Typhoon Tip

So ...we're likely to nick the SE zones ...? If perhaps only the Cape and Islands with wind whipped cat paws and/or wet flakes, regardless, that is " a little " NW correction coming into shorter terms - interesting. The next on the docket of potentials is the 11th -13th. Unlike the general population.. I don't really maintain biases based upon the overall seasonal tenor of abuse - ha. I mean I'll go ahead a commiserate with my usual flair for nested insults and passive trolling, but that's if and only if it offends people ... ( muah haha). So for the majority of sub-forum, we miss this first opportunity of the onsetting seasonal relaxation climo... too bad. I still see a ten day to perhaps two week window remaining that offers best hope for winter enthusiasts, even if it's blurred by the amorphous seam of seasonal transition. This is blue bomb bowling time.. We can have 61 F light wind warm sun afternoons and a foot of snow that night, and this patter coming up "airs" ( puns are free) on the side of a good year for that. It's outright modeled below as an example... But, the flow is still relaxing and the wave lengths are pretty coherently shortening. There are two table-setting factors: one, there is an increased/energetic wave frequency in the general circulation ambience; two, there is a lot of mid tropospheric cold in all guidance draped over-arcing through Canada, so these are cake batter items. So .. with the introduction of a different mechanical layout across the hemisphere, these are new paradigms ..and pure logic means the tenor of the previous season is meaningless. We may not get an event - okay..but that's more likely a coincidental characterization of results and false equivalency in terms of causality if that occurs. There are plenty of members here that signal an important event, and the EPS mean from 00z does carry some inflection for the time in question:

On March 10 ..? That's a ripper BD front on the Euro's day 6...

Could be... MOS guidance may or may not have that kind of discrete science built into their algorithms. Obviously, we know they are heavily climo weighted as they get out in time ... 4, 6 and 7 days out, so it would probably be hard to know if the super-adiabatic overturning/tall BL is being modulated/hidden out by the database averages. Also, considering the averages ...those may or may not contain the "hockey stick" aspects of recent climate change. Ever since the 1990s really, the MOS would routinely under-assess the high temperatures on sunny well mixed days while in the absence of CAA, anyway, and one should wonder if the last 10 years make that worse. Those rotted polar air mass and/or westerly continental conveyors with low RH will drive a 61, D7 MOS to 72 every time because of climo weight, but even in the near term ...like the next day, there's still almost a guaranteed 1 to 3 tick bust.

Yup...I've been monitoring that... It's an epic journey through bundom to do so...but I'm often interested in tracking those first warm fair days in spring; I mean, they happen so rarely they may as well be considered freak events and thus have their place in the annuls Of course... having it be 70+ last January...and 80+ in Febs and March's several times over the last 6 years, the novelty of that is wearing off too -

The GEF's -based teleconnectors do not support any operational model that suggests cold and snow, at any point, over the next two weeks. The operational run is some-odd, 0 for 20 average in modeling winter storms between D5 and 10 over the last eight weeks, at the same time it's ensemble mean has signaled a favorable pattern 0 % of that time. Pretty strong argument for sidling with the ens mean and not even using the operational. But it begs the question ...why? It really is that starkly coherent: ensemble mean implies 0 chance... operational has modeled 120 inches with 0 success. I find that fascinating in a nerdly sort of sense of it, for operational usage of the GFS. I am not sure what the other model's ensemble derivatives have been like ...GGEM, UKMET or Euro, when comparing to their own teleconnectors, but... regardless, they are at minimum guilty of 0 realization... How do we know...? Because 0 has happened, that's how. So, unless they have carried along the last eight weeks with 0 chances - which they have not - they aren't doing much better. Here's the aspect that's interesting... The individual ensemble members of the GFS, which I do upon occasion glance over them ... have signaled substantial cyclones and events over eastern N/A ... yet en masse, they must be canceling one another out to end up with neutral or nominal threat ... because the pegged neggie PNA and pegged positive NAO, with whopper positive AO the whole way mind us...plus, WPO-EPO arc completely torpid of any signal at all...the whole way, doesn't actually imply any given one of the members should ever be signaling anything. It's really like GEFs mean is "accidentally" painting a tele's spread that has verified remarkably well, while being individual piece of shit. weird. - Well, anyway... my guess is that any 202 hour GFS cut off upper MA/SNE juggernaut is going to be hard to surmise without that erstwhile crushing bias in mind. Be that as it may, if the flow remains relaxed ... it is unfortunately a stand alone/sort of non-trend determinant entity. This one over the next 60 hours ( btw..) still deals with velocity contamination, despite rolling eyes and the fact that it's just a little less velocty - still too much... I'm talking about 'as is' in modeling trends. We'll see if it does a Boxing Day deal ...

