Ellinwood Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 And your Met. degree is from where and where do you work? If not a pro met., how do your ideas on the upcoming winter stand above what other amateurs are forecasting? His forecast was relevant to the area and to the thread. I wanted to hear opinions based on facts and I posted it and will do so again when revised. If a site owner says his ideas are banned for discussion I will happily oblige. Read my sig. for a mini-CV of education and current job. When did I say that my ideas stand above what other amateurs are forecasting? While some may seem more correct than others, that's just still my opinion. I was solely discussing the quality of Henry M's forecast (who is a met, not an amateur). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marked8 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Read my sig. for a mini-CV of education and current job. When did I say that my ideas stand above what other amateurs are forecasting? While some may seem more correct than others, that's just still my opinion. I was solely discussing the quality of Henry M's forecast (who is a met, not an amateur). I was reading from a tablet and your sig was not visible on it. You are still missing my point here, I want to know (other than his idea of trends) how his idea of how the winter is going to stack up compared to what others here think? What are your current ideas on how the winter is going to stack up and what is he missing? I posted it solely for that comparison. I read the threads here because the info is better than that available there, but there has to be a discussion to get any information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
violinist Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 Your statement is completely unnecessary about the subject then. Why do you care? Your pretty much sitting here saying people should be able to post the garbage. You might as well be posting it Sir, all I,m doing is defending the right to post what he says. Why do I care ? Because someone has the right to post what he thinks. No matter what you think of him. If people dont like him , so be it. Its your want him to be banned , over nothing, is what I object to. Difference is I dont post ""garbage"" as you put it. but I like to read all points of view, which is not what you , seem, to want to do. I,m more tolerant of other people's opinions, whereas you seem to be the opposite. Go about your business, as I,m done here. You and I are on two different wavelengths, and that will never change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellinwood Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 I was reading from a tablet and your sig was not visible on it. You are still missing my point here, I want to know (other than his idea of trends) how his idea of how the winter is going to stack up compared to what others here think? What are your current ideas on how the winter is going to stack up and what is he missing? I posted it solely for that comparison. I read the threads here because the info is better than that available there, but there has to be a discussion to get any information. From my sig: Operational Forecaster for MDA Information Systems Inc. / EarthSat B.S. with Honors in Atmospheric Science from SUNY Albany, with minors in Computer Science and Mathematics. One semester of grad. school at NCSU. My "current ideas of how the winter is going to stack up" was already posted more than once... here's the latest: It's in the main forum: http://www.americanw...precip-forecast Will re-post that I'm expecting 90-125% snowfall for the Mid-Atlantic this winter (which would be around 15-21" for DCA). What he is missing? Evidence of his claim by showing correlations (most likely via analogs) is the biggest one that stands out. Anyone can make a claim, but when one doesn't substantiate what you're saying, your credibility takes a hit. Henry M. has shown that he consistently does not substantiate his arguments/viewpoints with evidence/real science, which is one of the reasons why he is a bad met. Hell, even if he said "I don't have much evidence to support this, but this is my own theory/gut feeling of how things will play out," THAT would be better than saying "this in October means this in winter." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nj2va Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 I don't see the problem in people posting "garbage" - let the board see all views, understand them, and evaluate them. For whoever has an issue, couldn't you either block them or educate the board as to why you think their forecast sucks. I enjoy reading all views and understanding why they are more or less accurate. The issue I have is the attitude some here have. To each their own. In the end, why get so worked up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brad1551 Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 I believe that DCA will get 22-26in because of the storm track is going to be active. I believe that Northern Va from Prince William County to Hardy West Va will get 26-31in because of the storm track. Less for DCA but still above average because they will get more of a warm air slot when the L pressure system hits the coast. Just my opinion not a true forecast. I have been right 4 out of the last 5 years. I was off in 09-10. Who would of thought all of that snow anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterWxLuvr Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 I, for one, want to see the postings of people with knowledge and skill, along with their reasoning. I don't want to see WAG's because I could make one of those myself. I'd be willing to say that there are many, many members of this board who should never venture a "guess" about long range forecasting. It's one thing to throw out a particular "theory" about an upcoming storm, happens all the time in winter storms, myself included, but long range is a whole other ballgame. I vote we keep the long range for those who actually know something so that those of us who don't can enjoy it and learn from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellinwood Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 EDIT: I'm an idiot... Looking at DCA's seasonal snowfall totals from my analogs: 2010: 10.1" 2008: 7.5" 2000: 7.4" 1995: 46.0" 1970: 11.7" 1962: 21.4" The weighted-average from my analogs is 21.2" If I do the more realistic approach and cut 1995's total by half (since it's also my most-heavily weighted year), we get 14.2" However, we need to consider that 4 of the 6 years were below average. Seems like anything is possible by just looking at my analog years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BethesdaWX Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 You have 1995/96 in there? Would you think it might be a good idea to include a mixed-layer QBO year like 1967/68, as we have now? I've been curious why so many won't even consider analogs before 1950, despite the lack of atmospheric data some good inferences could be drawn on years such as 1898/99 and 1903/04 in a more applicable sun activity phase. Not sure if I have the guts to make a winter forecast because theres no way I have the skills to compete with folks like you and HM, but sometimes I feel the exclusion of some years earlier in our records is superficially done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 You have 1995/96 in there? Would you think it might be a good idea to include a mixed-layer QBO year like 1967/68, as we have now? I've been curious why so many won't even consider analogs before 1950, despite the lack of atmospheric data some good inferences could be drawn on years such as 1898/99 and 1903/04 in a more applicable sun activity phase. Not sure if I have the guts to make a winter forecast because theres no way I have the skills to compete with folks like you and HM, but sometimes I feel the exclusion of some years earlier in our records is superficially done. Our data on those years generally is very poor. We have sfc data but little else to go on except sunspot stuff too. It was also a much colder period in general when talking about years around 1900 so the analogs can be dangerous. ENSO data is there but it has high error bars that far back. Much better data from the mid 1940s onward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellinwood Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 You have 1995/96 in there? Would you think it might be a good idea to include a mixed-layer QBO year like 1967/68, as we have now? I've been curious why so many won't even consider analogs before 1950, despite the lack of atmospheric data some good inferences could be drawn on years such as 1898/99 and 1903/04 in a more applicable sun activity phase. Not sure if I have the guts to make a winter forecast because theres no way I have the skills to compete with folks like you and HM, but sometimes I feel the exclusion of some years earlier in our records is superficially done. 1995-96 trended from a near neutral start in the summer to a weak Nina (analogs include weak and moderate Ninas). NAO was negative overall, with the strongest anomalies towards the beginning of the winter season (which is what I think the NAO will do, and is similar to the AO pattern from that year), and 30mb QBO trended from positive earlier in the year to negative by the start of winter. AMO started weakly positive and ended near neutral. PDO was neutral to positive, though... hurts its credibility a bit. I did not include 67-68 mostly due to the +NAO in December and the fact that the 30mb QBO had trended from negative at the start of the year to solidly positive by the winter. I may or may not include it in my update, and I'm also considering tossing 2000. There could also be other changes with years/weights. pre-1950... no. I don't really trust the "inferences" and measurements of the pre-1950 era. EDIT to add: 1966-67 snowfall at DCA was 37.1" Link for reference if anyone wants to look up other analog years: http://www.erh.noaa.gov/lwx/climate/dca/dcasnow.txt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Chill Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 EDIT: I'm an idiot... Looking at DCA's seasonal snowfall totals from my analogs: 2010: 10.1" 2008: 7.5" 2000: 7.4" 1995: 46.0" 1970: 11.7" 1962: 21.4" The weighted-average from my analogs is 21.2" If I do the more realistic approach and cut 1995's total by half (since it's also my most-heavily weighted year), we get 14.2" However, we need to consider that 4 of the 6 years were below average. Seems like anything is possible by just looking at my analog years Good stuff. Thank you. No love for 62-63? I just realized you had that one. I was thinking your 62 was for 61-62. We average around 10" of precip between Dec-Feb so it's always damn tricky in the MA (especially MD-VA). Gotta get the