@JXthemeteorologist Well since it did nothing and should've been an EX not a SS. WHy weather do this?

It met the criteria to be classified so they classified it, just because it's going to be short lived doesn't disqualify it from classification, there's no point in making a big deal out of it just cause it formed when you didn't expect it to

What Doug said. That's like saying there's no point in naming ANY OTS short-lived (sub)tropical storm just because you think it's a "waste" of a name even if they meet the requirements to be classified as a TC. What's the point of having definitions/requirements for tropical and subtropical cyclones if we purposely ignore one when it forms?

Plus systems like Karen still have an impact on the season’s overall storm count (determining whether it was average season or not) and the ACE index, not to mention it's now the northernmost forming TC on record, which makes it notable.

By your logic, Hurricane Pablo (2019) shouldn’t be named either.

I don't know why its tiring.

there are a lot of people on twitter claiming that the NHC is naming random storms to pad the ratios and push the climate change narrative, which is just blatant stupidity.

@StarlingSierra Ironically, the main reason why a lot more storms are being named nowadays is because we have better technology to analyse tropical cyclones. This is mainly because we have enhanced satellite imagery and radar, advanced scatterometres, buoys and Hurricane Hunters, and we simply have faster and better data of tropical cyclones. Historically, (sub)tropical cyclones over the open ocean were not recorded due to lack of satellite imagery, but with today's technology, we are more efficient in detecting and monitoring weak, short lived (sub)tropical cyclones, as well as out-to-sea systems.

@StrawberryMaster Okay, could you close this please, i realize this was a mistake of a post?

at least me and @Poxy6 agree in something

I think it was a cool storm. Just don’t like the name Karen.