be here at the New York City Emergency Management Department to deliver this important message. For those of you who are joining us by webinar, this media briefing is being recorded. So if you do not wish to be recorded, please disconnect at this time. My name is Jasmine Blackwell, and I am the media contact for today's Hurricane Outlook. At the conclusion of this media briefing, you may reach me by email at jasmine.blackwell at noa.gov or by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>. The news release and graphics related to today's announcement will be available shortly on noa.gov. The beginning of today's media briefing will consist of about 20 minutes of remarks from our experts, and then we will take questions from reporters in the room. For those of you who are joining us by webinar, you will have the opportunity to ask written questions using the questions box to the right of your screen, and I will read them aloud for one of our experts to answer. Please be sure to include your full name and your media affiliation when asking your question. Our speakers today are NOAA Administrator, Dr. Rick Spenrad, New York City Mayor, Eric Adams, New York City Emergency Management, First Deputy Commissioner Christina Farrell, and FEMA Administrator, Deanne Criswell. And now we will begin with remarks from Dr. Spenrad. Thank you, Jasmine, and good morning, everyone. First, I wanna make sure and thank everyone for joining us today for the announcement of NOAA's 2022 Atlantic Hurricane Season Outlook. It really is a pleasure to be with you today. Mayor Adams, First Deputy Commissioner Farrell, and FEMA Administrator, Deanne Criswell, with whom we've developed an extraordinarily effective working relationship. Thank you for that, and I've gotta say hello to Commissioner Bray, my old friend as well, Jackie. Particular thanks to the New York City Department of Emergency Management for hosting us here at this site today. Let me take just a moment and set the stage if I can. We just experienced two extremely active hurricane seasons, marking the first time on record that two consecutive hurricane seasons exhausted the list of 21 storm names. If you go back two years, the 2020 hurricane season broke records across the board, and it's the most active season on record with 30 named storms. The 2021 hurricane season, which is the third most active year on record in terms of names of storms, brought us 21 named storms with impacts raging from the Appalachian Mountains all the way to New England, resulting in over $78.5 billion in U.S. damage. One of those storms, Hurricane Ida, of course, made a huge impact right here in New York City. Hundreds of miles north from where it made landfall, a still powerful hurricane Ida, brought astounding record-breaking rainfall amounts up to nine or more inches in an extremely short amount of time to much of the Tri-State area. Despite early and dire warnings from the National Weather Service, stellar preparation by our partners, the severe flooding resulted in 27 direct drowning deaths, and many of which took place in historically underserved communities. Hurricane Ida emphasized the vulnerability and consequences that tropical cyclones can bring to our coastal and inland areas, but we are encouraged by the continued coordinated efforts of federal, regional, state, city, and local partners to rescue, recover, and rebuild after these events, and as equally important, develop hazardous weather planning and mitigation efforts ahead of the next, which will ultimately lead to a more weather and climate ready nation. And a decade before Hurricane Ida, Hurricane Sandy brought a devastating five to eight foot storm surge to this region, brought tropical storm force winds, which damaged hundreds of thousands of homes, caused tree and power line damage that resulted in some residents going without power for one to two weeks, resulted in at least 65 fatalities in the Tri-State area. On a personal note, I'm a New York City boy myself, and that storm resulted in the permanent displacement of my then 95 year old mom from her apartment in Manhattan, and incidentally, resulted in more than $80 billion in damages. And of course, that storm wasn't unique. Other notable storms that have impacted the Tri-State area included Gloria in 1985, Hurricane Donna in 1960, and Hurricane Carol in 1954. These storms have taught us many lessons. One of the most important is that it's never too early to prepare for the devastating impacts of hurricanes. And while we're here today to preview an outlook of what trends will shape this year's hurricane season, it's crucial to remember that it only takes one storm to damage your home, neighborhood, and community. Preparedness is key to the resilience that we need, and now is the time to get ready for the upcoming hurricane season. So now let's talk about the upcoming hurricane season. NOAA is predicting an above normal 2022 Atlantic hurricane season, which would make this year the seventh consecutive above normal season. Specifically, there's a 65% chance of an above normal season, a 25% chance of a near normal season, and just a 10% chance of a below normal season. For the range of storms, expected NOAA calls for a 70% probability of the following ranges. 14 to 21 named storms with top winds of at least 39 miles per hour. Of these, six to 10 will become hurricanes with top winds of at least 74 miles per hour. And of these, three to six major hurricanes ranked as categories three, four, or five with top winds of at least 111 miles per hour. Let me say a word about the accuracy of the forecasting and how NOAA's forecasts have improved in recent years to better predict the storms and protect life and property throughout the hurricane season. Since the year 2000, we've seen a 57% improvement in the average 72 hour national hurricane center track error in the Atlantic basin. This can be attributed in part to NOAA's flagship weather model, the global forecast system incorporating things like drops on and hurricane hunter flight data into its analysis. Our improved track forecast has allowed us to more accurately pinpoint the area most at risk, which reduces the size of areas that may need to evacuate when a hurricane threatens. This improvement is illustrated in the National Hurricane Center's track forecast cone, also known as the cone of uncertainty, which represents the probable track of the center of a tropical cyclone up to five days out. The cone of uncertainty has gotten significantly smaller, since 2005. We've also seen improvements in our intensity forecast. Forecasters can now more accurately predict changes to hurricane intensity early in a storm's life cycle. The National Hurricane Center's average intensity error is now 40% lower than it was in 2000. Looking ahead, NOAA will triple our operational supercomputing capacity for weather and climate this summer. This upgrade will allow for more detailed, higher-resolution Earth models that can handle larger ensembles of models, meaning more numerous calculations, more advanced physical considerations, and improve capability to assimilate the data collected out in the storm. Along with the better science, we'll ultimately make way for better hurricane forecast model guidance for years to come, which is what the forecasters, of course, rely on. So before I close, I'd like to take a moment to give a special thanks to the skilled and dedicated forecasters at the National Hurricane Center in Miami, who work around the clock to deliver timely and accurate forecasts each and every hurricane season. Better systems, better sensors, better satellites, better aircraft, of course, are critical. It really boils down to the people who make the forecasts. As well as the hurricane hunters, both ours and those of the U.S. Air Force Reserve out of Keasler Air Force Base, who fly hundreds of hours each hurricane season to support critical hurricane forecasting and research, and the numerous members of the emergency management community who are so critical to protecting lives and property. And last but not least, the forecasters at the National Weather Service forecast offices around the country who work year-round to provide weather forecasts, watches, and warnings that the entire nation can depend on. I also want to call out the experts at the Climate Prediction Center who develop the seasonal outlooks, run the models, assimilate the data, including the hurricane seasonal outlook, which are used as a tool by decision-makers and planners and emergency managers and the public when planning for the season ahead. So with that, I conclude my remarks. It is my pleasure now to turn it over to Mayor Adams. Mr. Mayor. Remember the good old days when you're lucky if you have one camera to hear this forecast. Now we're glued to the TV. We're worried about hurricane seasons because now the hurricane seasons, they have taken an entirely new meaning. And we are concerned about not only the damage to property, but also lives lost. We have to refocus to this new reality of dealing with the change in our environment and how it impacts us every day. And let's be clear, this information is vital and it's crucial for the men and women who are signed here, both the commissioner and the deputy commissioner and this entire team, because it allowed us to be prepared and we cannot thank our federal partners enough for giving this information in a timely fashion, using technology to predict what is about to happen and how the inclement weather could impact our daily lives and responding to emergencies. And this is not new to New York. We know 10 years ago, Hurricane Sandy hit our city. We remember the catastrophic flooding that submerged our city and 44 New Yorkers died during that storm. As a state senator moving throughout the entire area, we saw how it impacted us. And just last year, the remnants of Hurricane Ida caused torrential rains and flash flooding that killed 13 New Yorkers in basement apartments. I remember being out that night, moving around the borough and city and saw the Brooklyn Bridge flood for the first time in my entire life and that sent a clear message. So when it comes to coastal storms, hurricanes, and floods, preparation is everything. And today this announcement is allowing all of our agencies and New Yorkers to be prepared. That's why we are here today with partners from NLAA, FEMA and the New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services. It's gonna take real partnership for us to combat these unprecedented levels of storms that we are seeing in our city and in our entire country. And I want every New Yorker to be ready because once we are giving the information, once the agencies are in place, it's going to come down to New Yorkers also participating in this partnership. New York has six evacuation zone areas that may have to be evacuated in case of severe flood issues. Zone one