0 for 3

Unless you're the guys that write the Farmer's Almanac, it seems that predicting the weather over any length of time--even only one season--is a tough business.

Another hurricane season is about to end, and for the second year in a row, expert predictions overstated the number and intensity of storms that materialized. This is in stark contrast to 2005 when experts were wide to the other side of the mark when their predictions understated the number and intensity of storms.

Nevertheless, NOAA is not deterred:

'The seasonal forecasts are quite good,'' said Gerry Bell, NOAA's lead seasonal forecaster. ``Last year, we over-predicted and this year we over-predicted, but our track record, I think, is excellent.''

If you put your monopoly money chips on "black" long enough, you're bound to come out a monopoly money winner sooner or later; as opposed to the real people who earn real money and have real livelihoods on the line and make decisions based on what these hurricane experts are saying.

This reminds me of what the Bureau of Labor Statistics does when they report the Consumer Price Index numbers each month, then back out food and energy and call it the "core CPI" because food and energy prices are "volatile." At some point, one must ask, "what's the point?"

If hurricane forecasting is wrong as often as it is right, what's the point in forecasting at all?

I wonder how this news will affect the opinions of those that believe Global Warming is supposed to cause an increase in hurricane activity?