Maestrobjwa

29 minutes ago, losetoa6 said:

They melted TO the windshield.  Friction and dry rubber at high speed  .. lol Paging RR

We were going to break the side window but her mom said not to . 

Whoops! Missed a word...But still--I've never heard out that happening! Wow, hahaha

8 minutes ago, losetoa6 said:

Lol

In high school a  girl I knew  locked her keys in her car RUNNING with the wipers on HIGH speed LOL for 2 hours.  The wipers melted to the windshield 

Wait WHAT? They melted the windshield? How? Lolol

8 hours ago, Eskimo Joe said:

where was this during the winter  

Yeah it's like it's working extra hard to troll us this year...mercy

6 minutes ago, Chris78 said:

Lol. Yea I mean La Niña. When I think of a Niña Ussualy it means were ain't getting much snow but after last winter almost anything would be an upgrade lol.

No kidding...And yeah think of nina as nada too, lol Man I hope we ain't headed there...that would truly suck after what we've been through post January 2016! You just gotta hope it's weak or fizzles out...But it will be interesting to see what if any effect this deep minimum will have...

2 hours ago, Chris78 said:

If we are heading for a la nada I'm expecting another crappy winter no matter what.

Did you mean la nina? (I thought la nada meant neutral...which doesn't seem to work well either, lol)

2 hours ago, Eskimo Joe said:

Since that fluke event in Januar 2016, we've had total suckage during winter in these parts.

I'm not sure you can call that a "fluke" per se...it was a pretty classic setup, if memory serves.

Alright, so I'm confused...if we had this low of a sun activity last year...and we have a possible "lag" effect...when do we get the winter benefit? This year? Or do we start the clock on the lag this year and have to wait ANOTHER year? (I hope it's the former...because having to wait until winter 2021-22 is gonna kinda suck). I guess we can only wait and see...

1 hour ago, JakkelWx said:

It's gotta be an 11 year cycle right? 2009-10 was the last minimum, and 2020-21 is just coming out of the minimum so perfect time to get a february 2010 repeat. Maybe a bootleg 2010 tho as ENSO is gonna be in the la nina phases instead of the el nino during fall-winter of 2009-10.

Now I'm wondering about this...Are we heading out of the minimum, or does this year mark the official "start"? I'm a bit confused about how they measure it. Because if we get a "lag" effect, I don't know where the clock would start from, so to speak, lol

1 hour ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

Maybe do the solar max years?

Now that's an idea...may look at that tomorrow!

9 minutes ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

But if you can find other two year periods where the same occurred outside of the years you chose, then that would make the conclusion invalid.

But why would that invalidate it?...Are there not enough repetitions with the same variable (the solar minimum) present? Sure, any two year period could repeat a pattern, but it wouldn't be with any consistency. Whereas here...there seems to be at least a degree of consistency when one variable (the minimum) is present.

3 minutes ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

Personally I don’t think that data supports any conclusions.

Maybe maybe not....I just thought by the numbers there seemed to be an either or pattern. Sometimes in those next two winters was always either average or above average. Don't know why or if it's just a statistical blip...but there does seem to be repeated with the exception of 1996 (where it happened just before)

So here are a list of solar minimums--counted here as the start of a new solar cycle--and the two consecutive winters that followed each one. I used approximate months for the start of new solar cycles that I found on wiki (yeah I know, lol That's why I just put the season, as opposed to the individual months--except for the winter months).

Solar Minimum: January 1902
1902-1903: 19.8"
1903-1904: 25.9"

SM: Summer 1913
1913-14: 23.0"
1914-15: 16.0"

SM: Summer 1923
1923-24: 33.6"
1924-25: 19.2"

SM: Fall 1933
1933-34: 47.9"
1934-35: 29.2"

SM: Winter 1944
1944-45: 17.3"
1945-46: 26.1"

SM: Spring 1954
1954-55: 10.1"
1955-56: 19.1:

SM: Fall 1964
1964-65: 18.6"
1965-66: 32.8"

SM: Late Winter 1976
1976-77: 11.1"
1977-78: 34.3"

SM: Fall 1986
1986-87: 35.2"
1987-88: 20.4"

SM: Summer 1996
1996-97: 15.3"
1997-98: 3.2"

*****Now this was a bit of an anomaly...of course we all know what happened BEFORE this minimum, lol

SM: Dec 2008
2008-09: 9.1"
2009-10 77.0"

So I'll let the experienced minds weigh in here...but there seems to be a trend of either one winter or the other seeing average or above average snow. I don't know what that would mean for this year. Do we know where we are with our solar status? Did we hit the minimum sometime last year, or this year? I've read that nailing down the cycles precisely can be a challenge. But nevertheless...this is what I observed just by looking at the record.

33 minutes ago, frd said:

Are you salivating about the potential of robust blocking in 20-21 winter? Delayed effect and timed also with the favorable QBO .  Need an @Isotherm  grain of salt to ponder on over the hot summer months.   

 

 

20 minutes ago, C.A.P.E. said:

HL blocking is extinct in winter until proven otherwise.

Tbh, I can't salivate about anything after the last three winters...it's like crap has been broken up there in the atmosphere for winter, lol BUT...when looking back at all our winters surrounding a solar minimum on record, we never had a complete dud. In fact, all but 2 solar minimums produced a winter with above average snow. 

