GaWx

29 minutes ago, forkyfork said:

 

Nino 1+2 is very warm, but Adam’s post:

-is ignoring the effect of GW on skewing Nino 1+2 upward in 2026 vs 1997. The highest relative weekly in 1997 was +4.1  (set twice). Relative values for Nino 1+2 are currently 0.5 or more cooler than the non-relatives. NOAA and other orgs have recently been using relative values as official because of the skewing caused by GW.
 

-He’s looking at yesterday’s daily rather than at a weekly average, which is what the historical data is based on.
 

-These OISST charts have recently been warmer than the released NOAA weeklies as has been noted in many posts since July.

-Let’s see what this Monday shows for relative Nino 1+2 averaged over this week. I doubt it will reach +4.1, but we’ll see. I’m guessing high 3s.

33 minutes ago, PhiEaglesfan712 said:

Do we now have a relative and a traditional PDO now (like we do with the ONI)?

This one shows July as -2.14 and August as -1.84:

 https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/pub/data/cmb/ersst/v5/index/ersst.v5.pdo.dat

I’m not aware of a relative PDO. Like the SOI and IOD, I don’t think relative is needed for these 3 indices because all 3 are based on differences between different areas that I assume largely cancel out any effect from GW.

 I do see why there are now two NOAA PDOs: yours is based on ERSST version 5 whereas mine is based on ERSST version 6, the newest version. How about that for adding to confusion? 
 
 With 6 being the newest ERSST, I assume that it is the most official for NOAA PDO now.

11 minutes ago, Ji said:

its already out boss

 

That says August. The August forecast isn’t new. The Sept 1st forecast is the new one we’re waiting for. The monthly Euro forecasts are normally released on the 5th of the month.

 The NOAA August PDO came in at -1.11 vs July’s -1.35. This is the 2nd month in a row for which the NOAA monthly actually came in less negative than what the WCS dailies suggested (see image below). That is even more the case with August, for which the WCS averaged slightly lower than -1.5. This -1.11 compares to the significantly stronger -PDO of Aug of 2023 of -2.02:


 

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/pub/data/cmb/ersst/v5/v6/index/ersst.v6.pdo.dat

53 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

"Global warming doesn’t cause bedrock to buckle...."

whaaaat,  um, no. 

I mean I realize you're asking Don but I could help my self.    

Just in brief and off the top of the head, there are three easy aspects in how CC may both directly and indirectly factor. 

1,  glacial rebound.  

2,  liquid water fluxing

3,  bedrock?

With rebound, that happens because if land spends multiple multiple Millennia in a stable/colder climate regime, the ice accumulation weighs down. This gravitational anomaly supplies a constant pressure downward into the undergirding and surrounding bedrock. Over time ...succumbs by sinking.  Remove the ice, the land may rebound... upward.   And it doesn't do so according to any necessary ease. It tends to do so in jolts felt as tremors.  

With increasing melt ( liquid flux) the basal water may enter ground; in CC, the warming summer means this quantity is rising. Over decades, repetitious freezing and thawing literally cracks the Earth due to phase change expansion(contraction). How much so notwithstanding. But this is a weakening implication in the integrity of the supporting geology beneath the overriding ice - failure ( land slide) results. 

These two also work together.   In fact, #2 actually happens first, then... #1 tremor triggers the landslide. 

Whether these factors were in play in the higher terrain/alpine region of Nepal, I am not claiming so.. But Mr Martz makes a blanket all preclusive statement that is epistemically false. 

Beyond these two, the third relates to, what officiating/reviewed source said or analyzed and proved that "bedrock" indeed failed?   It is possible that the undergirding was actually a strata of compressed glacial deposits mixed with icy compressed rubble. An avalanche was inevitable - probably so, anyway, but if this was the type of supporting foundation beneath the overcasting of ice weight ( which itself was calving the leading segments), then the whole structure probably would not need to wait for the geological time for #1 and #2 to work together. 

 
 Thanks for your reply, John. I’m asking anyone but tagged Don only because he’s been about the most involved with me in the discussion about the Nepal disaster and thus wanted to make sure he sees this.

 Martz appears to be correct in saying that there aren’t going to be many days that go >0C based on my just now seeing what’s down below that I’m quoting from the link below. If ~+1C really is the warmest at 5,364 m or 17.6K feet, is there going to be significant melting way up that high?