People are the same everywhere on the planet - regardless of race, creed, ethnicity of shade We're just dogs. - conceit too oft gets in the way of that truism, but the beauty of truisms is that they are true ...whether people want to believe them or not.

Exactly ... the fall back position: we’re getting a storm anyway - delusion over disparity

That models suck when they don't show a storm

It's hemming and hawing around the tenor on this site -haha

I was reading this could be a bad 'bug year' in general... The lack of antecedent significant cryo- events isn't good.

You're too sensi man ... d-bag..? whatever brah, it was sarcasm... get a grip, yeah

Anyway, there are two things ( imho ) that need to happen to bring this threat back more so: -- the wave coming off the Pac needs to get stronger like it was three days ago in the Euro; it's been weakening in all guidance cycles slowly ever since. -- the ridge on it's heels needs to pop higher in latitude, such that it would get a constructive interference from the larger --> short wave length scales, and help carve things out...tipping the flow more S-N along /off the EC and that would change things storm-favorable. I see the first of these two as being more plausible than the latter... The reason being, it's more likely that smaller scaled stream mechanics associated with a S/W will be missed, before the integration of the large scale ... where any such errors tend to get absorbed into the mean; of which the ridge amplitude in the west is constructed. Also, I'm noticing the ridge has 50 to 70 kt winds curving/arcing over it's top in southern Manitoba - I hate to say, that's a speed anomaly for that flow construct and is probably having an neggie interference in the transitive sense. It's ablating the ridge from getting N, which then transitively effects the digging potential down stream... Then, if the weaker polar stream Pac ejection really remains sort of middling ... case close. It's not over all optimistic, no, just not impossible. 90% sure of a system evolving... very low confidence it will be in time for us - but reserve the right to change my mind should we start seeing the above two concerns accommodate.

You're angry ..so you didn't read objectively - that is not what I said... "climate change shit is trying to move Philly to our doorstep faster than most admit ." is an opine and not a statement of claim to a 'new norm'.. If other Mets violently disagree with climate change, they should be stripped of their credentials. And that man told me he agrees the winter seems like a climate move north and got the tongue-in-cheek reference to Philly for it's conferred value without having that be some means to abase the implication - admitting climate change is really what that's about when people do that. That's not him. Knee jerk reacting in a way that protects the what folks don't want to lose - and it makes me want to jam an inferno down people's f'n throats.

No rabbit hole Only nimrods and toe-lining malcontents

Why would that be temporary - think about what is going on with the world, get a grip with what that means and where logic leads ...check back in with the answer to that S.A.T. question. I mean, it's a matter of time ...but it's coming. Look, it won't be a smooth curved transition - no. We'll probably have several cold snowy years...and/or at min, intra period spells, but over the long term mean we'll see gradual reduction in the occurrences of said cold and snow; that is concomitant with a warming climate moving winters ever north. Having said that, this does not account for ... comet impacts, or some super terrestrial thing by sun, orbit, comet or asteroid ...etc...etc... if the present influences remains unchecked,

Yup... Harvey Leonard bemoaned that same point to me in an email last week ... paraphrasing to a close approximation: I've never seen a winter like this for combining warmth specifically with lack of even "close calls" or even "near misses" since mid December. ( I just looked again and it's pretty much spot on..) So yeah, I'd call that a spot on echo to your own observations ...and one that I happen to agree with in both renditions. Heh. Ugh. I mean, it's one thing to deal with a ratter, but this one was transcendence of something far worse in terms of unlikeliness actually taking place .. all the time. Having said that... you know I was thinking... There really is less difference between this year in 2011-2012 from a step back larger perspective. I mean, we can get into whether detailed departures and what not match or serve as analog but they won't really - I mean from a 'gestalt' look. Both years had an early snow, and then nadda - period. With one exception: 2011-2012 may have actually had more 'near misses'... This event, however, that is likely to foist just too far east, qualifies as a near miss - it's kind of a separate rub that it would be interesting if not morbidly fantastic, to actually witness this season exit this way; yet we cannot even get that much to succeed. Hell really discovers its new dimensions - A bottom line, brass-taxes sort of comparative analysis begs the similarity. Whether we put down a big snow event on October 31st or Dec 2nd ...that's irrelevant in nature? Both are early, both never saw shit until the following year. I mean obviously we have March to get through and even thru Easter is fair at our latitude ( as difficult as the latter may seem to even visualize in this unrelenting abuse) but, I opined/bemused in spring of 2015 that with 150 to 300% of the annual snow achieved, we could go four years in a row under-achieving and still end up above normal for the 5 year mean. You and others have also opined, we are 'due' ( a statistical term I actually hate but that 'sides the point ) for a ratter.. The problem I have with the due -argument is that it's like comparing Ali to Tyson.. Two disparate techniques spanning entirely different cultures of the sport? It makes any comparison dubious. Only using that metaphorically here, the climate of 1955 through 1985 ... was changing, moreover, that change has been 'accelerating' since 1985... so, if 'due' is based on a background climate signal, that signal should by logic be increasingly entropic and therefore, less reliable. So there cannot be any 'due' ... I guess what I'm backing us into here is that we just simply got absolutely butt-banged period... And, seeing as the climate change shit is trying to move Philly to our doorstep faster than most admit ..anyway, that's not helping.

