User talk:Evolauxia

I am currently only an intermittently active editor, but I will respond to my talk page, and to requests here from projects with which I was involved. Evolauxia 17:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Anti-twister 2 Tornado Weather in Australia 3 Heritability of Stature 3.1 Accumulative generation effect 4 Article move 5 {{infobox tornado outbreak}} 6 Tornado events (Nov 1992 Outbreak) 7 Coincidence indeed! 8 Re:Category:Television stations in St. Louis 9 Tornado winds 10 ePodunk External Links 11 Your addition on Weather forecasting 12 Pages up for deletion 13 Tropical Cyclones 14 2006 tornado season 14.1 March 30-31 15 Article formatting 16 Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #2 17 Thanks 18 List of tornadoes and tornado outbreaks 19 European tornadoes

[edit] Anti-twister

Thanks for the proper term for an anti-twister. I've never been keen on that title either; basically, I just threw something there so it wouldn't get deleted way back when. Now it has a proper home, under Anticyclonic tornado. Anti-twister is now just a redirect. BTW, welcome aboard! Denni☯ 23:18, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

• I originally merely added the comment but left the article, until I reread it and saw tornado rotation attributed to Coriolis effect. They are too small to be generated from this. I'll revise the new article.
  • If you reread it, you'll see that it is the parent thunderstorm's rotation to which the article refers. It would certainly be incorrect to attribute a tornado's rotation to the Coriolis effect. Denni☯ 03:27, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
    • I have edited the article to best reflect the current understanding of the anticyclonic tornado phenomenon (though I've not yet completed it), which isn't understood well, indeed, the exact process of tornadogenesis itself is not yet understood. Evolauxia 09:19, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tornado Weather in Australia

Hi Evolauxia, just looking at your edit on the Buladelah Tornado... can you ellaborate on the "classic setup for violent tornadoes"? Also I'm not convinced there's something really special about Canada, Bangladesh, and India for violent tornadoes. Glancing at the graphs in this article [1] seem to suggest that in most places around the world, tornado intensity distributions are similar (the UK and France being opposite exceptions, possibly for reporting-related reasons). Australia gets a moderate number of tornadoes (a few reports per state per year), sometimes they're significant and occasionally they're violent. -- pde

One must be careful with what those graphs actually mean, though indeed, in that paper there is a quite similar distribution of F-scale categories for most regions of the world that experience tornadoes. Note, however, the datasets for all other regions are much longer than the US dataset, yet overall numbers are still much lower. Consult the number of observed tornadoes by intensity in Tables 5 and 6. Although they occur, and the populations should be aware of this, violent tornadoes are somewhat rare outside the regions I mentioned; and it is (theorized) due to lesser occurrences of favorable environmental parameters, including in other works by one of the coauthors of the paper you cited (Brooks). No F5 tornadoes have been confirmed outside the U.S. and Canada, in fact, some European tornadoes are overrated.

These environmental parameters are what I was alluding to when I mentioned 'classic setup' and it's a somewhat complex thing to get in to with adequate treatment. Essentially, to get the requisite meteorological setups with much frequency seems to require a certain geography that is somewhat unique to North America and that area of southern Asia. Various features provide for a high frequency of warm, moist, unstable low levels with dry air at mid-levels, capping inversions setup just right, various jet streams and colder air aloft (lapse rates), and a wind shear profile which is somewhat rare (increasing speeds AND anticyclonic veering with height, esp. 1-3km and 1km AGL for the veering) especially in conjunction with all other requisite conditions. FWIW, I think there are underreporting issues in places like China and Russia, potentially other areas, and Australia (lower population density, and possible tornadoes with intense offshore supercells).

I was able to find very little information on this tornado, but given its significance it certainly deserves a better article, as do some other Australian events (such as Bucca and Sandon). Evolauxia 10:52, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I've started articles on the Brighton tornado and the south coast tornado. Maybe we should also do the Northam tornado if we can clear the rights to the photos... -- pde 04:22, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Good. Seems fine to me for articles on said and similar events. They could also be linked either on the main global listing of significant events and/or the coming seasonal (or decadal/centennial for further back) global summary articles. Evolauxia 07:42, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Sadly, I don't know anything about the Tuggerah Lakes tornado. Might require a call to the NSW beureau of meterology, or some digging through contemporary newspapers. -- pde 01:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Heritability of Stature

Great to hear you're going to take this on! I'll take a look for more references. Off the top of my head I seem to remember a bunch of really interesting discussion about long bone growth and prenatal hormone exposure in the last few pages of Martin & Nguyen (2004) Anthropometric analysis of homosexuals and heterosexuals: implications for early hormone exposure. Hormones and Behavior 45: 31 – 39. Cheers, Pete.Hurd 17:33, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Accumulative generation effect

Hi, I just read the article about Human height. From what I could gather, you should be the one who wrote:

Thus, there is an accumulative generation effect such that nutrition and health over generations influences the height of descendants to varying degrees.

