Typhoon Tip

yeah, i posted about this over int the novie thread just this morning, too.

expanding this ( humorously ) further ... a lot of seasonal forecasters using ENSO in sale and promotion pitches lending to d-drip readers purchasing, and costing them "a lot of emotional money", too. LOL

I will say one thing in defense of the NAO ... it's more important for NW Europe.

Adding to the bold ... RONI studies, which are hugely necessary and thank god imho, there has to be revamp in correlations - or evolution .. maybe not complete overhaul. I remember writing posts suggesting something like a RONI was needed, jesus .. 15 years ago? In the end days of Eastern, that the ENSO cannot mean the same thing when the Hadely Cell is expanded. Most spurned the notion ... typical. There may have, and probably was, already research going on about the HC expansion ... but I hypothesized that on my own decades ago. It started in 1998 for me actually, at the tail end of that super nova El Nino ...when I noticed ( and came up with the "Miami Rule" ) that the heights over the Caribbean and adjacent SW Atlantic were failing to recede as far in the winters. It's subtle... like 3 to 5 measly hgh contours goes under the radar. But, that means the flow is compressing whenever troughs press east across the continent. That compression means higher geostrophic base wind velocity and guess what ...that's been verified(ing) ever since. And it's gotten worse. This is not merely ENSO...as it is observed regardless of cool and warm phases. It occurred to me that those large scale mechanical balances were possibly overwhelming ENSO forcing... That's gotten more obvious since. Some of these ENSOs are not registering nearly as obviously as they used to around the common climo expectation regions where it was known to do so in the past. The boa constrictor of CC.

yeah,... i didn't wanna get into that in the longer diatribe about the pacific i composed and hour ago ( seeing as everyone's gonna read it -) but these NAOs ... i just really hate them. it's always been a voodoo index, based upon earlier research in the middle part of last century... that no one really bothered to actually intimately understand. then, fell asleep at the meteorological wheel for a couple of decades, only to come roaring back in the heady heydays of TWC showcasing. i blame them for graphics shock and wooing people with it. like an amazing thing "north atlantic oscillation ation ation ation" zomb! but even Heather Archembault's statistical review 30 years ago said that it was weakly correlated. in reality, few understood(stand) it. there is only a narrow spatial and spatial-temporal ( both have to be right) circumstance when and where that index means what the popularity was led to believe it means. and it is different for each, D.C., Boston, and Caribou. it's a moving parts access. it's like a train rolling by and you got one chance to leap on board, or you bounce of the side and probably break a leg - for this context, your heart. it's tedious to explain for a twitter'ed down "focus" group audience ... so forget it. but the primary storm and cold ( both ) loading pattern has always been the delta(pna) modal states - which it should... forcing on earth is not actually e-->w... it's w-->e. all naos are, are indicators (only) that a given storm and/or cold might get positive or negative interference. what you're saying above? that modulation in this case is a basically telling us that there is background neg interference. sorry just venting

Large scale changes in the circulation mode of the Pacific are emerging in both the operational prediction methods, and experimentals. It is way out there in time. We won't get too crazy. That does imply standard challenges to confidence, but relative to typical predictive skill at extended leads for pattern evolution, this is above normal. There are compelling signals nearing and post TG. Those go beyond just numerical indexes, too. They're related to zonal wind structural collapse at very high altitudes ( around 60 N) over Siberia, unzipping around globe toward the the Alaskan sector. That can be associated with Sudden Stratospheric Warming event. However ... I suspect what is happening in the guidance is the other way around. An exceptionally loud upper level ridge signal may be emerging in time. These big-time N-NE Pacific ridge blossoms can lift heights and ultimately the jet latitude S far N, forcing the mean polar vortex to 'kidney bean' around. The model zonal wind collapse is the top of ridge - think of it like a stationary cap cloud over a mountain top... it exposes how the wind bumps around the obstacle beneath quite high. Interestingly, it can be a prelude to an SSW too - that's a longer discussion but I suspect that is worth watching for (SSW) later in December. Meanwhile, all three, EPS/GEFS/CEFS ensemble systems are drilling both the West Pacific and East Pacific Oscillation indexes negative on and after Thanks Giggedy. This is also nicely painted in the spatial synoptic charts. They are all clearly reconstructing the Pacific; there is even evidence of an HC recession, with lowering heights beneath 40 N between Japan and N of Hawaii. That's a regression in low latitudes that would typically herald a ridge response over the NE Pacific and Alaska. Those latter telecons and synoptic arguments are perfectly timed. SO, there are multiple methodology converging on a signal for Pacific changes, changes which btw are canonical preludes to continental cold loading. We may also have to contend ( ha, "contend" - some people want it ) with a warm up E of 100W across the continent for an interval as this is all beginning. The NAO probably loses the non-linear support for it's existence and starts to disappear as these aforementioned changes are emerging.

