Typhoon Tip

You know ... not to make light of this ...but it's funny how we are proverbially bargaining with cumulus cloud shadows to prevent ice loss ... heh. But yeah, it's actually true - when we are teetering at the edge of the 2012 comparison...that closing margin does get sensitive to intra-weekly perturbations passing through the the domain. Fascinating actually -

thanks

Source?

Deniers deny because they can. That simple. If a person is standing on a train track and there is a one-eyed headlight monster roaring and rumbling metallic horn blowin' warnings at them ...they'll be less apt to deny how standing on said tracks would be detriment to their well-being... The problem with Human response to this crisis ...particularly as it relates to the slowness and/or stopping the denying "idiocracy" ... we simply cannot hear, see, touch, smell, or feel AGW or GW or whatever comfortable or uncomfortable euphemism there is that labels what's going on with the planet. When that happens, the denying will stop. But for the interim... it's not in a guy's living room... It's not stopping them from driving to work. Taking their kids to Soccer. Going on that family vacation... sitting around and opening presents on Christmas morning ( if that's your bag...). All there is are dire warnings that attack the ability to engage in all that... A human being... which billions of create this thing we call Humanity ... never react to warnings. They only agree to them in principle. What resonates is pain - it has to register as an inconvenience to the corporeal senses... That's perhaps an evolutionary catch-22 ( as a digression...) but, we have evolved now the ability and ingenuity to improve survival chances ...beyond ecological balance.... Which Terra-forms this world whether we are intending to or not... and...more likely toward a realm that is no longer going to sustain those same advancements. That's the C-2-2 We are capable of these advances... but the capacity to predict and anticipate consequence for action has not kept pace with the powers of ingenuity. In the mean time, it's a nice summer day out there ...and that's the validation for the warnings - good luck.

Firstly, I'm not sure the social-media community in this particular web destination really IS of the 'wanting/wishing' ilk ... I'll just expand on that a little more... but it was really a 'just in caser' Imho, should 2019 somehow by excruciating number crunching ( less than obviously ) fall short of 2012 ... was it really worth all the effort and writing...and annotated graphs and monitoring and ..well, basically obsession? We are not "making sure that happens" - by plying that effort. I can understand statistical accuracy but I wonder if the real motivation for doing so lurks behind that excuse, because the bigger, longer term consequence of what the world faces is so dire right now that to do so ...could not be any more futile. If it falls short, nothing's different. Why then? The longer vision, we're still f*!&ed folks. As far as that article... There's a lot of complexity that is not really discussed in that... In a general scope and concept it's not "un-clad" exactly ...But, there are ... synergistic effects that are 'emergent properties' and aren't really predictable... More over, those can have secondary ...tertiary spontaneities too... The blocking idea can come from other sources: First, ... extinguishing planetary wave/dispersion into higher altitudes. Think of it as where warm advection plumes go to die. The vagaries of R-wave undulations over time, can create episodes where/when warm fluxes cause/contribute to tropospheric blocking .. These are ephemeral in nature... If they persist ( causally ) it's the underpinning pattern that's supporting it.. The NAO domain is a good teleconnector to exemplify this.. It can fluctuate at intraweekly time scales because of this sort of transient phenomenon... And is why seasonal predictions for that teleconnector - heh... good luck. Second ... blocking anywhere from that can happen in any era. Third, ... it is not abundantly clear that GW would in fact promote more of that to happen, because ... it's all still based upon gradients. Without gradients...no air movement exists at all. From that very fundamental requirement of physics, working together with gravity over a curved surface... without the first initial requirement of changing PV=NRT from one point to another...not of this, in fact, this conversation, can happen.... Why is that important? Beyond the obvious ... the arctic also is said to be differentiating warmer/faster than everywhere else... Is that true in the middle troposphere? If so... than the gradient is not necessary increasing because of GW... but, I suspect it is anyway... The arctic is just trying to catch up ...and in the interim ...we are witnessing extraordinary jet speed anomalies and have been now over the recent decades. Flights between NY and London...also across the expanse of the Pacific have registered historically fast ground-based velocity speeds in that time. This is happening because the warmer equator/sub-tropical latitudes are storing more water vapor ( concomitant with the GW ...) and fiddling with the math ... that is keeping heights slightly elevated; pressing ( as it were) against seasonal nadirs in the winter. Even if they are warming...they are not warming fast enough to compensate for the ambient steepening of that gradient that exists between ~ 35N and the 60 N girdle around the hemisphere. This creates the hurried velocity saturation being observed... Lastly ... folks are forgetting that we are still moving through the 11, 22 and 300 year temporal super-position of the Max(min) solar. Those times have been correlated strongly with -AO tendencies... That makes it incredible difficult to untangle 'how much' of blocking is a result of warming arctic ( as it relates to GW ) - vs how much was destined to take place as this solar expectation has arrived and we transpire through... I suspect like everything...there's shared forcing there... ** The gulf stream stuff and the AMOC - that's a whole 'nother ball of wax. The warming in the previous ... probably going back to the early 1980s is when it really started... has been adding fresh water to the surface of the Atlantic... That's been accelerating particularly in the latter half of that multi-decadal time span. At some critical threshold the specific gravity has changed too much...and the buoyancy gained in the aqueous saline waters (at a given temperature).. slows and/or can stops the sinking water process... No sink = no drawing surface water N = break down of the Gulf Stream. This was theorized back then, too... We are ( more likely so ) now seeing this being measured in the environment... Altering the transport of warm surface waters to higher latitudes certainly would effect circulation tendencies through the various meteorological circuitry over time...and time being a variable in climate - there we go... It's a mind boggling array of countermanding forces and whatever is left after canceling out ...dictates the systemic character.

