96L disturbance hanging in there; F4 tornado confirmed in Missouri

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 1:52 PM GMT on September 26, 2006

Share this Blog
6
+

Well, it sure was great to watch a football game in the New Orleans Superdome last night, and not worry about a hurricane threatening the coast! The hurricane season of 2006 has been exceptionally kind to us by the standards of the past ten years, are there is nothing out there today that causes me any concern. The tropical wave (96L) we've been watching, about 900 miles east-northeast of the northern Lesser Antilles Islands, does has the potential to develop into a tropical depression, but is not expected to threaten any land areas. Wind shear has dropped from 30 knots yesterday to 20 knots today, and the system has been able to maintain more heavy thunderstorm activity near its center this morning. The storm is in a moist environment, and the ocean beneath is warm. The Canadian model is still the only model that develops the system into a tropical storm, but it appears that wind shear will drop another 5 knots over the next two days, potentially allowing 96L to organize into a tropical depression. Bermuda will need to keep an eye on this system, but I expect it will recurve out to sea before reaching the island.

Elsewhere in the tropical Atlantic, it's time to start watching the cloud-covered areas of the ocean surrounding the U.S. where cold fronts stall out. One such area to watch is off the North Carolina Outer Banks on Wednesday, when a tropical low could develop and scoot quickly northeastward out to sea. The more dangerous possibility is in the Gulf of Mexico or Western Caribbean near the Yucatan Peninsula early next week. A strong cold front is expected to push off the East Coast of the U.S. this weekend and stall over the Gulf of Mexico or Western Caribbean. The past few runs of the NOGAPS model have been predicting that if this front stalls out over the Western Caribbean, it could serve as a genesis area for a tropical storm. None of the other models are picking up on this, but this is a typical type of development we see in this region in October.


Figure 1. Preliminary models tracks for Invest 96L.

F4 tornado confirmed in Missouri
The National Weather Service confirmed yesterday that the second violent F4 tornado of the year occurred Friday. The 350 yard-wide tornado ripped through Crosstown, MO, injuring five. F4 tornadoes have winds speeds of 207-260 mph (there have been no F5 tornadoes with winds in excess of 260 mph reported in the U.S. since 1999). The weekend severe weather outbreak was the second largest of the year, with 59 tornadoes (including 40 on September 22). The other F4 tornado of 2006 also affected Missouri, when Monroe City got hit on March 12 as part of the biggest severe weather outbreak of the year--84 tornadoes over a 3-day span.

I'll have an update Wednesday morning.
Jeff Masters

Huge thunder head (wunderandrew)
SEVERE STORMS OVER ILLINOIS it did not storm were i live but there is another chance of severe weather tomorow
Huge thunder head

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 207 - 157

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21Blog Index

207. voit
6:03 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Go drive your SUV's and race your engines all you want ! I sure do it ! Most of the Co2 release comes from nature, from underwater volcanoes, not man. This has been very well documented in research underwater, but not talked about much, for obvious reasons. Plus the last time we headed into an ice age, CO2 levels rose quickly, and yes, all without humans! Just a typical natural cycle that repeats itself and we are due for it again.

Forget these environmentalists.
We have the cleanist country on earth. Earth takes care of itself and we have over 140+ years of oil left ! And in 20 years from now, we will find additional oil, far more than we expected. We could easily have over 1,000 years left of oil.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
206. jake436
6:06 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
I control what I can control, but I must work, play, eat, etc...also known as living. When is the last time you took a plane, drove a car, wore a garment made in a factory that emits pollutants and creates trash, etc...
I do have sources that are indisputable that say it was like this in the past, then it changed, then it was like this again, then it changed, and so on, and so on. By the way, Vivian Brown just corrected herself. 1,000,000 years, not 100 years. Don't worry, it'll be cold once again! Then who will we blame?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
203. photorescues
6:12 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Posted By: voit at 5:09 PM GMT on September 26, 2006.

Interesting study suggesting that hurricane intensity has DECREASED in the Atlantic since 1950


I would like someone to study how much tornado outbreaks have increased/decreased since 1950 as well...

