Typhoon Tip

Within a Millennium seems a bit conserved to me.... Particularly when the GW is accelerating ... I didn't look very closely at their math but on the surface ( heh...pun) they didn't appear to have logr effects due to accelerating variable values... This whole thing with synergy is just not being taken very seriously -probably more like less understood. Unrelated ... but Sanjay Gupta was recently extolling human beings are simply not wired to process the specter of climate change - I further that sentiment by re-iterating some of my recent opine material, related to " ..humans have never responded very well to threats that do not readily appeal via one of the corporeal senses.." - it's commentary routed into the same concepts... and GW/climate change is an insidiously quite stalker. This is particularly true, when the one force that is causing the ballast of the pernicious changes ( Human activity ) is uniquely adaptable ... thus making it easier to deny for readily evading its harmful effects via that same adaptation. I further again that synergistic effects ... acceleration, and gestaltian under-estimates can under calculate ablation ...the atmosphere accelerates further... that complicates their application - I'll have to read the article again... ( I'm on about 7 of these today - my god..) But the ocean levels rise at a greater rate than these linear application of rudimentary mathematics will imply given acceleration.

Yeah that product I posted is the MASIE ... or the augmented IMS ... hints at that in the lower right text block ...which for some reason had previous escaped my attention. Heh... anyway I found a different site that describes similarly when searching this shit - anyway, I think these curves have to converge at some point - thing is... we're so close to shared curve space that's probably splitting hairs at the moment... 2012 vs 2019 I mean

Okay ... .this is just quick and dirty Web goop but... IMS is being used by the National Snow and Ice Date Center ... IMS Daily Northern Hemisphere Snow and Ice Analysis at 1 km, 4 km, and 24 km Resolutions, Version 1. This data set provides maps of snow cover and sea ice for the Northern Hemisphere from February 1997 to the present from the National Ice Center's Interactive Multisensor Snow and Ice Mapping System (IMS). That's what's confusing ... if we say "...2nd lower behind NSIDC" ( which I'm not trying to refute...) but this statement above says they are using the same IMS tech, and said tech is showing 2019 has been lower than 2012 the whole way... that's a discrepancy.

I have a question - which may be fairly 'duh' but since I haven't been by those other sources ... Are those more comprehensive than "sea ice only" ? That IMS product is sea ice only ... And also, just fyi ... the IMS product comes from NSIDC - we may be able to put the pieces together here on why the disparity. It's gotta just be some dumb product thing I'm not seeing shit

I don't doubt there is/was relevant science and/or postulate content that predates the shenanigans that go in here I mean ..it's a public forum ... to which a social media outlet certainly qualifies, and folks rarely cite their sources, anyway. That said ... this came up back in Eastern days... from which this site really owes it's heredity of users ... (initially anyway ...that's probably obscured by now), but unfortunately, content didn't follow. Also, I frankly wouldn't put it past anyone in the general ambit of research ... regardless of affiliation and rank, elsewhere ...to poach ideas from dialectical free-for-all sources ( like the Web when it's not degrading into vitriol ) and then run with it using the wherewithal they have at their disposal. Much of that wouldn't even be malfeasance ... not the point. If I'm in a conversation with someone and it triggers a thought progression...and I science it and make discoveries... It's just where the 'idea zygote' took place. But like I said...like mindful quorums and consortia and who-knows-what intelligentsia ... they will tend to converge on similar ideas at the same time - this has taken place throughout human history. I probably shouldn't have mentioned it as an afterthought .. .

Firstly ... I like the opening thought here ... There are indeed vying forces ...some more dominant than others, in every multiplex system of Nature - to which the governing atmosphere/climate forces certainly fall into this give and take. Secondly ... you know it's funny - this business about "fossil" fuels... It took this planet some 100's of millions of years to sequester carbon out of the global biota ...and inter it all into these VOC chemistries ... then, Humanity comes along. With its ingenuity ( which has clearly out-paced any pragmatic checks and balances in the evolutionary sense of it...) we've managed ( ..if left to our own devices ) to liberate all of it back to environment in unbounded form in just 1,000 years. 100s of millions 1,000 The idea that there is anyone at all who would have the audacity to even try and ask anyone to negate ramification - ...that's incredible. I suppose it is possible ( tho proven not the case on Earth...) to find a system somewhere in Nature where you can completely forcibly infuse change without actually witnessing change ...

