All Activity

Yep! I’ve seen erupting a few years ago when the lava was flowing into the ocean - cool, but this was another level

Big boy wind. You can see what a mess wind like this going through a forest would make when trying to figure out if it is tornadic or not. On the velocity front, keep in mind that it is radial velocity, so some component of that wind was not being sampled since it was not directly parallel to the radial. I would say 60 mph would be the lower bound of the estimated wind.

Paul, you need to find a case where you can show PHA failed, and more generally, show that PHA is a bad approach. The burden is on you to show that the station was incorrectly adjusted, not on me to walk you through the variables a Newlinville. Here is a quick review of where we are at on your 2 year old thread: Q1 — Is it necessary to adjust raw data before use for climate trends/model inputs? Yes. Raw records carry known, non-climatic biases (station moves, instrument changes, time-of-observation changes, site changes) that don't cancel out and will systematically distort trends if left uncorrected. Q2 — Is it perfect? No. Breakpoint detection is demonstrably imperfect and even unstable run-to-run (shown in this thread's own evidence), and the method is explicitly statistical inference, not direct measurement. Q3 — Is it pretty good, and has it undergone rigorous review/testing for over a decade? Yes to both. Multiple independent blind benchmarks (Venema 2012, Williams 2012, Killick 2022) show it reduces error relative to known synthetic ground truth, and it's been continuously re-tested and refined for over 15 years, including by critics actively trying to find its weak points Q4 — Given all that, does a cherry-picked local anomaly (minor adjustments at Newlinville era) amount to a valid attack on the process? No. A single, non-representative case can't outweigh a decade-plus of adversarial, blind-tested evidence — however carefully that one case is analyzed.

Not sure I'll experience a thunderstorm better than today's storm - at least not IMBY. I've never seen wind like that, not from a t-storm. Plus 0.96" in 13 minutes. Legit white out at times. Lots of massive oaks and pines down around town, and fortunately most were not on cars or homes. Half were uprooted and half were just snapped off at the base. Not sure how accurate RadarScope is with estimated velocity, but 60-65 mph smells in the ballpark. Power out about 6 hrs. Some phil from local news.

Nice. Spent two weeks there. We were staying in Princeville on the north shore but did take a ride to Waimea one day. Didn't go far into the canyon due to time but that's a nice area.

Just keep it hot and humid until Sept 12th, when I get back from the beach. Then we can cool off for good.

Yep 3rd straight evening under a severe thunderstorm warning.

I think thats a reasonable take. Especially for the coast, its not like December is prime winter normally anyway, much less in a strong nino. @roardog @LakePaste25 and other Great Lakers. @40/70 Benchmark i know you dont forecast for the Lakes. I dont "forecast" at all but with all the discussion to date I can envision the season playing out something like this in SE MI- we get a good winter blast in mid or late November (hopefully Thanksgiving time) with well below avg temps and snow (probably synoptic and lake- watch out lake belts). Then December sees that late Fall vibe return. Not "warm", but more murky mild and Novembery. It will snow, but with the mild days handily outnumbering the cold ones will need some luck and good timing or else Decembers wintry opportunities may be limited to mood flakes and snow squalls. January and February is when its game on but we will have two different scenarios to worry about. Scenario 1- the warmer strong nino outcome. More mild days. This also increases our odds bigtime of those dynamic wet snowstorms (think Jan/Mar 2023). But with those odds you still have to worry about storm track, plus you lose a lot of the daily mood flakes/light snows you get most winters. Scenario 2- the colder outcome models hint at. This is good for a more traditional winter feel, but too much of this could be cold and dry (moreso MI and west, not so much LakePaste territory). Winters like 1957-58 & 1965-66 that east coasters salivate over were boring as hell here, cold and dry with very light snowfall. We did at least have a light 1-3" snowcover each time for all the cold, but id imagine id be pulling my hair out as multiple storms hit the east. (Closest ive come to that was 1995-96 but even that was better than '58 or '66). Personally I dont think its happening, at least to that extent. If the cold wins, I think we see much more snow than '58 or '66 (not necessarily above avg, just more than those pitiful years). We've had two winters in a row where snowcover and cold "outpaced" snowfall, cant imagine 3 in a row. March- most of us are well overdue for a good March and early outlooks agree. I expect a good snowstorm this month. And if the rest of winter is lighter on snowfall, I can almost guarantee it.

So I am having rotator cuff surgery in October so will not be able to do any snow/ice removal all winter. Does anyone know any companies in/close to HBG I could hire to take care of my sidewalks/driveway for the season? I’ll pay good money - I’m anal about snow removal for my wife’s safety @SnowPlowGuy88

Definitely a rowdy night with the lightning and thunder best show of this year so far. No wind gusts over 20 mph and no hail. 1.32” in the Davis.

Not much in the wind category, had 3 rounds of storms one right after the other. One heck of a CTG light show with thunder shaking the house.

