All Activity

Nam is slightly more north

EPS is sneaky decent for Saturday too. Pretty snowy for SNE and CNE on that one.

So you know how they say no ice is completely safe? Yeah, had my foot fall through something out in the middle of the lake. Great shots though.

How about a Modoki, with hella NA blocking? We can't have nice things anymore

Euro Ai, OP and EPS now on board for 24th event heh End of Ukie looked decent, gfs and cmc were getting there

Yup. We had an arctic desert for 20 days.

Looks to fall with temps mostly at or above freezing so probably no shoveling

Very light rain has broken out here. I think I see a transition to wet snow sometime between ~8-11pm. Putting the O/U at .3". It may not lay on most surfaces, but it will have no problem laying on the pack

Here are two big problems with his arguments: He writes: Regarding all the articles from so called authorities that climate change is already cutting back on food production: 100% nonsense. It's the exact opposite. With crops, we can't tell how much impact is from CO2, climate/weather, genetics, fertilizers, use of pesticides/herbicides(technology). When you change numerous variables at the same time, like we do with crops, it's impossible to separate the impact from each one on the outcome. Flaw: He claims that "it's impossible to separate the impact" from CO2, climate/weather, genetics, etc. Yet, he also claims that the idea that climate change is "100% nonsense." That's inherently inconsistent logic. He also states: ...we have 2 ways to address that with OBJECTIVE data which clearly speaks for the impact of photosynthesis by itself and for photosynthesis +climate change. 1. The impact of JUST adding CO2 and not changing anything else... 2. But other human factors impact soybeans, including climate change that we can't separate out. Flaw: He oversimplifies things by ignoring the variable of temperature. Omitting temperature provides him the solution he seeks. However, cherry picking in pursuit of confirming one's biases is not a valid scientific approach. Recent research provides a clear link between temperature and crop yields. For example, a May 31, 2024 paper in Nature Communications found: All specifications and weather data uncover an asymmetric relationship for the US where yields are increasing in temperature for moderate temperature ranges, but sharply decrease in temperature at the upper end.

.10 so far

Over? Jumped up

Nope. 12 years old and above

I say for next year we make a rule for our sub, no storm threads till 12 hrs out not that I’m superstitious or anything

Good to see it increasing

Approaching 40 here. Melting continues, especially in sunny, south facing, urban and highway areas.

Now this looks like a spring storm. Rain to central Quebec, but "Creating its own cold air" down here, lol,....everyone's favorite.

18z HRRR gives us close to 2 inches. I'd be very happy with that.

Start the thread

Is there a minimum salary requirement to be able to post here?

Bring it

And as far as I can tell, the intake for DC's water is up by Great Falls and none of the local counties use the Potomac for water from any point south of that. So, it seems like the sewage problem is gross, but is unlikely to affect much other than the handful of people who use the river for recreation.

Local water levels are REALLY low here even with some snow melt now. I have former ponds in my area that are now meadows.

Yea I can def point to better examples for down here than this one today. Not gonna lose sleep over it though - we had decent cold air in dec and jan, that wasn’t the problem, getting an active STJ is/has been.

Lots of 1-2” snowfalls consisting entirely of dendrite aggregates seems to inflate totals because of extremely low water content. It counts, but it really doesn’t feel like as much as the numbers indicate.

Quite a difference between Gefs/Geps and Eps at the end of their 12z runs. Eps being cool to seasonal w I th temps while Gefs/Geps are warm.