Liberal Forum

Huey » 07 Sep 2019 9:35 am » wrote:
BV says
There was no such "early track" from any official weather service.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=43263&start=160#p1265402

There certainly was

What does the Green indicate?

Does it indicate The Track of the storm?


Please limit yourself to citations.

Blackvegetable » 07 Sep 2019 9:43 am » wrote:

Huey » 07 Sep 2019 9:35 am » wrote:
BV says
There was no such "early track" from any official weather service.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=43263&start=160#p1265402

There certainly was

What does the Green indicate?

Does it indicate The Track of the storm?

Please limit yourself to citations.

BV says
There was no such "early track" from any official weather service.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=43263&start=160#p1265402


There certainly was

Argue with NOAA.

Misty » 04 Sep 2019 4:12 pm » wrote: Just saw him on TV still sticking with his lie that Alabama was in the original forecast.
And the King of the black sharpie has no idea how that black mark got on the map.
The man is so incapable of ever admitting he was wrong about anything that it looks like he may have altered an official NOAA map, which is illegal.

You should stay away from actual issues, psycho.
Stick to cartoon propaganda.

That's your speed.

NOAA Delivers The Death Blow To The Liberal Media Over Trump's Hurricane Dorian Map Controversy
Matt VespaMatt Vespa.....

From Wednesday, August 28, through Monday, September 2, the information provided by NOAA and the National Hurricane Center to President Trump and the wider public demonstrated that tropical-storm-force winds from Hurricane Dorian could impact Alabama. This is clearly demonstrated in Hurricane Advisories #15 through #41, which can be viewed at thefollowing link.

https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2019/D ... bs_34_F120


The Birmingham National Weather Service’s Sunday morning tweet spoke in absolute terms that were inconsistent with probabilities from the best forecast products available at the time.

I mean it’s almost becoming embarrassing how the liberal media gets played, slapped down, and utterly owned every time they try to attack this presidency. Trump is an absolute professional at making them look like morons
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa ... s-n2552738

Misty » 04 Sep 2019 4:24 pm » wrote: Do you have a link to that map that shows it headed towards Alabama on Sept. 1st?

I just cited one, wackjob.

.

Blackvegetable » 07 Sep 2019 9:33 am » wrote:

Huey » 07 Sep 2019 9:31 am » wrote:
You tell me.

Because you are incapable of doing so?

NOAA backs Trump on Alabama forecast, and rebukes Weather Service office that accurately contradicted him

WASHINGTON - The federal agency that oversees the National Weather Service has sided with President Donald Trump over its own scientists in the ongoing controversy over whether Alabama was at risk of a direct hit from Hurricane Dorian.
In a statement released Friday afternoon, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) stated Alabama was in fact threatened by the storm at the time Trump tweeted Alabama would "most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated."
Referencing archived hurricane advisories, the NOAA statement said that information provided to the president and the public between Aug. 28 and Sept. 2 "demonstrated that tropical-storm-force winds from Hurricane Dorian could impact Alabama
In an unusual move, the statement also admonished its National Weather Service office in Birmingham, Alabama, which had released a tweet contradicting Trump's claim and stating, "Alabama will NOT see any impacts from #Dorian."
The NOAA statement said: "The Birmingham National Weather Service's Sunday morning tweet spoke in absolute terms that were inconsistent with probabilities from the best forecast products available at the time

https://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/a ... 420459.php

Huey » 07 Sep 2019 9:49 am » wrote: NOAA backs Trump on Alabama forecast, and rebukes Weather Service office that accurately contradicted him

Interesting choice of words.

Could someone be toying with you?

Huey » 07 Sep 2019 9:49 am » wrote: WASHINGTON - The federal agency that oversees the National Weather Service has sided with President Donald Trump over its own scientists

BAM!

Nailed her stupid ***!

Cannonpointer » 07 Sep 2019 9:54 am » wrote:

Huey » 07 Sep 2019 9:49 am » wrote: NOAA backs Trump on Alabama forecast, and rebukes Weather Service office that accurately contradicted him

Interesting choice of words.

Could someone be toying with you?

Huey » 07 Sep 2019 9:49 am » wrote: WASHINGTON - The federal agency that oversees the National Weather Service has sided with President Donald Trump over its own scientists

BAM!

Nailed her stupid ***!

In a statement released Friday afternoon, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) stated Alabama was in fact threatened by the storm at the time Trump tweeted Alabama would "most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated."
Referencing archived hurricane advisories, the NOAA statement said that information provided to the president and the public between Aug. 28 and Sept. 2 "demonstrated that tropical-storm-force winds from Hurricane Dorian could impact Alabama

Huey » 07 Sep 2019 10:05 am » wrote:
In a statement released Friday afternoon, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) stated Alabama was in fact threatened by the storm at the time Trump tweeted Alabama would "most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated."
Referencing archived hurricane advisories, the NOAA statement said that information provided to the president and the public between Aug. 28 and Sept. 2 "demonstrated that tropical-storm-force winds from Hurricane Dorian could impact Alabama

If you go back a few years farther, Alabama has been threatened several times.

I'm trying to agree with you here.

Cannonpointer » 07 Sep 2019 10:07 am » wrote:

Huey » 07 Sep 2019 10:05 am » wrote:
In a statement released Friday afternoon, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) stated Alabama was in fact threatened by the storm at the time Trump tweeted Alabama would "most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated."
Referencing archived hurricane advisories, the NOAA statement said that information provided to the president and the public between Aug. 28 and Sept. 2 "demonstrated that tropical-storm-force winds from Hurricane Dorian could impact Alabama

If you go back a few years farther, Alabama has been threatened several times.

I'm trying to agree with you here.

Ok. My bad.