It seems there's an underpinning 'agenda' to keep this year elevated above 2012 ... I guess for the sake of records? I'm curious because I'm not sure why we are so preoccupied by finite distinctions and what those mean to specific records, when the specter of what's happening over the last 20 years is far more telling. I would certainly hope that no one is coveting or even abstractly taking comfort in a acre less melt if it comes to that... In any case, last week I mentioned that the heat wave in western Europe was modeled to plausibly affect Greenland and now ..headlines to that effect are indeed foisted. Granted CNN, https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/31/europe/greenland-heatwave-climate-crisis-intl/index.html , ... tends to spin toward aggrandizing in any attempt toward ratings that turn the gears of their media-profit-machine ... we'll just have to see if corroboration surfaces ... I believe some acceleration is likely though. The deep tropospheric heat anomaly effectively severed, formulated a high latitude blocking node ...and that feature has since been retrograding toward Greenland. Still carrying along with it actual warm thicknesses within the anomalously tall H500 isohypsotic surfaces - in other words...a balloon of warm rich ice-sheet melting air - I was wondering if this may enhance the seasonal melt rate. Seems to be at least according to CNN's dystopian formula - The question is, if so ... does any of this also effect an acceleration of ice loss in the total arctic?

There might also be CV activity to follow over the next week ... The MJO is weak but circuiting through the right side of the Wheeler ... and as typical with those wave spaces, the 200 mb velocity potential not as negative ... in fact, modestly positive between the west coast of Africa and 55W. As of the 27th the 200 and 850 mb vector analysis' had modestly hostile/sheer orientation. Today being the 30th...that's a fair amount of time to have changed those metrics. I'm not sure what those are now, but... SSTs/integral heat content is nearing apex, and given to the MJO and those velocity potentials ...those stress mitigators may be lessening here. Meanwhile, a decent cyclonic momentum has recently been ejected and presently is wsw of the CV Islands. It's broad and needs a lot of work ... Saharan air/dust appears for the time being to behave in it's climate zone N of that area. Just in the off chance ... I gotta say...with the AA structure/bias to the hemispheric circulation we are observing as a persistence this summer season... that doesn't really probabilistically/intuitively lend to the notion that this is a good season to carry a TC 3,500 K miles west. For 'cane enthusiasts ... you want more longitudinal flow types...with less N-S-N wave undulations and less blocking at mid and high latitudes - the preponderance of the latter indirectly effects said probabilities, because when there is a lot of that, ...we tend to TUTTs and weakness in ridges.

