That's over a mile wide!!!Well the Covington tornado was 2000 yards wide. The widest tornado of this outbreak.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
That's over a mile wide!!!Well the Covington tornado was 2000 yards wide. The widest tornado of this outbreak.
(Trying to be as constructive as possible...)Most of these tornadoes weren’t long-tracked (PLs of ≥ 25 mi). Of the 38+ significant (EF2+) tornadoes, only five were long-tracked. By contrast, 4 May 2003 featured 25 F2+ events, of which 17 were long-trackers. Most of the high-end outbreaks tend to feature a higher proportion of long-tracked EF2+ tornadoes than occurred in this event. (As an extreme example, 27 Apr 2011 featured 25 EF2+ long-trackers.) Obviously, this past outbreak was still a relatively extreme event, but in terms of intense long-trackers it doesn’t stand out especially. A lot of intense short-trackers, certainly...
He's counted the significant long-trackers for the whole 9 days of the outbreak sequence.(Trying to be as constructive as possible...)
Not sure what map you're looking at but May 4, 2003 had seven long-tracked (going by the same ≥ 25 mi definition) tornadoes, not 17.
Yes, I stand corrected. I meant EF2+ long-trackers for the entire sequence.He's counted the significant long-trackers for the whole 9 days of the outbreak sequence.
I’ll readily admit to this, in part because I am personally tired of AGW-related hysteria (that tries to “prove” that AGW increases the incidence of severe weather, when evidence, in my view, points to the opposite).It’s all part of some kind of narrative being pushed by that particular person that climate change has rendered the big tornado outbreaks of the past essentially extinct.
That’s a bit of an exaggeration. I still said that the outbreak was a “relatively extreme” event, not a nonevent.If it’s not the top 1% of top 1% of outbreaks, it wasn’t really an outbreak per that logic lol
Isn't the best solution just to keep the chatter out of these threads then? I have my own personal views that aren't far off yours, but it's very near the bottom of the things I want to talk about. Being someone who is mainly interested in the physical and historical aspects of tornadoes (though I confess to not understanding the synoptic-scale meteorology much despite looking at it for a decade) seeing these things and the inevitable arguments they cause makes me wince.I’ll readily admit to this, in part because I am personally tired of AGW-related hysteria (that tries to “prove” that AGW increases the incidence of severe weather, when evidence, in my view, points to the opposite).
And yet, you continue, after the people that do this for a living, and professionally I might add, have told you that you are not correct.Yes, I stand corrected. I meant EF2+ long-trackers for the entire sequence.
I’ll readily admit to this, in part because I am personally tired of AGW-related hysteria (that tries to “prove” that AGW increases the incidence of severe weather, when evidence, in my view, points to the opposite).
They have readily admitted to this several times, and stated in their climate-change thread that they will continue to do so regardless.And yet, you continue, after the people that do this for a living, and professionally I might add, have told you that you are not correct.
This performance is all part of some kind of narrative/climate crusade you are on.
You’re right, my apologies for feeding it. The ignore button is there for a reasonThey have readily admitted to this several times, and stated in their climate-change thread that they will continue to do so regardless.
Pro-tip: The less you engage with it, the better.
It happens, don't fret too much over it. In the end, it's for your own sanity's sake as much as anyone else'sYou’re right, my apologies for feeding it. The ignore button is there for a reason
Using May 2003 as a benchmark for what tornado outbreaks "used to be" before climate change allegedly rendered them obsolete isn't fair because you're comparing an entire month to a single day, and 4/2003 was literally the most active month on record before 2011. Events like those were extremely infrequent back then, and they are still extremely infrequent now.Yes, I stand corrected. I meant EF2+ long-trackers for the entire sequence.
I’ll readily admit to this, in part because I am personally tired of AGW-related hysteria (that tries to “prove” that AGW increases the incidence of severe weather, when evidence, in my view, points to the opposite).
In terms of total tor counts Easter 2020 ( or the great dec 15 2021 derecho)How long has it been since we've seen an outbreak this massive?
Easter 2020 I think.How long has it been since we've seen an outbreak this massive?
I haven’t seen much in the way of peer-reviewed literature that suggests this, precisely because it’s difficult to prove a causative link between the deterministic effects of a large-scale process like climate change on a small-scale, highly random event like a tornado. I’d like to see both a causative mechanism for what you’re claiming and evidence that you’ve identified an actual effect at all that can’t be adequately explained by statistical noise. I’d also like to see the sources of the allegedly widespread claim of causative links between severe weather on a local scale and climate change, because I suspect that this claim isn’t actually very common among experts. I’m highly skeptical that you can demonstrate any of those three things.Yes, I stand corrected. I meant EF2+ long-trackers for the entire sequence.
I’ll readily admit to this, in part because I am personally tired of AGW-related hysteria (that tries to “prove” that AGW increases the incidence of severe weather, when evidence, in my view, points to the opposite).
I’d love to know when the threshold is for tornado events that were affected by climate change and those that weren’t, considering that anthropogenic warming has likely been ongoing since the early 1970s and the +1 degree (F) mark was reached in the early 1990s. Is there empirical proof that we had to pass a certain temperature threshold for the effects on tornadoes to be detected? Color me skeptical.Using May 2003 as a benchmark for what tornado outbreaks "used to be" before climate change allegedly rendered them obsolete isn't fair because you're comparing an entire month to a single day, and 4/2003 was literally the most active month on record before 2011. Events like those were extremely infrequent back then, and they are still extremely infrequent now.
Must agree with everyone else. Like that judge who said he couldn’t define pornography but knew it when he saw it: this was an outbreak.Oh would you just stop with this nit-picky nonsense.
I haven’t seen much in the way of peer-reviewed literature that suggests this, precisely because it’s difficult to prove a causative link between the deterministic effects of a large-scale process like climate change on a small-scale, highly random event like a tornado. I’d like to see both a causative mechanism for what you’re claiming and evidence that you’ve identified an actual effect at all that can’t be adequately explained by statistical noise. I’d also like to see the sources of the allegedly widespread claim of causative links between severe weather on a local scale and climate change, because I suspect that this claim isn’t actually very common among experts. I’m highly skeptical that you can demonstrate any of those three things.