November Banter

[DaculaWeather]

You're always harsh and you're always critical.

 

What's not scientific at looking at past analogs? What is your winter forecast? 

[Brick Tamland]

I see a couple of members of the Legion of Gloom are here.

[GaWx]

Larry,  I love your stats but one city doesn't provide enough of a sample size to make any reasonable conclusions. 

 

 Marietta,

 Not enough of a sample size? That's irrelevant as Atlanta correlates quite well with the SE US in general. I can virtually assure you that a pretty similar pattern would be found for many other SE cities regardless of the much warmer than surrounding stations on radiational cooling nights. Also, this is a a sample of 33 analog years with similar ENSO. That's a pretty large sample size of analogs and a much larger sample than many other analyses used by people here and elsewhere for wx analog based studies.

  If you aren't satisfied with this data, please show us your own hard stastistics to refute my findings instead of just making general pessimistic statements. Until then, you have no hard data upon which to assert your pessimistic position and, therefore, not nearly as credible a position.

[LithiaWx]

You're always harsh and you're always critical.

 

What's not scientific at looking at past analogs? What is your winter forecast? 

 

I don't pretend to be able to forecast how cold or snowy a season may or may not be.  I am in the camp that meteorology is a long way away from being able to make such predictions with any accuracy beyond luck.  If someone is going to put out their thoughts on winter they need to be prepared for folks to be critical and skeptical of such forecasts.  That is how science advances.....  What isn't scientific about looking at those analogs is they are cherry picked for one city without any concrete rules in place for what has been used as warm/cold/normal.  You will end up with a different result by changing the ENSO state or what is considered warm/cold/normal for a winter. 

[LithiaWx]

 Marietta,

 Not enough of a sample size? That's irrelevant as Atlanta correlates quite well with the SE US in general. I can virtually assure you that a pretty similar pattern would be found for many other SE cities regardless of the much warmer than surorunding stations on radiational cooling nights. Also, this is a a sample of 33 analog years with ENSO. That's a pretty large sample size of analogs and a much larger sample than many other analyses used by people here and elsewhere for wx analog based studies.

  If you aren't satisfied with this data, please show us your own hard stastistics to refute my findings instead of just making general pessimistic statements. Until then, you have no hard data upon which to assert your pessimistic position and, therefore, not nearly as credible a position.

 

Larry, what ENSO state did you use?  Weak/Moderate/Neutral?  Did you take into account what the ENSO state was in November or did you take Dec-Feb?  What is considered as a normal/cold/warm winter?  Atlanta typically favors colder pattern in weak ENSO years, that is skewing the results and leading people to believe that a cold Nov has the impact as opposed to the weak ENSO state which tends to produce colder winters.  Also as has been stated the colder years are from way, way back.  That was a colder time periods in general which also skews the results.  There are lots of questions here and as I said earlier a slight change here or there will change the encore result.  Sorry, but your stats don't prove or disprove anything imo,  They are interesting but not of predictive value imo.

[GaWx]

It's not scientific, period.  The current ESNO is not even weak nino yet, it may end up there but are we basing this on the current state or weak nino?  Also what constitutes a normal or cold November or a normal/cold/warm winter?  The stats don't prove anything.  I hate to be that harsh but they are of no predictive value as you can manipulate those numbers a bunch of different ways and come out with a different look.

 

Wow!!! I have no response to this right now.

[Brick Tamland]

I don't pretend to be able to forecast how cold or snowy a season may or may not be.  I am in the camp that meteorology is a long way away from being able to make such predictions with any accuracy beyond luck.  If someone is going to put out their thoughts on winter they need to be prepared for folks to be critical and skeptical of such forecasts.  That is how science advances.....  What isn't scientific about looking at those analogs is they are cherry picked for one city without any concrete rules in place for what has been used as warm/cold/normal.  You will end up with a different result by changing the ENSO state or what is considered warm/cold/normal for a winter. 

 

 

There have been plenty of other positive scientific indicators given by actual mets as to why this looks like a big winter for the entire southeast. Maybe you should read the threads by them on here that are pinned instead of just being pessimistic for the sake of it when there is a lot more evidence that this winter will be good for snow around here. 

 

I would suggest starting here.

 

http://www.americanwx.com/bb/index.php/topic/44777-raleighwx-winter-forecast-2014-15/

[LithiaWx]

There have been plenty of other positive scientific indicators given by actual mets as to why this looks like a big winter for the entire southeast. Maybe you should read the threads by them on here that are pinned instead of just being pessimistic for the sake of it when there is a lot more evidence that this winter will be good for snow around here. 

 

OPI? failed last year

Eurasian snow cover? failed last year

How about Sea ice extent which has been higher than recent years - btw lower extent over the Kara region is associated with -AO/-NAO - the extent is higher now than it has been in many years.

