×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Sky Watchers Want Recognized a Newly Described Type of Cloud

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the but-armageddon-is-a-place dept.

Earth 166

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."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I suggest (5, Funny)

zapakh (1256518) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709173)

"Armageddulus"

Re:I suggest (4, Funny)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709805)

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

Pretty simple for me. (2, Insightful)

More_Cowbell (957742) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709175)

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.

Re:Pretty simple for me. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709185)

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

my hobby (5, Funny)

HNS-I (1119771) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709197)

Yeah, the reflections are all wrong. Definitely photoshopped.

Re:my hobby (0)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709285)

It's a photo where everything is dark, except for clouds. What reflections?

Also, there's more than one picture of them. Here [wikipedia.org] is another one from Wikipedia.

Re:my hobby (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709779)

The reflections of whoooooosh:)

http://xkcd.com/331/

Re:my hobby (5, Funny)

Sparx139 (1460489) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709295)

Re:my hobby (3, Funny)

caitsith01 (606117) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710353)

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

Re:my hobby (1)

The_mad_linguist (1019680) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709383)

I can tell by the pixels, and from having seen quite a few shops in my time.

Re:Pretty simple for me. (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709335)

So where is the problem?

Better question: So IS there a problem? Sounds like the World Meteorological Organization just hasn't officially said "yeah, new cloud." You have to give experts time to weigh in, the guy quoted in the article as saying this was still going over the data, looking at the weather patterns for those locations. And it's not like this scientific organization sits around in a commune waiting for new meteorological news to come in and act immediately. Next meeting those guys have, I'd guess they will officially put it in their official book unless someone convinces more people that it's shopped or false. Then again, IANAM(eteorologist).

Re:Pretty simple for me. (5, Informative)

toby34a (944439) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709597)

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.

Re:Pretty simple for me. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709689)

I have an earth shattering cloud formation in my room right now. It's a silent and deadly cloud. Damn beans... I even threw out the soak water this time.

Re:Pretty simple for me. (1)

kdemetter (965669) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710217)

I guess that's the point open for discussion : is it a new cloud or not.

I guess this is as interesting for meteorologists as the discussion whether Pluto is a planet or not , is for astronomers .

Most people won't care as the name will be to difficult to remember anyway.

Re:Pretty simple for me. (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29710637)

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.

Re:Pretty simple for me. (3, Informative)

Alioth (221270) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709407)

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.

Re:Pretty simple for me. (1)

Katchu (1036242) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709487)

No, read the article. Look at Wikipedia article about how mammatus looks and may be formed and compare it with the article. quote: "It's warmer, moister air above and colder, drier air below, with an abrupt boundary in between." Add wind passing over rolling terrain and "you get the same wavy effect as on the surface of water."

Re:Pretty simple for me. (1)

Alioth (221270) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710645)

But that's also a known and documented phenomenon - wave clouds (which we get very often here).

Re:Pretty simple for me. (5, Informative)

Rei (128717) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709491)

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 [darkroastedblend.com] . And yes, they actually do look that unreal.

Re:Pretty simple for me. (1)

Jarik C-Bol (894741) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710345)

Ah yes, Mammatus clouds. Sky full of asses.
Coincidentally enough, we had Mammatus formations where i live, 4 days ago. (wednesday evening)

Re:Pretty simple for me. (3, Funny)

smoker2 (750216) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710435)

Breasts not asses. Mammal, mammaries, TITS !

Re:Pretty simple for me. (4, Funny)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709431)

And while you're at it, also add this puppy [flickr.com]

Re:Pretty simple for me. (1)

bronney (638318) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709553)

you clearly have too much time on your "hands".

Re:Pretty simple for me. (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709595)

you clearly have too much time on your "hands".

Sorry for this, I forgot to "douche". Just consider it as natural lube...

alto-cirrus (5, Interesting)

conureman (748753) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709181)

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?

Re:alto-cirrus (5, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709381)

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.

Re:alto-cirrus (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709727)

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

Re:alto-cirrus (1)

InfoHighwayRoadkill (454730) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710323)

oh how I wish I had mod points right now... well done sir

Mod parent up (1)

SoVeryTired (967875) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710713)

For a very smart reference to The Orb [youtube.com]

Re:alto-cirrus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29710241)

You really should take cover when funnel clouds are forming. That sounds like a fantastic image, though. Pics?

