It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Lichter daraus
That is most definitely not a micro burst. They do much more damage than that. I have been through many and the damage can be very extensive in a rural or city area. I have seen one blow in the side of a brick department store.
[edit on 07/16/2009 by Lichter daraus]
Originally posted by Lichter daraus
That is most definitely not a micro burst. They do much more damage than that. I have been through many and the damage can be very extensive in a rural or city area. I have seen one blow in the side of a brick department store.
[edit on 07/16/2009 by Lichter daraus]
Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Originally posted by Lichter daraus
That is most definitely not a micro burst. They do much more damage than that. I have been through many and the damage can be very extensive in a rural or city area. I have seen one blow in the side of a brick department store.
[edit on 07/16/2009 by Lichter daraus]
They can also do a lot less damage
The last microburst I saw was actually a dry microburst which was so ferocious it whipped up a dust storm on the gust front of a towering cumulus. They can do some damage, but they often dont do that much if any
Originally posted by Mr Mask
Originally posted by Lichter daraus
That is most definitely not a micro burst. They do much more damage than that. I have been through many and the damage can be very extensive in a rural or city area. I have seen one blow in the side of a brick department store.
[edit on 07/16/2009 by Lichter daraus]
We had a microburst blow through my town in CT a few years back. It most definitely does not "have" to do "more damage then this".
The one we "lived happily through" just fell a few trees and powerlines and lasted for about 15 minutes (if that).
I am sure there are more severe microbursts happening out there, but plainly stating "this was not a microburst" because "you seen them do worse" is a sure way to bumble into disinfo.
Just do not like people spreading bad facts about normal weather. It always leads to someone seeing a UFO in a cloud, or the face of the devil in the sky.
Peace with you.
Originally posted by Lichter daraus
Ok, i have never heard of a dry micro burst, I have only seen ones with really bad storms along with straightline winds and tornados.
Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Originally posted by Lichter daraus
Ok, i have never heard of a dry micro burst, I have only seen ones with really bad storms along with straightline winds and tornados.
Yeah dry microbursts occur usually with towering cumulus clouds (cumulus clouds which havent quite reached the point of rain or converted to cumulonimbus clouds), and they are quiote hard to see unless you are in a dry dusty area, like here in the Aussie desert, lol.
I think wet microbursts are much more spectacular though
Originally posted by MissMegs
On spaceweather for Sat, they say that were Halloween storms:
spaceweather.com...
On Oct. 30th, the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) near Earth tilted south, an orientation that weakens our planet's magnetic defenses against solar wind. Indeed, solar wind poured into Earth's magnetosphere and sparked an early Halloween display over Alaska.
I'm curious if this had any effect.
Originally posted by Mr Mask
Well...just so you know "making sweeping factual statements" based on your "limited experiences" surly IS spreading disinfo.
Lucky for those who are interested enough, they can read here how wrong your "eye witness expertise" is.
No harm no foul...but you may wish to pay attention to what you post as fact or not. After all, it is your credibility on the line. You may want to take better care of it while staying here.
Peace with you.
[edit on 10-11-2009 by Mr Mask]
Originally posted by Mr Mask
reply to post by Lichter daraus
Look man, if you are just not getting what I am laying down...that is fine. But I really suggest you try harder to get this idea through your head.
You plainly said "this definitely was NOT a microburst" because you have been in "many". and they "do way more damage then this". That was a "factual statement" and it was absolutely wrong. It was so wrong that someone beat me to telling you how wrong you are.
As for this whole "how was I supposed to know about dry bursts", point being "research your answer" before you make a factual statement that could wrongly bring someone down the wrong path...or...just do not make factual statements.
You could have easily used the terminology of "I think" or "in my opinion". But no...you used "surly not" and "this is not".
Now...lets add that the microburst I was in was a "wet microburst"...tons of rain. It did no real damage...two trees went down for the entire town. Now...saying "how was I supposed to know about dry bursts" is irrelevant to the point I am making.
The point is this...you are no expert on microburts (as much as I am not), so unless you do not care about having "zero credibility" in future subjects you may post within...you may want to be a bit more meticulous in your information sharing.
Why?
Because "denying ignorance" should not only be a catch phrase, but also everyone's job on this entire site. Disinfo is a cancer and leads fools down hallways of foolishness.
Make sense? Or are you still going to act as if "making false statements claimed as fact" is ok as long as "you didn't know what you were talking about"?
Sorry man...but it is a serious pet peeve with me. I do not enjoy people making factual statements that are seriously bankrupt on facts.
[edit on 10-11-2009 by Mr Mask]
Originally posted by Mr Mask
reply to post by Lichter daraus
Wait...you were offended? Why? Was I not gentle or something? Is there a "soothing" way to point out a grave error on behalf of ignorance?
*sigh*
I don't get it...ok carry on. I think you got the point and I don't want to derail this thread any further