I can recognize that radar signature any time I see it. Alta Vista my beloved.
-
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
Severe Weather 2025
- Thread starter KevinH
- Start date
I can recognize that radar signature any time I see it. Alta Vista my beloved.
Interestingly the Holly Lake Road tornado was given EF2, I would've thought the tornadoes from April 4th would've been higher end given the environment. But there are still a few (particularly Clarksville TX and a few of the Arkansas tornadoes) that still have to be rated.
Kds86z
Member
- Messages
- 4,297
- Location
- Greencastle, PA
BiggieInterestingly the Holly Lake Road tornado was given EF2, I would've thought the tornadoes from April 4th would've been higher end given the environment. But there are still a few (particularly Clarksville TX and a few of the Arkansas tornadoes) that still have to be rated.
Kds86z
Member
- Messages
- 4,297
- Location
- Greencastle, PA
Expect/expected an ef3 where that one house was destroyed.Interestingly the Holly Lake Road tornado was given EF2, I would've thought the tornadoes from April 4th would've been higher end given the environment. But there are still a few (particularly Clarksville TX and a few of the Arkansas tornadoes) that still have to be rated.
CheeselandSkies
Member
- Messages
- 3,840
- Location
- Madison, WI
On Friday afternoon especially the OWS activity over Arkansas was really stunted compared to many of the HRRR runs which were fairly bullish on it, a bit like a less extreme version of the model's meme-worthy output on the morning of 5/20/19. Tornado production was limited to the cells right along the front, which remained discrete-ish, but somewhat messy which limited tornado intensity/longevity.
KevinH
Member
- Messages
- 2,511
- Location
- West Central GA
Bruh… you gotta include the run/valid date and times of when you post graphics. We have no idea when this is supposed to be for LOL
Sky_I565
Member
Grabbed this off X from Eric's post. Thought it was interesting.
Eric Webb
@webberweather
I came up w/ list of subseasonal to seasonal (S2S) analogs for this year's tornado season in late April into early May & this is what the 1°x1° tornado track density composite grid looks like over the CONUS using @NWSSPCs database that goes back to 1950. Note like my plot from earlier this year, I use a 30-year sliding base period anomaly here relative to April 20 - May 5th in the year to account for long-term non-stationary behavior in tornado data (due to better detection & increased spotting in recent years).These analogs hint at a fairly classic late April into early May this year with potential for above average tornado activity over climatologically favored areas of the Great Plains, including in/around Oklahoma.The mean anomaly is plotted on the left & the mean of the analogs is on the right.
Eric Webb
@webberweather
I came up w/ list of subseasonal to seasonal (S2S) analogs for this year's tornado season in late April into early May & this is what the 1°x1° tornado track density composite grid looks like over the CONUS using @NWSSPCs database that goes back to 1950. Note like my plot from earlier this year, I use a 30-year sliding base period anomaly here relative to April 20 - May 5th in the year to account for long-term non-stationary behavior in tornado data (due to better detection & increased spotting in recent years).These analogs hint at a fairly classic late April into early May this year with potential for above average tornado activity over climatologically favored areas of the Great Plains, including in/around Oklahoma.The mean anomaly is plotted on the left & the mean of the analogs is on the right.
Kds86z
Member
- Messages
- 4,297
- Location
- Greencastle, PA
Thanks but i thought last year was the year for active plains and such?
Cyclonic Paracosm
Member
- Messages
- 474
- Location
- Zanesville, Ohio
One more reason why I love Supercell Wx, just p much Guru'd my app and it looks fire, can't wait to use this.
- Messages
- 875
- Location
- Iowa
Fascinating video about a new study that asserts tornadoes are electromagnetic phenomena.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 875
- Location
- Iowa
Some other claims from the study (my notes):
-The green hue supercells have is the result of positively charged air stripping electrons from negatively charged precipitation
-The reason tornadoes look so different from suction vortexes created in labs is because tornado energy comes from, and is strongest at the ground, where friction creates the most positive charge. There's no electric damage because the rapid collision of negatively charged ions from the air, and positively charged ions just above the ground, neutralizes the charge. The neutral ions flow up and increase thermal potential (see below) creating extreme low pressure.
- tornadoes have charges ranging from 100-250 amperes
- A tornado's low pressure core is the conduit in which the electrical current flows.
- The lowest pressure, tightest radius, and fastest winds occur at the ground, where friction is greatest.
- Frictional heating increases buoyancy of the air, but the negative charge in the ground holds it in place until the negative charge of the vortex neutralizes it and allows it to explode upward.
