Tornado Alley

[Mikey]

Pretty sure the Weather Channel gets 99% of their info from NOAA.

The best, most up to date weather information, if you're interested in weather information and not 11:00 news type presentation, can be found right here.

http://www.weather.gov/organization

OK, this is good too...

http://www.wunderground.com/

[Derron]

Who here turns to the NWS for any forecasts? I bet most use the Weather channel or other private outlets.


Rarely can the government provide a service as cheaply and as accurately as a private source.

I pretty much use NWS , and a BOR site for my weather, and have for the last 25 or so years. And I do not pay a thin dime for it.

Pretty accurate weather forecasting, and the BOR site for crop use data gives me all I need. Pretty dry and boring, but pretty accurate and technical in my opinion. Good access to radar images, you can pretty much call your own shot with that data.

http://www.weather.gov/

http://www.usbr.gov/pn/agrimet/

[Smackie Chan]

You'll be washed into Idaho. Which won't be bad at all.

Idaho prolly won't be thrilled.

[Mikey]

Derron moves to Idaho

[Dinsdale]

Oh, you can only imaging the stress that the imminent tsunami causes us folks living at 150+ elevation and 50 miles inland.

I'm building levees as I type.

[Mikey]

Oh, you can only imaging the stress that the imminent tsunami causes us folks living at 150+ elevation and 50 miles inland.

I'm building levees as I type.

I'd imagine an arrival of the Crimson Tide would be more daunting.

[Mace]

Plenty of places. The U & L where I live for one.

Tornado - A couple in the last 40 years over 35 miles away. A couple of cold air funnel clouds each year, never down, no damage.
Hurricane - Maybe Columbus Day in 1964, predictable with today's forecasting.
Earthquake - Last one of any size in 1995. Potential is there for a big one. But unlike tornado alley, where you know for sure there exists a potential for death by windstorm each year, the odds are still in our favor.
Volcano eruption - Check - 1980, Mt St Helens. Wise people stayed the fuck away from the blast zone, the unwise not so much and very dead. Predictable in today's science. Minor ash fall in our area, no infrabustructure damage.

People have to live where ever they have to live. I will just stay here.

We stay here, Derron, because it's where we live and work, and because the fertile fields are here. The odds of actually falling victim to a tornado are about the same as the Cubs winning a World Series. Sure, one could touch down on my house today or tomorrow, but, in 63 years, that's not happened yet. Most folks have a basement or storm cellar on their property and might have to utilize them for safety once or twice a year....or not at all in most years....when the tornado sirens are going off. We usually have plenty of warning and time to seek shelter, but it depends on the time of day the tornado hits. I'd much rather be at home than out in public when the tornado hits, and one of my biggest fears when I was coaching baseball was that of getting caught out at the ballpark when the storm hit with nothing to shelter us from the storm, and not enough time for everyone to seek shelter.

[Dinsdale]

The chances of a tsunami rolling through my front door are much higher than Bama getting on a plane to Eugene.

[Mikey]

True dat.

[Derron]

Oh, you can only imaging the stress that the imminent tsunami causes us folks living at 150+ elevation and 50 miles inland.

I'm building levees as I type.

Not to mention the 3,000 foot mountain range between the coast and our hoods.

[Derron]

We stay here, Derron, because it's where we live and work, and because the fertile fields are here. The odds of actually falling victim to a tornado are about the same as the Cubs winning a World Series. Sure, one could touch down on my house today or tomorrow, but, in 63 years, that's not happened yet. Most folks have a basement or storm cellar on their property and might have to utilize them for safety once or twice a year....or not at all in most years....when the tornado sirens are going off. We usually have plenty of warning and time to seek shelter, but it depends on the time of day the tornado hits. I'd much rather be at home than out in public when the tornado hits, and one of my biggest fears when I was coaching baseball was that of getting caught out at the ballpark when the storm hit with nothing to shelter us from the storm, and not enough time for everyone to seek shelter.

Oh yeah.. I get that. To me though, even the off chance that a tornado could smite you still seems pretty bizarre. If people prepare themselves and are capable of reacting correctly, then you are good to go. Besides, if everyone moved form where tornados and other weather shit affected you adversely, the U& l would be overcrowded, and that would suck.

[Derron]

Derron moves to Idaho

If you could get crop yields like that, might not be a bad move. But then again, there is way too many of those crazy survivalist prepper mother fuckers there. I would have a hard time fitting in.

[Felix]

if you think you've seen the last of these monster tornadoes, your seriously mistaken....

you're going to see increased velocities, increased destruction caused by tornadoes......
you're going to see higher intensity, more destructive hurricanes.....
you're going to see significant more severe weather regardless of what it is....droughts, rain storms, etc.

you're starting to see the beginning patterns of climate change.....what you'll see in the coming years is just a premonition of what is going to be the norm in about 30 years.......

check the NOAA historical records and anybody with an excel spread sheet and half a brain can see the patterns....

[mvscal]

if you think you've seen the last of these monster tornadoes, your seriously mistaken....

you're going to see increased velocities, increased destruction caused by tornadoes......
you're going to see higher intensity, more destructive hurricanes.....
you're going to see significant more severe weather regardless of what it is....droughts, rain storms, etc.

you're starting to see the beginning patterns of climate change.....what you'll see in the coming years is just a premonition of what is going to be the norm in about 30 years.......

check the NOAA historical records and anybody with an excel spread sheet and half a brain can see the patterns....

Fuck off, idiot.

With increased national Doppler radar coverage, increasing population, and greater attention to tornado reporting, there has been an increase in the number of tornado reports over the past several decades. This can create a misleading appearance of an increasing trend in tornado frequency. To better understand the variability and trend in tornado frequency in the U.S., the total number EF1 and stronger, as well as strong to violent tornadoes (EF3 to EF5 category on the Enhanced Fujita scale) can be analyzed. These are the tornadoes that would have likely been reported even during the decades before Doppler radar use became widespread and practices resulted in increasing tornado reports. The bar charts below indicates there has been little trend in the frequency of the stronger tornadoes over the past 55 years.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/sev ... ml#history

[Derron]

if you think you've seen the last of these monster tornadoes, your seriously mistaken....

you're going to see increased velocities, increased destruction caused by tornadoes......
you're going to see higher intensity, more destructive hurricanes.....
you're going to see significant more severe weather regardless of what it is....droughts, rain storms, etc.

you're starting to see the beginning patterns of climate change.....what you'll see in the coming years is just a premonition of what is going to be the norm in about 30 years.......

check the NOAA historical records and anybody with an excel spread sheet and half a brain can see the patterns....

Yeah that pattern looks like there will be pretty much 300 tornadoes a year. Some year there maybe more. Some years a lot more.

It does not take your half a brain to see that pattern. Looks like a real trend developing there over the last 50 or so years. :doh: :doh:

[Derron]

.....what you'll see in the coming years is just a premonition of what is going to be the norm in about 30 years.......

Any chance that you could restate that or maybe somebody could provide an English translation ??

[Dinsdale]

BTW - I'm no meteorologist, but the last round of tornadoes came after a decent low-pressure mass parked itself over the U&L about a week prior, then wound its way around the Cascades/Rockies, then reorganized over the plains.

The low that's been camping here the last few days, and just moving on today (quite the rainmaker, it was, and quite cold), was wayyyyy bigger.

Not really calling my shot... but have fun with that, Flyovers. Hope it doesn't whack you like the last one did.

[Truman]

you're starting to see the beginning patterns of climate change.....what you'll see in the coming years is just a premonition of what is going to be the norm in about 30 years.......

The beginning of climate change?! You mean climate is static and you're NOT posting from under a mile-thick Pleistocene ice sheet?! Are you just as big an idiot in RL as you are on this Board?

