It wasn't really the government folks preparing for the "worst case scenario" that earned my scorn.
I have no complaint about preparedness. I do it myself from time to time. While some said it was good practice for the emergency services, overdoing things can be expensive, draining resources from other services. I believe the media bombardment swayed the judgment of what should have been cooler heads. I could be mistaken, I often am. It was the media blitz and their continuous blathering, saying the same thing over and over, that had me laughing. They EVEN preempted Oprah!!! After "Special Reports" every few minutes with continuous Earl streamers at the bottom of the screen on the Boston TV stations for days leading up to The Big Event, full time coverage started at 1600 Friday afternoon and went on and on with continuous "reporting" after that. At 2000 I tore myself away from all the show and switched to the satellite channels. Every normal news time was filled completely with Earl chatter. It even infected the Gloucester big-wigs who cancelled the lighted boat parade on Saturday night and the annual Schooner Races on Sunday, one of the major events of the season here. As I said, Friday night in Gloucester was dead calm and foggy, with a few light to moderate showers after midnight. Saturday and Sunday were sunny, breezy (perfect for sailing the big boats) absolutely stunning early fall New England days. The weather services grossly overestimated the Earl weather for New England. The media further inflated the hysteria for profit. News reporting is a drama event on TV. It's all about market share and apparently they will produce whatever they think will attract viewers with whatever quantity and quality they believe will garner the highest ratings. Ratings determine what they can charge for their commercials and ultimately what ends up in their pay envelopes. The cops even forced local businesses to close on the islands and declared a curfew demanding that people go home even when it was obvious to anyone with his wits about them that the Earl event was going to be nothing more than a normal New England Northeaster on Cape Cod and the Islands, and a rather short, weak, one at that. I disagree about false alarms. Recall "The Boy who cried Wolf" story. If our guardians issue false alarms to cover their butts then folks learn that they cannot be trusted. My personal experience with the weather people in general is that they can not be fully trusted. Sometimes they predict much higher winds and seas than I find "out there" and sometimes we get nailed by unexpected weather even while the NWS is still declaring "10 to 15 Kts, 3 to 5 feet". I prefer to look at the NWS data online myself, take a walk around the deck, and come up with my own estimates about the weather. Usually they fall into line with the professionals but sometimes they don't. There is no way a Hurricane would ever "hit without sufficient warning". There are too many people and organizations frantic for something to do to get attention. My Mother in Ft Myers FL experienced a hurricane, perhaps Bob. There was no damage to her condo, and she had phone and water, but she was without electricity for 10 days. Turned out that while the community in general had their power restored quickly after the storm passed, she and the other homes at her end of the street were ignored by the incompetent "authorities". Ever wonder where my viewpoint comes from? She was a tough old lady; she told me the worst thing was that she had to play Solitaire with "real cards"! The best weather reporting I ever saw on TV was when I accidently awakened early in the morning and stumbled upon "Weather for the Aviator". It was a really first class presentation. Norm S/V Bandersnatch Lying Gloucester MA > Norm, > > Before you complain too loudly about "government employees" crying wolf, > think about the consequences. > > I think it is hundreds of times more damaging if a hurricane hits > without sufficient warning or preparation than it is when warning is > given but the event is less serious than predicted. In all cases > meteorology deals with probabilities. "Government employees" must > determine how much preparation to make based on the probability of the > impending event. If the probability is only 25%, you might think that > they should all chill and let the dice roll - but would you bet your > family's life on a dice roll? > > >From a statistical standpoint, I would rather see 10 or 100 false alarms > for every correctly predicted catastrophe. > > Hugh. _______________________________________________ Liveaboard mailing list [email protected] To adjust your membership settings over the web http://liveaboardonline.com/mailman/listinfo/liveaboard To subscribe send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] The archives are at http://www.liveaboardonline.com/pipermail/liveaboard/ To search the archives http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] The Mailman Users Guide can be found here http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/mailman-member/index.html