We are currently in a peak solar cycle - it's a weaker one but it's literally near the peak. - also not associated with colder winters

 

There is a lot that can still go wrong, I think some cautiousness is in order, the general idea that winter is going to be awesome has huge bust potential.

[Brick Tamland]

OPI? failed last year

Eurasian snow cover? failed last year

How about Sea ice extent which has been higher than recent years - btw lower extent over the Kara region is associated with -AO/-NAO - the extent is higher now than it has been in many years.

We are currently in a peak solar cycle - it's a weaker one but it's literally near the peak. - also not associated with colder winters

 

There is a lot that can still go wrong, I think some cautiousness is in order, the general idea that winter is going to be awesome has huge bust potential.

 

 

Well, I guess all those mets are wrong. There is always potential for a bust. But the fact is a lot of mets think this winter is going to be big based on plenty of scientific evidence. There are more positives than negatives. There's no use being pessimistic about it at this stage. No matter what they say, it seems you are just going to be all doom and gloom. You already know this winter is going to suck, so no reason to even come here.

[DaculaWeather]

OPI? failed last year

Eurasian snow cover? failed last year

How about Sea ice extent which has been higher than recent years - btw lower extent over the Kara region is associated with -AO/-NAO - the extent is higher now than it has been in many years.

We are currently in a peak solar cycle - it's a weaker one but it's literally near the peak. - also not associated with colder winters

 

There is a lot that can still go wrong, I think some cautiousness is in order, the general idea that winter is going to be awesome has huge bust potential.

Sounds like you know just what to look at. Why don't you come up with your stats or is that too hard for you? Instead you'd rather bash and pick apart someone else's?

[LithiaWx]

Pitchforks, and people wonder why nobody will come out on the warm/skeptical side of things.  This is why you see cold and snowy forecasts.  If you don't you get shouted down as ignorant of science, pessimistic, and unreasonable.

[Brick Tamland]

Pitchforks, and people wonder why nobody will come out on the warm/skeptical side of things.  This is why you see cold and snowy forecasts.  If you don't you get shouted down as ignorant of science, pessimistic, and unreasonable.

 

Yeah, all those mets with their forecasts are just making it up to make people happy. Or maybe you could just see that most mets think this is going to be a big winter for snow based on the scientific evidence, and there are a lot more positives than negatives going for this winter instead of just being pessimistic for the sake of it. Did you even read the forecast put out by RaleighWx and other mets to see the reasoning behind their thoughts?

[LithiaWx]

Well, I guess all those mets are wrong. There is always potential for a bust. But the fact is a lot of mets think this winter is going to be big based on plenty of scientific evidence. There are more positives than negatives. There's no use being pessimistic about it at this stage. No matter what they say, it seems you are just going to be all doom and gloom. You already know this winter is going to suck, so no reason to even come here.

 

Nope, I have no clue what winter is going end up like.  It could be wall to wall cold or it could be a torch fest.  To assume we are a lock for a banner year winter weather wise is unwise.  That is all I am saying.

Sounds like you know just what to look at. Why don't you come up with your stats or is that too hard for you? Instead you'd rather bash and pick apart someone else's?

 

As I said before that is how science advances, what stats do you want me to come up with?  please be specific.  I asked Gawx for some additional information on how he came to the conclusions he did and am waiting for his response. 

[Brick Tamland]

Nope, I have no clue what winter is going end up like.  It could be wall to wall cold or it could be a torch fest.  To assume we are a lock for a banner year winter weather wise is unwise.  That is all I am saying.

 

 

 

No, that's not what you're saying. You're just being pessimistic when the evidence is a lot more positive than negative. All these mets saying that would not just say that to make people happy.

[DaculaWeather]

Nope, I have no clue what winter is going end up like.  It could be wall to wall cold or it could be a torch fest.  To assume we are a lock for a banner year winter weather wise is unwise.  That is all I am saying.

 

As I said before that is how science advances, what stats do you want me to come up with?  please be specific.  I asked Gawx for some additional information on how he came to the conclusions he did and am waiting for his response. 

What i want from you is exactly what Larry did, you provide your own assumptions, whatever they may be. Outline those and present the data.

 

Larry provided his data and how he came up with it. If you think it's wrong, PROVE it wrong. It's not up to Larry to prove it right.

[LithiaWx]

Yeah, all those mets with their forecasts are just making it up to make people happy. Or maybe you could just see that most mets think this is going to be a big winter for snow based on the scientific evidence, and there are a lot more positives than negatives going for this winter instead of just being pessimistic for the sake of it. Did you even read the forecast put out by RaleighWx and other mets to see the reasoning behind their thoughts?

 

I absolutely have read most of the forecasts that have been put out on this forum.  Yes, some of them forecast cold to get subscriptions and attention.  I have said that for a while now.  I guess you and others suggest we just ignore the negatives and only focus on the positives? There is a lot we don't know about weather, a ton can go wrong.  I can't understand why this is so hard for some to accept on a science board.

