Typhoon Tip

There's no debate. The objective reality is that this was caused by destabilization of geological mass (ice/rock/water) failing and thus accelerating from elevation. The +flux (which means increase) of melt water destabilizes the previous the geologic structural integrity that previously held glacial lake and unstable landscapes at bay. A collapse was inevitable. Occurring at significant elevation provided excessive momentum - a structural failure that went on to become mass-gaining. The land, ice, or both-slide probably inundated glacial lake, en masse accelerating down the highly sloped region... subsequently gaining more most every time in swept through and acquired the mass of any alpine lakes and kettle nadirs that may have been transiently filled with seasonal melt ...etc etc... now you have a biblical torrent with so much mass/weight, it is capable of setting of seismology detection. That's it as far as cause. The rest is humanity building civility in the fertile/convenience of an alpine river valley thus being in the way when that happened.

Wouldn't shock me if ensuing administration applies referendums, if not immediately repeals when and where legislative rules allow, many of the changes that have been making headlines during this ... quirk of history BS that seems like an infinitely long 4 years in an asylum run by inmates

It's deeper than that ... It actually is an attempt to atone for the weakening correlation that's been observed in climate recency. Not wanting to get into a whole pedantic tl:dr but correlations exists between two points because there is a physical relationship between them. In the context of ENSO, as the whole planet's been warming outside the ENSO girdle with accelerating d(C), the gradient is shallowing. That shallowing gradient means the (particularly warm ) ENSO phases are not coupling to the hemisphere(s) outside the <= subtropical regions as deeply. Climate Prediction Center says it right in their definition, "..RONI is one measure of the El Niño Southern Oscillation, and other indices can confirm whether features consistent with a coupled ocean-atmosphere phenomenon accompanied these periods..." RONI is an attempt to tighten the correlation back up by accounting for the whole systemic warming, which offsets the climate bases of ENSO alone. So, using the RONI outlook should ( in principle ) show better impact/effectivity scoring. Heh, it's why Ray and I and others are keenly interested in this espoused ensuing super NINO - it's the best opportunity to date to test that. Really ... all of this is necessary because the climate change has out paced the usefulness of using a static climate inference to gauge the intensity of warm(cool) ENSO.

the act itself was political. don't kid yourself

Some may find this Univ. of Michigan study interesting... "...We don't see a time in the past where El Niños have been as strong as today, and we show that the strength of El Niño changes in parallel with warming global temperatures,..." https://phys.org/news/2026-08-el-nios-intense-years-previous.html "..This event is superimposed on global warming, and it's likely to supercharge the temperature increase that we would normally see from greenhouse gases. There are forecasts that we might get as hot as 1.7 or 1.8 degrees Celsius above preindustrial temperatures, which is quite a bit higher than the current record..." I've been saying this myself ... the super position of the +ENSO with CC is likely to cause synergistic results - they're naming temperatures. But, it's more broadly implicating then just temperature; put another way, makes us all prone to experiencing unusual event.

Between that ongoing greedy shit down there and that plume of toxic cirrus that pumped over during max heat hour ...that oughta bout sum it up for our neck of the woods

Could not have more perfectly timed a butt bangin' cirrus plume

Right ... and "New America" blithely so named because it stole the land from the "old Americans"

Dolly is highly likely being dry air inhibited when looking at the SAL products at Wisc EDU.

I've noticed that too over recent seasons... I suspect ( not intending to impugn any organization ) that it's largely cultural/institutional reliance on modelling. When and if a TC is born out of an invest, if/when it occurs ahead of the modeling, that's when we get the jump - because they can't wait for the models, if the TC is there, it's there. Along these lines, the model reliance is also why sometimes you look out there and see an impressive wave that even appears to be closing off a circulation, yet NHC has the basin in a nada status. It's because no model has it developing. The models went through an evolutionary upgrade over the last 10 to 15 years. The Katrina's and Maria's of the last 20 years sort of lit a candle under the ass of R&D. Proven in their forecast statistics. They became objectively better at initialization, improving over human intuition and monitoring of prior generations. I don't personally have any issue with the model reliance - their performance is what it is. They may not be ideal with aspects like RI this or shear that after the fact, but in so far as putting the TC on the map -

A little more encouraged re convection today as the orientation of the fields has a better change for residuals chugging E of the ignition region

Re the Nepal disaster, if real this is something beyond nuts! stunning is more like it it doesn’t just overtop the dam … the dam, the entire facility, and the surrounding valley are all completely subsumed beneath https://www.instagram.com/p/DchKUP7En1N/?img_index=1

mmm no. If you don't know that Twitter does not veraciously provide "data" and "models", then you're in trouble. -obviously... Social media of any kind (really) does not provide veracious anything. Yes, that includes us, here. It's opinionized. Ends veracity. Sure, one can certainly "tentatively" trust some sources more than the others. Yeah. However, everything and anything still must be corroborated against what is known to be factual. Digress: the problem is: that requires energy; that requires intelligence. And these two are subjective of one another. Low energy doesn't lend to intelligence. Stupidity emerges as a primary decision agency. ... Too much population exist now that has become lazy and dumb in their general approach/virtuosity of their daily lives. Thus, too little of either: low energy/will; lacking intelligence.

I'm actually quite interested in the test for RONI In physics, physicists are always chomping at the bit for natural extremes, because it is at the boundaries of what is conceived as possible, that the boundaries finally get to be tested. RONI isn't exactly an offset factor to the prior generational ENSO, whereby a laboratory test can be very readily examined (... droll understatement). In fact, there is NO way to do that. It has to be tested by the vagarious doings of the wholesale atmospheric hemisphere(s) over time. This is one of those times. Agreed. The extremeness of +ENSO definitely puts a plan in place that gives RONI ( I suspect...) it's best test to date. If this were to say go over the unthinkable 3.5 ...then a 2.7 equivalent attack on the canonical climate pathways should be observable. I mean if this ENSO gets out of whack and STILL there were comparatively/relatively minor impacts, then the amount of RONI's current importance/significance gets a side eye look as not being enough - and vice versa. etc

HA ... the most "nuanced" understanding of ENSO is actually that its influence may be dwindling as an agency over winter patterns - that's what the very necessary evolution of RONI is all about. Which is all ironic because that dwindle affects the "general" application - or should. What I mean by that, if RONI and CC are implicating less effective factorization, then logically the nuances go out with the bath water. I'm also suspecting a hesitation if not reticence to adapt to these fundamentals of changing factor-ability wrt the various input channels. Part of that may be a state of the art needing to go up the learning curve .. but it also seems that there are those that have sort of 'institutionalized' a standard canvas upon which to draw long lead outlooks; if having to acquiesce to a notion that their canvas is thus torn/tearing, they're losing their ability to paint - the artistry suffers. Some ego too