- The reduced pressure in the vortex, due to the centrifugal force from rotation, decreases the air's electrical resistance, facilitating a consolidated flow of electrons. This increase in electrical current density enables the neutralization of increasing amounts of positively charged air
- The rear flank downdraft comes from negatively charged humid air being repulsed by a pool of positively charged Ions in the storm's anvil (see below).
- When there is warm air aloft in the jet stream, it can actually be electromagnetically forced to the ground, which aids in turbulent flow and creation of another electric field that fuels the tornado.
Last edited:
US_Highway15
Member
- Messages
- 635
- Location
- Michiana (IWX)
Mike Morgan just posted to Twitter saying we're about to get Moore 1999 all over again after looking at this. (sarcasm)
Last edited:
AJS
Member
- Messages
- 2,368
- Location
- Houston Texas.
I mean seriously. What the f**k. He is a grown man on twitter saying this stuff. Unbelievably immature behavior right there.
- Messages
- 630
- Location
- Columbus, OH
I’m highly skeptical of this idea, despite the plethora of sources being shown. After reading some bits and pieces of the abstracts and references here, I’m seeing some numbers that are just absurd.
Small nitpick with your post: Amperes is the measure of current, not charge. But to someone who doesn’t have a background in physics, it’s understandable to get a lot of this mixed up.
This paper that I cannot fully access due to being behind what I believe to be a paywall has an abstract that states that tornadoes are responsible for about 135,000 coulombs of charge transfer. If you know anything about EM, this number seems unbelievably ludicrous, and to me seems inconsistent with the idea that there’s a current of ~225 amps running through a tornado. Now unfortunately, I cannot see the rest of the paper, so there’s no way I can safely assume they reached these numbers in an irrational or rational way, but I’m disliking this already, to say the least.
This number is ridiculous though. For example, if you somehow managed to freeze time and teleport 1 C of pure charge just sitting out in the open, it’s about on the order of 10^19 electrons sitting in a single spot undisturbed. If you then turned time on, that 1 C would seek to neutralize itself with over 5 billion joules of energy. That’s a bigger explosion than one ton of TNT.
This paper shows mathematics and a strong foundation for how to get a very rough idea of what the magnetic field in a tornado would potentially look like. There’s a huge issue though: In the conclusions section, it states that the calculated magnetic field would be on the order of ~0.2-2 T (Tesla). This is a very strong magnetic field. It’s comparable to MRI machines. If this occurred I feel like anyone going through a tornado, even in a basement, with anything metal on them whatsoever would become minced meat in a far more gruesome way than even an EF5 could do. But forget that: why have we never heard of ferromagnetic objects being attracted to the center of a tornadic vortex? This to me is the ultimate reason why I can’t see this being a possibility. I could be wrong, but there’s a lot here that just doesn’t seem to add up.
Seeing as there’s a plethora of resources to read here about the subject, I don’t want to call crock on it. In fact, there’s probably some legitimacy to it that I’m not seeing, not yet at least. I need to dig deeper. The reason why I’m so invested in this is because I do have a background in physics and this idea just screams crackpot to me despite there being actual papers on it. It just sounds like the electric universe people who believe gravity doesn’t exist when they try and fail to apply electrodynamics to every single situation, on the surface at least.
Small nitpick with your post: Amperes is the measure of current, not charge. But to someone who doesn’t have a background in physics, it’s understandable to get a lot of this mixed up.
This paper that I cannot fully access due to being behind what I believe to be a paywall has an abstract that states that tornadoes are responsible for about 135,000 coulombs of charge transfer. If you know anything about EM, this number seems unbelievably ludicrous, and to me seems inconsistent with the idea that there’s a current of ~225 amps running through a tornado. Now unfortunately, I cannot see the rest of the paper, so there’s no way I can safely assume they reached these numbers in an irrational or rational way, but I’m disliking this already, to say the least.
This number is ridiculous though. For example, if you somehow managed to freeze time and teleport 1 C of pure charge just sitting out in the open, it’s about on the order of 10^19 electrons sitting in a single spot undisturbed. If you then turned time on, that 1 C would seek to neutralize itself with over 5 billion joules of energy. That’s a bigger explosion than one ton of TNT.
This paper shows mathematics and a strong foundation for how to get a very rough idea of what the magnetic field in a tornado would potentially look like. There’s a huge issue though: In the conclusions section, it states that the calculated magnetic field would be on the order of ~0.2-2 T (Tesla). This is a very strong magnetic field. It’s comparable to MRI machines. If this occurred I feel like anyone going through a tornado, even in a basement, with anything metal on them whatsoever would become minced meat in a far more gruesome way than even an EF5 could do. But forget that: why have we never heard of ferromagnetic objects being attracted to the center of a tornadic vortex? This to me is the ultimate reason why I can’t see this being a possibility. I could be wrong, but there’s a lot here that just doesn’t seem to add up.
