Severe Weather outbreaks

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Lord of the Large Pants said:
Semi-related question. I've heard that some of the controversial EF4 ratings in the last 10 years are due to certain emergency funding being available only for EF5 tornadoes, so meteorologists are being politically pressured to give artificially low ratings.

Any truth to this?
Click to expand...
Many people think it has something to do with insurance, personally I don't think that's the case, in practical terms there's really not that much of a difference between high end EF4 and EF5 damage, your house has been wiped off the face of the earth either way. I think it has more to do with the NWS becoming extremely autistic about building codes along wih the EF scale being applied inconsistently.

There's also something to be said about the EF scale being outdated and limited if what you want is to know how powerful a tornado really is, since its based solely on damage if a strong tornado doesn't hit something that is rated for EF5 it won't get the rating and if it doesn't hit anything it'll get a ridiculously low rating. The most infamous example of this is probably the 2013 El Reno tornado, a record breaking 2.6 mile wide multivortex monstrosity with Doppler radar confirmed 300mph+ winds, initially rated EF5 based on the Doppler radar analysis but since it spent most of its life over open fields and didn't hit much of anything it was later downgraded to EF3. If you were to apply the same logic to say, nukes, the Hiroshima bomb would be rated higher than the Tsar Bomba which is just silly.
I don't get why they refuse to take Doppler radar readings into account, instead of trying to estimate windspeeds based on the damage this tells you directly, I get that very few tornadoes can get analyzed this way because its very impractical but there's no real reason to disregard the data in cases where we do have it available.
 
DapperShark said:
Many people think it has something to do with insurance, personally I don't think that's the case, in practical terms there's really not that much of a difference between high end EF4 and EF5 damage, your house has been wiped off the face of the earth either way. I think it has more to do with the NWS becoming extremely autistic about building codes along wih the EF scale being applied inconsistently.

There's also something to be said about the EF scale being outdated and limited if what you want is to know how powerful a tornado really is, since its based solely on damage if a strong tornado doesn't hit something that is rated for EF5 it won't get the rating and if it doesn't hit anything it'll get a ridiculously low rating. The most infamous example of this is probably the 2013 El Reno tornado, a record breaking 2.6 mile wide multivortex monstrosity with Doppler radar confirmed 300mph+ winds, initially rated EF5 based on the Doppler radar analysis but since it spent most of its life over open fields and didn't hit much of anything it was later downgraded to EF3. If you were to apply the same logic to say, nukes, the Hiroshima bomb would be rated higher than the Tsar Bomba which is just silly.
I don't get why they refuse to take Doppler radar readings into account, instead of trying to estimate windspeeds based on the damage this tells you directly, I get that very few tornadoes can get analyzed this way because its very impractical but there's no real reason to disregard the data in cases where we do have it available.
Click to expand...
Given that weather phenomena are routinely used to justify muh climate change alarm, you'd think that the establishment would want to over report EF-5s for fundraising.

Maybe because tornados typically only affect the "flyover" states it's not on the climate alarmists' radars so the tornado enthusiasts have been spared the typical political infection.
 
Catgirl Tyranid said:
Given that weather phenomena are routinely used to justify muh climate change alarm, you'd think that the establishment would want to over report EF-5s for fundraising.

Maybe because tornados typically only affect the "flyover" states it's not on the climate alarmists' radars so the tornado enthusiasts have been spared the typical political infection.
Click to expand...
BREAKING NEWS: The NWS deliberately hid the number of EF5 tornados under the orders of rethuglikkkans and blornald blimft to deceive people about the Climate Emergency. Sources familiar with the way drumpftler thinks about climate change effecting his tiny penis say vladimir putin is directly involved
 
Return of the Freaker said:
BREAKING NEWS: The NWS deliberately hid the number of EF5 tornados under the orders of rethuglikkkans and blornald blimft to deceive people about the Climate Emergency. Sources familiar with the way drumpftler thinks about climate change effecting his tiny penis say vladimir putin is directly involved
Click to expand...
You jest, but there are now a few youtube grifters trying to blame tornado casualties on DOGE cuts. "MAGA betrayed!" and other such ghoulish gravedancing, as if smartphones aren't connected to EAS alerts.

Though in St. Louis, a fire chief said the sirens weren't activated in time due to "human error", not staffing shortfalls.
 
Catgirl Tyranid said:
Given that weather phenomena are routinely used to justify muh climate change alarm, you'd think that the establishment would want to over report EF-5s for fundraising.

Maybe because tornados typically only affect the "flyover" states it's not on the climate alarmists' radars so the tornado enthusiasts have been spared the typical political infection.
Click to expand...
The climate change people usually only pay attention to tornadoes when there's a mass casualty event, like after the Mayfield tornado, you had Hollywood retards like Mark Ruffalo screeching about a CLIMATE CATASTROPHE.
 
Some of the most extreme ground scouring from a tornado I've seen in a long time. Also caused extreme debris granulation and complete debarking to trees, which (imo) makes it a legitimate contender for an EF5 rating.
...unfortunately the survey is utter dogshit and they gave an EF2 rating to clear-cut EF4 damage numerous times throughout.
 
indomitable snowman said:
This just popped up on my recommended. It's a research group flying drones inside/around a forming tornado
Click to expand...
That second video is showing an anticyclonic tornado (spinning in the opposite direction). Probably the only time a drone has flown into one of those.
You can also see incredibly clearly in both videos the subvortices of the tornado. Absolutely incredible footage
 
2025's Hurricane Season began yesterday, and the NOA are predicting an above-average level of activity in the Atlantic this time around.

Whether they're right remains to be seen, but it might be worth noting that we're about two days in and there are already two probable disturbances:
1748909036961.webp1748909056684.webp
and this is after a Tropical Storm already formed and dissipated in the Pacific a full week before the season was supposed to start.

Granted, that was still just in the Pacific. And the increased odds are mostly forecast for the Atlantic. But I think it remains interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom