March Madness

[Layman]

3 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Heh ... yeah.  Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, right or wrong.  I just provide the data, as other's do, as it arrives.  For me, people can take or leave it - because they are also entitled to do that, too.

It just is what it is.

Well since you didn't ask for it...my opinion surrounding this kind of data is that it's problematic using a human scale of time that's approximately three generations-ish, cast onto a planetary system that has a seeming complete disregard for that human scale of time.  Depending on what someone's personal beliefs systems are, the planet is pretty old.  I subscribe to the fact that it's exceedingly old - millennia+.  Viewing planetary data on a time scale so small is seemingly akin to analyzing a single heartbeat over a lifetime to determine the health of someone.  It doesn't change the data but I believe it should be considered in the analysis of the data.  You had a post over the past week or so mentioning the need to incorporate recent data into analysis without letting that recent data bias that same analysis which makes total sense to me.  I believe we're viewing data that belongs on such an astronomically long time scale that even data sets incorporating 10's of thousands or millions of years may still be considered "recent".  

[Typhoon Tip]

Meh... not really.   Factually, that product covers the 99 years between 1901 and 2000, only.

Factually, the compendium of science in climate change is based upon Math, Physics, and Chemistry, beginning ~ the late Proterozoic geologic eon, which covers the last 480+ million years.  Relative to that range, there are changes now that exceed the change rates that have occurred at any time during the last half billion years.

However, if the 2nd paragraph is true - which it is cannot be controverted with any veracious objectivity, than the first paragraph has confidence as to its significance.  Understanding and knowing that is purely a function of whether the person is smart enough or not.

It's far in a way more likely that the planetary system is lagging behind the change being forced within it, too fast.  In other words, it is still responding.  Doing so in 2023 like surges is troubling to put it nicely.   The next surge in wholesale planetary temperature ( ie. 2023) may not be a single degree.   NO one saw the first surge... ALL opinions on the next are meaningless, until the former lag, and the latter surge, have been explained by Math, Physics, and Chemistry.

The data recency discussion is apples and oranges to ^.   Conflating concepts and utility.

[weatherwiz]

26 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

We really did get lucky here this winter and fortunately we were able to cash in. While I didn't write up an official outlook, I did make several posts that I was fearful of anomalous above average temps across the U.S. based on how the state of the PAC was right through fall and into early winter. But I think you could argue too (and I'm sure Ray will address this in his post analysis) that the state, obviously combined with the early on SSW really helped to save us from those anomalies stretching east. 

[Typhoon Tip]

31 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

We really did get lucky here this winter and fortunately we were able to cash in. While I didn't write up an official outlook, I did make several posts that I was fearful of anomalous above average temps across the U.S. based on how the state of the PAC was right through fall and into early winter. But I think you could argue too (and I'm sure Ray will address this in his post analysis) that the state, obviously combined with the early on SSW really helped to save us from those anomalies stretching east. 

no I recall you mentioning that last september.  

I nailed the early blocking/front loaded winter.  I'm not 'taking credit' for that, as it was a pot shot sort of sardonic intimation in a drive-by paragraph in one of the seasonal outlook threads. However, I did clearly state that the best hope for winter expression this year would be earlier/front loaded, with a colder time of it.   

I also stated in said paragraph that I thought we'd be flowering by February.  How did that work out!?  haha.  so..., (A + F)/2 = C grade.    i really don't give a shit.  'sides, the Feb call was definitely not deferential to any method other than thinking it's hard to get DJF end-to-end cold in this latter era of CC so may as well blast the late winter away.   oops 

We did not have a propagating SSW this year.   It's pretty clear if one looks at the geopotential height history at the 500 through 50 hPa sigmas, those warm bulges came from beneath. The only reason I haven't been more vocal about it is because .... what difference does it make? Either way resulted blocking which established super synoptic CCBs into N/A.  We've had more loading pattern variances this year than I can count. 

 

[SnoSki14]

44 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Very sinister way our climate itself is playing out the frog in the boiling pot analogy 

[Typhoon Tip]

3 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

Very sinister way our climate itself is playing out the frog in the boiling pot analogy 

LOL ... dude, are paraphrasing me ...ha

seriously, I have been using that metaphor for this for the last 10 years.    rock on!

[WinterWolf]

39 minutes ago, Layman said:

Well since you didn't ask for it...my opinion surrounding this kind of data is that it's problematic using a human scale of time that's approximately three generations-ish, cast onto a planetary system that has a seeming complete disregard for that human scale of time.  Depending on what someone's personal beliefs systems are, the planet is pretty old.  I subscribe to the fact that it's exceedingly old - millennia+.  Viewing planetary data on a time scale so small is seemingly akin to analyzing a single heartbeat over a lifetime to determine the health of someone.  It doesn't change the data but I believe it should be considered in the analysis of the data.  You had a post over the past week or so mentioning the need to incorporate recent data into analysis without letting that recent data bias that same analysis which makes total sense to me.  I believe we're viewing data that belongs on such an astronomically long time scale that even data sets incorporating 10's of thousands or millions of years may still be considered "recent".  

Excellent post… for a Layman .   Well done. 

[WinterWolf]

8 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

Cold euro 

Clown land…but that’s frigid!  I hope that’s wrong. 

[weatherwiz]

9 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

no I recall you mentioning that last september.  