Fwiw - as of two days ago ( 18th ) from IMS: https://www.natice.noaa.gov/ims/

Really ... Not looking for credit per se ... but, I haven't heard about the gradient hypothesis from anyone other than the person who proposed it five years ago ... and has been heavier about it over the last two. Now, it's owned by someone else - Heh... I suppose - fire was quasi implemented as a formal tool in human history at the same time every, too, so ...it's possible more than one person had the exact same to the letter ...inference regarding climate variations and large scale circulation forcing -

I almost wonder... hmm.. purely speculation but could the changes in the overall circulation of the N.Hemispheric winter that's been noted over the last two decade be partially causal in that...

It's probably more subtle than idealy coherent ... buuut, that seems to be a recurrent theme in recent years... But all's not lost? Because what happens - in deference to Scott's Euro stuff... - is that the NE Pac lends to more -EPO - like perturbations. We did remarkably well with winter expression in the rough NP-Lakes-SE Can/NE region with stretched L/W down wind of cold loading from that source... It'll be interesting if replay similar tapes. The other aspect is -NAO ... are these biasing over the western vs eastern limb -

.. Amplitude in the AA context imposes colder delivery to middle latitudes...which concomitantly slopes the heights ...faster wind speed results. Again... the Arctic is warming faster than the mid and lower latitude troposphere's ( do to various "synergistic" feedbacks and so forth...), but... it is still generating differentiable cold heights in the autumn and winter, and still sufficiently deep compared to the ballooning Hadely cell to create more gradient. They're not talking about geostrophic wind saturation in this article - they are talking about the large scale wave features these winds travel around. These features are a different beast than the flow along their gradients. When the gradient speeds up south ..this inegrates a weakening of the annular mode of the Arctic...draws/redraws the polar jet S where the gradient is larger ... this causes slowing of the zonal wind component at higher latitudes - check... But that means the gradient is intense along that southerly displacing polar jet and the wind...fast. Also .. for me, if anything... it makes sense that faster flow may "lock" patterns, as the forcing must be large and therefore "immovable" ( relatively..) and cause R-wave translation/morphology to slow.. because faster wind speeds intuitively would tend to dampen permutation forcing.

ISM is lagging by date ... as of last check... They seem to update that about every 10 days...and it's for the previous week, too...so by the time it's published it's an addition three or so days beyond that week... Aug 11 ... That's what I've seen from them since July. They'll probably release an analysis for the 18th in about two days... oy - As far as the subject crap - nah dude. More like concern... I don't really care if people want/need/do/or don't have biases... I just want to know that what I'm reading isn't that - which admittedly is probably not going to happen in a public social media source. word. Just so we're clear. In order to make that assessment... I may sound I like I care about specific posting behavior ... but that's not it. I'm not sure anything you have said should invalidate IMS inclusion - not that you mean to... I think it is at least worth it to vet why their plots vary... interesting. I'm wondering if it's density related.

