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."

9 of 166 comments (clear)

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

    "Armageddulus"

  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  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 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.

  7. 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?