I'm pretty sure the 100% real person who told him their insurance company might not pay for the damage could have also provided the name; if he was actually worried about it and not distracted by the novelty of a boat on the land.
(And it wasn't even his boat! Who knew Hurricanes were so wild?)
The sea levels have risen. By about 6 inches. Higher seas mean higher coastal flooding from the same storm surge strength, and higher coastal flooding means longer lasting and higher inland flooding. So hurricanes could remain the exact same strength, and simply higher sea levels would mean more damage to low lying coastal states like the ones I describe.
How much of the sea level rise is attributable to which sources? Glaciers have obviously retreated significantly (I've visited a few and the pictures from, say, 1910 vs. the terrain you say today is unbelievable). Is the bulk of it from Greenland or Antarctic melting or what?
Absurdly the breakdown goes like this...
2 inches of sea level rise is due to glaciers melting
2 inches of sea level rise is due to Antarctic and Greenland melting
4 inches is (and I had a hard time believing this until I did the calculations) THE THERMAL EXPANSION OF THE OCEAN.
Oh yes, if it gets 3 C warmer, even if we can somehow contain all the extra water in a giant bath, the ocean will still get a foot deeper just due to thermal expansion. Thats how deep the damn ocean is. It's nutty. Even if you don't think glaciers melt, or if you think that the Antarctic floats, then if it gets warmer, the sea still gets deeper just because the water gets bigger.
C'mon now, it's not the wildlife that'll kill people in Florida.
It's the Floridians.
In addition to their own crop of snakes, spiders, alligators, and crocodiles, Florida has invasive piranhas, northern snakeheads, various large constrictors, large lizards, a couple troops of monkies known for messing with people, and armored catfish that while harmless to humans have learned to love the taste of manatee skin.
It isn't quite Australia in terms of terror beasts, but they're clearly working on getting there.
Hevach on
+4
Options
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
The sea levels have risen. By about 6 inches. Higher seas mean higher coastal flooding from the same storm surge strength, and higher coastal flooding means longer lasting and higher inland flooding. So hurricanes could remain the exact same strength, and simply higher sea levels would mean more damage to low lying coastal states like the ones I describe.
How much of the sea level rise is attributable to which sources? Glaciers have obviously retreated significantly (I've visited a few and the pictures from, say, 1910 vs. the terrain you say today is unbelievable). Is the bulk of it from Greenland or Antarctic melting or what?
Absurdly the breakdown goes like this...
2 inches of sea level rise is due to glaciers melting
2 inches of sea level rise is due to Antarctic and Greenland melting
4 inches is (and I had a hard time believing this until I did the calculations) THE THERMAL EXPANSION OF THE OCEAN.
Oh yes, if it gets 3 C warmer, even if we can somehow contain all the extra water in a giant bath, the ocean will still get a foot deeper just due to thermal expansion. Thats how deep the damn ocean is. It's nutty. Even if you don't think glaciers melt, or if you think that the Antarctic floats, then if it gets warmer, the sea still gets deeper just because the water gets bigger.
Holy shit. And it's only been a few degrees so far. Yiiikes.
The sea levels have risen. By about 6 inches. Higher seas mean higher coastal flooding from the same storm surge strength, and higher coastal flooding means longer lasting and higher inland flooding. So hurricanes could remain the exact same strength, and simply higher sea levels would mean more damage to low lying coastal states like the ones I describe.
How much of the sea level rise is attributable to which sources? Glaciers have obviously retreated significantly (I've visited a few and the pictures from, say, 1910 vs. the terrain you say today is unbelievable). Is the bulk of it from Greenland or Antarctic melting or what?
Absurdly the breakdown goes like this...
2 inches of sea level rise is due to glaciers melting
2 inches of sea level rise is due to Antarctic and Greenland melting
4 inches is (and I had a hard time believing this until I did the calculations) THE THERMAL EXPANSION OF THE OCEAN.
Oh yes, if it gets 3 C warmer, even if we can somehow contain all the extra water in a giant bath, the ocean will still get a foot deeper just due to thermal expansion. Thats how deep the damn ocean is. It's nutty. Even if you don't think glaciers melt, or if you think that the Antarctic floats, then if it gets warmer, the sea still gets deeper just because the water gets bigger.
Holy shit. And it's only been a few degrees so far. Yiiikes.
