TimB

15 minutes ago, Rd9108 said:

18z euro north again fwiw. Need to see some type of bleeding to the north stopped tonight or tomorrow or else this thing is going to Youngstown/Cleveland. NAM is next up. 

Once the bleeding starts, it never stops. We know this by now. Another wasted storm and likely another wasted winter.

1 hour ago, Blizzard of 93 said:

18z Blend looks good.

Note that this is through 2/21.

3-4” of snow in the southern half of PA outside the mountains over a 10 day period in February is approximately climo.

What a dumb winter. Can’t believe we got two of these in a row, and this one is somehow worse than last year, which was the worst winter that’s ever occurred here.

27 minutes ago, Rd9108 said:

Gfs not budging. The low was slightly south of 12z before transfer but the area is just flooded with warm air. My guess is the gfs is most likely gonna be right unfortunately. It just seems like in recent years anytime there is any sign of warm air/warm tongue that it's always north of even the models. Any hope is the cold air pushes further south than progged/more confluence. I'm not saying this one is over, it's just that we most likely willnnot win in this scenario unless we see some better trends...

It’s over. 6z GFS had the 6-8” line clipping a portion of the county, at 18z no one in Allegheny gets more than 3-4.

18z NAM has us in a good spot but it continues to tick north. I’m worried we’re in a precarious spot and this is just part of a bad trend.

Razor thin margins, but love when this gets put in the point and click.

That said, the Euro took a slight shift north at 12z. Far northern Allegheny county is still fine, but the rest of us are riding the slop line.

14 minutes ago, Burghblizz said:

Was just looking at that. Could be another sign that the it’s GFS Op versus the world. 

The depth maps are meh, so I’m thinking it’s bad temp profiles and tough to get accumulation anywhere close to 10:1 even with a mean of 7”, but who knows.

GEFS mean looks awesome.

And just like that, it’s gone on the GFS. 

Sadly, the 0z GFS went the wrong direction. But the GEFS ensemble mean still looks pretty good.

57 minutes ago, Ahoff said:

I don’t know, I saw a screenshot that showed like 18” here.

6z run, I think.

16 minutes ago, ChescoWx said:

HI bdgwx, No need to rehash the same explanations again!! I will of course continue to only present the actual concordance of validated factual climate data as recorded by the official historic NWS Cooperative Observers for Chester County PA without any post hoc adjustments. I will protect the integrity of the factual actual data set by not including any unsupported adjustments like blanket county wide time of observation tweaks etc. A valid exception could be if we were to see real time documented NWS notes or reports at the station level documenting either faulty equipment or observation errors as noted by the NWS reviewer prior to their stamp of approval as best available record on the station climate sheets. I will continue to default to the NWS Cooperative Observers of record who at the time were supplied with the best available equipment and training and served this role in some instances for 30 or 40 consecutive years. I will not risk actual historical data contamination with adjustments made years or decades after the recorded observations.

Your arrogance is disgusting. I can’t wait until climate denial mostly dies with your generation.

This is the second time on record and first since 1878 that the first 7 days of February have featured exactly zero measurable precip. In 1878, there was measurable precip on the 8th. At this juncture, no model is showing precip before midnight tomorrow night, so we may make history.

11 minutes ago, dseagull said:

Incorrect.  You suggested locking human beings away, under the guise of insanity, simply because they have questions.

 

Ok, got it....  I have an idea.

 

Let's make sure there's enough food and water in a padded wall room, and then lock ChecoWx in it for simply questioning why certain data was adjusted.   Even though he didn't say that it was done with a a hidden agenda, let's not take any chances.  

 

We can't have people questioning our "settled science," especially if it was settled by a government agency.  Sorry, ChescoWx.... Banished be you.  

Not on board with that.

Take out the food and water part and we have a deal.

Oh, and re: “human beings”, I’m not sure it’s settled science that climate deniers are human beings.

7 minutes ago, dseagull said:

Let me get this straight...  

You are suggesting that those who question or challenge the conclusions that a government entity came to, be institutionalized?    

 

That's terrifying for those of us who have served and those who love America. 

 

Good luck, comrade... tough times ahead.