As for your "increased velocities, increased destruction caused by tornadoes"... Not this year, Champ. Moore notwithstanding, their EF 4 fails your criteria, and overall, tornado frequency - and casualties - are way down in the Alley this year. Guess you can pin your failed hopes on hurricane season to "prove" your fraud science.

[Truman]

The low that's been camping here the last few days, and just moving on today (quite the rainmaker, it was, and quite cold), was wayyyyy bigger.

Not really calling my shot... but have fun with that, Flyovers. Hope it doesn't whack you like the last one did.

:brad: Ratfuck you and your U&L rain to hell, Dinsdale. Barbecue in the rain...[/grumble]

[Derron]

The low that's been camping here the last few days, and just moving on today (quite the rainmaker, it was, and quite cold), was wayyyyy bigger.

Not really calling my shot... but have fun with that, Flyovers. Hope it doesn't whack you like the last one did.

:brad: Ratfuck you and your U&L rain to hell, Dinsdale. Barbecue in the rain...[/grumble]

You may have got lucky there Truman..it looks like the low that douched us with 2.5 + inches of rain and a 48 degree high temp on Wednesday is moving towards Minnesota area. Cannot say we did not try though, sending that kind of moisture into flyover country mixed with that nice warm southern air, could have only resulted in some awesome storms.

[M2]

WASHINGTON (AP) — A prominent physicist and skeptic of global warming spent two years trying to find out if mainstream climate scientists were wrong. In the end, he determined they were right: Temperatures really are rising rapidly.

The study of the world's surface temperatures by Richard Muller was partially bankrolled by a foundation connected to global warming deniers. He pursued long-held skeptic theories in analyzing the data. He was spurred to action because of "Climategate," a British scandal involving hacked emails of scientists.

One-quarter of the $600,000 to do the research came from the Charles Koch Foundation, whose founder is a major funder of skeptic groups and the tea party. The Koch brothers, Charles and David, run a large privately held company involved in oil and other industries, producing sizable greenhouse gas emissions.

Be-careful what you fund... if you don't want it to fuck you in the ass.



Fucking clowns.

[Dinsdale]

And those charts have nothing to do with moving the goalposts in regard to taking reporting stations offline in Northern Canada, and replacing them with new ones on rooftops in temperate urban areas?


GIGO. At what point are we to assume the people using slanted terms like "skeptic" and "denier" (why stop there... let's go with "heretic") stopped lying, and started telling the truth?

Absolutely no scientific evidence to suggest that known liars-for-financial-gain have stopped lying at any point.

HIDE THE DECLINE!!!!!!

Here's how "science" works -- someone(s) posit a theory, and collect data. They submit these results for peer-review. Other scientists (and laymen, for that matter) review the theory, and poke holes in it, if possible. Until proof is amassed, it's still a "theory."

Here's how science doesn't work -- labeling anyone who disagrees with you a "denier." Going back and altering observed data because it doesn't fit with the way the data should look according to your theory (at this point, the theory has been DISPROVEN, beyond all doubt). Using phrases like "HIDE THE DECLINE," and "we'll change what the peer-review process is!"


But it's been a long time since someone came up with a new widespread religion (which UK courts have ruled AGW to be) to seperate fools from their money... unfortunately, the wealthiest of the wealthy are trying to use it to seperate the rest of us from our money, as well...

because liberals are stupid.

[M2]

And those charts have nothing to do with moving the goalposts in regard to taking reporting stations offline in Northern Canada, and replacing them with new ones on rooftops in temperate urban areas?

I guess you missed the video... or left it out on purpose.


Can't really hide the facts... there.



Oh yeah, you were saying about urban areas ?


http://www.scitechnol.com/GIGS/GIGS-1-104.php

[Felix]

if you think you've seen the last of these monster tornadoes, your seriously mistaken....

you're going to see increased velocities, increased destruction caused by tornadoes......
you're going to see higher intensity, more destructive hurricanes.....
you're going to see significant more severe weather regardless of what it is....droughts, rain storms, etc.

you're starting to see the beginning patterns of climate change.....what you'll see in the coming years is just a premonition of what is going to be the norm in about 30 years.......

check the NOAA historical records and anybody with an excel spread sheet and half a brain can see the patterns....