Well...since you put it this way ...I don't disagree ... I also think that increased snow fall -- having caved last night and given it more thought -- could very easily be guided by two very certain factors: 1 ... increased frequency of smaller events - aggregation as oppose to 'block-buster' season definers... 2 ... whether true or not... any system tapping into increase ambient WV associated with a warming world.. would, counter-intuitive to the lay-folk... proficiently rain or snow, both. It's just that yar ...as the world warms... one side of that gets favored eventually. These two factors ... however disparate, appear to be converging in the climate modulation since 2000 - fascinating. I will add as an after thought ... for those forecasting seasonal characteristics - if it were me I would keep it in mind that this GW -related circulation modulation stuff is accelerating - by that we mean still changing... Probably not for the better for those interested in cryospheric agenda at middle latitudes... The punching N/invasion/swelling of the mean suptropical circulation eddy into the Ferrel latitudes is why we are seeing increased gradient... It kinda more than sorta goes like: Arctic is warming at a faster rate ...but since it starts at a very low scalar point ... it still imposes deep heights near the northern girdle of the mid latitudes... This then directly imposes upon said ballooning Hadley cell ... flow speeds up... But, with GW still accelerating ( apparently ...) that Hadley cell expansion ... not sure why that would imminently cease to occur.... and in fact ( pure speculation from this point forward...) I almost imagine the tripolar split of the atmosphere ( Polar:Ferrel:Hadley) becoming more and more duple in character over future years ...however long that takes. Imagine one contiguous subtropical band with more a singular polar jet ... split flows rarefying... interesting... Anyway, supposition aside, ... that's not 2019-2020

Nah. I was just using his post for making general point about my position on the snow. Probably my fault that he interpreted that as directed at his other stuff

I don't know… It strikes me a bit like people just not wanting a record to be broken I'm sorry it does. Otherwise the IMS plots I supplied would've been part of the discussion all along and looks a bias when potentially valid data is elided. Maybe it's not that way OK…

Granted ... I really didn't start paying that close attention to the tropics until I was mid way through me teenage years ... and also, checked out a bit during my early 20s, but of all other years remaining, I don't recall mid August with such a dearth in activity. That's just fantastically pathetic out there... wow. That 20/20 invest over the outer banks? Joke ... .that's merely desperation gasps by an office going mad in corporeal boredom - Sorry ... this isn't Saharan air/dust doing all that suppression. no f'n way man. I realize folks like and need things to make sense, and want neat, tidy explanation and all, but there's more to this suppression than that one factor. For those of you "super responsible intellects" among us that wantonly root on dystopian carnage ... you should be happy about this... Oh you miss out on the immediate gratification of dead beloved pets bobbing in the flotsem of harbor aftermath ... sure.. But, the upshot? Think how unprepared the dumb down complacent civility will be next year!

We keep saying this ...than it's not - where are y'all getting your data... I've been utilizing NOAA's IMS ...and admittedly, it has not updated since the 11th ...but there curve was substantially more loss than 2012 as of the 11th ... it'll be interesting to see if that tend trajectory could have down such a drastic 45 deg angular change so abruptly and gone back across the 2012 slope - which is what would need to have taken place according to their products in order for the current 2019 to be less disastrous - Anyway, may be a moot point - the AO is trying to rise in the GEFs ensemble. I don't get to see the Euro EOFs but... should it rise, that may alleviate the ice loss rates - slow it down ...and in fact, if that's true they may be one in the same already... I want to stress though, that there's nothing gained in the longer run by 2019 failing to surpass 2012 - it means nothing.... The longer termed issue with the polar ice cap remains dire... I'm hoping there isn't some coveted like idea that we are coming out of the arctic crisis? ... just sayn'

yeah... uh.. just for the record - I'm not on either side of that snow debate ...really. My concerns is the large scale - Globular - circulation changes that are presently being researched as caused by climate change, and the fact that the evidences are massive ... and confidence is high within the greater reputed ambit of NOAA, NCEP and countless other institutional informatica circuitry, that shows those changes are for real, and causally linked to the former. That. needs. to. be. incorporated. into. seasonal. forecasts. Because... said efforts cannot be based upon the previous statistical packages if the governing circulation that created those statistics in history have changed - that's just logic. Not sure how to get around that and to be stubbornly reliant on methods being left behind by the evolution and the forces of change over time, is tantamount to inane. I'm sensing I'm being accidentally railroaded into the snow increase, climate vs noise thing... - I won't serve as a lightning rod. I don't give a shit about snow. The circulation is changed because the subtropical Hadley cell is expanding with a warming world, and it is encroaching on the Ferrel cell region of the mid latitude ( roughly 35 to 60 N) ...and that is expressing as a gradient rich environment. Gradient directly enforcing faster balance wind field... and that definitely by numerical/physical proxy effects wave mechanics embedded within. Not debatable... I've heard that snow increase bandied about, and anecdotally/existentially... I will add ... I've personally witnessed the increasing snow stuff since 2000... But that's as far as I'll go into that stuff. In other words, these may be mutually exclusive... Bigger seasons due to aggregate totals... storm behavior this that or the other thing... More actually falling because there is more WV... I dunno -

