psuhoffman

Except you didn’t provide the relevant data. How warm it was the day before doesn’t matter. How warm was it while it snowed? Did the temp drop to 27? If so 2f wouldn’t have mattered and that’s still a snowstorm now. But if it was 32 during the snow, I got bad news for you regarding what math says the +2f would mean

Not globally but the rate of increase does continue to accelerate. What’s happened that caused the sudden post 2016 decline in snowfall was a pattern change to a hostile pacific much of the time which has made the 2f matter more because we’re stuck in a warm regime most of the time where even when we do get snow threats we need Them to work with marginal temps and those marginal temps are now warmer. Some of this will get better when a better long term cycle emerges. But make no mistake we’re bleeding snow even in those. For example the last time we timed up a favorable Atlantic and pacific in the 2000s Baltimore only averaged 21” during that period. Better yea but only slightly above what the 30 year mean was anyways. At the same time NYC and Boston were averaging 150-175% of normal! That should have been us! And in the 1960s when a similar pattern happened it was us. But it’s warming so the core of the snowfall shifted north. And we got scraps on the southern edge of the max snowfall anomalies despite a perfect pattern cycle. That’s going to keep happening and get worse. we will continue to see short term cycles of less and more snow but over top of that is the long term decline. Each up will be less up and each down will be more down and eventually Baltimore will have a winter climate similar to what Raleigh used to have where snowfall is an extreme anomaly and not something you expect in any given winter.

Will most of the column from h85 down is nearly isothermal so they all start warming together in this case. Slightly. But the equation gets a lot harder the further southwest you go right now.

True BUT this topic never comes up in a vacuum. It’s not like someone comes in here and just says now let’s talk about climate change. What happens is we get a synoptic situation that is being impacted by climate change. It’s impossible not to note that this storm we are tracking right now is being impacted by it being warmer. You’d be under an advisory if not a warning right now of it was 1970 and 2f colder with this same exact synoptic setup. That discussion is muddy because it bridges both topics. And I don’t think the people that shit it down do so because it’s the wrong thread they do so because they are uncomfortable with the topic. Either because they are in denial about what it’s doing to our snowfall or because they are in denial because it’s inconvenient to their preferred ideology. I have no patience or fucks to give about either of those reasons.

This storm is taking a perfect track. It’s just too warm for DC

The high resolution models can pick up on them but the issue here is the higher mountains in our area are southwest and in this case south of the thermal boundary that sets up. The high resolution do show more snow on Catoctin and parrs ridge in Maryland.

I don’t agree with the argument but some argue C02 concentration are cyclical. Look I’m on your side I just don’t want to muddy the snow argument because what’s causing the warming doesn’t matter to the is the warming hurting our snowfall argument. Those 2 debates can be severed.

As long as NWS doesn’t issue any advisories and downplays it we are good! Let’s reverse psychology this into a snowstorm.

To be fair the nam and euro were pretty identical the last 2 runs. We don’t know what the euro will show this run yet!

The snow alg on wxbell is flawed for the AIFS ensembles. It seems to count anything remotely close as snow. I tried to figure out what’s wrong but it just seems like someone accidentally set the freezing temp as 35 instead of 32 lol. It’s not the model it’s the clown snow map wxbell makes.

For the last time Chuck we used to be able to get snow in hostile pac regimes. look at this sounding for Westminster while it’s raining. It’s 33-34 in the boundary layer. Cold enough everywhere else. The boundary has warmed 2f since 1970. So explain to me how is the fact it’s 2f warmer not hurting our snow chances tomorrow when it’s 2f too warm? I’m listening. Explain the math to me.

