2026-2027 Super El Nino

[GaWx]

27 minutes ago, bluewave said:

No red herrings involved. My first post showing the warmth this month was based on the warmest 1991-2020 averages. So that is why I kept it for continuity between posts.

But your cooler base period doesn’t show any material difference from the main point how much warmer this summer has been than past developing El Niños due to the record ridging from north of Hawaii across the CONUS.

So it just seems like you are inventing ways to be argumentative without addressing the main point. 

 I never said this summer wasn’t hot and never said 1987 was as hot. But 1987 was still hot and not normal for Nino. That’s why I pointed it out as another hot summer exception for Nino. That’s all.

Edit: I agree with your original idea that 2026 hot summer to date is atypical of pre-super-Nino. Then I brought up ‘91 being hot because it was the other exception to pre-super Nino hot summers. Then you correctly said that ‘91 was still just weak during summer. Then I brought up 1987 because it was mod to strong Nino in summer and hot.

[bluewave]

First July 31st  ever with a +2.46 Nino 3.4 SST anomaly and a -2.03 PDO.

 

 

[qg_omega]

10 minutes ago, bluewave said:

First July 31st  ever with a +2.46 Nino 3.4 SST anomaly and a -2.03 PDO.

 

 

The oceans are on fire globally

[GaWx]

5 minutes ago, qg_omega said:

The oceans are on fire globally

They are overall although not the BN Arctic interestingly enough.

[bluewave]

1 hour ago, GaWx said:

 I never said this summer wasn’t hot and never said 1987 was as hot. But 1987 was still hot and not normal for Nino. That’s why I pointed it out as another hot summer exception for Nino. That’s all.

Edit: I agree with your original idea that 2026 hot summer to date is atypical of pre-super-Nino. Then I brought up ‘91 being hot because it was the other exception to pre-super Nino hot summers. Then you correctly said that ‘91 was still just weak during summer. Then I brought up 1987 because it was mod to strong Nino in summer and hot.

The summer of 1987 was only the 6th warmest summer of the 1980s ranking only around the 60th warmest summer average temperature overall for the CONUS since 1895.

The warmest summer from that era was 1988 which was the 12th warmest average temperature for the CONUS.

While the summer of 1987  was warmer than the 1982 developing super El Nino, the 500mb and temperature pattern from the Pacific to the Atlantic was a general match for El Nino.

Even though there was an area of warmer departures relative to the other regions in portions of the East, other areas from the Pacific to Atlantic did match El Nino expectations. Since you can have a good general match without 100% conformity to the El Nino composite.
 

[mitchnick]

6 hours ago, bluewave said:

That will be the test going forward. We will have to see how things evolve in the coming months. Since the seasonal models missed this summer pattern. So the seasonal models may even have lower skill than they traditionally have had beyond the one month forecast period. 

This summer is featuring a weaker Aleutian low than usual for a developing super El Niño and a much stronger mid-latitude ridge across the Pacific and the CONUS. 

So if this continues into the winter , then it could mean the traditional super El Niño ridge gets displaced further south and perhaps east into the CONUS than usual.

Since a -PDO atmospheric state even overlapping at 10%-20% relative to the winter super El Niño forcing could lead to shifts.

This would have implications on the warmth and possibly where the heaviest precipitation zones set up. 

The mid-latitude ridges being stronger than the troughs has been the main feature of our winters and other seasons since the 2015-2016 super El Niño. 

 

 

You've posted this several times this year and even before the 24/25 winter. So are you saying the ridges will be or won't be stronger and thereby causing current seasonal modeling for the southeast, mid atlantic, and/or northeast to be wrong? I mean you could be right, or you could be wrong  obviously, but your post appear to be simply saying "current seasonal modeling could be wrong." Forget about the rest of the globe because I'm sure we'll find seasonal modeling too strong or weak with ridges/troughs as that's a given.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

First July 31st  ever with a +2.46 Nino 3.4 SST anomaly and a -2.03 PDO.

