Guest Tom Scully Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 (edited) (Huge weather related damage costs and economic interruption. NYC subway system service could be lost for an unpredictable length of time with billions of dollars of damage from sea water flooding of tunnels and compromising third rail power distribution systems mounted next to subway tracks, and low lying electrical control and signal control equipment. The stock exchange has already announced it is closed Monday and Tuesday.) I'm doing this temporary thread because I was extremely surprised by the news that this hurricane has now broken the atmospheric pressure record lows recorded of the most poweful and destructive northeast U.S. storm in recorded history.: http://www.northshor...ane19380921.aspThe "Long Island Express" hurricane of September 21, 1938, also known as the "Great New England Hurricane", was at that time the costliest natural disaster ever experienced in the United States. It was also one of the deadliest, taking at least 600 lives on Long Island and in New England, many from storm surge flooding but also from inland flooding of rivers and streams and from causes related to the high winds. In the 21st century, this hurricane remains the benchmark by which all other destructive storms in the northeastern United Sates are measured...... The storm crossed the Connecticut coastline between Bridgeport and New Haven with New Haven reporting a lowest pressure of 28.11 inches at 3:50pm. Other locations in Connecticut, presumably those closest to the path of the hurricane, recorded pressures as low as 28.00 inches. From Connecticut, the storm continued to move very rapidly, but towards the north-northwest and the center passed near Burlington, VT at around 8:00 PM. At that time, the storm was still of hurricane strength and Burlington recorded a low barometer reading of 28.68 inches.... .....The hurricane of September 1938 is believed to have originated near the Cape Verde islands around the 10th of September from a tropical wave that moved off the coast of Africa a few days earlier. Cyclonic circulation noted near 19N, 37W on the morning of September 13, 1938 may have been the first direct observation of the storm that was to slam the northeast a week later. The storm was first definitively located based on ship records late in the day on September 16 near 21N 53W, at which time a Brazilian ship located near the center logged hurricane force winds and a barometric pressure of 28.31 inches (959 millibars). ... ......Therefore, it is likely that the storm was moving north between 60 and 70 miles per hour as it approached Long Island and Connecticut. The first landfall occurred over central Long Island, where the coast guard station at Bellport reported a pressure of 27.94 inches (946 millibars). Based on numerous reports of a period of calm over central and eastern Long Island during the height of the storm is believed that the eye had become somewhat elongated as it approached Long Island and was probably as much as 50 miles wide. This period of calm seems to have lasted the longest over central Long Island indicating the likely path across the island of the center of the large eye. The storm crossed the Connecticut coastline between Bridgeport and New Haven with New Haven reporting a lowest pressure of 28.11 inches at 3:50pm. Other locations in Connecticut, presumably those closest to the path of the hurricane, recorded pressures as low as 28.00 inches. From Connecticut, the storm continued to move very rapidly, but towards the north-northwest and the center passed near Burlington, VT at around 8:00 PM. At that time, the storm was still of hurricane strength and Burlington recorded a low barometer reading of 28.68 inches. (Numbers in red displayed above are those recorded on 21 September, 1938.) https://twitter.com/svrwxtweets Rob White @svrwxtweets The Battery flood gauge now at 12.93 feet and still rising. #Sandy 10 minutes ago (8:10 pm EDT) Rob White @svrwxtweets 7pm EDT water level at The Battery in NYC was 11.25 ft. Shatters old record set in 1821. Not bad enough? 2 hrs to go til high tide Continuing updates: The Original Weather Blog : http://originalweath...g.blogspot.com/ http://www.nhc.noaa....ml/291439.shtml 000 WTNT33 KNHC 292058 TCPAT3 BULLETIN HURRICANE SANDY ADVISORY NUMBER 30 NWS NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL AL182012 500 PM EDT MON OCT 29 2012 ...SANDY MOVING QUICKLY TOWARD SOUTHERN NEW JERSEY AND DELAWARE... ...LANDFALL EXPECTED EARLY THIS EVENING ACCOMPANIED BY LIFE-THREATENING STORM SURGE AND HURRICANE-FORCE WINDS... SUMMARY OF 500 PM EDT...2100 UTC...INFORMATION ---------------------------------------------- LOCATION...38.8N 74.4W ABOUT 30 MI...45 KM ESE OF CAPE MAY NEW JERSEY ABOUT 40 MI...65 KM S OF ATLANTIC CITY NEW JERSEY MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WINDS...90 MPH...150 KM/H PRESENT MOVEMENT...WNW OR 300 