right track and the right temps and more often than not there isn't much wiggle room. I don't think predicting normal, slightly below, or slightly above snowfall is unreasonable. It's not likely that this year will be a blockbuster or a bustola. I have wonderered where the overrunning events have gone. We just don't seem to get them anymore and I remember them being much more common. What happened to the simple open wave of LP tracking across TN and NC with a high parked in eastern Canada or northern NY? A nice easy 2-4 or 3-5 with no need for cyclogenesis to make the ground white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCoWx Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Good stuff. Thank you. No love for 62-63? I just realized you had that one. I was thinking your 62 was for 61-62. We average around 10" of precip between Dec-Feb so it's always damn tricky in the MA (especially MD-VA). Gotta get the right track and the right temps and more often than not there isn't much wiggle room. I don't think predicting normal, slightly below, or slightly above snowfall is unreasonable. It's not likely that this year will be a blockbuster or a bustola. I have wonderered where the overrunning events have gone. We just don't seem to get them anymore and I remember them being much more common. What happened to the simple open wave of LP tracking across TN and NC with a high parked in eastern Canada or northern NY? A nice easy 2-4 or 3-5 with no need for cyclogenesis to make the ground white. When you say precip. do you mean snow? Or liquid precip? There's a difference as 1" of water equates to around 10 or 12" of snow. Here in this town (southeastern VA) we average 10" of snow a Winter. If you go an hour north to Richmond, they average a foot of snow. Just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BethesdaWX Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 When you say precip. do you mean snow? Or liquid precip? There's a difference as 1" of water equates to around 10 or 12" of snow. Here in this town (southeastern VA) we average 10" of snow a Winter. If you go an hour north to Richmond, they average a foot of snow. Just curious. Dude he literally just said 10" of *precip* (Rain/snow/etc) from Dec thru Feb...if he meant snow he'd say snow. Central MD more than doubles your yearly snowfall so I'd think it should be obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BethesdaWX Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Our data on those years generally is very poor. We have sfc data but little else to go on except sunspot stuff too. It was also a much colder period in general when talking about years around 1900 so the analogs can be dangerous. ENSO data is there but it has high error bars that far back. Much better data from the mid 1940s onward. So you don't think it is wise to make a few inferences on the different behavior of La Nina events during that time period? The La Ninas of that era seemed to feature a different anomaly confuguration across the US than what we now call a "typical" La Nina. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BethesdaWX Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 1995-96 trended from a near neutral start in the summer to a weak Nina (analogs include weak and moderate Ninas). NAO was negative overall, with the strongest anomalies towards the beginning of the winter season (which is what I think the NAO will do, and is similar to the AO pattern from that year), and 30mb QBO trended from positive earlier in the year to negative by the start of winter. AMO started weakly positive and ended near neutral. PDO was neutral to positive, though... hurts its credibility a bit. I did not include 67-68 mostly due to the +NAO in December and the fact that the 30mb QBO had trended from negative at the start of the year to solidly positive by the winter. I may or may not include it in my update, and I'm also considering tossing 2000. There could also be other changes with years/weights. pre-1950... no. I don't really trust the "inferences" and measurements of the pre-1950 era. EDIT to add: 1966-67 snowfall at DCA was 37.1" Link for reference if anyone wants to look up other analog years: http://www.erh.noaa....dca/dcasnow.txt Ok, thanks a bunch. Though I'm somewhat confused regarding the reference of the AMO/PDO phase as a driver in a short-term manner, pretty sure changes in the general pattern in the atmosphere would lead to a change in surface SST readings? The Gulf of Alaska has really cooled off in the past 10 days big time as that big negative has been sitting there. Would you also consider weighting analogues with similar sun activity higher than those without it? Just for hype, some analogs way back there than feature the -PDO/+AMO phase, + the Weak Sun, 2nd yr La Nina, (QBO aside) would include 1898/99, 1903/04, and 1909/10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoCoSnowBo Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 A bit random, but anyone see the Siberian snow? http://rt.com/news/prime-time/siberia-roads-paralyzed-snowfall-497/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 A bit random, but anyone see the Siberian snow? http://rt.com/news/p...d-snowfall-497/ showing up now on the N. Hemisphere snow cover maps http://moe.met.fsu.edu/snow/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 showing up now on the N. Hemisphere snow cover maps http://moe.met.fsu.edu/snow/ I think odds are starting