Seeing as there’s a plethora of resources to read here about the subject, I don’t want to call crock on it. In fact, there’s probably some legitimacy to it that I’m not seeing, not yet at least. I need to dig deeper. The reason why I’m so invested in this is because I do have a background in physics and this idea just screams crackpot to me despite there being actual papers on it. It just sounds like the electric universe people who believe gravity doesn’t exist when they try and fail to apply electrodynamics to every single situation, on the surface at least.
Last edited:
US_Highway15
Member
- Messages
- 635
- Location
- Michiana (IWX)
Jason Mills
Member
225 amps is insane. From a different perspective, that is enough current to power 450 60 W light bulbs (assuming 120 V and the basic relationship P=IV)
It could be described as 'interesting' though I'd tend towards 'outlandish' (or similar less kind terms). I actually have a few of the papers the guy cites and they could be described in a similar manner (I used 'far-fetched' for one of them previously).
I’d love to see your take on this thread linked below, where our biggest dumpster fire poster is asking about tornado’s electrical phenomena ripping open a hole in the space/time continuum:
Mysterious electrical phenomena during tornadoes
I have to agree. I've only heard good/positive things about Adam Lucio in the past. However, I'm an extremely skeptical person by nature. This type of phenomena ostensibly being captured on video is something I'm going to have to see with my own two eyes before rendering an opinion. For a...
talkweather.com
Just a gem from that thread:
As I suggested above, I think that tornadoes, among other severe-weather phenomena, could interact with localised topographic and even electromagnetic anomalies to yield gravitational fluctuations that “bend” the visible spectra and allow observers temporary access to otherwise-invisible realms, albeit on a small scale. If one believes in the existence of other dimensions, then maybe witnesses are even being granted rare access to “invisible” worlds
- Messages
- 630
- Location
- Columbus, OH
Wow. After reading through some of it, what an unbelievably ridiculous leap in logic. Sure, it could be something other than a car (which no one even came close to proving that it was not, beyond a reasonable doubt within the thread) and it could be some electrodynamic phenomena that we do not fully understand yet, but I feel like if it was we would absolutely see more examples of this in violent tornadoes, especially at night. To me, this is a car, and it is until proven otherwise.I’d love to see your take on this thread linked below, where our biggest dumpster fire poster is asking about tornado’s electrical phenomena ripping open a hole in the space/time continuum:
Mysterious electrical phenomena during tornadoes
I have to agree. I've only heard good/positive things about Adam Lucio in the past. However, I'm an extremely skeptical person by nature. This type of phenomena ostensibly being captured on video is something I'm going to have to see with my own two eyes before rendering an opinion. For a...
Just a gem from that thread:
As I suggested above, I think that tornadoes, among other severe-weather phenomena, could interact with localised topographic and even electromagnetic anomalies to yield gravitational fluctuations that “bend” the visible spectra and allow observers temporary access to otherwise-invisible realms, albeit on a small scale. If one believes in the existence of other dimensions, then maybe witnesses are even being granted rare access to “invisible” worlds
But then this guy goes on a tirade about it being a wormhole??? Where in the unholy f*** did that come from? There's no where NEAR enough energy involved in ANY tornado to even come close to generating something as extreme as that. We don't even know if wormholes are possible to exist in the first place, and IIRC if they did exist, they would imply the existence of negative mass (unobserved and very unlikely to exist, based on our current understanding of physics) and/or negative energy density in a given region (slightly more plausible, but I have my doubts) in order to keep something like that open in the first place.
A LITANY of questions can be asked here that already debunk this completely absurd, leap-in-logic idiocy. Why is it circulating around a tornado? Why is it generating light in the visible spectrum? What mechanism opened it up? How in the ever-living F*** did a so-called electromagnetic phenomenon generate enough curvature in the fabric of spacetime, which typically requires black holes (something so far beyond a tornado, or Earth, or even the Sun, that it's not even funny) to generate singularities to even come close to describing what he's talking about? If this were the case, then a violent tornado is capable of producing a singularity in the fabric of spacetime. No, absolutely not, and to even breathe the idea into existence is absolute stupidity to the highest degree. I feel like it takes a lot for me to say things like this.
I shouldn't even be wasting my breath here. This has to be a troll. No way around it. The guy is clearly nuts if he isn't one.
EDIT: If anyone wants to discuss things like this with me, take it to DMs. I don't want to clog this thread with unrelated content. I apologize for the complete loss of control here, but I get really heated at blatant BS like this!
Last edited:
54th tornado confirmed yesterday for the year in MS. Last year, we didn't reach 54 until the 12/28 outbreak. In Alabama, up to 41 tornadoes. In 2024, they had the 41st tornado on June 5.