And how are you seeing these as headed toward OKC?  They're too far west:



Also, there is no high risk for tomorrow; it's only moderate just like today.

Jeff, what is an upper level storm?

And how is it that a lack of instability is inhibiting tornado development?

I'm done with this conversation.  I don't have time to argue pointless rhetoric.  I've got severe weather to track.

And that's what you say when you know you're wrong.  You don't understand it, and it's dangerous to give advice on storms when you don't understand it.  I had this conversation here instead of on Facebook to save you the embarrassment in front of all your non-forum friends.  What you're doing right now is dangerous.  The major threat right now is the western part of the state, and in a couple hours, if the models hold, 0-6 km shear should increase, but I'd be very surprised if OKC gets a warning, unless some things really change over the next couple hours.

Inks, I have been studying weather for 25+ years since you were either just a baby or not even born, so I know what I'm talking about.  I am watching our NBC affiliate.  Mind you, Oklahoma City has the best meteorologists in the entire world, plus KFOR (NBC) now has Reed Timmer, who needs no introduction.  Mike Morgan on KFOR has been doing the weather for 30+ years and studied under Gary England of KWTV (CBS) who has been doing weather for nearly 40 years.  I am using the exact terms that both of them use day in and day out.

Then you're either misinterpreting them, or your city's meteorologists are idiots.

Stop it! Just, stop it.

Don't you dare call Oklahoma City's meteorologists idiots.  That is not accurate and you know it.  Everybody in the nation should have heard of Gary England.  He doesn't study weather for nearly half a century in the most severe weather prone city in the nation by being an idiot.

I am not misinterpreting them, either.  You must think I am an absolute idiot on pretty much everything.

Yes, I know that OKC's meteorologists are not idiots... that was my point.  That means you're misunderstanding them.  You're using terms I've never heard of before, and you're way off on your analysis and understanding of how severe convective storms work.

  Plus, dewpoints are way to high to the east, because there's not enough moisture over there.

huh?

That should be way too low, not way too high.  And I used the wrong "to".  Yikes... that was pretty bad.

http://www.weather.com/weather/today/Will+Rogers+World+Airport+OK+OKC:9:US

Dewpoint is 70.  That's hardly too low.

Ahh, yes, because all storms start at the surface.  Surface observations are all that's important!

No, Jeff, you don't know what you're talking about.  I've never heard of an "upper level storm" that moves in and ignites the gasoline.  I don't know what the heck that means.  You should leave this stuff to people who actually understand it... especially because you're advising others of the weather.

Inks, I have been studying weather for 25+ years since you were either just a baby or not even born, so I know what I'm talking about.  I am watching our NBC affiliate.  Mind you, Oklahoma City has the best meteorologists in the entire world, plus KFOR (NBC) now has Reed Timmer, who needs no introduction.  Mike Morgan on KFOR has been doing the weather for 30+ years and studied under Gary England of KWTV (CBS) who has been doing weather for nearly 40 years.  I am using the exact terms that both of them use day in and day out.

Then you're either misinterpreting them, or your city's meteorologists are idiots.

 Plus, dewpoints are way to high to the east, because there's not enough moisture over there.

huh?

That should be way too low, not way too high.  And I used the wrong "to".  Yikes... that was pretty bad.

Storms are not tornadic, yet, but the air is more unstable in Oklahoma City so the tornado threat may go up as they approach from the west.

What?!?!  No!  You can have a CAPE of 9,000, and that alone wouldn't give you a tornado.  More instability isn't the problem... the issue is shear.  So far, there's relatively weak shear associated with the storms and this system overall to be conducive of strong supercells.  As of the 2100Z RUC run, 0-6 km shear is only at 30 kts, and Oklahoma has Bulk Richardson numbers of less than 10.  Sure, half of Oklahoma has BRNs of 20-40, which is great for supercells, but the problem is that those are all east of the storms right now, and the storms in Oklahoma are moving north-northeast.  And you're going to have a hard time getting any storms to develop there with the numbers I'm looking at for Convective Inhibition.  Plus, dewpoints are way to high to the east, because there's not enough moisture over there.

OK, I just have to dissect this:

The storms in Southwestern Oklahoma in the warned area are rapidly intensifying. We have extremely unstable gasoline type air,

What does that mean?

and the jet stream is arriving.

No... just no.

These storms are already producing at least quarter size hail and growing. These storms are headed in the general direction of Oklahoma City and if they become the main show and nothing develops ahead of them, they should arrive in Oklahoma City between 1830-1900 tonight. Temperatures in OKC are right at 90, and in western and southwestern Oklahoma, upper 90s to low 100's. Altus is 101 right now. It won't take much for these storms to start rotating.

