Some Refinements to the Gimbal Sim

[TheCholla]

About the date for the event, I attach a csv file that lists occurrences of wind > 110 knots at 400 hPa (near 25,000ft), between January 1 and January 25 2015, inside a 300-mile circle from Jacksonville, also excluding day time (between 7am and 3pm local).

Apart from the evening/night of January 24, the closest date would be the night of January 7. Unless they waited 2 weeks to extract the Gimbal video, exactly the night of another high-wind event, this must be it.

I also share the ERA5 data file (Netcdf format) that includes hourly 'u' and 'v' (zonal and meridional components of wind, m/s), 'ws' (wind speed, in knots), and 'height', corresponding altitude in feet (plus 'z', geopotential height, but don't needed here), at different pressure levels. So anyone can check.
Link to ERA5 data for Jan2015

 

[Mick West]

I've banned Zaine. His posts were getting increasingly incomprehensible, and he's admitted to relying on AI for his analysis, which is probably why.

If he wishes to contribute to the discussion, I suggest he finds someone willing to put in the time to follow what he is saying and check it. So far, it seems to have been a giant waste of time for everyone involved. Perhaps he can team up with @TheCholla or Marik.

 

[TheCholla]

Incomprehensible to you.

Zaine has proposed an explanation for the clouds misalignment, for which you have none (or a hypothetical additional dero that doesn't hold water). There has been a lot of interesting points in the discussion, but you prefer to shut it off suddenly.

I personally think the distant plane for Gimbal is wrong and has been a giant waste of time too, doesn't mean I can't discuss it.

And how do you know he has used AI only? For which points he made? Horizons mismatch is not from AI, his panorama isn't from AI...

 

[Mick West]

I've looked in depth at several points he's raised over the years, and they are all complex theories built upon misunderstandings. I feel like it's wasting everyone's time.

This thread, and the forum, remains open to you and others to make more focused and well-grounded points, which can include continuations of Zaine's arguments, if you can communicate their validity.

 

[TheCholla]

they are all complex theories built upon misunderstandings

The theory that cloud motion is at an angle because of depression in the elevation angle of the camera, it is not complex, and it is not a misunderstanding.

You simply don't like it because it's inconvenient to your debunk. Or not so inconvenient in fact because the plane can do anything. So what's the matter? I don't see these complex theories based on misunderstandings by Zaine. He doesn't always explain himself very clearly (we all don't) but that's not some obscure theories out of nowhere.

 

[Mick West]

The theory that cloud motion is at an angle because of depression in the elevation angle of the camera, it is not complex, and it is not a misunderstanding.

It's something I'm planning on getting around to investigating. But, as I've said, I'm not entirely interested in this, and have other things to do.

Maybe Zaine will be spurred to do a full 3D recreation.