includes those communities, most at risk, especially low-lying coastal areas and waterfront communities. And zone six is a lower area, a lower risk. But knowing your zone can have you prepared when the information is put out and every New Yorker should know their zone. I know my zone city hall is on six and Gracie Mansion is not zone. And we are going to do our part to make sure that every New Yorker's using a mapping system will know exactly where their zones are located. Second thing that's important is preparation, proper planning, share with friends and families, have food, have supplies, have go bags. And particularly if your loved one may need some form of medicine, you should be prepared to have it in a go bag or ready to put in a bag. Listen to the warnings and make sure you let your neighbors know exactly if they are not aware of the urgency of a particular storm. And know your neighbors. This is a moment where we should know each other, particularly those who are elders or shut in. We should make sure that we check on them and have a line of communication. We can do it block by block, neighborhood by neighborhood, partnering with our community boards, our faith-based institutions. We're going to do a briefing with all of our faith-based leaders as we move into this season to ensure that they're part of the deployment plan. New York City, we know we have the best emergency management team anywhere. In fact, they leave here and they move to other levels. FEMA Commissioner, Commissioner Criswell came straight from her role as the Commissioner of New York City Emergency Management Office. We have the best and they move to higher levels in their profession. In our New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services Commissioner, Bray came from New York City's emergency management background as well. We continue to move through the system and help the entire country, if not the entire state. With the leadership and the help, we together can ensure that we save the lives of New Yorkers and be prepared. We must be smart, we must be safe, and we must be prepared. And no matter what happens of FEMA, Homeland Security, Office of Emergency Management, we have the backs of New Yorkers in the state. And so I want to now turn it over to our Deputy Commissioner here, Commissioner Farrell. Commissioner? Good morning. I want to welcome everyone here to New York City Emergency Management and to the City's Emergency Operations Center. Even though it's very full, I think we prefer it here with press than filled after a storm. I want to thank all our partners, including Dr. Spinrad from NOAA, Dianne Crisbo, FEMA Administrator, and our former commissioner, welcome back. Jackie Bray, the Commissioner of New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services, Joanne Ariella, who's the Chairperson of the New York City Council Committee on Fire and Emergency Management, and of course, Mayor Adams. I also want to welcome a very special person who's with us today, Faman Ahmed. He's a ninth grader at Nest High School in Lower Manhattan. He's our commissioner for the day. He won an essay contest from essays across the city, and he is the future of emergency management. So we are very happy he would take a day off from school and join us. As emergency managers, we know that preparedness will save lives. Through our work, we make sure we help all communities safely and equitably to prepare for and recover from hurricanes. As has been said, we see that one storm can have a devastating impact on New Yorkers and their communities. We know hurricanes won't wait, and neither should you. With the start of the 2022 Atlantic hurricane season just days away, you can be prepared, and we encourage you all to take the first step. And as the Mayor said, please know your zone. If you live in one of the six evacuation zones, you may be ordered to evacuate for your own safety by emergency management and by the Mayor if a dangerous storm is approaching. If ordered to evacuate, it is vital that New Yorkers follow city officials' guidance. It's very easy to find out what zone you live in. You can visit nyc.gov slash know your zone, or you can call 3-1-1. More than three million New Yorkers live in the city's six hurricane evacuation zones. To encourage New Yorkers to know their zone and prepare for hurricane season, we are once again running our know your zone awareness campaign. Starting next week, New Yorkers will see new know your zone ads on bus shelters, bike pumps, storefronts, online, and newspapers, and other places across the city. But even for New Yorkers who don't live in hurricane evacuation zones, extreme weather, as we have seen, can impact. Make sure that you stay informed with emergency information during hurricane season and throughout the year. The best way to do that in New York City is to sign up to receive emergency updates from notify NYC, the city's free emergency alert program. It's available in 14 languages, including American Sign Language. So please visit nyc.gov slash know your zone for more information, including how to sign up for notify NYC. Thank you, and it's my privilege to introduce Deanne Criswell, FEMA administrator. Thanks, Christina. Good morning, everybody. First, I'd like to recognize Administrator Spinrad. Our partnership has been excellent during my time in office and the relationship that FEMA has with NOAA really helps us get the information out to the public so we can make sure that we are helping people before, during, and after disasters. And I'd like to say how great it is to be back here at New York City Emergency Management. Seeing my old colleagues has really been just such an honor to remember serving here and to be able to come back now in this role. I couldn't be more proud of the amazing work that New York City Emergency Management continues to do every day to help New Yorkers. And Mayor Adams, thank you for joining us today. It's great to see you. And thank you for your ongoing commitment and support of New York City Emergency Management. They do so much good for New Yorkers. As you heard today from Administrator Spinrad, we're looking at another similar season for hurricane preparedness. But that doesn't mean that we should take it lightly, right? As we saw from Hurricane Sandy or Superstorm Sandy, it doesn't even have to be a hurricane to cause such devastation to communities. And so for years, the predictive weather data that we've gotten from NOAA has really helped us, helped FEMA in our ability to support critical decision-making and not just at FEMA but also at the state and local level. That predictive modeling that they put out and the accuracy that they've been able to improve over the years has made our jobs easier in helping to get information out and warn the public when they're facing these threats. So whether we face three storms or 30 storms, I'd like you to know that FEMA, we are ready for this hurricane season. We are gonna continue to maintain a very strong forward-leaning presence. We want to be able to make sure that we are putting personnel, commodities, and equipment in place before the storm hits so we are ready to respond and support the communities that may have been impacted by the storm. We have our commodities pre-staged, ready for rapid response operations, spanning from the Pacific to the Caribbean to the Eastern Seaboard. And we have thousands of expert response personnel at the national as well as our regional level that are ready to support lifesaving and life-sustaining operations. So my question to the public today is, are you ready? We must not forget that just last year, Hurricane Ida made a nine-state destructive trek across the United States. It affected coastal, urban, and suburban communities. This shows me that no one is immune from the effects of these tropical storms. So FEMA has an urgent call to everyone, a call to action for everybody that lives in these areas. The time to get ready is now. As this year marks the 10th anniversary of Superstorm Sandy, which although again was not classified as a hurricane, it brought devastating impacts. So there are actions that you can take today. The first one, know your risk. It's incredibly important that you understand what your and your family's risk is. Again, as we saw from Hurricane Ida, from the coast to the Midwest to the Eastern Seaboard, people had impacts across nine states. Know what your risk is. As you heard from Christina, First Deputy Commissioner, know your zone here in New York City, but across the US, know what your risk is. Once you know what your risk is, then you can make a plan to protect your family. It's really important to better understand what your unique risk is going to be and put that plan in place for, if you have to evacuate, where are you gonna go?  What do you need to take with you? Sign up for emergency weather alerts. You heard how you can sign up for them here in New York City, but you can also download the FEMA app and get up to date wireless emergency alerts. And then finally, and I think one of the most important pieces that I can share is listen to your local officials. Listen to them when they tell you to evacuate or shelter in place. It's incredibly important that you follow their advice because it's also gonna protect you and your family, but it will also allow our first responders to continue to do the important work that they need to do. And so the first thing, or the most important thing that I will ask everybody is that prepared families are safe families and a prepared nation is a resilient nation. So listen to your local officials, know what your risk is and make that plan to make sure that you can protect your families. Thank you. Thank you, Administrator Kurzweil. Before we move on to the Q&A portion of our media briefing, I would like to introduce Matthew Rosencrantz, the lead hurricane season outlook forecaster with NOAA's Climate Prediction Center, who is available to answer questions about the science behind NOAA's hurricane outlook. For those of you who are joining us by webinar, I would like to remind you that you have the ability to ask written questions using the questions box to the right of your screen. Please be sure to include your full name and your media affiliation when asking your question, and we will do our best to answer all incoming questions in the time available. Now we will take questions from our first reporter in the room. Steve Burns, WCBS Radio. I know there's so much talk about Sandy and Aida and so much in the way of following advice here, but the advice in advance of both of those storms was notoriously terrible. There were no evacuation orders that became very late. What kind of outreach changes and public policy changes have we seen at these agencies to be more proactive in their advance warnings and not see a repeat of what we saw with Sandy and Aida, very little