40/70 Benchmark

Makes sense with descending solar....probably more to come next several years.

I'll bet we can salvage that...we just ended an incredible decade of predominately +WPO....it just flipped this past season, so probably due for continued regression there.

I hope so.

Yea, looks like WPO is going to be key to salvage a decent northeast snowfall season...only 1982 wasn't a disaster, which has a -WPO.

Probably, so I am willing to bet it will stink, aside from maybe one great storm. I don't feel as optimistic after seeing that RONI vs ONI relationship, as I was already leery of that after 2023.. Still plenty of time to and data to consider, though. I do wonder if we see that gap begin to close, though with the changes underway in the Pacific..that maybe what we need.

You are misunderstanding me....I know what RONI is...it's not the reading itself that I am concerning myself with. It's what it represents....we WANT the El Niño to correlate to the North Pacific pattern, so having the RONI lag the ONI does not mean that it's a "weaker" El Niño...it means that there is another force, likely of cool ENSO ilk, competing with the El Nino, and it's not forcing the north Pac pattern to a degree commensurate with the ONI intensity. If it were simply a weaker El Niño....it's probably more west-based and the Aleutian low is thus further west, which is favorable....but a lower RONI may mimic a west-based in the SST pattern, but actually has so much warmth in the western Pacific as to introduce more MC forcing than is typical in a potent El Niño. We'll see what happens have a lower RONI again in another strong El Niño.

@Stormchaserchuck1, I agree that the correlation tools have some utility, but I do think that @bluewave is onto something with the lower RONI being reflective of a negative impact for eastern winter enthusiasts....ie cool ENSO residue. Consider several moderate to strong El Nino events that were "good".....ie 1957, 1965, 1986, 2002, and 2009...EVERY ONE OF THEM had a RONI was at least equal to, or GREATER than the ONI.

That's my concern 2023...but then again, I'm not sure winter enthusiasts would feel any better if the RONI and ONI were in lock-step.

It works both ways...we get caught in brutal stretches for extended periods, like these past several years, but we can also go on a run, too....like last decade. Brutal periods are warmer and great periods are warmer and wetter.

That's what I have always maintained...if we hit like 2035 and are still in that pattern, then I'll capitulate....but the tide already seems to be turning. Obviously the world is warming....I'm not disputing that, but I'm just referring to the ability to discern the degree to which these patterns/phenomena are a byproduct of CC versus how much they are attributable to natural variation. The atmosphere is still cyclical...it's just warmer, and some of said cycles are becoming augmented and somewhat increasingly stagnated.

I noticed that Box stealthily removed mention of it "becoming M Sunny", and now simply describes the day as "M Cloudy".

42.3 1/4mi Visibility Rectal Plaque+

Yea, I mean.....I do think some of this is a byproduct of CC, but clearly many are embellishing the degree to which it factors in. We are also still in the declining phase of the solar cycle, which is not where you want to be for abundant NAO blocking, and it's going to be a long climb out of this Pac cold phase, so there are some additional lean times ahead. I'm not not convinced winter 2026-2027 will be one of them as of yet. Part of my rationale for looking at 1957 and 2002 is because they were in the descending phase of the solar cycle following an extended Pacific cold phase, during a +QBO/healthy El Nino.

I'll bet I could teach a class on that at this point even without ever having earned a met degree...theoretically speaking of course. Wholeheartedly agree on having commenced a Pacific phase shift....better times are ahead.

I would love to take a class like that, which focuses on seasonal forecasting and doesn't try to stuff Calculus 8 down your throat.