psuhoffman

The negative vibe won't change until we can look at a long range pattern and not see a 570hpa ridge centered right over us. The problem isn't the analysis its the pattern. If what the majority of people here want is snow...so long as the pattern is really bad for snow...the analysis of that SHOULD BE BAD... unless its bad analysis. The fact that it has barely snowed at all all winter justifies the analysis. If we had long range threads all winter saying "this looks awesome its gonna snow soon" that would mean we suck at this and should find a new hobby. When the pattern is actually good for snow...then the analysis should be positive. When the pattern is bad for snow it should be negative. I don't actually get upset at all by whatever direction the discussion takes because the discussion and the actual snow are two different things. Yea the fact it is not snowing bothers me some. Not much anymore because I've pretty much given up and moved on. But no matter it never bothers me if the discussion is about a bad pattern or how its not going to snow...because its just words. Its not actually snow. Even if we were discussing how awesome the pattern looks and page after page of digital snow...its just words and pictures its not actually snow. Analysis of a good pattern doesn't excite me anymore than analysis of how awful it is. Its just a discussion, words, pictures...all the same. Just analysis. Why are people getting upset by people saying its not gonna snow? The words aren't the reason its not actually snowing. If we say its gonna snow and then it doesn't does that really make it better?

The chart doesn't look that impressive because it's not showing temperatures, its showing "change in temperatures". The temperatures warmed very gradually for 1000 years leading to that warm period. That chart is showing that temps are warming faster now than at any time in the last 1000 years, but its not showing what the temperatures actually were during any given time period.

Great movie though

@mattie g my frustration is this side discussion and AGW in general is totally irrelevant my actual point and analysis that currently our snow climo is degrading. The fact it was warmer at points in the distant past is irrelevant to whether it’s getting warmer right now. Whether it’s a natural cycle or human caused is irrelevant to whether it’s snowing less now than 50 or 100 years ago. AGW worriers on both sides who can’t just let it go keep hijacking the discussion

I know one way they estimate historical temperatures are ice core samples. It’s misleading because it makes it seem like it’s warmer now than the mid eval period if you just glance at the chart. What it’s actually showing is that we are warming way faster in the last 100 years than anytime during the last 2000 years. That’s relevant to an AGW discussion but I’m not (and we aren’t supposed to be) talking about that. But the mid eval period was still warmer than now (although at the rate we’re warming that may not be true for long) because from like 1000BC until 1100AD temps were warming. They were warming at a relatively slow pace, especially compared to now, but look at the chart and you can see from 0-1100AD temp change was slightly above 0 just about the whole time. So the accumulation of all that warming eventually lead to a very warm period in the Middle Ages. That’s well documented. Based on what we know about the climate in Europe and Asia during this period it’s likely the DC area had a climate closer to Rome or Atlanta during that period and snow was virtually non existent. I don’t think that fact is really relevant since no one is comparing now to then and when people say our snow climo is degrading we mean compared to 50 or 100 or 150 years ago not 800 years ago lol. But I’m also not trying to hide things or manipulate facts. It is what it is.

Positive NAO SER negative NAO SER

Seems to go like this… step A someone (often me) makes an observation involving the current pattern that mentions the anomalous warmth and the obvious issue that creates for our snow hopes step B someone on either side of AGW immediately jumps in. Either to use it to further an AGW case or because they feel the un mutable itch to let us all know it’s not really getting warmer because 300 million years ago it was 2000 degrees. Imo the problem isn’t A it’s B. A is just observing the reality we’re in right now. B is people who can’t keep their political agenda out of the discussion. We shouldn’t have to ignore temperature which is half the snow equation just because they can’t control themselves.

It's been discussed some. Warmer mid latitudes would tend to consolidate the TPV which would naturally make places like Siberia even colder. Add in the fact they are much less influenced by maritime air like we are. Kind of a see saw effect going on there to some extent.

Often we are coldest when the PV is displaced to our side of the pole and vice versa. However there is also the fact Asia is much more insulated from the effects of the warmer oceans. So not sure how much correlation to our current problems we can attribute what happens over there.

human norms and expectations are not set on that timescale. We base them on our experiences and the more recent relevant past. Even if we had records boing back millions of years we wouldn't be basing our current expectations on previous climate periods from hundreds of years before anyone today was live.

