Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,515
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    amirah5
    Newest Member
    amirah5
    Joined

May 2013 Banter

WilkesboroDude

By WilkesboroDude,
in Southeastern States

Recommended Posts

metalicwx366

metalicwx366

Posted
Posted

Lt. Gov Todd says he hopes heis wrong but when all is said and done this tornado, in terms of injuries, loss of life and damage will exceed the totals of the previous two that have hit Moore.

Well obviously because of more technology industry and whatever else that we have more of than previously. If the 318mph beast hit today in the same spot this preliminary EF4 hit, the 318mph beast would have done way more.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 585
  • Created
  • Last Reply
jburns

jburns

Posted
Posted

Well obviously because of more technology industry and whatever else that we have more of than previously. If the 318mph beast hit today in the same spot this preliminary EF4 hit, the 318mph beast would have done way more.

 

I think the width of this one was a big factor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
metalicwx366

metalicwx366

Posted
Posted

I think the width of this one was a big factor.

Yeah that. That thing was massive. When TWC showed that one picture where they had no words, never seen anything that big live.

Anyhow, this is the dumbest thing I have ever seen. So explain 2011 then.

Henry Margusity Fan Club · 8,208 like this.

5 minutes ago ·

Interesting theory, but lack of tornadoes this year may have lead to more available energy for superpcell storms to tap. May answer why we have seen minimal tornadoes but some very big and destructive ones recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jon

Jon

Posted
Posted

Yeah that. That thing was massive. When TWC showed that one picture where they had no words, never seen anything that big live.

Anyhow, this is the dumbest thing I have ever seen. So explain 2011 then.

Henry Margusity Fan Club · 8,208 like this.

5 minutes ago ·

Interesting theory, but lack of tornadoes this year may have lead to more available energy for superpcell storms to tap. May answer why we have seen minimal tornadoes but some very big and destructive ones recently.

Oh god that sounds like Wilkes and the sky healing theory... That just sounds silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Disc

Disc

Posted
Posted

Yeah that. That thing was massive. When TWC showed that one picture where they had no words, never seen anything that big live.

Anyhow, this is the dumbest thing I have ever seen. So explain 2011 then.

Henry Margusity Fan Club · 8,208 like this.

5 minutes ago ·

Interesting theory, but lack of tornadoes this year may have lead to more available energy for superpcell storms to tap. May answer why we have seen minimal tornadoes but some very big and destructive ones recently.

 

You've got to be kidding me. That's not a theory. That's just totally irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
downeastnc

downeastnc

Posted
Posted

Well obviously because of more technology industry and whatever else that we have more of than previously. If the 318mph beast hit today in the same spot this preliminary EF4 hit, the 318mph beast would have done way more.

 

I dunno there is a upper limit that once you past it it becomes more a function of length of time in the funnel etc......A slab is a slab once you reach that point it doesnt really matter if the winds are 200 or 300 chances are your already dead. Another thing to consider it how long you experience those conditions....would you rather have a small 100 yrd wide 200 mph tornado moving at 50 mph hit your house  or a 120 mph half mile wide tornado that is moving 15-20 mph?

 

One of the reasons todays tornado was so deadly and destructive is it was moving pretty slowly, also engineers can build houses to withstand quite a bit of  wind and I am sure the building codes in Oklahoma are pretty good with that, however its hard to engineer a cost effective house with walls and roofs that will withstand the Chevys and Fords in that wind slamming into the homes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kvegas-wx

kvegas-wx

Posted
Posted

Lol Katrina was a cat 3, but yeah a cat 5.

Point of reference numb nuts.  Don't make me toss specifics at you like Dixie Blizzard.  :angry: And why bother even asking the question if you already know that death and destruction are the two answers?  Do you need a little MORE death and destruction? 

 

Crawl back in your hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WxJordan

WxJordan

Posted
Posted

Yeah that. That thing was massive. When TWC showed that one picture where they had no words, never seen anything that big live.

Anyhow, this is the dumbest thing I have ever seen. So explain 2011 then.

Henry Margusity Fan Club · 8,208 like this.

5 minutes ago ·

Interesting theory, but lack of tornadoes this year may have lead to more available energy for superpcell storms to tap. May answer why we have seen minimal tornadoes but some very big and destructive ones recently.

 

This might be one of the craziest statements I have ever heard... I bet some of the atmospheric science professors at school (UNC-Asheville) are laughing at this one. If this is the case, where would the atmosphere store the energy? The only element that can store energy is oceans and water. It takes time for water to loose the energy due to a higher heat capacity. This makes no sense what-so-ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bevo

Bevo

Posted
Posted

You guys are dumb. ****ing what? 20+ years ago?

 

 

you do have a point for and im not sure why there was hostility towards you. a cat 5 today would be horrible obviously if it hit a populated area.

 

So the population of Miami/Homestead would be drastically different now?  Being 20 years ago is irrelevant to this point.  Besides, the original question posed no time-frame.  The reason for hostility lies in the fact that the questions are often asked with the assumption that we all know WTH he is thinking.  *Of course we should have known that he was only speaking in terms of "from this day forward".  

 

He got an answer, then changed the question.  Bollocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
metalicwx366

metalicwx366

Posted
Posted

Yeah - so dumb. I mean 20 years ago...we were driving Model T Fords and churning our own butter. SO much has changed since Middle/High School. Hell, the NBA has like 4 new teams now.

I don't have a problem with you guys. Just the fact that yall are being smartasses when you know damn well what I meant when I was asking the question.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixieBlizzard

DixieBlizzard

Posted
Posted

you do have a point for and im not sure why there was hostility towards you. a cat 5 today would be horrible obviously if it hit a populated area.

 

Really? No, I am not being a smart azz either. What's the legitimacy of a question that has such an obvious and apparent answer? Hmmmm, what would a Cat 5 storm do if it hit today? Probably the same damn thing it did when it destroyed the Mississippi Gulf coast in 1969 or what it did to Dade County, FL. in 1999. Lives would be lost and property would suffer damage. It plays out the same way just about every single time so yes, the question was downright moronic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buckeyefan1

buckeyefan1

Posted
Posted

Metal.... watch the language :angry: I don't care that you ***'d it out, the meaning is clear. Don't ask dumb questions and you won't get smart azz answers. I understand you are young, but seriously? Google is your friend and it doesn't matter if it were 50 years ago, the damage would be the same. Think before you post  :angry:  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shawn

Shawn

Posted
Posted

Metal.... watch the language :angry: I don't care that you ***'d it out, the meaning is clear. Don't ask dumb questions and you won't get smart azz answers. I understand you are young, but seriously? Google is your friend and it doesn't matter if it were 50 years ago, the damage would be the same. Think before you post   :angry:

 

On a side note, I found this that you and many others from SC may be interested in:

http://www.dnr.sc.gov/climate/sco/ClimateData/SC_Tornado_Climo2012.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...