JustinRP37

You know it is a boring time when there are no posts for ten hours in late November. Should see the sun some today so that is exciting!

When you make claims like this back it up with evidence. It will mean a lot more with some sort of scientific reasoning. Meteorology is a science not a belief system.

It’s funny because where my in-laws live in the Midwest, the town actually had no money to salt last year unless it was a ‘bigger’ storm. Ever since that November storm I jokingly told him we even treat for icing in thunderstorms when it is 80 outside. Not too far from the truth these days. There was one storm last year that came in as rain and 34 but since the storm cut we spiked in temperature, yet the town was spread salt throughout.

I was happy to see no salting going on in the campus I work on in the Bronx. But like you said the trees are really stressed. You almost always see the trees next to highways drop leaves earlier in the fall because of all the stress. This doesn’t help. Not to mention ponds and streams next to roadways taking all that salt. It is ridiculous.

No doubt. But big difference to being prepared and actually dumping tons of salt based on all forecasts.

People do need to realize the ecological consequences of the overuse of road salt. It is becoming a nightmare for amphibians and plants near roadways or streams affected by runoff. I cannot believe the amount of salt dumped on the roads here today, then again nothing surprises me these days. Road salt is not a benign substance for many organisms.

To be even more fair, not one flurry here in the Bronx on Fordham Road. Just a gross day with pointless cold.

This seems much more realistic given what the long range has been showing and the observed patterns. I like when people do not hype just for clicks. Looks like a 'short' main event time centered roughly on the three-four weeks of mid/late January to early February. I hope they are a bit off with the snowfall, but I myself am thinking slightly below average to just average for snowfall. Takeaway summary from the article: "Our current expectation is for temperatures to average near or slightly above average in NYC, with near or slightly above average snowfall.The worst of the Winter will likely be observed from mid to late January into early February."

It is easier to make long term temperature predictions than it is snowfall. You can have a much above normal temperature winter and then get one massive blizzard to be above average for a year.

Snow is dangerous whenever it happens. Yes leaves make power grids fail, but accidents always spike when it snows regardless of if it is in October or December. Second, there will still be plenty of leaves on trees in the NYC metro even the first few weeks of November. I still have plenty of oaks and even a few maples around campus that are still green. I love snow much more than spring or fall, but let’s not pretend there isn’t always risk, hence why schools and businesses close.

Ballsy call given how much is starting to go against this. Then again everyone and their brother always predicts snowy and cold around here (which has been true more times than not since 2010 for snow but not for temps). However, rather than use the over used snowy terminology, let's talk days with snow cover of 1 inch or more. Suddenly when you look at the 2010s, it isn't so pretty anymore. Sure we have had many seasons with above normal snowfall, but it doesn't tend to stick around. An above normal season for snowfall means nothing to me and the ecological world if you get one blockbuster storm of 30+ inches and it melts within 5 days. We have had more years with below average snow cover while still being at or above normal with snowfall. It is one thing I have been looking at for tick-borne diseases. My call for this winter based on what I am seeing right now is above normal temps DJF, I'm thinking +2.5 (mainly December and early January) and normal to just above normal snowfall mainly from a few events (later in the season). I believe days with 1 inch or more at Central Park and other snow depth recording stations will be below average for the season.

Yes I realized that, but that is why I posted the last 30 days map later. But still no below average within an hour’s drive of NYC metro, largely because as you pointed out the above average overnight lows. We are right around to just above average which seems to be the theme lately.

Not seeing any 'below' average within 2 hours of the city. Data are data...

These are always a crap shoot. The solar discussion I think was given way too much weight. Just kind of glossed over the fact that thus far this decade is MUCH above normal for snowfall throughout most of the region, yet the information presented showed us as being towards a solar max for a good chunk of it (especially the snowier years of 14-15. DT though is far better that JB in tempering winter forecasts. With JB it is always going to be historically cold and snowy because that is his 'narrative'. It is still very much a crapshoot I think for this winter, which DT did allude to. I would place much more money on this being a normal temperature year with normal to just below normal snowfall again for the Tri-State. Of course, lately it just takes one monster storm to put us solidly AN for snowfall, so that is a wildcard. On another note, talk about a massive temperature shift. This was incredible. I literally flew from Miami to Maine without ever boarding an aircraft between yesterday and today. My one year old is sick with a severe cold and ear infection. It was nuts brining him to the Dr. yesterday with temps in the mid 90s and then today we will need heavier jackets.

I gotta ask, that is the jetBlue retrojet as your avatar right?

It's like a drumbeat. "The major warm-ups are over". I just don't understand. Even if we don't get to 90 this is still going to be an impressive stretch. To me 70s in December is just as interesting as the departures we will see later this week and next.

87 with a 63 dew point. Lots of dry leaves around and grass is definitely browning now.

Don't worry, micro analyzing a flurry event can drive you up that bard wired flag pole, just not naked since it will be cold. Or maybe you'd still want to be naked.

People post the temperatures daily, so don't know what point you are trying to make. @SACRUS, @CIK62, and @donsutherland1 post the temperatures on an almost daily basis. We are also nowhere near the record number of sub 80-degree high temperatures for Central Park. The month is still slightly above average. EDIT: I see @donsutherland1 answered your question.

Pool days are likely over as water temps plunged.

I definitely don't believe many are apolitical. I always look at their data and see if their conclusions are truly supported or not. I have been studying the blacklegged tick and Lyme since 2010. I'd label myself as a climate focused vector disease ecologist. My PhD dissertation focused on tick over-wintering and metabolism as it relates to climate. This tick is one tough cookie, but seems to do great in years where snow cover is sustained and protects it from extreme cold. Years with extreme cold and little snow can be devastating as can warm years. But this is just the tick v the rodent reservoirs add in more complexity. I too am shocked at how little support Lyme gets. It is the number one vector disease in the USA. The majority of funding still goes to mosquitoes. Even places that fund tick research a lot it is just sampling and not really prevention. Lots of work to be done. A lot of work.

What was the Nature article? Nobody tells climate scientists what to think, how to active etc. We just analyze data. Scientist just report data, the media applies the hype. Please don't confuse the two. Often when I see the media reporting on an article there are so many inaccuracies it skews the whole report. As for vectored diseases, they most certainly have been tied to climate change. Lyme disease has continued its progression north (not south). We have also seen the percentage of ticks of ticks infected decrease in certain areas. It is very interesting. There are also many mosquito-borne diseases that are linked to the climate. Vectored diseases are unique in that when you think about it, the reservoirs (like rodents for Lyme), the causative agents (bacteria for Lyme), and the vector (the tick), are all intricately linked, and all depend on climate. A kink in system in any one of those areas and the whole think falls apart. Many are definitely working on at least trying to introduce a kink in any one of those areas to disrupt the disease cycle. The Lyme disease cycle is absolutely amazing once you start to study it. How it can remain in a tick for 2 years is absolutely interesting.

Wow I never once said that you must agree with me. I am. It fascist either, I’m an open market guy. I do have to say though that having been in the coal remediation industry, that is one fuel we should never need to burn unless absolutely necessarily. However, saying climate scientists don’t know anything about climate is like telling an oncologist, “yeah you don’t know that for sure doc”. We will adapt, I have firm beliefs that humanity will persist, but note, that doesn’t mean we all will survive. And many will experience true issues in their lifetime. Many areas that are within a few feet of sea level in coastal areas have already begun to flood regularly. These areas will likely need relocation. There are many positive effects of a warmer climate, but one shall not gloss over the big negatives either. My current field is vectored diseases and we are seeing a large increase worldwide. And for the record, I’m not an alarmist, I’m just pro reducing water and air pollution, which you don’t get from burning bunker fuel and coal.

Wow as a scientist and this being a weather science board, I am quite alarmed. I really cannot believe there are people that do not understand the Laws of Thermodynamics. It seems they love to believe that the first law does not apply to the burning of fuel. You know the whole, 'energy can be created nor destroyed'. I also do not understand how we can claim we have not had an effect on the environment when our population has literally exploded over the last few centuries. Modern medicine, the green revolution (agriculture not the anti-fossil fuel people), and fossil fuels have allowed humanity to reach amazing heights. Further, do high overnight lows not matter anymore? Yes we didn't set record high temperatures, but July was a very warm month, as was the second half of June. August is still averaging above normal as well. I get that many on this board love winter, as do I, but ignoring the scientific data is just downright alarming. We can see sea levels rising and measure it. We also have not strung together very many below average months this whole decade. We have had a few here and there, but truly nothing like what we have seen for above normal months. Ignore at your own risk, but I choose to let the data stand for itself. The planet overall is warming and the greatest departures from normal have been in the arctic.