I think it was the "political" statement in one post, and the banner marquee when you were proved correct that may have given the perception ....
I like Reed but he is known for exaggeration on size and strength. And he was probably already driving to his next chase when the noaa guys got there to begin their analysis. I thought it looked like an F5 also, but I am not going to make that call, and I am sure the damage from a top ef4 vs a bottom ef5 is minimally different, especially for the victims.
Like everything in science, further observation and review usually changes diagnosis/prognosis.
Earthquakes are analyzed for days (months+) afterwards. Its quite common for a 6.9 to become a 7.2 etc days later.
I think someone hit by a cat 4 hurricane with 150mph winds wouldnt know the difference between that and a cat 5 with 155 winds?
You get an EKG in the ER, do you go with the initial analysis of the 1st year resident ER generalist, or do you wait for the head of cardiology to have a look?
Truth is the advance team made an "initial" report of a very strong F4. After further review by the core team, the ef5 was arrived at as the "final" report. You summed it up in your own words. "appeared"
Andrew
I was merely studying the damage and even Dr. Forbe's and Reed Timmer both said that the Joplin tornado appeared to be an EF5. They were not gloating either.
