Typhoon Tip

There was some minor "hope" - if we want to call it that .. - in the NAM runs 42 .. 36 hours leading. I saw one run that was 0C isothermal N-W of Boston, with nearly .75" liq eq. But the short game started sneaking temperature back into the column. I saw that and rolled eyes, 'whatever.' I mean in late March? - we can't be adding therms. These late season blue deals need to default neggie, not posi It actually hearkens back ( for me) to that idea that the "flop direction" used to be more dependably cold side when in leading marginal set ups. I remember seeing just about any +1 or +2 cold side QPF envelope in 1995 - 2005 seemed to always wind up blue glories. Now, they are always ending up +2 to +3 instead... Or worse yet, -2C end up +.5 ughers. That could be modeling changes, or NJ climate invasion .. who knows. This late in the year ... mid spring month begins in 3 days... it is also harder to separate lacking seasonal cold issue, from the fact that it was 48 to 62 in sun-soaked earth yesterday, immediately before hand. About as close to 10 on the nape scale as is theoretically possible right around 1:30pm yesterday, when it was 62 and dead calm air under close to 100% cerulean blue sky. Then clouds slabbed in abruptly at five, if anything ...insulating all that rad. It started raining here around 7 ish last evening, and it was still 51 F when that commenced ... Without a dynamic hammer that woulda been hard to do in 1995 for that matter. If the 00z GFS is right ...NNE should get some back side/"upslop" chances over the next two days.

It's interesting to see all three major operational models oscillating between shit, cold, shit, cold, shit right through D10 like that.

There's dreary ... then somewhere beneath that distinction is the realm of March 28th, 2023

LOL ... proof that the 1980s blew pickle dicks

Not sure I see very much disagreement between y'all - in so far as where it counts... You're both suggesting you need more data, specifically ... as it pertains to validating whether or not declination of snow totaling is now (or not) a dependable delta in Boston's climate. First of all, I wouldn't use Logan as a proxy in that. Too much oceanic interference - or in the least, the proximity to the ocean would need to be ruled out somehow geo-physically/statistically as a contaminated data series. Probably, use the triangular method: HFD-CON-ALB. Then perhaps do a separate region that is bounded by BED-PVD-ORH. Reanalysis techniques may also speed some of that up... however, I would aver at this time that if anything, the snow should be increasing, until such time as a "threshold" is breached. It's unclear that 8 years of anything in climate means very much. If we go by that scale, the 1970s would have us staring up the fascia of a 1/2 mi high ice sheet by now - kidding... That all said, the threshold idea ( which IS veracious, unfortunately) means that it may not take 50-100 years. It may not take 20 years for that matter.... or 10 or 5... That's the point. Particularly if it's a silent boundary, like going through an Event Horizon - you may not noticing anything particularly out of the ordinary going over a threshold. Again... you just sort of wake up one day and realize you're not going back. What has me a little spooked is that the climate modeling is already behind the rapidity of noted changes, so theoretical thresholds are closer than thought would be as recent as the projections from 20 years ago. See... don't look at the 1.5C since the Industrial Revolution. Decimals in that average are not linearly, or symmetrically distributed across the face of the planet, nor is the affect of CC.

The issue that immediately jumps to mind for me when I hear or read these answers to the question of snow vs CC over eastern N/A ... they appear to assume a linearity, and/or symmetric result and that's philosophically dubious to me. The forced circulation of the planetary body of atmospheric responses do not typically motivate as a linear 1::1 cause to effect, at all temporal scales and spatial sizes - the latter of course being slower by simple momentum arithmetic and Newtonian dynamics. and so on Perhaps a way of backing into that realization? - considering "thresholds" (as a verb) phenomenon. These abstract virtual boundaries in how the systems respond to forcing in nature appear to take place once compensating stabilization means, in situ, are finally overcome. An "elasticity" or bounding event or series, resets a location into a new paradigm - in this sense ...we are talking about climate. There's a reason that scientific circles accept the vernacular, "nearing thresholds..." etc.. A purely linear/ and symmetric, or coupled causality to observed results, would not suffer threshold phenomenon. A linear atmospheric systemic response, to which climate describes, would move concertedly with the advent of the new forcing. Thresholds, on the other hand, are an acceleration. That's not a straight line in simpler terms. We cannot logically assume, given that reality, that raising the temperature 1.5C since the Industrial Revolution --> x-y-z, having snow results so far = a-b-c, will continue along that linear projection. It is more likely ...at some point along this journey... either knowing it is happening, or unwittingly we all just realize, we've ended up on the other side of the virtual boundary (threshold). Some thresholds are crossed silently. Some would argue that much of eastern SNE is already much more NJ -like, just by anecdotal accounting. Which obviously that is far less than the consilient findings of the scientific ambit. It's still fun to relate this morass to the common everyday life, though - otherwise why the f are we doing this thing called humanity ( other than unwittingly forcing a "Fermi boundary event" )

