Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,610
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

The "Double Trouble" Banter Thread


Windspeed
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, notlikethis said:

The outflow channel from Bavi across the ITCZ back to the Gulf is particularly impressive for this time of year!

NLT.....thanks for the confirmation.:grad:

isn't the Outflow Channel on Direct TV?????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this aged well LMAO

 

6 hours ago, vortex95 said:

The asymmetries in the CDO suggest still some dry air is getting ingested in the W quad.  You can see small areas of bursting very cold IR cloud tops just W of the center and a partial erosion of the colder cold tops on the W side of the hurricane.  The CDO as a whole is having trouble organizing into a smooth circular pattern with uniform cold cloud tops. Outflow is being persistently restricted in the W quad and doesn't seem to have linked up with the trough over ern TX to provide a large anticyclonic poleward outflow channel that is often key to RI (Harvey and Michael did have strong poleward outflow channels). So even though conditions have improved the last 12 hours, they are not ideal.  The patch of dry air in the wrn GOMEX persists.  The shear, which did relax during the day Tuesday, was initialized at 3 kt at 00z by the SHIPS output.  06z it has 13 kt and it stays close to this value until landfall.  The window of opportunity for RI may be closing.
http://hurricanes.ral.ucar.edu/realtime/plots/northatlantic/2020/al132020/stext/20082600AL1320_ships.txt
 

goes16_ir_13L_202008260347.gif

g16wvmid.jpg

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Audrey in 1957 does seem to be a pretty good match. Its landfall was right around where Laura's is forecast: Sabine River/Cameron LA area. According to Wiki, Audrey had a 12 foot storm surge that went 25 miles inland. Strong cat 3. (I think it was downgraded from a 4 during reanalysis years after it occurred.) Devastating loss of life with it. Cameron was destroyed by Audrey, and then by Rita and Ike in the 2000s. I don't think too many people live there anymore. As Moore OK is to tornadoes, Cameron seems to be to hurricanes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, mappy said:

It -- hurricanes are things not people, not he or she. 

And how exactly does saying "he" or "she" infer that its a human being again..? People have been referring to storms as "he" or "she" as long as theyve been named, not sure how or why anyone would get bent out of shape over something so trivial and irrelevant. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 4
  • Weenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Hc7 said:

And how exactly does saying "he" or "she" infer that its a human being again..? People have been referring to storms as "he" or "she" as long as theyve been named, not sure how or why anyone would get bent out of shape over something so trivial and irrelevant. 

moved this to banter

storms are not people, friend. they are storms. not mothers, fathers, daughters, sisters, brothers. not he, or she. just storms. things. 

this is a weather forum, where we talk science and its a good idea to refer to weather phenomenon correctly. sorry to upset you. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, mappy said:

moved this to banter

storms are not people, friend. they are storms. not mothers, fathers, daughters, sisters, brothers. not he, or she. just storms. things. 

this is a weather forum, where we talk science and its a good idea to refer to weather phenomenon correctly. sorry to upset you. 

 

Oh good lord. Now hurricanes are gender neutral. Hurricane Pat. There, feel better, Mappy?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Hc7 said:

the rate shes deepening at is concerning to say the least given the smaller size of her eye and the large size of the system itself. Is the shear shell encounter right before landfall even going to be able to have much actual impact on what shes capable of if shes a large, mid-high end cat 4 by that time?

Wouldn’t be shocked if this guy has a really extensive collection of blowup dolls and skinsuits

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mappy said:

moved this to banter

storms are not people, friend. they are storms. not mothers, fathers, daughters, sisters, brothers. not he, or she. just storms. things. 

this is a weather forum, where we talk science and its a good idea to refer to weather phenomenon correctly. sorry to upset you. 

So..did you just have a very abrupt change of heart about people using pronouns to refer to storms in place of their official names or something..? Should I go through the thread and show you when regular long term users, even certified meteorologists referred to the storm as either "her" or "she" and for some reason those posts just went unnoticed and unbothered by the pronoun police? Do I need a certain amount of posts, or a meteorology degree in order to use the pronouns "her" or "she", because I havent seen any rule stating as much. 

I mean, clearly youre the one whose particularly upset if you thought it was actually necessary and egregious enough to say something, and even move a comment completely relevant to the thread. Im more baffled at something so incredibly trivial bothering you to such an extent, and your own lack of consistency on the matter. 

Weird...I see a "she" used there just a few pages back? I mean shit, at least attempt to have even a semblance of consistency if you want to act offended over absolutely nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hc7 said:

So..did you just have a very abrupt change of heart about people using pronouns to refer to storms in place of their official names or something..? Should I go through the thread and show you when regular long term users, even certified meteorologists referred to the storm as either "her" or "she" and for some reason those posts just went unnoticed and unbothered by the pronoun police? Do I need a certain amount of posts, or a meteorology degree in order to use the pronouns "her" or "she", because I havent seen any rule stating as much. 

I mean, clearly youre the one whose particularly upset if you thought it was actually necessary and egregious enough to say something, and even move a comment completely relevant to the thread. Im more baffled at something so incredibly trivial bothering you to such an extent, and your own lack of consistency on the matter. 

Weird...I see a "she" used there just a few pages back? I mean shit, at least attempt to have even a semblance of consistency if you want to act offended over absolutely nothing.

No, no change of heart. was playing catch up since my last visit and saw your post. could have been anyone, really. please don't take offense to it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...