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-highest-and-lowest-temperatures-ever-recorded-at-Mt-Everest-base-camp

“Highest and lowest recorded temperatures at Everest Base Camp (EBC) depend on which camp and which dataset, but reliable observations come from automatic weather stations (AWS) installed at the South Base Camp (Nepal side, ~5,364 m) and other nearby high-altitude stations.

Summary of best-available values (observations and published AWS records, through May 2024):

• Highest recorded air temperature
  • South (Nepal) Base Camp AWS: about −1.0 °C to +1.0 °C on the warmest days in late spring/early summer (typically May). Many published station summaries and expedition logs report peak values near 0 °C; a commonly cited peak is ~+0.5 °C. Slightly warmer spot measurements in sunlight or lower-elevation tent sites can exceed +1 °C briefly, but sustained, instrumented air-temperature peaks at the official South Base Camp are around 0 °C to +1 °C.”

 Yes, the cocky Chris Martz was wrong with his initial thought that this disaster was earthquake induced. But I think most of this from him yesterday is at least worthy of discussion/debate. Opinions?

Climate alarmists refuse to let go of their narrative about Nepal despite the load of evidence against their claims.

 The avalanche (and by extension, flood) in Nepal last week was triggered by the collapse of bedrock beneath the Yala Glacier, not the glacier partially collapsing itself.

 Global warming doesn’t cause bedrock to buckle. It was likely geological in origin caused by seismic activity in recent years and months causing fractures in the rock. The Himalaya are highly active due to plate tectonics moving India into the Asian continent. And the “melting permafrost” argument doesn’t hold much water either because temperatures have generally been below freezing, even during summer, where the glacier sits ~17,000 feet (5,200 meters) up. You aren’t going to see a lot of days get above 0°C (32°F). Not every environmental disaster that happens needs to be blamed on humans. Nature itself is more than capable of causing these types of events. It’s time to get rid of the mentality that mankind is the cause of every bad thing that happens.

5 hours ago, Ji said:

Hearing rumors that new euro is very snowy

The next Euro forecast going into winter won’t be released until Saturday.

The summer of 2026 ended up with the 2nd strongest summer -SOI back to 1876!
 

Here are the 16 strongest -SOI summers. Note that while 1882 is way out of place with it being cold neutral, the rest are El Niños (with all but 1914 being moderate or stronger for their respective (later) peaks):

1896 (-22) strong

2026 (-21) progged super

1982 (-19) super

1882 (-18) cold neutral

1905 (-18) moderate

1997 (-17) super

1941 (-17) moderate

1940 (-16) strong

1987 (-16) moderate

2015 (-14) super

1965 (-14) super

1994 (-14) moderate

1914 (-14) weak

1977 (-14) moderate

1888 (-13) super

1972 (-12) super

This is the first time I recall seeing the white shading, which is warmer than a +5C anomaly, on the TAO surface maps. It is within the E section, in a narrow corridor just S of the equator and E of 110W.

5 hours ago, Scott747 said:

This has more of an Allison feel as opposed to Harvey.

 

Is there any chance that Edouard could be retired due to heavy rains, which caused Allison to be retired?

To add to the above, here are Nino 3 and Nino 4 (note that these aren’t relative, but that’s ok since my point is to show the slopes):

Nino 3: still a slow rise through Aug instead of nearly flat like 3.4:

Nino 4: had been falling through Aug 17th though a bumpy net slow rise since:

 The new relative OISST (not ERSST) has just been released and the change from July jibes well for Nino 3.4 with the slope of the graphs we’ve been following (though as I’ve also been saying the weeklies/last 2 months are notably cooler than what the cyclonicwx graphs have been suggesting).

2026    7      2.84     1.73     0.34      1.38
2026    8      3.35     2.52     0.11      1.78

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/rel_mthsst9120.txt
 
  This 1.78 is a new record high (back to 1981) for August Nino 3.4 as it barely beats the 1.74 of 1997. Here are the warmest Augusts since 1981:

2026 1.78
1997 1.74
2015 1.30
1987 1.24
1982 1.19
1991 0.82
2002 0.80
1994 0.72
2004 0.71
2023 0.63

 Note that Nino 3 rose twice as much and Nino 4 fell 0.23! Also, Nino 1+2 rose the 2nd most at 0.51. All of this indicates that this Nino has been becoming increasingly E based and that the W portion of Nino 3.4 is what is holding it back vs what model projections had been.