yeah... honestly even after Feb ~ 15th every year, I start ruminating inside about how meaningless it kind of is in those moments when I stop to look down my streets. I play with futility thoughts as neighbors dutifully send snow tubes out of their blowers. The ones I especially like are the detail anal bleaching some expend over the roof, hoods and windows of their cars ... on March 10 when the suns do out in 3 hours after the affair. The next day after a spring snow, unless the synoptic circumstances pull of something very rare ...it's going to 43 to 50 under a microwave emitter for a sun angle.

It depends on what you mean by 'snow equipment' ....if you mean shovels for the walk way, I wouldn't shed that particular tool anywhere N/E of NYC until May 15 around this ass banger spring climate... If it was just me at my residence, I wouldn't even shovel for 5" ... I wouldn't, unless the plow berms the bottom of the driveway - I wouldn't care to get stuck ... Survival prospects of snow at this time of year post mortem of any event is about on par with a blind roofer's. ...if you mean the plow on the front of the F150 used to supplement daughters tuition at State college U.S.A., there's always some old lady's driveway that that will call for a swipe in 2" of vaguely transparent gray glop. ...if you mean salt products and accessories ... yeah, the shovel and/or plow should be plenty at this late time of year. The heaviest is over by dawn, and then we pale sky in September 11 equivalent sun will melt snow while it is falling and the roads would be just wet by mid morning. As for snow blowers...keep it handing, but the snow may almost be too heavy for that... Whatever this does, it's not lasting long on the ground.. .and definitely not the streets.

For spring/warm enthusiasts...that extended 00z GFS was inspirational... Just wish we could remove the word "extended," and replace it with 'short range' But within that modeled fantasy range itself, 572 dm hydrostatic heights through everywhere, with 850s > +15C on a deep layer well mixed WSW flow ... That is equivalent ( for climate referencing...) to an ~ September 2nd sun intensity... Sorry, that's 85 to 90 F there.... But for winter/cold enthusiasts ...relax! I'm not trying to troll on the eve of what could be the last gasp snow event of the season for the interior/elevations. By the way, the 06z NAM was over 3/4" liq equiv at Logan on the FOUS, with +.5, 0, and -3 C (980, 900, 800 mb levels) for the duration overnight tonight. That's a straight up snow sounding.. We could be 54 F with warm post equinox sun by day, and wake up with 4 .. 5" of blue glory Metro West... Looked to me like the overnight GFS wasn't altogether opposed with this snows in the region... nor the Euro for that matter, but I didn't look at the discrete layout on those so I don't know how much. The NAM is inside of 30 hours on this so it's likely to have shed it's N-NW bias, so in all...these are encouraging for a light kiss goodbye. Again, I -personally - am not feeling a bowling ball in April this year (but don't hold me to that - the idea is experimental). As I outlined yesterday... I suspect we may actually be heading for a warmer April, both above climate and above CC default to do that anyway ... However, BD's not "beheading," I wouldn't care to ever remove that sore butt built in aspect of our climatology in the utmost confidence of outlook times..

Tomorrow night arrived like a decent snow event west of BOS in the NAM FOUS

Geez ...I just got done talking about a warm burst signal this morning - heh... you ask and you shall receive. Although that may be genesis there. That's really pretty tenuous when it's a east of the cordillera like that. I'd like to see that upstate NY with at least 60s eating away the ski industry...

