fujiwara79

Narrator: Big game hunting in our new era.

Chicago has had a couple perfect track rainstorms this winter too, so it's not just us. The oceans have become saunas and probably the latent heat flux is having some impact. It's all part of the New Base State.

Oceans are on fire. We've got to figure out how to stop these underwater volcanos from continuously erupting.

NW areas still look to be in good shape during this upcoming pattern. The lowlands, maybe not. At this point, as much as I want a flush hit for everyone, it's all about our backyards.

well, to be fair, they weren't measuring temperature next to a river and jet exhaust back then.

January 3, 2022

I've been waiting all winter to post an "it's happening" gif. Please make it happen.

Yeah I've experienced PD2, Blizzard96, Jan16, and the 09-10 storms. All amazing. But the March 93 storm was an atmospheric marvel. Ironically, if the storm was just slightly less amped, it probably would have taken a more easterly track and crushed the megalopolis areas with 30" totals too. But that storm was on steroids. There were radar echos in the Gulf that were way past dark red - they were violet and white. I've never seen echoes that intense in such a large area. The 30 year anniversary is coming up!

Superstorm 93 was the best storm ever. I know it mixed with sleet in these parts, which ruined it down here. But I lived in southern PA at the time where it was all snow...and I've never seen a storm that ferocious.

Looks like the storm track for the 1993 Superstorm

I think they got 7+ inches in the St Paddy's Day storm in 2014. Need to go by storm totals not daily totals. DC also got dumped on in the March 1999 storm. March and December are actually very comparable in the snow department.

If we don't cash in during this window, then even ChatGPT can't predict what's going to happen in the New Base State.

Looks like we have a new King: The GFS.

I know it's the 84-hour NAM and thus probably worthless....but it does have the cold pressing down quite a bit further south compared to even the CMC at that hour.

UKMET looks very close to CMC at H5.

The other models have more confluence pressing down. GFS has the confluence further north and not as strong. That's basically the difference.

And this, my friends, encapsulates why so many people believe that every facet of life must involve a conspiracy. They heard about it from randos on the Internet.

It's fascinating how people of a certain political persuasion are suddenly concerned about birds and whales when it comes to the windmills? They've never cared about impacts on wildlife when it comes to any other industry. But they suddenly want to save the whales and sing kumbaya when it's about those pesky windmills. Offshore oil rigs kill plenty of whales. Skyscrapers kill one billion birds per year. But I've heard nary a peep about these concerns. It only seems to matter if it's those darn windmills doing it. Which makes me think it's a bad faith argument made by those who have an agenda. But yes, we should strive to reduce impacts to wildlife as much as we can, whether it be windmills or oil rigs.

I need a decoder ring to understand @Stormchaserchuck1 but it sounds accurate

cold air damming alberta clipper overrunning frontogenesis deformation band All of these terms have been retired because of our new base state. It's time to add them to the Old English dictionary.

Any argument involving a characterization of Earth's climate a bazillion years ago is dumb. Usually this argument is cleverly masked as "well, the climate has always changed". Yes, the Earth was a furnace a billion years ago. Who cares? Humans didn't exist back then. Stick with the climate record from 5000 years ago to today. It is a notional example which illustrates how anthropogenic forces can easily overwhelm natural forces in a very short period of time. Unless you don't believe in the nuclear winter theory. Which is fine. Hopefully it will always just be a theory. Anthropogenic forcing has only been a factor since the Industrial Revolution. Of course core samples from thousands of years ago will show natural forces exceeding anthropogenic forces - because there was no anthropogenic forcing back then. Do you think the cavemen starting some fires is anthropogenic forcing?

I'm not sure about that. Seems like that statement is an article of personal faith, not anything based on evidence. If the world were to unleash all the nuclear weapons in existence, I'm sure the climate would change pretty quick. Man can affect climate. Urban heat islands are anthropogenic. The Dust Bowl was anthropogenic. Hundreds of years of continuously releasing CO2 that is deeply sequestered underground is a radical experiment that hasn't happened before. Modern civilization began around 5000 years ago. Our modern industrial society began about 170 years ago. All of these things occurred within the bounds of a relatively stable and hospitable climate and a very short geological timespan. Humans have been around for millions of years, and yet modern civilization only began 5000 years ago. Some people think a inhospitable climate is the one of the reasons it took so long. Simply claiming that there were rainforests in the North Pole back when dinosaurs roamed the Earth is, frankly, a dumb argument that doesn't prove or disprove anything.

Where is this documented? Man being the center of the universe and the most prized, special creation tends to be a prevailing view amongst most organized religions. But I'm not aware of scientists viewing the world that way. If anything, they're the ones who push back against that philosophy.

Meteorology and climatology are two different fields. Climatology should actually be easier to predict compared to weather. Meteorologists assume climate models are like the 16-day GFS. And are we seriously debating the veracity of climate change based on a random thermometer in Chester County, PA? LOL

Yes, can confirm. There was a famous Newsweek article in 1975 about an impending ice age, which is frequently cited by "skeptics". But if you actually read that article - something that very few of these people have actually done - a non-trivial portion of the article talks about how there's a growing view amongst scientists that the world is actually going to warm due to CO2. But the media sensationalized the ice age stuff back then.