 Also, note that Nino 3.4 rose only 0.4C from the July avg to the Aug avg. I say “only” because several models were suggesting (as I’ve posted about several times) a record rapid rise for 3.4 of ~1C. It remains to be seen what the rise was per ERSST, but it’s clear that August didn’t warm nearly as much in 3.4 as model consensus had suggested, which has caused some at least near-term cooling of progs in some models’ recent runs.

 Here’s the latest OISST relative 3.4 chart through Sept 1st: STILL no sign of resumption of warming with it practically flat the last 31 days!

The CDAS (not relative) agrees with the continuing flatness:

OHC monthly rose to a new record high that last month had set (note these aren’t adjusted for GW in a “relative” sense, but they’re still very impressive):

2025   11    -0.02     -0.33      -0.46
2025   12     0.26      0.01      -0.03
2026    1     0.64      0.45       0.49
2026    2     1.08      1.02       1.15
2026    3     1.38      1.39       1.36
2026    4     1.85      2.07       2.24
2026    5     1.67      1.97       1.99
2026    6     1.79      2.14       2.26
2026    7     2.03      2.50       2.96
2026    8     2.19      2.75       3.20

 The following image is for the same longitudes as that for the 3rd column and it jibes fairly well:

Prior to 2026, this had been the record high for the last 2 columns:

1997   10     1.35      2.05       2.56

9 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Incredibly impressive radar and satellite appearance. Given the wind observations you noted @NorthHillsWx, maybe a bit of Brown Ocean Effect slowing decay at least?

This slowness of decay seems to happen fairly often in this region per my memory.

5 hours ago, mayjawintastawm said:

I have a friend who's hiked all the 14ers and many more than once, and for him the Bells are some of the most dangerous he calls it "hiking on a giant pile of dinner plates". But not till you get above pass level (12K).

Have you ever been there?

I was hiking on mainly level trails in the Maroon Bells valley at 11.5-11.7K. I do t do anything high risk, which would include skiing or snowboarding if I were to ever be there in winter. However, I will note that a good portion of the scenic loop (just beyond the lake) was quite rocky with a few areas of relative steepness. And I’m not at all an experienced hiker with trails like this. Thus I needed to walk very slowly in this portion and watch every single step I took to make sure I didn’t slip, slide on lose rock, or lose my balance. Thank goodness I had a ski pole that I would stick into the ground to use as a stabilizing hiking stick. Otherwise I could have easily fallen and been injured. A couple of times I played it extra safe by sitting down on my behind and sliding lol.

0Z UKMET has Edouard’s little sis like the 12Z run sort of had with its 1010 non-TC low, but is notably stronger with it as it has it as a TD:

NEW TROPICAL CYCLONE FORECAST TO DEVELOP AFTER 150 HOURS
FORECAST POSITION AT T+150 : 28.8N 95.9W

LEAD CENTRAL MAXIMUM WIND
VERIFYING TIME TIME POSITION PRESSURE (MB) SPEED (KNOTS)
-------------- ---- -------- ------------- -------------
1200UTC 08.09.2026 156 29.5N 96.9W 1003 29
0000UTC 09.09.2026 168 31.1N 99.1W 1007 21

2 hours ago, Chinook said:

I have never seen this type of real-time analysis map be +1.0 degrees C

Even when it is using the cooler 1981-2010 instead of the warmer 1991-2020 for climo?

38 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

Here are the temperature anomalies for the Nepal/Tibet area. If Copernicus confirms this data for August, that will raise questions about JB's maps. Perhaps, just as with the CFSv2, they have a cold bias?

August 1-25, 2026:

Summer (June 1-August 25):

Thanks, Don. Wow, this isn’t even close to the cold JB showed though it was unlabeled. Is he by chance using normals from the Eocene epoch?

3 hours ago, Chinook said:

My friends once told me that the Maroon Bells are crumbly and dangerous.

Fortunately, I stuck to relatively safe lower elevations near the lake.

 I ended up with an impressive ~8.85” of rain in August.

