TheClimateChanger

With numbers like these, Ohio might as well be the new Tennessee. Just across the river...

Don’t forget to share the bad news too.

Funny how it used to always be the Kuchera maps that were the clown maps, and now it's the 10:1 ratio maps.

In addition to xMacis missing several days of snowfall from that winter, including the 6.6" snowstorm on January 1st, there are several periods of observations that are physically impossible. Snow depth increases by 3.0" from 1-14 to 1-16, on 2.7" of new snowfall. Snowfall increases from 19.9" at 7 pm on 1/30 to 22.7" at 7 pm on 1/31 - an increase of 2.8" with a two-day total snowfall of 2.3". Meaning even if all of the snow on the 30th fell after 7 pm, depth increased by at least a half inch more than reported snowfall. And, of course, depth proceeds to increase by nearly nine inches between 1/31 and 2/1, with only another 0.9" of snow reported. As noted, the 4 days of 30"+ snow depth are more than all other years combined in the threaded record. Even in December 2017, when nearly 100" is alleged to have fallen, depth never exceeded 27". Look, nearly 43" over two days with a peak depth of 27". Compare that to these meticulous, uninflated numbers from 1944-45.

Sharing a post from @mitchnickin the Central PA forum showing the GEFS (see link above). Looks like a miss or minor event on the majority of ensemble members (although there are a couple/few big hits).

I will say the 24-hour period from 12z 12/13 to 12z 12/14 looks solid. 5.0" using Kuchera ratios, and 7.3" at 10:1 [probably too high with marginal temps], and this is only 5 days out [rather than some distant, remote possibility]. But other than that, not too many big threats.

Which run? I was unimpressed by the 12Z which had Pittsburgh at 6.7" and more like 5-6" at KPIT through the entire run. North Carolina gets dumped on though - 22" at Greensboro and a foot at Raleigh-Durham. Edit: Doesn't show the North Carolina event until the 19th-20th, and Pittsburgh is in the upper 30s for highs those days.

@donsutherland1 Is it possible that some of the 1-3" days in the early years would be 3-6" days under current snow measuring techniques? And similarly some of the 3-6" days (not shown) would have registered as 6"+ days under current snow measuring techniques? This trend might mostly be generally an artifact of data quality issues and actually masking a general decrease in total snowfall. UCAR estimates proper snow board use with 6-hourly measurements can increase reported total snowfall by 15-20 percent relative to a single storm measurement. Moreover, there were other inconsistencies before 1950, including the use of a simple 10:1 ratio for snowfall at some sites and/or simply measuring change in depth (although I don't think this was the case at Central Park). Regardless, snow boards didn't come into use until the latter half of the 20th century. Source: Snowfall measurement: a flaky history | NCAR & UCAR News

At MSP, this is the warm weather equivalent to 1895, which at -11.7F is the coldest by 3.4F (second place: 1936, -8.3F). Warmest First 7 Days of February Coldest First 7 Days of February

Honorable mention shout out to LSE. More than a degree over second place (1878), which itself is nearly SIX degrees warmer than 3rd place.

Unbelievable SCORCHING start to the month. The average high at MSP has been more than 4F above any other year over this same 7-day period, and DSM has been nearly 2F above any prior year. Chicago has its warmest first 7 days of February since 1882! Expect eastern sections to climb over the next few days. Many places could see their warmest first 10 days of February on record by average high temperature. Here are some rankings for average high temperature over the first 7 days of February: Minneapolis/St. Paul (1st) Chicago (2nd) Green Bay (2nd) Des Moines (1st) Indianapolis (5th) International Falls (2nd) LaCrosse, WI (1st) Milwaukee (5th) Toledo, OH (5th) Detroit (7th)

Looks like Punxsutawney Phil has been spot-on so far.

