Typhoon Tip

I think the distinction between the two is irrelevant since about circa 2004 moving forward

I'm thinking atmospheric arithmetic ... like (A+b+X+y + ... n)N-term type forcing. This go of it, the hemisphere commits to winter gradient/jets and R-wave situation; the result would favor a flat +PNA with fast embedded wave propagation, as well as times of intense ambient wind speeds in mid and upper levels. Tendency mind you ... And, that also would be a mean. Even in the worse seasons, a +PNA can spike intra weekly and get the job done - see February 1995's particularly ongoing putrid winter, then out of nowhere we set up a bombogen Del Marve to interior Maine and we got 10-20" in the interior. And it does matter whether a flat PNA --> PNAP occurs in 1900 vs 1950 vs 2000 vs 2023, too. We have to at some point capitulate to the obvious, namely ... these subsequent seasons are taking place along a warming climate curve, one that is increasingly more logarithmic - meaning accelerating in latter/recent decades. High analog value synoptic set ups, can result a 1900 snow storm as rain in 2023 ...etc... I think we could be storm active ... with quick moving events that may favors rain --> cold transitions. This type of look would not take but a minor adjustment to get those front wall IB snow scenario.. Or, in fairness, rain.

I could envision a pattern scaffold/'shape' tendency that aligns (at times but not always...) with that thinking. Perhaps from late October to mid Dec. But not as much with the details that flesh it out. Like, beware warmer variant.

"Pyrocene"? what - is that a sub-classification for 'The Anthropocene' that's recently been codified by the general consortium? ... Not that it needs elaboration ...but the idea of the Anthropocene is that we the people, of the united state of humanity's innovation having outpaced the checks and balances of the back ground various planetary systems, have breached the point where fucking up said planet, in order to form a more perfect world for ourselves, is officially substantial. And hence forth, we are now proven enough in doing so that we're actually definable as geologically significant force - thus, and epoch known as the Anthropocene. Nice loaded run-on sentence - It just seems logical that trying to define Fire ... Flood, heat and even cold craziness, when these systemic symptoms are really indirectly if not directly causally related to the former, is just reductive and inflammatory (pun intended for purposes of annoying haha). But he may have been tongue-in-cheek anyway. LOL Yeah, kidding aside, ...I don't think it takes much of an idiot (really) to see that we are getting these conflagration explosions like never before. The old mantra/assumption that bad land management is contributory...? doesn't work. How was midriff Canadian continental space a product of poor land management? And ...doing so on every continent at the same time. I gotta say, maybe Maui was just bad timing... but a firestorm on an island is something pretty significantly chilling (sorry) when its surrounded by thousands of miles of water. If we can do it in that geologic setting... we can do it over continental expanses. One aspect I have not seen researched/printed ...is any publication that discusses the carbon footprint of the global surge of fires and the C02 exhaust - the integrated. See, not that you or anyone else reading this asked... but, this is part of the "uncertainty curve" of the Climate Change "feed-back" loop. The CC models that attempt(ed) to project the future world given various degrees of temperature increase, are (sure) vastly more sophisticated compared to those 1990s versions, but ... I don't think any of them are that discrete. Like did they predict fire storms, per se? Certainly not when and extent. Did they predict Methane Hydrate release/explosive out-gassing from ancient permafrost thawing? Did they subsequently release enough green-house gas emissions from these ( as well as the CO2 from all the square-mouthed enraged climate deniers) to the bake? I'm asking here - not declaring. But it seems intuitive that there are unknown feed-backs that have been/are taking place; they can cause this thing to be accelerated. And, we all know that observations of, therein, as well as the attribution sciences tending more and more to confirm, all point to an acceleration display.

SW lower Michigan is in some kind of exotic trouble this evening... jesus. 93/80 at Kalamazoo, with S sfc wind, NW at 700 mb, and SRS just S of a warm boundary that is currently collapsing S of Lake Michigan. Meanwhile, the inversion cloud wave forms have just gone... vanquished, which means their losing CIN - the 'core is exposed' That watch is for the whole gambit. SBCAPEs must be like over 4000

Meanwhile ... we're bustin' our balls over 77/58 Usually there is a heat disparity between the MW and NE ... living here for more summers than many people have ever been alive tells us that is normally true to varying degrees. This seasons might be the biggest variance I've seen. So much deadly heat west, and while we just kept getting colder. Tellin' yeah, we got our head up our collective ass if we try to argue against CC based upon our own experience. LOL

Ha ha... 99/80 at KENW with a southwest lava breeze ... it's 79/72 at KMKE with a NE drift off Lake Michigan. Sound familiar...

About the only way it matters is having the higher sun angle lazing away at the back of one's neck and shoulders. Yeah...if it's 95/70 on June 21, the sun will add more, but in terms of high temperature... the modulation isn't as much as popular guess might have it. It does account for some... but 25 C at 850 mb, well mixed, has to obey the adiabatic condition - it's just that simple.

