Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sky Watchers Want Recognized a Newly Described Type of Cloud

Posted by timothy on from the but-armageddon-is-a-place dept.

phantomfive writes "In Iowa and Scotland there are reports of a type of cloud not yet recognized by the World Meteorological Foundation. It seems the cloud does not match any of the clouds in the International Cloud Atlas, and thus there is a campaign underway to have it included. Some have said the clouds look like Armageddon has arrived."

38 of 166 comments (clear)

  1. I suggest by zapakh · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Armageddulus"

    1. Re:I suggest by aaaaaaargh! · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's always newsworthy when something has happened in Iowa.

  2. Pretty simple for me. by More_Cowbell · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not a meteorologist, but I love clouds and have looked at thousands of cloud photos over the years. Never seen any exactly like this. FTA, no one seems to dispute that these are so far undocumented. ... So where is the problem? Add a new cloud already.

    --
    Experience teaches only the teachable. -AH
    1. Re:Pretty simple for me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      i am an expert on photoshop and i can tell by the pixels around the text that this is a photoshop pic not real

    2. Re:Pretty simple for me. by Alioth · · Score: 3, Informative

      They are not undocumented, they do indeed have a name and are called "mammatus clouds". They just aren't very common. There are thousands of photos of mammatus on the internet.

      --
      Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
    3. Re:Pretty simple for me. by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 4, Funny

      And while you're at it, also add this puppy

    4. Re:Pretty simple for me. by Rei · · Score: 5, Informative

      Indeed. Mammatus aren't too common, but they're really creepy when you do see them in person; it's a whole, "clouds aren't supposed to look like that!" feeling. There's some great photos here. And yes, they actually do look that unreal.

      --
      "I'm GOD! Yapple Dapple!" -- God, "Jesus Christ Supercop"
    5. Re:Pretty simple for me. by toby34a · · Score: 5, Informative

      There most likely is no problem. I actually AM a meteorologist (BS, MS, and finishing up my PhD) and these just look like some cumulus lenticularis- the formation mechanism is due to some waveform within the atmosphere that causes regular forms of condensation that appear like this. These are nothing really new, the sceintific basis is pretty good for these clouds to be listed. It's a 2-D wave pattern with a good airmass boundary. It's definitely neat, but it's not like it's earth-shattering cloud formation.

    6. Re:Pretty simple for me. by smoker2 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Breasts not asses. Mammal, mammaries, TITS !

    7. Re:Pretty simple for me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I am a meteorologist too.

      I remember, when I was studying meteorology, people expected me to be on some kind of first-name basis with clouds.

      "Hey what's that cloud over there?"
      "Oh that's a cumulonimbus capillatus but his real name is Bob".

      Cloud names are highly overrated by the uninitiated. Forget the impressive-sounding latin names. They are fanciful descriptions of the appearance of a cloud but they don't tell you much beyond that.

      I would go as far as to say that the interesting feature in this picture is the wave action at the interface between two atmospheric layers. The cloud just happens to make the waves visible. It is garden-variety cloud, hardly worth mentionning actually.

    8. Re:Pretty simple for me. by Anpheus · · Score: 5, Funny

      But what's his name? His story? Did he survive hardship to get to where he is today?

    9. Re:Pretty simple for me. by Ambiguous+Puzuma · · Score: 2, Informative

      I see Latin scientific names as a separate namespace used to avoid ambiguity between descriptions and classification/labels. That way two things can appear alike (resulting in similar descriptions) but can still be concisely distinguished based on less obvious characteristics.

  3. alto-cirrus by conureman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the olden days, when I was a kid, alto-cirrus were notable for their rarity. Nowadays, in California at least, they seem almost a daily phenomena. Climate change, perhaps?

    --
    The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
    1. Re:alto-cirrus by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Funny

      In the olden days, when I was a kid, alto-cirrus were notable for their rarity. Nowadays, in California at least, they seem almost a daily phenomena. Climate change, perhaps?

      In my day, clouds were rainbowy in color and had spirals and thousands of moving finger-like projections. We'd see them all the time on the hill where the mushrooms grew.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    2. Re:alto-cirrus by Laser_iCE · · Score: 2, Insightful

      At this point in time does anyone deny that our climate is changing?

    3. Re:alto-cirrus by dbIII · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The "Heartland Institute" who will also tell you that tobacco is safe are the main offender there.
      It was all a lot simpler 30 years ago before it became a magnet for anti-intellectual nutcases using it as the new soft target to try to prove that science is worthless.

    4. Re:alto-cirrus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      you might still see that in the desert. little fluffy clouds.

    5. Re:alto-cirrus by camperdave · · Score: 3, Informative

      The question isn't THAT the climate is changing, but WHY and HOW the climate is changing. Is it part of the natural cycle of climate change? Is it caused by years of burning fossil fuels? Is it a side effect of cutting down the forests? Maybe it's tied to the weird sunspot activity, or the ocean saline currents. Perhaps it always happens just before the Earth's magnetic core switches polarity. Some say we are due for an ice age. Some say the Earth is getting warmer.