Europe's recent heat wave is pinching off a warm secluded ridge node and is modeled to slide west toward Greenland. I'm wondering if that may bring warming conditions to the terrestrial interface/boundary layer

GW as being a fallacy: objectivity elided/forced by an opposition that is more likely incapable of perceiving consequence for their stance - 'else, they would not do that. The reasons for that inability are varied from individual to individual, special interest group to special interest group... But by and large, mostly because the specter of what it all means is probably just too untenable within the vaster multi-facets of society, and would not resonate based on verbal warnings alone. However, written on the epitaph of Humanity's headstone, "this is just a fad concern". The human gestalt has never responded as well to threats that are vocal, ..which, compounding, the early efforts to do so attacked the institutions that have procured multiple generations of successful living ( by and large ...) - very bad PR. Compared to when the perception of the threat is corporeal in nature? If a threat can be seen, touched, smelled, felt, or tasted ... people move out of the way. Even now... as the measurements are arriving in clear, coherent datum ... Pompeiians tried to run - when they could finally see it... For everyone else, it would most certainly be abhorrently stirring to deny what was scienced decades ago...and is verifying in the Global environment today. Akin to being warned not to grab the red hot poker... grabbing it, then attempting to persuade people it is not really hot - the onus of persuasion really falls on the other side of that debate at this point if anything at all.... The correlation to the ending preposition - related to global warming - is more likely true than not, given all science on the matter. This all hearkens to a separate issue having to do with modern technology and conveniences effecting perceptions. People are being protected by the former, in such a way ...a bad decision here and there...is no longer resulting in as dire of consequence for a miss-calculation. Integrate that culturally over... it's not helping the AGW--> consequence model in a positive way. As my professorial circle of associates and I have discussed, ...this is as much a sociological crisis as it is a physical sciences one - and until the former is equally addressed... the solutions for the latter will be partial at best.

I don't deserve any credit - I repeat ...no credit. Mainly... because I did not cobble together a seasonal forecast late last summer/autumn. What I did instead ... was drive-by snark post pot-shots at other's gallant, back-of hand pressed to forehead over glazed eye efforts. I mean... veritable Master's caliber dissertations, replete with advanced word processing and state of the art graphical annotations... and me, blithely and assholier than thouly reducing them in two flippant sentences. Nice. That's the way I roll - Kidding... still, I distinctly recall warning contributors often enough, that gradient saturation, a paradigm shift that has occurred since ~ 2000 and continues to become more destructively interfering as the decades click away ... is muddling the climatology of longer termed multi-seasonal teleconnector packages. The ENSO relative numbers and how they have come to correlate ( hypothetical/supposition ) in the past, .... don't work. They didn't work in the powerhouse mega ENSO ( warm phase ) several years ago; and in fact, ...papers were submitted and peer reviewed successfully noting the startling lack of correlative impacts Globally by one of ...if not the, hot ENSO events ever recorded. ...etc...etc... It becomes less likely ( intuitively..) that minoring standard deviation events could impact the circulation of the Global very meaningful, when the massive momentum contributors, could not. ( I have physical hypothesis why that is, too ) I for one am frustrated by GW/climate change...and the continued reticence to even acknowledge that we are living in times that are increasingly rendering all heretofore correlative expectation-sciences ... less than germane. Perhaps not entirely ... please don't read this as absolute. As we know ... the gears of the environment are lubed by balancing forces ...So...threshold and partials are in play at all times...such that result sets both do and do not represent suggestively... At times, demonstratively so, at others...seeming to have returned to the prior expectation...and so on and so forth. But, given the longer time spans...eventually the new paradigm does take over - we're not there yet... But, I do believe that veracious attempts, from the ranks of aficionados that are fortunate enough to have been born and live in an era that provides them any sort of pulpit at all... ( where social media's "peer review" process is tantamount to popularity politics ), to the exulted societal offices of the science... I'm sensing we are all being bamboozled by our own lack of consideration to the changing paradigm that for some reason... no one considers when they engineer their expectations. So how do we do it? Don't... It's irrelevant. I know it's an interest area... but the sad reality we've come to is that party favor seasonal outlooks are a distraction to the real dystopian storm on the horizon. In 50 years... approximately mid way through the big kill-off ... is this going to matter? ( more snark relax...but, ) if we turn to examining seasonal variance as it relates and is pertinent to the Global crisis...that has some substantive value in it. But hell... this is an open forum to the public hoi polloi...and that's not hand-cuffing students to their desks... it's an entertainment/hobby past-time .... and entertainment and responsibility ... mm, usually part company.

