vortex95 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 I am speechless, almost. Every wx event that negatively impacts society now is summarily attributed to climate change, as if such wx events never occurred before, or are not supposed to happen anymore? http://dailycaller.c...-we-are-seeing/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Ugh...have any of these people heard the word "mesoscale" before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 is all that article needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aslkahuna Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 In particular, the most famous of all Dallas tornadoes was the one in April 1957 which resulted in some of the best movie imagery of a tornado at the time. Photogrammetry analysis of that film provided the first indications of the true windspeeds in tornadoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phlwx Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 The issue is more with what Alexandra Steele said on CNN...not just with the article being written...although the article is not that well written to begin with...Steele should know better... smh at all of it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunder Road Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 wasn't Steele the one who suggested that AMS members should be stripped of their membership for not being gung-ho over AGW? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 wasn't Steele the one who suggested that AMS members should be stripped of their membership for not being gung-ho over AGW? I'm not so sure she is even a degreed met, so that's a pretty ballsy statement right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike2010 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 This guy's voice is the best http://dfw.cbslocal....r-neighborhood/ (tornado video) "holy moly...holy moly....please save my house". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 http://www.americanw...xtreme-weather/ http://www.americanw...weather-events/ http://ipcc-wg2.gov/...ocure_FINAL.pdf So what's that supposed to mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Did someone really attribute these tornadoes to climate change?? So a few essentially average tornadoes in Texas in April are now considered unusual? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Did someone really attribute these tornadoes to climate change?? So a few essentially average tornadoes in Texas in April are now considered unusual? LOL, climate changed caused the ULL and leftover boundary draped across DFW metroplex. Such garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phlwx Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 wasn't Steele the one who suggested that AMS members should be stripped of their membership for not being gung-ho over AGW? Heidi Cullen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aslkahuna Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Did someone really attribute these tornadoes to climate change?? So a few essentially average tornadoes in Texas in April are now considered unusual? You hit that nail on the head. There were, what, about 12 tornadoes? I know of no knowledgeable climatologist or meteorologist who would consider that to be any thing but a run of the mill tornadic April day in Texas. From what I've seen of the damage on video they weren't even particularly noteworthy in intensity. I'm aware that that there seems to be evidence tying extreme events to climate change-however, this can in no way be considered an extreme event for April in the Alley. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knitwx Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 In particular, the most famous of all Dallas tornadoes was the one in April 1957 which resulted in some of the best movie imagery of a tornado at the time. Photogrammetry analysis of that film provided the first indications of the true windspeeds in tornadoes. That is the video with the buildings' roof being pulled back. Right? Isn't there also a small snippet of film that is thought to also be from this tornado ,but they can't say for sure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Royse City and Forney had some higher end damage (EF3 or possibly even higher), although it isn't everyday you see two large confirmed tornadoes (however strong) targeting a metropolis of over 5 million people. This appeared to be a run-of-the-mill day, until that OFB decided to pull a fast one. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this is the most the Metroplex has been targeted by a tornado event since the Ft. Worth tornado on March 28th, 2000 (obviously discounting all the other potentially more impressive setups that failed to produce in the Metroplex area since then). But of course attributing this to climate change is a heaping load of BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 You hit that nail on the head. There were, what, about 12 tornadoes? I know of no knowledgeable climatologist or meteorologist who would consider that to be any thing but a run of the mill tornadic April day in Texas. From what I've seen of the damage on video they weren't even particularly noteworthy in intensity. I'm aware that that there seems to be evidence tying extreme events to climate change-however, this can in no way be considered an extreme event for April in the Alley. Steve Yep-- agreed. There is simply nothing in any way remarkable about this event except that it happened near a population center and produced some spectacular video. It just goes to show how clueless the media is when discussing weather events-- they can't distinguish between the meteorological magnitude of an event and its human impact, which are completely separate things. If a dozen EF4s occurred out in the cornfields yesterday, no one except us weather nerds would have given a crap. You get a run-of-the-mill EF3 near a city, and it's climate change zomg!!1! Ugh. P.S. I am no climate-change denier-- I totally believe it's happening, it's a problem, and it's man-made. But comments like this just cheapen and trivialize the discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Yep-- agreed. There is simply nothing in any way remarkable about this event except that it happened near a population center and produced some spectacular video. It just goes to show how clueless the media is when discussing weather events-- they can't distinguish the meteorological magnitude of an event from its human impact, which are completely separate things. If a dozen EF4s occurred out in the cornfields yesterday, no one except us weather nerds would have given a crap. You get a run-of-the-mill EF3 near a city, and it's climate change zomg!!1! Ugh. P.S. I am no climate-change denier-- I totally believe it's happening, it's a problem, and it's man-made. But comments like this just cheapen and trivialize the discussion. That's about how 99% of mets feel. It totally propelled an incorrect assumption. You could also say the SPC thread would not have been started if it hit a wheat field in Kansas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 That's about how 99% of mets feel. It totally propelled an incorrect assumption. You could also say the SPC thread would not have been started if it hit a wheat field in Kansas. Yep. Totally. P.S. It's good to know I'm thinking like a pro met. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Even after flippin 4/27 last year, the CNN coverage was spotty at best... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Question: even if climate change does cause extreme weather events to happen more frequently, isn't that something that would need to be evaluated over a long period of time and not one day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aslkahuna Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 the links I posted provide context for her comments. the scientific community is examining the links between climate change and extreme weather and the new IPCC report is about climate change and risk management of extreme event aftermaths. The question here isn't about whether or not climate change has any link to extreme weather events but whether or not this was an extreme weather event at all which anyone familiar with Texas Tornado climatology would have to conclude that it was not consequently climate change would have nothing to do with the type of a run of the mill Texas event that has been occurring for millenia. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 The question here isn't about whether or not climate change has any link to extreme weather events but whether or not this was an extreme weather event at all which anyone familiar with Texas Tornado climatology would have to conclude that it was not consequently climate change would have nothing to do with the type of a run of the mill Texas event that has been occurring for millenia. Steve Bingo. The bottom line is that a mediocre April tornado outbreak in Texas is climatologically ordinary and therefore an odd stepping-off point for any climate-change discussion. And, again, I am a total climate-change believer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Lizard Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 BTW, do EF-4 tornadoes in Kansas cornfields exist? Looking at prelim surveys from NWS FWD, most of the tornadoes in population areas were rated EF-2, with one EF-3, while the tornadoes over open country were rated EF-0. Maybe the conditions had changed by the time the storms were East of the Metroplex population centers, but if EF ratings are based on damage, and there are no structures, barring something extreme like EF-5 style pavement being ripped from the ground, won't most rural tornadoes be prone to receive lower EF ratings than their wind speeds would otherwise justify? Putting it another way, Dr. Forbes on TWC showed a graphic, in the last decade, 100% of the EF-5 tornadoes have had associated fatalities. Every EF-5 tornado has hit a populated area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 BTW, do EF-4 tornadoes in Kansas cornfields exist? Looking at prelim surveys from NWS FWD, most of the tornadoes in population areas were rated EF-2, with one EF-3, while the tornadoes over open country were rated EF-0. Maybe the conditions had changed by the time the storms were East of the Metroplex population centers, but if EF ratings are based on damage, and there are no structures, barring something extreme like EF-5 style pavement being ripped from the ground, won't most rural tornadoes be prone to receive lower EF ratings than their wind speeds would otherwise justify? Putting it another way, Dr. Forbes on TWC showed a graphic, in the last decade, 100% of the EF-5 tornadoes have had associated fatalities. Every EF-5 tornado has hit a populated area? Yes, the problem with assessing rural tornadoes is well known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 In particular, the most famous of all Dallas tornadoes was the one in April 1957 which resulted in some of the best movie imagery of a tornado at the time. Photogrammetry analysis of that film provided the first indications of the true windspeeds in tornadoes. By the way, everyone-- here is the film that Steve is referring to. The footage is really awesome-- especially from ~0:50 to 1:15, which shows the surface circulation very close up as it was passing through the city just W of Downtown. It's grainy and the camera is a bit shaky, but it's still some of the coolest tornado footage you'll see anywhere: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1uY3evy61k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
somethingfunny Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 There also hasn't been a Category 5 fish hurricane since 1953, for what I'm assuming are similar reasons. Well not exactly similar, the highest TCHP is in landlocked seas like the Caribbean and Gulf. But you'd also think a borderline 135KT hurricane is more likely to get that upgrade if it threatens land. Either way, does anybody think people like Cullen and Steele are actually paid shills for the fossil fuel industry put out there to trivialize and discredit real climate scientists? edit: That is an incredible video! Thank you for posting that. The tornado didn't "quench itself with a drink of water," but for 1957.... that's just stunning. The music makes it complete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
somethingfunny Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 I was reading the blog of a local met there and it appears that it's the 4th largest outbreak in north Texas: http://dfw.cbslocal....in-north-texas/ I think now it's the 4th largest, but if the tornado count (now at 13) goes up to 15 or higher, it will tie (or surpass) the 3rd largest outbreak in the area. also from Ian's new blog: http://www.ustornado...vents/#more-729 there's nothing wrong with examining the links between extreme weather events and climate, especially given the extremes in Texas over the last year. Wasn't the detection rate for EF0/EF1 tornadoes a bit lower in 1994 than it is today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 I dunno... Fourth-largest outbreak in one part of one state doesn't really sounds like a big extreme to me. It sounds like the kind of "extreme" that occurs somewhere in the country every day. I just think when we start tying every climatologically normal event to climate change, the discussion dissolves into useless banter. Again, a cluster of strong-ish tornadoes in N TX in April is about as climatologically average as you can get. L.A.'s high temperature was a few degrees above normal on Saturday. Does that reflect climate change also? Where do we draw the line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 The biggest, strongest, most monstrous tornado to hit the USA-- exceeding every yardstick to this day-- happened in 1925. If it happened now, would folks have big discussions about how it reflects climate change? By far the most intense hurricane to hit the USA happened in 1935. Same question. My point is that these single events are pin pricks in an overall discussion of climate. Not every localized event has relevance to this discussion. If a basket of EF3s in TX in April is now somehow a unique extreme that reflects climate change, then essentially every kind of weather that happens everyday is. Downtown Los Angeles was hit by a strong (F2) tornado in March 1983. The roof of the convention center was torn off, many homes were damaged, and thirty people were injured. Could you imagine the hype if that happened today? The media Armageddon would be off the charts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 it's more complicated than how you are presenting it. I offered some links to some good reads on the subject as we have some good discussion on this larger issue in the climate change forum. if you have research that disprove this ongoing discussion, you're more than welcome to post the links over in CC for discussion. the reality is that the climate change/extreme weather locus is a focus of legitimate research activity in the scientific community, and no one has 100% made the connection; instead the community is working on teasing out the possible linkages. last month I met with one of the IPCC folks who had a role in its latest report (link already provided in this thread) to discuss a book laying out what we do know and starting to tease out possible linkages. the problem here is that Alexandra Steele is the wrong messenger as she's not a serious figure and she overstated the case. Again, the question is not whether climate change is causing-- or will cause-- extremes in weather. I think all of us except for climate-change-denier idiots agree on this. As Steve said, the question is whether the TX event the other day is even an "extreme". He and I feel it is not-- that it was purely ordinary from a climatological perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.