Huey » 07 Sep 2019 9:49 am » wrote:
NOAA backs Trump on Alabama forecast, and rebukes Weather Service office that accurately contradicted him

WASHINGTON - The federal agency that oversees the National Weather Service has sided with President Donald Trump over its own scientists in the ongoing controversy over whether Alabama was at risk of a direct hit from Hurricane Dorian.
In a statement released Friday afternoon, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) stated Alabama was in fact threatened by the storm at the time Trump tweeted Alabama would "most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated."
Referencing archived hurricane advisories, the NOAA statement said that information provided to the president and the public between Aug. 28 and Sept. 2 "demonstrated that tropical-storm-force winds from Hurricane Dorian could impact Alabama
In an unusual move, the statement also admonished its National Weather Service office in Birmingham, Alabama, which had released a tweet contradicting Trump's claim and stating, "Alabama will NOT see any impacts from #Dorian."
The NOAA statement said: "The Birmingham National Weather Service's Sunday morning tweet spoke in absolute terms that were inconsistent with probabilities from the best forecast products available at the time

https://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/a ... 420459.php

This has shot well past pathetic..

Is this the "unsigned statement"?

Trump tweeted Alabama would "most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated."

What does The Green represent?

Just tell us and "the point" is made.
Would "most likely" sit at that end of the spectrum?

To whom it may concern,


The dog ate Little Grifty's homework...

Signed,

My mom

Blackvegetable » 07 Sep 2019 10:12 am » wrote:

Huey » 07 Sep 2019 9:49 am » wrote:
NOAA backs Trump on Alabama forecast, and rebukes Weather Service office that accurately contradicted him

WASHINGTON - The federal agency that oversees the National Weather Service has sided with President Donald Trump over its own scientists in the ongoing controversy over whether Alabama was at risk of a direct hit from Hurricane Dorian.
In a statement released Friday afternoon, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) stated Alabama was in fact threatened by the storm at the time Trump tweeted Alabama would "most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated."
Referencing archived hurricane advisories, the NOAA statement said that information provided to the president and the public between Aug. 28 and Sept. 2 "demonstrated that tropical-storm-force winds from Hurricane Dorian could impact Alabama
In an unusual move, the statement also admonished its National Weather Service office in Birmingham, Alabama, which had released a tweet contradicting Trump's claim and stating, "Alabama will NOT see any impacts from #Dorian."
The NOAA statement said: "The Birmingham National Weather Service's Sunday morning tweet spoke in absolute terms that were inconsistent with probabilities from the best forecast products available at the time

https://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/a ... 420459.php

This has shot well past pathetic..

Is this the "unsigned statement"?

Trump tweeted Alabama would "most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated."

What does The Green represent?

Just tell us and "the point" is made.
Would "most likely" sit at that end of the spectrum?

Yes, your continued spin and twists trying to justify your statement is pathetic

BV says
There was no such "early track" from any official weather service.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=43263&start=160#p1265402


There certainly was

Argue with NOAA

Blackvegetable » 07 Sep 2019 10:14 am » wrote:To whom it may concern,

The dog ate Little Grifty's homework...

Signed,

My mom

Mr. Trump has never dummied up a note that bad. People from every side of the political spectrum are telling me that Mr. Trump dummies up the best notes.

Huey » 07 Sep 2019 10:17 am » wrote:
Yes, your continued spin and twists trying to justify your statement is pathetic

BV says
There was no such "early track" from any official weather service.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=43263&start=160#p1265402

There certainly was

Argue with NOAA

What does the green represent, Tiny..

Just post the number

Huey » 07 Sep 2019 10:05 am » wrote:
In a statement released Friday afternoon, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) stated Alabama was in fact threatened by the storm at the time Trump tweeted Alabama would "most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated."
Referencing archived hurricane advisories, the NOAA statement said that information provided to the president and the public between Aug. 28 and Sept. 2 "demonstrated that tropical-storm-force winds from Hurricane Dorian could impact Alabama

Your tax dollars at work.


Imagine if we had a spending problem

This must be the most humiliating episode in the history of weather service.

Obliged to pen a rationalization for Willful Stupidity Born of Indolence, the call goes out for someone to sign - and EVERYONE refuses.

Blackvegetable » 07 Sep 2019 10:30 am » wrote:
Your tax dollars at work.

Imagine if we had a spending problem

This must be the most humiliating episode in the history of weather service.

Obliged to pen a rationalization for Willful Stupidity Born of Indolence, the call goes out for someone to sign - and EVERYONE refuses.

When you deliberately show it in the most negative light, you can make anything look hinky.

Cannonpointer » 07 Sep 2019 10:40 am » wrote:

Blackvegetable » 07 Sep 2019 10:30 am » wrote:
Your tax dollars at work.

Imagine if we had a spending problem

This must be the most humiliating episode in the history of weather service.

Obliged to pen a rationalization for Willful Stupidity Born of Indolence, the call goes out for someone to sign - and EVERYONE refuses.

When you deliberately show it in the most negative light, you can make anything look hinky.

He's right. The only issue is whether NOAA backed the president. And it did. Officially. On its letterhead.

Blackvegetable » 07 Sep 2019 8:42 am » wrote:
Do you see Alabama mentioned?

**** inbred cretin

Sorry you can't read a map, you ghetto rat

Cannonpointer » 07 Sep 2019 10:40 am » wrote: When you deliberately show it in the most negative light, you can make anything look hinky.

Unless he's wearing a pant suit, of course.

But seriously, assuming I was possessed of such lofty ambition, how would I go about trying to make The Grifter look " hinkier"?

deadeyeshot » 07 Sep 2019 10:43 am » wrote: Sorry you can't read a map, you ghetto rat

What does the green indicate?