I'm very interested in this. There could be some interesting parallels in explaining the change over time of characters other than height. Could you tell me of some reference(s) where I can find more detail about this effect? (I can get almost anything at my university). Cheers, F4810 09:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I poorly articulated that section, I intend to rewrite the manuscript of the article eventually. Anyway, I know of no papers that specifically cover this, though it might be addressed in some pediatric or auxological books. Some papers touch upon it such as when covering prenatal growth, I'll dig them up. Evolauxia 10:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article move

Hi, Late-November 2005 Tornado Outbreak would normally have lower case 't' and 'o'. Any reason to break convention? Rich Farmbrough 11:42, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I moved it because specific tornado outbreaks are considered to be proper, they're specifically identifiable events by their name (like hurricanes but less regimented), and all the other outbreaks are thus capitalized so I moved it to fit this. I did it early before people recognized the first name and before there would be links to it. Evolauxia 00:00, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] {{infobox tornado outbreak}}

Fair enough, the infobox was loosely based off the hurricane one, hence the windspeed. NSLE _(T+C) 01:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tornado events (Nov 1992 Outbreak)

Thanks for your comments on my comments to the List of Tornadoes and Tornado Outbreaks. Still attempting some sporadic work on this; I just added a draft/article for the November 1992 outbreak, it's in need of some work, but I'll clean it up over the next few days. Any contributions would be welcome. David--Davidals

[edit] Coincidence indeed!

Thanks for your efforts as well. . .can we use a redirect on category pages? I was soing to put a redirect from Category:Saint Louisians to Category:St. Louisans. Will that work? If so, I'll do the same with St. Louisans and St. Louisians. I always type St. Louis by habit and hate having to spell it out. TMS63112 06:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

ThanksTMS63112 07:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Category:Television stations in St. Louis

Sounds good to me, i see no problems with a minor detail such as that. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 22:54, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tornado winds

I feel that, if the information is available from the NWS local offices, it should be included. However, it should have to be proven from there. CrazyC83 17:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay thanks for the information, that column should now be removed. CrazyC83 19:07, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ePodunk External Links

Was ePodunk used as source or a reference in the article on Saint Louis. If so it should probably be described as a source or reference.

Also ePodunk seems to have excessive advertising on it and could be considered link spam. I didn't want to remove the link again untill I found out more about why it keeps re-appearing on the article.

I used the following guidlines on External Links when I removed the link.

Thanks, --Colin Faulkingham 00:51, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I've added it because it's a decent place/geography site with its collection of information, and is provided for some other cities. I think more should be represented than just city government and tourist sites if the other sites are "reputable". Epodunk isn't pushing anything but does have a lot of google ads, so I could see an argument made on excessive ads. Evolauxia 04:04, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your addition on Weather forecasting

Hey, I saw your edit on the weather forecasting page. It sounds very similar to this quote I found some years ago:

"Imagine a system on a rotating sphere that is 8000 miles wide, consists of different materials, different gases that have different properties (one of the most important of which, water, exists in different concentrations), heated by a nuclear reactor 93 million miles away. Then just to make life interesting, this sphere is oriented such that, as it revolves around the nuclear reactor, it is heated differently at different locations at different times of the year. Then someone is asked to watch the mixture of gases, a fluid only 20 miles deep, that covers an area of 250 million square miles, and to predict the state of that fluid at one point on the sphere two days from now. This is the problem the weather forecaster faces."

When I found this quote, it was attributed to Bob Ryan. What do you think of replacing the unsourced quote with this one? EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 21:56, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. After posting my message, I decided to check it out and found multiple sites that quoted him including couple that cited when/where he said it, such as this one. I'll make the change and include where he published this quote. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 22:09, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again for all your help. Interesting how both of the quotes we found were somewhat distorted versions of the original, but I suppose that's the nature of quotes, constantly changing from one report to another. Kind of a shame, since yours with the frozen poles and such and my previous one that mentioned water vapor add even more complexities to weather forecasting. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 22:19, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pages up for deletion

Revolution within the form is up for deletion. Can I ask for a vote to "Transwiki". Thanks.WHEELER 23:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tropical Cyclones

You said at the Wikiproject Tropical Cyclones page that "As a meteorologist, I have a background in atmospheric sciences, as well as access to journals, conferences, and experts". Would it be possible for you to eventually use your access to journals etc to help me find death and damage totals for tropical cyclones from Pacific hurricane seasons from 1972-1987. The NHC reports are available after 1988 and the Monthly Weather Review is free online before 1973. Between those years is a "hole" where death and damage information, if it is online without having to pay anything, is scattered about in pieces everywhere. I thought that you might be able to eventually find information regarding those cyclones since you have access to journals. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 22:58, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me that the MWR was available... I never noticed the change. Thanks again. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 00:04, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2006 tornado season

Forecasters say that there is a chance of an outbreak tomorrow into Thursday in the central US. I am keeping a close eye on it - at this point the conditions are not as volatile as, say, last November 15th (which had been predicted 2-3 days in advance), but it could still be major. Should a new general page Tornadoes of 2006 be created to cover everything that does not warrant outbreak articles? BTW, the WikiProject you suggested I am working on - as a major part of Meteorology and Weather Events. The project page is User:CrazyC83/Meteorology. CrazyC83 23:14, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Its okay. CrazyC83 05:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] March 30-31