Fuck off, idiot.

I think I said something increased velocities and increased destruction, not necessarily frequency or did you misinterpret that? that tornado that hit the oklahoma area was registering unusually high wind velocities which in turn results in more devastating destruction.....you need to look at all the data, not a single graph.....

The beginning of climate change?!

did you purposely leave out the word patterns, or was that just an oversight.....

[Truman]

that tornado that hit the oklahoma area was registering unusually high wind velocities which in turn results in more devastating destruction.....

No it wasn't, and no it didn't.

While tragic, such activity is not exactly uncommon to folks in these parts - and hasn't been since there were folks IN these parts.

Moore suffered the effects of an EF4. For those keeping score at home, that's one less than an EF5. Care to take a stab at how these storms are rated? Your clue is found in the ridiculous and asinine statement you posted above.

As for your "more devastating destruction," there's a big difference quantifying "more" devastation between an EF5 dropping out of the sky and pummeling a sole grain silo in the middle of Kansas, and the EF4 that, guess what, roared through a populated and developed suburb. Christ, Felix, fix your meds.

The beginning of climate change?!

did you purposely leave out the word patterns, or was that just an oversight.....

The fuck does it matter? You're still just as stupid with- or without it. And these guys say you're full of shit, too, as well as 31,000 others:

"If elected officials feel compelled to 'do something' about climate, we recommend supporting the excellent scientists who are increasing our understanding of climate with well-designed instruments on satellites, in the oceans and on land, and in the analysis of observational data. The better we understand climate, the better we can cope with its ever-changing nature, which has complicated human life throughout history. However, much of the huge private and government investment in climate is badly in need of critical review.

Every candidate should support rational measures to protect and improve our environment, but it makes no sense at all to back expensive programs that divert resources from real needs and are based on alarming but untenable claims of 'incontrovertible' evidence."

Swallow an EF5. Seriously.

[Truman]

You may have got lucky there Truman..it looks like the low that douched us with 2.5 + inches of rain and a 48 degree high temp on Wednesday is moving towards Minnesota area. Cannot say we did not try though, sending that kind of moisture into flyover country mixed with that nice warm southern air, could have only resulted in some awesome storms.

Oh, it's forecasted, Der, but the lack of warm, moist southern air has made for an "unusually" cool ('sup Felix) spring in the middling climes, so severe weather isn't really much of a threat this weekend. Must be why tornadic activity is down throughout the Alley this year...

[Truman]

WASHINGTON (AP) — A prominent physicist and skeptic of global warming spent two years trying to find out if mainstream climate scientists were wrong. In the end, he determined they were right: Temperatures really are rising rapidly.

The study of the world's surface temperatures by Richard Muller was partially bankrolled by a foundation connected to global warming deniers. He pursued long-held skeptic theories in analyzing the data. He was spurred to action because of "Climategate," a British scandal involving hacked emails of scientists.

One-quarter of the $600,000 to do the research came from the Charles Koch Foundation, whose founder is a major funder of skeptic groups and the tea party. The Koch brothers, Charles and David, run a large privately held company involved in oil and other industries, producing sizable greenhouse gas emissions.

Not so fast, two-dles:

"The results of the study are now being called into question not just by climate skeptics but by a leading member of Muller’s own team. Prof. Judith Curry, head of the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, said Muller’s findings were a 'huge mistake' with no scientific basis.

'There is no scientific basis for saying that warming [continues]', Curry, who is listed as a co-author on the BEST reports, told The Daily Mail. 'To say that there is detracts from the credibility of the data, which is very unfortunate.'

Though Curry admits some temperature gain since the 50s, she suggests it’s impossible to ignore the relative warming standstill we experienced in the 90s when BEST data reveals little change.

'This is nowhere near what the climate models were predicting,' Curry told the Daily Mail. 'Whatever it is that’s going on here, it doesn’t look like it’s being dominated by CO2.'"