warning? Do you like to take? Hi, thank you for the question. So for Hurricane Sandy, there actually was a city-wide evacuation. We had different zones at the time, but we did do, we evacuated several hundred thousand people. We have learned a lot since Hurricane Sandy. As you noted, a year ago we had Hurricane Aida. There was not an evacuation put in place. We had not seen rain like that. What happened overnight, the multiple inches per hour, but we know it'll happen again. We have done a lot of work with our federal partners, city, state, everyone. We started enhanced messaging right last September as we saw weather in September and October, and we've been doing that. It is very hard work. We need everyone in the city to come together. We know there are people at risk that live in situations that compound their risk, but we are incredibly dedicated. We've been working the whole off season, and we will message early. We will message often in all the languages that New Yorkers need, but as the administrators and others said, we need the media. We need our elected officials. We need faith-based leaders to help us when that message comes out, and we need New Yorkers to pay attention and to follow the advice. If I could briefly follow with you or the mayor. Obviously the big story with Aida was basement apartments and how at risk they are. The former mayor mentioned a census. I wanted to see what kind of effort is ongoing in terms of figuring out how many basement apartments there are, what their risk is, and how they can be protected. Still underway, we want to legalize basement apartments. There's legislation pending now in Albany. We hope we get the support from our state lawmakers to make it happen, but we're still underway of getting the exact total account of those basement apartments. And also as the deputy commissioner stated, the goal is to use a universal language to all of our agencies. And what we're looking at is how do we ensure a smart system that all of the agencies are kicking in gear at the same time? I know it's expected ahead of time, similar to what we do with the terrorist threat. Everyone knows their roles, and we know how to coordinate in a better effort. Coordination, communication, and implementation. That's the key to protect New Yorkers during the storm. So just, sorry, just following up on that.  Is there any specific outreach to let them know? Hey, danger might be on the way. You might need to evacuate. Yes, but we're looking at the text messaging system, as well as the communication system to let people know beforehand that what their zones are, what areas there they live in. And as the deputy commissioner indicated, we're talking mother nature. This stuff moves, none of us expected the level of rain we witnessed the last time. And being able to shift the communications in a rapid manner by proactively knowing what are the areas that are prone to flooding, that is extremely helpful. I never saw a flooding like that in Crown Heights. Who would have imagined that level of water? And so we have to be able to communicate fast and shift because these storms are coming rapidly and they come in a different ways. Hey there, Mr. Mayor. Hi, this is for FEMA work for you. I was just looking at the emergency management map that you're sending folks to. I looked up one of the addresses where somebody died during IDA. It's not in any flood zone. So I'm curious if there has been a new plan to adjust her zones, what it has to do with flooding rather than rain flooding rather than coastal flooding. It doesn't seem like where you're sending people reflects that currently. Of my understanding that area, if you're talking about the one in Queens. Just on the edge of the flood zone, but where somebody died in their basement apartment. Right, because part of the issues that we're facing, and that's why we put $2.5 billion into the sewer upgrades in certain areas, part of the problem we're facing is also drainage. We have to really reexamine how we're building out our sewer systems. We may be building out some of our sewer systems based on storms of the past and not storms of today. If we cannot get rid of the water, this flood zones is going to deal with those dangerous areas based on how the normal flooding areas, but if we don't do a good job in catch basin cleanup, making sure the sewer systems can handle the water. There's so much more we have to do inland that we are moving towards to correct. Maybe for FEMA then would the warnings go to people who aren't in any zone then if they're in low-lying areas that might flood from rain? Is that, thanks for saying that. Yeah, I think what I would say is when we talk about evacuations for flooding from hurricanes, we're typically talking about storm surge inundation. And so the flood zones are based on the type of inundation that we can expect and the flooding that we can expect from storm surge because the majority of fatalities that we see from hurricanes come from storm surge. When we talk about the remnants of these tropical storms and as tropical storm or as Hurricane Ida went across nine states and then reached the Eastern Seaboard, it brought a variety of other hazards, heavy rain. The type of evacuation and flood zones are not designed for rain events. It also brought tornadoes that we saw in New Jersey. And so again, it's incredibly important that individuals take the time to understand what their risk is. And if they live in a place that only has one form of egress, it's incredibly important that they listen to the potential threats that might be coming to their area so they can take appropriate action. I get a question. As far as the evacuations go, what is the plan to make that run as smoothly as possible? What logistics are in place to address asking many people to move an imagining and kind of pretty short notice when roads might be flooded, subway tunnels might be flooded. Can you kind of lay out how that will work? Yeah, an important question. And I will go back to understanding and knowing your risk. And so when we're talking about evacuations from storm surge, we typically have some warning for storm surge so people can take action and put the plan that they made in place. But we are seeing these storms develop faster. They're developing more frequently. And so it's giving our state and local emergency managers less time to actually warn the public. So they do, FEMA does not issue evacuation orders that comes from the state and the local level and they have plans that they put in place and how they're going to do that and when they make that decision. We support their operations. We can support it through mass care efforts, bringing supplies and commodities to shelters and reimbursing for any of the activities that they put in place. But the state and the locals, they determine when they're gonna issue an evacuation order and then we can support them. I mean, Mayor Adams, on the city level, could you offer some more detail on what the plans are and how evacuations would work? And it really depends on knowing your evacuation location, your site, your route, and that's the role we must play. We have to do a good job, if not a great job in identifying what are the routes where your evacuation location paired them with the zones and that is what we are putting together because of late information could be deadly information. And our goal is to make sure that we communicate. I cannot emphasize that enough. Communication, communication, communication. And knowing what that information is early allows us to do a proper job of evacuating and the routes to take. If you're living in the Rockaways, if you're living in Coney Island, if you're living in those coastal areas where there's a historical problems, we wanna make sure we evacuate appropriately. Will those routes be laid out for us? Hold on one moment. Can you control this?   These are the available routes you should use. So these are the ones you shouldn't use. Yes. Thank you. Hold on, hold on, hold on. We're gonna do this through one person. What is your plan being in 421 Dyson, Albany? What is your plan?  If I could, if I could just jump in. For the reporters in the room, we'd like to make sure that we have time to ask questions specifically about the hurricane outlook, which is what we're here to announce today. So I'd like to take this question here from Al Roker. Mayor and Senator Administrator, just curious, you're talking about storm drains, things like that. It's all based on what's happening now, modeling now. Climate change, obviously it's changing that. What plan are you making in coordination with FEMA to look ahead towards what is going to be happening? Such an incredibly important question. We're seeing these storms happen more frequently. They're lasting longer. I'll go back to even Hurricane Ida again. As it became a category four hurricane, then it stayed a category four hurricane for four hours over Southern Louisiana. I mean, that's just remarkable, causing incredible amount of damage. But we're also seeing the increase in the rapid intensification of our wildfires. And so we're seeing such a dramatic change in the type of weather events that we're facing as a result of climate change that we really have to get ahead of that. And so one of the biggest things that we're doing, that FEMA is doing, is putting a lot more emphasis on the other parts of our mission, which is about preparedness and mitigation. Individual preparedness, incredibly important as we've already talked about, but reducing the impacts that we're seeing from these storms. As we work to try to change the effects that we're seeing from climate change, we have to be able in the meantime, reduce the impacts that we're seeing from the severe weather events. And that's why we were given close to $5 billion last year to put forward to communities such as New York City, received one of the BRIC projects to help reduce the impacts that we're seeing from climate change. We have to continue to do that. And we're doing a lot of outreach, especially to communities that maybe haven't thought about the types of projects that they can do and the types of mitigation efforts that they can do, because we wanna move away from this incremental approach to hazard mitigation, this house by house kind of approach, incredibly important, and we still have to do that. But we also have to look at it from a system, as a community, and what can we do to better protect an entire community so we can reduce their impacts that they're seeing from these types of weather events. More on topic. I'd like to now take some questions from reporters that are joining via webinar. Our first question from the webinar comes from Jared Silverman with WFAB. Jared is asking, to what do you attribute the uptick in active hurricane seasons in the Atlantic in recent years, specifically the role El Nino, or lack thereof plays