I nailed the early blocking/front loaded winter.  I'm not 'taking credit' for that, as it was a pot shot sort of sardonic intimation in a drive-by paragraph in one of the seasonal outlook threads. However, I did clearly state that the best hope for winter expression this year would be earlier/front loaded, with a colder time of it.   

I also stated in said paragraph that I thought we'd be flowering by February.  How did that work out!?  haha.  so..., (A + F)/2 = C grade.    i really don't give a shit.  'sides, the Feb call was definitely not deferential to any method other than thinking it's hard to get DJF end-to-end cold in this latter era of CC so may as well blast the late winter away.   oops 

We did not have a propagating SSW this year.   It's pretty clear if one looks at the geopotential height history at the 500 through 50 hPa sigmas, those warm bulges came from beneath. The only reason I haven't been more vocal about is is because .... what difference does it make? Either way resulted blocking which established super synoptic CCBs into N/A.  We've had more loading pattern variances this year than I can count. 

 

Interesting note on the SSW (well lackof). 

One thing I find interesting this winter (based on the pattern) was the lack of a more active STJ (maybe that was a product of ENSO state?). Of course, when we did have the active STJ with the blocking in January, we saw what happens when those to coincide. I'll say this and this is going to yield alot of agree-to-disagree, but after the last few years or several years...give me an active southern stream versus an active northern stream any day of the week. Sure active northern stream comes with plenty of opportunities but we just try to will them a chance because of the probability (or potential game) with the mindset of, "well one of these have to work out". 

what does work out and I bet with high probabilities (or "higher") is throwing an active southern stream into the mix when you have blocking and the polar jet throwing PV lobes into our side of the hemisphere. 

[MJO812]

4 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

Clown land…but that’s frigid!  I hope that’s wrong. 

Just in time

[Typhoon Tip]

Those are all warm index complexions.. 

 

[Kitz Craver]

14 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

Cold euro 

Any winter wx to go with it?

[MJO812]

Just now, Kitz Craver said:

Any winter wx to go with it?

Hopefully but no

[weathafella]

Dank and dark.  I enjoyed sunny and 70s much more earlier in the week.

[MJO812]

6 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Those are all warm index complexions.. 

 

No they arent if they keep going in opposite directions. Lets get 1 more snow event.

[40/70 Benchmark]

40 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

no I recall you mentioning that last september.  

I nailed the early blocking/front loaded winter.  I'm not 'taking credit' for that, as it was a pot shot sort of sardonic intimation in a drive-by paragraph in one of the seasonal outlook threads. However, I did clearly state that the best hope for winter expression this year would be earlier/front loaded, with a colder time of it.   

I also stated in said paragraph that I thought we'd be flowering by February.  How did that work out!?  haha.  so..., (A + F)/2 = C grade.    i really don't give a shit.  'sides, the Feb call was definitely not deferential to any method other than thinking it's hard to get DJF end-to-end cold in this latter era of CC so may as well blast the late winter away.   oops 

We did not have a propagating SSW this year.   It's pretty clear if one looks at the geopotential height history at the 500 through 50 hPa sigmas, those warm bulges came from beneath. The only reason I haven't been more vocal about it is because .... what difference does it make? Either way resulted blocking which established super synoptic CCBs into N/A.  We've had more loading pattern variances this year than I can count. 

 

This is why I am beginning to use the language "reversal" instead of SSW because it more accurately denotes what I am actually forecasting. I don't really care whether it begins on the ground or in the strat. RE the "front-loaded" aspect....I think the only reason that worked out is because the early February reversal failed....had that succeeded, it would evolved differently, a la 2018 and 2001....as it was, it was delayed until early March, so we get the Feb 2018 like record warm spell in March, instead, and then the return to "winter" will engineer an April butt-bang for everyone due to the erosion of climo.

[Brian5671]

16 minutes ago, Kitz Craver said:

Any winter wx to go with it?

cutter city

[MJO812]

2 minutes ago, Brian5671 said:

cutter city

Right now

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said:

I would like to see that map for a later baseline....

What is the link for that data?

[40/70 Benchmark]

2 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

Right now

Yea, plenty of coastals to soak the marathon runners.

[40/70 Benchmark]

John, was the reversal in early March from the bottom-up, too? I haven't bothered to look yet...

[Damage In Tolland]

Pounding sleet .Radar looks pretty good upstream 

[dendrite]

7 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Pounding sleet .Radar looks pretty good upstream 

A lot of that is virga

[weathafella]

7 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Pounding sleet .Radar looks pretty good upstream 

Should end within the hour per box radar.

[weatherwiz]

7 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Pounding sleet .Radar looks pretty good upstream 

just started sleeting here

[weathafella]

Then again, it does look ok coming up from NY/NJ.

[Damage In Tolland]

1 minute ago, dendrite said:

A lot of that is virga

Snow/sleet mix 34

[Damage In Tolland]

2 minutes ago, weathafella said:

Should end within the hour per box radar.

It lasts thru 7-8 tonight per models 

[WinterWolf]

19 minutes ago, Brian5671 said:

cutter city

Well with type of cold…suppressed would be more in order. 

[WinterWolf]

Just now, Damage In Tolland said:

It lasts thru 7-8 tonight per models 

If more doesn’t develop…the modeling doesn’t mean much.