It was definitely more vivid here with unaided eye than it was back in May, viewing this from the same vantage point in both incidences with the same light obstruction Light pollution is a factor folks. I’m sure you all know this but just in case.

Just had a huge plume of auburn glow right next to goblin green, much more vivid and obvious to the unaided eye than what we had last May. In fact, I was seeing it right through street lights.

that looks like Buzzard's Bay is sending a local le snow band across New Bedford.

Same here... first frozen was last week on Nov 6 with those graupel showers. today there are wind sent single flakes ... really sparse but they are there if one is nerdy enough to study the air. ha

Fwiw - the models have been attenuating the cold air mass all along, showing rising thickness en masse within the trough for days of guidance cycles. That may not be much consolation reading that. I know. This whole trough and cold snap ( primarily west of our longitude) was originally modeled by the GFS about 8 or 9 days ago to generate an impressive coastal with implications from N-PA to interior SNE. By D6 the guidance went away from that idea. The trough morphed into more of a meridian type with EC parallel flow. In fact, over these last 6 days there's been very good model performance overall for poorly consolidated low turning up through PA into eastern Ontario. Can't say the Euro or the GGEM were much different - they seemed to get on that same page a while ago, too. From my perspective, the models are having trouble with the idiosyncratic -NAO ... gee what's new. But back some 2.5 weeks ago the long range numerical outlooks showed a collapsing index in the NAO. That actually verified ... the index numbers are in fact negative and have been. What's fascinating is that synoptic layout is not representing that exertion ... sometimes that happens, though rarer. As it were, the cyclone still turned left prior to 90 W and ended up NY state - in other words, despite -2 SD NAO in the derivatives, the former behavior was really more nuetral NAO like. It all shows how difficult the NAO is to work with. The PNA was left to it's one devices ... and the trough amplifies too early/maximizes west. That idea of commitment to a coastal made more sense relative to the numerology back whence. This "could" have been the season's first synoptic run in. +1 SD PNA with a failing western exerted -NAO? If I were seeing that index outlook from 12 days ago I'd be just as inclined to watching the coastal storm routes for eventual operational emergence. Just the way it goes. You know, we've often reminded folks that all these teleconnectors, air, sea and combinations therein and et al, they are never 1::1. There's always exceptions. Just be glad it happened now, prior to thanks giggedy, when there's still 4 some odd month's worth of other scenarios for the atmosphere to anti-correlate new and exciting ways to tune up winter enthusiast's dignities like a chef with a steak hammer... Anyway, failed humor aside ... it helps to have some explanation. Not to be high handed or anything but ... heh, I honestly walked away from this whole synoptic era pretty early in the game, as I could see this unfolding like 5 days ago. I've seen this before when the indexes may derive positive or negative field values despite the behavior not being perfectly aligned - it's rare ... but if there is going to be a time of the year where that is more likely to anti-correlate, its at this time of year and sometimes in April

Winter 2025-2025 ....? What's the 2026 half lookin' like lol

26,000 tons of iron ore Tropospheric fold whoops

Yeah, I saw something related to that ^ last week. A paper discussing the pivot point as being weaker than previously thought.

Can't say I actually disagree here ... whether this chart above actually occurs in reality, the time frame in question is vulnerable to early season winter expression. This has been very consistent in the numerical teleconnectors, with a lowering -(AO/NAO). The AO and NAO share domain space; they are not exactly collocated. The NAO appears to be weighting the AO down when looking at the different ensembles spatial depictions of the H500 hgt anomalies, the expression of which are also setting up over the western limb ( E/NE Canada/ Baffin Island/ D. Straight ...etc) of the NAO domain. The cyclone genesis/track correlation for that type is S of of. The problems are the notoriously poor handling of the NAO in terms of spatial layout nuances and amplitude. It makes it less useful as a forecast planning tool as say the PNA, which given to it's massive size, tends to be change slower, making it more reliable ( bigger objects taking longer to change and so forth ) Lot of concepts to juggle here ...I know. The operational runs have been fiddling with the notion of above ... hinting in then abandoning, then back in with it... fits that notoriety of being an unruly index. But, so long as the signal is there in both numerical and synoptical presentation, the probability for a cold system type during that period is > than daily climatology.