in the forecast and outcome? Yeah, thank you. That's actually a really nice segue to the comments you just heard from administrator Criswell. So we are in an active period. We've been in active periods before the 50s and early 60s were in active period as well. There are certain ingredients, if you will, that drive the intensity and the frequency of hurricanes, whether we're in a La Nina cycle or an El Nino cycle, climatological effects is one of those. We are in a continuing La Nina cycle right now. Impacts on things like the temperature of the ocean in the Atlantic, which is higher right now, also affect that. And if we have particularly active West Africa monsoon season as we do now, that also affects it. So those are the kinds of factors that we're looking at right now that play into the outlook that you just saw. Thank you, Dr. Spinrad. Our next question from the webinar comes from Andrew with Fox Four and Fort Myers. The question is, with the forecast of three straight years of an above normal hurricane season, how is climate change impacting our hurricanes? Dr. Spinrad or Matt? So I think I just answered that, but I will add that as a note of caution, we can't simply point to a particular storm, whether it's a strong storm like Ida or any others and say, there, that is climate change. The attribution is more in the patterns, the tendencies, the mode that we're in. And so the factors I just alluded to, which are a component of climate change, that La Niña impact, the warming, tropical ocean waters, the West African monsoon, or the climatological factors that we're looking at that affect this outlook. We received a question from Joseph with the Staten Island advance. Joseph is asking, no previously released and adjusted set of climate averages to determine what is considered normal in terms of national temperatures. Is NOAA considering making similar changes when assessing what is considered normal for Atlantic hurricane season and what is the consistent above average projections? Yes, Mr. Ray, I will. So we regularly, as a matter of operations, revisit the outlook in mid hurricane season. So you can expect to see that, that's a standard procedure for us. And I would say that we will continue to monitor the long-term trends in intensity and frequency of these storms as we've done for years. We're not necessarily in the business of recalibrating, if you will, what is average. That's a statistical determination from the data that we get. So we'll be looking at the trends over the decades to provide an indication of how things are changing over the years. So we have any questions from reporters in the room that are specific to the hurricane outlook forecast? I think, I saw your hand first. Rebecca Greenberg, New York One, the self-advertisement, Eric Spindrat. Is there a specific reason why New York City was chosen as the location for this year's announcement? The question in the room was, was there a specific reason why New York City was chosen for the location of this announcement this year? Dr. Spindrat? I think it's safe to say there are two factors. One of which is we're recognizing 10 years after Sandy. It seems appropriate to take a look back and see how things have improved, but also recognize the work that we need to do. And then, of course, the impact of IDA last year is one that's fresh in many people's memories. And we felt it most appropriate to come here and talk with folks. There is another aspect. A lot of people throughout the country tend to think of hurricanes as an isolated phenomenon in the Gulf or in the Southeast.  Yes. Mayor Adams, your predecessor after IDA said that the city can expect to see mandatory evacuations, travel bans, et cetera. Do you plan to continue that policy if things get bad? Yes. Okay, I will take our next question from reporters that are joining us via webinar. Can you please talk about the factors that went into the forecast? La Nina, sea surface temperatures, loop current. This will be the seventh above average hurricane season. What's striving that? And that question came from Jenny with WLRN Public Radio. Sure. So the main factors that we looked at for the hurricane outlook, the above normal sea surface temperatures in the Atlantic, which are still above, the ongoing La Nina right now, the latest weekly value for that was minus one. And that's forecast to stay throughout the entire hurricane season. We've also looked at the winds over the Atlantic Ocean, which are more favorable for the disturbances that come off of Africa to develop into hurricanes. So that more favorable environment just leads to a little bit tilt in the odds to having an above normal hurricane season. Do we have any other questions from reporters in the room specifically about the hurricane outlook? Yes. I'd love to know from the new normal report that was released from the last administration that Mayor Adams just said he was following, has been done to protect New Yorkers since Hurricane Ida. This press conference has been a lot about personal responsibility and preparedness, but what has the city, state, and federal done to protect New Yorkers since then? The question is about a report that was released last year about the new normals. What has the city, state, and federal partners done to protect New Yorkers since then? Hey, so as you noted, the new normal report was released a couple weeks after Ida, and we have been working emergency management, the mayor's office, environmental protection, all of our different partners on the different aspects of that to prepare as we get into the storm season. As I mentioned, we already started enhanced messaging and we've done a lot, we were working in the off season doing focus groups, speaking to non-English speakers about the messaging to see if it was effective, how we can work. As I mentioned, notify NYC, we now have a million subscribers. It is available in 14 languages, but most of those subscribers are in English and we know the people that need the information the most may not get it all the time. So we are continuing, we're doing, we also have expanded our strengthening communities program which was started during COVID, but we've increased the funding and that is working with nonprofit partners, community-based partners in the most vulnerable areas and we've added people from the areas in Queens and Brooklyn that saw a lot of flooding and those are giving money to community groups to work with us to make sure that people are prepared, they're getting the message and then there are infrastructure and other pieces that are working through DEP and the other agencies, but we are incorporating the best practices that were identified there along with the priorities of the new administration. As the administrator mentioned, we have received federal funding through BRIC, there are other grants available and we also have very strong partners in the state. So it is a large undertaking, obviously climate change is here to stay, but we are looking at all the pieces to better prepare New Yorkers. There were two updates after that report, but the new administration hasn't released any. Will you commit to doing that? We are doing it in a more holistic way, looking at the different priorities and how this administration wants to update New Yorkers, maybe not through the updates of the report, but through other means such as this press conference. Our next question comes from Maggie Astor with the New York Times. The loop current looks similar this year to the way it did in the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season when several hurricanes underwent rapid intensification over a warm loop current in the Gulf. Is this one of the factors influencing this year's forecast and if so, what can you tell us about the anticipated impact? Yeah, so the loop current does look like 2005, but it depends on if the storm actually moves over that loop current and forecasting the specific track of storms, it's not something we can do beyond the about a week timeframe. So whether or not a storm moves over the loop current and it actually impacts it and helps it undergo rapid intensification, it's not something we can address at this far of a lead time. Our next question comes from Seth Bornstein and he's asking what's the forecast ace and what factors, in addition to La Nina going to this above average forecast and additionally, what is the forecasted accumulated cyclone energy index? Matt, do you wanna take that one? Yep, so the forecast ace range, the accumulated cyclone energy, that's a total measure for the entire season which accounts for both intensity and duration of tropical storms and hurricanes. That's forecast to be 115% to 200% of normal. So could be active as twice as normal. Next question comes from Andrea with the Houston Chronicle and she's asking, will the Saharan dust affect this hurricane season and if so, how? Matt? What's that? Oh, all right. So yeah, so the Saharan air layer, Saharan dust, it does impact typically earlier in the season as you get waves that come off of Africa, they interact with the dry air and can keep down some of the parts of the season. As you move into the earlier parts of the season, it's less of a factor, especially in years when you have an active West African monsoon, you can actually keep down some of that dust. So those outbreaks typically last six days to 10 days so they can kind of come and go throughout the season. It's not likely to impact the entire season as a whole. And Matt, this last one will likely be for you. If you could tell us why NOAA chooses to use a range for storms expected, for example, why are there 14 to 21 named storms expected this year? That question comes from Justine with the Verge. Sure, NOAA uses a range rather than a specific number to account for some of the uncertainties in making these forecasts. They're made based off of measurements of the ocean, measurements of the atmosphere and we don't have exact measurements of those on the entire planet all the time. There's a lot of uncertainties in that. There's uncertainties in the weather models that we run. There are calculations made with certain assumptions and they don't account for every single possibility. So these forecasts are given with an accuracy range of about 70% and then we've been pretty solid getting close to that every year since about 2008. So thanks. Thank you, Matt. And that appears to be our last. Sorry, we have one more question in the room. Thank you, Lamar, for the time of law. How do you express, hey, how do you express talking about peace? You took my local law in 97? Okay, I didn't say that. Next. All right, so we are now out of time for the day. So I'd like to thank you all for joining us, especially NOAA Administrator Dr. Spinrad, Mayor Adams, first Deputy Commissioner Farrell, Administrator Criswell, and our lead hurricane season forecaster, Matthew Rosencrantz, for