 

 

The fact that the PDO has dropped -2 during the time of Nino 3.4 warming +2.4 has to be some kind of record too, for both sides (Nina+PDO too). It might be a 5-6std event.

[EasternLI]

5 hours ago, mitchnick said:

My point was despite any warming, last year's Niña was pretty canonical. This year's Niño can still happen (canonical) by either the PDO coming around or the Niño overwhelming it. And when you consider all the seasonal models are pretty well aligned to one, odds favor it short of a total failure of all seasonal modeling. 

Ah, I see what happened now. Sorry for the confusion this morning. You probably thought I was referencing what bluewave was posting about. I was not. I was referencing what so_whats_happening had posted. About recurving typhoons. Which is why I quoted him. Was a coincidence I posted that right after BW did. I think I could have worded that a little better. Perhaps it was just too early.

[GaWx]

CFS is at warmest yet!

Nov peak +3.75 vs record +2.69! Also, still has a record crazy rapid plunge Dec-Mar!

OND peak +3.5 vs record +2.52!

[EasternLI]

This loop is impressive.

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

53 minutes ago, GaWx said:

CFS is at warmest yet!

Nov peak +3.75 vs record +2.69! Also, still has a record crazy rapid plunge Dec-Mar!

OND peak +3.5 vs record +2.52!

Yeah, that plunge looks like 1973, 1988, 1998, 2010 territory. All of those years resulted in a backlash, strong la nina.

[cmillzz]

1 hour ago, GaWx said:

CFS is at warmest yet!

Nov peak +3.75 vs record +2.69! Also, still has a record crazy rapid plunge Dec-Mar!

OND peak +3.5 vs record +2.52!

If the anticipated decay of the Niño occurs during that timeframe (or ideally later), it would favor another warm and active spring for the Midwest especially. I’ll take it.

[snowman19]

3.4 Over +2C:

 
 

 

 

 

1+2 Over +4C:



Region 3 over +3C:




Thermocline:


 

 

 

 

[snowman19]

 

 

[GaWx]

 I know that the right sides of these are typically overdone and that’s nearly certainly the case here, of course. But the last 2 weeks of the 12Z 8/1/26 CFSv2 AAM prog is one for the books with the earliest 4+ amp. in a run from a member that I’ve ever seen (day 20) as well as the first run I’ve seen with more than two members at 4+ at the same time! This one has ALL 4 members at 4+ on the far right allowing them to actually have room to put the 4 member color key on the far right instead of on the far left like it always has been: 

@snowman19

[bluewave]

17 hours ago, mitchnick said:

You've posted this several times this year and even before the 24/25 winter. So are you saying the ridges will be or won't be stronger and thereby causing current seasonal modeling for the southeast, mid atlantic, and/or northeast to be wrong? I mean you could be right, or you could be wrong  obviously, but your post appear to be simply saying "current seasonal modeling could be wrong." Forget about the rest of the globe because I'm sure we'll find seasonal modeling too strong or weak with ridges/troughs as that's a given.

How can anyone take the seasonal models at face value for the winter which is 4-6 months away when the May forecast for this June and July only 1-2 months out had such significant errors? 

This is another example of the models not having much skill beyond the 15 day period.

Notice how the ridges in the mid-latitudes verified much stronger leading to the strong -PDO +AMO pattern. 

The forecasts were going for a general Nino 3.4 correlation which didn’t work out. So it looks like the models are just defaulting to Nino 3.4 climatology for June and July.

Back in 2023-2024 the winter forecasts also defaulted to general Nino 3.4 correlations with the ridges verifying much stronger and the troughs weaker. 

 

Forecasts from around May 1st

June Forecasts

June correlation for Nino 3.4

 

 

June verification

July forecasts 

July correlation Nino 3.4

July verification

 

[mitchnick]

17 minutes ago, bluewave said:

How can anyone take the seasonal models at face value for the winter which is 4-6 months away when the May forecast for this June and July only 1-2 months out had such significant errors? 

This is another example of the models not having much skill beyond the 15 day period.

