Typhoon Tip

Dude - you can't penetrate that mind with logic ... Oh, it has the capacity, but is deviantly on a PR campaign since circa 2004

James ... there are glaring differences between these two ... just to help you out. I sense that you may be identifying just the locations of (+) and (-) nodes in your comparison, and then leaping to passionate conclusions (heh, so to speak..). If so, that approach is not seeing crucial aspects with the interstitial relationships/limitations in between those nodes. It's alright. Folks don't come along with that knowledge necessarily built into their filters, so don't take this as chiding. First and for most, ...the flow is too fast in the lower panel. Look over Old Mexico to Bermuda: when you see that entire axis is in a 'laminar' construct ....with lots of isotachs smashed together and smooth, that means the flow is highly compressed. Compression = high velocity. You don't want that ... A January 2005 redux would intrinsically require a slower field, which if you look at the geopotential height gradient tapestry of that top panel, the flow is much slower ... key: outside of individual wave/spaces/impulses identifiable in the flow, the winds are lighter. That aspect is important for both slowing systems down .. giving them time and space to maximize. Another way to think of it: the total torque budget of the system is conserved at the S/W scale...and not borrowed by torque already used up in L/Ws ... screaming along like Jovian wind bands - mind you...I'm speaking in hyperbolic terms there, but just to help visualize the point. Secondly, the individual wave spacing/morphology is not even in the same ilk really, even if the flow of the lower panel were slackened off... Wrt to the targeted impulse in your comparison, I'm assuming to be the fast open-wave structure over the lower Ohio Valley area, vs the compact(er) mechanics diving through Wisconsin of the top. It "might" be that the structure of the S/W is different partially due to the compression differences ... but, open wave mechanics in a progressive field isn't really in the same ball-park of cyclogenesis type --> evolution. Point being ... you can have open waves in weaker overall gradients and vice versa. There is a bit of mastery in knowing/learning to recognize which wave structures are 'heading' toward a negative/closure, but.. the baseline requirement is not having over say... 80 kts of wind outside of S/W spaces. Having pointed that out... yes, you can have powerful flat waves in high velocity saturation that create fast moving robust storm ... They snow prodigiously along < 500 mile wide corridors... Essentially, Dec 2005, or November 1987 are variants of that...But those are not analogs for Jan 2005. Another aspect/difference, which is more systemic in nature: Notice that 'hook' low you see just west of California? Commonly referred in met parlance as an "outside" slider (yes there are 'inside' sliders, but both function similarly), that feature is a positively feed-back to the compression E of the 100th latitude(s). It's existence in space and time ... by exhausting latent heat down stream of it circulation, that is helping to rise heights from Texas throughout the Gulf/Florida and adjacent SW Atlantic Basin. The flow down there can have elevated heights anyway, but the hook look is only adding to that circumstance. There may be other limiting factors, but these in total make analog ratio between those two charts, very far from 1

I'm just down the road a piece along Rt poop and haven't seen a flake... It's definitely raw'er 'n' holy hell though.

It's an active pattern... I'll give y'all that. "robust storm" ? Mmm, depends on what one thinks of as robust. 3-6" .... 4-8" okay. Gradient saturation isn't good - oh, it's sweet on paper to see all those lines on the charts, But when you see that the ambient geostrophic wind speed is concomitantly blowing at ludicrous speeds where you have the line densities ...And with too much balanced wind speed like that, S/W's tend to be fast movers ... limiting embedded cyclogenesis - albeit that doesn't mean none. Thing is, ...that is all true, but doesn't mean your backyard can't lollypop its way to 12+ is a meso band with CG .. .I just mean your not getting hornet sings on the chart. And the big dawg numbers are rarefied.

