Tropical Storm Ophelia moves westward

Position and possible track of Ophelia. Graphic by

Tropical Storm Ophelia, which formed over the Atlantic Ocean at 11 last night, is moving westward.

At 5 am, the center of Tropical Storm Ophelia was located near latitude 12.7 north, longitude 41.8 west or about 1,325 miles east southeast of Dominica.

Ophelia is moving toward the west near 13 mph (20 km/h) and this general motion is expected to continue for the next 48 hours with some increase in forward speed.

Maximum sustained winds are near 45 mph (75 km/h) with higher gusts.  Some gradual strengthening is possible during the next day or so. Tropical storm force winds extend outward up to 175 miles (280km) mainly to the north of the center.

This system is forecasted to be near the island chain by the weekend.

Residents in Dominica are advised to continue to monitor the progress of this system as we continue to keep you updated.

Disclaimer: The comments on this page do not necessarily reflect the views of Inc. All comments are approved by before they are posted. We never censor based on political or ideological points of view, but we do try to maintain a sensible balance between free speech and responsible moderating.

We will delete comments that:

  • violate or infringe the rights of any person, are defamatory or harassing or include personal attacks
  • are abusive, profane or offensive
  • contain material which violates or encourages others to violate any applicable law
  • promote hatred of any kind
  • refer to people arrested or charged with a crime as though they had been found guilty
  • contain links to "chain letters", pornographic or obscene movies or graphic images
  • are excessively long and off-message

See our full comment/user policy/agreement.


    September 21, 2011

    dont worry man is hoop sayway those storms does play with us these days

  2. Humanist
    September 21, 2011

    Ah. This time, those who believe that weather is the work of a god have posted before me…all the better, perhaps, since my post will have clearer context, though unfortunate, too, since it suggests the ineffectiveness of my previous posts on this subject. Eradicating superstition is a long, difficult task.

    Basically: if you want to pray about weather, do it on your own time, in the privacy of your mind, home, or church. Don’t post it here on DNO. I won’t post these comments about superstitious people who believe, like cavemen, that the weather is a deity, if you do not post these comments about being “spared by the Lord” and all that. One for one. Fair trade, no? In many ways, I am here only because your posts are; I will disappear from these articles when you do.

    No matter what you believe, the fact is that all weather we know of can be explained by science–even weather on other planets. If a thing has a clear natural explanation, there is no need to evoke something supernatural to explain it. This is simple logic that anyone should be able to comprehend. If you cannot, reread it and try to understand it. Occam’s razor: the idea that the simplest ideas are usually the correct ones. A supernatural explanation is NOT a simple answer, nor is it scientific (“supernatural” = super + natural = out of the sphere of the natural).

    And what happened, pray tell, when you were not there to pray for storms not to hit? What happened before Dominica was inhabited at all? Would the world explode if people stopped praying?

    • Truth Seeker
      September 21, 2011

      Thank you! Is all I have to say.

    • NatureBoy
      September 22, 2011

      Humanist, the Bible agrees, and so do I, with some of your points, namely, that the weather is not a deity, but simply purely natural phenomenon that can be scientifically explained, and that a natural disaster can’t be directed to arbitrarily hit another land instead of the one to which it’s heading, by prayer. (which would hardly be justice by a deity anyway). However, o humanist, in many of your posts, while you strongly criticize bloggers for their belief in a supernatural being they know as God, on the grounds that you can’t see God nor can explain Him scientifically, you yourself dogmatically try to impose your own atheistic beliefs on them, and that without offering the slightest proof of evolution or of the non-existence of God!And logically and scientifically, the inability to SEE something is NO PROOF that it does not exist! You yourself well know this indisputable fact. Scientists have predicted (correctly too) the existence of things unseen, such as chemical elements (based on patterns in know elements) and ‘black holes’ (based on their effects on other celestial objects). You can’t deny the existence of air simply because you can’t see it, nor of gravity, magnetism or electrical current, can you?How do you prove that such things exist? by the visible/physical effects on other objects. When you hear thunder without seeing the flash of lightning, what do you conclude? When you see tree branches swaying and feel a rush on your skin, how can you prove that it’s moving air that’s causing that, and not some other phenomenon that scientists have yet to discover? But you just accept it as wind because for now that’s all you – and I – know. So, please humanist, apply your same logic to the fact that all the wonders of nature which no human can duplicate, give clear evidence to many clear-thinking persons of a cause – a creator – who designed and built these wonderful things, many of which humans strive hard to imitate, yet only do so clumsily. (eg. airplanes imitating birds’ flight.)If airplanes needed to be designed and built, who in their right mind, and not blinded by atheistic bias, would conclude that birds with far superior flight ability, simply came about by accident? If birds came be accident, then the far simpler, clumsy aircraft should simply appear by accident far more easily, shouldn’t they? So use your thinking faculties – for that didn’t come by chance either – otherwise robots, without thinking ability, should also come about by chance far more easily than your brain. The Bible’s logic is simple, clear and indisputable – Heb. 3:4 – “Of course, every house is constructed by someone, but he that constructed all things is God.” And he is real – he has a name – Jehovah. or Yahweh as some pronounce it. Psalm 83:18

      • NatureBoy
        September 22, 2011

        :oops: Sorry, I forgot to put paragraph spacing for easier reading, which I usually do if making a long comment. Next time.

      • Humanist
        September 22, 2011

        NatureBoy, the thing is that you want to believe in the bible, and so you transform the fact that we exist as complex life forms in a complex universe into “proof” of a creator, a “creator” you then suddenly transform into the biblical god by a startling leap.