[Brick Tamland]

I absolutely have read most of the forecasts that have been put out on this forum.  Yes, some of them forecast cold to get subscriptions and attention.  I have said that for a while now.  I guess you and others suggest we just ignore the negatives and only focus on the positives? There is a lot we don't know about weather, a ton can go wrong.  I can't understand why this is so hard for some to accept on a science board.

 

And I don't know why it is so hard for you to accept the evidence that has been presented by mets and others is a lot more positive than negative when it comes to getting snow here this winter. No one is saying ignore the negatives, but when the positives outweigh the negatives and so many mets have said so, there is no reason to be so pessimistic. 

[LithiaWx]

What i want from you is exactly what Larry did, you provide your own assumptions, whatever they may be. Outline those and present the data.

 

Larry provided his data and how he came up with it. If you think it's wrong, PROVE it wrong. It's not up to Larry to prove it right.

 

I posed some very reasonable questions.  His work can't be looked at without the answers to my questions.  He did not provide what parameters he used in getting those results.  If you read my posts from today you will see my assumptions on what I think we can and can't assume and what I think this winter will end up looking like.  If you are going to put out a long list of analogs and expect them to be taken as gospel you have to be able to answer how you came up with those results.  He hasn't yet. 

[LithiaWx]

And I don't know why it is so hard for you to accept the evidence that has been presented by mets and others is a lot more positive than negative when it comes to getting snow here this winter. No one is saying ignore the negatives, but when the positives outweigh the negatives and so many mets have said so, there is no reason to be so pessimistic. 

 

Please show me where I have been overly pessimistic about this winter.

[Brick Tamland]

I posed some very reasonable questions.  His work can't be looked at without the answers to my questions.  He did not provide what parameters he used in getting those results.  If you read my posts from today you will see my assumptions on what I think we can and can't assume and what I think this winter will end up looking like.  If you are going to put out a long list of analogs and expect them to be taken as gospel you have to be able to answer how you came up with those results.  He hasn't yet. 

 

He came up with the results by looking at winters of the past and seeing  what the conditions were then. What other parameters does he need?

[burgertime]

Larry, what ENSO state did you use?  Weak/Moderate/Neutral?  Did you take into account what the ENSO state was in November or did you take Dec-Feb?  What is considered as a normal/cold/warm winter?  Atlanta typically favors colder pattern in weak ENSO years, that is skewing the results and leading people to believe that a cold Nov has the impact as opposed to the weak ENSO state which tends to produce colder winters.  Also as has been stated the colder years are from way, way back.  That was a colder time periods in general which also skews the results.  There are lots of questions here and as I said earlier a slight change here or there will change the encore result.  Sorry, but your stats don't prove or disprove anything imo,  They are interesting but not of predictive value imo.

 

 

In his defense he laid all of those answers out already. 

[JoshM]

Good news. I remember well my first, "see you in a year" after a period of monthly doctor visits for my heart issues. Feeling so good these days, I wouldn't go back at all if the SOBs wouldn't cut off my prescriptions.

 

If we start fantasy storms this early they're going to need to up my meds!

[Brick Tamland]

Please show me where I have been overly pessimistic about this winter.

 

In just about every post on here.

[LithiaWx]

In his defense he laid all of those answers out already. 

 

Is there some post that I am completely missing because I didn't see even one of those questions answered.

[burgertime]

Pitchforks, and people wonder why nobody will come out on the warm/skeptical side of things.  This is why you see cold and snowy forecasts.  If you don't you get shouted down as ignorant of science, pessimistic, and unreasonable.

 

I don't have a problem with it at all. I do think though that Larry has a good track record of statistical analysis around here and therefore isn't likely to lead anyone astray for the sake of what he hopes to find vs. what is there. You also have to be aware that anytime anyone here gets into an argument with someone who is respected there will be people who take that person's side just in defense. That's human nature and it doesn't transcend a keyboard. 

[Brick Tamland]

I don't have a problem with it at all. I do think though that Larry has a good track record of statistical analysis around here and therefore isn't likely to lead anyone astray for the sake of what he hopes to find vs. what is there. You also have to be aware that anytime anyone here gets into an argument with someone who is respected there will be people who take that person's side just in defense. That's human nature and it doesn't transcend a keyboard. 

 

The problem is being so skeptical when the evidence presented by plenty of mets goes the opposite way. It looks like being pessimistic just for the sake of being pessimistic. 

[weatherfide]

Mari,

 

Is there some post that I am completely missing because I didn't see even one of those questions answered.

