WinterFire

Yeah except that the monthlies—that were discussed *extensively* here and elsewhere through the end of November—were pretty much uniform in showing a torch December, transitional January, and a killer February. That’s what all the guidance showed, that’s what most experts discussed, and that’s where you and so many other people would have landed if you weren’t intent on wishcasting a Modoki/CP-based Nino that never existed.

Holy shit are you serious? So many people said this, you just cherry-picked the data you wanted to look at to get the results you wanted. Moron.

It would be great if you would stop lying, both about what the models have said and about what other people have said. It’s sad, especially when it’s so easy to see that you’re making things up.

https://x.com/webberweather/status/1740164865161924685?s=46 Fwiw even Webb isn’t canceling winter (and tbh he’s been more bullish on this winter than he’s given credit for, he just likes to troll the snow weenies on Twitter)

Arguing with a toddler is pointless; best case scenario is you win an argument with a toddler. So I say this not to argue with this specific individual but for the rest of the folks reading the thread: this is emphatically not what is happening. Reference the images a few days ago in my exchange with WW—the models advertised a pattern change for late December and a pattern change is indeed coming. Regardless of someone’s feelings, facts are facts and all of this data is freely available on sites like TT and pivotal; anyone can feel free to scroll back 10-15 days and see how the GEFS or EPS envisioned the atmosphere for this time period. The long-range models are pretty good at figuring out long wave patterns two weeks out, actually!

Our quest stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little and it will fall, to the ruin of all… Yet hope remains while all the company is true.

Any time, happy to help.

Pattern change still on track for the next couple days, so not even a little bit.

I’m not saying you are making things up, and I’m definitely not trying to suggest that there weren’t people on this board who got excited about snow potential next week. Actually, I think this was a very helpful exchange for me to see just how much distance there can be between a correct (assuming the next few days don’t see a pattern collapse) model forecast and the ways in which we interpret it, especially on this board. Anyway, I’m not trying to come for you, and I’m sorry it’s been piling on to your specific post. You certainly are not the only one who has mentioned can-kicking, and I think you’ve at least been sincere. Other posters, on the other hand…

And there is indeed a coastal at this time frame, though I will grant that temps are worse than marginal, even inland. Which should have been anticipated given the airmass we are working to scour out.

This is the same time from today’s 18z GFS. Not a lot of daylight between them, I don’t think?

It might be worth looking again, because no one seriously talked about anything other than a pattern change coming around or just after Christmas. That remains on track to happen as it has been discussed since the 12th or 13th. Some op runs (and even some ensemble runs hinted) at a shot potential next week, but that was never terribly likely or realistic. What has happened instead is that people read this thread and hone in on the rip-and-read blue pixels that less knowledgeable posters got excited for and confused that with an accurate analysis of model predictions. The can hasn’t been kicked, at least not on the models. The only reason that some people think that is because they are confusing a specific storm that showed up once on guidance with a set-in-stone prediction. The can is not being kicked, the pattern is on track to change as forecast weeks ago. Cold air is moving in and appears to be more stable after the new year…as predicted by weeklies earlier this month. Don’t confuse weenie expectations with model forecasts.

Hard agree. I love ignore, it is a beautiful function, but it is completely ineffective when everyone quotes and responds to the people I’m trying desperately to ignore lol

Jesus christ the long range thread is unreadable today…and that’s with the worst offenders on ignore, I don’t know how you people do it, reading every one of Ji’s and Eskimo Joe’s absolute garbage posts…

This is something I’ve been wondering about as well, not just today. It’s seemed like even with the better looks we’ve seen in previous weeks, the 540 line has stayed pretty far north. Not panicking/trying to deb but maybe someone with more knowledge could explain why that’s not a flag? Or just what it means in aggregate.

Fwiw, DCA is running 1.8 degrees above normal and IAD is running 3.9 degrees above normal. So while it’s been cooler than previous torch Decembers, it’s been solidly AN despite what it may seem like.

Dude you posted the D15 Euro control. That is an incredibly unserious thing to take verbatim and it is *deeply* silly to die on this hill…

No, it implies that natural gas day traders think there will be a +NAO this winter. Commodities trading has absolutely no bearing on how our atmosphere works, on a seasonal scale.

He’s also dead wrong…Dec 2018, 2015, and 2014 were snowless at DCA (though we all remember how achingly close 2018 was), and all were warmer than average, as was 2004. 2002 and 2009 were the aberrations for Dec Nino climo.

FWIW, that was pretty quickly removed in the next update. The big heat looks to stay focused in the Midwest, as it has been. But the cool-down the long range GFS wants to bring us… …is definitely not going to happen, but fun to look at

If we can’t discuss why long range patterns are progressing the way they are being modeled to progress in the literal long range thread, what the actual fuck is the point of a long range thread?

Hmmmmm not sure you’re the one to be making the point you think you’re making here chief.

The term atmospheric river was coined by Zhu and Newell at MIT in 1998: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/mwre/126/3/1520-0493_1998_126_0725_apafmf_2.0.co_2.xml The polar vortex and bomb cyclones have been discussed in academic contexts for decades. Just because something is new to you doesn’t mean it’s new, and the media using correct terminology in public communication is a good thing even when these terms are unfamiliar to you.

I don’t think I’d agree that his forecast will be spot on—more like he’ll have the snowfall right but for the wrong reason. He predicted a warmer than average December—it won’t be. I do think if we crap the bed in January, it’ll be because of warmer than average temps—which he specifically went against. So yeah maybe he’ll get Feb right, and maybe a full Jan and Feb torch will land us in a top-5 warmest winter ever (again, his prediction), but getting the top line right while completely missing the pattern evolution doesn’t mean he had a successful seasonal forecast.

This part. I’m not sure if you’re meaning to imply this, @WesternFringe, but focusing on an annual average change of -.06” makes it seem like your argument is that DC winters have only seen a decrease of .06” from 1941 to today. But that’s not what a slope of -.06 implies—rather, it’s indicating that the annual snowfall from 1941 has decreased by a total of something like 4.5”. Which is noticeable, I’d argue. So yes, between last year and this year, most people would not notice a decrease of .06”. But over the last 30 years, we do notice a decrease of nearly 2” (which incidentally matches relatively closely with the 30 year average in the 00s of 15.4”/year compared to the 20s average of 13.9”/year).