A SCORCHING start to the month of February across central and western Pennsylvania. Rankings for average high temperatures for the first 7 days of the month: Harrisburg/Middleton (6th) Williamsport (3rd) Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area (8th) DuBois (2nd) Bradford (3rd) Pittsburgh (5th)

The average high temperature over the first seven days of February (49.3F) has been the fifth highest over 150 years in the threaded record, and exceeded only by 1991 at the airport (52.3F). Given the high temperatures over the next 3 days, I'd say it is likely this will be the warmest first 10 days of February on record by average high temperature.

What’s it look like with Kuchera ratios? Kuchera ratio maps used to throw up massively inflated totals, but I’ve noticed over the past couple of years, they have often been less than the 10:1 maps.

This would be swell.

I know most here don't like data, but I had to re-run the numbers through six days of February torch - and it's not pretty. Up to 4th place now, matching the highest of any winter to date since 1931-32 [downtown city office], and a full 2 degrees warmer than any year at KPIT (2016 & 2002). And it looks like the rest of this week will likely be even warmer, especially with overnight lows.

Countywide averaging is not an adjustment, though. The countywide average can, in fact, be less than all official observing sites if the observing sites are located generally in warmer locations (low elevation, latitude). The county averages shown by NCEI are still often lower than the official temperatures. The actual adjustments are small and well-justified to eliminate known and recognized biases in the raw data. Berkeley Earth already recreated the warming trend without any explicit adjustments - instead treating variations in the data [when compared to data from surrounding sites] as a new station. Moreover, the U.S. is less than 2% of the earth's surface. Finally, if the warming was all made up from adjustments, then why do satellites, radiosondes, and more recent observations [largely unaffected by these old adjustments] all show strong warming over the past 4-5 decades? If the warming trend was not real, then wouldn't these new tools reveal that the earth really isn't actually warming? But instead, they all show warming - including the UAH satellite data analysis, headed by notable skeptics? Not to mention, warming is evident in physical changes which have been observed - remote sensing of Arctic and Antarctic ice cover, changing plant and animal behavior, etc.

There is no modern winter that comes close to 1944-45, at Erie or Buffalo. Sure, the snowfall amounts, while high, are not record-breaking. But it's clear they weren't measuring with the same diligence that they do today. There were several storms where the depth increased more than the reported snowfall at Erie, including one where depth jumps 9 inches on less than 2 inches of snow. NOTE: 6.6 inches missing from January 1 - should be 38.3 inches on month, per actual records. This is despite missing data on 4 dates. Unfathomable today. The missing numbers are 10" on 12/31, 18" on 1/1, 22" on 1/31 and 31" on 2/1. The bad thing is these numbers probably got flagged due to the bad snowfall figures. No. of days with snow depth of at least 12": 62, per xMacis [actually 65]. 2008-2024, there's been 64. No. of days with snow depth of at least 15": 50, per xMacis [actually 53] - this is more than the next 3 years combined. No. of days with snow depth of at least 18" - there were more of these in 44-45 than there are days of 12"+ in any other winter! [33, per xMacis - actually 36, which is more than the next 3 years combined] No. of days with snow depth of at least 20" [20 per xMacis, actually 22] No. of days with snow depth of at least 24" [9 per xMacis, actually 10] No. of days with snow depth of at least 30" [3 per xMacis, actually 4 - which is more than ALL other years combined]

Sorry for off-topic, but it warrants a response. There are plenty of places in the midwest that have seen snowfall drop precipitously over the past decade. Cleveland Columbus Toledo Saint Louis

The late 1980s to mid 1990s are the steroid era at first order sites: An Investigation of Temperature Discontinuities Introduced by the Installation of the HO-83 Thermometer on JSTOR In Tucson, It's Not the Heat, It's the Thermometers - The New York Times (nytimes.com) Suspect in Record Highs: New Gauge - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

For the record, I was playing around with the AWSSI last week, and 1997-1998 is the current full-season record low. Last winter appeared to be the second least. It's not a particularly easy tool to find rankings, but I checked several of the dud winters since 1950. It looks like the cold snap just before Christmas prevented last year from being the record low.

Part of a long-term trend that really took off in earnest around 2010.