Winter Banter & General Discussion/Observations

[dendrite]

hrmmmm...not sure if i have to clear my cache. do you guys see a sunny pic or a squall?

[CapturedNature]

3 minutes ago, dendrite said:

hrmmmm...not sure if i have to clear my cache. do you guys see a sunny pic or a squall?

Squall from 12/15.

[dendrite]

Just now, MetHerb said:

Squall from 12/15.

thanks....strange. all i did was enter the img url from my site

[Lava Rock]

3 minutes ago, dendrite said:

hrmmmm...not sure if i have to clear my cache. do you guys see a sunny pic or a squall?

Same here. I posted my backyard cam and all I see is a summer picture embedded in the post above. I cleared my cache and even checked my tapatalk on my phone and it's the same. I used the "insert pic url" option when replying to MPM's post. Not sure what's going on.

[dendrite]

Yeah...that's messed up. I'll have to look at the admin cp settings later...no time right now

[powderfreak]

1 hour ago, Lava Rock said:

Same here. Now that the sun is up, the obliteration is worse than I thought

Holy crap.  The leaves are incredible!  Can't believe it bloomed that fast there in CAD world.

Didn't you get two feet of high water content snow?

 

[HIPPYVALLEY]

Ice box neighborhood ftw!

 

 

 

[ORH_wxman]

5 hours ago, moneypitmike said:

My Lord, 10.5-foot sea-level rises coming to a New England community near you. 

I want my next job to be a 'climate scientist'.  Not much accountability in saying how things are going to be 100-200 years from now.  Another tough day at the office....

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/01/12/northeast-will-experience-faster-warming-from-climate-change-new-study-finds/nitce6eK8zqQN2LXZXgvwK/story.html

 

That's awesome...they are predicting 0.7C of average temp rise by 2025....almost 0.1C per year.

 

I liked this quote though:

“I tell my students that they’re going to be able to tell their children, ‘I remember when it used to snow in Boston,’ ” said Ray Bradley, an author of the study and director of the Climate System Research Center at the University of Massachusetts. “We’ll have occasional snow, but we won’t have weeks and weeks of snow on the ground.”

 

Unfortunately, this is the kind of quote people remember when the next January 2011, December 2007, January 2009, February 2014, and February 2015 happens in the year 2027.

[CoastalWx]

Climatologists Gone Wild. These guys have to learn Computer model solution A, does not mean it will happen as modeled.

[DavisStraight]

3 hours ago, Lava Rock said:

Same here. Now that the sun is up, the obliteration is worse than I thought

I see you didn't waste any money on Lesco.

[Lava Rock]

I see you didn't waste any money on Lesco.

Nope, gotta save the money for the bigger lawn project out back

[ORH_wxman]

6 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Climatologists Gone Wild. These guys have to learn Computer model solution A, does not mean it will happen as modeled.

Not only that...do they not understand the climo of the region? I would figure this guy does since he's from around here. But playing devils advocate for a minute...lets assume we get extremely rapid warming in the next decade or two as they claim.... you could tack on 2F to any of those months I listed and you'd still have weeks of snow cover and huge snowstorms. Also, most of the warming is going to occur from overnight lows...stuff that has little effect on our snowfall.

I have a hard time he actually believes what he says unless he really is pretty ignorant of our climo in winter. But I guarantee the computer model said snowfall will decrease by like 50-60% so that means it's going to happen in their mind.

[CT Rain]

16 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Climatologists Gone Wild. These guys have to learn Computer model solution A, does not mean it will happen as modeled.

Yup... and it's the catchy phrases like "remember when we used to get snow" that they'll use to get media attention. That seems to be where the science gets forgotten in a play for media coverage. 

[CT Rain]

7 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Not only that...do they not understand the climo of the region? I would figure this guy does since he's from around here. But playing devils advocate for a minute...lets assume we get extremely rapid warming in the next decade or two as they claim.... you could tack on 2F to any of those months I listed and you'd still have weeks of snow cover and huge snowstorms. Also, most of the warming is going to occur from overnight lows...stuff that has little effect on our snowfall.

I have a hard time he actually believes what he says unless he really is pretty ignorant of our climo in winter. But I guarantee the computer model said snowfall will decrease by like 50-60% so that means it's going to happen in their mind.