I've read that ...somewhere. Mm. might 'ave been via Extended range forecast discussion outta NCEP a few weeks back. I did find the 12z interestingly flat with that wave. Ironically, it tends to over amp troughs (and ridges for that matter) in mid ranges, so that east facet, as well as this one in question... sort of fly in the face of it.

yup...that 'bout sums it up for me. the EPO in the GEFs, I'm not sure how it compares to present EPS mean - Scott's been mentioning that it hasn't looked so good overall, but I'm not sure whether he was considering the EPO domain space and won't type words in his hand, but, I have personally noted that the GEFs seems to do very well with the EPO domain/index. That could certainly just be coincidental to the last five or so years, but they've predicted some of the NP-Lakes -...NE and southern Canada cold shots with very good lag - But even if the EPO's magnitude is not handled perfectly? I don't think that really matters for determinism. The index has had a neggie sag for like four to six days and it's getting more coherent. Enough so to question warm signals. I like the idea you implied there ...re the EPO sort of bullying into the 'relaxation'/warm up's wave space and sort of gumming that up. That's huge in the offset department.

Sorry if the self-quotation comes off in bad taste but, the new EPO numbers were just updated on CDC's site from overnight, and they did exactly what this statement above surmised/implied they might... The previous night's computation had this signal neutralizing closer to Dec 7 ...now we see it arrive extended to 10...AND, depthier. To re-iterate the 00z Euro's operational notion of pooling continental syrup in Canada is still out there, as a plausible cross-guidance lurking signal... Curious what the 12z looks like - EPS for that matter. At this point, at least in so far as the GEFs are concerned, I have a problems with any warm assumption with this look below.

Yet another in a panoply of examples of how Human activities (if it is indeed because of Human activities... but saneness knows the truth...) is OUTPACING the background capacity of the planetary, both bio to geologic processes and back, ability to compensate. Hence the poking of the sleeping monster metaphor. Not that you don't get that but... waking that demon up is when these surpluses begin instructing a new paradigm - that is probably the greatest gamble in Human history as to what the paradigm will include. Personal rant: I mean it's like... denying Human kind as causal, forget that layer of the problem for a moment. How exactly is that a reason not to act? That's the whopper logical flaw in the denier side of that argument that the scientist and/or activists fail miserably to point out. The truth is, they don't want to act, first. Not healthy skepticism - what's going on now, by and large, is a ruse of the latter. The simple truth is denier's have a faux luxury of GW being invisible to their every day life, such that is easy to choose not admitting to the crisis, over the despair of the reality. Obviously, because they have special interest (...usually economically...) that are ultimately going to be adversely effected if they do. It's not complicated - so they and lobbyist and basically self-centered ilk ...they ferret any plausible deniability ...which protects those interests, because they do not see/sense any imminent consequence. It's not just an empirical crisis - it's a sociological/psychological one! I have close friends in the doctoral circuits of higher education, in atmospheric sciences, and in social sciences, and THAT is the daunting fear they discuss at their meetings. And it leads to one inexorable conclusion: there has to be a holocaust before people admit to the problem. In a lot of ways...it is really akin to suspension of disbelieve --> living in illusory bubble is being enabled, by the lack of sensible impact in everyday life.

I've always known this... You just don't like it when I've taken the temerity to point it out... by choosing to get defensive about it -

Risking getting involved in this further ... ( ) .. j/k, but I think the importance of this study is at risk being lost in the din of discrediting ... notwithstanding the veracity of the discredit effort. I repeat: not challenging that veracity! Focus and attentions spans are exceedingly brief in this day and age, and getting briefer. Our lives are inundated with so much data, too much so there is no means to organize/vet it appropriately (as a plaguing problem actually). Thus, consequentially people tend to see a headline, ...if they read or even catch a zephyr that there may be a contrarian disputation, they move on. ... They may even be at that social gathering at some later time, and have the audacity to those glimpses into, "...I was just reading that's bull crap..." Heads nod in reply, "Yeah...there's soo much fake news." Virtue ... lost. This is a situation in dire need of not moving on. And that's directed toward every consumer soul on the planet, save those that are truly, purely preindustrialized ... As individuals, we change our demand around an awareness scope, the integral takes care of its self ...not you personally - I mean the royal you. Anyway, the atmosphere is heating up... The oceans (intuitively) would gain energy in the coupled state, as you and other's are posting data to point that out. Since that is the case, that is a bad bad place to play games. You/we ..the world is poking at a sleeping demon of global power, and everything we covet as a species,...possibly including our very existence, requires(ed) the worst of that monster remain just a snore. It's not a very difficult science fiction novel to imagine crossing a thermalcline threshold of no return until the entire biosphere is vanquished in lieu of a fresh, scrubbed slate to make a final go... before the sun increases luminosity in all wave-lengths by another 10% and effectively closes the final chapter on Earth as a life creator. ...talking the next billion years of course, so much fantastically incomprehensible time that it really comes down to whether we want our species to last sooner or later.

