category 2.

National Weather Service

Planes from the US Air Force take measurements of various storms.

And weather people as well as amateurs take readings.

Of course they did. The National Weather Service also says man is responsible for global warming -- but they never tell you how much "man-made" CO2 warms the earth.

Even Greg Postel from the Weather Channel is challenging the hurricane center as I do ... https://x.com/GregPostel/status/1833978091225641023

Isn’t your evidence of it being a category 1 hurricane also hearsay?

As I understand hearsay, 99% of our knowledge is based on hearsay in that we have no personal knowledge of most events.

But people rely on hearsay for many of their daily decisions.

Your data seems to come from the Now tv channel.
We have that same channel to watch golf.
What makes their report any more valid than all the others, apart from agreeing with your agenda?

Remember it is a conspiracy!!

Cat 1 status has evidence --- Cat 2 does not -- unless you have it.

There is certainly irrefutable evidence that some posters are a pia.

It developed in the gulf you dont think that the short time over the hot water had anything to do with it.

Who cares? Cat 1 or 2. If you lived there, you wouldn’t care either. It was a strong hurricane and caused damage.thats a fact and thats all that matters. Such trivial things are always brought up for debate!

No -- that's an excuse. Check out past media reports, where many (including so-called experts) where sure (and even hoping) that "rapid intensification" would happen -- because of the boiling oceans and constant heat waves.

That is really the only constant: the constant string of excuses dating back to Katrina, of why we're not suffering from an avalanche of super hurricanes.

Isn’t it still too warm for slippers? Get me my flip flops, minion!!

😎

It's not trivial when there's an institutional change in how and when storms are being named and categorized -- because in most cases the trend is to inflate the numbers -- which of course adds to the fake climate crisis narratives. This was clearly described by the longest serving Director of the National Hurricane Center -- Dr. Neil Frank -- in his article ... How Busy Was the 2020 Hurricane Season? – Watts Up With That?