Typhoon Tip

humor or not… it’s apparent some of you conflate “threads” with storm and or storm drama. Without actually reading the content of the thread starter and trying to digest what is going on there, and then you judge, after the fact like you were misled? The last thread said in the title, it was either going to be a big storm or complete whiff. Fairly meaning that it was a range of possibilities and guess what what it fucking snowed. I always qualify those discussions with probability and they’re not always that great so stop associating bad turnouts to your own poor interpretation. Jerry no problem with the thread, but I would suggest mentioning that there’s very low ensemble support right now for any specific event

pretty decent continuity by the ICON ... ... tho I am not in general very impressed by that guidance - at least in a vacuum this 120 hr is intriguing considering it's similarities to predecessor runs. something made me wanna check... maybe because folks keep bringing it up in here. anyway, with a wave cyclone closing off down in the Carolinas, while the right exit region of a 150 kt 500 mb jet max is approaching from the west ... that's setting the thread right for the needle. it may be time to start thinking junior varsity for events this year. persistent negative interference and noisy inharmonious wave fights is just relentless. i've never seen so much thermodynamic potential left so incapable of exhausting. hmm i wonder if under-productive winter storm season's might correlate to warmer spring and summer - the budget isn't being spent so to speak... it does sound acme, but why not? when there's a low tc season, the ocean tends to be warmer the following year ...

question: if it never snowed again this winter ... and stayed this cold, would this formally go down as the worst piece of shit winter season since the invention of fuckery ? i think that would be a fair question. i mean, i wouldn't even say it would be worse if it were warmer, because at least there could be something recuperated for outdoor activities. obviously there's going to be subjectivity in any sore butt ranking system but i just cannot help but sense an extra special kind of sucktitude from having two planet's worth of could ingredients and having nothing happened... all the while, posters like Tip and Brook's are mesmerized by gaslighter ensemble means -

it's an aarp driven weather pattern control psyops to see how long it takes for civility to have their faculties lobotomized by ennui -

euro looks like saturday smacks face in the evening with a cold light rain before a butt bangin' light snow misses east of the coast sunday night. where are you guys getting s- on sunday night from ? oh...that's cuz i was looking at the gfs -

it's funny how there's basically a dearth of anything altogether obvious as a focus out there in time and so people seem to somehow see one anyway -

it's a sarcastic jape relating this new AI modeling tech to the key plot element in the sci fi franchise thriller, "The Terminator", from way back in the 1980s - at this point, a series of some 5 films, with the most recent ... I think called, "Dark Territory". in the plot... Skynet was an evolving AI that became self-aware, and then exhibiting separatist modes that were clearly not in the best interest of humanity. Humanity attempted to 'pull the plug'. This only incensed the AI, and in a kind of fit of self-preservation it touched off a nuclear holocaust by launching all the U.S. missiles at the Soviet Union ( at the time the original movie was mad back in the 1980s ... was still an intact sovereignty, and still the primary "Cold War" enemy to western non-communist ..blah blah-blah ), knowing that the Soviet Union would return in kind. That's the gist of it ... it was actually a brilliant story and quite ahead of the times. ...actually, just Wiki "The Terminator" done deal - anyway, people are having fun referring to Euro AI as 'Skynet'

ggem's varied wildly with the total manifold of synoptics, too much so to think that's not just noise - be leery of using it.

there are all kinds of argument to support your hunch there ... but, there is an 'intangible' aspect to this season's modeling performance that is best defined by 'so fuckin' what: it's goin' to do it that way anyway' ness valid arguments are failing with remarkable oddness

you shouldn't have to 'get use to' anything - good writing is awareness of the audience, because what's the point of writing if the communication does not take place. this is a tricky prospect in here though, because if we wanna actually talk theoretical weather -related stuff, you have to "talk theoretical" - I don't invent terms like "geostrophic balance" or "positive vorticity advection" or "velocity absorbing the s/w" because the former is a gradient problem that suppresses the latter ... it's just what these terms have been long codified to mean. the problem there is that there has to be some level of understanding, if even responsibility to engage with this stuff. or else this really is just a pointless waste of time endeavor, because for malcontents on the spectrum...? good luck

what? nothing difficult in the passage okay i put another statement in there - maybe that'll help

it's an overrunning vulnerability e of buff's ~ longitude from my take. it's been looking like that for days of modeling to me. the basic synopsis from 144 thru ..i dunno, day 10-ish, the entire region e of buff and down the ec is quite sensitive to blossoming qpf fields. when the angle of the 700 to 500 mb layer is modeled as paralleling the surface to 850 mb baroclinic axis (approximately from coastal GA to e of cape cod by 144+ ) the model in question does less or nothing. when the modeled flow in the mid level veers even slightly more s (i.e., going back over the boundary) you get the 00z GGEM solution types. it's like a head game in the models of creating enough geophysical instability to detonate the planet into an asteroid ring, and just leave it there in stasis with no trigger - no consequence. LOL that seems a bit difficult to succeed in doing. hyperbole aside, philosophically we get to a point of such excessive volatility, any perturbations at very small scales probably emerge something ... and those triggers are too small, beneath the resolution of the mid range/global solution machinery.