Not sold... The three month trend is rife with faux leads of big warm ups in the Week 2's + and they're having trouble verifying. The big one to end Novie and wring in Dec is now no longer than a mere warm sector push that's all of a 36 hours. I need to see that present sort of era scaled verification tendency show a different error before I bite on this next warm up... Like I was saying to Will or whomever that was, it almost strikes me as a pattern "lost signal" more than a real one for pattern change (or even relaxation).. If it comes to pass that these latter attributes reign correct, than Ok - my feelings won't be hurt but I need more than what I'm seeing. Granted, the teleconnector hard numbers as they stood, as of yesterday morning, were flagging a PNA flatline, along with the break-down of -NAO .. But, as far as the American cluster, they also contained a 7 day stint of -EPO... beginning 3 to 5 days and ending near Dec 5 or 7th ... Moreover, the EPO handling tends to falsely rise in the extended... I've noticed this more often than not, in past recent winters (going back some 5 year's worth) ...where a -EPO always slopes toward neutral or even positive, but subsequent nightly processing lowers each daily values gradually. Supposition at this/that point in discussion, but I'm willing to take a flyer on the length of this EPO. FWIW, the Euro swaths a ginormous mass of loaded, sub -20C air in the 850 mb products growing in mass from D7 thru 10 of the operational, which is a pleasing fit for a -EPO interval. I'm a fan of cross-guidance hand-shakes... such as the GEF's sagging the EPO while the operational Euro cold loads Canada. Pattern may (or may not) bring that mass down in modified forms and intervals, but that cannot be ascertained at this range... particularly when the Pacific is a mess and lacks a coherently canvased wave spacing. But should Alberta-western Quebec - Nunavut size mass of < -20 C 850 air pan out... you can't feel comfortable going balmy at this proximity to that hemispheric circumstance ... We've been beaten over the head in recent years why the EPO is probably the more important November to early April factor in mid latitude, temperature anomaly distributions... Someone may read this and get excited for winter? don't! I'm not here claiming cryo Hades on Earth ... I'm just saying that I'm not impressed with the recent verification so far on extended warm ups, and given that, and some of these modeled fields.. I have decent enough reasons to doubt December is really anything at this point.

Oh ..this is a support group, period. Really, may as well meet on Tuesday nights from 7 to 9 pm, where people raise their hands and discuss their addiction. Truth be told, there are strict forums out there where the contribution is purely analytic/theoretical, and is borderline referee-able right out of the type. The climate in those is about as chilly as the collective here wishes the winter is... Content changes relatively infrequently, with gaps in participation extending weeks at a time. And much of it is unreadably dry We are not that, here. By the way ..the 18z GFS is remarkably cool profiled for that deal next week, particularly when factoring in it's whopper BL warm bias - speaking to the NE forum folk. That's a flat wave snow if ever there was one modeled... But, it just one run.

yeah all that.. 'cept you said, "The real peer review process happens after the research is formally published..." no comment - my original sentiments were around not trusting the Internet sources. To that ...the sentiment is hugely justified. everything is dragging the discourse into a direction I didn't even wanna go.