There ain't a single one of us here that aren't crazy

Ladies and gentlemen, may I present to you…a February rainstorm

Maybe if we’re really lucky and everything goes absolutely perfectly in every synoptic variable and we get perfect timing and wave spacing we can get a trailing system to take a 100% perfect track along with a perfect track vigorous mid and upper level SW during our snowiest month and FUCK

floating near surface underwater volcanoes that don't show up on any measure of seismic activity

I am not denying CC but two things can be true. That chart is misleading, its showing temp change not temps. The mideval period was significantly warmer than now because it came at the end of hundreds of years of "warming" temps. We will get back and surpass that quickly though at the rate we are warming now. There were times millions of years ago when the Earth's average global temperature was above 90 degrees. We wouldn't survive in that climate but just saying. We wouldn't even be able to breath at points billions of years in the past when the atmosphere wasn't composed the same as now. The real threat of CC is if we change the environment faster than our biology can adapt. But no I do not want to have that conversation and debate with anyone. There are other places for that. My point is I don't even have to engage in that nonsense because the fact it was warmer at random points in the distant past has absolutely no bearing on a conversation about our snow climo now and whether it is currently getting worse or not.

I like Steamboat, will probably get at least one day in there in a couple weeks when I am out there. I like Winter Park a lot too. The tree skiing on Mary Jane and Eagle Wind is awesome. For anyone thinking of moving to Colorado for snow...the area around Steamboat is actually probably where you want to be. A lot of the other towns people live in Colorado have a pretty nasty snowshadow affect. And even when they do get snow due to downsloping often it melts pretty fast. But the area west of Steamboat Ski resort actually gets a ton of snow and stays pretty cold. It's a high elevation plateau and far enough from any other ridges to their west and north that they don't suffer from downsloping like most Colorado towns with systems tracking west to east across the state. 20" plus storms aren't unusual in town there unlike most of the other lower elevations and whenever I am there in winter there is always deep snowcover even down in the town not just at the ski resort.

But more importantly where is it centered? If we get an east based Nino with the raging warm northwest pacific and western Atlantic... we are likely going to torch. Frankly that will make things worse! Like trying to fix your stab wound by shooting yourself in the face.

If that's the SST anomaly heading into next winter I am predicting +20 with negative snowfall. That's right that winter will be so awful it will go back in time and steal all our snowfall from previous winters.

I agree, except its not really cluttering the thread because without these spats there would probably be nothing at all to discuss other than a once a day "yup still looks the same" post. I think some just want to converse about the weather (so its not banter really) but since there is nothing positive about the pattern it ends up inevitably steering into these side debates. Ji's post that started this most recent tangent was valid...and belonged here...it just got more attention and discussion because there isn't much else to talk about.

K

I tend to agree BUT if we wanted to play devils advocate (I look at both sides of everything) look at 2019 The pac looks really familiar there… So I do think (hope) that was just a fluke and maybe being weak (but not weaker than other ninos that still had a canonical pac pattern) it failed to impact the pattern the way a stronger Nino would. But it’s suspicious it happened in the most recent and only test case we have so far during this run of pacific awfulness. My money is on a modoki Nino causing more snow. But I think it’s fair to at least entertain the possibility the pac trouble runs deeper than enso.

No one is saying a Nino (at least a central or west based) isn’t better or definitely won’t help. But the speculation is because some studies recently correlated two of our biggest issues wrt the pac with non enso causes due to overall SST warming. Given the failure of the 2019 Nino to significantly impact the pac base state I think it’s fair to at least speculate. Yes the 2019 Nino was weak but it’s also possible, if unlikely, that ninos will have a harder time overcoming the pac base state of other factors are driving it.

Yea as an avid skier I used to have to worry and stress about planning and being flexible so I didn’t miss a big snow at home. Now…naw just plan my ski trips.

K

2004 was below avg snow but decent. But look at the north pac and atlantic SST's that year It had a lot going for it outside the enso state. And it was coming off an el nino. 2015 was a weak modoki nino actually. 2014 has been the only good enso neutral winter we have had in the last 30 years. Other then that have all been pretty bad. 2004 was the next best but again, it had a lot going for it in other areas. If we get enso neutral with the current north pac and atl base states we will torch all winter.