joining us today. If there are any additional questions or we were unable to get to your question before the end of the session today, please do not hesitate to reach out to me. Again, my email is jasmine.blackwell at NOAA.gov and I can also be reached by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you don't already have it, the news release along with the accompanying graphics are already available on NOAA.gov and the live stream from this call will also be available online, linked in our press release later this afternoon. Thank you all and have a wonderful day. Because he had been afraid to take the subway. So today there's a hearing at the Taxi and Limousine Commission about the possibility that you would either approve of raising the rates that Uber drivers have, or also change their surge procedures. The question that a lot of people are raising is why would you want to do that at a time when people are afraid to take the subway and a lot of communities, the Asian community, for example, have written letters saying that they want the prices to be held down because they want to be able to take Uber, Lyft and other four-wheel-drive vehicles because they're just afraid to get out in the subway. So how do you feel about the wages? How do you feel about the surges? And also what would you say to New Yorkers who are really afraid to take the subway now? Okay, let's do it in pieces. The city council, they handle what they do. I'm not in control of what they do in the city council. I don't want to speculate on what they're doing. Whatever method of transportation we have, it should be affordable, it should be safe. Our subway system is the centralized method of moving throughout the city. And there are many people who can't afford to take Uber. They cannot afford to be in a vehicle. They cannot afford to drive. So we must make our system safe. And that is what I'm going to do. In spite of the pushback of many people who state we should not have police officers on our system. We should not put more on our system. I have been ignoring all of that noise, making sure we get police officers there. So no matter how people move around the city, because we have Uber drivers who are robbed and shot. We have people who have their cars hijacked. And so what we cannot do is view our transportation methods based on the inability of keeping people safe. That is the focus. We have to, people must be safe, no matter how they move around the city. What are the members of the Asian community who have been the victims of a lot of anti-Asian hate and who prefer to take a car service, be it a green car or Uber or whatever, because they're afraid to get on the subway. Don't even think you should try to keep those rates affordable for people who find that that's a better means of transportation for them. Hate crimes take place on the streets also. So the goal is not to have only certain parts of transportation safe for all groups. The city must be safe. And that is what I must do as the mayor of the city and my police department and every agency that is connected. And that's what we're going to do. Mr. Mayor, about a block from City Hall for the past few weeks, there's been a man selling pepper spray and it's kind of being billed as to use if needed on the subway. Are you concerned at this point about people arming themselves? I mean, it's not a gun, but still, but about arming themselves to protect themselves on the train? And I have one follow-up after that. We don't want people arming themselves to protect themselves. We want people to have faith and trust in their law enforcement entities to keep them safe. And that is the job that I have to do and my police commissioner and all of our agencies must do. I'm not familiar with the person who's selling mace on the corner, but we don't believe people should do that. And that's why I stated we need to be extremely concerned about the Supreme Court ruling of the right to carry. We saw what happened in Atlanta a few days ago. Atlanta just removed many of the barriers to purchasing a gun. That is just, it's unacceptable. And so we can't have open carry in a distantly populated city like New York. That concerns me. The other question I had, you mentioned meeting with business leaders about the crime situation and the subways. Have you spoken to them? What kind of feedback have you got from those guys? Can you share a little bit of that? Well, prior to taking office, I started the process of fostering a good relationship with our business leaders in the city. That was important to me because businesses hire low wage employees, middle wage, high income, and that's the financial ecosystem that we must support as well as speaking with small business owners. We've had meetings with small business owners because not only are the large corporations employees using our subway system, but if you work in a restaurant, you take this train to and from. When I'm on the train, I speak to restaurant employees. I speak with people who are messengers. And so the goal is we're meeting with our large companies and our small companies. We're rolling out, giving them information on what happened here, giving them information on our deployment plan in our subway system, update them on our encampment issues because that was one of the number one issues we heard about on a subway homelessness encampment. That was a real problem. So we wanna give them information, keep them informed on what we're doing and really just have an open dialogue with our companies. They are saying the same things. Their employees are concerned about the safety on the subway system. And we are addressing that every day.  Homicides have gone down. Shootings have gone down. You are starting to see the implementation of what we are attempting to do of making sure the city is safe. Thanks. What is your backup plan in 421A guys now Albany? How will the city deal with that housing importance? Well, I say this over and over again. My job is to present my case to Albany. I don't control Albany. Albany must make the decisions based on the case that I present in other cities across the country present. We're going to continue to encourage affordable housing. We're going to continue to encourage building in the city. We're hoping that 421A pass or 485 or have an extension at least a year so we can study this more. I communicated that to the leader of the assembly and the leader of the Senate. And hopefully they'll make a determination that we can continue to encourage development, particularly around housing in the city. On the subways, can I just start by a follow up question. Do you have an update on the QT train shoes? The police department will be releasing any information based on the apprehension. We have a suspect and based on the apprehension, they will update that information. The police commissioner will do so. I wanted to ask more about the city pitching to host the 2024 DNC. Just given that New York is in a swing state and those conventions are typically held in battleground states, what's your pitch to national Democrats on why they should come to New York City? And you're right, traditionally is in the battleground state. But what we are learning is that because of the diversity of this city, we have the largest Jewish population outside of Israel. One of the largest Chinese population outside of China. Largest South Asian AAPI. New York is now being viewed as a place that speaks to America. And as you look to secure its base by hosting it here, it's going to send the right message across the entire country. And I think it's a smart decision if they decide to have it here in New York because they have a fantastic mayor here that will make sure it's done correctly. Last question, Steve. Mr. Mayor, on mayoral accountability, we're seeing the initial reports of an agreement starting to coalesce in Albany around three years and three additional members on the PEP. Wanted to see what your general feelings are about that specifically on the PEP.  Does that additional three members tilt the scale in any way? Two things. One, that we don't know the final outcome. I know Albany, Albany. This is the week where so much gets done. And we don't know the final outcome. There's a lot of rumors coming out of Albany. We have been having great conversations with both leaders, electeds. Many people talked about our plan of how we communicate with Albany, but we got so many wins. One day we're gonna realize that I got this. And so mayoral accountability is important. We have a great chancellor and we are hoping that they come across and realize that we should be in charge of the school system and be accountable to New Yorkers and parents. And so we're waiting for the final outcome. And there's a lot of rumors coming out right now. We don't know until that bill is passed and the session is over. This is the last week. And lastly, you know, in school when I came every day they gave me a gold star. You used to get a gold star. You had all our press conference. You know that? Thank you all. Thank you.


So to help illustrate this, I've given you kind of a scale, if you like, to see how we can interpret, well, perceive how these verses have been interpreted. So you save through faith with works. This is that the sinless perfection end of the spectrum. Based on the latter passages in Chapter 3, you have to be absolutely sinless to be saved, right? And so they will say then that 1 John 1, 8 to 2, 2 is about sinners repenting of their sins and turning from it until they have fully surrendered, or however they will phrase it. On the other hand, on the other extreme of the spectrum, you've got saved through faith without works, and that's what the Bible calls grace, okay? And people will say, people often say this, that God has forgiven all sins past, present and future, and for as long as you still live in this body of the flesh, you're always going to sin. And therefore, according to 1 John 8 and 2 to 2, we acknowledge this, so we believe on Jesus. That's how they will often interpret it on the faithful-owned side. In the middle, with the Lordship salvation, it's kind of like saved through a true faithful-owned that will produce works, you know? It's like one foot in there, one foot in there. Based on the later passages in chapter 3, there needs to be some evidence of changed life to be saved, but it doesn't mean perfection. So 1 John is kind of like acknowledging when we sin God is faithful to forgive, as long as there isn't a lifestyle of sin, so that's how they will interpret it, okay? So where do they get their interpretations from? Well, verse 8 is really problematic to a sinless perfectionist, so they have to assume that it essentially means the same thing as it does in verse 10, that you are denying that you have past sins that you need saving from. So it doesn't mean that you have present sins, because