Hurricanes can be seen coming, much like the old-fashioned wars fought with bands of armies. Tornados can be predicted that they can happen today, but not where exactly, much like terrorists, eh?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
202. ihave27windows
6:08 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Now see, that phone call was just one of the music directors at my church asking if I could sing in Latin.....Solo, in Latin for a Taize' Service.

Now, does anyone here understand that could have been my "bad feeling"......the fact that I have not sung in Latin in many years.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
201. rroyce
1:10 PM CDT on September 26, 2006
voit,

I am in agreement with you, maybe not so much as what the weather will do but what it won't do. Too many scientist start with a personal opinion and develop a way to prove it, just like political pollsters do when they pose a question, it is slanted to the outcome they want. Then they post it as gospel, when it is only one of many theories with multiple outcomes.

This year may have been one to the hottest in a 1,000 years, they want you to see: "the hottest" and hope you donít see in a 1,000 years. Anyone with the capacity to think for themselves will see that it has been hotter many times before and it will get colder, there are cycles to the atmosphere. In the same year we can have record highs and record lows.

If you are afraid the sea level will raise and flood your house, it is not going to do it overnight like Katrina, then move. I hear Colorado is nice this time of the year.

I am not a scientist and not much of meteorologist either but someone who can look at what has happen in the past and see it was hotter than this. I love my SUV and the Motor Home gets 8 MPG and I plan on keeping both.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
200. Melagoo
2:07 PM EDT on September 26, 2006
Question if and when 96L ever becomes a storm of sorts does someone win a prize for first reporting it .... I think Taz should get a perseverance award for sticking with 96L heheheee :c)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
199. Patrap
6:10 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
..my personal favorite..LOL!
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 428 Comments: 129903
197. dpryor1
6:06 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
China also has raw sewage problems that they aren't addressing- this will add to the global warming thing as well. The Yanzgtee River is being dammed to create "clean" power, but they aren't addressing the inherent issues that deal with the injury this causes to their natural resources. No treatment plants means more methane gas released- and not just from cows!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
196. Patrap
6:09 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Credit Global warmingLink
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 428 Comments: 129903
195. ihave27windows
6:06 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Thanks everyone, and especially Pat.....I had a phone call I had to take, so sorry I didn't respond to everyone individually.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
194. rwdobson
6:05 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
yes, jake, the EFFECTS of GHG emissioons are uncertain. however, the quantities of GHG emitted are not uncertain.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
193. rwdobson
6:02 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Jake, very convenient. just decide that everything out there is garbage. that allows you to believe whatever you want without any facts getting in the way.

when you are talking about quantities of CO2 emitted, there are reliable sources out there that are not contradicted by any other sources.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
192. jake436
6:01 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Posted By: rwdobson at 5:59 PM GMT on September 26, 2006.

The debate on what effect greenhouse gas emissions are having is very complicated, and I don't think anyone knows for sure one way or the other.



I can't believe I wrote that whole last post, and in the meantime, you nailed it for me. This is my point! They don't have a clue. But they present their "facts" and create alarmists.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
191. stampapaul
6:03 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Posted By: saddlegait at 5:34 PM GMT on September 26, 2006. (hide)
Oh...and this whole burning fags thing really bugs me too...I mean, just because we don't agree with how they live and what they do in their own bedrooms should


and what about discrimination?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
188. jake436
5:56 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Posted By: rwdobson at 5:55 PM GMT on September 26, 2006.

jake, if you wanted to, you could look up emissions data from reliable sources. there is lots of it out there. and none of it says that china emits more than the US. but instead you chose to state, with no source, something that is not true. why?


First of all, I thought you were leaving, and second of all, I just told you why. I can find an opposing story for every story you can find. You say reliable sources. I don't believe opposing sources are any more reliable that your alleged reliable sources. I don't think any of them have any clue as to what is fact and what is not. Debating it is a waste of time because both sides can claim to have the "reliable sources". Just quit driving, walk everywhere you go, don't make any trash, quit farting, belching, no more hair spray for you. Do what is it that makes you feel better.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
187. Melagoo
1:58 PM EDT on September 26, 2006
Very true ... we are all to blame ... except for maybe Papa New Guinea :c(
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
186. dpryor1
5:56 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Posted By: jake436 at 5:56 PM GMT on September 26, 2006.