Re:alto-cirrus (2, Insightful)

Laser_iCE (1125271) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709391)

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

Re:alto-cirrus (3, Insightful)

dbIII (701233) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709419)

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.

Re:alto-cirrus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709641)

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

The question here is not "is the climate changing", rather "is the changing climate the cause of the change in types of clouds". The "common sense" answer is probably yes, but that's not how science works.

Re:alto-cirrus (3, Informative)

camperdave (969942) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710767)

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.

Re:alto-cirrus (0, Flamebait)

glitch23 (557124) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709561)

Climate change, perhaps?

Yeah, otherwise known as the four seasons.

Re:alto-cirrus (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709599)

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?

Cirrus clouds can be formed from airplane contrails. So most likely it's just heavier air traffic.

Re:alto-cirrus (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710285)

The FAA wants us to believe that, but air traffic has not increased as much as the occurrence of these clouds. You can see it just from big sky pictures; it's hard to find one without contrails in it today; it's relatively difficult to find one with 'em from fifteen years ago. Either something dramatically is different with the sky, or with the planes, and it's not the number of aircraft.

Re:alto-cirrus (1)

snero3 (610114) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709661)

Totally understand where you are coming from but wouldn't this make more sense

"The formation has probably been around for a long time, but it's only now getting attention: "Before the Internet and digicams, people might have mentioned it to a few friends and that would be it,"

Re:alto-cirrus (1)

mrmeval (662166) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709783)

Kudos for using the right alarmist code word. Considering the code words "Impending Ice Age" and "Glowbull Warming" have been an embarrassment to those using it it was the right call.

Re:alto-cirrus (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710127)

Perhaps you recently moved to California.

Best. Cloud. Ever. (4, Funny)

dangitman (862676) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709191)

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

Re:Best. Cloud. Ever. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709201)

i can't wait for this to be modded +5 Funny because you cleverly managed to reuse the concept from a slashdot threaded endlessly discussed earlier today and used a not-at-all obnoxious-separation-of words-through-misuse-of-punctuation technique in your title.

i suspect others will gain +5 Funny moderation by noting i parody through hypocrisy.

Re:Best. Cloud. Ever. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709339)

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

Re:Best. Cloud. Ever. (1)

lastgoodnickname (1438821) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709457)

Best. Comment. In the past few minutes, except for all the others.

Re:Best. Cloud. Ever. (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710043)

That'll be safe as soon as my patent application to this new cloud has been filed.

forest for the trees... (1)

FallinWithStyle (1474217) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709217)

"Some have said the clouds look like Armageddon has arrived." ... Others have said, that once you enter the cloud, things get really foggy and damp... What's the point of this again?

Re:forest for the trees... (2, Funny)

Shadow of Eternity (795165) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709237)

What's the point of this again?

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

Re:forest for the trees... (3, Insightful)

flydude18 (839328) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709515)

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.

Undulatus Asperatus (1)

infiniphonic (657188) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709251)

Seen it. Took a picture. Just sent it to them. I was at a camp out. Everybody totally freaked out and hid in their tents and vehicles.

Re:Undulatus Asperatus (1)

Gnea (2566) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709325)

Wikipedia seems to have some references to this as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undulatus_asperatus

We get those in Texas (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709255)

I'll never forget being outside with my wife and we noted how strange-looking the clouds were. I was thinking of epic battles and soldiers raging forth from Valhalla instead of Armageddon, though. Later, we saw a guy out in a field taking pictures of them. They're pretty neat! And it's good to be hearing more about them.

More Clouds ... (4, Informative)

foobsr (693224) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709261)

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

The Cloud Appreciation Society [cloudappre...ociety.org]

CC.

Re:More Clouds ... (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709319)

Well, now we suspect an Adobe pluggin to make those kinds of clouds en-mass. Our conspiracy shall not die! ;-P

Re:More Clouds ... (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709439)

And more here [flickr.com]

Re:More Clouds ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709935)

I saw a few of these clouds on Youtube as well.
And while i am one to always refute a "photoshopped" comment... even i thought the clouds looked unreal.

I think someone screwed around with the Matrix code.

Re:More Clouds ... (2, Funny)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710235)

I think someone screwed around with the Matrix code.

The Matrix uses cloud computing?

in other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709263)

Slashdotters want corrected a better grammatically post title.

(captcha: contempt)

Re:in other news... (3, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709365)

Slashdotters want corrected a better grammatically post title.

Yoda hater!
   

win some, lose some (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709273)

Call it "Pluto"

Re:win some, lose some (1)

stonedcat (80201) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709791)

We would but we're afraid some assholes will come along 2/3 of a decade from now and decide it's not a real cloud.

Mammatus (1)

barnacle (522370) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709277)

Looks like mammatus clouds - something any pilot would instantly recognize (and avoid)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammatus [wikipedia.org]

Re:Mammatus (1)

Gnea (2566) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709303)

No, these are more wavey in form, rather than bulbous.

More like this: http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-5/729624/clouds_Iowa.JPG

Re:Mammatus (2, Interesting)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709451)

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.

Seen it. (1)

Gnea (2566) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709283)

It's usually out in extreme rural areas, where cold and warm fronts usually push against each other. Northwest Iowa is a perfect example, up near South Dakota and Minnesota.

Pillows, Marshmallows, and Rainbows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709299)

I like clouds. They're fluffy, like bunny tails.

Re:Pillows, Marshmallows, and Rainbows (1)

lastgoodnickname (1438821) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709481)

But they don't taste the same.

Photoshoped and Wrong place in Scotland (1)

NSN A392-99-964-5927 (1559367) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709311)

I know Scotland quite well. This is on the East Coast of Scotland in Inverurie slightly North West West of Aberdeen and in between Peterhead. You just do not get this weather coming over the North Sea in Land. wired.com have got this totally wrong and as another user has pointed out, it was edited in Photoshop. I can now confirm this. As I downloaded the picture and just opened it in Photoshop CS4 and it has clearly been "heavily edited". Nice one wired.com for wasting my time and others. The photograph was submitted by Photo: Danielle Maxwell. You would have least thought wired.com would have checked the validity of this.

Re: Photoshoped - What about all the others? (1)

Telephone Sanitizer (989116) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709387)

> it was edited in Photoshop. I can now confirm this.

Perhaps that image was.

What about these?

http://images.google.com/images?q=undulatus%20asperatus&hl=en&safe=off [google.com]

Re: Photoshoped - What about all the others? (2, Funny)

Vintermann (400722) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709429)

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

Re: Photoshoped - What about all the others? (4, Funny)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709603)

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

Yes. Or else it would miss the best site [undulatus-...tus.org.lu]

Re:Photoshoped and Wrong place in Scotland (1)

Serious Callers Only (1022605) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709621)

As I downloaded the picture and just opened it in Photoshop CS4 and it has clearly been "heavily edited".

Photoshop is used for adjusting contrast and levels as well as retouching images - almost every image you see published will have gone through photoshop (save on sites like flickr.com). That the image passed through photoshop on the way to being published on wired is really no surprise. There are certainly heavy jpeg artefacts on the image, but that's not surprising either, could have been introduced by the camera or wired resaving as lower-res.

What do you mean by 'heavily edited', and why is that in quotes - did someone tell you this and you're repeating it to us?

Re:Photoshoped and Wrong place in Scotland (1)

smoker2 (750216) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710505)

WTF is north west west ? Did you mean west north west ? And you must have fucking good eyesight to determine that this picture was taken anywhere specific. A few power lines and a couple of rooflines with trees around. Maybe you could give us the GPS coordinates smartarse. And opening a probable 3rd generation image in photoshop proves nothing. There is no image data available other than size.

