Vortex is a fancy word for anything with vorticity. Polar air mass doesn't obtain clicks, but polar vortex does. Ah, I recall the El Nino phase. Meteorologists will refer to polar vortices as such when they occur after a sudden stratospheric warming event (you can google it...I think another one is occurring right now).
Regarding tornadoes...is it worth writing this? I'll write this to educate others regarding it's an investor web site.
There are 3 interactive ingredients to form tornadic thunderstorms: 1) warm, moist air-mass, 2) cold, dry air-mass, and 3) three-dimensional wind shear of the “storm” cloud (typically provided by the jet stream). It’s a balance of these 3 ingredients that leads to tornadoes, and this balance most commonly exists in the Great Plains of the United States in the Spring. This set up can obviously exist in the other 3 seasons...like in the southeast in the winter...see Weather Channel on January tornadoes.
To me, the tornadoes in OKC (late May) and Illinois (November) were related to large shifts in the Arctic Oscillation pattern. Huh? I'll say it this way...recall the stubborn cold air mass this March/April/May, midwesterners were ready to kill Punsutawney Phil. After mid-November, didn't a record cold air mass settle into the eastern U.S.?
And now I have to hear how the cold is related to global warming? Ugh. I really don't see how, but I appreciate AGW arguments from Dr Judith Curry. I also must note what Roger Pielke, Jr., who admits at 2:59:30 in the video in "it's misleading and just plain incorrect to claim disasters associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, flood, or drought have increased on climate time-scales either in the United States or globally." And he's just referencing the IPCC.
IMO, the government is scamming us about global warming. Why? It's complex, but I'll just say this: so they can print their way out of debt! |