GaWx, on 05 Nov 2014 - 1:04 PM, said:

 See below. These are only the analog winters for the current ENSO. Note how top heavy are the cold winters (in blue) after normal to cold Nov,'s as opposed to warm. The historical stats facts say that cold winters have much more often followed the cold Nov analogs (those near the top of the list) than after warm Nov. analogs (bottom of the list). In other words, there is much more blue on top of this list. I don't know how this correlation could be made more clearly.

 

Year/Nov. mean/Winter

1976/44.2/cold 1.0"

1911/47.0/cold 5.2" & a major ZR

1880/47.3/cold ~6.0"

1951/47.5/warm 3.9"

1923/49.8/norm 4.0"

1969/50.1/cold 0.6"

1968/50.1/cold 2.2"

1936/50.1/warm 0.0"

1939/50.2/cold 8.3" & a major ZR

1885/50.5/cold little SN/IP but a moderate ZR

2002/50.9/norm T & a moderate ZR

1884/51.3/cold ~11" & a major ZR

1963/51.5/cold 3.6"

1904/51.6/cold 1.0", 2 major ZR's, & 1 moderate ZR ,

1929/51.8/warm 5.1"

1914/52.4/cold 1.4"

1895/52.4/norm 0.2"

1953/52.7/warm 0.1"

1952/52.8/warm 1.3"

1900/52.8/norm 4.4"

2006/53.8/warm 0.1"

1935/53.8/cold 10.9" & 2 major ZR's

1979/54.3/norm 4.4"

1977/54.3/cold 0.3"

1913/54.8/norm 4.4"

1927/55.7/norm 0.2"

1919/55.7/norm 0.1"

2004/56.4/warm 0.5" & a major ZR

1990/56.5/warm 2.1"

1958/56.5/norm 2.4"

2003/57.6/norm 2.5"

1986/57.9/norm 4.8"

1994/58.3/warm 0.4"

Parameter 1 = current ENSO state

Parameter 2 = all D,J,F following ENSO state above for which November is normal or below normal average temperature.

 

Although he didn't provide the correlation coefficients, it is clear enough in the data set above. The statistics aren't that difficult to understand, and as always, Larry has spelled it all out very clearly.

 

I'll put you down for "whatever is opposite of the meteorological consensus" this winter.

 

Carry on.

[packbacker]

Mari,

 

GaWx, on 05 Nov 2014 - 1:04 PM, said:

Parameter 1 = current ENSO state

Parameter 2 = all D,J,F following ENSO state above for which November is normal or below normal average temperature.

 

Although he didn't provide the correlation coefficients, it is clear enough in the data set above. The statistics aren't that difficult to understand, and as always, Larry has spelled it all out very clearly.

 

I'll put you down for "whatever is opposite of the meteorological consensus" this winter.

 

Carry on.

 

Agreed, Larry's stats/analogs looked great, kind of hard to argue that.  If you want to argue whether we will see a weak nino this year then that's another thing, but let's face it odds are we will see a weak nino this winter.  Would be surprised if the odds are not bumped up from 65-70% to 80+% next week.

[LithiaWx]

Mari,

 

GaWx, on 05 Nov 2014 - 1:04 PM, said:

Parameter 1 = current ENSO state

Parameter 2 = all D,J,F following ENSO state above for which November is normal or below normal average temperature.

 

Although he didn't provide the correlation coefficients, it is clear enough in the data set above. The statistics aren't that difficult to understand, and as always, Larry has spelled it all out very clearly.

 

I'll put you down for "whatever is opposite of the meteorological consensus" this winter.

 

Carry on.

 

I'll wait for Larry to answer, but thank you for your attempt to answer my outstanding questions.  I seriously doubt he took the ENSO state as Neutral which is where we are right now.  He probably used a weak Nino which isn't guaranteed.  He also didn't include what a normal Nov is or what he considered a warm/cold/normal winter. 

 

If the temps listed are for November that's great but what criteria did you use for determining if a winter was cold/normal/warm..  There are outstanding questions here and I do still think a slight change in what one considers cold/warm/neutral or what ENSO we actually end up with could change everything.

 

Lastly, if a November started with a weak ENSO and continued into Dec-Feb, that could be a different set of analog years than if Nov was neutral and ended up Weak for Dec-Feb.  There are a lot of variables that are yet to be determined and can be altered just slightly(and still be correct) giving you a completely different outcome.

[Brick Tamland]

I'll wait for Larry to answer, but thank you for your attempt to answer my outstanding questions.  I seriously doubt he took the ENSO state as Neutral which is where we are right now.  He probably used a weak Nino which isn't guaranteed.  He also didn't include what a normal Nov is or what he considered a warm/cold/normal winter. 

 

If the temps listed are for November that's great but what criteria did you use for determining if a winter was cold/normal/warm..  There are outstanding questions here and I do still think a slight change in what one considers cold/warm/neutral or what ENSO we actually end up with could change everything.

 

Why are you so hung up on what Larry presented and not taking in all the other winter forecasts from mets that have presented on here?