J Paul Gordon

Back it up 50 miles and you've got the picture.

I'll take it

When might BOX release an updated snow map?

It sounds quite fascinating at any rate!

wait....is this like a joke? If so it is pretty funny. If not, could a norlun event happen within a larger scale storm?

Okay, so I'll ask. HMIMBY? Worcester east side... will give address to get a more precise (in hundredths of an inch) forecast.

Looks like we all get slammed, especially when you consider higher ratios inland. I guess "in my own little corner of my own little world I can pretend whatever I want to be". Heard that song a million times when my daughter was little. She was a Cinderella addict. In this case it applies to the hopes I put in whatever model shows the most extreme performance.

Anyone notice how well the Boston/NYC maps match?

East slope of the Berks and Worcester hills do well with upsloping, often there are screw zones to our west, their east (namely the Pioneer/Connecticut valleys.)

Looks like Worcester (especially east side) gets into some of that banding while 20-30 miles west of us gets screwed.

Its not a crazy forecast when you factor in ratios and potential banding inland

looks good for ORH east on that.

Have to check back in later to see if this isn't the normal, "Take me to the bridge", stuff that happens every time the models update or whether it misses us altogether. NWS hasn't done too badly lately (unless snow is the ONLY factor,in which case the monster that slammed us a week ago last Friday was a bust--when in fact it was a wicked good storm to watch unfold). Last week was amazing in the Berks and most of the rest of us west and north of 495 did OK or better. NWS is being prudent right now, if you look at the forecast discussion, but seems pretty convinced it isn't going to be a whiff. Should be a lock in by late tonight, tomorrow morning.

Good to see you Southern folks enjoying an early snow. Stay safe on the roads. We expect a good snowfall here tomorrow (6-8") and the direction seems to heading upwards. You might not believe it but when the first snow comes, it seems like everyone forgets that we average 65-70" here in Worcester, MA and starts driving like its a snowstorm in Pensacola, FL! LOL

Will the bottoming out of solar irradiation due to decreased sunspot activity affect sea ice minima in the Arctic basin?

Thank you. This helps. So, the good news (tongue in cheek) is that if we were to enter a larger scale cooling phase, AGW (GHG?) would compensate at least in part. A poor reason to foul the only nest we've got! I'm perplexed as to why to politicians and political GW experts are focusing on wind power, solar power, etc. instead of putting massive funding into fusion power research and /or other hydrogen power sources. Low pollution factors and just about nil contribution to CO2. Anyhow thanks again for a clear and understandable response

I asked this question on another thread but got no answer. Hope it is appropriate here. If GW is mostly anthropogenic, then there is little doubt (actually no doubt) that the trend will continue. If it is only in small part anthropogenic, then can we assume it will continue at (or greater than) the current rate? Warm/cold multi-decadal fluctuations are common. My point is not to debate the obvious. The warming trend is measurable and beyond any serious contention. Since I have no idea how much of it is AG (5%,25%, 60%, 95%) and doubt anyone else can state how much is human caused with certainty, my question is purely just that. Do we have models that can give us a pretty clear idea that the overwhelming data points to continued, unabated GW? Or, is there room for longer term stasis or even cooling? PS It seems certain that some of the warming is human related, so let's not go down that street and get into an argument over it. The question is about certainty. For the sake of argument, let's assume that AG contribution is <50%.

What are the ratios for various cities in SNE (and NNE). If anyone wants to throw in a list of predicted amounts, that would be great.

Interesting that the cold predicted for after this storm is MUCH more significant than after 2013. It is also more significant than after 1969 and 1978 ('69, of course, came at the end of Feb). And you know what's really funny is that I've gone from being thankful about a 1-3 inch snowfall to worrying about whether I break 2 feet!

I hate to do a IMBY, but what does this mean for ORH considering fluff, etc. I'm near the junction of 190/290.

Pretty insane over ORH for awhile on that Canadian. Feb 8-9 2013 gave us 28.7". Wonder if we'll beat that.