With Bulk Richardson numbers in the 40-80 range, what's your thought process behind thinking there's going to be a lot of rotation here?  Sure, we'll get some supercells, but most of this system won't be supercells.

And then the earlier one:

The models shifted a bit last night in favor of a stronger cap, or lid on the atmosphere, that would inhibit thunderstorms from forming. As of 2200 last night, the most likely area was from Northwestern Oklahoma into Kansas, Nebraska, and the Dakotas. However, as of 1245 this afternoon, skies have started to clear in southwest Kansas and western Oklahoma which will help destabilize the atmosphere and give greater chance for the cap to break.

Destabilization has nothing to do with the cap "break"ing.  A somewhat small cap is what can lead to very supercells, because it limits the number of cells that have access to the CAPE above the cap.  Destabilization doesn't have to affect the cap at all and has nothing to do with a storm breaking through the cap.  That has to do with moisture advection/updrafts.

At the same time, an upper level storm is punching out from the Four Corners and will basically light the match and ignite this gasoline. If the warm air cap breaks, and all indications are that it will, thunderstorms will explode, quickly become severe, and quickly start to rotate.

Again, just no... an upper level storm?  What is an upper level storm?

Filibuster reform should be all or nothing... quit with the stupid nuclear options just to get what you want only when you think it's important.  They should require actual filibusters to be a filibuster, and that'd solve everything.

The "nuclear option" isn't a type of filibuster reform, it's a procedural way for Reid to pass real reform (requiring a spoken filibuster, like you suggested) that only requires 51 votes to pass. It's kind of a stupid name, because only in the US Senate would something passing by a majority be called "nuclear."

I understand what the nuclear option is.  But the way to go about not having your nominees filibustered is not to say, "Well, nominees should be an exception to the filibuster rule."

Why not?  A nominee is fundamentally different from a piece of legislation.  For example, the ability to pressure the majority to allow an amendment to a bill be considered prior to a vote on that bill is one of the most important benefits of the filibuster.

That's a fine argument, but the proper time to make such a change is at the beginning of a session.  Not halfway through when Reid is scared that he can't find the votes to pass a cloture vote.  Yes, the rules need changing, but he's in the position that he's in now because he was too dumb or too scared to do this when the session started.

Filibuster reform should be all or nothing... quit with the stupid nuclear options just to get what you want only when you think it's important.  They should require actual filibusters to be a filibuster, and that'd solve everything.

The "nuclear option" isn't a type of filibuster reform, it's a procedural way for Reid to pass real reform (requiring a spoken filibuster, like you suggested) that only requires 51 votes to pass. It's kind of a stupid name, because only in the US Senate would something passing by a majority be called "nuclear."

I understand what the nuclear option is.  But the way to go about not having your nominees filibustered is not to say, "Well, nominees should be an exception to the filibuster rule."

You should tell the Senate Republicans that. I'm sure they would agree with you that Obama's nominees are filibustered four times more often than Bush's because Reid is using the exact same threats that Bill Frist used when Bush was President.

No, it is of course because the Republicans viscerally hate everything about the Democrats, obstruct at all turns as a political strategy, and have no interest in being partners in government.

What exactly is the point that you're trying to make?

A slice of ham and two slices of bread would not fill me up Inks. I'm surprised that two of those is even enough for him, I doubt it would satisfy me. But yes, he should supplement it with some baby carrots and hummus.

Recommending baby carrots and hummus is a terrible idea.  You have to built into such things.

How about celery with peanut butter and raisins.  We can work our way up to hummus.

Work our way up to hummus? I could eat a pound of hummus in one sitting if you let me.  I love that stuff.  A bit of garlic with it too... oh it's amazing.

A slice of ham and two slices of bread would not fill me up Inks. I'm surprised that two of those is even enough for him, I doubt it would satisfy me. But yes, he should supplement it with some baby carrots and hummus.

OK, so add some cheese, lettuce, and tomatoes; maybe some bean sprouts.  Is it normal to just eat a piece of ham between two pieces of bread?  Goodness... that's so boring.

The episode was a good episode, and the best of the season (but that's not saying much).  I'm sad it's over, but this season was pretty bad.

I did not cry in this one, although the episode where Michael leaves still gets me teary eyed when I watch it.  It was a great show, and one that I'll always love.  Definitely the end of an era last night and a big loss for NBC, in my opinion.

What did you have for lunch?

Two ham sandwiches.  I didn't have much, but still it was enough of a lunch that I need to taper what I eat tonight.

