tamarack

Why? What's the point of posting something that has nothing to do with climate change in a climate change forum?

Well, at least it was in the banter thread.  However, my understanding was that a facet of warming in the East was milder minima, which would result in slightly lower diurnal ranges.

Tam,

 Thanks for this data.

 

 To be fair (and assuming a near steady background avg. temp.), the # of records of any kind will be biased higher in earlier periods. Example: An all-time record low or high on any date at most any station in, say 1915, was much easier to attain than it would be in 2015 simply because the record is now 100 years longer.

Easier to set at that time, but with 100 years to be broken at a later date.  IMO, the size of the observational network would be the strongest bias, with fewer stations in the 19th and early 20th century (and, unfortunately, in recent years.  I've noted a number of very long term sites having ceased reporting during the past 5 years.)  I've found many sites with records beginning August 1, 1948, perhaps a postwar effort to add robustness, and a small but interesting number for which records begin Jan. 1, 1893.  The more places being observed, the greater the chances of catching an extreme.  The -50 in 2009 which reset Maine's cold extreme came, IMO, because there was finally a station recording in the far NW part of the state.  There are a number of anecdotal accounts of sub-minus 50 temps from that area, -52 at Estcourt Station, -54 at Nine-Mile Bridge on the St. John (recounted in the book of that name) and others.  And now both Clayton Lake and Allagash have winked out, leaving that cold quadrant with nothing except Big Black.

One data set I've used as a proxy for extreme events is the state records for hottest and coldest days, and wettest/driest years, 200 records in all.  Two caveats:  First, the smaller number of recording locations prior to 1900 will bias against representation from that time.  Second, some of the temperature extremes note "also on earlier dates", which may also bias against earlier years.  (Or not - Maine's hottest temp is one of the ties, but the earlier date occurred during the same week and location.) 

There are only 10 records set prior to 1890 and only one of those was for temperature.  Then the 1890s, 1900s, and 1910s averaged 9 per decade.  The 1920s set only 3 extremes.  Then came the 1930s, with 23 record highs, 10 lows, 2 wettest, 17 driest, 52 extremes in all and top decade for all but wettest year.  The next six decades averaged 17 each, ranging from 12 to 26.  Extremes have been less common during the new millenium, with only 7 for 2000 on, though there may be updated records of which I'm not aware.  The two most recent are both cold extremes, 2009 in Maine and 2011 in OK.

I have a question regarding snow growth. Does high winds always mean bad dendrite formations? We have blizzard warnings up for  my hood. Winds gusting to 65mph.

Npot necessarily.  The Dec. 6-7, 2003 storm was one of the windiest I've seen in our somewhat protected (by forest) location, with gusts well into the 30s and much drifting, and it dumped 24" on 1.63" LE, ratio of 14.7.

 

GYX all over the road, my totals up and down by a foot every update it seems. 

First big January snowstorm in years, and I'm visiting family in S. NJ - expecting 12-16" down here, had about 1" from today's clipper.  We were planning to drive home tomorrow - guess that's not a wise idea, but the Forester ought to make it on Wednesday.   I'd be satisfied with the current GYX forecast of 8-12" for S. Franklin; would be nice to be able to get into the driveway Wednesday evening.

Climate sensitivity (warming per doubling of Co2 concentration) is probably the best way to break down peoples opinions into categories. Since you've all used loaded language in you labels, I'll continue with the tradition:

 

1. Extreme alarmist: believes or focuses solely on the high end or even higher than the scientifically accepted climate sensitivity (>4C). Focuses solely on the worst case consequences and denies or ignores all benefits.

 

2. Alarmist: believes or focuses on the high end of scientifically accepted climate sensitivity (3-4.5C). Focuses usually on the worst case consequences and acknowledges few of the benefits. 

 

3. Scientifically grounded: acknowledges the full range of scientifically accepted climate sensitivity (1.5-4.5C). May lean slightly one direction or another within that range based on a good-faith effort to objectively interpret the evidence with assistance of peer-reviewed literature, but acknowledges all of the uncertainty and the lack of concrete evidence. Has a balanced understanding and acceptance of the various consequences and benefits and the evidence that on net the consequences will be negative. A moderate to high level of mitigation is warranted, and adaptation cannot be relied upon solely.

 

4. The biased/arrogant/confused/misled lukewarmer category: believes or focuses solely on the low end or slightly below scientifically accepted climate sensitivity (1-2C). Ignores the evidence that climate sensitivity is probably higher than 2C. Often an undue focus on the benefits of AGW, or downplaying of the consequences. Possibly believes that the benefits of AGW will outweigh the consequences.

 

5. Denier/stupid: believes in a climate sensitivity below the scientifically accepted range (0-1.5C). Usually focuses on the benefits of warming and downplays the consequences. Probably believes that the benefits of warming will outweigh the consequences.

 

6. Extreme denier/stupid: believes CO2 has little to no warming effect. If warming did occur, it would be good.

Much prefer taco's rating.  To me, words like alarmist, skeptic, denier (in AGW context) are part of the vernacular and relate mainly to opinions being held.  Words like arrogant, confused, misled, stupid seem far more heavily loaded and pejorative.  Also, I think there's an unintentional oversight in that the above ratings apply those extra-loaded words only to #4 and below, and that skier would agree that the extreme alarmist camp includes folks to whom some/all of those words might apply.

