andyhb Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 P.S. As an ultra-hurricane-nerd, I have very little interest in Katrina. From my perspective, it was an ugly, falling-apart cyclone with a crappy radar signature at landfall-- not my cup of tea at all. But I can still understand the significance of it, beyond my nerd perspective. Well if it stayed the way it was when those advisories were issued... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 Well if it stayed the way it was when those advisories were issued... ...then we would have had a sexycane landfall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 ...then we would have had a sexycane landfall. well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 well... What, child? Do you disagree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 What, child? Do you disagree? Quit calling people child. I'm not disagreeing with you, but in this case, I really wouldn't want to find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 Quit calling people child. :hugz: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 And I'm gonna keep callin' folks "child" if they're gonna keep sayin' childish stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 You know I agree with you from a purely tropical/max sustained wind point of view, but as I've argued with you offline, this storm was very nearly the worst case scenario for the Northeast as a whole. The only thing that was missing was a Cat 3 core. From a surge perspective, it will likely never be worse than this storm given the angle of approach, wide wind field, and timing at high tide. Completely agree with this post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 Completely agree with this post. But other hurricanes in the Northeast USA have produced much higher surges. And it's possible 1938 had as large a wind field. Read the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 But other hurricanes in the Northeast USA have produced much higher surges. And it's possible 1938 had as large a wind field. Read the thread. I have and I still agree with his post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 I have and I still agree with his post. So you agree that Sandy was the worst-case scenario even though its surges weren't as high as other storms? So the other storms would be Double-Whammy Worst Case Scenarios...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 So you agree that Sandy was the worst-case scenario even though its surges weren't as high as other storms? So the other storms would be Double-Whammy Worst Case Scerarios...? Considering where this came into the coast and at the angle/speed, this is the worst case. If 1938 had came into the coast in a similar fashion it probably would have been worse, but it didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 What's 1938? Magic, Super-Sized, Celestial Worst-case Scenario? Why do people have opinions about historical topics when they don't know the history? Why are you assuming that no one knows the history? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 Considering where this came into the coast and at the angle/speed, this is the worst case. If 1938 had came into the coast in a similar fashion it probably would have been worse, but it didn't. We were discussing Northeast as a whole. Out of incidents that have actually occurred, Sandy was not the worst for the Northeast. Read the thread-- it's full of substance and research by history nerds like me and snowflake-- not just gut reactions to the news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 Why are you assuming that no one knows the history? Because of the things being posted here. People clearly haven't studied some of these past events. If they did, they wouldn't say these things. We're going in a big circle. Boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 Because of the things being posted here. People clearly haven't studied some of these past events. If they did, they wouldn't say these things. We're going in a big circle. Boring. Because the fact that it is going in circles is all because of other people... To make it clear, I'm not saying Sandy is worse than x event (I.E. Katrina, LIE, 1944, w/e), but your attitude towards some of the people here regarding this is beginning to get on some people's nerves, as can be seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 We were discussing Northeast as a whole. Out of incidents that have actually occurred, Sandy was not the worst for the Northeast. Read the thread-- it's full of substance and research by history nerds like me and snowflake-- not just gut reactions to the news. Josh I know meteorological history too, so don't feel I am coming with an empty cup. This isn't a gut reaction type post, I know the data I have seen with respect to surge for many locations with respect to Sandy. Furthermore comparing the 2 storms is a bit silly considering the advancements in technology/infrastructure since 1938. Also since 1938 there are many more people living along the coast in New Jersey and New York. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 Because the fact that it is going in circles is all because of other people... Correct. If anyone is going to grossly misunderstand history, snowflake or I will continue to point it out. I'm not trying to be a ball-buster or (as Adam describes) some alphanerd. It's important to me that discussions here are reality-based. To make it clear, I'm not saying Sandy is worse than x event (I.E. Katrina, LIE, 1944, w/e), but your attitude towards some of the people here regarding this is beginning to get on some people's nerves, as can be seen. I'm not here to be popular. I'm here to have intelligent, informed discussions. If it gets on people's nerves to have historically incorrect statements challenged, note sure what to tell ya. Josh I know meteorological history too, so don't feel I am coming with an empty cup. This isn't a gut reaction type post, I know the data I have seen with respect to surge for many locations with respect to Sandy. Cool-- then you know that the 1938 storm surges were much higher than Sandy's (as were 1938's winds, destruction, and deaths)-- in which case, I don't know why you're suggesting Sandy was worse. Furthermore comparing the 2 storms is a bit silly considering the advancements in technology/infrastructure since 1938. Also since 1938 there are many more people living along the coast in New Jersey and New York. Huh? 1. The Northeast USA was not made of straw in 1938. 2. Older buildings are actually often better-constructed and stronger than the cheap crap being produced now-- especially when it comes to single-family homes. Modern does not automatically mean stronger and more storm-resistant. 3. A lot of today's NYC area is made of buildings from before 1938, and wow!-- most of them did just fine in Sandy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 Cool-- then you know that the 1938 storm surges were much higher than Sandy's (as were 1938's winds, destruction, and deaths)-- in which case, I don't know why you're suggesting Sandy was worse. Huh? 1. The Northeast USA was not made of straw in 1938. 2. Older buildings are actually often better-constructed and stronger than the cheap crap being produced now-- especially when it comes to single-family homes. 3. A of today's NYC area is made of buildings from before 1938, and wow!-- most of them did just fine in Sandy. 1938 the wind strength was stronger, I have yet to find data saying the wind field was larger however. Deaths back then would have been worse because back then there was limited technology so that stat is irrelevant to the conversation. The surges were higher but not for the locations that got hit this time around again these aren't comparable storms even if they hit the same general vicinity. Josh, the building codes are completely different now than in 1938 so to see the amount of damage we are seeing today is unimaginable whether or not you believe it. Plus your point of buildings from 1938 surviving, I am talking about not just lower Manhattan, Queens/Brooklyn/Staten Island were hit severely hard along with the entire Jersey Coast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 1938 the wind strength was stronger, I have yet to find data saying the wind field was larger however. See snowflake's post Re: the wind field. (You said you read the thread but I guess you didn't.) Deaths back then would have been worse because back then there was limited technology so that stat is irrelevant to the conversation. Huh? So? Did human life count less in 1938? Are the Sandy deaths more tragic or do they count more because they happened in 2012? Not following. P.S. I suppose in your opinion, the Galveston 1900 'cane isn't the nation's worst hurricane tragedy, since those 12,000 people died so long ago and, well, the infrastructure wasn't that great? The surges were higher but not for the locations that got hit this time around again these aren't comparable storms even if they hit the same general vicinity. Again-- for the thousandth time-- we were talking about what was the worst storm in the Northeast USA-- not N NJ. I already conceded Sandy may be the worst for NJ (again, read the thread). Snowflake, however, disagrees and says 1944 was worse for NJ. (See above.) Josh, the building codes are completely different now than in 1938 so to see the amount of damage we are seeing today is unimaginable whether or not you believe it. So the little cottages that got smashed on the Jersey shore in Sandy are better built than the mansions and brick buildings on Long Island and CT and RI that got demolished in 1938? Please make sense. Do yourself a favor and do Google image searches and watch some YouTube videos about 1938. Judging from your posts, you've never done this. Whole towns were wiped away; not flooded-- wiped away. Larger cities like New London and Providence were flooded, smashed, and burned. Why are you expressing an opinion when you've obviously never taken the time to learn anything about this topic? You're a met-- a scientist. Investigate and collect facts before formulating an opinion. Plus your point of buildings from 1938 surviving, I am talking about not just lower Manhattan, Queens/Brooklyn/Staten Island were hit severely hard. A lot of Queens, Brooklyn, and Staten Island are also old. I grew up there. I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 See snowflake's post Re: the wind field. (You said you read the thread but I guess you didn't.) Huh? So? Did human life count less in 1938? Are the Sandy deaths more tragic or do they count more because they happened in 2012? Not following. P.S. I suppose in your opinion, the Galveston 1900 'cane isn't the nation's worst hurricane tragedy, since those 12,000 people died so long ago and, well, the infrastructure wasn't that great? Again-- for the thousandth time-- we were talking about what was the worst storm in the Northeast USA-- not N NJ. I already conceded Sandy may be the worst for NJ (again, read the thread). Snowflake, however, disagrees and says 1944 was worse for NJ. (See above.) So the little cottages that got smashed on the Jersey shore in Sandy are better built than the mansions and brick buildings on Long Island and CT and RI that got demolished in 1938? Please make sense. Do