Typhoon Tip

Seems to be the case,yup.

Ukmet's a 90 Wed-Thur

Warmer Tues+ on these GFS/CMC runs

Yeah, the Euro's dramatically yawing between synoptic concepts wrt that pinch low formulation... Doesn't lend to confidence it knows what to do, when the 12z run just yesterday morning had zero impact from that feature along with +2 SD heat intrusion to our region, and then the immediate new 00z had that thing completely shutting it all down and a 0 SD heat intrusion... The GGEM has that pinch low too, but it conserves just enough progressive w-e aspect to formulate it far enough away ( and moving E) to not be a factor here mid week. Believe it or not...it may be a compromise and better solution ... at least through 144 hours. The GFS is even more so progressed away with it. However, I hate the run overall. Longer read: It seems to be fighting the non-linearity of the teleconnection signal - which is ridging over eastern N/A's mid latitudes. It's got modest height anomalies, but it won't expand them into the correlation extent - meaning it's low balling it. It's drilling the westerlies through the top of the ridge latitudes, limiting the ridge expanse. Meanwhile, I'm noticing the CAG low genesis ( TC ) down there, which is a feature not uncommon to the -PNA summer, whence ridging formulates over the eastern conus this creates favorable genesis period in the Caribbean gyre region at low latitudes underneath. Near the Yucatan Pen and Bay/Camp. etc. So It's like the GFS is seeing the the whole scope, but is shirking the ridge part of it. The GFS has about .1% w-e stretched bias at all times ( sarcasm but true-ish) at all times - definitely used to, but has improved with that progressivity bias some over the years of upgrading the model. This strikes me as possibly interfering just enough albeit subtle, nonetheless.

Manitoba is apparently on fire. You can already see the smoke aggregating in the atmosphere on satellite across the continent. It's not clear where these plumes will end up, if so ... how much they may effect temperature. I'm (personally ) not sure what the science/present consensus verdict is on that. Intuitively it seems to me that it would dim potential above some particulate density threshold ... Plume height might also play a role.

there is no altered data.. stop it.

This is recreational whining in here... I mean there's nothing wrong with this weather. There was objectively nothing wrong with it either - the subjective side? it comes off as support group complaining.

mm... not so. I'm not saying Kevin had or has any sort of special insight buuut ... most of the time it's 88 F at BDL-FIT-ASH, it's not much higher than 80 above 700 or so foot elevations. If it's a true heat dome, with tall soundings...than it you'll get 88 up there, and 96 at those lower elevations. So saying 80-88, even if by dumb luck ( LOL ) sounds like paying deference to both.

Oh, Will doesn't seasonal this engagement based on user contribution and content... He leaves because he doesn't give a ratz azz about warm weather climo - unless it's ( probably...) something truly extraordinary, which this land that god forgot region of the planet doesn't seem to incur enough to waste his time. That's why the man opts out. Believe me ...there's just as much and probably actually more so in the way of bonehead squabbling and tedious nimrodery that goes on in the winter, too.

The Great Barrington tornado

This 12z Euro run is the better fit for the present teleconnections ... not the the others. Just sayn'.

I know what climate variations over geological time is. What were/are you referring to when you use the word "denialism" - what does that mean in the context? hint hint, I already know what your tact was. This cannot be pointed out any clearer: you are completely off based and just ... wrong, period. The entire ambit of climate research has not only distinguished the difference between natural vs (natural + human influence) in climate change, they have used physical chemistry data to prove it. Let me let you in on a secret that only the enlightened people are aware of ... we don't get to question data that is objectively real. - something that is quite irritatingly obvious at this point, what you are clearly doing is trying to create uncertainty in data measuring practices, that ISN'T THERE. Your are wasting your time. And you are wasting the bandwidth of these threads with this DENIALISM stategy.