0.8 degree C so far.
It's sometimes easier to think in terms of percentage: the average Earth tempature now is 5% hotter than 1880.
Phoenix-D on
0
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
C'mon now, it's not the wildlife that'll kill people in Florida.
It's the Floridians.
In addition to their own crop of snakes, spiders, alligators, and crocodiles, Florida has invasive piranhas, northern snakeheads, various large constrictors, large lizards, a couple troops of monkies known for messing with people, and armored catfish that while harmless to humans have learned to love the taste of manatee skin.
It isn't quite Australia in terms of terror beasts, but they're clearly working on getting there.
You forgot our impressive cornucopia of poisonous plants and algae.
The sea levels have risen. By about 6 inches. Higher seas mean higher coastal flooding from the same storm surge strength, and higher coastal flooding means longer lasting and higher inland flooding. So hurricanes could remain the exact same strength, and simply higher sea levels would mean more damage to low lying coastal states like the ones I describe.
How much of the sea level rise is attributable to which sources? Glaciers have obviously retreated significantly (I've visited a few and the pictures from, say, 1910 vs. the terrain you say today is unbelievable). Is the bulk of it from Greenland or Antarctic melting or what?
Absurdly the breakdown goes like this...
2 inches of sea level rise is due to glaciers melting
2 inches of sea level rise is due to Antarctic and Greenland melting
4 inches is (and I had a hard time believing this until I did the calculations) THE THERMAL EXPANSION OF THE OCEAN.
Oh yes, if it gets 3 C warmer, even if we can somehow contain all the extra water in a giant bath, the ocean will still get a foot deeper just due to thermal expansion. Thats how deep the damn ocean is. It's nutty. Even if you don't think glaciers melt, or if you think that the Antarctic floats, then if it gets warmer, the sea still gets deeper just because the water gets bigger.
Holy shit. And it's only been a few degrees so far. Yiiikes.
0.8 degree C so far.
It's sometimes easier to think in terms of percentage: the average Earth tempature now is 5% hotter than 1880.
Well this is just a bad way of thinking about it because it depends on where the zero point of your scale is, F gives a different answer than C and obviously K is wildly different
18 USC §1658(a) makes it a federal crime to plunder a lost, wrecked, stranded, cast away, or distressed vessel.
A Crime A day is a Twitter account that is listing the criminal statute, one crime a day.
So no, that yacht in your yard is not yours.
You just have to say "legitimate salvage" then its ok.
Nah just charge the owner for boat parking.
Eh, Trump isn't too far off, in fairness. In NC an owner of a derilect vehicle is required to promply remove it, if the owner cannot be found the property either becomes property of the land owner if they want it or state if they do not. If the owner can be found, but does not promptly remove it, they can be liable for storage fees and damages against the property (lost use, clean up for any oil/fuel spillage, etc), and if they do not remove it after a certain point the land owner could claim it as abandoned (which requires a determination by the state agency responsible for fish and wildlife in the case of boats) and the owner of the vehicle could even be subject to criminal penalties for illegal disposal of a vehicle (which is a felony).
Unlike some states, where you have situations where a possessor of a title can make claims up to 30 years after abandoning a vehicle, the law in NC is not friendly towards possessors of abandoned or derelict property.
Even if his point is correct (which it is not, FEMA and POTUS failed in their response) his article is still not one that has a glowing endorsement for the Federal Government.
As Hurricane Maria bore down on the financially, socially and politically crippled island, the Federal Emergency Management Agency was doing precisely what needed to be done when faced with almost third-world circumstances. FEMA was coordinating closely with the Department of Defense to provide the logistical support that FEMA simply does not have for such a situation.
So what this tells me is that a US Territory filled with US Citizens was allowed to devolve into conditions you would expect of a third-world nation, and not of a place that is part of the US and the Federal Government in the lead up to this storm did nothing to try and fix this knowing the threat of a disaster of this scale and scope was not just likely but inevitable. That may even be a worse point to promote than that the response to Maria was slow and ineffective.
ChimeraMonster girl with a snek tail and five eyesBad puns, that's how eye roll. Registered Userregular
This just goes to show that no matter what the Saffir-Simpson Scale rating is, you should always look at the big picture of threats a storm is forecast to bring and act accordingly.
