Typhoon Tip

Agreed ... To understand the global perspective does represent certain challenges. vastly understated Can't be done really. Quantum Computing may one day be equal to the task, but that's probably a ways off yet. Or so it is thought... On a separate note, QC's advent along human history has a creepy aspect about it. Like if some agency made the plug-in breakthrough to claim ownership of the most powerful device ever contrived by human kind, the ability to peer into the intentions of God, would they even tell anybody they were that agency? uhm... hmm. Let's see, to do so makes them target (oh yeah, thaaat). Very delicate. Plus, we cannot mix that up with the humanity inside humans. Unless of course our naivete is just inherently entrusting the better valor of all people... yeah no problem go for it Ho man. imagine that? The issue with doldrums occurring in the midst of GW is this word called synergy. Synergy, when combined actions and operations synthesize a product that is more than the summation of the individual parts. GW is bad. Doldrums were probably always part of the natural order... But working as team?

speak of the devil... interesting for objective readers/learners: https://phys.org/news/2026-10-el-nio-storm-weather-disaster.html

I thinks it’s a prelude of winter’s behavior. fast fast fast any short waves worth a shit will speed up through the field proportional to to their strength.

Compared the operational Euro and GFS from 2 and half days ago to this 12z run this morning, and the cold is ~12 dm less cold in the thickness as a steady correction over the span of those model runs since... Get used to that during this winter.

That data, particularly how they relate/conveys behavior about the natural setting, are misleading the way you've presented. ...a basic interpretation skill of the data is needed here: 1 ... systems in nature seldom move along predictable well behaved trajectories. As an aside, and obvious caution is also needed. GBR system is one example. Note, ~40% of the whole world's reefs are at risk of extinction due to climate change. 2, logical flaw in you one example anyway: That GBR system shows recovery; that does not evince any kind of proof of either sustainability there - certainly there's no logic in using one example that the world is safe from climate change, either. But we'll let that tacit exception go... 3, the primary aspects that affect coral: Thermal stress and bleaching: heat can kill corals, or weaken them and reduce growth and reproduction—even if they survive. Mechanical stress from turbid waters... this arrives from enhancing wave action in the mean energy, as well as specific to tropical cyclones. Competing biology. Example, Crown-of-thorns starfish that eat living coral. Specific species ... coral reefs are a vast colony of different species. Some regions of the world have more(less) phenology. So, you're use in exemplifying the GBR demonstrates a too limited, too linear response mechanism in how/why the affects/effects in the vitality of reef. 'Oh, since there's a recent regrowth' no thermal stress. Incorrect. Your are not even aware that a biological competition within the reef, combined with transients in growth offsets - causing temporary rebound, or much in the way of the complexity of how these individually differentiating factors, then interact to create curve behavior that moves up and down but is misleading over larger data sets. WRT to GBR example... studies by AIMS and Yale point to the biggest factor in recent regrowth was particularly fast-growing species, Acropora. The corals produced were during a relatively favorable interval for species, but that does not represent the vitality of the whole structure. It can't. Not when the vitality requires a vast phenology of species input. Overall, bleaching events were still extensive but less intense than those earlier events, causing less mortality. But, the recnet increase was driven mostly by the Acropora. So the rise is better explained by rapid coral growth plus a temporary reduction in regional stress factor, not as evidence of a sustained ocean-cooling trend. .. I don't have time to run down the rest of you list of probably similarly shallow refutation points... I'll stop here. Good luck with your debate.

"Future Arctic winter sea ice is likely to shrink by around 1 million square kilometers (386,000 square miles) more than previously thought, after researchers used clues from a warm period 6,000 years ago to improve the reliability of climate models." https://phys.org/news/2026-10-winter-sea-ice-loss-underestimated.html ( https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-026-02123-w)

At some point a heating climate change has got mean less snow guys Time to eat shit and suck on reality snow does not like warm air if we need to put it in really easy terms It’s especially uneasy for snow if it’s in concurrence with something like a super El Niño. Synergy quotient is both unknown and off the charts. Granted, this latter aspect is sort of uncharted water so we can’t be certain, but from a step back philosophical perspective, you’re talking about a warm state of affairs. And it so kind of follows intuitively that we might be more fucked than not. Just trying to be fair to the reality we’re in There is a pathway to getting more snow based in the fact that we have a negative PDO coupled state in the northern Pacific ; the incongruence between that index mode, and this particular El Niño open some dialogue of intrigue. But in a former forecast framework AccuWeather can’t really go on that. I’d haven’t read their tech discussion; for all we know they could have mentioned a caveat or two in there.

I was 30 last week with a higher thickness setting going in tho. I dunno.. we're in the time of year where the land battery doesn't get charged during the day. yeah, the sun feels warm and given the right conditions, we can go above average... by quite a bit even. but even on those types of afternoons, the sun kisses the tree tops in the w and it's 10 off the high really fast. I noticed that just the other day when we were 75 for high and it was 64 on dusk.

hm If we decouple there's going to be brick off the edge falls tho

bizarre .. the operational version too. Chaotic hodgepodge of perforation in anything that resembles a ridge. That's been a verifying theme, though - holes punched in ridges. seems like there will be holes punched in the heights S of the polar branch, but at this range ... not correct on where those are. That run from 00z happened to time/place one where a book-end TC happened to be getting going ... Goes on to being a nice example of spontaneous emergence from model generated noise.

mm yeah thing is, it doesn't feel that way for us here in SNE .. maybe it's this 'blazing above normal' because the nights stay hot under cooler afternoon routine that's been going on since global warming began it seems ( ) - if that is the reason for that 'faux impression' my hunch is that we will be among the coolest relative to the whole, while still being above normal?

To be clear ... "already" does not = can't happen again. When I said that, it was purely in support of the poster's assertion and this year 'may have succeeded in the statistical suggestion already' - that is/was the context in fair reading... but I would caution anyway - seeing as no one else had mentioned this ... - there are very few or even no ensemble members as amplified or even tolerably similar to that Euro's D8+, 00z range - a range typically proven fantasy as an aside. Lack of support is also true outside of the EPS cluster, U.S. and Canadian punt. Having said that, since there is a climate suggestion for front side warm ENSOs somehow enhancing EC cyclogenesis, and this autumn ...definitely circumstantially applies, wisely it's not impossible. 200+ hours leaves time to modulate other guidance.

I didn't shift anything. Nor have I been in your debate, guy - merely made the observation that people have different ideas on the nature of what a existential threat is - time and imminence being a part of that. By the way, you are factually wrong much of the time. "- it has very much *not* been due to global warming; " garbage semantics. Climate-related die-offs are happening now. If you want to dodge acknowledgement by saying they’re not all caused by climate change alone that's elementary anyway, but doesn't work to abase the former. I also said the toxicity ( meaning pollution) plays a roll. Either way, this can and should all be under anthropomorphic activity. That's not 'goal posts', that's intelligence. It is divisive to attempt to do otherwise, that or ignorance, anyway, because the use of fossil fuels for combustion creates toxicity, in conjunction green-housing... But as far as temperature specifically, a clear current example is coral reefs: NOAA reports that the fourth global coral bleaching event affected about 84.4% of the world’s coral reef area with bleaching-level heat stress between January 2023 and September 2025. Plus, I spoke of diasporas in that, too - which is species migrations... which is evidentiary supporting the same notion. There's plenty of others, and I'm not going to do the petty low-brow game of citing them for you - go do the research. More broadly, warming and extreme weather are already affecting wildlife and this is just flat empirical fact. Habitat loss, disease, and other pressures are scienced and heavily papered.