      There's no shortage of speculation, just of solid conclusions.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  4. Best. Cloud. Ever. by dangitman · · Score: 4, Funny

    Though I'm not sure I would want to store my data in it.

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
    1. Re:Best. Cloud. Ever. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mainly, I'm expecting you to get lots of 'redundant'.

  5. my hobby by HNS-I · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yeah, the reflections are all wrong. Definitely photoshopped.

    1. Re:my hobby by Sparx139 · · Score: 5, Funny

      For those that don't get it

      --
      Our culture doesn't get smarter, it just finds new ways of being retarded.
    2. Re:my hobby by caitsith01 · · Score: 3, Funny

      How appropriate - XKCD truly is the comic for people who don't get it.

      --
      Read Pynchon.
  6. Re:forest for the trees... by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 2, Funny

    What's the point of this again?

    No, these are argumentus roundillus. You're thinking of cynicus pointillus.

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
  7. More Clouds ... by foobsr · · Score: 4, Informative

    ... for all those who suspect 'Photoshop':

    The Cloud Appreciation Society

    CC.

    --
    TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    1. Re:More Clouds ... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think someone screwed around with the Matrix code.

      The Matrix uses cloud computing?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  8. Re:in other news... by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Funny

    Slashdotters want corrected a better grammatically post title.

    Yoda hater!
       

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
  9. Re: Photoshoped - What about all the others? by Vintermann · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is there any need for that safe=off in your query string?

    --
    xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  10. Rorschach Clouds by bobdotorg · · Score: 2, Funny

    Rorschach Clouds. Seriously.

    I look at that picture and all I see are breasts. Mmmmmmmmmmmmm... Boobie Clouds.

    --
    __ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
    1. Re:Rorschach Clouds by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 2, Funny

      Rorschach Clouds. Seriously.
      I look at that picture and all I see are breasts. Mmmmmmmmmmmmm... Boobie Clouds.

      And here are some clouds that swing the other way

  11. Re:Mammatus by TeknoHog · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I agree, it does look like a flat-breasted version of mammatus, complete with the similarly well-defined surface. However, one might ask why the instability does not develop any further into a full mammatus. So perhaps there is a qualitatively different phenomenon.

    --
    Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  12. Re:forest for the trees... by flydude18 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's not the ominous-looking clouds that worry me. If you read the article, the first line says "In hill country from Iowa to the Scottish Highlands..."

    The sudden and inexplicable appearance of hills in Iowa will keep me up all night.

  13. Mammatus Lenticularis. by rew · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Two clicks away from the article, I found the name "mammatus lenticularis".

    Lenticularis are lens-like clouds that usually hang just above the peak of a mountain. These are caused by a warmer layer of air on top being pushed above the condensation level by the wind having to go over a mountain.

    These look like mamatus, but more creepy. Less regular.

    So referring to mammatus refers to the way they look. Referring to lenticularis refers to the way they form: In exactly the same way as normal lenticularis does.

    1. Re:Mammatus Lenticularis. by Scrameustache · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So referring to mammatus refers to the way they look. Referring to lenticularis refers to the way they form:

      I'm pretty sure they're named lenticular because they're lens-shaped.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

  14. Re: Photoshoped - What about all the others? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is there any need for that safe=off in your query string?

    Yes. Or else it would miss the best site

  15. meh, not all that interesting/new by CAIMLAS · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This isn't all that interesting/new to me. Maybe I'm just not enough of a cloudy-scientist-type, but out here on the plains, I tend to spend a great deal of time looking up at the clouds (not much else to look at).

    Clouds like these seem to come around out here on the Dakota plains this time of year - aka during hurricane/tornado season. I've seen them a handful of times, and they are kinda freaky. I think each of the times I saw them it was due to several fronts of differing temperatures converging - ie, not just two fronts, but a hot and cold front, as well as another of unknown median temperature. Oddly, I don't recall any storms accompanying them, though there was a little dribbling a time or two as well as some very high up lightning.

    I'm pretty sure that this isn't a "cloud structure" so much as multiple cloud structures at different altitudes passing each other and possibly causing turbulence in the other layers - not a subduction, per se, but something like one. But what do I know, I don't even know the proper names for all the different clouds...

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  16. WMO, not WMF by Lord+Satri · · Score: 2, Informative

    not yet recognized by the World Meteorological Foundation

    Not surprising, since it's called the World Meteorological Organization.

    --
    Animoog.org
  17. Undulations? by pgn674 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I am by no means an expert or even amature cloud identifier, but those look like severe Altostratus Undulatus to me. And actually, ever since the summer of 2005, I've noticed them a lot here near Portland, Maine, when I never noticed them before. When they get well pronounced, it does look Armageddonish.