The sea levels have risen. By about 6 inches. Higher seas mean higher coastal flooding from the same storm surge strength, and higher coastal flooding means longer lasting and higher inland flooding. So hurricanes could remain the exact same strength, and simply higher sea levels would mean more damage to low lying coastal states like the ones I describe.
How much of the sea level rise is attributable to which sources? Glaciers have obviously retreated significantly (I've visited a few and the pictures from, say, 1910 vs. the terrain you say today is unbelievable). Is the bulk of it from Greenland or Antarctic melting or what?
Absurdly the breakdown goes like this...
2 inches of sea level rise is due to glaciers melting
2 inches of sea level rise is due to Antarctic and Greenland melting
4 inches is (and I had a hard time believing this until I did the calculations) THE THERMAL EXPANSION OF THE OCEAN.
Oh yes, if it gets 3 C warmer, even if we can somehow contain all the extra water in a giant bath, the ocean will still get a foot deeper just due to thermal expansion. Thats how deep the damn ocean is. It's nutty. Even if you don't think glaciers melt, or if you think that the Antarctic floats, then if it gets warmer, the sea still gets deeper just because the water gets bigger.
Holy shit. And it's only been a few degrees so far. Yiiikes.
0.8 degree C so far.
It's sometimes easier to think in terms of percentage: the average Earth tempature now is 5% hotter than 1880.
Temperature doesn't work that way, absolute temperature (which you can muktiply) starts at 0 Kelvin. You can multiply Celsius or Farenheit like that, it doesn't mean anything.
0.8 C warmer is the right way to put it. Or, for relative comparisons, it means that your popsicle will melt 5% quicker on the average day today compared to 1880
Honestly the more I see and learn about hurricanes, the more I think the Saffir-Simpson Scale is too simple. Wasn't there some other rating system that worked off of total energy output of the storm or something? Anyway, just wind alone isn't sufficiently descriptive, I feel.
0
Options
ChimeraMonster girl with a snek tail and five eyesBad puns, that's how eye roll. Registered Userregular
Honestly the more I see and learn about hurricanes, the more I think the Saffir-Simpson Scale is too simple. Wasn't there some other rating system that worked off of total energy output of the storm or something? Anyway, just wind alone isn't sufficiently descriptive, I feel.
The problem is that one threat can really skew a single scale that is built to encompass all threats combined. The SS scale is designed only to warn on the highest sustained winds in a storm, which is a small area near the edge of the eye. Every hurricane is unique in its size and threats. Using one scale to try and encompass all of that would be impossible. The size of a storm, the speed of a storm, the diameter of a storm, the type of hurricane it is (annular or asymmetric), does the landfall timing match high-tide, what angle is it hitting the coast at, what is the topography of the cost, what environmental factors are in play like topography, etc. The best way to warn for a storm like this is to warn on each individual threat separately instead of focusing solely on the Saffir-Simpson rating. One thing about this storm that I found from interacting with the people there is that this time they were well warned and knew the timing and severity of the threats from the storm. Anyone that was there and was caught off guard by the flooding of other hazards of the storm simply was not listening to the warnings.
Honestly the more I see and learn about hurricanes, the more I think the Saffir-Simpson Scale is too simple. Wasn't there some other rating system that worked off of total energy output of the storm or something? Anyway, just wind alone isn't sufficiently descriptive, I feel.
The problem is that one threat can really skew a single scale that is built to encompass all threats combined. The SS scale is designed only to warn on the highest sustained winds in a storm, which is a small area near the edge of the eye. Every hurricane is unique in its size and threats. Using one scale to try and encompass all of that would be impossible. The size of a storm, the speed of a storm, the diameter of a storm, the type of hurricane it is (annular or asymmetric), does the landfall timing match high-tide, what angle is it hitting the coast at, what is the topography of the cost, what environmental factors are in play like topography, etc. The best way to warn for a storm like this is to warn on each individual threat separately instead of focusing solely on the Saffir-Simpson rating. One thing about this storm that I found from interacting with the people there is that this time they were well warned and knew the timing and severity of the threats from the storm. Anyone that was there and was caught off guard by the flooding of other hazards of the storm simply was not listening to the warnings.
It sounds like NOAA needs to adopt something similar to their space weather warning system. It has separate warnings for possible radio blackouts, radiation threat, and the geomagnetic threats.