You mean like this ... https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/14/us/greenland-sudden-ice-melt-wxc/index.html ...course, it is CNN -

Mishandling the MJO ? ... like the distribution of upper level divergence ?? Heh, seems the GFS does this every May though... I wonder if it mishandles the MJO every May... Actually, it seems to me the GFS ( and GGEM for that matter ) both start curving the isobars cyclonic over the western Caribbean too often beyond 200 hours, regardless of month anywhere between April and early December - you may be right about the MJO but I also wonder if it's just an artifact of those particular physical models way out in time, also. In any case, the prediction is near normal for this year.... They're predicting "two to four" (whatever that means...) majors canes, which presumably mean 6 or so total... and 12 sub cane TCs... blah blah but, these numbers didn't mean shit in 1992

Not sure if this has been discussed so excuse any redundancy - I've accepted the notion smoldering underneath all this monitoring that the perennial ice is on a course toward extinction ... whether that reality is observed next year or decades away, notwithstanding. What I'm interested in is the "rate" of recovery over the seasonal transition. Those modalities are perhaps more telling about the drivers and forces effecting a system than the scalar statuses. Many of these more impressive cold wave winters (that may or may not have had concomitant snow storm efficiency) were led off by fantastic recovery rates with sea ice expansion, as well, with land-based cryospheric metrics, during the preceding autumns. I think it is also less systemically observable over antiquity because passed decades did not have as much exposed naked sea-surface, having ice more enduring during warm months ...such that said rates more likely merely went unnoticed. So, it's supposition...but, I suggest a rapidity in areal ice recovery ... along with land-based numbers, can be telling signs for an ensuing winter's arctic contribution to modulating middle latitudes around the Hemisphere - notice I said 'Hemisphere' and not 'local-yoke's backyard'...

Fwiw - https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/23/world/arctic-sea-ice-breakup-greenland-trnd-wxc/index.html

It's interesting as we track a mid latitude heat event (plausibility) over the eastern 1/2 to 1/3 of North America, which we similarly did back near the end of June when that took place up near Siberia - Probably a basic R-wave argument in place there -

Perhaps .. I'm not sure I agree with the tone of the mathematician cited often throughout that University of Washington source, either - case in point: " "The good news is the indicators show that this slowdown of the Atlantic overturning circulation is ending, and so we shouldn't be alarmed that this current will collapse any time soon," Oh really - that seems a little preclusive if not a presumptuous leap based upon the reasoning supplied in the article, and only 14 years worth of empirical data... It is what it is... he she could be right.

