Iowa/Missouri maybe?

Growing up where I did you'd hear about famous outbreaks, I recall one where a particular county had a few dozen touchdowns in one storm. But most people here have never seen one directly.

But like I said, treelines limit vision here by quite a lot.

A dozen funnel clouds is pretty easy, those are genuinely common. 2 touchdowns in 25 years also sounds about right for you guys' conditions, that is not so common. And sure, the heaviness of the rain doesn't indicate tornadoes or anything, but tornadoes and rain absolutely do show up in the same circumstances and tornadoes absolutely can be obscured by rain.

You tornado alley folks are also particular in the Great Plains having sightlines that are absolutely huge. The rest of us in the midwest have tornadoes too, we just also have treelines. You cannot expect see a billion miles in every direction from the highway, your line of sight in one direction may only be 100' or less.

Anyway, you may have the most, but you guys don't own tornadoes.

Probably. Consider too, it's actually kinda rare to see one, since the storm they're happening in often has heavy enough rain that you can't see very far, especially if it's in the evening.

In these cases, you hear them before you see them.

Even worse, apparently only a single base had all the supplies for it. That was a single point of failure that, when struck, caused the failure of the entire supply mission.

You'd think the Navy would be a little better prepared. Here I thought redundancy was an important part of military conduct and operations.

Can rivers eventually carve through solid rock?

He already knew he could. He budged it during Avengers Age of Ultron, and he probably would have noticed it move (Thor did). But he stopped trying so he didn't embarrass both himself (by claiming to be worthy of godhood when he's a pretty humble guy) and Thor (by being just as good as him despite being mortal).

So, when the opportunity came again, it was a no-brainer. He knew he could, and he knew it'd be useful to him.

Yeah, if anything about it bothered you, that was probably smart. The trilogy is, among other things, a very slow yet steady escalation of horror.

She did write two other trilogies in the same setting following different characters that you may prefer more. Different narrators does change the prose, but she still manages that same fluidity, which is what I always loved so much about it.

Romans and coups. An Austrian Hapsburg and another Austrian Hapsburg. Russia and taking massive casualties.

Yeah, I take several random samples of the prose from throughout the book, just to get a good sense of the overall style. Though I do always begin with the first paragraph, and on at least one case, that was enough to immediately close and buy the book.

That being the over-the-top, sorta Victorian prose of Jacqueline Carey:

Lest anyone should suppose that I am a cuckoo’s child, got on the wrong side of the blanket by lusty peasant stock and sold into indenture in a shortfallen season, I may say that I am House-born and reared in the Night Court proper, for all the good it did me. It is hard for me to resent my parents, although I envy them their naïveté...

She then keeps going just like that for three large books, probably totaling something like 2k pages. I loved every page of it.

Yeah that's more of a hotel thing. I'm guessing this is that influencer trick of intentionally lying about a detail so people will make comments to correct you, giving you free engagement.

The main difference I see is that when a professional wants to read something very thoroughly, they employ techniques of what's called slow reading. That's usually when the highlighter comes out along with note-taking materials.

This is possible with print information because of how much of it is put in front of your eyes at once. Rereading a paragraph, even a half dozen times to guarantee you fully understood it, is very easy with print. It is not with audio. Flipping back to page xxx to check something, also very easy with print and less so with audio. Smoothly speeding up/slowing down your rate of consumption to match the complexity of the current topic, also easier with text than audio. Etc etc.

So, for casual consumption, they're fairly equivalent and both fine. But if you wanted to claim mastery of a complex topic after putting years of intensive effort in, I'd say that probably required some reading that could not have been replaced by listening, and if you did no reading, I'm going to be a little doubtful of your mastery of the knowledge. It's possible to still understand what you need to, of course, but you definitely neglected what is usually the most efficient, reliable method by far.

This Stepan Banderas stuff gets so tiresome.

Your country doesn't have any historical figures it honors for certain things despite an ugly background? Mine has plenty, just because history itself is pretty ugly and extremely messy.