DEGREES AT 28 MPH...44 KM/H MINIMUM CENTRAL PRESSURE...940 MB...27.76 INCHES http://originalweath...t-pressure.html The latest Hurricane Hunter aircraft observations recorded a minimum central pressure of 943 millibars inside of Hurricane Sandy. This is the lowest pressure on record in the Atlantic Basin to the North of Cape Hatteras, NC. The old record was set by the Hurricane of 1938, which now falls to the #2 slot in the record books. Rob White said... UPDATE: A subsequent fly through by the Hurricane Hunters found an even lower pressure of 937 mb inside Sandy! I'll update the post once the final record is reached today. October 29, 2012 11:50 AM Edited November 3, 2012 by Tom Scully (No longer breaking news of unprecedented event) Removed "Temporary" from thread title and moved thread from JFK Debate Forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Once again Scully demonstrates his unfitness as a moderator. One of the forum's rules is "(vii) When you start a thread please make sure it is relevant to the events surrounding the assassination of JFK. We have other areas of the forum where you can post about Politics, History, Mass Media, Sociology, etc. ". The thread is of course completely irrelevant to the assassination but he posted it here because he anted maximum exposure for whatever point he was trying to make. How can he enforce the rules here when he flaunts them himself? I'm sure he'll make a point of pointing out the thread is titled as being temporary but that does not justify this. I refuse to accept his authority, I will undo any edits he makes to my posts and ignore any instructions he gives me unless they are repeated by another moderator or an administrator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 I don't make edits to your posts, Len. At most, I make a "reason for edit" comment, in "the reason fo edit" comment box, but it is my SOP to merely disapprove a post. I serve on a moderating team, Len; a committee. I actually have little or no individual authority for you to refuse to comply with. You report more posts of other members than any other active member, Len. You author more protest threads and protest posts than any other member. You can measure the results of what you are doing? Observing the effects of what you are doing, they seem to be opposite of your intended consequences. Have you noticed that there is very little reaction in proportion to the sheer number of reports of post and protests you generate? Where do you suppose my "authority" you refuse to submit to, still comes from, Len? Very little that goes on in the Ed Forum escapes your notice. You make sure we all know this. I am not exactly a beer drinking buddy of John Simkin, and I do not seem all that closely aligned with any other moderator or administrator. I'll let you in on a li'l secret, Len. I'm not overruled by the other members of the mod team all that often because they know from experience that my more active than average role here is a thankless, irritating job, and they don't want a greater part in it than they have, now. One of the aggravations they seem to have had enough of happens to be you, Len. You ought to be able to figure out that this is a circular dilemma. The more you do what you do, the more support I receive from the other members of the team. Thank you, Len! If not for you, John Simkin would probably have replaced me. I'll move the thread to another area of the Political Conspiracies section, soon. The conspiracy I see is the coordinated refusal of "conservative" elected officials to consider anything but support from the fossil fuels business "community" when the significance of the signs and risks off global warming loom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 I don't make edits to your posts, Len. At most, I make a "reason for edit" comment, in "the reason fo edit" comment box, but it is my SOP to merely disapprove a post. I serve on a moderating team, Len; a committee. I actually have little or no individual authority for you to refuse to comply with. You report more posts of other members than any other active member, Len. You author more protest threads and protest posts than any other member. Perhaps but almost all those reports and protests concern your abuse of the rules you are supposed to enforce this thread is a perfect example. And if I really “report more posts of other members than any other active member” then you guys must not be very busy, correct me if I’m wrong but IIRC in the last 6 months I’ve only reported 1 or 2 posts by Gaal, obviously justified since he was suspended (though I didn’t report the posts that led to his ‘last warning’ or suspension), I reported that a member was using a photo of a famous singer as his avatar and I complained 2 or 3 (or was it 4) times about your blatant abuses of the rules. I don’t care that much about others but hold moderators to a higher standard. Go ahead please post