Notice how the ridges in the mid-latitudes verified much stronger leading to the strong -PDO +AMO pattern. 

The forecasts were going for a general Nino 3.4 correlation which didn’t work out. So it looks like the models are just defaulting to Nino 3.4 climatology for June and July.

Back in 2023-2024 the winter forecasts also defaulted to general Nino 3.4 correlations with the ridges verifying much stronger and the troughs weaker. 

 

Forecasts from around May 1st

June Forecasts

June correlation for Nino 3.4

 

 

June verification

July forecasts 

July correlation Nino 3.4

July verification

 

Can't you ever answer a simple question with a simple answer? When I was in law school, they beat into our heads: be brief and to the point. I didn't ask if any models should be taken at face value. I asked if" the ridges will be or won't be stronger and thereby causing current seasonal modeling for the southeast, mid atlantic, and/or northeast to be wrong?" 

So, do you or don't you? Because right now, your statements are nothing more than "could be." Which leaves them open to you claiming victory if they are stronger and defending the statements if they aren't by saying "I said could be."

[bluewave]

30 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

Can't you ever answer a simple question with a simple answer? When I was in law school, they beat into our heads: be brief and to the point. I didn't ask if any models should be taken at face value. I asked if" the ridges will be or won't be stronger and thereby causing current seasonal modeling for the southeast, mid atlantic, and/or northeast to be wrong?" 

So, do you or don't you? Because right now, your statements are nothing more than "could be." Which leaves them open to you claiming victory if they are stronger and defending the statements if they aren't by saying "I said could be."

First, let’s get something straight right now. The weather and climate isn’t law school. Trying to reduce weather patterns to some type of legalistic definition isn’t going to fly. 

All we can say is beyond two weeks is that the models lose skill. But they have been making errors in certain types of ways. One is to underestimate the magnitude and even location of the ridges. The other is that the troughs have been verifying weaker. 

We are currently heading into a super El Niño without precedent. First, the strength is going off the scale. Second, the 500 mb weather patterns are currently in more of -PDO +AMO pattern. This has never happened before.

So it’s probably a reasonable guess at this early point that the ridges during the winter will continue verify stronger than the model forecasts like that have most winters over the last decade and the troughs weaker.

If you want the exact locations now, then I think you are being unrealistic. Especially since the 500mb pattern is yet to take on a more traditional pattern. So we are going to have to wait and see how close or different the pattern develops going forward.

So even if a 10%-20% Niña-like mid-latitude ridge enhancement continues into the winter, it could lead the El Niño ridge pressing further south and east than usual. 
 

 

 

 

[rclab]

52 minutes ago, bluewave said:

How can anyone take the seasonal models at face value for the winter which is 4-6 months away when the May forecast for this June and July only 1-2 months out had such significant errors? 

This is another example of the models not having much skill beyond the 15 day period.

Notice how the ridges in the mid-latitudes verified much stronger leading to the strong -PDO +AMO pattern. 

The forecasts were going for a general Nino 3.4 correlation which didn’t work out. So it looks like the models are just defaulting to Nino 3.4 climatology for June and July.

Back in 2023-2024 the winter forecasts also defaulted to general Nino 3.4 correlations with the ridges verifying much stronger and the troughs weaker. 

 

Forecasts from around May 1st

June Forecasts

June correlation for Nino 3.4

 

 

June verification

July forecasts 

July correlation Nino 3.4

July verification

 

 

25 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

Can't you ever answer a simple question with a simple answer? When I was in law school, they beat into our heads: be brief and to the point. I didn't ask if any models should be taken at face value. I asked if" the ridges will be or won't be stronger and thereby causing current seasonal modeling for the southeast, mid atlantic, and/or northeast to be wrong?" 

So, do you or don't you? Because right now, your statements are nothing more than "could be." Which leaves them open to you claiming victory if they are stronger and defending the statements if they aren't by saying "I said could be."