I have a picture of this from Dallas (1)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709373)

This occured on May 25th 2009 in Dallas, just north of downtown. I'm sure if you search flickr for that geotag/timestamp, other pictures of it will show up in outdoor pics in the background of the images. Here's my 2megapixel cell phone camera picture of it:
 
  http://nearlydeaf.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/IMG00395.jpg [nearlydeaf.com]
 
And here's my shameless personal blog plug about my entry about it just now:
 
  http://nearlydeaf.com/?p=377 [nearlydeaf.com]
 
I'll admit my picture isn't as good as the one posted in Wired (it hasn't been photoshopped to hell with image contrast and color saturation), but I was on my lunch break trying to meet up with a friend for lunch at the mall that day.

Re:I have a picture of this from Dallas (1)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709409)

Ooops, I have a second, better pic of said undulatus asperatus. This one was taken at Skillman and Mockingbird, Dallas, TX - about 3 miles north of downtown:
 
  http://nearlydeaf.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/IMG00396.jpg [nearlydeaf.com]

I May have seen it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709377)

I have seen something similar on http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html [nasa.gov] some time ago. Not sure if they fit in the same family.
The link is http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap071230.html [nasa.gov] (thanks to the search engine)

And a bonus picture: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap090121.html [nasa.gov]

FFS (1)

Alioth (221270) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709393)

These clouds do have a name - they are called mammatus clouds. They are typically associated with convective activity. They are not unknown, and there are thousands of photos of mammatus clouds on the internet. We get them occasionally where I live. I understand they are most frequent in places like the mid West in the United States, but that doesn't mean you don't occasionally see them in other places - such as where I live, or in Scotland.

Re:FFS (1)

jaygridley (1016588) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709645)

I've seen mammatus clouds..those aren't it.

Re:FFS (1)

Alioth (221270) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710657)

Not all mammatus clouds look exactly the same. The ones in the cited article most certainly are - just because they don't look exactly like boobies doesn't mean they aren't mammatus.

Also spotted in Spain. (1)

Gnea (2566) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709395)

The city of Malaga in Spain has experienced these as well:

http://tinyurl.com/yzmoqnu [tinyurl.com]

Rorschach Clouds (2, Funny)

bobdotorg (598873) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709437)

Rorschach Clouds. Seriously.

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

Re:Rorschach Clouds (2, Funny)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709625)

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 [undulatus-...tus.org.lu]

Re:Rorschach Clouds (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710223)

This is clearly manipulated. You even still see the hands!

I am not a cloud expert (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709445)

So I will just say... those look really, really cool.

cumulus mammatus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709489)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammatus_cloud [wikipedia.org]

Not new. Always ominous looking, for good reason.

Mammatus Lenticularis. (4, Interesting)

rew (6140) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709551)

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.

This is what I needed, yet another fad. (1)

thatkid_2002 (1529917) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709711)

The cloud is just a fad.

meh, not all that interesting/new (2, Interesting)

CAIMLAS (41445) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709809)

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...

Anonymous Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709815)

I'd say this is an undulatus asperatus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undulatus_asperatus

RTACO (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29709819)

those uber-aashole there are could save it

Cumulo-Fracto-Nimbus. (1)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709841)

The king of all clouds.

OMG . . . (1)

Gabrill (556503) | more than 5 years ago | (#29709969)

Are we so hard up that we are now ogling cloud boobs?

Do they have... (1)

Cheesetrap (1597399) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710085)

Do they have the one that looks like a whale? :D

.

P.S: Try to resist the urge to respond to this with yo-mama jokes ;)

That's no cloud (1)

Helge9210 (759666) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710221)

It's moving fast against the wind.

WMO, not WMF (2, Informative)

Lord Satri (609291) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710415)

not yet recognized by the World Meteorological Foundation

Not surprising, since it's called the World Meteorological Organization [wmo.int] .

Undulations? (2, Informative)

pgn674 (995941) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710491)

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.

If I saw one of those ... (1)

Tim Ward (514198) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710545)

... I'd keep well out of its way.

I'd probably stay on the ground, actually, unless someone experienced in flying in that sort of weather was able to convince me that it was OK.

I think they are a variation of Mammatus clouds (1)

Aging_Newbie (16932) | more than 5 years ago | (#29710755)

When I was in Southern Illinois Mammatus clouds [wikipedia.org] were evident now and again. Usually they were associated with very unstable air and sometimes preceded severe storms by a while. Once you see them, they are pretty distinctive. They really do look like angel breasts.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?