Jump to content

40/70 Benchmark

Members
  • Posts

    77,653
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by 40/70 Benchmark

  1. It's one of those seasons with an innate ability to deconstruct potential.
  2. If it ever did hit, I totally buy that depiction...fits the multiseasonal theme.
  3. I went for a big March, but if we do get that, then I will have been right for wrong reason...as I expected a SSW.
  4. So a C, sounds about right for you on the season. December was an F for me and January a C.
  5. Even in SNE it becomes an uphill battle after mid month...very doable, but fading. Well, I do post snowfall amounts for the mid atl during the fall, so I keep an eye on it. I think I am in pretty good shape down there. Its up here where I will be too high.
  6. I loved that event....that was an acceptable CJ. I don't need to jackpot, but there is a difference between something like that, and the crap that last month's blizzard dealt my way. Most of the people who claim to be okay with 12" when so many others land 24-30"+ are lying.
  7. My ideas played out with respect to the tropospheric vortex earlier this season, but instead of linking up with the stratosphere later down the line, the strat vortex remained potent until the trop vortex finally succumbed and is now coupling. Game over with respect to that....if we salvage a happy ending, it will be due to the Pacific.
  8. Yea, I was on the SSW train going into the season, but I am going to be wrong on that. The only thing worse then being incorrect is being obstinately incorrect.
  9. Because the strong western ridge gets kicked by a system in the PNW.
  10. I haven't seen that.....yea, I would think we would want it by mid February, as climo is so hostile Second half of March.
  11. If only. I would never doubt your numbers, so I didn't mean come across like that. You are one of several I always look to for measurements.
  12. Lets just drop it....I am sure the issue is less glaring than I perceive it to be, so I won't contest that.
  13. Well, I just trusted that Will used reputable data. If that is the case, then yes...I am wrong with respect to you....but not Will and Scott.
  14. I was also going to assume that Scott averages 55" to be safe, and he is the one that corrected me and suggested 50"....not trying to meet any agenda, dude.
  15. The same thing was done for all stations, though.
  16. I just told you that your numbers are fine....stop, breath, and read. I said that I do not trust the HAVERHILL site. There are very few that are reputable, and Reading is one. I'm sorry if you can't accept that. Will would tell you the same thing, but I guess he wants to meet my agenda...what an asinine comment.
  17. Thank you. I told him that I didn't trust it, but it suites his argument.
  18. Place me on ignore if it makes life that intolerable for you...not like there is much going on.
×
×
  • Create New...