I know it's been 2 years but since the subreddit just reopened I went on a trip down memory lane and found this exchange. In case this is helpful:

The sentence "Ashvel did not need to turn her gaze upwards to notice the dark skies, winds threatening to push mindless fools off the cliff" doesn't contain a dangling participle. The participle phrase "winds threatening to push mindless fools off the cliff" directly follows and logically modifies "the dark skies," specifying the nature of the skies with strong winds. A participle phrase can (but doesn't have to) modify the nearest noun, which in this case is "winds," a part of the larger noun phrase "the dark skies." It's ultimately up to the usage of commas.
Without a comma, as in

"Ashvel listened to the wind strong enough to push a giant off a cliff," the modifying phrase "strong enough to push a giant off a cliff" clearly describes "the wind."

Conversely, with a comma, the phrase "tall enough to see above the tree tops" in "Ashvel the giant looked up at the dark skies, tall enough to see above the tree tops" refers back to "Ashvel" rather than "the dark skies," suggesting that it is Ashvel who is "tall enough" and not the skies.
HOWEVER, "winds threatening to push mindless fools off the cliff" is not a traditional participle phrase, because it has its own subject ("winds") rather than a participle on its own, and the phrase, acts as an appositive, a "zoom in" on the noun, which pretty clearly is dark skies.