Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,507
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    SnowHabit
    Newest Member
    SnowHabit
    Joined

January 25-26 Threat


HoarfrostHubb
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

I suppose if one was anticipating Dec 1992 or March 1997 these runs would be a disappointment

See ...this sort of insinuates that expectation was set? 

That's on the part of the reader unfortunately.   The ULL behavior and so forth does mimick those events.  But there's no declaration of for a redux there. 

Truth be told, the same sort of comparisons could be drafted up and said for any partial/quasi-closed system that moves along as such... That's all it is/was.  One should be able to mention and have the reader process properly - 

yeah, I know. 

It's like you can't bare mention at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

See ...this sort of insinuates that expectation was set? 

That's on the part of the reader unfortunately.   The ULL behavior and so forth does mimick those events.  But there's no declaration of for a redux there. 

Truth be told, the same sort of comparisons could be drafted up and said for any partial/quasi-closed system that moves along as such... That's all it is/was.  One should be able to mention and have the reader process properly - 

yeah, I know. 

It's like you can't bare mention at all. 

Mention away. Some folks might expect storms like that to happen. Buyer beware and all. 
not Directed at you at all.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, weatherwiz said:

I think analogs are kinda stupid.

I totally get the significance of them but I think they're misinterpreted or misunderstood. 

The problem is, Even if they look similar, There are no two that are alike or that you can expect the same results, they give you a baseline of what could happen in a similar setup, That's about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dryslot said:

The problem is, Even if they look similar, There are no two that are alike or that you can expect the same results.

Exactly!!!

A similar pattern configuration, evolution, etc isn't going to produce similar results at the surface and it may not even produce something that is remotely close. There are numerous different solutions which can result from the "same setup"...so when a result happens it was just that one result out of the xxx amount.

Too much emphasis is placed on analogs...ESPECIALLY seasonal forecasting 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, weatherwiz said:

Exactly!!!

A similar pattern configuration, evolution, etc isn't going to produce similar results at the surface and it may not even produce something that is remotely close. There are numerous different solutions which can result from the "same setup"...so when a result happens it was just that one result out of the xxx amount.

Too much emphasis is placed on analogs...ESPECIALLY seasonal forecasting 

Yeah, There are way to many variables to end up with the same solution verbatim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

Exactly!!!

A similar pattern configuration, evolution, etc isn't going to produce similar results at the surface and it may not even produce something that is remotely close. There are numerous different solutions which can result from the "same setup"...so when a result happens it was just that one result out of the xxx amount.

Too much emphasis is placed on analogs...ESPECIALLY seasonal forecasting 

Chaos theory?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, dryslot said:

The problem is, Even if they look similar, There are no two that are alike or that you can expect the same results, they give you a baseline of what could happen in a similar setup, That's about it.

Well, it depends.....I mean, I wouldn't toss around 35" analogs for an 8" snowfall. I get the meteorological similarities, but there needs to be some remote sensible appeal....JMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Analogs are fine to discuss as long as people know why they are being discussed....problem is, too many people obsess over the snowfall and assume that it means the storm in question will produce similar amounts. Storms like Dec '92 are rare because of some of the details....like the lunar eclipse high tides plus the 12-24 hour stall. This one could produce prolific amounts of snow too if we managed to stall it a bit underneath us...prob not as much as '92, but you can get some special things when you have prolonged deep layer east flow (see Mar '13 which was vastly underpredicted in select areas)....some runs have come close to that. This won't ever match the tides of '92 though.

 

And I agree with tip somewhat...if folks are too lazy to read into it more, then joke's on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Typhoon Tip said:

I never could stand the reasoning that it's up to the speaker to make sure the idiot doesn't run with a story - 

It takes two to tango in that. 

Yea, I don't think anyone here was suggesting that 2-3' is likely, but rather the potential was there if all broke right. Always have to have that on the table with a potent closed H5 low possibly passing beneath LI in January.

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...