40/70 Benchmark

I think its more about the orientation of the cool ENSO event than it is the QBO.

That isn't the case up here....IDK about the mid Atlantic.

I honestly am not trying to call Scott and John out....was an honest inquiry because I only look at guidance for tropical threats during the summer.

Okay...all I was looking for. The point and click reference was for Saturday. Clearly I don't pay close attention during spring and summer.

I was speaking of Saturday....what is your point?? There was supposed to this soaker through the first portion of the weekend.

I used my central air for the first time last night....just a couple of hours.

No, it was into the first part of the weekend.

People were saying that...absolutely.

P&C has P Sunny next weekend...what's with all of the dramatic 3 day nor easter posts?

I thought there would be some rain today...ended up a nice day to get the yard work completed.

That usually ends well...only time it was every right was when it lead the charge on the December 2022 PV lobe phasing west before xmas.

Screwed again

The reality is that it's likely a combination of regression and CC that is leading to this snowfall drought along the east coast. I think its patently absurd to ignore the regression element after what happened last decade.

Something ironic and hypocritical about this.... I'm not sure how you can dispute that a warmer climate has more moisture available....if you want to argue that the warming will eventually become great enough where that won't matter in terms of snowfall, sure, but that doesn't seem like an entirely objective take. I agree with your last statement.....I think the current drought is attributable to both CC and natural variability....maybe more the former in the mid atlantic and the latter across southern New England.

Theoretically speaking, the combination of a better pattern relative to the atrocious regime of the past several years coupled with increased moisture owed to a warmer climate...not to mention any potential volcanic implications. Surely you have considered this given that you are a bastion of objectivity on the topic, Mr. @TheClimateChanger...

I've resisted...probably try to tough it out through tomorrow night.

Chef's kiss-mic drop....I had never even thought of that. A larger number of smaller events means less error....its the "all" events that are riddled with greater inconsistency and when there is mixed precipitation, some of those are UNDERmeasured...undoubtedly.

Annual Ptown family trip?

I think there are a few odd birds on this site that find it uncomfortable to be human....as someone that has been to several weather conference, I can tell you that there are.

I think a reasonable compromise is that maybe amounts are inflated by like 10% on average today because I don't think anyone used the clear method 100 years ago...I am even willing to concede that, but this obstinant insistance that its 15-20% is frustrating becaues its not as clear cut as he portrays it. I'm sure the array of reports wasn't as dense as it is today, either, so maybe snowfall back then was also a bit under represented if some higher amounts were missed. I don't reject that entire concept, but just feel its overstated.

I have had measurements derived from 6 hour clears tossed by the NWS in larger events, so he is incorrect, whether or not he chooses to acknowledge it or not. Others have also cited instances in which it was apparent that Central Park significantly under reported snowfall in mixed events. Its like we can sit here and see that the sky is blue, but I'm sure Chris or anyone else can scour the internet for a peer reviewed arcitcle that argues that isn't blue...not going to change my mind, sorry.

I thik the jury is still out for the NE interior coastal plane, which is where I am.

You can use precipitation rate for the middle one..I use it before the other tool updates when I do monthly recaps.

Absolutely agree....this is where I am at.