Evidence for debunking the "veer-back-veer" myth

[jpeters3]

I've posted a link to a recent study by Matt Parker at North Carolina State University:

WAF paper

Feel free to read the abstract or the entire article.  In general, the study debunks several of the "myths" surrounding veer-back-veer.  In particular, the "wrong-orientation of spin" imparted by backing aloft on the updraft has little effect on the efficacy of tornado production.  Certain factors that are known to be detrimental to tornado production sometimes, but do not always, accompany veer-back-veer, and he suggests that forecasters focus on those things.

Yet another reminder that certain popular notions in the forecasting community do not necessarily have rigorous scientific evidence that supports them.

[andyhb]

Based on observations, I tend to think that VBV is more a symptom of an unfavorable synoptic/mesoscale setup that already tends to discourage discrete supercells as opposed to being the cause of a bust. These setups tend to favour updrafts not propagating away from boundaries and for large amounts of updraft seeding to occur. 4/26/2016 is a classic example.

[Amped]

On 12/25/2017 at 9:03 PM, jpeters3 said:

I've posted a link to a recent study by Matt Parker at North Carolina State University:

WAF paper

Feel free to read the abstract or the entire article.  In general, the study debunks several of the "myths" surrounding veer-back-veer.  In particular, the "wrong-orientation of spin" imparted by backing aloft on the updraft has little effect on the efficacy of tornado production.  Certain factors that are known to be detrimental to tornado production sometimes, but do not always, accompany veer-back-veer, and he suggests that forecasters focus on those things.

Yet another reminder that certain popular notions in the forecasting community do not necessarily have rigorous scientific evidence that supports them.

I always wondered how winds that high up could actually effect tornado production. Not surprised if it turns out to be another  "Correlation implies causation" myth.

[rolltide_130]

15 minutes ago, Amped said:

I always wondered how winds that high up could actually effect tornado production. Not surprised if it turns out to be another  "Correlation implies causation" myth.

Weak or messy winds at Anvil level can decrease shear and therefore cause a messier updraft, which could significantly hinder tornado potential. While there are a few cases of this being overcome, it seems to take EXTREME instability to do so, with the most famous example being the Jarrell F-5. 

[Hoosier]

Basically, would it be fair to say that VBV simply increases the odds of "messier" tornadoes more than it reduces actual tornado production?