« The dots don't connect | Main | Rushing to judgement »

Comments

WRand

That chart is a mess. The size of the circles behind the numbers vary in size which seems to indicate something (strength of the storm?) but I can't find a key to that anywhere in the chart. Tucking the chatter off the right helps to have it ignored. The headline of the chart is misleading since there is nothing about Debbie in the chart. And the heading in the box is inaccurate. Also doesn't help that a past storm is also named "Debbie" with no explanation.

And I think you're right on target that the names and years of the storms that didn't make landfall are largely irrelevant.

hadley

We used some of this data in our JSM Data expo entry (http://had.co.nz/dataexpo). I think the data is pretty easy to get hold off, or you can email me to get our copy (in a nice csv file).

It's really interesting data to look at interactively, tracing the paths of storms over time etc.

The comments to this entry are closed.

BOOTCAMP SUMMER '19



Link to Principal Analytics Prep

See our curriculum, instructors. Apply.
Kaiser Fung. Business analytics and data visualization expert. Author and Speaker.
Visit my website. Follow my Twitter. See my articles at Daily Beast, 538, HBR.

See my Youtube and Flickr.

Book Blog



Link to junkcharts

Graphics design by Amanda Lee

The Read



Keep in Touch

follow me on Twitter

Residues