The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
by Solving Tornadoes / James McGinn

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16329

We make assumptions, and believe we are right about the assumptions; then we defend our assumptions and try to make someone else wrong.
Don Miguel Ruiz, Author

Sometimes people believe things that are nonsense because they have painted themselves into a corner with their assumptions and believing in nonsense is the only option that remains to save them from appearing to be complete fools. The most stupefying
myth in all of meteorology is the myth that steam can persist in our atmosphere. It is universally believed by all meteorologists yet, strangely, not one of them would claim knowledge of a test or experiment to demonstrate its validity. Stranger still,
what little empirical evidence we do have decidedly indicates that the notion fails. This notion has evolved into a taboo within the disciplines that study the atmosphere, the primary champions and enforcers of this taboo being meteorologists, most of
whom for which the issue is a mute point in that they exclusively work with synoptic charts (cold fronts, warm fronts and such, usually displayed on computer screens) and, therefore, the notion is never applied in the context of their daily duties. Only
for a very small subset of meteorologists—those that deal with the severe weather and, even then, only those that deal with the theoretical aspects thereof—does this notion have any real significance. But for these few the effect is intellectually
devastating, rendering them feckless, incapable of making any kind of real progress in the discipline. One consequence of this being that the theoretical aspects of the study of severe weather have come to epitomize academic vapidity. And there really
isn’t much any of them can do about it in that belief in the concept is a prerequisite for being taken seriously by any of the various stakeholders in the discipline. But at least they don’t look like complete fools.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 4:10:43 PM UTC-6, Jim McGinn wrote:

The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
by Solving Tornadoes / James McGinn

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16329

We make assumptions, and believe we are right about the assumptions; then we defend our assumptions and try to make someone else wrong.
Don Miguel Ruiz, Author

Sometimes people believe things that are nonsense because they have painted themselves into a corner with their assumptions and believing in nonsense is the only option that remains to save them from appearing to be complete fools. The most stupefying

myth in all of meteorology is the myth that steam can persist in our atmosphere. It is universally believed by all meteorologists yet, strangely, not one of them would claim knowledge of a test or experiment to demonstrate its validity. Stranger still,
what little empirical evidence we do have decidedly indicates that the notion fails. This notion has evolved into a taboo within the disciplines that study the atmosphere, the primary champions and enforcers of this taboo being meteorologists, most of
whom for which the issue is a mute point in that they exclusively work with synoptic charts (cold fronts, warm fronts and such, usually displayed on computer screens) and, therefore, the notion is never applied in the context of their daily duties. Only
for a very small subset of meteorologists—those that deal with the severe weather and, even then, only those that deal with the theoretical aspects thereof—does this notion have any real significance. But for these few the effect is intellectually
devastating, rendering them feckless, incapable of making any kind of real progress in the discipline. One consequence of this being that the theoretical aspects of the study of severe weather have come to epitomize academic vapidity. And there really
isn’t much any of them can do about it in that belief in the concept is a prerequisite for being taken seriously by any of the various stakeholders in the discipline. But at least they don’t look like complete fools.

Thank you Jim - that was well written. I am a storm shelter manufacturer and owner of http://www.tornadoshelter.com - I enjoy studying meteorology and appreciate hearing people speak candidly of their passions. I would love to hear more.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 4:59:13 PM UTC-8, Matt Hillburn wrote:

On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 4:10:43 PM UTC-6, Jim McGinn wrote:

The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
by Solving Tornadoes / James McGinn

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16329

We make assumptions, and believe we are right about the assumptions; then we defend our assumptions and try to make someone else wrong.
Don Miguel Ruiz, Author

Sometimes people believe things that are nonsense because they have painted themselves into a corner with their assumptions and believing in nonsense is the only option that remains to save them from appearing to be complete fools. The most

stupefying myth in all of meteorology is the myth that steam can persist in our atmosphere. It is universally believed by all meteorologists yet, strangely, not one of them would claim knowledge of a test or experiment to demonstrate its validity.
Stranger still, what little empirical evidence we do have decidedly indicates that the notion fails. This notion has evolved into a taboo within the disciplines that study the atmosphere, the primary champions and enforcers of this taboo being
meteorologists, most of whom for which the issue is a mute point in that they exclusively work with synoptic charts (cold fronts, warm fronts and such, usually displayed on computer screens) and, therefore, the notion is never applied in the context of
their daily duties. Only for a very small subset of meteorologists—those that deal with the severe weather and, even then, only those that deal with the theoretical aspects thereof—does this notion have any real significance. But for these few the
effect is intellectually devastating, rendering them feckless, incapable of making any kind of real progress in the discipline. One consequence of this being that the theoretical aspects of the study of severe weather have come to epitomize academic
vapidity. And there really isn’t much any of them can do about it in that belief in the concept is a prerequisite for being taken seriously by any of the various stakeholders in the discipline. But at least they don’t look like complete fools.