My vote would be a scale for expected rainfall, windspeed, and overall size of the storm. I'd also recommend purposefully making it so these scales can't be combined to form an overall rating for the storm, or we will eventually be right where we are now.
0
Options
ChimeraMonster girl with a snek tail and five eyesBad puns, that's how eye roll. Registered Userregular
Honestly the more I see and learn about hurricanes, the more I think the Saffir-Simpson Scale is too simple. Wasn't there some other rating system that worked off of total energy output of the storm or something? Anyway, just wind alone isn't sufficiently descriptive, I feel.
The problem is that one threat can really skew a single scale that is built to encompass all threats combined. The SS scale is designed only to warn on the highest sustained winds in a storm, which is a small area near the edge of the eye. Every hurricane is unique in its size and threats. Using one scale to try and encompass all of that would be impossible. The size of a storm, the speed of a storm, the diameter of a storm, the type of hurricane it is (annular or asymmetric), does the landfall timing match high-tide, what angle is it hitting the coast at, what is the topography of the cost, what environmental factors are in play like topography, etc. The best way to warn for a storm like this is to warn on each individual threat separately instead of focusing solely on the Saffir-Simpson rating. One thing about this storm that I found from interacting with the people there is that this time they were well warned and knew the timing and severity of the threats from the storm. Anyone that was there and was caught off guard by the flooding of other hazards of the storm simply was not listening to the warnings.
It sounds like NOAA needs to adopt something similar to their space weather warning system. It has separate warnings for possible radio blackouts, radiation threat, and the geomagnetic threats.
My vote would be a scale for expected rainfall, windspeed, and overall size of the storm. I'd also recommend purposefully making it so these scales can't be combined to form an overall rating for the storm, or we will eventually be right where we are now.
We already have that! The NHC is just responsible for the forecasted track of the storm and what name and rating it is getting and the surge threat. The local NWS offices and the Weather Prediction Center are responsible for the rain and flood forecasts, and the local NWS offices and Storm Prediction Center are responsible for the tornadic threats the landfalling storm can cause. Sure they don't put a numerical rating on the threat but they do issue warnings and watches ahead of time. I would say that most headed the warnings, even inland, and the system worked this time. If you start giving numerical ratings to hurricanes for each impact you lessen the effectiveness of the current warning systems for flood threats generated from non-tropical cyclone storms which do not get names or ratings. At the end of the day, the only improvements that need to be made are by the local and national media. They should focus less on the Saffir-Simpson category and more on the actual threats of the storm. That said the media did a very good job ahead of this storm explaining how big it was and that it would be devastating despite no-longer being a major hurricane before landfall.
The one time the system really broke down and failed was Sandy since it had lost its warm core and was no longer a hurricane at the time of landfall it did not get a hurricane warning and many took the fact that there were not and hurricane warnings as meaning there would not be any surge. Since then the NWS and NHC have created a storm surge warning and watch which has largely solved this issue.
Chimera on
+1
Options
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
C'mon now, it's not the wildlife that'll kill people in Florida.
It's the Floridians.
In addition to their own crop of snakes, spiders, alligators, and crocodiles, Florida has invasive piranhas, northern snakeheads, various large constrictors, large lizards, a couple troops of monkies known for messing with people, and armored catfish that while harmless to humans have learned to love the taste of manatee skin.
It isn't quite Australia in terms of terror beasts, but they're clearly working on getting there.
Also it's worth noting that unlike the venomous snake back home in California, that were mostly very courteous and just wished not to be stepped on, the ones out here are aggressive territorial assholes.
C'mon now, it's not the wildlife that'll kill people in Florida.
It's the Floridians.
In addition to their own crop of snakes, spiders, alligators, and crocodiles, Florida has invasive piranhas, northern snakeheads, various large constrictors, large lizards, a couple troops of monkies known for messing with people, and armored catfish that while harmless to humans have learned to love the taste of manatee skin.
It isn't quite Australia in terms of terror beasts, but they're clearly working on getting there.
At 1239 PM CDT, emergency management reported many of the county
roads near and south of Ada were impassable. Over nine inches of
rain have fallen in Fittstown, and rainfall rates over three
inches per hour are still being observed from Pontotoc to
Stonewall. Dangerous flash flooding is already occurring.