Yeah, exactly. Say warming accelerates through some feedback processes... certainly possible... but who's to say there aren't all sorts of other impacts including disruptions in the stratosphere, flow in polar regions, stronger temperature gradients owing to ocean warming at different rates than land. There's a lot more that goes into storminess than an overall temperature increase.

[HoarfrostHubb]

5 hours ago, moneypitmike said:

My Lord, 10.5-foot sea-level rises coming to a New England community near you. 

I want my next job to be a 'climate scientist'.  Not much accountability in saying how things are going to be 100-200 years from now.  Another tough day at the office....

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/01/12/northeast-will-experience-faster-warming-from-climate-change-new-study-finds/nitce6eK8zqQN2LXZXgvwK/story.html

 

Shorter drive to the beach

[HoarfrostHubb]

9 minutes ago, CT Rain said:

Yeah, exactly. Say warming accelerates through some feedback processes... certainly possible... but who's to say there aren't all sorts of other impacts including disruptions in the stratosphere, flow in polar regions, stronger temperature gradients owing to ocean warming at different rates than land. There's a lot more that goes into storminess than an overall temperature increase.

Hopefully the White Mountains enter a period of increased volcanic eruptions to eject dust into the air. 

[dendrite]

Their model probably ingested bad Tolland data due to a high moisture bias. That really exponentially adds up over a decade.

[ORH_wxman]

5 minutes ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

Hopefully the White Mountains enter a period of increased volcanic eruptions to eject dust into the air. 

Actually, the higher latitude volcanoes have much less influence on stratosphere than the ones further south...so you probably want to go for the tropical volcanoes going wild if you are going down that road.

[HoarfrostHubb]

1 minute ago, dendrite said:

Their model probably ingested bad Tolland data due to a high moisture bias. That really exponentially adds up over a decade.

Your chickens should be delighted at that report.

[weathafella]

2 minutes ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

Your chickens should be delighted at that report.

They all came home to roost.

[ORH_wxman]

3 minutes ago, dendrite said:

Their model probably ingested bad Tolland data due to a high moisture bias. That really exponentially adds up over a decade.

Maybe they were using StepheninCT snow data and then noticed a sharp decline in snow as he stopped reporting...but the models didn't know that and assumed it would continue.

[tamarack]

13 hours ago, ORH_wxman said:

Had it back in November. Awful. 

That's when it hit around here.  Probably half of those attending our church got hit, and we sent it out with a visiting missionary plus my son-in-law and half the grandkids.  (Fortunately their symptoms began AFTER they reached home in SNJ.)

Last night's drive home was perhaps the most unpleasant since moving here in May 1998 - the dense fog came in patches, so visibility would be 100 yards then almost zero, back and forth for 1:15.  Usual commute is 45 minutes.  I could go 35-40 on Rt 27 where the centerline and edges had paint, but 15-20 was all I cared to try on secondary roads.

Still clinging to 17" at the stake, which will be glacial once the cold has a chance to work.  However, 17th thru 27th may do a lot more damage, unless the models are overplaying the thaw.

[HoarfrostHubb]

2 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Actually, the higher latitude volcanoes have much less influence on stratosphere than the ones further south...so you probably want to go for the tropical volcanoes going wild if you are going down that road.

Maybe Tip or James could write a sci-fi novel/story about manmade volcanism designed for the purpose of controlling the climate by some weenies.

The antagonist could live in a secret mountain hideaway high in the Tolland massif and his evil plan is hatched after ingesting too much LESCO

[dendrite]

3 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Maybe they were using StepheninCT snow data and then noticed a sharp decline in snow as he stopped reporting...but the models didn't know that and assumed it would continue.

Multiple LL emoticons entered into the OLR equations.

[dendrite]

3 minutes ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

Maybe Tip or James could write a sci-fi novel/story about manmade volcanism designed for the purpose of controlling the climate by some weenies.

The antagonist could live in a secret mountain hideaway high in the Tolland massif and his evil plan is hatched after ingesting too much LESCO

It would be better if they collaborated.

[OSUmetstud]

They also took the worst case sea level rise change and ran with it in the article which for more attention.  

[tamarack]

2 hours ago, powderfreak said:

Holy crap.  The leaves are incredible!  Can't believe it bloomed that fast there in CAD world.

