Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,540
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    clydes6
    Newest Member
    clydes6
    Joined

Upstate/Eastern New York


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, TugHillMatt said:

The fact that NOAA only uses ENSO for winter forecasts seems ridiculous to me. They are weather professionals, yet seem to ignore the many different factors that affect a season.

It's weird because even if you use Ninos, they are predicting a weak one which usually results in below normal temps across NE. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone on Facebook I recommend you following Kevin Williams... TV met in ROC he does daily Facebook live segments and really goes geek deep into some topics. Lately he has been showing the various international long range winter models and dissecting them... Today he touched on the NOAA outlook and said they favor the warm biased models and he thinks its directly the result of the first half of October showing well below average snowfall in Siberia. He doesn’t buy the solution fully verifying... Anyways some great material to watch/listen too...


.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, tim123 said:

That guy is great. One of best in the nation. He was let go from channel 10 for not buying into global warming narative

Except global temps are rising, without any uncertainty. Do you mean he doesn’t believe in anthropogenic global warming?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except global temps are rising, without any uncertainty. Do you mean he doesn’t believe in anthropogenic global warming?
Yeah, and they rose in the early 20th Century as well but no one seemed too alarmed back then? So why then the huge concern now? In my mind its Cyclical, simple as that, but I dont get into the heated debate that's been present. Its my opinion is all.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CNY-LES FREAK said:

Yeah, and they rose in the early 20th Century as well but no one seemed too alarmed back then? So why then the huge concern now? In my mind its Cyclical, simple as that, but I dont get into the heated debate that's been present. Its my opinion is all.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 

To be clear, the actual rate of temperature increase is not an issue of opinion. But out of curiosity, what evidence would you require to be persuaded of the reality of a dramatic global temperature increase of a magnitude not seen at least in over 100,000 years. There’s evidence for it, but clearly it’s not good enough for you. What evidence would be good enough? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be clear, the actual rate of temperature increase is not an issue of opinion. But out of curiosity, what evidence would you require to be persuaded of the reality of a dramatic global temperature increase of a magnitude not seen at least in over 100,000 years. There’s evidence for it, but clearly it’s not good enough for you. What evidence would be good enough? 
"None" read my post. Was I NOT clear when I stated that I will not debate this preposterous hoax, Thanks.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, so you’re saying that there is literally no possible evidence that would convince you that a global scale increase in temperature is real? 

I can say that there are plenty of things that would convince me it isn’t real. A decrease in mean global temperature, for instance.

I’m not looking for a debate, but for understanding. Is “hoax” your bottom line because there is no possible evidence that could convince you otherwise?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are problems with AGW theory... but moreso in terms of the myriad idiotic predictions of every possible bad thing happening as a result of some warming (too hot, too cold, more bugs, less bugs, etc etc.), usually done to further some vested interest.  This has developed into a robust cottage industry that i've been observing since the Summer of 1988 with a low success rate of accuracy.  Regardless, earth has warmed in aggregate, even discounting the data manipulation controversies and scandals over the years.  One can argue how much warming has occurred but there has been a couple of degrees of warming.  Its not unreasonable to think human activity (CO2) has had an impact - although being able to parse how much of the temperature rise is soley due to human influence vs other factors (cycles etc), is impossible...and that's where politics and stupidity gets involved.  And where I check out of such discussions...

Frankly, given where we live, a little bit of warming isn't the worst thing that could happen. ;)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not believe in global warming until I spent almost an entire summer researching it. I debated a local Met on it (Don Paul) a little bit on the old blog. He’s a firm believer in GW and I was strongly against it. I didn’t think there was enough data to make a strong enough argument but I was wrong. I changed my mind after that summer of research. It’s real, it’s a fact. Humans are affecting this planet more then we know. Overpopulation and global warming are our two biggest issues in the next few hundred years. I’m happy I was born now and not in the future. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The air aloft will continue to cool Saturday night into Sunday
with 850 mb temperatures nearing -10C by Sunday morning. This
will certainly generate sufficient over-lake instability to
support widespread northwest flow lake effect showers. Model
soundings keep low level vertical temperatures profiles warm
enough for mainly rain early Saturday night, before profiles
cool sufficiently for a mix and then a complete change over to
snow, especially for higher elevations. This will likely lead to
a minor accumulation (less than 2") in any steadier or more
persistent snow showers.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Syrmax said:

There are problems with AGW theory... but moreso in terms of the myriad idiotic predictions of every possible bad thing happening as a result of some warming (too hot, too cold, more bugs, less bugs, etc etc.), usually done to further some vested interest.  This has developed into a robust cottage industry that i've been observing since the Summer of 1988 with a low success rate of accuracy.  Regardless, earth has warmed in aggregate, even discounting the data manipulation controversies and scandals over the years.  One can argue how much warming has occurred but there has been a couple of degrees of warming.  Its not unreasonable to think human activity (CO2) has had an impact - although being able to parse how much of the temperature rise is soley due to human influence vs other factors (cycles etc), is impossible...and that's where politics and stupidity gets involved.  And where I check out of such discussions...

Frankly, given where we live, a little bit of warming isn't the worst thing that could happen. ;)

Very well said. I think the majority of rational people think similarly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BuffaloWeather said:

Long range GFS but has Euro and Ensemble support of it getting pretty cold in early November. We will see if it keeps getting pushed back like the last several years. But if it came to fruition, first lake effect snow event is close.

Well to that regard the GFS and other output models sniffed this pattern change we are in now a good 240 hours on advance so I'm  buying this year so far...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...