Yeah, no ..I've never been a fan of the 'daily sun' argument. It's like the ground is too warm? sort of antithesis to that silliness. But I have obsevered 82-85 F in 3 Februaries now in the last 7 years, right here imby. I mean, if the 850 mb is mixable, and it's 25F up there, it'll be in the 80s on Xmas

Both Orchard Field and Midway airports are 99/ 77 and 79 respectively. That's a HI of 118 ! On August 24 ... wow

oh I see. helps to go back some ...heh

is that what you're doing these days for work?

This one's sea level at D7 ... Granted up there at 55 N but I'm pretty sure that's outlandish even for them on August 31.

Ha ha

Mm with the sun starting to slope and the AO flipping into the positive mode melt would traditional slow fwiw

well, to be clear. The hurricane numbers 'matches' the memory pretty well. we were speaking about the increased - apparently so ... - of sub category TCs to affect the upper MA/NE regions. this latter aspects is the point of interest

This statistical overview has to do with at or > hurricane declarations? Earlier/recently in this thread there was discussion elucidating that while hurricane "drought" is noted, the advent of TC with lesser intensity may have actually improved over recent decades - since ~ 2000. This was speculation, mind you - no declaration is being made. It's more of a curiosity where it seems so, and if so ... why. Less hurricane in lieu of > frequency of forgettables. Interesting if the number bear that out.

Fwiw, the solar activity does not, however... just sayn'

I'm beginning to suspect we've been getting some 'harmonic' sort of feedback between the heat genesis and the ridging. The warm Atlantic SSTs are contributing to positive node in the N. Atl basin ... while the unique heat potential of the N/A continent W of 90...100W is servicing helping to anchor that aspect. The nadir between is mathematic Intense thermal ridging adds by driving an intense thermal wind vector that when acted on by the C-force, it bends anticyclonic which is the mechanical constructive interference. In a sloppy sense ... the 'ridge protects itself' It may help explain why our 'warm than normal' summers over the last decade(s) has been ballast in the overnight lows/DP contribution to elevating matters rather than stellar highs. As well as the transfixing nature of summers incapable of bringing the goods east other than transience.

it was never going to be west - not with the modeled hemispheric circulation mode. no way. every TC, the models will put out a cycle or two at D6 to 8 lead whence they attempt to violate geophysical mathematics. lol ...Annnd summarily, dopamine drips.

Narragansett does pretty well with that

Next !

Hugo was actually a heart breaker for cane enthusiasts ( of the 'totally responsible mentality' ilk lol ..). I mean, it was a long ... looooong ass tracker that made the entire distance along a clad climo trajectory for ECer's of lore. Even passing within 60 naut miles N of PR... You know? there's this ISE, which is both cumulative for seasons, and for individual TC life. Integrated Storm Energy. They should one like ISD, integrate storm dildo. ... it's basically proportional to "the length" of time and space the given system justly spends within the realm of reach and hope without reach-around

Yeah... farmer John's recollection here ... We've observed a lot in the way of decaying TCs that have lifted along the EC - in fact, that sub-classed traffic seems to have increased? "Gloria" in 1986 was the last MDR long track text book express, but it left something on the table actually because between passing the latitude of Cape May NJ and landfall along L.I. it dropped all the way to Cat 1. Kind of a rapid weakener. "Bob" in '91 was a home grown ... but with it 'hooking' right so much it wasn't a higher population impactor. What I think is interesting is that while it is likely more true than not, we've had more favorable set ups in recent decade(s), we have also seen an increased number/frequency of those sub- Cat 1 type cyclones. It's interesting what/why for this latter increase - as its own story. But otherwise ..we should consider Hugo ... Irene ... Sandy, which 'sort of' did but did not happen to key hole the right parabolic track. I don't even know if Sandy was an MDR ...but for brevity's sake. Hugo missed entirely, but hit the EC nonetheless. Irene was mangled by land too much; got too far west. It was also moving rather slow compared to 'express climo'. If that had been more east of its verification, I'm not sure that slow rate of ascension would have survived the colder shelf waters S of L.i., anyway. At the end of the day, it seems we've seen increased frequency of favorable synoptics, without a big pig.

Plus ( no pun intended ...) the curve is not linear? you know that, but from what I sense, there is a kind of lingering air - if not assumption - of linearity to this thing, in a systemic change that is clearly become more logarithmic - or has been exposed to be so at this end of the curve compared to the progress of CC between 1980 and 2000... It's as though saying one thing, but not truly in sync with it. Even in the ambit of higher climate sciences and the ethical leaders ( as few as they are in this latter group), there's a lapse in projecting the upward parabolic trajectory. All the impacts so far registered that are either in or have been through attribution science, were predicted to occur later than they materialized. There are also new impacts that were not anticipated by the tech and purposes, altogether. Such as the marine heat wave phenomenon. The impacts on the mid latitude circulation modes during winters...etc...