yourself a favor and do Google image searches and watch some YouTube videos about 1938. You obviously don't know anything about it. Whole towns were wiped away-- not flooded-- wiped away. Larger cities like New London were flooded, smashed, and then burned. Why are you expressing an opinion when you've obviously never taken the time to learn anything about this topic? You're a met-- a scientist. Investigate and collect facts before formulating an opinion. A lot of Queens, Brooklyn, and Staten Island are also old. I grew up there. I know. I am done arguing this, you aren't budging an inch so it isn't worth my time wasting keystrokes. Btw your insulting undertone is completely unbecoming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 I am done arguing this, you aren't budging an inch so it isn't worth my time wasting keystrokes. Btw your insulting undertone is completely unbecoming. No, I am not budging an inch. Why should I? The two nerdiest hurricane historians in this community-- snowflake and me-- have a reasoned, researched opinion about Sandy and how it fits into history. For the record: Sandy was a meteorologically extreme event and it will certainly be talked about for decades. The destruction is staggering, and even the fatalities are now getting higher than I would have expected. I don't want anyone to think I'm suggesting otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 No, I am not budging an inch. Why should I? The two nerdiest hurricane historians in this community-- snowflake and me-- have a reasoned, researched opinion about Sandy and how it fits into history. For the record: Sandy was a meteorologically extreme event and it will certainly be talked about for decades. The destruction is staggering, and even the fatalities are now getting higher than I would have expected. I don't want anyone to think I'm suggesting otherwise. Unfortunately this is how you have been coming off, though I know you aren't doing so purposefully it is how it reads to many which is why several have came to question your points. And if Sandy isn't the top of the class, it is top 2 or 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 Unfortunately this is how you have been coming off, though I know you aren't doing so purposefully it is how it reads to many which is why several have came to question your points. And if Sandy isn't the top of the class, it is top 2 or 3. I think it's definitely one of the worst for NJ-- if not the worst-- and it's Top 5 for Northeast USA since 1900. 1938 was definitely worse, and I'd need to research Re: a few of the others before reaching a verdict. I've made a bunch of posts saying how impressed I'd been with Sandy-- not just the destruction, but the wind data and other factors. I even blogged about it: http://icyclone.com/...tober-2012.html I just sometimes feel like there's no room for nuance around here. You either have to agree that an event was the most extreme ever, or you're perceived as this ball-buster anti-weenie. I said Sandy was an extreme event and one of the worst this century-- and for me, that is a very strong statement to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 I think it's definitely one of the worst for NJ-- if not the worst-- and it's Top 5 for Northeast USA since 1900. 1938 was definitely worse, and I'd need to research Re: a few of the others before reaching a verdict. I've made a bunch of posts saying how impressed I'd been with Sandy-- not just the destruction, but the wind data and other factors. I even blogged about it: http://icyclone.com/...tober-2012.html I just sometimes feel like sometimes there's no room for nuance around here. You either have to agree that an event was the most extreme ever, or you're perceived as this ball-buster anti-weenie. I said Sandy was an extreme event and one of the worst this century-- and for me, that is a very strong statement to make. I guess that is where the disconnect is, people may not see your statement as being that strong when in reality it is. That is probably why some questioned it. Seems more like a miscommunication than anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 I guess that is where the disconnect is, people may not see your statement as being that strong when in reality it is. That is probably why some questioned it. Seems more like a miscommunication than anything. Maybe. I'm sorry if I was harshyharsh to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 Maybe. I'm sorry if I was harshyharsh to you. Is ok, no harm done. Just need to still keep educating myself on tropical meteorology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 Is ok, no harm done. Just need to still keep educating myself on tropical meteorology. And I need to mellow out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
am19psu Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 post You didn't provide any evidence that 1938 was as large as Sandy, at least that I saw. Sandy was 1100 mi in diameter. The only number you gave for 1938 was 500 n mi in diameter. Also, other sources, which I can't quote here, suggest 1944 was worse in Cape May and OCNJ, but that Sandy was worse from ACY northward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
am19psu Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 Were there higher surges reported in 1938 than the 15.8ft water level measured in Providence? Also, the surge was higher in NJ than the 1944 hurricane. Sandy Hook was nearing 14 ft above MLLW before it failed. I don't think it's objective to say 1944 was worse in NJ than Sandy. Agree. Given what I've read elsewhere, I'm not buying that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.