How many tornadoes did you get this year so far?

[Mikey Gribble]

I am not wallowing in guilt Shane. I just don't think every little dust whirl should be counted as a tornado. Technically, yes, it was a tornado, but I think it is a little misleading if you don't clarify that it was an incredibly weak one. I think there should be a distinction made between a 200 yard wide F3 that picks up cars and flattens houses and a dust whirl that I could fly a kite in without breaking the string.

Shane said...
"IMO, the people who scrutinize tornado counts are far more concerned with counting than the ones who just count."

LOL, I didn't put a whole lot of thought into what my count on tornadoes was. I think you are reading way too much into a statement that was intended to be sarcastic. If I were concerned about counting and numbers of tornadoes seen, don't you think I would have gone with the highest count and just said 3?

 

[John MacKay]

I haven't seen any tornadoes this year. I've only gone out once to chase (due to college and unfamiliarity with the road network just outside of Manhattan). I may have seen a funnel (definitely a wall cloud), but I was about 15 miles west of the storm and weaving in and out of the Flinthills while looking at the structure in question.

I've only seen three in my life, and they all occurred on June 12th of last year. The first one I couldn't see touch the ground (I was 7-8 miles east of it), but after hearing the confirmation by a storm chaser by radio, a damage assessment by the ICT NWS, and a photo on Jon Davies site, I counted it as a tornado just because of various evidence suggesting it took place. Otherwise, I would have called it two tornadoes and a funnel. I had to make a beeline out of the wedding reception I attended in Wichita.

I was also at a wedding in Conway Springs, KS on May 29th last year. If I wasn't in my dad's car, I would have chased it, but instead, I left quickly for home. It was good experience for June 12th last year, when the same thing happened further east.

 

[Bryce Stone]

2.

 

[nickgrillo]

I myself have gotten burned in the past for counting "weak" tornadoes, or a tornado with a small needle funnel - and a dirt kickup under it. It was a tornado, but I got my share of persecution by some...

If it's a WEAK tornado, it's gonna be considered a WEAK tornado by me. If it's a BIG tornado, then it's gonna be considered a BIG tornado by me. Either way, they are both gonna be in my tornado count, as they are both tornadoes (intensity DON'T count)...

 

[KMcCallister]

I am not doing so well. I saw two good tornadoes on April 21 in Neosho county. I almost feel bad counting the third one, which was a brief spin-up in Nebraska on May 11. I will call it 2.5 for now. The only major disappointment I had was May 12. I had finals that day so I couldn't get out chasing. It would have been really nice to see the tornadoes down in Texas. Hopefully the second half of the season will pick up.

Why do people wallow in guilt for counting weak tornadoes? People chase on weak supercell/multicell days all year, all across the country. If it's a weak or meager sup the person says "well at least it put on a good light show" as if to compensate a less-then-stellar sup. Why are less-than-stellar tornadoes automatically written off as crap?

Who sat down and decided tornadoes have to be world-class to even exist, let alone "count"?

IMO, the people who scrutinize tornado counts are far more concerned with counting than the ones who just count.

Some people are more concerned about recording history correctly (thereby increasing the accuracy of the data) than they are about "bumping their count" or trying to satisfy their juvenile need outpiss the competition.

I certainly agree with the thinking about weak tornados. If it's a tornado, it should be counted just as "not sure" events should NOT be counted. Of course, those definition issues are a problem here, but storm chasers are not the people to decide such issues.

How (many) tornados are reported, under reported, or now over reported is important to me. Bad tornado reports somehow find their way into the database and therefore are potentially detrimental to research and education. So, the counts are perhaps more important to me than SOME of "those who just count".

 

[Mike Peregrine]

I completely agree that accuracy should be one of the most important goals to any chaser ... and that submitting inaccurate or unsure reports results in nothing but trouble ... for one thing, a person can get a rep quick and then nothing they say can be considered reliable.

But what I don't care for almost just as much is when folks jump in and are quick to insinuate that others must be falsifying without having seen their imagery or having been on the storm in the position as the one making the report. To me, it's just as juvenile to impune wrong motives on the part of others, and it shows poor judgment to be quick to speak without having all of the information.

 

[Kiel Ortega]

I got 5 dust devils (are we gonna count these) last July in some fields south of my apartment...I might go there when the heat starts to kick in and start tallying them all up. Maybe they'll down a prarie hawk or something...or I'll go for a jog through one of them. :lol: :lol:

What about photos and video...do they count?

 

[nickgrillo]

LOL, Now, Dust Devils are NOT tornadoes, therefore they cannot be counted...

 

[Morgan Palmer]

Big fat zero this year. There has been nothing in North Texas on days when I could take off.

What a load of <insert expletive of choice here> :evil:

mp

 

[Andrew Pritchard]

Well, my count depends on this whole 'dust whirl' issue. The way some count, I should have several. On May 13th, and this past Thursday I caught what would be considered "non-supercell" tornadoes. They were quite large, organized gustnadoes...but not tornadoes. However, I've seen a few chases posted which included gustnadoes being counted as classic tornadoes. These were very tornado like, and even had some very organized rotation, but, they were obviously occuring underneath the shelf cloud, or outflow of the thunderstorm. In my book, if it ain't coming from a classic meso, it's not technically a "tornado".

Several of these that I captured were very wide, and did extend to nearly the cloud base. So take your pick, if you count the dust whirls, give me 3 or 4 this year...but, IMO, I'm still at 0.

 

[Shane Adams]

My new question is: "what does intensity have to do with accuracy?"

This recurrent "skewing the data" thing I don't understand; are we to assume that only significant tornadoes are to be counted to keep climatology 'correct?'

I'd venture to guess the owner of a mobile home suffering a direct hit from a weak tornado might disagree with this philosophy.

 

[Andrew Pritchard]

I agree with you Shane, that intensity does not have anything to do with it. The only thing that I'm kind of poking at is what people are considering a tornado. There's no line to be drawn in intensity, but there is a line between a classic tornado, and gustnadoes and other sorts of non-supercell tornadoes.

 

[Shane Adams]

I agree with you on that point...and I assure everyone, all my questionable tornadoes are supercell-induced :wink:

 

[nickgrillo]

I agree with you on that point...and I assure everyone, all my questionable tornadoes are supercell-induced :wink:

Same here...

 

[Jeremy Lemanski]

i'd be happy with a dust devil at this point, there has been only 3 days this year there has been thunder at all, all of which occured in a big bunch of crap, not even a chance at structure pics or lightning shots. UGH! michigan.

Maybe tomorrow will give a little, very little, hope.