40/70 Benchmark

I will admit, I was even annoyed that I didn't see a flake from that last piss event....now this one will be just north of me, and then the next on in the mid atl....I think I am as frustrated as anyone dating back the last 5 seasons.

You can see this coming....people are going to get very impatient if nothing is imminent by mid month because the residual frustration from last season is still fresh. If you feel the urge to cancel winter and melt in December, then I would consider stepping away.

It is about how you feel because it impacts how you perceive the data. I am of the opinion that the el Nino will be of sufficient intensity to move the forcing out of the Maritime region. You argue that we need better coupled el Nino to accomplish this, then in the same breath reference the magnitude of warmth in 2015, which was an extremely coupled event. I interpret the data as having forcing displaced to the west, closer to the dateline, than would normally be expected an el Nino with this type of evolution. You interpret it as indicating that this el Nino will essentially act like a La Nina and favor the Maritime forcing. I do not agree, as there has never been a significant el Nino that has done that....you can argue 1972, to which I would respond that descending solar fostered a dramatically different polar domain, which is evident in 1965. I am sure you will say that -NAO will not be as effective now because the block will be too far south.....frankly, I don't care to argue this anymore. We disagree and we'll see what happens.

There isn't any data that will alleviate your concerns because you feel as though milder phases will be prevalent for the foreseeable future due to CC. What I do know is that lower MEI years offer much greater potential for cold and snow than higher MEI years and this is not debatable. Its also a fact that years with forcing INVO the dateline offer greater potential for cold and snow. Based on this and the fact that we are not yet in the descending phase of the solar cycle, I will take my chances on the degree of DM warmth not being prohibitive of decent snowfall.

My update yesterday is the last you will see from me for a couple of weeks....not gong to write about an inch of slush on ball sack hill.

I understand that the warmest region 4 reading on record implies that one should proceed with caution as far as any negative temp departures this winter, but folks can not keep ignoring how paltry the MEI and RONI values are....this is a reflection of how much weaker the Pacific dipole is this year relative to 2015. Stop ignoring that.

Warmer than average in the DM mean is expected, but I will confidently say this will not be as warm as 2015.

Well, first of all, whether or not the warmth wins out "bigly" in December has nothing to do with the degree of blocking in January. Secondly, the idea that blocking already exists BEFORE any PV disruption is also supportive of the notion that January will not feature a dearth of blocking.

I feel like he has done a better job of being a bit more objective.

2.71" for the month will do it.

I think the Canadian is wrong for January with the loss of the blocking, but there should be a thaw, so maybe that skews things if its long enough and timed correctly.

Opposed to the later CFS with more blocking.

This is essentially what I went with...even if the slightly colder risk wins out, it shouldn't be too far off....CPC is on the same page, as well.

Yea, I could see that....like 1987, which is also a good analog, but I select two week windows of time, so still would be a pretty good call from that lead time.

More like don't "don't go cold"....

SSW between Xmas and 1/8.

Great chance of that for you IMO.

George, that was actually good analysis......very objective and level-headed....be skeptical of colder evolutions until the jet slows...all blocking does is prevent December 2015 and keep the warmth from being absolutely prohibitive to threats.

Agree.

This is minor.... I'm talking maybe normal instead of +1 to +2, but blocking alone won't dramatically alter things because the PAC jet will be active until at least the later third of the month or so.

I never "abandon" or change the final outlook product....graded as is. However, the tone of the update is to simply imply a slightly cooler risk due to more blocking. But I also stated it will still be fairly mild until the PAC jet slows down. The most important note was the implication of this early blocking for later in the season.