You said this, "but no HHH on the visible horizon. " Having a powerful -PNA with a modest -EPO instructing a non-linear tendency for a major trough over the west, while the over arcing AO/NAO mass fields are evolving toward zip blocking, is not consistent with that. It's all good though ... I realize that folks "might" not be necessarily referring to these deeper analytic methods/points when arriving to their conclusions. LOL But I'm not sure what "consistently in the next 2-3 weeks" means ?

For some reason ... I don't share in this idea that because a weekend day rains, the weekend "blows" Be that as it may, I don't mean to belittle anyone's angst for having to deal with a wet weekend. ...just in so much as druthers are concerned.. I see a huge upside for raining on Saturday and/or Sundays. Namely, to those that keep perpetuating the "stein" meme? I hope that every weekend, forever, rains and is ruined for all people that keep typing that word.

Wrong

What does this statement mean?

Teleconnections support a more significant heat ~ D6 ... 12 at some range in there. The operational run blend is dodging that signal with a flattened, fast progressivity to the overall handling. It's not clear if this operational aspect is a bias, or a real a signal... Those two indicators are somewhat in conflict at this time. Just sayn' I wouldn't be very assured in a cooler look between D6 and 12... June 4-8th in particular is when a shallow -EPO teams up with a very strong -PNA, while the NAO is neutral positive, and while all this is happening, the operational heights just refuse to build the ridge through the teleconnector region - There were several run cycles up through about 2.5 days ago that were substantially warmer - actually better fits... The telecon part of this puzzle has not deviated since prior to then, thru it, and up until now, either. The operational runs have been oscillating more than less - right now, they are less. Sometimes when the operational blends disagree with the multi- ensemble source derivatives ( the -PNA ...+EPO... -AO...blah blah), they win. Other times, they lose ... This is probably like in the winter, when there is a loud signal for a large event in the extended, then we 'black out' for 3 days and never hear from it ... only to have it come storming back at 84 hours or whatever. We'll have to keep an eye on it as inCREdible temperature nerds with nothing better to to do than to monitor whether we make 88s out of 77s or not. hahaha. F, it's better than this recreating whining and complaining bs at least.

It's an excuse to keep denying climate change ... that's it. nothing else -

Modeling has been inconsistent with that pinch low near the M/A ... this GGEM solution from 12z looks nothing like it's 00z predecessor wrt that feature. The 12z version of that model would blunt warmth from getting east of the Hudson; the 00z would not. Next week's temperatures would definitely be effected by that should it evolve - some posters are leaping on any model cycle that pimps that an inch more. Haha. Allowing for minimal doubt as to what they want to see happen... But the surrounding super-synoptic scaffolding (both telecon, and established trends) don't really support that feature being there - for now. if that changes, this aspect changes along. Until that happens, I'd side with that being less meaningful. The EPS was not cooler than the 00z though for that period. I'm not entirely sure when the argument is for? but ... here's a comparison between the 00z vs this 12z EPS mean, centered on Wednesday this next week. The 12z right (hand side) if anything is arguable a warmer complexion than the 00z

yeah, you know ... yesterday i even limited the post to one paragraph and still it didn't seem like anyone even read it. but this thing this weekend is not the same beast as that bullshit last - not even close. hasn't been modeled that way for a long time, either. but that type of focused insight into modeling details lending to more realistic impressions, just having interest in general, hasn't happened in this "weather forum" for about 10 years anyway. lol

it's the last of the blocking actually paying dividends up here from the Pike N ... it's pinning that miasma in the mid atlantic i place; meanwhile, we have constant dvm/erosion enough to keep the cloud canopy at bay. solar max sun works on this modulated air mass.... well anyway, it's in the 70s already and much warmer n

Kind of a sneaky warm one incoming today.

I think it's impressive that full foliage and that DP existing at the same time - very rare.

yeah sell the GFS with that thing... that's spurious until it gets anything resembling support - which is far as I've found there is none.

Not really ... 570+ thickness building into the region after D7 ...? though I'm not sure what, nor when, people are whining about in this recreational complaining outlet. But 588 height to Concord NH with 850s > 16C is is not a disaster for warmth and humidity