As we near June 1st, we Floridians will hear increasingly forecasts of an unusually severe hurricane season. I can't help but wonder if there isn't a contrarian element in this drama. If you are a forecaster, what scenario guarantees you the most interest in your forecast? A relatively benign year? ho hum. A potentially devastating year, everyone is on the edge of their seats, wanting now to know, what are the chances that one will land where they are located.
Last year, the forecasts were similarly dire, no hurricanes landed. After the fact, forecasters explained that the lack of activity was due to the El Nino effect, which won't be true this year. Still, I'm sceptical that we can really predict a cycle of increased hurricane activity for the next ten to fifteen years when forecasts of next week's weather can be so wrong. Insurance companies are, of course, ecstatic over these forecasts, property insurance rates seem to double almost every year in Florida. I know many homeowners who no longer insure their properties.
2004 and 2005 were unusually bad years for hurricanes. That is certainly true, but are they harbingers of a new trend, that is the question. I take the direst forecasts with a grain of salt, as I recognize the bias that makes such forecasts more likely than milder ones. Indeed, as I read about the studies produced in Colorado, it seems that they dropped some of the indicators that were forecasting a milder season, as they felt a 'simpler' system would be more useful.
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