that would contradict other verses in John, supposedly. So they really just say that verse 8 is just the same thing as verse 10, just said in a different way. And that they will use verse 6 preceding it to set the context for it, because if we are not in the truth, we walk in darkness, quote-unquote. So verse 8 cannot mean that a saved Christian continues in sin in the present tense, because that would contradict walking in darkness in verse 6, right? Now, using a non-KJV translation, they will insist that verses such as 1 John 3 8 are outright proof that a saved believer should not be continuing in sin. So the idea that a Christian is always going to sin based on 1-8 is quoting it out of context and in ignorance too. Sorry, I forgot to complete that sentence for some reason, but in this one, there is a bit of a thing about how this says practice, obviously. The King James doesn't say that, but that'll have to wait until chapter 3. So I looked around at how sinless perfectionists answered this. And so these are a few of the things that I found. So this guy is, you know, hardcore term for me sins to be saved. So he says, essentially, verse 6, if we continue in darkness, this proves that verse 8 does not mean continued present sin, because we can't be walking in darkness, okay? In 2 John 2, 18-19, we have these antichrists that went out from us. Well, this shows that the epistle was written about the Gnostics, and they had all kinds of heretical teachings. And further qualified in 1 John 4, 1-3, where it says test the spirits, you can clearly see that he is addressing the Gnostics, right? And supposedly, the Gnostics claim that they didn't have any sin. He also says, and this is obviously true, that if you eat a letter, so if you take out the chapters and numbers, read it in the flow of a letter, obviously the chapters and numbers weren't there when John wrote it. So that's some of the points that he's made about it. Now, this guy, Dan Moeller, you wouldn't normally think that they belong in the same camp, because you might not actually realise that he's a sinless perfectionist, because he's really more about identity, kind of a gospel, which is something that he would refute. But I think he does really kind of believe it. He says it in a very nice way and a much more gentle way than most people, and he kind of says it without saying it really. So it's maybe not obvious that he's a sinless perfectionist, but he believes that essentially you're walking in a new identity and your new identity is that you don't sin. So verse 7, if we walk in the light and he'll embellish that to say, if we come clean, come free from ourselves, getting true fellowship with him, it cleanses us from all sin, righteousness is done. So we're not dual-natured, we're not driven by sin, not desperately in need of the blood every single day. Not, oh, thank you, God, I'm always going to sin, but he forgives me. So he's refuting that kind of a mentality, yeah? And so being cleansed from all sin, that means all our sin, which he would, although he doesn't say this, it seems like he's saying that it includes your propensity to even sin, that's completely removed. So even your desire to sin essentially is removed. He's kind of saying it without saying it really. So in the context of verse 7, verse 8, if we say we have no sin, he interprets that as meaning, if you say you have no need for the blood. So it doesn't mean if you sinned today, it just means do you recognize that you need Jesus? So the person who says, I have no sin, he's basically saying, I don't need to be born again, I don't need Jesus, I'm a pretty good person. That's how he's defining that. So in verse 9, when it says if we confess our sins, it doesn't interpret this to mean that we're always going to have sin. But if we stumble, then the light of my life reveals, then recognises that it wasn't God and my mindset was selfish and I get convicted, et cetera, so I say far. So this is what I mean about the identity thing, where it's just like proclaiming truth over yourself essentially. And that's how you get around the sin issue, apparently. This guy, one reality, again, hardcore work salvation, comes right out and says it. Christians read this with a mentality that they're always going to sin until the day they die. Sorry, I've spelled that wrong. And this is why pastors, apparently, molest children or cheating on their wives and Christians think that they have to deliberately sin to be in the truth. I've never heard anybody say that, that's what he's saying. John is writing to Gnostics, there is again, who think that they have not sinned since birth and wouldn't need Jesus who are converting over to Christianity. Not sure why, but that's what he says. John does not address beliefs until chapter 2, supposedly. So in verse nine, we confess that we have sinned and we are cleansed from all unrighteousness, so we cannot have sinned present tense, according to verse eight. So in essence, then, this passage is about an unsaved person getting saved that they will confess their sin and, in his words, repent of their sin and get saved. So that's how he's interpreting it, okay? Jesse Morel, so I've put the video titles in there if you want to check that he's out, but he'll say that a lot of Christians use this to attack holiness preaching. I don't know who, but that's what he said. John was writing against the Gnostics who believed that the flesh was a sinful substance and that you could never be free from sin until you died and you're released from the body. Walking in darkness, verse six, is walking in sin, walking in unrighteousness, not walking in the truth. So it's also important to note that he interprets cleansing from all sin as referring to in this life, and it means that you no longer have the propensity to go out and sin, that the saviour cleanses from all sin is not death as the Gnostics taught. Now, this is noteworthy, what he said, that if somebody commits a sin such as fornication, but then they claim they're not being sinful, this is the kind of person that the passage is talking about. He also says as well that a lot of people interpret the Bible based on today's debates, like Calvinism versus Arminianism, rather than the issues of the time and the audience of its day. Okay, so we're maybe misunderstanding the argument because we're looking at it from modern argument point. So he says that the whole point of telling you to confess your sin is that you'll get forgiven and cleansed and don't continue in sin by which Jesse Morrell means repent of it, stop doing it altogether. Noteworthy as well is that according to one John, to one it says if any man sin, that means it's possible to sin but it's also possible to stop sinning because he wrote the epistle that you would not sin. He does also point out another false extreme that some sinless perfectionist say it is impossible for a saved person to sin. And this is exactly what Mike Rikowski believes, the next guy that he does believe that he's at a point where he can't even choose to sin. It's impossible for him to sin essentially. So basically what he says, everyone on this earth except Jesus was born in sin, that does not mean we will always continue in sin. There are no scriptures that say, well he always says relate, he had some weird obsession with using that word that we will always continue in sin or that we can never stop sinning. The Bible never says this supposedly. People who do not possess the Holy Spirit want to justify why they continue in sin. So when it says if we say we have no sin, it does not apply to his own claim that he does not sin anymore because he confesses that he was born in sin and for 50 years of his life he lived in sin, he then confessed his sins and so he stopped living in sin. So again, it's about unbelievers getting saved in long story short. He then quotes later verses from John that whosoever has been born of God does not sin and he cannot sin because his seed remains in him and the wicked one cannot touch you. So if you are allowing the Holy Spirit of God to guide you, you will not sin. Now additionally, if you've not heard of this guy before, Rikowsky's doctrine of overcoming sin also involves overcoming sickness. So if you get sick, it's because you sinned and sin and sickness come from the devil. And it's later clarified in one John three that whosoever sins has not seen him and does not know him. So if you say you still sin, it's because you don't know God and you don't have the Holy Spirit, have no idea who God is, you're the one that's living a lie, you are deceived, you are blaspheming the Word of God. And so essentially saying that if you still sin, you are denying the power of God. Essentially is what he's saying there. So that was Sinless Perfectionism. What about the opposite end of the spectrum? Free grace, easy believers, and where do they get their interpretations from? So verse eight obviously is fine as a self-contained verse. If we say that we have no sin in the present tense, so free grace advocates would say that believe a sin even to the day they die. So because this verse is in the present tense there's no problem for easy believers about what verse eight means. Now verse nine is surprisingly controversial among free grace advocates because different people have interpreted it in very different ways. And some people have even reconsidered their interpretation. You might argue with perhaps that how the word confess is interpreted could be an issue there. Verse 10 again, not controversial, there's no issue with verse 10. So I'll give you an example of things I've heard from other easy believers to say about this passage. So initially, Greg Jackson, once in a video, he stated it was directed at the Gnostics and the Gnostics claimed they didn't have any sin and so they needed to acknowledge that they were sinners who needed to trust in Christ. Some people have refuted him about this view stating that it refers to believers but he's declined this view because it would involve ongoing confession such as in Catholicism. And so obviously that would be maintaining forgiveness as opposed to one time forgiveness. Now I think he did change his view that his view has changed to that more in agreement with the second guy although they disagree on many other things which I'm not gonna get into but destroying the works of the devil he said that he disagrees that this verse is about believers as well for much the same reasons as Greg. Although rather than saying it's about the Gnostics he's saying that it refers to unbelievers generally who need to confess their sins in the John the Baptist sense like the one time confession conversion because they've not yet believed the gospel. And when people have confronted him about the use of the pronoun we because it says if we confess our sin and obviously the context is believers he likens it to, I think it was