That wasn't exactly greek, dpryor. Charley, Foxtrot, Hotel, Tango?

*Sorry... hablo english solamente... :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
185. MTJax
5:53 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Seriously dead in the trpoics. Here is something to get a few people a little fired up. Check out the waves. They seem to be telling us where everything is. What is that thing next to Texas? The 6 that is...
I also see 7, 8, 9, 11, and 14

latest wave heights
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
183. rwdobson
5:56 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
The debate on what effect greenhouse gas emissions are having is very complicated, and I don't think anyone knows for sure one way or the other.

However, when you talk about how much is being emitted, that is not really being debated. it is easy to quantify how much coal or oil is consumed and use that to determine emissions. this information can be found easily on the web.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
182. auburn (Mod)
12:56 PM CDT on September 26, 2006
Posted By: Melagoo at 12:53 PM CDT on September 26, 2006.

Earth temp. is totally related to weather ... umm there is not much happening in the ocean(s) right now maybe in a few days .... The answer to whole debate is CHINA as mentioned before is the biggest concern to the planet.

American Company's like walmart,who buy so much from china don't help any
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
181. Patrap
5:56 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
..He looks like riccderr...
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 428 Comments: 129903
180. Patrap
5:55 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Our HLinkero...
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 428 Comments: 129903
179. jake436
5:54 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
That wasn't exactly greek, dpryor. Charley, Foxtrot, Hotel, Tango?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
177. Melagoo
1:54 PM EDT on September 26, 2006
I think it is a cycle too not a 1,000,000 year thing I agree with you and they are alarmists but the China thing is really scarey
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
176. rwdobson
5:52 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
jake, if you wanted to, you could look up emissions data from reliable sources. there is lots of it out there. and none of it says that china emits more than the US. but instead you chose to state, with no source, something that is not true. why?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
175. Melagoo
1:48 PM EDT on September 26, 2006
Earth temp. is totally related to weather ... umm there is not much happening in the ocean(s) right now maybe in a few days .... The answer to whole debate is CHINA as mentioned before is the biggest concern to the planet.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
174. dpryor1
5:47 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Patrap counting in Greek... blog is super-slow for sure.

I hope the good Dr. is wrong about the GOM- I am sick of the "excitement" of the last few years! I made an emergency visit to Graceland 4 times in the past 2 years due to storm activity. I have gotten to where I HATE Graceland- it even smells like the 60's!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
173. rwdobson
5:51 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
you can also look up the amount of "cattle farts" if you want. belches, mostly, not farts, but that doesn't matter. it's a pretty small contributor to the overall greenhouse gas emission total. landfills emit a lot more methane than cows.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
172. jake436
5:39 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
you are connected to the internet, obviously, so why don't you look these things up have another link which some believe is a more accurate view of history inside it: Link.
before saying them?


have another link which some believe is a more accurate view of history inside it: Link.




This is why! For every source you find, I can find one that "proves" your source wrong. I can find one that some believe is "more accurate" than yours. I don't believe everything I read in the paper, the internet, or see and hear from other media outlets. I don't believe the scientists have anything but THEORIES. Remember in the 70's and 80's, everything caused cancer. Then half of what they said caused cancer, or more than half, was proven to not cause cancer. Now I hear that sunblock causes more problems than it prevents, because the sun is a source of vitamin D, and the sunblock prevents the body from recieving it. Oh, and now they say vitamin D may be the cure for cancer! Obviously you don't wanna go around sunburned all the time, but people just take things to extremes. Same with the environment. I don't go around dumping my used oil in the local river, but I'm driving my truck whether anybody likes it or not. Why are we paying so much for gas? Because most refineries have been shut down, and no new ones are allowed in the US. But then the same global warming alarmests are mad about the price of gas, when they won't allow any refineries in this country. By the way, how many oil rigs are off the coast of California and Florida? Nope, can't have that here. What about New York? Nope. But why are we paying too much for gas? To protect the environment obviously. Pick one.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
171. auburn (Mod)
12:45 PM CDT on September 26, 2006
Cow Farts: Global Warmers Or A Load Of Hot Air?
August 05 2005



Scientists and farmers around the world are debating a very serious subject at the moment. Cow farts. Yes, really, they're talking about farting cows. They're talking about cow burps as well, and sheep burps, and even sheep farts.