So I looked at two consecutive winters that fell either during or after the minimums (due to the suspected "lag effect" that's been discussed here)

The lowest total was the 40s at 18"...which isn't a dud but exactly our average. Now I don't know how to make a chart showing all this...but I can post a list of the winters sometime soon (too lazy to do it right now, lol)

But you'd think...that if we saw zero solar minimum effect last year...we'd have to see some kind of effect this year, right? (What are the odds we see no effect in the atmosphere?)

6 hours ago, North Balti Zen said:

Let's hope. This has been really unreal to have it this cool for this long.

Of course my brain has been wondering if this has anything to do with it...but I'm sure it's not that simple, lol (Although the day with the coldest high temperature and the record low we broke on the 9tb did come at the end of solar cycles...but of course, tiny sample size, I guess!)

@Mrs.J You're about to be drafted as the sole caterer of the next forum meet-up...lol (if you haven't been already!)

Happy Mother's Day to all of the mothers here! And especially Mother @mappy  I always view you as the somewhat mother of our forum...giving us firm scoldings and timeouts when we need them 

So did I really see a few scattered flurries about an hour ago? Hahahaha That is fantastic!! Love it, lol

33 minutes ago, C.A.P.E. said:

The recent 2 Nina winters were better, and one was much better, with slightly above avg snowfall around here. The bomb cyclone was epic.

Epic for OC perhaps...lol See that winter, despite snowfall being around average at BWI...the near misses really stung. (To me those can be worse than getting nothing sometimes, lol)

1 hour ago, frd said:

Yep, enjoy the cold , once departed might be very warm until mid October, wondering about the implications of a Nina, would be interesting in the backdrop of an eventual -NAO winter and delayed onset of the effects from the solar min.  

Like to see some big changes in the Pac leading up to winter. However, feels great out there this AM. Went to get bagels and coffee and the temp was 35 degrees. Amazing !!!   

You just said a bad word (nina)...Don't tell me they think we'll get one this winter

42 minutes ago, jonjon said:

Thanks.  Just read the last several pages in their thread and thought it was going pretty well.  Too bad its mostly people I'm not familiar with.  Wish our sub-forum could have handled it.

I understand that those types of conversations are not for everyone, and there is no way to eliminate some political and personal biases on the topic; but its a thread that you don't have to click on if it bothers you.  I guess I just never understood calls to close threads.  Its not like they are forced upon anyone, and if they aren't getting any value by reading it anymore or are offended by the tone, then there is a simple solution for them.  But closing a thread cuts off an avenue of discussion for those who did get some value out of it.  

Agree. I was certainly getting some value out of it and some of the information shared by others. Was a nice place to kinda discuss the virus in a smaller forum than Facebook. But alas...all it took is for a few to derail it, smh

2 hours ago, stormtracker said:

I'm almost to the point of just saying just open everything up.  If we're all willing to bet human life to settle the issue, then let's just do it?  I'm mostly being facetious, but at this point, nobody can agree on what the best path going forward is.  I'm on the side of just waiting a bit and stagger things.  

Also, I'm trying to figure out when all this became partisan? How does pro or anti lockdown means favoring one party over another.   I dunno. 

Yeah it's really sad...After seeing a political polarization even in THIS, I'm concerned that this may be evidence that such polarization has poisoned every square inch of our American existence, smh I mean I'm only 29, but...I don't remember another time where every little thing is polarized (even the dang weather last year, lol). But so it goes...It pretty much started off like this--with the whole "serious concern vs media hysteria=not that bad" debate. That was also somehow, some way, along party lines, smh

4 minutes ago, Eskimo Joe said:

"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge"." -Isaac Asimov, 1980.

I strain to understand arguments made for "intellectualism" when made by those who choose to ignore even the experts in the field in favor of their own, uneducated knowledge (not talking about you, specifically...just to some folks I've seen and heard doing this.). I think mistrust of government unfairly gets cast on the experts officials listen to. 

31 minutes ago, PrinceFrederickWx said:

People don’t trust institutions because they’ve been wrong on everything and keep changing their minds week to week.

I think we have to give some leeway here when it comes to understanding this virus: it's a new virus, and even the best minds are still learning as we go. It's unrealistic to think information and advice won't change as things progress and we learn more about it. We simply don't know everything about this virus yet...so of course guidance is gonna change as new information is learned! Kinda like the weather, you adjust how you prepare and respond as you get more info.

Now, that's for the virus...I won't speak to other reason for government distrust and such (rabbit hole, lol)

30 minutes ago, DCTeacherman said:

Interesting. It doesn’t seem to me like we’d get to 3,000 deaths a day if we keep up the mitigation but I’m just spitballing obviously. 

Ack! Don't spit-ball at a time like this--that's unsanitary  (unsanitary pre-pandemic...downright radio-active waste during it!)

Now see, this really makes me mad. And makes me worry about this being a new normal. All the consecutive Springs we've seen this happen over and over (albeit maybe not quite this late) worries me...What are the odds that it just can't -EPO, -NAO, or -AO in the winter months anymore for whatever reason?