• 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

Significant Tornado Events

Uh... dude, not trying to pile on you or anything, but I just got done reading the past four or so pages of this nonsense... and your "contributions" aren't coming off as such, they're coming off as low-quality shitposting.

For example, in the EF scale debate thread you posted "Imo, Smithville isnt even Top 5 of all time, a bunch of aspect of Smithville is overexaggerated and overrated" without posting ANY evidence to back that up whatsoever. In this thread, you've mostly been posting short quips that range from "ground scouring is unreliable because cows eat grass" to "this is scouring from an EF3" when the photo showed CROP DAMAGE, not scouring, and then into "i'm 17, stop being mean".

This is a forum where you're expected to provide evidence to back up your claims, and you've done little to none of that. I mean, that comparison of grass scouring to the eating habits of cows... seriously? Come on. Intentional or not, stuff like that just comes off as trolling.

Anyhow, that's my two cents on the BS. Everyone, please take a breather and calm down. Thank you!
Im not bringing up the age thing as a deflection, I brought it up because some people assumed I was some sort of child on his dad's email. Also I have brought up my evidence towards the rochelle homes not being that well built in the earlier pages
 
Because yall began calling me clueless and "knuckle draggers" for no reason other than believing certain contextuals aren't reliable
IMG_2450.jpegOne has to learn more, I too, have before been on mount stupid. Stopping arguments, researching what you are saying, and not yapping for 4 pages are a good way to ascend the slope of enlightenment.
 
View attachment 49322One has to learn more, I too, have before been on mount stupid. Stopping arguments, researching what you are saying, and not yapping for 4 pages are a good way to ascend the slope of enlightenment.
I did do research on the rochelle homes, its just this "4 pages of yapping" was caused by the conversation spiraling down into hostility and insults
 
Grass scouring caused by the Gary, SD EF3 tornado. And for the second part, one of the homes had an abundance of cut nails usages as its anchoring so EF5 is out of the window for that home. The third photo home has the bolts too spaced out. The fourth photo home, not only theres quite a bit of debris left on the foundation, there's also shrubbery left unaffected. Not too mention some of these homes likely had garage failure
Ignoring the Gary portion of the post, he's my opinions on the homes
 
My frustration stems from the fact that I literally just made a multi paragraph post about people who know nothing about lawn grass scouring, and have no mental database of the tornadoes that produced lawn grass scouring, coming in trying to dismiss the significance of lawn grass scouring.

Then someone comes in and does that EXACT THING. Unreal.
 
My frustration stems from the fact that I literally just made a multi paragraph post about people who know nothing about lawn grass scouring, and have no mental database of the tornadoes that produced lawn grass scouring, coming in trying to dismiss the significance of lawn grass scouring.

Then someone comes in and does that EXACT THING. Unreal.
The flint-Beecher tornado of 1953 reportedly scoured rows of houses lawns to bare soil while sweeping them away. I believe it was near the coldwater road area.
 
My frustration stems from the fact that I literally just made a multi paragraph post about people who know nothing about lawn grass scouring, and have no mental database of the tornadoes that produced lawn grass scouring, coming in trying to dismiss the significance of lawn grass scouring.

Then someone comes in and does that EXACT THING. Unreal.
Now that I think of it, I remember someone vaguely said Matador did some grass scouring and how extremely rare for a tornado to do that, so I guess there might be evidence linking grass scouring to extreme intensity since Matador did some extremely violent contextuals
 
Ignoring the Gary portion of the post, he's my opinions on the homes
Oh boy... if this is the extent of your "research", you need to look up what that word really means.

1. You're mistaking straight-nailed wall studs for cut nails used as anchoring. There's a HUGE difference between the two.
2. Admittedly, I can only make out one bolt from the photo, but just looking at that single photo and saying "the bolt spacing is too wide, case closed" doesn't sit well with me. I need more photos of the house or, at the very least, a textual description from a surveyor.
3. The fourth photo... ignoring the fact that the debris isn't actually on the slab, you say "shrubbery left unaffected" when there's exactly one fairly intact shrub... and the rest of the shrubbery is obliterated.