This contains some useful info - ...also, discusses that it will be in parallel with the GFS in mid December ... which technically right now it is not. The entire doc this comes from is posted by NOAA ... it's over the 9.7+ mb file size so I can't post it here.

yeah... and "progressive" can come in a couple different meanings, too.. Like, 'too fast' or 'too far east' are both encapsulated in progressive bias; but they have different causes.. They're likely subjective (physically influencing...) one another, but, looking at snap shots of D8's and 5's and 3's ... a system being corrected gradually west could be slowing down across successive model runs as much as the model being too stretched in the west-east coordinate. blah blah ..

Nnn no.. science evaluation of others by accredited officials in/or of the same discipline is supposed to happen prior to a paper describing the work is then published/journaled. That's the standard refereeing intent. Your word choice is stating things backward? Bet that as it may ... even if it just sort of "got lucky" (or unlucky) in that it slipped through the cracks in the process -... okay. But, there is definitely a tendency to "rush" these studies out now. That part is pretty clear as a cultural modality. The fact that the entire publication industry did not benefit by the proficiency of the modern Internet, ...in previous generation, it is not a huge intuitive leap to see how that may have actually helped prevent spurious releases of inflated results. To put it nicely... Interesting. It's as much a sociological concern...

In any case... the current perf monitoring on the FV3' discusses that it does have a progressive bias in the middle range ... to which next week is bit late on that but within reasonable scope. The 00z Euro was primaried up over the eastern Lakes with another one of these excruciatingly boring pallid commitments to secondary... So, it might be interesting to 'contest' the two, and see if the FV3 goes back west or the Euro comes east...etc...etc

potent Arctic pop careening into the backside too - that system's been flagged for a while... The other models...heh, off and on more or less. The FV3' isn't shy about cold boundary layer systems over this pattern (thus far that I've noticed). Not sure how it is scoring. The model's 'experimental' technically, but is scheduled for parallel roll-out in mid December. That'll be interesting! Get to start making 'official' 'er comparatives.

it's an interesting observation, Jerry - not that you or anyone asked but my hunch is that the MJO was simply not really effecting the flow as much as it would later in the cold season when the gradients everywhere are approaching seasonal saturation, and thus the sources become more "instructive" for lack of better word. The simpler version is that when the gradients everywhere are weaker ... phases of these various indexes come and go with less apparent forcing signatures on the pattern. The steeper gradients of mid cold season have better integration of those forcing sources... November ...could kinda be construed as deep enough ...? It depends, on the season at hand. I think in this case, no. The gradient hasn't yet been very focused despite some recent Canadian/NP-GL-NE cold anomalies. I'm seeing a lot of fragmentation of L/W spaces and difficulty smoothing the Rosby constructs around the hemisphere still... Warm season vestigial hang-over perhaps... As for the MJO ... the WPO is positive and strengthening ...that is a tamp down on waves emerging in 6 --> 7 and onwards, and so as this MJO tries to punch out of oblivion in 8, it may be encountering some larger scaled destructive interference. I've long argued that the MJO's significance was conditional more so than instructive over the years, more of a modifier. What that means is, if the surrounding atmosphere supports its presentation on the flow, it may come out gang-busters and soar around the phase diagram at altitude. Then of course a big bomb does a megalopolis job and it's all the rage ...MJO, yay! But, when the surrounding medium is not, you get this meandering at low amplitude or tamp down inside the coherency envelope like we're seeing now. Granted ...this is all theoretical tipisms ha

Yeah...I just used the entire cinema of that to launch a diatribe... I wasn't frankly very interested in reading much further into Bluewave's original post as the content seemed theoreticaly dubious out of the gate. Considering the specific heat of water is several orders of magnitude greater than free Terran atmosphere, I stopped ... heh. For obvious reason at 60% of one's eyeballs popped out of head. Then, I saw Will's newspaper article from some ' Tribune' I never heard of and lost patience with the whole thing. You're probably right - but, it escaped me because it didn't matter. I wanted to bitch ahaha

irrelevant to my points. Like I just pointed out to Will... the issue taken is with the uselessness of the web in the first place. I'm not vetting the Princeton scientists or the the counter-point. The standards for review and release are eroded almost as badly as people brazen immorality to use the web for their own agenda... But, it is what it is...