a waitress in a restaurant saying, oh, what are we having today? But the waitress herself is not eating, right? And then Toronto Bible study he's said that this passage I think I apologize to him if I'm wrong about his interpretation but it refers to ongoing confession of sins to God not for salvation. So it's not something that you have to do to be saved but something that maintains your earthly fellowship or relationship with God unless you can get chastised or perhaps disfellowship from the brethren or something like that. And so then there's Lordship salvation among Lordship is I didn't really find anything surprisingly different from what we've already seen. It's mainly a repetition of some of the same points. And so it's kind of a mishmash of the aforementioned points that you know, the epistle was written to the nostics or because they rejects and this perfectionism they were like knowledge the ongoing sins of believers but at the same time they'll still insist that walking the light must warrant a change in lifestyle not making a practice of sin. So I didn't really find anything new in that category to handpick for you. So there's a lot of different arguments going on here and quite a lot to unpack. So I'm going to have to break down and refute some of the arguments. I can't go into every micro thing that they've said for the sake of time. But just as a spoiler alert I don't really agree with any of the aforementioned interpretations including those by other easy believers and I'm not having to go at them or anything. I just professionally disagree with them but I have previously considered Toronto Bible studies interpretation and for a time I thought it was correct but then when I've studied it again I've kind of repented of that view and I'm using that word correctly by the way because I've realised something very obvious that I missed the whole time and when I saw it I couldn't believe how obvious it was. All of these conflicting interpretations explain why John's epistle is such a complicated book because the things that John is saying in these verses is not really complicated in itself. He's using quite simple language and so it's amazing how so few words can cause so much conflict about what he means. The answer to this passage is actually quite simple and when I noticed it I felt rather silly that I missed it the whole time because it was always there and all we have to do is just think carefully about the way that John phrases it and the reason why he says certain things. That's all you have to do but just think carefully about why he's saying it the way that he's saying it, right? So I'll try and pick some of the main arguments see I can't go through every micro argument but easy believists and sinless perfectionists alike have interpreted this epistle to be all about Gnosticism but they've taken their own spin on what Gnostic doctrine John was actually refuting. So if we ask the sinless perfectionists who say that John was writing about the Gnostics well they say that the Gnostics lived in sin and wouldn't turn from sin and so that was the issue that John needed to address. On the contrary, easy believists who also say that this book was directed towards the Gnostics denied that they had sin or that Jesus was the Christ and so that was what John addressed. So either one or both of these sides are picking and choosing the aspects of Gnostics to associate with this epistle so as to defend their own positions and in some of their assertions about Gnostics and not really necessarily accurate or evident evident from the writings that we have about Gnostics they're either cherry-picked or they're conjectural or just simply not true or relevant really. Further building on this you see my biggest problem with this assertion is the lack of evidence within the Bible itself. John makes no mention of Gnostics or Gnosticism and we have to rely on extra Biblical sources and conjectural assumptions to come to this conclusion essentially. Now there's a lot of hearsay about this epistle that John wrote it quite late in his life even after the Temple of Jerusalem was destroyed but doesn't bother to mention it but scholars can only deduce that based on his writing style they don't really have any absolute proof. Many scholars would deny that John even wrote the book so John didn't really find it necessary to document anything particularly relevant to his timeframe. So in summary I reject the idea that it's targeted at Gnostics specifically because I don't think that that sets the premise for the whole book because you cannot establish that from the Bible itself. Somebody has to plant that idea into your head essentially. Now most of what we know about Gnostics as far as I'm aware comes from against heresies by Irenaeus. So I actually produced a video going through the book to debunk a claim that Osas was a Gnostic doctrine. The Gnostics really believed in all kinds of kooky weird things. Assuming that what Irenaeus said is actually true and not biased by the way but they believed in all kinds of weird things and so really John writes in his epistle barely scratches the surface of what Gnostics actually believed and the Antichrist characteristics that John exposed were quite specific. So really I would argue that his epistle is very inadequate if it was intended to address Gnostic teachings. To top this off really the Antichrist characteristics could easily be applied to the Jews of John's time who also denied that Jesus is the Christ and also denied that they had sin and Paul warned us about Judaizers in his epistles. Now strictly speaking John doesn't mention Jews in his epistle, right? But at least internally the Bible would make a much better case for that claim and a more self-sufficient case than the Gnostics. Just from the self-sufficient internal evidence. And furthermore as well as I mentioned earlier in the study sometimes the Bible does name certain people that were the cause of certain false doctrines like the Nicolaotans, right? But John doesn't give us that epistle so we don't know that he was targeting a very specific group of heretics. So John just said another argument then this is quite a big one. A lot of the sinless perfectionists were saying this that John just said prior to verse eight, nine and 10 walk in the light before saying if we say we have no sin. So he is not talking about present tense ongoing sins. Now I perceive that there are two problems with this argument. The first biggest problem is that it's really begging the question that is to say asserting the conclusion because the sinless perfectionists have read that word, that phrase walk in the light and they've free decided that that's what walking the light means. Well it says walk in the light so it means you don't say it. Well you've decided that that's what those four words mean. Okay you've made that assumption. So really what they're doing is they're using a cryptic figure of speech like walk in the light to define a clear statement if we say we have no sin rather than taking the more obvious statement and applying it to the more cryptic one, right? Which would make more sense. Well earlier in the study we already looked at what walking the light means that if we use other passages in the Bible particularly mainly in John's gospel that use the same phrase walk in the light it's really used more to do with believing who Christ is and believing in him not in living a new kind of a life. Okay that's how John's gospel defines it far more clearly. So if John's borrowing terminology from his gospel in his epistle which we can see that he does it's really far more to do with what you believe not your works. And so the closest to works like passages that we have that are similar are like walking in the spirit not walking in the light though or walking as children of the light. So you know John's gospel presents a better case for our interpretation that walking in the light is really the truth that you believe it's walking in the truth acknowledging what is true believing in what is true. The second problem with this argument okay if we're to assert that the sinless perfectionist view is true that walking the light means not sinning then really the way that the Holy Spirit moved John to speak makes absolutely no sense whatsoever because John wrote a sentence that contradicts his own salvation doctrine. Logically speaking if a sinless perfectionist's view were true that Jesus has to remove sins not just the sins that they've done all the penalty for sins but also the propensity to sin or the fact that they sin and this is how we're going to define free from sin that you're a person who doesn't sin anymore well then John cannot say in the present tense if we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves because it's not true in fact the opposite is true it's if we say we have sin we deceive ourselves. So we really accuse John of writing a nonsensical statement that doesn't even match what he's proclaiming about salvation if you just follow the logic right we've been set free from our sins that's how the interpret Jesus cleansed from our sins we don't sin anymore we're not living in sin you know we've been cleansed from our sins we don't have sin anymore oh by the way if we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves like that what that doesn't make sense with the satireology that you're supposedly claiming then it's like you're making John contradict himself now verse 10 still makes perfect sense if we say we have not sinned that's fine we don't have a problem with verse 10 but they're making verse 8 say the same thing when John worded it in the present tense not as something that happened in the past okay the third argument then that verse 9 and Dan Moeller said it this way but also easy believists have said this as well that confess means to acknowledge our need for the blood so like Dan Moeller said it's about unbelievers getting saved you know if we say we have no need for the blood that's what John really means by saying that but my answer to that really is very similar to argument 2 like my question would be if this is what John really meant why couldn't the Holy Spirit move John to say it in the way that he meant because really the verse ought to say if we say we have no passing then we deceive ourselves but that's not what he said he said if we say we have no sin present tense we deceive ourselves and then verse 9 ought to say if any man acknowledges need for the blood of Jesus he is faithful for it but again that's not how the Holy Spirit moved John to speak the Holy Spirit moved John to say if we confess that's an action present tense our sins he's faithful and just to forgive okay I am satisfied in my own mind you can disagree that's up to you but I think John is being deliberate in the language being used and that the Holy Spirit did not write him to move something