ThePhotoGuy Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Does it exist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Nope! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlizzardNole Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Just a layperson here -- doesn't "heat lightning" refer to when you see the flash in the distance at night, but the cell is far enough away that you don't hear thunder and can't even see the clouds (maybe they are below the horizon but you can see the flash)? I have relatives from the south that use that term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Just a layperson here -- doesn't "heat lightning" refer to when you see the flash in the distance at night, but the cell is far enough away that you don't hear thunder and can't even see the clouds (maybe they are below the horizon but you can see the flash)? I have relatives from the south that use that term. That is what the general public, who don't know any better, says. Heat Lightning does not actually exist. It's just lightning that is too far away that you don't hear the thunder associated with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellinwood Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 No. End of discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmlwx Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Just a layperson here -- doesn't "heat lightning" refer to when you see the flash in the distance at night, but the cell is far enough away that you don't hear thunder and can't even see the clouds (maybe they are below the horizon but you can see the flash)? I have relatives from the south that use that term. Yes but what BB is trying to argue is that it's a legit term. It's simply a lay person term that has no valid reasoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2O Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattie g Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 That is what the general public, who don't know any better, says. Heat Lightning does not actually exist. It's just lightning that is too far away that you don't hear the thunder associated with it. If you want to argue that it's a misnomer, then that's fine, but there's no saying that "it doesn't exist," because to do so is to argue that lightning cannot occur at such a distance as to be seen but not be heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmlwx Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 If you want to argue that it's a misnomer, then that's fine, but there's no saying that "it doesn't exist," because to do so is to argue that lightning cannot occur at such a distance as to be seen but not be heard. Think about how the term originated though...people thought that lightning was simply being caused by heat or something like and there was no thunder associated with it. Science has proven this wrong and therefore the term is wrong. Nobody is arguing that lightning can't be so far away that you don't hear thunder. That is not the argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2O Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 If you want to argue that it's a misnomer, then that's fine, but there's no saying that "it doesn't exist," because to do so is to argue that lightning cannot occur at such a distance as to be seen but not be heard. But it is wrong. It is just lightning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 If you want to argue that it's a misnomer, then that's fine, but there's no saying that "it doesn't exist," because to do so is to argue that lightning cannot occur at such a distance as to be seen but not be heard. Heat. Lightning. = Does. Not. Exists Lightning = Exists Lightning. At. A. Distance. = Exists Got it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 why are you guys still arguing about this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxUSAF Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 The problem is that it's a complete misnomer. The "heat" has absolutely nothing to do with the lightning. I believe (although I don't have proof), that the term originated in the South (like BlizzardNole suggested) when on hot summer days you get popup thunderstorms all over the place. If the storm is far enough away, you just see flashes in the distance. People erroneously associated that lightning with the heat itself. Any term that confuses the lay public should be discouraged from use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmlwx Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Cold Lightning: Does it Exist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellinwood Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Cold Lightning: Does it Exist? I hear the stratosphere's pretty cold this time of the year: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 bethesdawx saw some sprites last night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattie g Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Think about how the term originated though...people thought that lightning was simply being caused by heat or something like and there was no thunder associated with it. Science has proven this wrong and therefore the term is wrong. Nobody is arguing that lightning can't be so far away that you don't hear thunder. That is not the argument. I understand how it got the name, and realize that the reasoning behind the name is incorrect. However, I was arguing against the idea that "it doesn't exist" because it certainly does exist. It's lightning that occursat such a distance as to be seen but not heard. But it is wrong. It is just lightning The name was created out of a misunderstanding of the reasons behind flashes in the distance without any sound on a hot summer day. If most people here don't like the term, then that's fine, but it's widely used to refer to an actual meteorlogical phenomenon. Why such a visceral reaction? Does it really matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellinwood Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 I understand how it got the name, and realize that the reasoning behind the name is incorrect. However, I was arguing against the idea that "it doesn't exist" because it certainly does exist. It's lightning that occursat such a distance as to be seen but not heard. The name was created out of a misunderstanding of the reasons behind flashes in the distance without any sound on a hot summer day. If most people here don't like the term, then that's fine, but it's widely used to refer to an actual meteorlogical phenomenon. Why such a visceral reaction? Does it really matter? Let's flip the argument... why SHOULD it be used? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 I understand how it got the name, and realize that the reasoning behind the name is incorrect. However, I was arguing against the idea that "it doesn't exist" because it certainly does exist. It's lightning that occursat such a distance as to be seen but not heard. The name was created out of a misunderstanding of the reasons behind flashes in the distance without any sound on a hot summer day. If most people here don't like the term, then that's fine, but it's widely used to refer to an actual meteorlogical phenomenon. Why such a visceral reaction? Does it really matter? 1. ITS JUST LIGHTNING! IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT ITS AT A DISTANCE WHERE THUNDER IS NOT HEARD. HEAT IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH IT, ITS JUST LIGHTNING! 2. IT IS NOT AN ACTUAL METEROLOGICAL PHENOMENON! ITS JUST LIGHTNING. HEAT IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH IT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattie g Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Heat. Lightning. = Does. Not. Exists Lightning = Exists Lightning. At. A. Distance. = Exists Got it? If. You. Use. The. Term. To. Describe. Lightning. That. Makes. No. Sound. Then. You're. Just. Using. An. Incorrect. Term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattie g Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 1. ITS JUST LIGHTNING! IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT ITS AT A DISTANCE WHERE THUNDER IS NOT HEARD. HEAT IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH IT, ITS JUST LIGHTNING! 2. IT IS NOT AN ACTUAL METEROLOGICAL PHENOMENON! ITS JUST LIGHTNING. HEAT IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH IT. Why are you getting so upset about this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattie g Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 The problem is that it's a complete misnomer. The "heat" has absolutely nothing to do with the lightning. I believe (although I don't have proof), that the term originated in the South (like BlizzardNole suggested) when on hot summer days you get popup thunderstorms all over the place. If the storm is far enough away, you just see flashes in the distance. People erroneously associated that lightning with the heat itself. Any term that confuses the lay public should be discouraged from use. Thanks for the rational discussion. I completely agree that the general public should be discouraged from using the term. In fact, I try to educate friends that use it to describe lightning in the distance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattie g Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 why are you guys still arguing about this? Because it's fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2O Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Thanks for the rational discussion. I completely agree that the general public should be discouraged from using the term. In fact, I try to educate friends that use it to describe lightning in the distance. Then you have completely contradicted yourself by saying we shouldnt point out that BB is incorrect for using the term. Why defend its usage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nj2va Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Considering I'm reading about heat lightning on a NOAA page, I'd say it exists. Misnomer or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 If. You. Use. The. Term. To. Describe. Lightning. That. Makes. No. Sound. Then. You're. Just. Using. An. Incorrect. Term. OR. The lightning did in fact MAKE SOUND but its just TOO FAR AWAY for YOU to HEAR it. Why are you getting so upset about this? Not upset, just hoping by typing in ALL CAPS, you will understand it. Apparently not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattie g Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Then you have completely contradicted yourself by saying we shouldnt point out that BB is incorrect for using the term. Why defend its usage? I don't think I'm contradicting myself. I'm saying that the general public should be educated on what they think of as "heat lightning" doesn't actually exist. However, I think that BB knows that, and was simply using the term as a description in place of "distant lightning" or something similar. I suppose I'm just looking at it differently and perhaps from a less critical eye. The one big problem I have is that no one said "Hey, BB, you realize that the term 'heat lightning' is really a misnomer and, as someone who fancies himself a student of weather, you should probably cease and desist from using the term altogether." Instead, he got crapped on. At that point I figured I'd wade in and earn myself a little piss on my head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmlwx Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Considering I'm reading about heat lightning on a NOAA page, I'd say it exists. Misnomer or not. BEcause the public knows it by this name Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 I don't think I'm contradicting myself. I'm saying that the general public should be educated on what they think of as "heat lightning" doesn't actually exist. However, I think that BB knows that, and was simply using the term as a description in place of "distant lightning" or something similar. I suppose I'm just looking at it differently and perhaps from a less critical eye. The one big problem I have is that no one said "Hey, BB, you realize that the term 'heat lightning' is really a misnomer and, as someone who fancies himself a student of weather, you should probably cease and desist from using the term altogether." Instead, he got crapped on. At that point I figured I'd wade in and earn myself a little piss on my head. The problem with BB is he think he knows all, as he has said many times that he is quite knowledgable. So if he knows all, then he shouldn't use the term. Also, this isn't the first time he has used it and been told that it is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scuddz Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 It's Lightning. Lock the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.