Well the storm weakened to a category 2 storm within 24 hours after we started working on it. (Two Bears)

Post hoc ergo propter hoc? Unconvincing for many reasons.

I defy you to define that by current science. (Two Bears)

Two Bears, you are the one who claims that some things you report are unexplainable by today's science. That means you claim to have checked all possible explanations and found all of them wanting. So you could tell us which explanations you have checked by which methods and by which way you have convinced yourself that none of the many possible normal explanations doesn't fit.

I still have the impression you claim a knowledge upon that field which you do not have, My guess is that you use the word 'unexplainable' just for impression management and not as the end result of serious study. I wouldn't mind at all you saying you have witnessed something you do explain to yourself by the concept of Chi, but your use of the word 'unexplainable' is overbearing. You don't seem to have a clue what alternative explanations are possible.

I could list some explanations but to do so from afar has a big disadvantage: The probability to be far off is quite high. My experience is that quite often effects as they are reported are indeed unexplainable by today's science, but the effects as they have actually happened are often explainable. She who reports an effect with a certain frame of mind or prejudice can unwillingly distort the report according to her theoretical expectations.

Wolfgang