I didn't exactly say you were - the impetus wasn't accusatory there... just not to engage in that which semantics strains the goal of consensus ( to put in mildly) in the first place - think preemptive/sarcasm for fun. Like I said... this is conjecture on both sides - ...but that means subjectivity. So taken fwiw - Unless we provide every snow event since 1990 and somehow qualitatively assess 'how much of those' were from either event profile - which ...there can be cross over -... I mean holy heck. We're arguing through our hats. But such is the nature of the beast in speculation vs real math and science in anonymity of social media - ... All I know and am confident of, is that over the last two decades...storm trajectories have been speeding up...and, balanced geostrophic wind velocities have also concomitantly risen ...most likely due to the compressive effects of the swelling tropical/subtropical Hadley cell into the Ferrel cell of the mid latitudes...that key region where our storms evolve, which exists between the subtropical latitudes and 60 N. Endemic to this era has been modeling performances ... tending to over assess cyclogen in mid ranges...only to have to mitigate development - note, mitigation is not black and white stoppage. I mean that in partial sense... It's gradation -

Not sure how we can make this distinction - albeit ...we are just being conjectural here But, this is a "poly-contextual" question. Firstly, what is meant by "impeded"? Also, what is meant by "large scale winter storms" for that matter - this latter characterization may be prone to subjectivity ..which I really ..nothing sends me to irate distraction like someone hiding in semantics so let's not go there. ahaha. Seriously, we get winter "events". Frequency of lesser impacting events is favored in higher gradient. But that has more to do with storm "organization"/structural mitigation to screaming balanced flow being a negative interference in the physical interplay between larger to smaller scale wave-mechanics. Simple words ... more storms, nickle and dimers... with less ability to generate slow moving bombs. Winters that tended to steady diets of 4 to 8" events actually own the top total years - Will? I dunno ...it's more a question for him.. But I'm pretty sure that our bigger snow years come from buck shot numbers...that than through a biggie to bring it over the top... Yeah, relative to all data sets there are outliers... but honest interpretation - Another way this textured layering confuses this when trying to reconstruct how GW is effecting large scale circulation -- > storm genesis/snow and so forth... Just because a storm is sheared ...doesn't mean it won't dump snow prolifically? Also, although shearing patterns may offer challenges to deeper Norwegian Model low idealized results.., there's likely to be snow falling from other large scale mechanical forcing. Broad overrunning/isentropic slope events for example, which in fact, we happen to know are favored in gradient rich circulation mediums. In other words, there's a few ways to get snow and/or in-the-bucket water content elevated.