Try just eating one sandwich, like a normal person.

I doubt one sandwich for lunch is normal. Two sandwiches is a fairly small meal for a grown man.

Just one sandwich by itself may not be normal; he can have a sandwich and a side.  Eat a salad or some veggies.  That's going to be better than just 2 sandwiches.

What did you have for lunch?

Two ham sandwiches.  I didn't have much, but still it was enough of a lunch that I need to taper what I eat tonight.

Try just eating one sandwich, like a normal person.

One sandwich and I'm hungry again in 30 minutes...

So have some celery and water with your sandwich.  What all did you put on your sandwich?

What did you have for lunch?

Two ham sandwiches.  I didn't have much, but still it was enough of a lunch that I need to taper what I eat tonight.

Try just eating one sandwich, like a normal person.

No, I don't think you intentionally think of ways to deceive people.  I think it's built into your habits now; hence the reason I keep telling you that you should seek help.  At this point, I don't think you can help some of it (but not all of it).

I'm sure your family will be fine... they can track storms themselves.  They have TVs.  If you're dead set on tracking storms, then get up early and walk.  But don't make more lame excuses.

Filibuster reform should be all or nothing... quit with the stupid nuclear options just to get what you want only when you think it's important.  They should require actual filibusters to be a filibuster, and that'd solve everything.

The "nuclear option" isn't a type of filibuster reform, it's a procedural way for Reid to pass real reform (requiring a spoken filibuster, like you suggested) that only requires 51 votes to pass. It's kind of a stupid name, because only in the US Senate would something passing by a majority be called "nuclear."

I understand what the nuclear option is.  But the way to go about not having your nominees filibustered is not to say, "Well, nominees should be an exception to the filibuster rule."

Why are we in denial about this? CBS already reported it. And we know the White House didn't doctor the e-mails, because GOP officials issued an interim report in April that used the White House version - before coming up with the doctored version more recently.

Well, if CBS reported it, it must be true!

Well, enough is enough.  I'm about to get my shoes on and get out there and walk for about 25 minutes.

And don't just fake it by driving slow in your car... that may trick us, but it doesn't get you into shape.

I've already tried faking it.  It doesn't work.  The app is too smart for that.  I can't drive 3 mph, plus I would clog traffic.

The fact that you once tried faking it really tells us all we need to know.

Hey, now at least I can't cheat with it and actually have to "do the time".  Keeps me honest.

Normal people are honest because they want to be.  It's abnormal to have to be forced to be honest.

Oh who cares.  This is no longer an issue so drop it.

I walked today, does that matter to anyone?

It is an issue because you'd still be lying if you could.  You still probably lie about a lot of things.  You're a habitual liar... that's not normal.

But yes, it's good that you walked today.  Now do it again tomorrow and I'll actually think something of it.

Filibuster reform should be all or nothing... quit with the stupid nuclear options just to get what you want only when you think it's important.  They should require actual filibusters to be a filibuster, and that'd solve everything.

Well, enough is enough.  I'm about to get my shoes on and get out there and walk for about 25 minutes.

And don't just fake it by driving slow in your car... that may trick us, but it doesn't get you into shape.

I've already tried faking it.  It doesn't work.  The app is too smart for that.  I can't drive 3 mph, plus I would clog traffic.

The fact that you once tried faking it really tells us all we need to know.

Hey, now at least I can't cheat with it and actually have to "do the time".  Keeps me honest.

Normal people are honest because they want to be.  It's abnormal to have to be forced to be honest.

Well, enough is enough.  I'm about to get my shoes on and get out there and walk for about 25 minutes.

And don't just fake it by driving slow in your car... that may trick us, but it doesn't get you into shape.

[but I've made it a point to let everything roll off my back like a duck.]

Bushie you should just ignore Inks' hateful personal attacks. If he weren't a moderator they would have surely earned him enough infraction points to be put on mod review or even banned by now.

This.  Bushie won't report them so no points for Inks.

I do have to give Inks credit for not slapping others with death points for personal attacks though, since he's basically on hiatus.

There's no need to report any more of his posts.  They don't affect my everyday life, and they're just good conversation pieces.  It might get a little heated, but I've made it a point to let everything roll off my back like a duck.  Only I know what is really going on (and sometimes, I'm not quite sure of that, either).  He and the others can give advice all day long, but ultimately, like Inks and I agreed the other night, it is me who is either going to screw my life up or let it grow and prosper.

Clearly that's not true...

Actually, it is.  When I am away from the Update thread, I really don't even think what Inks would say or do.

Well, you were upset enough to renege on our no infractions for personal attacks agreement.