I feel, MN, that your first sentence speaks more of frustration than contention. My understanding of the atmosphere is less than fragmentary when compared to the well versed members of our forum. To give a simple answer in predicting the behavior of our atmosphere may be thought of as courageously assertive or assertively foolish. I do agree with your law school instructors admonition. Could such a ‘brief and to the point’ desire be applied to judicial decisions in our courts. Perhaps only to a jury with just a one or two word answers to a judge’s final question. 
Please don’t take exception to what I’ve write. I want to thank you for giving what grey matter I have left, some exercise. As always 

[mitchnick]

31 minutes ago, bluewave said:

First, let’s get something straight right now. The weather and climate isn’t law school. Trying to reduce weather patterns to some type of legalistic definition isn’t going to fly. 

All we can say is beyond two weeks is that the models lose skill. But they have been making errors in certain types of ways. One is to underestimate the magnitude and even location of the ridges. The other is that the troughs have been verifying weaker. 

We are currently heading into a super El Niño without precedent. First, the strength is going off the scale. Second, the 500 mb weather patterns are currently in more of -PDO +AMO pattern. This has never happened before.

So it’s probably a reasonable guess at this early point that the ridges during the winter will continue verify stronger than the model forecasts like that have most winters over the last decade and the troughs weaker.

If you want the exact locations now, then I think you are being unrealistic. Especially since the 500mb pattern is yet to take on a more traditional pattern. So we are going to have to wait and see how close or different the pattern develops going forward.

So even if a 10%-20% Niña-like mid-latitude ridge enhancement continues into the winter, it could lead the El Niño ridge pressing further south and east than usual. 
 

 

 

 

So you think everything in law is black and white? You're kidding me right? The point you miss is one doesn’t need to say a lot to make a point. 

The past 2 or 3 months, you've been triggered every month with the updated seasonal forecasts because they haven't shown a furnace in the east. In essence, your warning is models have under forecasted the strength of ridges  in the past which "could" be taken as guaranteed future results i.e. stronger ridges resulting in more heat. But no real forecast because we just don't know yet...but it still "could."

That really is the sum and substance of all those posts the way I see it. Where am I wrong?

[bluewave]

15 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

So you think everything in law is black and white? You're kidding me right? The point you miss is one doesn’t need to say a lot to make a point. 

The past 2 or 3 months, you've been triggered every month with the updated seasonal forecasts because they haven't shown a furnace in the east. In essence, your warning is models have under forecasted the strength of ridges  in the past which "could" be taken as guaranteed future results i.e. stronger ridges resulting in more heat. But no real forecast because we just don't know yet...but it still "could."

That really is the sum and substance of all those posts the way I see it. Where am I wrong?

Perhaps you lack understanding of my posts and the weather patterns in general is related to your stated disinterest beyond your backyard.

Maybe if you broaden out your horizons a bit to encompass the greater climate system your frustration will begin to decline.

I know you like the CanSIPS since you post it all the time. So you get triggered when people point out that it’s not a very good model.
 

 

[snowman19]

Here is a very interesting recent study on positive (westerly) QBO’s with El Niños

Link: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2024GL112854

Key Points:

Westerly Phase Impact: The westerly phase of the QBO suppresses tropical convection in the western Pacific, accentuating the weakening of the Walker circulation typical during El Niño. Observational and model evidence show that the QBO modulates upper-tropospheric divergence, with reduced outflow over the Maritime Continent during the westerly phase. It can also impact the warm phase of ENSO, El Niño, characterized by a weakened Walker circulation. These results suggest that considering the QBO state could improve El Niño prediction and projection, particularly for extreme events.

@LakePaste25 @EasternLI @GaWx @donsutherland1 @40/70 Benchmark @Stormchaserchuck1

[qg_omega]

18 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

So you think everything in law is black and white? You're kidding me right? The point you miss is one doesn’t need to say a lot to make a point. 

The past 2 or 3 months, you've been triggered every month with the updated seasonal forecasts because they haven't shown a furnace in the east. In essence, your warning is models have under forecasted the strength of ridges  in the past which "could" be taken as guaranteed future results i.e. stronger ridges resulting in more heat. But no real forecast because we just don't know yet...but it still "could."

