• 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 Threat June 15-23

Im beating a dead horse but it’s such a shame this dude was driven out of here due to some members acting like rapid dogs because someone dared to have a conservative take on tornado ratings.

Based on what I’ve seen, the guy just genuinely tries to be as objective as possible and actually points out mistakes regarding DAT. Just like what @buckeye05 said, such a potential valuable asset to this forum lost.

He’s actually quite reasonable most of the time, and him seemingly jumping to the defense of MEG was uncharacteristic and odd. I kinda got the vibe that he recently learned what “continuous load” means and decided he wanted to use that house as a platform to throw around flashy engineering terminology (albeit in a circumstance where it didn’t really apply), rather than take an objective look at the damage. If it was a CMU foundation that failed below the bolts, or an institutional building with incomplete rebar reinforcement, then we can talk about continuous load issues. But bolt placement barely applies to that topic, if at all. It took a “second pass” for him to look at Lake City objectively and reasonably.

We gotta keep in mind he’s still a young dude who’s still learning, and is probably overcorrecting and over-trusting NWS surveys after coming out of the “everything’s an EF5 candidate!!” phase everyone goes through prior to being more knowledgeable. For perspective, few years ago he was misidentifying bulldozer tread marks as ground scouring and using them as a basis for why Cookeville should have been rated EF5. He’s actually come a long way, and just needs to learn that it’s also not good to play it too conservative.

Anyway back on topic, I do not want to fully derail this thread.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top