• Welcome to TalkWeather!
    We see you lurking around TalkWeather! Take the extra step and join us today to view attachments, see less ads and maybe even join the discussion.
    CLICK TO JOIN TALKWEATHER

June 21st 2023 Matador TX Tornado Discussion



Looks like it has been added to the DAT now. To be honest nothing on here seems like a bad survey. The vehicles were included though those cant be assigned a rating. None of the houses shown seemed to have had any connections (at least from what I can see). The tree damage is very impressive, and some offices would assign it EF4 most probably. Overall I don't think this survey is poorly done, at least from what I have seen so far.

Clarification: I think some offices may have rated the home damage 170mph but probably not much higher. And also it’s not like other surveys this year were entires areas of dis are completely missed. And I wonder if there are some DIs they are yet to add, given it’s still preliminary. No doubt an exceptionally violent tornado, but there have certainly been many far far worse surveys, at least in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
To ignore the obvious indicates stupidity is present. It doesn't have to be checked off on a worksheet to have happened.
And there was a lack of effort here. All the 'rolled car' pics I see are big enough to be found if one lo0oks for them, yet they open the survey with telling of cars rolled several hundred yards, and two which couldn't be found. Yeah, you don't see what you don't want to see do you?
 
Sawmaster said:
To ignore the obvious indicates stupidity is present. It doesn't have to be checked off on a worksheet to have happened.
And there was a lack of effort here. All the 'rolled car' pics I see are big enough to be found if one lo0oks for them, yet they open the survey with telling of cars rolled several hundred yards, and two which couldn't be found. Yeah, you don't see what you don't want to see do you?
Click to expand...
It is a bunch of bulls**t!
 
Sawmaster said:
To ignore the obvious indicates stupidity is present. It doesn't have to be checked off on a worksheet to have happened.
And there was a lack of effort here. All the 'rolled car' pics I see are big enough to be found if one lo0oks for them, yet they open the survey with telling of cars rolled several hundred yards, and two which couldn't be found. Yeah, you don't see what you don't want to see do you?
Click to expand...
I wonder if they pay less attention and care less about the cars and scouring since they aren’t able to be used as rating a windspeed, that would be my guess though as you said it does show a lack of effort which isn’t good. Hopefully they change that when it’s all finalised.

I think that an EF4 rating probably is better suited for this tornado, but in context of the limits of the EF scale, I think it could have been much much worse and I think there were many much much worse surveys in the past. Also all of it is still preliminary so I am curious to see if/what anything changes.
 
I remember seeing a photo of an almost completely swept away brick home. I hope they don’t ignore this one, as I haven’t seen it on DAT yet.
 
It’s preliminary still. An upgrade to EF4 doesn’t seem totally out of the question in my mind, and it’s clear to us that this was an EF4/5 tornado.
 
No longer surprised by botched surveys with blatantly ignored contextuals and defaulting to lowest bound for everything; the EF scale has become unusable to compare events with, as the quality of the rating now entirely depedent on which WFO it happened in and what evidence they choose to completely ignore or completely misrepresent

The biggest crime of the EF scale was allowing 165 to be used at all to rate maximum damaged houses as the lowest bound is being abused horrifically
 
I’d preface with this, it is still preliminary. And I was honestly expecting a HE EF3 prelim rating. Conservative approach? There’s substance. But I can almost sense an upgrade is coming at some point. It’s all about protocol. The NWS is a GOVERNMENT agency. Realist ideology doesn’t matter; it’s a system, it’s corporate, and it takes time. I almost guarantee you every player in this survey thinks the same thing as us, but their social status and jobs limit them from speaking their mind, let’s be patient.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
jiharris0220 said:
The wxweenies on Twitter are cringe worthy.
Click to expand...
Did NWS Lubbock do a poor job with the survey if HE EF3 is the final rating? Absolutely. But I do agree that the twitter weenies hounding them with "BEEP U NWS LUBOCK U DONT NOW HOW 2 RAYTE TORNADOUGHS" isn't going to change their minds and make them say "Welp, we got these weather weenies insulting us constantly, better upgrade it to EF5."
 
TH2002 said:
Did NWS Lubbock do a poor job with the survey if HE EF3 is the final rating? Absolutely. But I do agree that the twitter weenies hounding them with "BEEP U NWS LUBOCK U DONT NOW HOW 2 RAYTE TORNADOUGHS" isn't going to change their minds and make them say "Welp, we got these weather weenies insulting us constantly, better upgrade it to EF5."
Click to expand...
I guess it still is preliminary.
 
TH2002 said:
Did NWS Lubbock do a poor job with the survey if HE EF3 is the final rating? Absolutely. But I do agree that the twitter weenies hounding them with "BEEP U NWS LUBOCK U DONT NOW HOW 2 RAYTE TORNADOUGHS" isn't going to change their minds and make them say "Welp, we got these weather weenies insulting us constantly, better upgrade it to EF5."
Click to expand...
Yeah, seriously? If anything the consistent finger-pointing might eventually push away the NWS from being more transparent with the public. They heavily rely on social media to better educate and inform the public. Bad habits from these fools on the social media could ruin the reputation the NWS has on everybody and could cause them to move away from informing as much. It's a real topic that no one seems to want to discuss, but it's becoming more and more important as each month passes.
 
I mean there are going to be less than intelligent people hounding WFOs even for properly done surveys that are rated competently, it kind of comes with the territory as annoying as it is. Would like to see people stop doing that even when the survey is as bad as this one as it really doesn't accomplish anything positive
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top