This is a FLASH FLOOD EMERGENCY for Ada, Pontotoc, Fittstown, and
Stonewall. This is a PARTICULARLY DANGEROUS SITUATION. SEEK HIGHER
GROUND NOW!
That's not bad data from the mesonet site, they really have had over 10 inches of rain today!
Well Texoma is like 25 feet low, so that’s good at least
Less than you'd think. Really heavy fast rain after a drought tends to just wash soil away. The water all runs off before soaking in like you need it to.
+2
Options
ChimeraMonster girl with a snek tail and five eyesBad puns, that's how eye roll. Registered Userregular
Going through the basement flooding cleanup of a freak 7ish inches of rain in a couple hours in green bay my heart goes out to all those affected. And call the clean up people asap they are going to get super busy so the earlier you get your requests in the better.
Posts
This fucking guy.
I have 549 Rock Band Drum and 305 Pro Drum FC's
REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS
I'm pretty sure the 100% real person who told him their insurance company might not pay for the damage could have also provided the name; if he was actually worried about it and not distracted by the novelty of a boat on the land.
(And it wasn't even his boat! Who knew Hurricanes were so wild?)
Also, it turns out that the law does not recognize "dibs":
So no, that yacht in your yard is not yours.
Yeah, but that's just a law. Like this President has any familiarity with laws or the consequences thereof of not following them.
Yet.
But yeah, "Grab everything you can that isn't nailed down, and pry it up if it is" is definitely this President's motto.
You just have to say "legitimate salvage" then its ok.
Bullshit they can't control the weather, we know the truth.
Nah just charge the owner for boat parking.
Florida's right here y'all.
Absurdly the breakdown goes like this...
2 inches of sea level rise is due to glaciers melting
2 inches of sea level rise is due to Antarctic and Greenland melting
4 inches is (and I had a hard time believing this until I did the calculations) THE THERMAL EXPANSION OF THE OCEAN.
Oh yes, if it gets 3 C warmer, even if we can somehow contain all the extra water in a giant bath, the ocean will still get a foot deeper just due to thermal expansion. Thats how deep the damn ocean is. It's nutty. Even if you don't think glaciers melt, or if you think that the Antarctic floats, then if it gets warmer, the sea still gets deeper just because the water gets bigger.
It's the Floridians.
In addition to their own crop of snakes, spiders, alligators, and crocodiles, Florida has invasive piranhas, northern snakeheads, various large constrictors, large lizards, a couple troops of monkies known for messing with people, and armored catfish that while harmless to humans have learned to love the taste of manatee skin.
It isn't quite Australia in terms of terror beasts, but they're clearly working on getting there.
Holy shit. And it's only been a few degrees so far. Yiiikes.
0.8 degree C so far.
It's sometimes easier to think in terms of percentage: the average Earth tempature now is 5% hotter than 1880.
This almost never happens repeatedly. Everyone here gets one.
You forgot our impressive cornucopia of poisonous plants and algae.
Well this is just a bad way of thinking about it because it depends on where the zero point of your scale is, F gives a different answer than C and obviously K is wildly different
Oh, screw you! We have our problems, sure. But that's an insulting comparison, and you know it.
Eh, Trump isn't too far off, in fairness. In NC an owner of a derilect vehicle is required to promply remove it, if the owner cannot be found the property either becomes property of the land owner if they want it or state if they do not. If the owner can be found, but does not promptly remove it, they can be liable for storage fees and damages against the property (lost use, clean up for any oil/fuel spillage, etc), and if they do not remove it after a certain point the land owner could claim it as abandoned (which requires a determination by the state agency responsible for fish and wildlife in the case of boats) and the owner of the vehicle could even be subject to criminal penalties for illegal disposal of a vehicle (which is a felony).
Unlike some states, where you have situations where a possessor of a title can make claims up to 30 years after abandoning a vehicle, the law in NC is not friendly towards possessors of abandoned or derelict property.
HEY! I haven't been there since Hurricane Irma!
Sure looks like we will have a medicane sooner than later! Just in time for my boss to take a two week long trip to Italy! :P
Is that even an article you want written?
Michael Brown defending your management of a natural disaster is like Mike Tyson defending your sound judgement and eating habits.
Even if his point is correct (which it is not, FEMA and POTUS failed in their response) his article is still not one that has a glowing endorsement for the Federal Government.