        First of all, a supernatural creator is not a simple explanation for anything. We have no evidence for such a thing. It is YOU, not ME, who must provide evidence, since it is you who are claiming that such a thing DOES exist, while I am merely saying that there is no evidence. Extraordinary claim = extraordinary evidence. Cough it up.

        I can’t disprove that unicorns exist deep within the core of Ganymede, but why should I try to? The mere inability to disprove something does not make proving it more likely. Bertrand Russell provides an example with his famous teapot image, which I will quote here for you:

        “If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.”

        This silly-but-effective example should demonstrate to you that the mere idea of my inability to disprove your assertions does not make them true. Nor does it make our assertions equally probable. Your assertion, having less evidence than mine, is less probable than mine, and therefore the burden is unquestionably on YOU, not me. So, once again: show me the evidence.

        As for evolution: there is the evidence of shared DNA, the evidence of similar animals adapating, in different environments (like islands), into different forms that allow them to live more effectively; there are a few fossils that suggest transitionining creatures, like the archaeopteryx and the recent Australopithicus sediba to turn it to humans, though the latter is controversial; there is the fact that no Intelligent Design argument has held up under scrutiny, like the one about irreducible complexity. Ironically, one of the staunchest defenders of evolution, Kenneth Miller, is a Roman Catholic. He went to court to rubbish the claims of the Intelligent Design folks, who wished to teach ID in classrooms alongside evolution. And Miller is a Catholic. This alone should tell you that evolution is not the key to your argument, particularly if that key is of religious origin.

        You like believing in a creator. It makes you feel good. But that doesn’t make it real.

        At the end of the day, I am not against the idea of something like the Deist conception of god, which is a thing that simply allowed the universe to start and then left it there–a conception of “god” that is not personal or involved in any way with the universe beyond its existence. This is not something there is evidence for, either, however, but I at least am willing to go for such an idea as more probable than the specific human-centered god you write about. That, to me, is madness.

        And how can you even begin to imagine that humans have the slightest shred of significance in the universe, when you look at how puny and ultramicroscopic we are on a cosmic scale? Even on the timescale of our own Earth, we are nothing. We have done more than any other organism we know, yes, but that does not mean we are somehow meaningful to the universe; we cannot even travel through 0.1% of the universe. We are tiny and likely insignificant. So what if that is not a happy image of human endeavor? The likely truth is likely to hurt.

    • isupport
      September 22, 2011

      You suffer from delusions of grandeur to count yourself as one on a mission to eradicate superstition. Your comments fall short in that you insinuate that we are primitive because we pray and believe that prayer changes things. As I have commented previously, provoked by your pseudo intellectual leanings, you boast here and attemt to sway the populace to your view. Our faith is that we believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God Almighty and we believe that he protects and guides us in all matters. Thankfully you also get the benefit of our prayers – whether you want them or not “since rain falls on the just and the unjust equally” May God richly bless you. He loves you inspite of yourself. Get a load of that!Kisses.

      • Humanist
        September 22, 2011

        What have I said that is pseudo-intellectual? Do you even know what that means? I seriously think you don’t. What does your choosing to believe in something you cannot prove have to do with my having delusions of grandeur? What are you trying to say? I once again doubt that you know.

        To act as though you “know” something more than pieces of crap like myself who actually study the world around us because you get a happy feeling in your head when you pray–THAT is pseudo-intellectualism. But why am I explaining this? You leave me “Get a load of that!Kisses” after presenting an utterly empty argument (we have faith, so therefore you are wrong = your argument = what the hell?), so I can only assume you do not even know what an argument is, much less how to present one coherently.

        Get a load of books and let your eyes kiss the pages. Maybe then, you’ll be able to talk some sense.

  3. .......A??
    September 21, 2011

    Ophelia taking the same track as Maria so that will not touch us. We will just sit there calm and waiting like how we did for Maria.

    • conscious
      September 21, 2011

      You never know…it may let us think that its taking the same path as maria and in the end it suprises us! Lets watch and see!

    • Me
      September 21, 2011

      Never say this. It’s too early to tell and storm tracks DO AND WILL change. Maria’s forecast tracks were all over the place, even 12 hours before it was “supposed” to hit DA.

  4. blue berry
    September 21, 2011

    Our country is blessed…no worries..we safe.

  5. Ras B
    September 21, 2011

    Spare us lord, We pray.

  6. Anonymous
    September 21, 2011

    God knows just what to do and when, Da has start adopting the practice of whitch craft, turn away from wicked was and quench the wrath of God. we were known as a praying nation let continue to be so.

    • Glen Beck
      September 21, 2011

      u people are such idiots i just wish you people god just smite all of u!

    • Jus a reader
      September 21, 2011

      who said we are not,i jus cannot some of those people that put negative comments on DNO..

    • Humanist
      September 21, 2011

      It’s hard to take such a post seriously content-wise, but even more so when the poster cannot even spell “witch,” much less “witchcraft,” nor give any example of what this “witchcraft” might be, nor be bothered to finish the statement she has scarcely begun.

      Back to the books, I’d say. And by books, I mean basic grammar and learning how to convey coherent thoughts.

  7. .......A??
    September 21, 2011

    Guide and protect us Lord. AMEN..

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

:) :-D :wink: :( 8-O :lol: :-| :cry: 8) :-? :-P :-x :?: :oops: :twisted: :mrgreen: more »

 characters available