I highly suggest you work on getting a better understanding of tornado damage and intensity before you make posts saying things along the lines of "The homes in Rochelle were EF4/185 max".
 
The flint-Beecher tornado of 1953 reportedly scoured rows of houses lawns to bare soil while sweeping them away. I believe it was near the coldwater road area.
What I’m actually trying to see is he can find an example of severe lawn grass scouring where the home on the property was NOT obliterated. This is because I’m sick and tired of people trying to dismiss lawn scouring, while they fail to see that it literally only occurs within the immediate vicinity of high-end structural damage.

They get so caught up in the idea that soil composition differences could theoretically cause grass scouring to happen at lower intensities, they fail to see that in reality, it doesn’t actually happen at lower intensities. That’s the crux of my point.

That’s why I keep saying “What matters the most is what happens in real life”.
 
Anyways I've been typing here for far too long and its nearing midnight so I don't want to stay here forever. Personally I still don't believe in Rochelle EF5, but if you believe in that, that's completely fine, as mentioned before, people are entitled to their opinions and this whole matter is pretty subjective to anyone.
 
What I’m actually trying to see is he can find an example of severe lawn grass scouring where the home on the property was NOT obliterated. This is because I’m sick and tired of people trying to dismiss lawn scouring, while they fail to see that it literally only occurs within the immediate vicinity of high-end structural damage.

They get so caught up in the idea that soil composition differences could theoretically cause grass scouring to happen at lower intensities, they fail to see that in reality, it doesn’t actually happen at lower intensities. That’s the crux of my point.

That’s why I keep saying “What matters the most is what happens in real life”.
Oh, I was saying that lawn scouring IS associated with extreme structural damage, and unless the tornado was so thin it hit the lawn and not the house, you are not finding otherwise. Also, what are other immediate indicators of a very high end tornado to you? Hey it’s midnight for me too! I can’t sleep though. :(
 
Last edited:
Now that I think of it, I remember someone vaguely said Matador did some grass scouring and how extremely rare for a tornado to do that, so I guess there might be evidence linking grass scouring to extreme intensity since Matador did some extremely violent contextuals
Thank you! We can disagree about Rochelle, but I’ve spent many years looking into grass scouring and I just know how significant it is. I’m very cautious about what kinds of contextual damage l consider to be significant. I’ve thrown out most vehicle mangling as a high-end indicator. I’ve thrown out asphalt scouring as a high-end indicator. I’ve even thrown out ground trenching as a high-end indicator.

But grass scouring is the one thing in my many years of personal research, that I’ve been unable to find any real life evidence that it’s unreliable, except for in one specific part of Oklahoma where the ground is weirdly sensitive to scouring. It’s simply an incredibly reliable indicator, and that’s a hill I’ll die on. I just get very frustrated when people who have limited knowledge on the topic try to dismiss 14 years of note taking and observation.
 
Y'all need to stop arguing about damage and ratings and name-calling each other, unless you want the mods to shut this thread down.
It's too late. The United States Federal Free Speech Police have already been informed of the blowup on this thread and are en route to shut Talkweather's servers down.
 
I'm gonna start posting some stuff on Guin again, as it's been awhile. I recommend this older Wikipedia version of the article on Guin with lots of TornadoTalk's info on it before it was taken down:



Also, damage aerial from Wikipedia:
Guin_Alabama_damage.jpg

I'm gonna post lots more stuff on Guin in the next week or so:
 
I'm gonna start posting some stuff on Guin again, as it's been awhile. I recommend this older Wikipedia version of the article on Guin with lots of TornadoTalk's info on it before it was taken down:



Also, damage aerial from Wikipedia:
View attachment 49323

I'm gonna post lots more stuff on Guin in the next week or so:
I think I know why the tornado talk got taken down. On the weather side of wikipedia, TT was decided by members to be unreliable for tornado articles since alot of TT articles are user generated and often have unsupported claims to them
 
Back
Top