Weather Channel Asks "Where Were The Hurricane Force Winds At Idalia's Landfall?"

The Weather Channel Admits What I've Claimed; That Idalia Probably Was Not Even a Minimal Hurricane at Landfall

Please excuse me of being a big nerd. Here’s a video of the Weather Channel admitting that they couldn’t find any Hurricane force winds in the storm:

In my post Massive and Repeated NOAA Exaggeration of Tropical Storm Strength, I make the case that the NOAA routinely exxagerates storm strength enormously, probably for more clicks and views.

For Idalia, which was supposed to be a Cat 3 at Landfall (I wrongly said Cat 4) , which means 111 to 129 mph sustained wind speeds would be expected. These speeds must be sustained for one minute and higher gusts don’t count as sustained.

By deducing from typical NOAA exaggeration, I said that I’d be surprised if Idalia’s winds would even qualify ‘her’ as even a minimal hurricane—not a Cat 3. I say that because the NOAA and Weather Channel are a bunch of serial exaggerators for the most part. And I mean exaggerate by A LOT.

Then, I was monitoring landfall of Idalia at A Quick Update on "Cat 4" Idalia: Making Landfall, I said:

At the end of the clip above, The storm is arguably weakening slowly now, possibly sharply as the ocean gets churned and surface sea temperatures decay. Much of the circulation is now over land.

The highest winds/gusts reported by the stations on the barrier island in Wakulla County, NW of the storm’s eyewall, are only 53mph/56 mph and 45mph/55mph. I don’t think it’s going to get any worse at this point. Both of these stations are close to one another, have given very similar readings and both haven’t lost electrical power/internet connection.

Then, finally I said at Yeah, Idalia Was a Hurricane. My Bad, that, based on video evidence of eyewall conditions at Perry, Florida (which was directly hit), I said that

Hurricane force winds were definitely found in Perry, FL; maybe 80 mph winds with gusts to 100 mph in some locations—specifically near the eyewall? I’m just guessing, but it was pretty ferocious there and nothing is or should be minimized. NB: These videos are intentionally trying to capture the very worse conditions in the eyewall.

In other words, I admitted that Idalia was a minimal Cat 1 storm. But it wasn’t a Category 3! I was right about that and I am right about the “Weather Industrial Complex” (lol) to routinely exxaggerate the strength of these storms, nearly ALL OF THEM to boost clicks and views and also boost the “climate change” alarmists. They do it ALL THE TIME.

"History" is now permanently written. It will go down as a Cat 3, another erroneous exxageration which will add fuelfor the climate change crowd. Gross exaggeration is the norm for storms and climate change. I believe that I just proved it.