41 minutes ago, Chinook said:

This is why you hike starting early, particularly with high mountains of 13000-14000, and particularly when you know it's not going to be perfectly sunny.  You try to get off the peak before lightning, which might even start going at 12:00-1:00. The earliest storms happen with the mid-day radiation. Thankfully I had many sunny days of hiking mountains, as I tried to plan it out that way. 

That was very early for me lol. I woke up pretty early as I knew it would take nearly 3 hrs to get there. I thought I was doing well based on the models showing hardly anything before 3PM. Regardless, it was still a stunning experience! It was nice (PC) for over an hour at the start and when it rained it was light with no lightning thank goodness.
 I also should mention that I had no intention to hike up those mountains. I hiked on ground that didn’t rise more than 150 feet or so up to only ~11,700 feet max not far from the beautiful Maroon Lake.

41 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

That's part of the reason I suggested that the precise role of climate change remains to be determined. Given the body of literature, there was likely a role. The least likely scenario is none. Further study will be needed to gain a better understanding. Even if there is a flash attribution study, the full picture probably won't be available for several years until research findings are published.

 I think that being open-minded about this is the best approach at this time. I initially assumed that CC was the main cause of this. Now, after reading about the bedrock collapse theory put out by a reputable publication (per my checking into it this morning), that’s giving me some doubt about my first thoughts. 
 

 I just posted this elsewhere:

 “I’ve also been reading about the theory about the main cause of this being bedrock failure with the glacier collapsing mainly because of that. Whereas CC could easily still have played some role, there are currently more doubts in my mind than earlier as regards whether it played a large role based on what I’ve been reading today. 

In summary, much more time is likely needed to attempt to figure out the actually cause(s) of this complex disaster. That’s the safest approach to take now. Even if CC didn’t play much of a role in this, that in itself doesn’t minimize the effect of it on melting ice in general due to GW.”

 Here’s Martz’s follow-up 5 minute video, which incorporates the “massive bedrock collapse” beneath the glacier as opposed to glacier collapsing, itself, theory that he quoted in his prior post, which I just posted two posts above this:

@donsutherland1@chubbs

Any comments on this @donsutherland1@chubbsor others?

From pro met. “USTropics”, here’s a very detailed post that I won’t pretend to understand fully. Any opinions?

“There are a few things making the satellite presentation appear that Edouard is weakening, but don’t let these processes fool you. This is not land proximity or dry air entrainment (WV would show this). The full process we are witnessing;

During the initial ‘ramp up,’ deep convection is typically asymmetric. This creates intense, localized potential vorticity (PV) anomalies. The ‘ramp down’ (where cloud tops warm and deep convection appears to collapse) is the system digesting these anomalies. The asymmetric PV is sheared out by the developing cyclonic flow and mixed into the symmetric mean vortex. Edouard is simply spending its energy aligning its low-level and mid-level circulation centers rather than fueling vertical updrafts.

Central pressure is a response to the integrated column warming (hydrostatic balance) and the broadening of the wind field (gradient wind). When the initial convective bursts collapse like it did earlier, they leave behind a thick mid-to-upper level stratiform deck and a broad area of latent heat release. This residual warm core forces the mass field to continue adjusting. The central pressure drops as the wind field expands, even though the intense, localized vertical velocities (and thus cold cloud tops) have temporarily vanished. This
Is why recon is still finding pressure drops.

This lull is actually highly productive for the storm. As the PV concentrates in the center and the pressure drops, the inertial stability of the inner core increases dramatically. High inertial stability resists radial outflow, meaning that any subsequent latent heat release will be trapped locally near the center. 

In addition, we have to account for diurnal convective pulsing. Deep convection typically peaks in the early morning hours (the ‘ramp up’) and naturally wanes by mid-to-late afternoon (the ‘ramp down’). If a system is undergoing vortex alignment during the daytime/evening, the lack of convection looks like a structural failure on infrared satellite, even while reconnaissance aircraft find a falling pressure.

Once the center is vertically stacked and the inner core has achieved high inertial stability, the next convective burst hits a dynamical tipping point. Because the heating is now occurring in a highly symmetric, stable environment, the energy efficiently projects onto the symmetric vortex. This triggers a much more sustainable and deep period of intensification.”