 

No, I’m saying that those who came to said conclusions have a lot more expertise in the matter than ChescoWx does. That’s why they, and not ChescoWx, were hired to do that job.

40 minutes ago, dseagull said:

So what is the answer?  Trust and agree with anything that is presented to you?  Not challenge it?  That's not scientific.  Declaring that no agenda exists is also denying that human nature does exist.  

 

As for number 5, "Humans are the primary cause of said warming," I'm not even sure how to respond to that.   That's a pompous and "all-knowing" declaration.   Its also the same human nature that you previously and conveniently discarded in (3.)  We are not at the center of the universe and the cause for everything, as is human nature to believe.   Good grief.  

 

 

Anyone who believes the NCEI has a hidden agenda should be locked in a padded room.

5 minutes ago, ChescoWx said:

But of course still no answers from Tim.....

I haven’t researched this particular issue, but it’s obvious to anyone with any critical thinking ability whatsoever that:

1) the NCEI had their reasons for making those adjustments

2) the reasons for those adjustments are based in actual science that they are qualified to do, otherwise NCEI wouldn’t have hired them

3) there is no hidden agenda in this particular issue

4) the earth is warming

and 5) humans are the primary cause of said warming.

It’s utterly ludicrous to disagree with any one of these points, let alone all 5.

13 minutes ago, ChescoWx said:

Charlie again the above does not answer the questions as I have the above data. The question is why were each and every Chester County station cooled to even lower than Coatesville ever reported? You mention above that Coatesville had a "cool bias" - then why give all of the Chester County stations the what you call "a well deserved bias adjustment" to make them all cooler". This bias adjustment resulted in actually cooling the all Chester County station average to cooler than the station (Coatesville) with the cool bias you mentioned above do you see my point??   This is in fact what happened in 73 of 77 years between 1895 and 1970 - as the average NCEI temperature for the county was lowered to below any averages reported by any station including Coatesville.

1895 to 1970, even if inclusive, is only 76 years. How can you do statistical analysis if you can’t do simple arithmetic?

Just now, ChescoWx said:

Timmy you sure have insults but as always come up a wee bit short on facts and data!

Psst by the my weather station data and equipment has as always been continually verified by MADIS with the latest note being with the note "These values are within the acceptable range. This probably means that your sensor is sited correctly and is calibrated correctly"

The meteorological community does not respect you. I can assure you of that.

1 minute ago, ChescoWx said:

Hey bdgwx how about showing me the analysis specific to Chester County PA that details what station or area they used as the control to make the after the fact adjustments to the NWS cooperative data for 95% of the years from 1895 thru 1970??

They certainly didn’t use the poorly sited weather station in your backyard. You’d probably get more accurate data out of it if you shoved it up your ass.

I would tend to trust the professional opinion of the experts at the NCEI over some amateur in East Nantmeal with a poorly sited weather station.

4 minutes ago, ChescoWx said:

In comparing the NCEI average post observation temperature adjustments applied to the actual recorded averages recorded by the NWS Chester County Coop data show the average temperature data was adjusted downward every single year from 1895 through 2004 or for 110 consecutive years. The greatest adjustments were reductions in average temperatures of 2.76 degrees in 1945 / 2.69 degrees in 1943 /2.62 degrees in 1942 / 2.58 degrees in 1951. Conversely. In the 18 years since 2005 every year has been adjusted upwards with the exception of 2019 with the greatest adjustments upward to temperatures being applied to 2018 +1.87 degrees and 2005 with a +0.66 degree adjustment.

Tinfoilhat.jpg

6 minutes ago, Itstrainingtime said:

Was that you on Action Weather 4? 

That’s none other than the great Jeff “snow showers” Verszyla.

Just now, ChescoWx said:

Since 2000 using the 1991-2020 average temperature for December through February which is 32.8 degrees here in Chester County - we have seen 10 winters that have averaged below normal temps.... but none have been below normal since the DFJ of 2015 - winters with below normal DJF have been 2000/2001/2003/2004/2005/2009/2010/2011/2014/2015

9 straight AN winters. Hmmm.

17 minutes ago, Blizzard of 93 said:

Here is the 12z Euro snow map for this run for this potential event on the 12th.

Do you have access to the Kuchera map by chance?