to favor a colder winter there. But I don't think it will be that snowy. Usually cold Ninas are not there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aldie 22 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 I think odds are starting to favor a colder winter there. But I don't think it will be that snowy. Usually cold Ninas are not there. There?.....Siberia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 There?.....Siberia? don't listen to ORH he is our anti-snow j/k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattie g Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I have absolutely no scientific reasoning behind this, which I'm sure will endear me to a certain few around here, but I've got this strange feeling that we'll see a couple nice storms of 8"+ this winter. They'll come during transitions between cold and warm spells, with a couple nuisance snows in between. A little east of I-95 will be the battleground and, of course, DCA will record lesser snows than IAD and BWI. Total snowfall will be just north of average, with a greater chance of that at IAD and BWI. Temps for the winter will come in around -1 or -2. Not a big winter, but one that will deliver a little something to remember. Farmer's Alamanac...eat your heart out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nj2va Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I have absolutely no scientific reasoning behind this, which I'm sure will endear me to a certain few around here, but I've got this strange feeling that we'll see a couple nice storms of 8"+ this winter. They'll come during transitions between cold and warm spells, with a couple nuisance snows in between. A little east of I-95 will be the battleground and, of course, DCA will record lesser snows than IAD and BWI. Total snowfall will be just north of average, with a greater chance of that at IAD and BWI. Temps for the winter will come in around -1 or -2. Not a big winter, but one that will deliver a little something to remember. Farmer's Alamanac...eat your heart out. I just got back from the grocery store - already stocked up on bread and water thanks to your forecast! No reasoning to back mine up either, but that was my general thought as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattie g Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I just got back from the grocery store - already stocked up on bread and water thanks to your forecast! No reasoning to back mine up either, but that was my general thought as well. Great minds... I have to admit that part of my "feeling" for this is a potential continuation of the -NAO/-AO regime and the likelihood of a slightly negative Nina, though with the possibility of the QBO jumping in to help us out. I suppose that's just a bit of scientific reasoning, but I don't actually know much of anything about why teleconnectors do what they do (which should be obvious by my post to this point), so I prefer to think of it as just one big guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Chill Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 This winter may end up relatively similar to last winter. The NAO wasn't exactly our friend last year though but the SE has a good time. All it would have taken last year was a little less suppression at the right times. It was also tough watching the NS and SS 500mb vorts trying time correctly last year. Their dance was clumsy at best. Maybe....just maybe......we get a nice phaser that throws a bunch of front end overrunning followed by a classic coastal........one can dream right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 This winter may end up relatively similar to last winter. The NAO wasn't exactly our friend last year though but the SE has a good time. All it would have taken last year was a little less suppression at the right times. It was also tough watching the NS and SS 500mb vorts trying time correctly last year. Their dance was clumsy at best. Maybe....just maybe......we get a nice phaser that throws a bunch of front end overrunning followed by a classic coastal........one can dream right? for me, 4" or more from 12/26 would have saved last winter it was a bitter pill because of how close reasonably decent snow came to mby but, everyone are the Cubs this time of year so we hope and wait I did hear the season's first group of Canadian Geese heading south last night, which is always inspirational for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usedtobe Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 for me, 4" or more from 12/26 would have saved last winter it was a bitter pill because of how close reasonably decent snow came to mby but, everyone are the Cubs this time of year so we hope and wait I did hear the season's first group of Canadian Geese heading south last night, which is always inspirational for me Personally, I'm waiting for the wool bears to see what color they are. So Far they have been quite suggesting this year will be a tough call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 25-30" for DCA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usedtobe Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 25-30" for DCA Wow, so early and emphatic. Ji probably is ready to propose to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Wow, so early and emphatic. Ji probably is ready to propose to you. could be a really short marriage... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.