So what this tells me is that a US Territory filled with US Citizens was allowed to devolve into conditions you would expect of a third-world nation, and not of a place that is part of the US and the Federal Government in the lead up to this storm did nothing to try and fix this knowing the threat of a disaster of this scale and scope was not just likely but inevitable. That may even be a worse point to promote than that the response to Maria was slow and ineffective.
This seems like a pretty awful story, like some assumptions being made, but I think they are safe assumptions.
pleasepaypreacher.net
This just goes to show that no matter what the Saffir-Simpson Scale rating is, you should always look at the big picture of threats a storm is forecast to bring and act accordingly.
Temperature doesn't work that way, absolute temperature (which you can muktiply) starts at 0 Kelvin. You can multiply Celsius or Farenheit like that, it doesn't mean anything.
0.8 C warmer is the right way to put it. Or, for relative comparisons, it means that your popsicle will melt 5% quicker on the average day today compared to 1880
The problem is that one threat can really skew a single scale that is built to encompass all threats combined. The SS scale is designed only to warn on the highest sustained winds in a storm, which is a small area near the edge of the eye. Every hurricane is unique in its size and threats. Using one scale to try and encompass all of that would be impossible. The size of a storm, the speed of a storm, the diameter of a storm, the type of hurricane it is (annular or asymmetric), does the landfall timing match high-tide, what angle is it hitting the coast at, what is the topography of the cost, what environmental factors are in play like topography, etc. The best way to warn for a storm like this is to warn on each individual threat separately instead of focusing solely on the Saffir-Simpson rating. One thing about this storm that I found from interacting with the people there is that this time they were well warned and knew the timing and severity of the threats from the storm. Anyone that was there and was caught off guard by the flooding of other hazards of the storm simply was not listening to the warnings.
It sounds like NOAA needs to adopt something similar to their space weather warning system. It has separate warnings for possible radio blackouts, radiation threat, and the geomagnetic threats.
My vote would be a scale for expected rainfall, windspeed, and overall size of the storm. I'd also recommend purposefully making it so these scales can't be combined to form an overall rating for the storm, or we will eventually be right where we are now.
We already have that! The NHC is just responsible for the forecasted track of the storm and what name and rating it is getting and the surge threat. The local NWS offices and the Weather Prediction Center are responsible for the rain and flood forecasts, and the local NWS offices and Storm Prediction Center are responsible for the tornadic threats the landfalling storm can cause. Sure they don't put a numerical rating on the threat but they do issue warnings and watches ahead of time. I would say that most headed the warnings, even inland, and the system worked this time. If you start giving numerical ratings to hurricanes for each impact you lessen the effectiveness of the current warning systems for flood threats generated from non-tropical cyclone storms which do not get names or ratings. At the end of the day, the only improvements that need to be made are by the local and national media. They should focus less on the Saffir-Simpson category and more on the actual threats of the storm. That said the media did a very good job ahead of this storm explaining how big it was and that it would be devastating despite no-longer being a major hurricane before landfall.
The one time the system really broke down and failed was Sandy since it had lost its warm core and was no longer a hurricane at the time of landfall it did not get a hurricane warning and many took the fact that there were not and hurricane warnings as meaning there would not be any surge. Since then the NWS and NHC have created a storm surge warning and watch which has largely solved this issue.
Don't forget about the giant rats from Africa.
https://www.browardpalmbeach.com/news/giant-rats-wont-die-and-keep-invading-florida-6441028
And also the giant lizard that's a threat to the alligators.
https://www.ajc.com/news/national/giant-invasive-lizard-threatens-florida/jPxBBvzbYcr2kQYrTtGtmL/
Also it's worth noting that unlike the venomous snake back home in California, that were mostly very courteous and just wished not to be stepped on, the ones out here are aggressive territorial assholes.
Bath salts.
Well shit....
Bad news, the Cape Fear River is where the surrounding communities get their drinking water.
Good news, the river and municipal water is already so polluted from other sources that most locals and businesses use filtered water anyway.
Status quo news, the poor are pretty fucked in both scenarios.
Most of that 10inches has fallen since after 12am!
That's not bad data from the mesonet site, they really have had over 10 inches of rain today!
Less than you'd think. Really heavy fast rain after a drought tends to just wash soil away. The water all runs off before soaking in like you need it to.