Thank you Jim - that was well written. I am a storm shelter manufacturer and owner of http://www.tornadoshelter.com - I enjoy studying meteorology and appreciate hearing people speak candidly of their passions. I would love to hear more.

Thanks for the feedback, Matt.

Meteorology's mistake has to do with mischaracterization of the role of H2O in storms. The real reason H2O is associated with storms has to do with H2O's surface tension being maximized under the wind shear conditions.

Stay tuned to thunderbolts Forum "Future Science" category. I will be putting up the first chapter of my next book before Xmas. The subject matter explicitly addresses the the molecular basis of the plasma that forms the sheath of tornadoes. BTW, this
substance might explain some of the stranger observations associated with the high wind speeds of tornadoes, like blades of grass embedded in telephone poles.


I really liked your website. Its got me thinking about low cost solutions.

Off the top of the head, one of the complications associated with *any* kind of permanent enclosure--in addition to the cost--is the fact that, tornadoes being extremely rare, people will start to use the space for other reasons, storage for example, and
then they are more likely to put a lock on it. Or they might even forget about it altogether. And it will be less likely to accommodate multiple people or the fact you might not have time to find the key. Etcetera.

I'm thinking of some kind of steel structure (maybe kind of a cage) that would also be decorative, not easily forgotten or dismissed, and that could be installed on peoples property--in a standing position--in a couple of hours. And that, in the rare
event of a direct tornado impact, could be pulled down (exactly how it would be hinged I don't know) maybe over a relatively slight depression in the yard, requiring people to lie down during the short duration of the impact, and provide, let's say, 95%
of the protection that being in a shelter would afford.

Thanks again for the feedback

Check out my other books on Amazon:
just search Amazon James McGinn Solving Tornadoes

Regards,

James McGinn
Solving Tornadoes

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 2:10:43 PM UTC-8, Jim McGinn wrote:

The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
by Solving Tornadoes / James McGinn

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16329

We make assumptions, and believe we are right about the assumptions; then we defend our assumptions and try to make someone else wrong.
Don Miguel Ruiz, Author

Sometimes people believe things that are nonsense because they have painted themselves into a corner with their assumptions and believing in nonsense is the only option that remains to save them from appearing to be complete fools. The most stupefying

myth in all of meteorology is the myth that steam can persist in our atmosphere. It is universally believed by all meteorologists yet, strangely, not one of them would claim knowledge of a test or experiment to demonstrate its validity. Stranger still,
what little empirical evidence we do have decidedly indicates that the notion fails. This notion has evolved into a taboo within the disciplines that study the atmosphere, the primary champions and enforcers of this taboo being meteorologists, most of
whom for which the issue is a mute point in that they exclusively work with synoptic charts (cold fronts, warm fronts and such, usually displayed on computer screens) and, therefore, the notion is never applied in the context of their daily duties. Only
for a very small subset of meteorologists—those that deal with the severe weather and, even then, only those that deal with the theoretical aspects thereof—does this notion have any real significance. But for these few the effect is intellectually
devastating, rendering them feckless, incapable of making any kind of real progress in the discipline. One consequence of this being that the theoretical aspects of the study of severe weather have come to epitomize academic vapidity. And there really
isn’t much any of them can do about it in that belief in the concept is a prerequisite for being taken seriously by any of the various stakeholders in the discipline. But at least they don’t look like complete fools.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 2:10:43 PM UTC-8, Jim McGinn wrote:

The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
by Solving Tornadoes / James McGinn

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16329

We make assumptions, and believe we are right about the assumptions; then we defend our assumptions and try to make someone else wrong.
Don Miguel Ruiz, Author

Sometimes people believe things that are nonsense because they have painted themselves into a corner with their assumptions and believing in nonsense is the only option that remains to save them from appearing to be complete fools. The most stupefying

myth in all of meteorology is the myth that steam can persist in our atmosphere. It is universally believed by all meteorologists yet, strangely, not one of them would claim knowledge of a test or experiment to demonstrate its validity. Stranger still,
what little empirical evidence we do have decidedly indicates that the notion fails. This notion has evolved into a taboo within the disciplines that study the atmosphere, the primary champions and enforcers of this taboo being meteorologists, most of
whom for which the issue is a mute point in that they exclusively work with synoptic charts (cold fronts, warm fronts and such, usually displayed on computer screens) and, therefore, the notion is never applied in the context of their daily duties. Only
for a very small subset of meteorologists—those that deal with the severe weather and, even then, only those that deal with the theoretical aspects thereof—does this notion have any real significance. But for these few the effect is intellectually
devastating, rendering them feckless, incapable of making any kind of real progress in the discipline. One consequence of this being that the theoretical aspects of the study of severe weather have come to epitomize academic vapidity. And there really
isn’t much any of them can do about it in that belief in the concept is a prerequisite for being taken seriously by any of the various stakeholders in the discipline. But at least they don’t look like complete fools.

Deep Dishonesty About Water Has Rendered Meteorology Feckless https://youtu.be/t38tSlrLoY4

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)