I definitely see something big here. While it is still too early to call it a big outbreak imminent, I see a potential for a major tornado event with the possibility open for a 20-state super outbreak stretching from the upper Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico. One to watch for sure! Talk:Tornadoes of 2006 has a section to discuss the potential outbreak. CrazyC83 05:56, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article formatting

Dear Tropical cyclone editor,

As a member of the Tropical Cyclone Wikiproject, you are receiving this message to describe how you can better tropical cyclone articles. There are hundreds of tropical cyclone articles, though many of them are poorly organized and lacking in information. Using the existing featured articles as a guide line, here is the basic format for the ideal tropical cyclone article.

1. Infobox- Whenever possible, the infobox should have a picture for the tropical cyclone. The picture can be any uploaded picture about the storm, though ideally it should be a satellite shot of the system. If that is not available, damage pictures, either during the storm or after the storm, are suitable. In the area that says Formed, indicate the date on which the storm first developed into a tropical depression. In the area that says Dissipated, indicate the date on which the storm lost its tropical characteristics. This includes when the storm became extratropical, or if it dissipated. If the storm dissipated and reformed, include the original start date and the final end date. Highest winds should be the local unit of measurement for speed (mph in non-metric countries, km/h in metric countries), with the other unit in parenthesis. The lowest pressure should be in mbars. Damages should, when available, be in the year of impact, then the present year. The unit of currency can be at your discretion, though typically it should be in USD. Fatalities indicate direct deaths first, then indirect deaths. Areas affected should only be major areas of impact. Specific islands or cities should only be mentioned if majority of the cyclone's effects occurred there.
2. Intro- The intro for every article should be, at a minimum, 2 paragraphs. For more impacting hurricanes, it should be 3. The first should describe the storm in general, including a link to the seasonal article, its number in the season, and other statistics. The second should include a brief storm history, while the third should be impact.
3. Storm history- The storm history should be a decent length, relatively proportional to the longevity of the storm. Generally speaking, the first paragraph should be the origins of the storm, leading to the system reaching tropical storm status. The second should be the storm reaching its peak. The third should be post-peak until landfall and dissipation. This section is very flexable, depending on meteorological conditions, but it should generally be around 3. Storm histories can be longer than three paragraphs, though they should be less than five. Anything more becomes excessive. Remember, all storm impacts, preparations, and records can go elsewhere. Additional pictures are useful here. If the picture in the infobox is of the storm at its peak, use a landfall picture in the storm history. If the picture in the infobox is of the storm at its landfall, use the peak. If the landfall is its peak, use a secondary peak, or even a random point in the storm's history.
4. Preparations- The preparations section can be any length, depending on the amount of preparations taken by people for the storm. Hurricane watches and warnings need to be mentioned here, as well as the number of people evacuated from the coast. Include numbers of shelters, and other info you can find on how people prepared for the storm.
5. Impact- For landfalling storms, the impact section should be the majority of the article. First, if the storm caused deaths in multiple areas, a death table would work well in the top level impact section. A paragraph of the general effects of the storm is also needed. After the intro paragraph, impact should be broken up by each major area. It depends on the information, but sections should be at least one paragraph, if not more. In the major impact areas, the first paragraph should be devoted to meteorological statistics, including rainfall totals, peak wind gusts on land, storm surge, wave heights, beach erosion, and tornadoes. The second should be actual damage. Possible additional paragraphs could be detailed information on crop damage or specifics. Death and damage tolls should be at the end. Pictures are needed, as well. Ideally, there would be at least one picture for each sub-section in the impact, though this sometimes can't happen. For storms that impact the United States or United States territories, this site can be used for rainfall data, including an image of rainfall totals.
6. Aftermath- The aftermath section should describe foreign aid, national aid, reconstruction, short-term and long-term environmental effects, and disease. Also, the storm's retirement information, whether it happened or not, should be mentioned here.
7. Records- This is optional, but can't hurt to be included.
8. Other- The ideal article should have inline sourcing, with the {{cite web}} formatting being preferable. Always double check your writing and make sure it makes sense.

Good luck with future writing, and if you have a question about the above, don't hesitate to ask.

Hurricanehink (talk) 19:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #2

The July issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:45, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Cheers, thanks! Pete.Hurd 04:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of tornadoes and tornado outbreaks

I had actually forgotten about that proposal, but I'm glad you agree. Do you mind if I just dig in and start moving events to their new respective pages? -Runningonbrains 19:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] European tornadoes

Hi, there is list of all known tornadoes in Czech Republic and of some in Slovak Republic at Czech Hydrometeorological Institute (in czech), many with photos and videos. The strongest confirmed tornado was F3, but tornado research in Central Europe began only couple of years ago. There aro also some historical ones in the list. I will incorporate some significant ones in couple of days. I don't know any claim of F5 tornado in Europe. I can try find some other sources from Central Europe countries. --Vladimír Fuka 13:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)