winterymix

For the record, we got around 6.5" here in Glyndon/Reisterstown at 760 asl. The roads were awful at 8 am with 23 degrees widespread. Experience tells me that the NAM is quite useful but must not be taken literally. Like the other models, it requires weighing its signals. Sure, Camp David didn't get 50" but 75 mile north of there got 40+ The NAM is great for sniffing out warm noses at 850. Long story short, very few of these snow chances are consistently modelled into the fine details until 36 hours from the start. People need to understand the probabilistic strength of a signal. Some signals are flimsy and some are stiff-backboned. When NAM pulls warmth above the MD line at 850, the probabilistic success rate seems robust.

HREF is sleet-o-mania. Some of our best storms have suffered from mid-storm sleet-poisoning. https://www.spc.noaa.gov/exper/href/?model=href&product=qpf_001h_mean_ptype&sector=conus

"Mom and Dad: the computer ate my homework."

Amazing; multiple waves of moderate...snow.

Kudos to the LWX crew. The rain forecasts have generally be excellent.

BWI: 18.1 DCA: 12.5 IAD: 18.8 RIC: 13.9 Tiebreaker (SBY 16.6):

Don, thank you for initiating this important forum thread. In my opinion, academic-based climate science lacks a much-needed legal-judicial administrative structure and our state governments lack effective state to state climate laws and climate statutes. Each of our fifty state governments must put forth a plan with the goal of each state leaving the best possible state climate for future generations. We collectively created the problem and we all collectively set for the solution. Influential climate experts need to create a legal backstop similar to that of the American Medical Association. Our best climatologists need to speak to all of our citizens with a compelling voice. Consider the manner in which physicians have stabilized their profession with post-graduate board exams and detailed state law throughout the USA. If some evidence-based-medicine denier starts tweeting that modern medicine is a contrivance, the general public will shrug off the kook and turn to a qualified health care expert. The climate experts must invite all of us here, around the US and around the world to access the best possible version of the truth regarding climate change. The problem facing modern meteorology and modern climatology is that anyone can post worthless drivel without repudiation. Gosh, rumors abound of a US president that posted a Sharpie-faked hurricane prognostication. Perhaps we need a Cabinet level Department of the Climate, if only without any political bias. If our nation continues to pursue climate policy slathered with political bias, we've declared war upon our planet. Based upon recent US trends, historically poor decision making has become a form of persistence.

etudiant: Do you understand what it takes to get a scientific study published in a career-leading scientific journal? Do you understand the scientific ethics involved? if you are not a scientist with university-level qualifications and haven't completed a college curriculum that exposes students to the scientific method you wouldn't know how and why scientists work towards a consensus. Areas that can be analyzed and modelled become established scientific concepts over time. Areas of knowledge that are challenging to analyze leave room for opposing scientific theories. Regarding modern climatology, enough is settled to deserve consensus. Over 97% of the World's top scientific experts agree that anthropomorphic influences are inducing changes in the planet's land, air and water. These experts are referred to as scientists because they have the intelligence, training, ethics and experience to put forth the best possible version of reality, knowledge and the truth. Unless you have superior intelligence, education, colleagues and insight and defer to experts with qualifications, you are deliberately drawing your thoughts from an inferior path. Knowing less, comprehending less and understanding less than accomplished scientists is an unwise but deliberate choice.

Josh was on CNN just now.

Nice discussion, Don.

Reisterstown 4.7 Congrats to those in the greater DC area that scored.

Magic!

We've had 4.2". Incoming: https://weather.cod.edu/satrad/nexrad/index.php?type=LWX-EET-1-12

Some sort of lift localized west of Martinsburg.

Snowgasmic here in Reisterstown. Very light intensity fine pixies. Started 10 minutes ago.

I regret insisting that the District would be advisory only. Up here in north west central Balto. County, am hoping for some upper level low goodies tomorrow afternoon.

I was positive DC wouldn't get a WSW. OOPPSSSS...Enjoy!

I'm thinking of something like this: http://tropicalsails.com/solar-eclipse-tour-2019/ Not sure I want to kind out what a 3 star hotel is like down there.

Nice comments from everyone. I did definitely see the shadow bands appearing against an off white plastic tent. Took a photo that shows nothing. These are mysterious and poorly explained and nearly impossible to capture in a photo. BTW, I counted on the NAM cloud cover maps at instantweathermaps.com. For all the NAM hatred, these maps did quite well for me. During the excitement, I mis-programmed my Nikon for ISO 3200 at 1/4000 second. Modern cameras are amazing, it still captured an image. Diamond Ring for y'all.

Just like sex, intense over too soon gonna be a wait until the next one

Impressed, want to know of Gallatin was skill or luck. Ste Geneviere, mo getting dim out and some cumulus, hopefully they disipaite

made it to Festus, near CL Got my shortwave for WWV

We are headed for FELIX VALLE HOUSE STATE HISTORIC SITE in SE Missouri in case you want to join us. 443-789-9680

In St. Louis hotel. Easting Snyders pretzels, BRISK lemonade, comedy on CNN. Thinking of leaving at 5 am for the area between Hopkinsville and Carbondale. GFS is clogged with clouds and the hated NAM is favorable. Bust heartbreak, anyone?

Same. Here at STL. Humid cloudy sweaty day. Much incertainty for tomorrow. Nowcasting time. Water vapor loop.