that is deliberately confusing okay so you know how just looking at that right there that table there of what John could have said versus what he did say would help you understand why I'm disagreeing with everybody here okay argument number 4 is that John is talking about unbelievers verse 8 to 10 are not referring to saved people they're about people who need to get saved now as we saw with Gnosticism both easy-believers and sinless perfectionists are like making this claim but they've got their own spin on how it actually applies you know the sinless perfectionist will say that it means unbelievers need to repent of their sins the easy-believers say that unbelievers need to recognize that they are sinners once again with argument 2 and 3 we're accusing John and the Holy Spirit of using nonsensical language that doesn't make doctrinal sense okay verse 3 and 4 quite clearly clarify who we are now in poetry books like Psalms or Job or Psalms obviously this is not as straightforward because the pronouns flip around all the time and it's poetry right but this ought to really be and this is an instruction letter it ought to be more straightforward than that okay no verse so far has redefined who we are okay we are the brethren the people of God so now some will say it's a figure of speech so I mentioned earlier that the waitress example like a waitress comes up to you say oh what are we having today but the waitress is not eating now I can't accept that for the main reason I find that view very conjectural I find it unverifiable like I can't verify that what you're saying is true I've got no way of knowing that I can only base it on your assumption right and really I don't think you can compare informal speech in a restaurant with men speaking as they are moved by the Holy Ghost and wrote and carbon copied this letter okay so you know I'm not having a go at the people that proclaim that you know I'm not ripping on them all but you know that I'm just professionally disagreeing with the other easy believers about this argument 5 is that it means to stop living in sin and this is essentially how Jesse Murrell and Mike Rakowski interpret well I suppose all the sinless perfectionists did really but as with all the previous arguments we're doing the same thing again accusing John of writing nonsensical language that contradicts his own theology he should not be saying if we say we have no sin present tense if we have been cleansed from our sins and we don't sin anymore and we don't sin good word children of God and you all sin but we don't you know you would see that yourselves we don't John should not be saying that it makes no sense with what he's actually talking about and again it's inserting the conclusion because what they're doing is they're reading the bit saying cleanses us from all sin and they think well that means you don't sin anymore well the thing is that that's not what cleansing means right cleansing like another word for cleaning or you know scrubbing now anybody who knows the first thing about cleaning knows that when you clean something it eventually gets dirty okay those of you that clean freaks and like to clean your house or maybe your housewife and you're looking after the family you know that as soon as the kids and the husband come home that house ain't as clean as you made it no matter how much effort you put into it it gets dirty very quickly okay the fact that it says cleanses us from all sin is not proof text that you don't sin anymore okay and they will they will borrow from later passages about he who commits in he cannot sin so you know they'll say well he who is born of God cannot sin right but then they believe in conditional security so their own definition violates those later verses just just think about it if a saved believer who has been cleansed of sin including their propensity to sin can then choose to sin and lose their salvation then by definition your definition of it they weren't cleansed they weren't set free someone who was born of God can sin and become unborn a person born of God can sin so they contradict their own interpretation because they just talk out of both sides of the mouth I can't unpack that now I know that's the bit that people get stuck on and I know that's the verses that people find super hard to understand and I will get to it I intend on getting to it but chapters three and five I just got to have to wait to their own study okay we've got to get through this we've got to do this in order okay so argument number six then this is saying that verse nine refers to fellowship or you might say relationship I guess so a saved believer should confess their sins in prayer presumably not for salvation so you know it's got nothing to do with says what must I do to be saved you know you're still saved if you don't do it but it's to stay in fellowship with God or with their brethren to stay in fellowship with them such as to retain or recover church membership and often they'll say that fellowship is perhaps using it in the same way as discipleship I guess I have previously considered this view but really I have repented of holding this view because what I've realized is that the problem here is really trying to define the word fellowship okay because the word fellowship it's used a handful of times in the Bible and perhaps similar words like relationship or brotherhood and other passages use fellowship in like a gospel like context like Philemon 1.5 and so sometimes fellowship does seem like it's salvation relevant where Paul uses the word fellowship he sometimes uses it as not associating with or participating in the needs of non-brethren and participating in things pertaining to the faith now I've not done like hours and hours and hours and hours of in-depth study about what fellowship means but at a glance you know if you look at all the different verses where it means it more commonly seems to mean association with or participation so if we are in fellowship with brethren it's because we associate with another you know usually other doctrines we believe right and we associate with God and so we are commanded not to be in fellowship or not to participate in or associate with the works of darkness right so if we say that somebody is cut off from fellowship with God like my problem with that view is well what does that actually mean do you mean that God won't answer your prayer or do you mean that God will punish you and chastise you in a non-hellfire kind of way and then if that's how you're interpreting it then the next question I have to ask is what verses in the Bible define fellowship in this way okay and so there's really too much openness to what fellowship actually means if you're gonna say that so to me this interpretation just leaves too many holes about what fellowship means and perhaps again we're asserting conclusions oh that's what fellowship means without really providing satisfactory proof to clearly define it and then apply it to what Johnny's even talking about and furthermore if we just look at what we've been looking at that you know in this chapter that chastisement of a disobedient believer or the consequences of disfellowshipping is not something that this epistle is talking about okay so we're just arbitrarily adding this definition when John himself didn't necessarily define it this way now if we were doing a study on perhaps one Corinthians that might be a stronger argument but I think it's too weak in John's epistle because really what you believe about what it means is outside of the subject of John's epistle you're talking about something that John's not talking about essentially so with all of that I see problems with all of the aforementioned interpretations there's more I could have said on that but I think you get the idea obviously then I need to provide justification as to what I believe it means now as I've said repeatedly John is using simple language he's not using fancy word salad it ought to be fairly simple to understand what John really means and I believe it is and when I recognized it I was surprised actually how simple it is and how obvious it has just been to me the whole time I just completely missed it really I'm summarizing here but John is tackling a mindset okay and it's about the mindset that we as believers have towards our sins and how that relates to our belief in Jesus the Christ and our fellowship or you might say association with one another so over the next few last slides let's have a look at the simple language that John uses and see if he defines his own sentences so see if we can grasp this okay so we already saw earlier in the study that there's two sides here right this ought to give us an indication of what John intended in saying in verse nine either we say we have no sin and we say that we have not sinned or we confess our sins they're the two extremes they're the opposite okay they're the choices right so verses four and five established that we you and you plural pronouns are referring to believers including John himself and the people that he represents and the group of people he was walking to whom he predominantly calls little children throughout his epistles so they were likely probably converts or people that John administered to and John felt you know a burdening responsibility to watch over them right we have seen and heard we declare on to you we write on to you that's who we are in chapter one right believers simple as that in verses eight to ten we start each verse with if we say that or if we confess right okay so what we do is not strictly being tackled here because again since lectures you've got to turn from us it's not saying what we do it's saying what we say okay what we confess what we say so it's what we collectively as believers say or confess regarding our sins right now if if John was writing about any one individual or somebody who needs to be saved he could have just said if any man or he that or who so ever but he didn't say this okay he said we that's what he said we're all together in these verses okay so John in the in the second chapter then gives us a reason why he's writing right just so as to make sure that you don't misunderstand what he just said he writes on to you that reading his writing you do not say okay that I write on to you that you say not that's why he's writing okay now we dealt with that if we say that okay we have all the verses that say if we say that what happens if we do that okay what happens if we do sin well we have a condition here now this is where it gets interesting because it doesn't actually say we now now it actually says if any man sin right now that's quite interesting we're going to have to look into that so it doesn't say we there but if we if any man sin okay then that condition is met well we have a solution we have an advocate okay there's a solution there if any man happened to sin right