In principle ...the expansion of the Hadley cell is papered and legit ... Personally, I suspect 'some' of the present/modeled observed heights across the N arc of the Pac basin may be related to La Nina "hang-over," however. Only recently ( ... 3 or so weeks) entered the break-down phase of a collapsing La Nina scaffolding. In fact, the SSTs/thermocline modulations along and E of the 3.4 region of the equatorial Pac have recently rapidly switched signs toward warming ... As CPC's methodologies and NCEP et al describe, they've issued their last Nina advisory for this evolution. We are presumed neutrality moving forward. However, during this delta window, there is a warm surplus - it's more of a default circumstance of residual west Pac warm anomalies, with recently established near or at neutral SSTs in the east - not the same as a +ENSO ... heh, call it a "La Nino." The atmospheric mechanics are not really there. It just seems that after a 3 seasons of persistent Nina coverage, 2/3rds of the times representing clad coupling to the atmospheric circulation mode, it's too plausible that the ridging up there is geographically lagged by the west Pac forcing, ...while the new warming SSTs in the trop E are an indirect indicator that the circulation mode overall is then drawing the heights farther E. I'm curious if that effects the spring R-wave geometry over N/A... Conflicting signals for early heat ( or not..). The residual Nina favors higher heights over the eastern 1/2 of mid latitudes in April-June. But drawing heights across the N/Pac could either drop the field over the Midwest, or... if it got overwhelming, the whole thing could go 2012-like.

It's almost like you're trying to Feng Shui the outdoors to elicit a response from the 'spirit' of summer ? LOL ... Kind of like that guy that starts wearing cargo shorts on April 15 whether there is a backdoor 38er in mist or not - Luckily for us spring/warm enthusiasts ... April has a warm signal between roughly the 5th and 15th. I mentioned this a couple of days ago as a one sentence pot shot jest. I meant it though. We'll see, but last night the GGEM and Euro "might" but just be detecting. It's D8+ blah blab so the obvious etc etc... Fwi not w, the 06z GFS rolled up 582 heights to NJ in the fantasy range. See ... I think we have a shot of more of that showing up in the models. Yesterday, and this flat wave on Tuesday ...these may have been the last gasps/bringing in the loved ones. I just don't sense the background canvas of probabilities as being very favorable for cold April - mind you ...there is a distinction between April just being a really difficult month to enjoy around here, and waging for one that is above normal. Folks tend to conflate their disappointment, with science. Anyway, the last 7 or so years of Feb/Mar/Apr ( despite individual years hosting a late snow or two...) have observed an unusually higher frequency of what I call "warm burst synoptics" . Essentially, the R/wave redistribution catches the eastern N/A mid latitudes between any cold signal at all, and resulting warm ups seemed to 'synergistic' over-achieve. It's been rather alarming (frankly). There may actually be some argument that the greatest standard deviation events we have experienced in New England in the last 50 years are really those 80+F events during those three month. There was an Easter that had 90+F (but the year escapes me). Almost like in the aggregate, that is definitely the most usual. Albeit's significance silenced by the fact that it was actually enjoyable and not of the ilk tearing roofs off of homes or burying villages in blue snow. Then being recurrent encourages looking for leading indicators. I suspect we're presently in renewed signaling, similar to back before the records in February - though those results were relatively mundane. Despite the rapidity of the Nina circulation break down, there's still some hang-over identifiable to the 'attitude' of restoration/base-line. The MJO then appears it wants to at least smolder through the right side of the RMM. Meanwhile, the NAO, the EPO are both neutralizing rather abruptly end March... all the while, the PNA statically sub 0 SD. Putting these together .. hm

Pretty epic positive bust ... KpI of 8/ G4 mag raged on while of course cloudy in New England. Seems we've have 7 or 8 Kp > 6 events in the past 15 years, and 100% of them were cloudy. Heh. This one appears to have completely slipped by forecaster awareness, and it was potent too.

no worries... with the crossing of the invisible climate denial threshold... it's never going to snow again S of RUT-CON-PWM