Looked like a polar low was trying to generate as it rolled down eastern Lake Michigan a couple of hours ago. fascinating

Not to make light of what you feel your situation is ... or is in fact, but doesn't that ( bold ) qualify as a home?

Not sure if you're kidding or not but ... personally? I don't have a problem with him in general. He's had some really interesting guests on his program over the years, and has shown a type of journalistic curiosity in getting them to speak from their positions of expertise - open minded and genuinely inquisitive. When he's interviewed so many luminaries from such a broad spectrum of disciplines, ranging from the most esoteric physics, to the humanities and entertainment ... he's been fair. He allows them their presentation. He's just not right in his ideas with climatology. It's not a crime. One thing that he does not appear to be is abstinent when posed with logic that exposes what is objectively real - that's a key difference.

`Well there you go... if what you are saying is true ( bold ^ ...I'll leave that up to you) than it shows - this just a little logic application and critical analysis, they are dubious (and immoral by the way) without even knowing their history.

It was suspicious ... These two struck me as big oil moles - they may not be linked as such, but they plied the same sort of tactic that big oil used to attempt. Buyout intellectuals pay them to be lobbyists, sending them into public forums and/or legislative debates. et al, where raise points that are ultimately false, but brilliantly articulated, thus too difficult to adjudicate and/or be objectively critical of by the target audience - who by not fault of their own, are just not educated or experiences or capable. This is particularly effective when the audiences are bias to begin with, such as Rogen and his reach. He's a CC skeptic, based upon his general history, one that is more than likely influenced by a political base - a latter aspect that is evinced via his media portrait and expose' over recent years. So Lendzen wastes no time in smirkly nose laughing comments that discredit climate science, 'how can there be a huge consensus when there are so few climate scientists around' - or words to that affect. It's so patently absurd when you think that climate scientists are but a fraction of the voices. What about all the alarms from oceanographers and biologist and general environment/natural scientists, et al... what about all them? No one in his audience - for example - even knows to ask that. It's obvious these guys are specious. Or stupid. ... and then he goes on to make statements to the affect of, 'you should be suspicious of any consensus'

It's 63 here ... What little wind is actually slacked off and even though the sun's angle is pretty ablate ( OH, heh...right, today enters the solar minimum - for the next 91.25 days until we exit Feb 8-10th) it feels quite warm. After a few days of 50/27, this feels more balmy than it is ? adding to it anyway

No, your villainizing the wrong person They were talking about climate change, and the usual suspects were in this denial mode again. I asked them salient questions, based upon incontrovertible logic and actual science already proven…and then was called an asshole by Steve for it Sorry, I was triggered I wasn’t talking about fucking temperature trends. And I’m still pissed off they can both go to f hell

And you’re an ignoramus worse yet you’re an ignoramus masquerading as righteousness when you’re not fucking right about anything. you’re completely in the wrong on this and your abstinence in even trying to understand global warming is what’s actually reprehensible. And I’m through with it. I’m sick of it. I’m tired of you and people like you and it’s time to pull you guys and make an example I don’t care what you think of me for having said this; the truth needs to be said You and people like you are a problem for humanity. you’ve been told in flat undeniable logic, and you still can’t penetrate your mind Don’t respond to me ever again put me on ignore and just shut the fuck up you ignorant asshole

The truth hurts, Steve? I didn't say anything untrue There's nothing elitist about subject matter that you either don't understand, or just don't believe in. Either way... . You've always been a truculent insufferable blue collar nimrod with clear resentment issues over your station, who's also routinely lied about your env sci creds over the years - made patently obvious whenever you type - and then hide over the internet when being disrespectful. If someone has clad argument other than abstinence, I'm sure the consensus here will be glad to engage with them. You you and him ...and people like you are on the wrong side of history and truth. How's that for elitist - eat shit.