So: 1) you are calling me a denier, which shows complete ignorance of my views on this issue, and 2) as much as you might like the world to be a simple black/white place, there are nuances and shades of gray. This is a complex issue, with complex personal views on it. That's not me "framing the discussion like a politician", that's just reality.

 

I'm sure it's easier to just frame everything as "denier vs. AGW believer".

Given tacoman's posts on CC, A-L-E-K's "denier" post would seem to place all the 3s,4s,5s in the denier camp, which would be classic "shift the middle" tactics,

We were working on a house down in Osterville, and I had to tunnel my way through, just to make it into the front entrance of a framed out home. I then actually dug a back hoe out because it was stuck. How often is a backhoe stuck in the snow.

Off topic ('cause it's NNE), but in the C.Maine New Year's Eve blizzard of 1962, a BGR plowtruck got paunched out near the old Pilot's Grill restaurant, then the 6-WD grader sent to rescue it got stuck, so they sent their large Cat dozer, and stuck that, too.

I found pics of the Oct 18, 2009 storm...while I was driving around early in the storm

That event, like 5/9/77, 10/10/79, and the NNJ snows of late April '83/'86, showed how climo-capricious the very early/very late snows can be. Nary a flake in my Maine foothills BY, but as we headed to IL (granddaughter #3 arrival) on the 19th we saw snow OG at both ends of I-84, shady shoulders in N.CT and the hills east of Scranton, PA. Then, 2nd day after the snowfall, we saw considerable snow in the woods along I-80 in W.PA, along with some trees broken by leaf-on accum.

Edit: Wonderful pics of 12/08; wish I some like it for 1/98 in Gardiner/AUG. THAT event was the most impactful wx of any kind I've experienced, and #2 just might be the NNJ ice storm exactly 45 years earlier. At least that 1953 storm is partly responsible for my lifelong interest in wx and trees.

12/08: I'm still not quite sure how/why MBY had the same rain (2", albeit after 4" snow) at the same 2m temps as ORH, yet escaped with 0.2" ice accretion and lots of cold puddles, but your dewpoint comment offers another clue - perhaps higher over MBY. I already think we had a thinner, if equally cold, sub-32 surface layer, so that the raindrops splashed in at less cool temps than down your way.

83-84 also had the notable March 1984 storm which would be quite a way to end a relatively snowless stretch of Marches we've had recently. Was that a bookend winter, Will? I know January was very cold (we had several very cold Januarys back in the early and mid 80s) but relatively dry.

Lived in Ft. Kent then, and our March storm came on 14-15 after 10 days of mid-Jan cold. 26.5" (CAR had 29.0", their record until the 12/25-27/05 stall-out) with 65" OG - 80" up in the woods, each the most I've measured - IMBY/anywhere, respectively. (The 28-29 event never got to N.Maine.) We had 16" LE in Nov-Dec, and probably more than half of it was still on the ground on 12/31, with more piling up each week, except for the last half of Feb, when our 59" snowpack settled to 35" - not much melted.

After the big March storm my snowpack held 16" LE, and I'm guessing the much deeper and equally solid snow NW of Allagash might've had 20". Unlike 2008, no April rain = no flooding that spring.

Will, maybe you could use the one from Jan 26-27 also, I remember some rotation was detected a few miles south of here on radar just as the second part of the storm got going and there was loud booming thunder and vivid lightning along with thundersleet that eventually changed to thundersnow. It actually did feel like it was hailing as the sleet was marble size and I actually think real hail was reported with this storm (weird to have hail and sleet together along with a possible tornado in a winter storm lol.)

Weird, indeed. Midcoast Maine had two tornados (EF1 and EF0) on Thanksgiving, 2005, during a rather modest storm, 2-5" most places with some mixing along tidewater.

The storm where the temp rose obscenely was probably Jan 27-28, 1994. I remember we were near 0F on the 27th and then by the morning of the 28th we hit 50F. We did get a lot of icing before the temp spiked up though from what I remember.

Farmington had -30 the morning of 1/27/94, then went up to 40 on the 28th, 4" snow followed by 1" RA. It's not often in the east one sees 70F change from one day to the next.

Yet to experience a snowstorm in SNE; seen a few in NNJ and Maine.

Those pics of 12/08 ice bring back memories of 1/1998. Damage IMBY looked somewhat similar, though other areas I saw then were even worse, and '98 sets the standard for widespread ice. I know of no other ice storm with anywhere near the areal coverage of that one.

9.6" I believe...somehow the airport came in with 6.2" but you can clearly see from the pics that it was a lot more than that.

From about 9A to 3P, that 1/14/08 radar had the nicest "banana" of 30-35 dbz curving from west of Sebago thru LEW and AUG to lower Penobscot Bay. It remained nearly stationary (the heavy precip area) for about 6 hr. AUG got 10" between 9:30 A and 2 P, at which time I headed to Farmington in 0.1 mile vis, because my wife had gotten rear-ended near home and then a meatwagon ride to the hosp. (She was fine except for back pain; fortunately all the sternum clips installed 3 months earlier during her bypass op held together.) The banana's north edge just grazed MBY - right when the accident occurred - for 8", while Farmington had only moderate SN and 5.5". Largest accum I found was 15.9" in Bridgton. GYX had 15".

I know I've pimped these out before, but my April Fool's pics from eastern.

Thanks, CoastalWx. If you hadn't, I was going to ask. Those are my favorite of all snow pics I've viewed here ("here" includes Eastern, of course), with LEK's monster snowblitz pics from 2006 or '07 as chief competition.