It is "very highly likely" that climate change is related to anthropogenic activity.
*grumbles*
*grumbles*
-
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
jiharris0220
Member
It would really help if the actual research papers for these studies were published, and that an official statement was put out following the process and eventual decision making.
But all of this discussion regarding the systematic process of finding strong evidence of EF5 winds and delivering your results to the higher ups is the root of problem in the first place.
Why do EF5 candidates need all of this processing to be verified? To get a rating of EF4, you simply call in the QRT and it’s done, the same should apply to EF5, like how it used to be before 2014.
The point Im getting at is that we’re technically still in a artificial EF5 drought, if we’re relying on random train lofting or other essentric non conventional DIs having to be well above 205mph to get the rating, then we’ve never actually made any progress.
But all of this discussion regarding the systematic process of finding strong evidence of EF5 winds and delivering your results to the higher ups is the root of problem in the first place.
Why do EF5 candidates need all of this processing to be verified? To get a rating of EF4, you simply call in the QRT and it’s done, the same should apply to EF5, like how it used to be before 2014.
The point Im getting at is that we’re technically still in a artificial EF5 drought, if we’re relying on random train lofting or other essentric non conventional DIs having to be well above 205mph to get the rating, then we’ve never actually made any progress.
Eoline
Member
As I saw on Discord a bit ago:
“A driver is going 100 miles per hour, sees he is going 100 miles per hour and six different speedometers all record him going 100 miles per hour. But then the police let him go because he was allegedly going 50 miles per hour the entire time, according to them.”
That’s how OUN’s thought process is coming off as. All the evidence is there for an upgrade, but they either are facing significant roadblocks or just don’t care enough to try.
“A driver is going 100 miles per hour, sees he is going 100 miles per hour and six different speedometers all record him going 100 miles per hour. But then the police let him go because he was allegedly going 50 miles per hour the entire time, according to them.”
That’s how OUN’s thought process is coming off as. All the evidence is there for an upgrade, but they either are facing significant roadblocks or just don’t care enough to try.
That’s a big issue that I often think about. There should be no stigma or extra hurdles attached to ratings. It should be completely objective. In my opinion, upgrading from EF4 to EF5 should carry no more weight or stigma that upgrading from EF0 to EF1.
jiharris0220
Member
Im gonna make a wild guess and say this whole systematic processing to rating a tornado EF5 started around 2014 (you know what I’m talking about).
It’s ironic because a lot of people like to say “why do you care wether it was an EF5 or not”, it looks like, every high ranking surveyor cares wether it was an EF5 or not otherwise we wouldn’t need an entire hierarchy to confirm it.
At this point, I don’t think anyone in the wether community amateur, enthusiasts, or professional mets/surveyors disagree that this “EF5 Drought” is artificial anymore, but it’s funny to see how many of them can look at the frequency of EF5s go from one per year to once per every 13 years apparently and be ok with it.
Considering that the 180 DI from this tornado was a house that any other WFO would rate 160 or less, anything other than external factors preventing them from upgrading Enid is “very highly UNlikely”. The way they’ve approached this survey from the get-go made it clear that if there was a way to get this rated EF5, they’d do it
WeathermanLeprechaun
Member
Caring about tornado ratings for me is simply due to accuracy in records. It's already been shown that the more we underrate tornadoes, moving the goalposts, it does nothing but damage that accuracy. I dislike the viewpoints people always assume about "nobody cares about the ratings"
There was one Mayfield resident confused at why their house wasn't rated EF5 if I remember correctly. People want to know the rating of tornadoes too, because it feels like they've survived something otherworldly. Imagine how any EF4+ survivor feels, they got hit by something extraordinary and lived to tell the tale.
There was one Mayfield resident confused at why their house wasn't rated EF5 if I remember correctly. People want to know the rating of tornadoes too, because it feels like they've survived something otherworldly. Imagine how any EF4+ survivor feels, they got hit by something extraordinary and lived to tell the tale.