cbmclean

Thanks. So is the RGEM confined to a smaller area like the NAM is confined to North America?

Been lurking and I have some questions about model acronyms. What is the GGEM? Is it just another name for the GEM/Canadian? Is the RGEM to the Candian as the NAM is to the GFS?

You know that scene in the original Matrix where Agent Smith was telling Morpheus that the first Matrix was an attempt by the machines to create a perfect human world, but human brains couldn't accept perfection and the brains kept crashing? That is how I feel about how good the long-range has been looking lately. It is too good to be real. I keep thinking I am going to black out and wake naked in a vat of goo high up an energy harvesting tower.

By this do you mean the Northwest Territories and/or Yukon?

You guys seem pretty excited about the parade of "big (mostly rain)" storms. Are you expecting the possibilities for frozen to improve as we get closer, and if so, why?

Well, I am east of RDU, so I expect the good old fashioned cold rain. Strength of that high pressure might be just enough for some hijinx up your way.

Who are you kidding? Frosty will get 20" like always.

I believe that Jan 1977 is the coldest month in RDU history. Mean temp several degrees colder then our normal low. Modest snowfall: 2.1 inches, which suggests that the major storms were suppressed even further south.

Did someone call?

Who is "Becky"?

Their opinions are mixed. I don't think I have seen anyone say it was actually worse. Some have shown pointed to correlation plots showing little to no improvement. There is at least one poster (psuhoffman) who really seems to know what he is talking about, who believes that it has shown notable improvement in some aspects, but astill lags the euro.

I have to admit that I pictured your house being an underground layer where you poured over historical MJO records and developed your own in-house "Jan 20th" model.

Rest is good, but I have seen so many times where teams that had the bye came out flat, or at least flat enough to fall to a team which came in to the playoffs hot. That red-hot Eagles are exactly the kind of match-up which I would look to knock off the Saints.

From official RDU records, 28.1 inches for 2000 calendar year: 25.8 in January, 2.2 in November, and 0.1 in December. If you meant for the 1999 - 2000 winter, it was just 25.8, since there was nothing in December 1999 or February 2000. Interestingly, 1999 was a complete shut-out: 0.0 inches.

I blame it on the Pacific jet.

I honestly feel bad for that kicker. Gotta imagine the locker room is not the most comfortable place for him right now.

My opinion: There are two reasons 1. I suspect that casual fans are a big part of the 15 -20 year boom in NFL ratings, and I suspect that casual fans like basketball on turf. 2. Legal liability: the NFL knows they are sitting on a poderkeg of liability for concussions. Basketball on turf is probably safer.

It's all part of my master plan to build up the MA snow pack so that cold air masses just skate down from the north with no moderation.

Ignore that last post. Having technical difficulties with phone.

Thanks.

But I just don't understand. From the definitions (simplified, as I as I understand them) 500 hPa geopotential height = the height at which the atmospheric pressure is 500 hPa 1000 to 500 hPa thickness = the height difference between the 1000 hPa level and the 500 hPa level Since sea level pressure is about 1000 hPa, I would think that the height at which atmospheric pressure is 500 hPa should be about the same as the height between the 1000 hPa level and the 500 hPa level. For example the pressure at RDU is about 1015 hPa. Let's say my 1000 hPa height is 11 dm, and my 500 hPa height is say 560 dm. So my 1000 - 500 thickness is 560-11 or 549 dm. So yeah, the 1000 - 500 thickness is a little less than the 500 hPa height, because 100 hPa is a little up in the air from the surface. But why don't 1000 - 500 thickness basically follow 500 hPa heights, just with a little negative offset?

I need some weenie education. So in the figure above I see the 540 dm geopotential height line almost completely in Canada. I know that the 540 dm 1000 - 500 thickness line is generally considered the "baseline" rain snow line. So I do not understand why the geopotential height is ever very different from the 1000 - 500 thickness. Isn't 1000 hPa basically the surface? So wouldn't the thickness between 1000 hPa and 500 hPA be about the same as the height of the 500 hPa geopotential surface? I am obviously missing something but I am not sure what.

That is interesting. I am not sure if I have ever seen that one before.

Did the famed Carolina Crusher (Jan 25, 2000) do something up your way or was there another storm?