Yeah been snooping around the hard hats from CSX. They're saying what we knew as neighbors going back years, "...That camp rail shouldn't have been used." He adds, "... but don't quote me" I can tell you as an eye witness, that track, when looking lengthwise down it - particularly on sunny hot summer days - the iron segments were bowing some. Not only that, it's on a turn, so they pitched the lay originally ... ... 50 years ago :/ ...by a couple itches by design, but the hard hat said it looked to him like that had 'improved' to a 7 inch draft. The CSX guy was nodding when I told him about the bent rail lengths, saying, "Yeah that warp is known as sun kink" ... We went on to mentioned Texas. But then I told him that even in the winter that rail was still warped looking, though. To which he nodded some more. By noon today ( this all happened 24 hours ago...) they had already removed that segment of the track completely down to the ties. Right? remove the evidence :/ Those blue cargo containers are garbage scows, btw. They began parking that train there habitually a couple years ago during the pandemic, ...sometimes for a couple of days at a time before moving them out to the Albany yards - after which they go on to some outfit in Ohio. That train was scheduled as a double haul, so the Intermodal was coupled, and it was a big fuck ...probably a half mile of train - it sat there overnight. No one in my neighborhood is altogether disappointed this track failure too place. Because imagine iron boxed pack full of scunge garbage baking in the summer sun... 94 f'um degree on July 1st, and CSK was taking advantage of the Ayer provincial neighborhood that are astride those rails. There was complaints to the town for two years since this practice started, and nothing's been done to stop them from parking fetid logistics right outside our f'ing doors ...while CSX makes lots of money no doubt. That's a hugely active line that cuts through Ayer. The two main center tracks bring the Purple Line commuter rail once per hour or two. Then, every so ofter, some 4 engine beast with clanging iron and house shaking weight rumbles by. Those two side rails are being used by the CSX in management with the center rails, like a switch yard. The old timers in the neighborhood say it was never designed that way. Those camp rails were just access points for local businesses, back when rail was a bigger part of shipping some ... you know, 90 years or whatever ago. But they were recently started being used and the whole thing stinks to high heaven as typical corporate captains seeing an opportunity to start making money without overhead' . It'll be investigated...

Frankly ... despite all long range twaddle at that range, and definitely wrt what we've dealt with over the past 6 months at even shorter ranges of 6 f'n days... that has more plausibility in my mind. Particularly when indexing - I mentioned yesterday a warm up that exceeds climo has some signature in April. the now cast on the MJO is proving the RMM guidance is too eager to kill the wave momentum, which appears it may be destined to the Marine continent... with residual Nina momentum not yet washed out of the hemisphere... that's starting to sniff out a constructive interference there. We'll see. Wouldn't be surprised if that range starts emerging as a warm burst.

Oh. That. Heh I had every news organization in New England knocking on my door when that train skipped the rail and sent its cargo down the ravine not more than 200 feet outside my front door. Sorry I didn’t have time to put my face on ha ha ha should’ve been wearing a baseball cap.

I don't know ...it seems they all spent time on and off with that thing next week. The Euro may suck donkey ballz now but this isn't the test case to point that out. They're all pieces of shit at this time of year anyway... We are in a longitudinal pattern and no model typically does well in that regime, ...now adding that to spring vagaries on top ...? There's no 'looking forward' to the next run of any guidance if one is being rational about limitations ... Big warm up in April possible, btw

I guess it depends on one's expectations but the charts from 10 days ago, for this week, were not much different than the charts now for 10 days from now - with one subtle exception, they are warmer in the general panache. That look back whence, which had sub 540 hydrostatic heights everywhere btw, resulted in 50s this week under Equinox warm sun. So...we are above normal in spring, despite that look. It's a hidden trend established in near perpetuity spanning the past ... oh 10 years really, to always have to add warmth to mid and especially the extended. The arctic outbreaks of 2016 and early this last Feb were exceptions to that rule... But here, we combine that with spring's tending to do that, anyway. Then, adding the present negative PNA through the period... mmm gee, I think it may end up warmer than the modeled signal. The question is...can a system along the way "overcompensate" ... maybe...

It's above normal the last 3 days ... in the 50s. I guess it depends on one's expectations but the charts from 10 days ago, for this week, were not much different than the charts now for 10 days from now - with one subtle exception, they are warmer in the general panache. Yet we are above normal in spring... I guess if by 'spring warmth' we rock 70s in convertibles ... probably not? But it's spring.

While for the vaster majority, technology blinds civilization. These synergistic deadly heat waves, or freak 30" snow falls, California being bombed by 10 years of precipitation inside a single winter... or methane hydrate blowouts in Siberia... sea level rise... oceanic deoxygenation..., humanity is just too ill-conditioned to really quantize those troubling omens for being pacified in perpetuity. It's really a failure about our nature: too much hesitation unless directly harmed, right now. There's an interesting rub about that ... how technology shelters inside the industrial bubble. Technology is a bit of a metaphor for a virus on this planet - perhaps your "superorganism." Just like a virus, it fools the natural "immuno-response," the ability to stop injury by way of blocking response mechanisms - in this sense, feeling the negative impact of our actions. Such that the pernicious result of our actions are largely unknowable by soothing the senses while technology consumes. By the way... I have nothing against tech. In fact, we are already too committed to it to survive a set back ( which is likely coming ). It's a race. We created tech and sold our evolutionary souls to it, and now we are inextricably dependent upon it . For example, should the grid truly fail, 1/3 the population is dead in 1 month. Of the remainder, 70-90% estimated gone in 1 or 2 years ( this is not true for those human pockets that don't live in the socio-technological dependency, btw). Whether reality in such a d-day scenario bears itself out, for the sake of discussion we all carry about in an assumption most don't know they're making. What needs to happen is technologies need to be invented to compensate for the injury of the technology that has already been invented. That's a tricky race... Probably one that will fail - because evolution never gets it right in one try. Everything we see in the natural order that presently survives is successful after millions of years of trial-and-error, where the "errors" did not result in blowing themselves to kingdom come - metaphorically speak... 500 years of industrialization of the planet hardly seems like it's withstood the crucible of time. This techno-evolutionary leap in humanity is iteration #1

