Sundog

I'll take normal, thank you.

Where do you get these great maps from?

It should be a good soaking for the area. "should"

3K NAM is actually one of the driest models for the geneal area, especially south of NYC, along with the GFS.

He's got like 10 inches before it flips

For metfan:

Take off from work? He already put in the request

Yea it was a total dud on the coast snow wise, but the storm was incredibly powerful and had massive coastal flooding.

Let's save the 60s for April, plenty of time for that. 50s with Sun in March feels amazing

I highly doubt metfan has any confidence in the GFS output, he's just a weenie at heart that's all.

Wasn't 92-93 not that good for the coast before the Superstorm?

This is actually pretty decent agreement for an event 6 days out

I like how "overamped" in this context means a big hit for coast Such is winter 24-25

At least that came when evapotranspiration is low. If that happens in summer there are going to be wildfires and stressed out trees/vegetation. The only positive would be that the mosquito population would be lower.

That was a crazy month. Constant westerly winds. I am tired of Aruba dewpoints without the scenery, beaches, or trade winds.

I would take 95/55 over 85/75. High dewpoints make me miserable.

I can't remember seeing so much of the country under some type of drought condition.

Probably. It felt really cold this morning.

I would be more impressed with early minimums decades ago when the ice was much more widespread and therefore had more vulnerable ice to give back. Getting an early minimum when all the easy ice is already melted and all we have is a compact core left is not as impressive, it's almost expected. What is impressive is how we continue to shed ice most years despite losing all the vulnerable ice well before the end of the season. Shows you how pathetic the cryosphere has been over the last 15 years.

AGW should be treated as any other insurance scenario. Nobody expects their house to burn down but I bet almost everybody out there (and everyone with a mortgage) has home insurance against several highly unlikely scenarios. Now we're talking about our whole planet, the only place we can call home. It's just a little bit more important than a few walls made of wood and brick yet we are currently playing with matches in a home with no insurance. Even if the uncertainty level regarding AGW was much higher than what it is now, we should still be all doing every damned thing possible to stop any type of GHG emissions. The risk of doing nothing is enormous. The gain even if AGW was not real is having a totally transformed energy economy with countless new jobs that will support it. There are literally no negatives.

Can any natural mechanism explain the dramatic increase increase in temperatures on land and in the oceans over the last few decades? When you show me one that can, let me know.

What hyperbole? Do you need to see iguanas colonize Antarctica to be convinced we have a serious problem?

I can see why earlier minimums can be more common with very low sea ice numbers since all the easy ice to melt is long gone while in more normal extent years there would have still been some vulnerable ice farther from the core to melt out.

We already know the Earth is fine for humans being a couple degrees cooler, because it was before the industrial revolution! I think it's better than doing nothing because we are definitely screwing up the Earth now. Why not at least try to offset the warming effects? Status quo is simply unacceptable.