Post Feb 15 ...certainly so post March 1 begins the time of year where the MOS will probably bust cool by a one to three ticks on days like this.

I can't say enough ... that ridge position/axis being roughly over the western Dakotas makes an east pass unclimatologically sound ... The ridge in the blend/means/trend is actually really rather perfect for these amplifying OV things to drive a realization closer/SE of ACK ... It's a wonder, if the flow velocity issues are trying to pull/stretch this east of numerical suggestion... because that foisting thing when the ridge is still back west like that is ... It can happen... I mean anomalies relative to anomalies happen..but, seeing as 100 hours is still time to correct things, I'm not sure this is over just yet. I don't care either way though - if it misses...it misses. If the n/stream turns out utterly over assess up to this point ...than we're out either way.

It's interesting if one is a tedious morphology follower across cycles tho - the cyclonic pressure pattern is opening up and expanding farther NW around 100 hours, but the centroid low is kept way out there... Filling in QPF too; I still don't think we are "not what you want to see" mode quite yet ...Considering the source for these wave spaces, there's room to fiddle with this and it won't take much at all to get this where folks want it.. well, if they "want" something reasonable that is ..haha

It's got better structure with a negative tilting/cyclonic tip to the 500 mb trough axis as it approaches the EC at/around 100 hours ... so, it may be in flux. Course there's always rooting for the underdawg, huh hahaha

That 00z GEFs spread should have sent shivers - literally ...as the envelope of uncertainty was all situated on the NW oblonged envelope of solutions, with some very deep members. The 06z was in the frame-work of noise. that 00z spread to me shows we could easily get a run here now, sooner or later that really brings the 968 wood to 20 naut mi SE of ACK ... You really can't looked at this with Operational intent and not go, hmm

I have a feeling this nearer term deal is going to come in ginormous on a run or two, then wax and wane thru Thursday depending on what cycle drops the ball out over the Pac. It may actually be a nod in favor of "trusting" ( ) the Euro more because of it's normalization and correction scheming supposedly curtailing permutations from screwing up trends and reality ...so it is assumed.

I think there's two events on the 12 -day radar ... this one presently being followed in guidance, but then give it another week...and we may be seeing something similar repeat. There's a pretty obvious signal there for a transitory reload maybe 3 or 4 days later. Not high confidence ... but, that operational GFS thing has several ens members also hinting at new amplitude into the east around D11

I don't think the NAM has ever NOT looked ominous at 84 hours regarding a butterfly fart either - We kid about the futility of the ICON ...but where there may be a slight ever so slight scintilla of hope in any one ICONic solution beyond 20 minutes from now, there is DEFINITELY no reason or purpose in adding carbon footprint to CC crisis because they're sending energy into the CRAYs to run that f'n meaningless beyond 48 hours. I do however disagree that < 48 the model is useless because if one knows how to incorporate its biases, it does have it's uses in shorter terms given certain dynamic scenarios. It's also very good as a convective initialization tool, but that's more relevant to the warm season and/or Plains.

That in of itself is true, but caution not to think that's some boundary on plausible morphologies et al going forward. There's a world out side of the intra-regional spacing of the wave/stream interaction/smaller scales of the modeling depictions - and that outside exertion is not faux factor-able. It's real...and a correction of even subtly bigger western ridge and stronger/steeper diving NP n/stream wave ...all that has nothing to do with the present finite scaled stream dynamical interplay as modeled at this time. I'm not inclined to 'lean' toward any direction and I don't see how an objective perspective could.