That really is the sum and substance of all those posts the way I see it. Where am I wrong?

We have the strongest east based Nino on record, it’s going to be an historic warm winter.  This is not difficult

[mitchnick]

7 minutes ago, bluewave said:

Perhaps you lack understanding of my posts and the weather patterns in general is related to your stated disinterest beyond your backyard.

Maybe if you broaden out your horizons a bit to encompass the greater climate system your frustration will begin to decline.

I know you like the CanSIPS since you post it all the time. So you get triggered when people point out that it’s not a very good model.
 

 

Oh, the need for a cheap shot can't escape you can it? You've shown your true colors. That was easy.

[MJO812]

22 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

So you think everything in law is black and white? You're kidding me right? The point you miss is one doesn’t need to say a lot to make a point. 

The past 2 or 3 months, you've been triggered every month with the updated seasonal forecasts because they haven't shown a furnace in the east. In essence, your warning is models have under forecasted the strength of ridges  in the past which "could" be taken as guaranteed future results i.e. stronger ridges resulting in more heat. But no real forecast because we just don't know yet...but it still "could."

That really is the sum and substance of all those posts the way I see it. Where am I wrong?

Many forecasts are for warmth but they are just going by enso. Many other factors to consider. 

[MJO812]

4 minutes ago, qg_omega said:

We have the strongest east based Nino on record, it’s going to be an historic warm winter.  This is not difficult

Dude nothing is set in stone this early. Some of you haven't learned a thing about long range forecasting.  

[bluewave]

1 minute ago, mitchnick said:

Oh, the need for a cheap shot can't escape you can it? You've shown your true colors. That was easy.

You posted recently how you don’t care about the weather patterns beyond your own local area. This isn’t a cheap shot since I am simply pointing out your stated stance. You are the main person in this thread taking cheap shots at others.

[mitchnick]

8 minutes ago, bluewave said:

You posted recently how you don’t care about the weather patterns beyond your own local area. This isn’t a cheap shot since I am simply pointing out your stated stance. You are the main person in this thread taking cheap shots at others.

Oh, the "not me, it's you" defense. Lol

If you call trying to get to the bottom line of a post/position an attack, I  can't help you. But the bottom line is, you haven't denied my synopsis of your post/position because it's accurate. Which is fine. You can take whatever position you want. But clarity matters, that's all.

[GaWx]

 

11 hours ago, GaWx said:

 I know that the right sides of these are typically overdone and that’s nearly certainly the case here, of course. But the last 2 weeks of the 12Z 8/1/26 CFSv2 AAM prog is one for the books with the earliest 4+ amp. in a run from a member that I’ve ever seen (day 20) as well as the first run I’ve seen with more than two members at 4+ at the same time! This one has ALL 4 members at 4+ on the far right allowing them to actually have room to put the 4 member color key on the far right instead of on the far left like it always has been: 

@snowman19

 Amazingly, the very next CFSv2 run of AAM (0Z on 8/2/26) is even more extreme overall than the posted prior run making it the most extreme I’ve ever seen although this one never quite gets all 4 at 4+ simultaneously (so the first week and last few days are only parts not more extreme): this one already has two at 4+ at day 20! @snowman19

[bluewave]

On 7/21/2026 at 9:14 AM, mitchnick said:

Without going into a competing long response, I  frankly just don't care about a warming planet. There's nothing I  can do about it aside from having a well insulated home (which I have since I receive the highest rating from my local energy provider for houses my size) and driving a fuel efficient vehicle. It is not, nor has it ever been, on my list of life's concerns at all. I care about weather imby and judge that weather from current conditions and progs. How those conditions got there, I don't care.

 

13 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

Oh, the "not me, it's you" defense. Lol

If you call trying to get to the bottom line of a post/position an attack, I  can't help you. But the bottom line is, you haven't denied my synopsis of your post/position because it's accurate. Which is fine. You can take whatever position you want. But clarity matters, that's all.