this is actually an exceptional overrunning signal... it's out there at the temporal horizon of the guidance but all three ens means have this implication of deep mass loading SE across Canada, while the S/stream turns back ne from deep latitude statically overruns the cold that the upstream flow loads into the GL and inevitably into the NE. the circumstance of those warmish heights extending from the TV off the m/a western Atlantic is not a warm signal for us in this hemisphere below -

i think i like weathermodels.com 's rendering better than pivotal or tt or golden gate. what's the fees on this site? may give them a trial - ... how are the other synoptic fields - h7, h5, h3 ... vorticity and anomalies... temperature...etc

yeah...i didn't see the 06z euro - frankly ... that hasn't helped in the past this season. LOL my issue is the canvas hasn't changed. too much gradient; too much velocity ( tmg; tmv) there may in fact be some middling events in the mid and extended range but they're likely to be in and out of the global models and not very dependable, as their mechanics are lost in it

great the cmc and the navgem, vs, competent modeling - what could go wrong

agreed

just wish the damn gradient would slack enough to allow curl physics to even happen. this columnated beam like those cosmic jets firing out of either end of a quasar thing is really f-n old man. we're not getting out of this winter without getting thru the f'er so please - seriously... it more than just seems that we can't seem to ever get cold without this elephant's ass sitting on a trampoline flow stretched too taught -

Probably not ... The purpose of that missive is just to be open minded to the possibility - "we have to consider" and all that ... Thing is, we all know it's coming - matter of when, not if. Not unless we can get the ... "quantum oscillator corrective kinetics" machine finally up and running ... haha, you know the 'qock' seriously though, i do think we are running into a problem where providing the cold air is sort of imposing on heights - to be honest, I've definitely seen an increase in compression circumstance whenever cold hydrostatic heights ( thickness) occurring when non-hydrostatic heights ( the g-dz line we see at 500 mb ) are attempting to happen at the same time. The storms of 1978 have "relaxed" for lack of better argument general tapestry, with cold vs hot more tied into the thickness thermodynamics. Trying to place that type of thermodynamic gradient in the midst of an already screaming g-dz ( compression --> higher velocity ambient geostrophic wind ) egh ... at minimum, we have to change the storm modes. But realistically, there's a negative interference intrinsic to the field when the g-dz velecoties are soaked and the s/w are then less able to amply within that flow. Anyway, this latter facet is coherently tending to be more so true in recent decade(s). Tendency, mind us - not a closed book...

Mmm... I find it personally more difficult do that anymore. Increasingly more difficult to employ the " ... I would think .." approach in any contexts where climate is the artist painting a vision of the future - why? ... duh. Yeah, "I would think" that answer precedes the question. LOL So, we can certainly argue that the climate change is not so far along that we can't regress - but, in your context above, it doesn't sound or come across like regression? It sounds like an expectation of a normalcy, ... perhaps event that "owed" fallacy. Maybe, but frankly, we have to start considering that, out here in the objective reality, cc is not just occurring but the empirical data in the ambit of the science is clearly observing it as accelerating.

This 12z GFS run is about the perfect scenario for the type of pattern. We're unlikely to manifest majors in that high speed compression, so this run is both nearly ideal in placement - given to the narrowing impact corridor - while also probably ceiling intensity under the circumstances

20th quick moving but solid moderate coastal storm impacting along the i-95 corridor - not bad for < 7 days ... like to see the ens mean with a f'n clue

12z gfs better

... that you squandered and failed the test anyway the next day ?

The coherence for an event around the 20th took a bit of step toward less overnight ... however, there's just as many odds that it will return. Personally, i've been of limited confidence in that, or anything specific at all ...really between the 17th and 26th+, for a basic reason: It's a very compressed, high speed medium. events within those also squeeze their impact regions down to narrower corridors. such that the models have to be pretty precise, at a range whence they are higher error anyway (standard performance) to begin with. I'm also personally not a fan of these 6 contoured spv's over lower Hudson Bay, in general. They tend to be really ominous looking but end up short on production - compression is a way in which super-synoptic aspects are in negative negative interference.