Me neither ... considering that SSW events time-lag correlate to a reduction of the +AO phase state, which is opposite of what is occurring with a strong(ening)(ened) we see now... The other aspect, ... the termination of down-welling warm plumes that are theorized to cause increased static stability in the upper troposphere over the arctic --> breakdown of storm strength and collapse of the vortex (whereby/when blocking episodes ensue)... all that: the end phases of those events are either a logarithmic decay, or a strong analog for a that behavior, as they disappear in a very gradual extinction... Compounding that fade out ... it is unclear as we then relay winter hemispheres, if they effect summer circulation across the virtual boundary of seasonality. Summers typically feature no thermal flux of any kind between approximately April/May thru late October or so... Contrasting to the starkly increased tumult of thermal cool and warm events that pop off and decay at different time expanses and magnitudes during winter. So if any preceding mechanism is in place, not sure I see how sufficient that forcing would remain when there is virtually no signature/marker left in the data that suggests anything at all still exists.. Seems unlikely... but hell... maybe the system goes by a kind of first law of Newtonian dynamics ...where it's going to keep behaving per it's last forcing until acted upon by another force sufficiently strong enough to effect a new course... So as the a-hole careens through the intersection and causes a pile-up...he/she keeps on rollin blithely away and is no where to be seen as the carnage lingers on - heh. I like that

https://phys.org/news/2018-07-atlantic-circulation-collapsingbut-shifts-gears.html#nRlv

huh.. .interesting.. well, I've decided that I received 14.5" where I am... and let the surrounding village people have their way. I'm at 74" even on the season after yesterday's event, ~ 30 of which has taken place in these first two weeks of March - impressive either way.

I agree...that 24 hours is too long to wait, particularly if it snows for 6 hours and one intends to/has to wait 18 hours for that measurement. However, I suggest that when the snow stops, and it is systemically clear that it's really the end of the event, then the measurement is taken. However, during the event, I disagree (if perhaps this is a strawman argument) that 6-hour clear should be done, because as I was just describing, storm circumstancial melting/settling/or even sublimation - though that would rarefied, should be considered part of the event.

yeah... like, "...Prior to melting or settling.." ? that's absurd. Like, what about 'sublimation' then - You can't then measure snow ultimately, accurately at all, if it is 32.5 F and S+ because yeah, your accumulating, but you are simultaneously suffering an unknown negation ... Settling? Not much better, because it can snow 30" at 20 F and settle a lot more than 15" at 20, by shear weight... Bottom line, that statement really is horrible when considering the physicality of purpose/cause in the matter. Personally? I think that stuff matters, melting and stettling and sublimating... all of it... when the snow stops, you measure... If the snow pack lost to those on-going negations that's part of the snow event, and cannot - or should not - be uncounted.

its interesting to come in here and see this discussion, because I'm debating snow totals with my group of friends in an IM that don't really do weather stuff... anyway, I'm saying that I maxed here in Ayer at my place at 14.5" and it doesn't jive with the 18 to 21" being reported around me. Either: someone ended up in a weird nadir total; someone doesn't know how to measure snow depth; someone is lying... Not sure which of those, but I just measure the stack depth ... I didn't clear anything every 6 hours. I just have a perfect snow board region that is out of the wind and it lain with 14.5" new as of midnight when I crashed, and there was no evidence of accumulation when I awoke this morning. So, I am left with a quandary as to how much really fell: my 14.5" ..or, the average of 18 to 20" ... I really don't believe the latter, however. I suppose it is possible that there was a 4 to 6" gap that shielded just my street, if not my yard...from the rest of the town...but somehow I find that less likely too - heh

It's cat in a bag mentality... They do that, cats will "hide" by jamming their heads in small paper bags, while their whole entire ass end and tail stick out ... Only in this paradigm, the user's storm-head is jammed up in their backyard, and instead of thinking about the entire panoply of the storm extent sticking out side their immediate observable distance to the tree lines... they've formulated what the storm was within that observable distance.

That's weird. ... after descending to almost 27 my temp here in Ayer has popped back to 30. The snow is less fluffy again ... are we wrapping warm air back west? huh

There will always be a smattering of people that were unfortunate enough to arrive upon the end of an event with lower snow totals, less wind, and rarely low visibility ... ready to inform us all that the storm was not a very big one ...