Didn't you get two feet of high water content snow?

 

But the sled trailer is ready to roll!

[tamarack]

46 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Not only that...do they not understand the climo of the region? I would figure this guy does since he's from around here. But playing devils advocate for a minute...lets assume we get extremely rapid warming in the next decade or two as they claim.... you could tack on 2F to any of those months I listed and you'd still have weeks of snow cover and huge snowstorms. Also, most of the warming is going to occur from overnight lows...stuff that has little effect on our snowfall.

I have a hard time he actually believes what he says unless he really is pretty ignorant of our climo in winter. But I guarantee the computer model said snowfall will decrease by like 50-60% so that means it's going to happen in their mind.

Don't most of the climate models point toward increased precipitation, especially in larger events?  Where winter temps average well below 32, that may result in greater snowfall, at least for a few decades until RIC temps reach PWM.

[ORH_wxman]

47 minutes ago, tamarack said:

Don't most of the climate models point toward increased precipitation, especially in larger events?  Where winter temps average well below 32, that may result in greater snowfall, at least for a few decades until RIC temps reach PWM.

Yes, but I think part of the problem with basic climate models is they don't parse how the precipitation occurs very well. Like there's obviously an inverse correlation between average winter temperatures and snowfall for our area and the model probably knows that. But there's ALSO a positive correlation between seasonal precip and snowfall, and I'm not sure how well the models handle this part. In addition, a majority of the warming is from overnight lows...and a majority of that is from radiational cooling which the greenhouse gases have the highest impact on. As we all know, these are basically irrelevant to snow events. We know how much trouble NWP guidance has with snowfall (showing rain and 35 when it's actually snow and 31)...and those models are supposed to do it well. The climate models are probably a lot worse with this as everything is coarser and probably done with a lot of algorithmic assumptions when they project a particular winter climate 15 years into the future.

Another problem with climate models is that they have proven to be particularly bad at projected changes temporally and spatially. I.E. they might figure out that temps rise in the northern hemisphere but they have been poor at saying exactly where...outside of the arctic....and when. Winter temps in the mid-latitudes have mostly stagnated the past 25-30 years while other seasons continue to warm. It makes it easy to be skeptical of claims of massive shifts in a small period of time in a specific place like New England or the Northeast U.S. if the above issues already discussed aren't convincing enough.

 

And then what Ryan and Nick said about the quotes is right...they make these silly quotes about "telling your kids when it used to snow" and also emphasizing the worst case scenario...a scenario that even on their models is pretty unlikely. In the end, I think it ends up doing more damage to climate science because it gives reason to become skeptical of the scientists themselves when they say such things to the media....even if the rest of the research is pretty sound.

[mreaves]

26 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Yes, but I think part of the problem with basic climate models is they don't parse how the precipitation occurs very well. Like there's obviously an inverse correlation between average winter temperatures and snowfall for our area and the model probably knows that. But there's ALSO a positive correlation between seasonal precip and snowfall, and I'm not sure how well the models handle this part. In addition, a majority of the warming is from overnight lows...and a majority of that is from radiational cooling which the greenhouse gases have the highest impact on. As we all know, these are basically irrelevant to snow events. We know how much trouble NWP guidance has with snowfall (showing rain and 35 when it's actually snow and 31)...and those models are supposed to do it well. The climate models are probably a lot worse with this as everything is coarser and probably done with a lot of algorithmic assumptions when they project a particular winter climate 15 years into the future.

Another problem with climate models is that they have proven to be particularly bad at projected changes temporally and spatially. I.E. they might figure out that temps rise in the northern hemisphere but they have been poor at saying exactly where...outside of the arctic....and when. Winter temps in the mid-latitudes have mostly stagnated the past 25-30 years while other seasons continue to warm. It makes it easy to be skeptical of claims of massive shifts in a small period of time in a specific place like New England or the Northeast U.S. if the above issues already discussed aren't convincing enough.

 

And then what Ryan and Nick said about the quotes is right...they make these silly quotes about "telling your kids when it used to snow" and also emphasizing the worst case scenario...a scenario that even on their models is pretty unlikely. In the end, I think it ends up doing more damage to climate science because it gives reason to become skeptical of the scientists themselves when they say such things to the media....even if the rest of the research is pretty sound.

Be careful, you'll be labeled a denier!