People are going to let their guard down and not take it seriously enough.
Unfortunately, that winds up happening for a lot of storms no matter what the cause is. For example, even if this makes landfall, some may see that this is a Category 4 storm and say they got through the last Category 4 storm just fine while they were, say, 150 miles from where it made landfall where they won’t be this time.
Communication of hazards associated with landfalling and near-landfalling tropical cyclones is a
major issue, and in my opinion the Saffir–Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale contributes a great deal to it. It’s why I generally don’t like to discuss a hurricane’s category rating at length — it’s never wind that kills the most people when a hurricane makes landfall, but that’s all that’s considered under the SSHWS. It’s 2019 and we can do better than rating an entire disturbance hundreds of miles wide based on wind speed at a single point, but folks are stubborn.
[doublepost=1567222688][/doublepost]
This is a little misleading (not intentionally of course).
The center of the cone is just offshore. Everyone in the entire cone area is at risk for a direct landfall. News anchors better make that extremely clear. There’s still a very high chance this makes a direct landfall.
I put a lot of emphasis on the NHC’s forecast track because they normally do an excellent job. They have, so far, done well with this storm, especially with the uncertainty involved. While I’ve yet to make one of my track GIFs for Dorian showing the evolution of the 5-day cone over time, I don’t think the real track has yet veered out of the cone.
In fact, I usually try to avoid focusing too much on the cone because of the common misconception (mentioned earlier in the thread) that it shows the storm’s size.
Edit: The track did veer outside the cone when Dorian skirted Puerto Rico to the east.