No... if your responding to my comments ...my gripe is focused on the general erosion of usefulness of the "information" ... and Internet. Like i said, the correspondence between Princeton and this other guy may be entirely useful/necessary, but ... why are we here, yet again. I also noted, that the "standards" of review and release is also eroded, as being indirectly part of that. It almost seems the internet needs to be partitioned ... gates where one enters vetted, vs the rest of it as caveat emptor. It's kinda sorta like that? but ...by and large, it is not.. and it almost is creating a secondary cultural movement toward breakdown in trust in anything ( I might add... different rant heh) . Dark and deceptive...

It's annoying... just how eroded the trustworthiness of the Internet has become. You know, it more than merely seems, the early Internet days were awesome... So much so that people didn't dare douching it down with their agenda - that level of brazen corruption was probably as much requiring time to evolve, as it might have been predictable to occur, too. And here we are. You could trust a information you read circa 1998 on the web, much more so than now...It's like the corrupters have put us back to dark pre-Internet days. By submerging the Internet in falsity ...it defeats the purpose almost entirely. And it's in here, too... You come in here, ...someone puts up an excerpt and/or linkage to some interesting paper, and UP! immediately... we got to wade through counter-point rangles that are less like science and more like "I hate GW and therefore need to dig up anything," in order to abase. Meanwhile, only obfuscating fact and truth that much more...because the real sufferer is that the counter-point! It may in fact be entirely valid. ..either way. And that, right there, is the particularly egregious annoyance: The general populate/consumer/user doesn't have the time. Science is supposed to purpose truth; the Internet invents a new science, to prove there is actually science . Vet the vetters? give us a f'n break with the Internet. Waste of goddamn time! It may be that the back-and-forth between the Princeton scientists and this mathematician is entirely useful, but the aforementioned gripe ... it's probably indirectly related to sloppy publication practices/immorality of the same ilk. Meanwhile, real truth gets bought and sold, both figuratively and literally, behind the scenes... It's like the whole specter of informatica becomes a plied distraction while those transactions conveying cogency are being carried out between sources, ...and we aren't really part of this latter consortium. Oh, we'll get the truth...when our crops fail... the ocean overtakes Washington D.C., Boston, Miami... the Philippines ... Or not... we'll never know, we'll we!?

Any debate of modern industrial-based societies of the world that ultimately roots to Environmental concerns has a fascinating stigma associated with it: The heat of the vitriol is ultimately driven by the intangible nature of the threat, not really the threat its self. To make sense of that paradox think about these statements: Tell someone a train is coming, they bide time; that same someone actually sees the train? Hell yeah! They'll step off the track with no argument and with the greatest expediency imaginable. That is the problem with GW, it has no visible train. The "specter" of Global Warming and all the intrinsic catastrophic train cars of consequence... they are only now just beginning to measure. Prior? There really were no, or very few ... certainly not enough actual corporeal forms to shut up those that need to have their mouths closed. All you (the proverbial you..) offer them instead of their present way of life (or chance to find one..) is to abstain from their ability to have that life. Think about that... not going to end well for those attempting to warn of anything that blocks that goal, not when they can't see the train. And so... the problem with this is there needs to be a new PR campaign that is revolutionary - if Nature isn't kind and gentle enough to do so in smaller doses... Which (ironically) it is, if we choose to look and heed to the signals... but that's also consistent throughout humanity's history. From Pompeii ignored rumbling, to the ancients warning the future through fictional works like Noah ... the disaster has to happen before people see the virtue of the warning.

The Finite­ Volume Cubed-Sphere Dynamical Core model.... lovingly referred to as the "FV3-GFS" ... is simply not interested in a warm up through D15 in the 00z run ...for how little that's worth. In fact, it blue bombs us D9 and threatens a dynamical arctic powder poof three days later, while the EPS and GFS are stringing endless 1" transparent QPFers west of NE. 06z was less winter optimistic but we still definitively colder overall. Interesting... granted, this is experimental