To me it is interesting that in thesis it is written, "...This temperature increase is consistent with the calculated effect due to measured increases of atmospheric carbon dioxide..." You know, this goes back to the Keeling curve (1958+) analysis - later, superimposing the temperature rise over the C02 increases demonstrates a pretty dead match. It's like these Hansen et al findings are really just adding to a consilience. The science of climate change keeps formulating new approaches that just add to a correlative pool. Of course, 1981 is a long while ago.. Any skepticism about the C02 correlation by this point in history is either contrived by faux science or all but immoral. But it is interesting that the history/evolution of the present day understanding really should be more institutional at this point - Personal furthering notion... the problem in that latter sense (I suspect) is human limitation related, a limitation that is there by way of all evolution of life at a biological level; constructing truth has to happen by means "corporeal-based reality." Meaning, what is directly observable via the 5 senses. You tell a person to beware of something, they'll bear it in mind. If they hear, see, smell, taste or touch, sample that something directly, only then will they actually react. This specter of CC, prior to ...perhaps 10 or 15 years ago, had no corporeal advocate. Simply put, it was invisible. Combining that notion with the shear grandeur of the whole scale of the planet, not being mentally tenable to most ( let's get real), acceptance --> recourse was going to be racing against time with a broken leg. It really is only beginning to manifest in such a way that can be seen or heard or felt...etc, and even these cataclysms are being ..almost shelved because they are media spectacles and drama someplace else? While for the vaster majority, technology enable -blinded civilization. Eventually, though, the industrial bubble does have a fragility. And, until CC somehow either directly or through indirection of a multitude of factors finally pops that protection, humanity will unfortunately continue enabled from what it is they (apparently) must have in order to at last react and learn - pain. All the while, the wrong momentum gathers....

Looks like we're back to some velocity aspects with that thing riding up a burgeoning SE ridge. It's really Saturday afternoon and night and by dawn on Sunday that's probably got a clearing back of the head racing away and leaving strata streets moving NW/SE in splashes of sun/breeze during the morning. "IF" that can speed up even a little more, Sunday has some d-slope aspect to it. Not terrible... It probably does correct faster, because that's a pretty dependable result ... in early out early when these S/W are running up gradient like that.

Could be... You know, I've had a problem with the western N/A bombardment all winter frankly. Firstly, it's not deep science exactly to reveal it hasn't really correlated too well with NINA. These so-called 'river' events are actually more NINO like ...etc..etc ( but the use of the term in media as it pertains to this season annoys me because a true river event is more perpetual with a clearer STJ origin in the tropical/lower boreal winter latitude interface. This season was more about an active polar periodicity of S/Ws... it's not really the same). Anyway, the Pacific Basin uncoupled from the La Nina baseline for 3 to 4 weeks between late November and late December 2022, but even after that had passed ... the pattern seemed to quasi occupy both spaces much of the way. It was either a lesser typically realized variant of NINA totality ... just not recognized ( perhaps ) for that rarity. OR, something else was offsetting ...at times succeeding more interference. The SE ridging at times isn't a terrible NINA fit, incidentally. It was funny that there were all these immediate suppressing conjectures that rang out of the science ambit in the weeks following that titanic blast. I didn't know... I didn't have any insight one way or the other, but as more of a spectator to it all ... I thought that was a bit presumptive to be so quick without more staged investigation. It was like a earth's syringe poked a whole in the stratosphere and injected toxin directly in - to be fun with ... just sayn' It's water vapor and other gunk from bowls of the planet - I was more of the school of watch and wait. I haven't actually read any papers ... but I'll try and find - it wouldn't shock me if the skeptics were premature.