And here is the URL ...for the rest of the story http://www.show.me.uk/site/news/STO873.html
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
170. rwdobson
5:46 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
"And the events listed on my commentary are not short term. If you look into the site I pasted, these "events" now occur more often in the last 7 years or more. Heavier snows, record cold, and the like. "

in terms of climatology, 7 years is very much short term.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
169. rwdobson
5:45 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
nothing in the tropics, gw debate flaring up...can't blame people for leaving. think i'll follow suit myself.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
167. Zaphod
5:37 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
I can tell you pretty accurately when we'll stop releasing CO2. Take a look at Easter Island 1000 years ago, and then now. Take at look at Haiti 200 years ago, and then now.

It seems pretty obvious: humanity will stop releasing CO2 when there is nothing left to burn. In a period of 200 or so years we will release BILLIONS of years of sequestered carbon stored in oil. Soon after I imagine we'll mine the methane hydrates, coal tars, and shale and burn some more.

Of course, there is the decent chance that fusion will halt the burn, and a still smaller chance that the Hadron collider will indeed create miniature black holes, but rather than these evaporating as theorized they will instead fall to the center of the earth and commence an inexorable consumption of the core leading to the implosion of the earth.

At least there are a few glimmers of hope!
Zap
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
166. auburn (Mod)
12:38 PM CDT on September 26, 2006
WOW Rand with a lol..and humor...I never saw that before....lol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
165. rwdobson
5:37 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
" In another token, the fact that we had record highs in January does NOT prove anything either. Nothing at all !"

no s%$t, sherlock. that was my point. you can't use short term events to prove things.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
164. Patrap
5:37 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Swooosh..Ahhhhhhhh!...Swoosh Ahhhhhhhh..."I find your confidence in me.."Impressive"...LOL!
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 428 Comments: 129903
162. Zaphod
5:37 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
and we could shut down every factory or refinery, even get rid of farting cows, and China would still be destroying the earth. We don't hold a candle to them when it comes to pollutants, not even close.

FYI, don't hold a candle close to farting cows, either!
Zap
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
161. photorescues
5:37 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
Posted By: rwdobson at 5:26 PM GMT on September 26, 2006.

People, try this link for some basic info on paleoclimatology. If you don't even know how scientists ascertain past climate conditions, you can't really add much to the debate. It also has good reference info on climate changes that have happened over the long- and short-term.


I have another link which some believe is a more accurate view of history inside it: Link.

Just reporting the views - you decide.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
160. rwdobson
5:36 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
"every American could start walking everywhere they go, and we could shut down every factory or refinery, even get rid of farting cows, and China would still be destroying the earth. We don't hold a candle to them when it comes to pollutants, not even close."

sorry, but that is simply not true. in 1998, the US emitted 2 times as much CO2 as china. Source

on a per-capita basis, we emit 10 times as much as China. in the future, China may pass us in emissions, but they are not there yet.

you are connected to the internet, obviously, so why don't you look these things up before saying them?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
159. jake436
5:34 PM GMT on September 26, 2006
lol saddle and randrewl...double lol, or lololol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
157. auburn (Mod)
12:31 PM CDT on September 26, 2006
Patrap...you are getting good with the youtube links...going to have to start calling you "The Link Master"...lol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 207 - 157

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.

Local Weather

Overcast
43 °F
Overcast

JeffMasters's Recent Photos

Lake Effort Snow Shower Over Windsor, Ontario
Sunset on Dunham Lake
Pictured Rocks Sunset
Sunset on Lake Huron