all the reports I’ve made in the last 6 months. You are also a hypocrite, you admonished David for ‘questioning my motives’ and edited out the offending portion (even though I hadn’t reported it, then less than 24 hours later you did the exact same thing. You can measure the results of what you are doing? Observing the effects of what you are doing, they seem to be opposite of your intended consequences. Have you noticed that there is very little reaction in proportion to the sheer number of reports of post and protests you generate? Where do you suppose my "authority" you refuse to submit to, still comes from, Len? Very little that goes on in the Ed Forum escapes your notice. You make sure we all know this. I am not exactly a beer drinking buddy of John Simkin, and I do not seem all that closely aligned with any other moderator or administrator. I'll let you in on a li'l secret, Len. I'm not overruled by the other members of the mod team all that often because they know from experience that my more active than average role here is a thankless, irritating job, and they don't want a greater part in it than they have, now. One of the aggravations they seem to have had enough of happens to be you, Len. In other words you think due your “thankless” martyrdom you should be give leeway to ignore the rules. You ought to be able to figure out that this is a circular dilemma. The more you do what you do, the more support I receive from the other members of the team. Thank you, Len! If not for you, John Simkin would probably have replaced me. In others I’m not the only person who thinks you are unfit, that doesn’t do much for your case. I'll move the thread to another area of the Political Conspiracies section, soon. The conspiracy I see is the coordinated refusal of "conservative" elected officials to consider anything but support from the fossil fuels business "community" when the significance of the signs and risks off global warming loom. Whatever you know and knew it has no place here but where so impressed with your brilliant (in your own mind) insight you decided to foist it on the JFK Assassination forum. I note didn’t even try to justify posting here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 SANDY IN PERPECTIVE wiki Most intense (by minimum surface air pressure) Most intense ever recorded: 870 mbar (25.63 inHg); eye of Super Typhoon Tip over the Pacific Ocean, 12 October 1979.[75] Most intense in the Western Hemisphere: 882 mb (26.05 inHg); eye of Hurricane Wilma, 19 October 2005.[126] Most intense ever recorded on land: 892 mb (26.35 inHg); Craig's Key, Florida, eye of the Labor Day Hurricane, 2 September 1935. While other landfalling tropical cyclones potentially had lower pressures, data is vague from areas other than the Atlantic basin, especially before the invention of weather satellites.[127] +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Lowest Barometric Pressures Ever Measured (900 mlb or lower)* **RANK PRESSURE LOCATION DATE NAME 1) 870 (25.69) W. Pacific 10/12/1979 Tip 2) 872 (25.75) W. Pacific 10/19/1997 Joan 872 (25.75) W. Pacific 10/18/1997 Ivan 872 (25.75) W. Pacific 11/21/1992 Gay 3) 876 (25.86) W. Pacific 9/23/1983 Forrest 876 (25.86) W. Pacific 11/20/1975 June 4) 877 (25.89) W. Pacific 10/5/1973 Nora 5) 878 (25.92) W. Pacific 5/10/2000 Damrey 878 (25.92) W. Pacific 10/14/1998 Zeb 878 (25.92) W. Pacific 11/2/1997 Keith 878 (25.92) W. Pacific 10/11/1992 Yvette 878 (25.92) W. Pacific 10/23/1978 Rita 879 (25.95) W. Pacific 8/23/2004 Chaba 6) 879 (25.95) W. Pacific 12/17/2001 Faxai 879 (25.95) W. Pacific 10/30/1995 Angela 879 (25.95) W. Pacific 10/24/1984 Vanessa 7) 882 (26.05) Caribbean 10/19/2005 Wilma 882 (26.05) W. Pacific 9/13/1961 Nancey 882 (26.05) W. Pacific 10/7/1961 Violet 9) 884 (26.11) W. Pacific 11/11/1971 Irma 10) 885 (26.14) W. Pacific 6/17/2004 Dianmu 885 (26.14) W. Pacific 9/9/2003 Maemi 885 (26.14) W. Pacific 11/27/1991 Yuri 885 (26.14) W. Pacific 11/10/1990 Mike 11) 886 (26.16) W. Pacific 12/16/1900 SS Arethusa 12) 887 (26.18) W. Pacific 8/20/1979 Judy 887 (26.18) W. Pacific 8/18/1927 SS Sapoeroea 13) 888 (26.22) Caribbean 11/13/1988 Gilbert 888 (26.22) W. Pacific 8/10/1983 Abby 14) 890 (26.27) W. Pacific 8/8/1980 Wynke 890 (26.27) W. Pacific 9/22/1969 Elsie 890 (26.27) W. Pacific 11/13/1967 Gilda 891 (26.30) W. Pacific 6/17/2003 Lupit 15) 891 (26.30) W. Pacific 9/15/1990 Flo 891 (26.30) W. Pacific 8/12/1987 Betty 891 (26.30) W. Pacific 11/23/1987 Nima 891 (26.30) W. Pacific 8/27/1959 Joan 891 (26.30) Bay of Bengal 1833 SS Duke of York 16) 892 (26.35) W. Pacific 4/20/1997 Isa 892 (26.35) W. Pacific 9/27/1997 Ginger 892 (26.35) W. Pacific 11/3/1992 Elsie 892 (26.35) W. Pacific 10/24/1991 Ruth *** 892 (26.35) Long Key, Florida 9/5/1935 Labor Day Storm 17) 893 (26.37) W. Pacific 9/26/1981 Elysie 893 (26.37) W. Pacific 10/15/1973 Patsy 18) 894 (26.39) W. Pacific 9/6/1964 Sally 19) 895 (26.39) W. Pacific 10/4/1982 Mac 895 (26.42) W. Pacific 11/3/1976 Louise 895 (26.42) W. Pacific 5/3/1971 Amy 895 (26.42) W. Pacific 9/23/1970 Hope 20) 896 (26.45) W. Pacific 11/3/1983 Marge 896 (26.45) W. Pacific 9/24/1959 Vera 21) 897 (26.48) Gulf of Mexico 9/21/2005 Rita 897 (26.48) W. Pacific 10/17/1985 Dot 897 (26.48) W. Pacific 7/25/1969 Viola 897 (26.48) W. Pacific 11/12/1962 Karen 22) 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 10/6/2004 Ma-On 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 5/16/2004 Nida 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 3/9/2002 Hary 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 10/23/2001 Podul 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 9/7/2000 Saomai 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 8/21/2000 Bilis 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 9/20/1999 Bart 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 9/11/1997 Oliwa 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 8/13/1997 Winnie 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 7/23/1997 Rosie 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 6/10/1997 Nestor 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 11/7/1996 Dale 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 9/7/1996 Sally 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 7/25/1996 Herd 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 7/16/1996 Eve 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 10/18/1995 Ward 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 9/14/1995 Oscar 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 8/28/1995 Kent 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 8/7/1994 Doug 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 10/4/1993 Ed 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 5/10/1991 Walt 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 11/26/1990 Owen 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 11/22/1990 Page 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 11/30/1989 Nima 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 10/18/1989 Elsie 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 7/14/1989 Gordon 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 4/21/1989 Andy 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 10/4/1988 Nelson 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 10/20/1987 Lynn 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 9/8/1987 Holly 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 7/29/1979 Hope 898 (26.51) W. Pacific 7/23/1971 Nadine 23) 899 (26.54) Caribbean 8/7/1980 Allen * With the exception of a handful of lucky observations by ships, data prior to 1950 is inconclusive. Western Pacific typhoons were not consistently investigated by aircraft until 1959. Lower pressures undoubtedly occurred in earlier years in the Atlantic Basin before hurricane-hunting aircraft began making routine surveillance of tropical storms in 1950. So these records really represent only about 50 years of observation. ** Ranking has been made chronologically, with more recent measurements ranking first. *** This is the lowest pressure ever observed at a land station. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 (edited) My family and I have been in Ventnor City... about 3 miles south of AC for almost 100 years.. Been thru MANY storms, Hurricanes, last year's freak windstorm and Irene... there has NEVER been water on Atlantic and Ventnor avenues... The Longport Marina photo - bottom right across inlet - is where we keep our boats... that photo shows about $50 million worth of homes with sand left from the water that went from ocean to Inlet.. ============= Maybe Len can find some humanity under all his complaining... Maybe - just maybe, Len can turn the channel when he doesn't like the show rather than yelling at the TV In years past you actually "contributed" here, I used to enjoy reading your POV... you seemed to have knowledge and the ability to discuss... Now you just keep sounding like a whiny child... on thread after thread after thread. So big bad Tom hurt your feelings... take a hint: Edited March 7, 2017 by David Josephs need room for new attachments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Get off it David, it has nothing to do with concern about how people fared during Sandy and how they have been since (“humanity”). Tom started this thread to make a political point, the fact that I largely agree with him is irrelevant. He knew it would get less attention elsewhere so posted it here. If you or I had done such a thing the thread would have been quickly moved. Tom is a hypocrite he moved threads that had some relevance to the assassination, and it wasn’t the 1st time he has violated a rule after enforcing it against others. ‘Whining”???, “hurt my feelings”??? hardly, he does piss me off though, his hypocrisy and arrogance irritates me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now