From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri May 16 2003 - 20:54:18 MDT
--- Harvey Newstrom <mail@HarveyNewstrom.com> wrote:
> Spudboy100@aol.com wrote,
> > Harvery Newstrom:
> > <<Despite this politically-biased and unscientific rant, the very
> site
> > referenced in the article confirms that the number of tornadoes is
> > dramatically increasing. Their trend graph shows this:
> > <http://www.spc.noaa.gov/archive/tornadoes/t50-98.gif> >>
>
> > So you think that none of this "trend" is as a result of advanced
> > Doppler radar tornados actually detecting storms that could never
> > be viewed by conventional radar? Must be all that anthropogenic
> > global warming.
>
> Are you aware that tornados are defined as funnel clouds that
> actually reach
> the ground? Doppler Radar helps us detect cloud rotation for advance
> warning, but they do not help us determine whether a touchdown has
> actually
> occurred. This is done by a site visit to ascertain the damage on
> the
> ground. (Don't you watch the Weather Channel?)
>
> So, no, it is not explainable by Doppler radar. If it were, I would
> expect
> the graph to be relatively flat with steps at the point that radar
> and later
> Doppler radar were deployed. This is not reflected in the historical
> data,
> which instead shows a definite incline before and after Doppler
> radar.
The vast majority of twisters are F1 tornados, the very weakest form.
These are generally only detectable, outside of direct observation, via
doppler radar.
Spud's assertions are completely supported if you consider that since
most twisters touch down in areas unobserved by people, and most of
these are F1 tornados, then if they have not been previously detected
by doppler radar they most likely would never be confirmed as twisters
by touchdown confirmation of damage after the fact, AND if not detected
and not observed, the ground damage would be explained later as only
gale force wind damage.
For example, we had an F1 touch down here in NH several years ago. The
radar said it was an F1. No locals reported seeing a funnel cloud, but
eventually a touchdown swath was found in the woods only a few hundred
yards from a local road, and even then detractors claimed that the
damage pattern was not typical of a twister, that it was just a gale
microburst. If it were not for the doppler radar, it would never have
been recorded as an F1.
Your complaint about there being no spike in twister detections by
doppler radar is explained by the fact that the radar was not installed
instantly everywhere. It instead had a lengthy period of introduction
and installation in many different areas until it reached total
coverage. As a result, this creates a gradual increase in 'reported
twisters' simply because the coverage area increased gradually and not
rapidly or instantly.
=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
- Gen. John Stark
Blog: Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.blogspot.com/
Flight sims: http://www.x-plane.org/greendragon
Pro-tech freedom discussion:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/exi-freedom
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 16 2003 - 21:06:20 MDT
