nzucker

Doesn't the weather look favorable with a vortex near Alaska/Beaufort?

Core of the cold looks to pass over eastern WI and the UP of Michigan.

I live just north of Pelham Parkway in a leafy, suburban neighborhood that is just a few blocks away from the Bronx Zoo/Botanical Gardens. I'm only a little over a mile from the Westchester border. There are no honking horns or exhaust fumes here. Pelham Pkwy has an impressive variety of trees, and in the backyard we typically see orioles, red cardinals, and bluejays. Not your typical urban environment.

Looks like a cutoff pattern about to unfold. Last May, we had highs in the low 50s for about a week straight. It definitely can happen.

I live in NYC and I haven't even installed yet...it's way too early for AC. Tonight will be the warmest night with a low around 60F...the extended shows plenty of nights getting down to the 40s with an outside shot at 30s. Very comfortable weather. Some people want to live completely in a bubble, running the heat until early April then turning on AC 2 weeks later. One thing I enjoy about spring and fall is the natural air...the cool breeze floating in the window at night. No need for everything to be artificial.

Anything not east will warm the coast. Kevin is all backwards as usual.

April 2007 had a major snowstorm in NNE on Patriot's Day/Tax Day. Was 970mb over NYC. Had 5" at Middlebury VT.

The GFS stopped showing the -40C contour. They used to show it. You now just see a big area of -30C on the MSLP/QPF/850 map.

The coronal hole thing probably explains the blip, but it's superimposed on a long-term decline in Arctic sea ice that allows for such abnormally poor periods in ice extent. Re: the temp anomaly map, that's an extreme example of the -AO warm arctic, cold continents pattern. +24C anomalies in the Arctic while Siberia, Southwest Asia, and Western North America see near record cold. It's actually fairly encouraging to see such large areas of cold anomalies, which suggest Winter 16-17 in the Northern Hemisphere will be MUCH COLDER than Winter 15-16 was in the Super El Nino, in which almost nowhere finished below average.

The GFS looks pretty favorable for the Arctic in the medium to long range with the vortex continuing north of AK in the Beaufort. There does seem to be some ridging in the Canadian Archipelago so that area could have some losses, on the other hand.

Planted tomatoes, red onions, tarragon, basil, and thyme here in the northern Poconos at 1560'...I'm not from your region but I usually post about my garden near NYC. This year I'm up north and growing less but still trying...may get some arugula in, too. Already have lots of sage, oregano, and wild mint. Red onions can take up to 150 days to mature, and I planted them May 24th here in northern PA. How will they handle cold weather in late October and early November? (We are in a sheltered valley at nearly 1600' in northern PA with an average first frost of 9/20...average last around 5/20). Any tips to speed the onions along?

-20C 850s moving in...

What happened to Baro and the guy from the Yukon?

I had 17" in the 2/10/13 storm and 52" on the winter. Not bad at all.

2/25/10 Snowicane?

Picked up 11" down here in Dobbs Ferry from XMAS 2002. It was forecast to be mostly rain but changed over quickly to a heavy, dense snow. It took my aunt and uncle 6 hours to make the normally 2-hour trip from Albany to visit us on Christmas; they kept waiting for snow to change to rain as they drove, expecting a flip south of Poughkeepsie, but it stayed white to the coast. Hellish drive for them on I-87 but a great weather day. Still one of my favorite storms despite only receiving about a foot.

As skierinvermont says, it's impossible to debate with someone who claims he didn't say one of his own direct quotes. Or someone who contradicts himself completely as in "RATPAC has no gridding" then "I never said RATPAC wasn't gridded." Just a total deceit in order not to admit being wrong. Also, individuals who are banned aren't supposed to make new accounts in order to post under a different name. Admins need to track the IP address in this case. Also, SOC should be on a very short leash as a previously banned poster. How he can create another disruption (and the broad consensus was that SOC was the party responsible) and then not be permanently banned is a shock to me.

If you're banned, you're not allowed to come back under a different username. This is a violation of the terms of service. Mods, I suggest StudentofClimatology's account be suspended or deleted as he has admitted activity in violation of forum rules.

Some very cold 850s in northern Greenland: Looks as if a warm-up is coming with an east-based -NAO, however.

You were wrong when you said that RATPAC doesn't use gridding. Later, you claimed, "I never claimed that data in RATPAC wasn't gridded," even though you clearly had, and we copied the post for you a thousand times, which said, "RATPAC does nothing in the way of gridding." So, you changed your story. The reason that people are piling on is that they all agree you are wrong (skier, mallow, msgaldo, navy, me)...Don't you see that no one agrees for you? Not even educated meteorologists. Who cares if I'm a French and Spanish teacher (I've been full time for a few years now) and you're a paleoclimate student? The fact is you completely contradicted yourself, and it is evident from comparing the two posts. And guess what, you're a paleoclimate student while Mallow is a degreed meteorologist, and Mallow thinks you're wrong. So if it goes by title, you're still wrong.

You first said, "RATPAC does nothing in the way of gridding..." Then later said, "I never claimed that the data in RATPAC wasn't gridded." You did claim it wasn't gridded, right in your first quote. So stop trying to complicate things and admit the obvious, glaring fact that you did believe, incorrectly, that RATPAC had no gridding system. When skier called you out on this, you had to backpedal into semantics. ADMIT YOU ARE WRONG: You said there wasn't gridding, and there clearly is. OK you made a mistake.

I guess you did claim that it wasn't gridded or extrapolated. Just look at your above post. You lose, Skier wins. Game over, buddy. Thanks for playing.

The bottom line is that skierinvermont is basically correct. He may be aggressive, but he's clearly won the argument against SOC. SOC claimed there was no homogenization/interpolation of data in RATPAC. Skierinvermont produced contrary evidence that the data was gridded, and then the average of the grids was taken. While Skier should have acknowledged that this does not completely eliminate the problem of poor aerial coverage in the Southern Hemisphere, where the warming has been least, his basic argument was correct: RATPAC uses a similar method to GISS to calculate anomaly, though not quite as accurate. SOC tried to backpedal and use semantics to cover up the fact he was wrong. He should have admitted such, and simply insisted that some data was still lacking. SOC also jumped on the solar study just because he perceived it might negate arguments that higher solar activity is responsible for global warming instead of human activity. Even though the study doesn't really change much, he worried it might weaken the skeptic position that solar activity is as important as anthropogenic inputs, so he immediately attacked the study. This without even reading the original paper. Skierinvermont was, once again, correct. Skierinvermont may be annoying sometimes, but the most annoying part to you guys is that he's right.

Will both of you guys just shut the F up? No one wants to see the thread clogged with this nonsense anymore.

Greenland looks to get real cold in the next week...18z GFS shows -20C 850s atop the ice sheet at 180 hours. First sighting of the -20C isotherm in a few months: