stadiumwave

Thanks for sharing Tom. Good luck but I hope you're off your game this year. It is 2020 after all.

Great job!!

1988-89 was one & it's also a strong analog for this winter for various reasons. If you look at that winter I encourage you look at it in 10 day increments. DEC had a good cold stretch & so did FEB/MAR. But JAN had a really strong warm stretch that kind of skews the 3 month mean.

He did talk of warmth last year & was not popular. Larry is objective...not a "cold every year" wishcaster. He may be wrong but not for that reason. Kind of refreshing to see someone not simply driven by nuances & status quo Climatology & make a cookie cutter La Nina forecast. That's lazy! And that is a lot of what I see every year nationally. It's evident from his analog years he put a lot of thought & considered many factors.

Larry Cosgrove

So is this temporary? I know @ORH_wxman had mentioned he thought easterlies would keep this east. Right now...clearly coldest anomalies chugging west.

Is @Isotherm not posting a winter outlook this year?

Where the warmth is located around & north of Hudson it would appear so.

IRI Model updated DJF JFM

I'm hoping this is sarcasm?

Trust me...you don't want to see...lol. There are no positives to glean. DEC...has a -NAO & might possibly squeeze a good storm or slop...if there is a temporary improvement out west not discernable in the means. JAN FEB

The culprit at this point is that most of the seasonal models keep indicating a very strong +AO/+NAO/+EPO & a -PNA. So if the models are wrong at this point just a little it will lead to a big bust. If they are correct it's going to mean a long and depressing Winter for Winter weather lovers. Has the look of a very strong stratosphere ploar vortex. I'll be honest this would surprise me. It seems that most stratosphere experts believe that the record strong +IOD last winter was the lead culprit. IOD is negative for now & I dunno.

FWIW...European Seasonal model updated & its a complete blowtorch for the entire CONUS for the entire winter. Alaska & Grrenland is the only winter in all of N. America.

Current SST anomalies...certainly +PDO. Last 15 days...increasing +PDO. Although I 100% agree with your statement hat it can quickly change & especially during fall seasons. So, thinking winter by looking at PDO in fall "can" certainly backfire.

So, let's say it was 132. Who knows maybe it was 135. I still think the driving force is just to think "that just can't happen", so let's investigate a reason to show how bad they missed it. Lets do away with the record. So, let's question the 100 degree temp in Alaska in 1915 also.

Count me unimpressed. Revisionist history. Maybe they will figure out a clever way to say 100 years from how stupid we were & our temperature data was way off....lol. I mean...come on. This is about setting the stage for new records. Climate change is real but I'm sorry I'm bothered by this.

Of course there's just no way they observed the correct record of 134 in 1913. Just has to be wrong...right?

FWIW...something else to look at. Josh Herman initialized his RRWT model yesterday, which is based on reoccurring rosby wave train. It did well early last year until SSW shakeup, struggled after that. 30 days NOV 24-DEC24 90 days NOV 24-FEB22 You East Coast folks will like the look 9f last week of DEC & beginning of JAN DEC 25-29 DEC 30-JAN 3

Great forecast & method!

I do not have a dog in this fight. Firm believer in AGW...however, the history of Arctic temps is a moving target.

Just a reminder we have to remain humble.

Dr. Judith Curry retweeted this yesterday This kind of...again...is making the point I've been pointing out in this thread: distrust is growing in science community

He is in the same mold as Dr. Curry. Again, just because facts show that one aspect of Climate Change is not playing out as the narrative says does not equal denial. That's the point of what myself, Dr. Curry, & many others are blowing the whistle about. It's not science. For instance, look at the trend of strong to violent tornado trend since 1954 per NOAA records & its obvious there are issues about AGW we do not understand. The trend does not line up with the predictions. The AMS: (NOAA's data below) Why can't we just be humble & say "there is much we do not understand yet"? Instead we'd rather say "we know", "we know", "we know". Just like this whole attribution joke about a heatwave that just occurred within a few weeks ago. And beyond comprehension blazes through Peer Review...lol. Its bullcrap & you know it. You think that'll stop the alarmist from shouting AGW as the cause of the next EF-5? Heck no! And many of those who no better will say nothing. And the ones who do say something will be labeled as deniers of AGW although that is not true at all.