Mike, those aerials are genuinely useful and I'm glad to have them. They establish something I'd have had a hard time establishing myself: that the site was disturbed, repeatedly, across that whole period. I'm not disputing that. But again they just don't get you to either of the two claims you're making. Documenting that something happened at a site is not the same as documenting how much it changed the temperature, or in which direction. The aerials show construction. They don't measure its thermal effect. Every step magnitude in the NCEI record was sized by neighbor comparison, not by anything visible in a photograph, and that is the number that has to be right for the correction to be right. And there's a direction problem I raised earlier that I have not heard you answer or reconcile. An electrical substation with megawatts running through it, accumulating buildings and hard surfacing from 1946 through 1982, that is clearly a warming influence on the raw record. Correcting a progressive warming bias means pushing the later data down or cooler relative to the earlier. NCEI's correction goes the other way - the two NOAA changepoints in that window are +0.45 F at 1959 and +0.95 F at 1971, net +0.40 F, raising the later data, and the overall adjustment lifts the modern era relative to the early one. You do offer a second mechanism - that the station itself may have moved as office space changed. If it moved away from the heat sources, that would produce cooling steps needing a warming correction, and the sign would work. But that's the opposite mechanism from the one the aerials show, and it's offered as a possibility rather than as something documented. Both can't be driving the same window. Which one do you think it is, and in which years? The other thing that doesn't sit right: if construction were producing stepwise changes throughout 1952-1982, I'd expect the detectors to be finding them. NOAA places two changepoints in that window. Berkeley places five, and by your own figure they come to about -0.10 F net across seventeen years. That's a lot of documented disturbance producing very little net correction. So where I see us in reality standing on this analysis is on validity: showing that an event occurred does of course not validate the size of the correction applied to it. That would take an independent measure of the effect, and I don't think you have so far produced one yet - yours truly also! Of clear necessity: demonstrating that the adjustment is essential requires showing the uncorrected data gives the wrong climate answer, which requires knowing the right answer independently. Neither of those has been establish here. I'm not claiming the adjustments are wrong. I'm saying "documented" and "validated" are different words, and the work so far has established the first, not the second. If you have something that speaks to magnitude rather than occurrence, I'd genuinely like to see it. But again we are far away from any proof you claim to see!

That's a good and interesting point. Given how few examples we have of this kind of scenario in this part of the Pacific, I would probably look at it with more of a grain of salt than say the MDR activity we currently have over in the Atlantic. HAFS-A and B would be my preferred intensity guidance here, especially after a cycle or two of recon ingested data. As for track, I'd still lean south for a center pass, avoiding landfall but still bringing wind, rain, and surf impacts.

Yet another MCS seems poised this late evening to crash into portions of SW VA and NE TN. The ground is soggy here. I spent the better part of today cleaning up storm debris in the form of downed trees. One good, windy storm is gonna be a huge problem if it occurs anywhere in the near future w/ all of the wet ground and very full leaf canopies. On the plus side, fall should be beautiful if we can get some cool temps later in Sept. It looks like something akin to a rainforest in NE TN right now w/ all of the green!

Generally, big Ninos are warm here IMBY. But...it doesn't take my imagination much to think about what "could" happen if cold managed to find its way where w/ the STJ absolutely ripping. Maybe 09-10 is an analog, but not perfect? For me, this winter is a mystery and not a slam dunk like the previous two Nina winters. The other thing is if the Nino crashes midway through winter, and allows cold air to rush SE w/ the precip pattern in place. I don't think winter will be overly cold. But the it doesn't have to be crazy cold if January goes climo w/ a loaded precip pattern. Tough call. If the CANSIPS holds for the next two runs, that would be a good step. Also, analogs have been super sketchy during the past decade in regards to being accurate. A lot of seasonal forecasts are analog based I think. All of that said...we have seen during recent winters that there have been big snows in the northern hemisphere where amped precip jets hit cold air. Some yet-to-be place in NA seems primed for that.

I am not sure how well it may perform here b/c since Deep Mind is trained on past events, and there are very few cases in this area of the Pacific compared to the ern Pacific and Atlantic. The HAFS-A and B, which are the best TC physics-based models, do not show the system attaining hurricane-strength. The HAFS-B was much stronger at showing a 965 mb hurricane at 06z, but 12z was weaker, and now 18z has backed down to below hurricane-strength. The both show the system quite asymmetric for convection for it closest pass to the Big Island, which we can already see on sat (all on the N side).

What's the record minimum?

CANSIPS has had a big western ridge(AK) for two straight seasonal runs - July and August.

Yeah even just a couple weeks ago later July they were bitin'. Wonder if Stein played a webbed hand

To be fair, that was before I was taking Chris' musings about the increasing prevalence of MC forcing very seriously...I mocked him in the lead up to that 2023-2024 winter and he ultimately handed me my ass. Invaluable learning experience for me because my outlooks have been much better since and I've addressed what had been a cold/snow bias.

Epic sig material

They were nuts in June…all biting insects have calmed in the past couple weeks.

High of 79. T of precipitation from 12 drops of rain. 0.13” month to date

Google deep mind model. One of the best performing tropical models out there these days