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/10/ ... z2UKDdD9u2

Be-careful what you post... if you don't want it to fuck you in the ass.

Or gore your own ox (quote fixed)...

[M2]

Poor Truman...


Seems his source is "backtracking" as fast as she can.


It's best if you do your own research and not depend on foxnews to think for you, my friend.

Curry has also questioned the way she has been represented in the Mail piece. She wrote on her blog yesterday

Curry says that she agrees with BEST's statement

Furthermore Curry says that the article's headline was "definitely misleading",

Oh yeah, as far as her being part of the team... well, I'll let her tell you

The Mail describes Curry as a "leading member of the Prof Muller's team" and the "second named co-author of the BEST project's four research papers". In fact Curry has written that she was not centrally involved but " participated loosely" in the BEST project; the fact that she is the second named person on the BEST papers "is attributable to my last name starting with the letter 'C'".

http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2011/10 ... -best-data




You want to step back and give it another swing ???



Just don't make me call you out on the "31,000" scientists that signed the "petition" in your link... I really don't want to embarrass you further.

[War Wagon]

fuckin hill billies cant afford in ground pools?

some jerkoff is running pool smack?

btw, there aren't many hills in Oklahoma you stupid sonofabitch.

[Mace]

btw, there aren't many hills in Oklahoma you stupid sonofabitch.

I guess that's why Woody Guthrie wrote a song called....:roll:....Oklahoma Hills.

Way down yonder in the Indian nation
I rode my pony on the reservation
In the Oklahoma Hills where I was born
Way down yonder in the Indian nation
A cowboy’s life is my occupation
In the Oklahoma Hills where I was born

[War Wagon]

You see "many" hills in those tornado pictures?

[R-Jack]

The Ozarks do stretch into Oaklahomo.

[Truman]

The Ozarks do stretch into Oaklahomo.

Er, actually, they don't, but if that take somehow makes you feel smarter then by all means...

[War Wagon]

the highest elevation in Oklahoma is in the far western panhandle, which isn't really a hill but a mesa of the Rocky Mountain plateau.

[Truman]

Shhh, Wags, R-Jack thinks he's on to something...

[R-Jack]

They do bleed into the northeastern part of Oaklahoma. Not a lot, but it's the only sliver of credence toejam's hillbilly smack had.

[Wolfman]

One of the few lists that has Florida at the very rear.Of course, Florida is mostly a giant sand bar. Hell, OK has a mountain for crying out loud.

http://geography.about.com/od/lists/a/ushighpoints.htm

[Felix]

And these guys[/url] say you're full of shit, too, as well as 31,000 others

dude, we've been all through this before.......of those 31,487 scientists, how many are climate scientists? let me save you the trouble....almost none

I know 31,487 sounds like a lot but given that the US has just under 11 million people that would qualify as "scientists" according to the OISM polling criteria, 31,487 out of 11 million represents about 0.00286 percent

insignificant to say the least

[mvscal]

The Ozarks do stretch into Oaklahomo.

Er, actually, they don't, but if that take somehow makes you feel smarter then by all means...

Er, actually, they do.

The Ozarks (also referred to as Ozarks Mountain Country, the Ozark Mountains, and the Ozark Plateau) are a physiographic and geologic highland region of the central United States. It covers much of the southern half of Missouri and an extensive portion of northwestern and north central Arkansas. The region also extends westward into northeastern Oklahoma and extreme southeastern Kansas.

[Felix]

http://www.petitionproject.org/qualific ... igners.php

yes, I know what the qualifications are and there are almost 11 million people in this country that meet those qualifications.....

here are some numbers for you
since January of 1991 and November of 2012, there have been approximately 13,950 peer-reviewed scientific articles published on climate change and of those, 24 reject human-caused global warming or endorse a cause other than CO2 emissions for observed warming......two dozen out of almost 14,000....that equates to 0.17% of the peer reviewed articles....

why don't they simply produce scientific data?