The surface has warmed on average 2f since 1970 now look at the sounding for Baltimore during the rain and tell me if it makes a difference!!!! its 35 at the surface and all layers are below freezing except the lowest 1000 feet. You think cooling it 2f wouldnt help? Now it’s 33 and only above freezing a very tiny bit. It can snow at 33! It would have still been marginal but…more likely to tip snow v rain. Now what about NW of 95. Look at the sounding for Reisterstown for example. It’s 33-34 in the boundary during the rain. What would 2f colder mean for them? Im tired of this honestly. Sooooo much of our snow came right at or near 32 in the last. It’s ridiculous to claim increasing temps 2f since 1970 or worse 3f since 1950 hasn’t fundamentally hurt our snowfall in a significant way. And the numbers show it. Our snowfall has decreased. There is no logical retort to this. And I’m not talking about human influence. I don’t care. Not having that debate. If you want to claim it’s not human fine. That’s political we don’t have to debate that. But it is warmer. That’s a fact. That’s not political. And it’s asinine to claim somehow it’s warmer but not hurting our snow in marginal temp situations like this.

Because it has a cold bias??? Among many other problems lol

NOT WITH THAT TRACK ON FEB 15!!! Dude we had this damn debate a few days ago. Yea it was cold, when we had a perfect pacific epo pna ridge. Of course it was cold go back and look at the flow, air was coming straight out of the arctic cross polar and dumping into the Eastern US. And Utah was torching with highs in the 60s! We’ve had that kind of thing before and it was even COLDER! Look at 1977 and 1994! We’ve had high temps near 0 in past years with that kind of direct arctic discharge with snowcover. 30 years ago what we just had would have been even colder Chuck. And the globe didn’t suddenly get colder we were juts lucky to be under the tiny bit if cold real estate! look at the global heights from Jan 25-Feb 5. 70% is still RED Chuck. For the last time this isn’t about what happens when we are lucky enough to have a perfect pac pattern that dumps arctic air over us and we’re in the 30% of the world that’s blue. I know we can still snow them. But what happens the rest of the time??? What about the 70% when we’re under the red? When thickness are now 10-15m higher in the same pattern. You don’t think that makes a difference. You don’t think if the whole thicknesses were a little lower tomorrow or might not tip the scales from rain to snow for some places in this forum? Have you looked at the soundings tomorrow? The whole damn column is cold enough except the boundary where it’s 35-38 degrees. Guess what layer is warming fastest! The boundary. How can you possibly think it’s not making a difference with the marginal storms? So many of our past snows were barely cold enough because we’ve always been on the southern edge of where it snows much in winter. If you’re going to argue warming isn’t hurting us then you need to answer these 3 questions. 1) where did all the marginal snows during hostile pacific patterns go? Why don’t we get snows from perfect track waves during warm patterns anymore? Because we used to. I know. I have a data base of all of them. So what happened? why are perfect track waves doing hostile pac patterns juts perfect track rain now? What changed? 2) why has the median and mean snowfall for DC and Baltimore been declining consistently for 100 years and accelerating in the last 50. Explain it. Baltimore used to average almost 25” of snow and now it’s 19 and likely to fall closer to 16 when it updates next decade! Why? What happened to 30% of our snow? 3) since you’re saying warming isn’t hurting us in these marginal Situations then explain this. All the snowstorms we got during otherwise warm periods from a perfect track wave in the past when it was barely cold enough to snow…take early March 1962 for example. Some places just NW of 95 got 10” but with temps of 33-34 degrees while it was snowing. It just snowed hard enough to overcome the very marginal temps. But it’s warmer now. How would that still be snow if you apply today’s temps to that storm. Now it’s 35-36! The whole column is warmer too. Which is worse because it was probably isothermal so now it has 5000 feet of 35 to overcome instead of 33. How is that still a snowstorm? Or are you saying it’s not warmer? That thicknesses haven’t increased. That thermometers are broken and they’re all lying to us? because you can’t have it both ways. So much of our snow in the past came when it was barely cold enough to snow. So you cannot say it’s warmer but don’t worry that’s not hurting us. You can’t because if you warm is at all we lose so much of our past snow. 1-2 degrees F warmer and so many of those storms I documented get worse. Become 3” instead of 5”. A 3” wet slop becomes just rain! And suddenly it only snows during cold regimes and you say warming has nothing to do with it which makes absolutely no sense logically. How can you warm what was already a barely cold enough to snow equation and say it’s no big deal to our snowfall? Explain that Chuck.