Definitely agreed here ... Some free thinking over morning joe - That's why I was emphasizing melted equivalency? Water content in the snow is - I think - a more meaningful metric. Considering mass: the mechanical force, regardless of any circumstance of larger-scaled variability ( and part of that variability being the 'elephant GW in the room' ) would need to be greater for more water transport ... because inertia and gravity are fundamental laws of physics that cannot, disputed, hidden or altered by fluff factor ... By considering the weight of water in bucket, over larger regional scope and scale and temporal considerations... that should be more telling when something "big" might be changing vs not changing the system. In a dark humor sense ... that's how nature works; we'll get 120" snow seasons at 22:1 more repeatedly...then, 40" snow seasons at 6:1 ...more repeatedly ( the latter of which can only happen in a warmer, WV rich transporting atmosphere) and because the latter is less physically consequential/inconveniencing ..this quite proficiently hides global warming's pernicious outcome... because Gaia's fighting back by attacking the world using her GWeapon of mass destruction - it reminds me of turning an oven up to "Clean" - only the temperature is misdirection-of-empirical-results in this metaphor. Anyway... so, if we're ( say ) doubling water equivalences over successive seasons ... the equally important question becomes, at what point does a sample set become more substantive in this business? that's a harder question ... 10 years. 20...40...160 ? I figure Millennial changes are safe. We all know that atmospheric shenanigans behaves like faux fractals ... which is to say, not really 'true ' chaos governed. But, there can be periods of time when results do repeat ... then, some form of unknown but real underlying paradigm shift take place - said pattern factors --> results falls apart ... and a new set of results seems to be a better indicator... Until that breaks down.. We see a quasi semblance of this sort of faux patterning in atmospheric variability. My belief is there are certain regions of the planet where this is more likely to occur - here being one of them. Just based upon geographical/geological antecedent "fixed" circumstances ...those regions tend to always own the variability a bit more. The region roughly bounded by the Great Lakes to New England ... upper Mid Atlantic, to SE Canada and the lower Maritime regions is one such region. This is the convergence point of two main jet structures, and arguably a third: Subtropical; Polar; Arctic (but really just the former two). Upstream forcing from disparate integrals vary these ... then, they tussle against one another for proxy ...here. More so than say ...the West Coast of North America ...where the Ferrel Cell tends to expand and covers their region from "as much" ( albeit intensely consequential when their pattern does flip around...). Anywhere on the planet where these "unmanned fire-hose" flop regions exist.. tend to own the lion's share of variability. This is critical in my estimation.. .because these 'fractal ' modes of internal variability ... at times even spanning a decade or two ... they can and do mask systematic changes due to climate change. I suspect the PNAP base-line N/A pattern ... which features a low amplitude western hump in the isohypses...and a flat open ended trough exiting the eastern limb of the continent - that base-line "canvas" ( if you will..), that alone might tamp down the synergy feed-backs of GW on temperatures ... which by common reasoning ... then might factor into precipitation profiles. Now .. some astute reader that's successfully gotten this far might go ...wo wo wo, hold on Tex' - we've been above normal... Yeeeah... but not "AS" above normal.. It's not petty to make that distinction. This is empirically shown that our positive departures are muted relative to other regions of the Globe - where by virtue of their geo - circumstantial ...may synergistically favor them like a Patriots football team. People need to understand that gestalt is true; it is by definition ...non-quantifiable, yet is a very real skewer in this GW stuff ... It is used as leverage by amoral arguments/deniers/ and/or cherry-pickers with other types of agenda in general... But I digress...

Yeah that IMS chart post just updated as of the 11th and looks nothing like that - interesting

Heh ...these kind of statistical comparison for drama and affectation, they don't fall on me with much weight... Means nothing... The antecedent conditions in 1999 may or may not bear resemblance to this year's.. And making that determination is too complex to look at mere SAL or ENSO ... (not that you are...just in general) in quadrature. There's a lot to that integral. The AMOC is totally different... The AO dominant summer plays an indirect roll, too .. how these interact with other forcing domains and emerge different mitgators or vice versa... oy, litany of contributors. To this point in time, it is probably closer to even probability, either way, that both seasons are in a dearth ... in a sense, as in two different people entirely happening to roll the same dice combination. If it can be physically demonstrated that the governing parametric variables in bother years are say... within the 90th plus comparison-percentile, in terms of dominant influence? ( hint, not likely...) than perhaps the comparison has more momentum.

That doesn't look any different than any year I've seen it spanning the last 10 frankly... Very similar... Look at it this way.. the gunk emerging off the New England coast is as potent ... just not as areal in coverage - but you live here... It's not been a very 'dusty' summer... I dunno... I suspect that the actual concentration as a scalar value is not very anomalously higher than normal... probably for the last month or so... Just a hypothesis -

Meh...conjectural... everyone's got an opinion - NASA/NOAA seemed more remarkable back in June ... I haven't seen anything from official channels lately ... Typical, people hear something early on and write bible passages over it like it's gospel-causal. We're still suffering -NAO headlines from the 1990s...