Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,584
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Spring Banter & General Discussion/Observations

CapturedNature

By CapturedNature,
in New England

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
CoastalWx

CoastalWx

Posted
Posted

Good news for KORH. Jet Blue will have service now to JFK. They will be getting a CAT III (basically that means you can land in pea soup fog) upgrade by late year/early 2018. That should generate more business as other airlines await the success from jet Blue and also waiting on getting the ILS system in. That's awesome. Good for ORH area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HoarfrostHubb

HoarfrostHubb

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Good news for KORH. Jet Blue will have service now to JFK. They will be getting a CAT III (basically that means you can land in pea soup fog) upgrade by late year/early 2018. That should generate more business as other airlines await the success from jet Blue and also waiting on getting the ILS system in. That's awesome. Good for ORH area.

Yup.  As expected.   Their prices need to come down a bit though.  JetBlue's service to FL from ORH is great but a bit overpriced.  So easy to fly out of there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said:

http://www.npr.org/2017/02/26/517305249/why-its-been-so-warm-on-the-east-coast

As usual, the typical weenie "New Hampshire climate become Connecticut and New Jersey" type hysteria...when the numbers don't support anything close to that. That's what bothers me the most about rhetoric like that...it's as if the underlying warming isn't enough by itself and instead, they feel the need to throw in extra weenie statements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Damage In Tolland

Damage In Tolland

Posted
Posted

Let's take some down!!!

  

...HIGH WIND WARNING IN EFFECT FROM 1 AM TO 7 PM EST THURSDAY...

The National Weather Service in Taunton has issued a High Wind
Warning, which is in effect from 1 AM to 7 PM EST Thursday. The
Wind Advisory is no longer in effect.

* Locations...include Massachusetts...Rhode Island...and Northern
  Connecticut.

* Winds...Westerly 15 to 25 mph with gusts up to 60 mph.

* Timing...The strongest winds expected into sunrise Thursday
  continuing through Thursday afternoon. Winds should begin to
  diminish into Thursday evening.

* Impacts...Downed trees and tree limbs expected. Isolated to
  scattered power outages.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, ORH_wxman said:

As usual, the typical weenie "New Hampshire climate become Connecticut and New Jersey" type hysteria...when the numbers don't support anything close to that. That's what bothers me the most about rhetoric like that...it's as if the underlying warming isn't enough by itself and instead, they feel the need to throw in extra weenie statements.

It's Meteorologist Bob Henson on NPR. 

Firstly, I don't know .. I don't go out of my way to referee these 'interviews'?

That said, he's a pretty well respected Weather/climate journalist, though.  And, NPR actually does pretty well to vet their sources... This not a 'for-profit' media outlet/news organization we're talking about.  Doesn't make them untouchable - no way. But I'm 'trusting' an open dialogue from that source way before CNN are Fox f news... 

As far as the numbers not supporting, I don't believe that is entirely true.  Among all climate models, they indicate global impacts.  The virtual 'bands' ...such as agricultural zones, deserts encroachments... species migration -vs- adaptation duress/failure/extinction rates ... and even seasonal variations, they are all modeled to gain latitudes both south and north of the equator. Not sure why that should not include moving climate regions up the eastern seaboard, which is also flat out modeled to do so.  The difference in latitude between Jersey, CT and NH, compared to the whole hemisphere is incrementally very small and a very small nudge really to get those climate zones to impact one another in either direction.

What we really need is a couple of Pinatubo's. 

Doesn't sound far fetched to me to get NJ to southern NH in decades ... what, 20 to 40 years..? Folks need to remember that the climate is accelerating... this isn't a linear ordeal... The numbers already bear that out in hard fact.  It may not continue that way but for the time being..so long as some derivative of logarithmic increase is verify(ed)(ing), I don't have a problem with the frequency of early springs and weird warm-ups increasing.  

Can we have a cryo-caustic winter in 15 years, hell yes!  ... Can we have one in 60 years... perhaps, but less likely.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ginx snewx

Ginx snewx

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

. 

As far as the numbers not supporting, I don't believe that is entirely true.  

Doesn't sound far fetched to me to get NJ to southern NH in decades ... what, 20 to 40 years..? .. The numbers already bear that out in hard fact.  II don't have a problem with the frequency of early springs and weird warm-ups increasing.  

 

 

All Boston Met Winters since 1891 Hard to see how we rise 3 degrees in 20-40 years at this rate, so many many factors involved in climate change, certainly on the low scale of predictability. 

 

Untitled.png.f49c1c1df5f98e2d318a48edbabe45a9.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

 Hard to see how we rise 3 degrees in 20-40 years at this rate, so many many factors involved in climate change, certainly on the low scale of predictability. 

 

... That's the problem with it, in part - 

I actually agree with you in principle but ...we are in an odd sort of circumstance with this beast, where the 'principles' are getting in the way of the significance of the warning. Not a good place to be. If there is anything actionable Humanity can do, it's likely not going to be in time given that limitation of foresight. There are too, too many people and special interest groups that it may be too late in some respects. 

That said, again: the climate is accelerating? That's a very important variable in that debate... 3 degrees at the present rate may be a bit much, but five years from now, "accelerating" means that today's rates no longer apply - it's ever rising faster.  So if there is a low predictive skill, it's really over the rate of the change - not the change it self.  

Not saying you do this, but too many people in scary echelons of public policy making in industrial society, are conflating those two illogically - if perhaps deliberately - to obfuscate the message and diminish it's importance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

It's Meteorologist Bob Henson on NPR. 

Firstly, I don't know .. I don't go out of my way to referee these 'interviews'?

That said, he's a pretty well respected Weather/climate journalist, though.  And, NPR actually does pretty well to vet their sources... This not a 'for-profit' media outlet/news organization we're talking about.  Doesn't make them untouchable - no way. But I'm 'trusting' an open dialogue from that source way before CNN are Fox f news... 

As far as the numbers not supporting, I don't believe that is entirely true.  Among all climate models, they indicate global impacts.  The virtual 'bands' ...such as agricultural zones, deserts encroachments... species migration -vs- adaptation duress/failure/extinction rates ... and even seasonal variations, they are all modeled to gain latitudes both south and north of the equator. Not sure why that should not include moving climate regions up the eastern seaboard, which is also flat out modeled to do so.  The difference in latitude between Jersey, CT and NH, compared to the whole hemisphere is incrementally very small and a very small nudge really to get those climate zones to impact one another in either direction.

What we really need is a couple of Pinatubo's. 

Doesn't sound far fetched to me to get NJ to southern NH in decades ... what, 20 to 40 years..? Folks need to remember that the climate is accelerating... this isn't a linear ordeal... The numbers already bear that out in hard fact.  It may not continue that way but for the time being..so long as some derivative of logarithmic increase is verify(ed)(ing), I don't have a problem with the frequency of early springs and weird warm-ups increasing.  

Can we have a cryo-caustic winter in 15 years, hell yes!  ... Can we have one in 60 years... perhaps, but less likely.  

 

NH winters (and most states in the region) are warming at 0.4F per decade since 1950 (similar trend if you compress it down to last 25 years if you choose to have a shorter, but more recent sample). Want the really long term trend from 1900? 0.4F per decade.

 

CT winters have a baseline of 8 degrees warmer than NH. So at the current rate, it would take 200 years to have NH equivalent to CT....nevermind NJ which would take at least another century (about 4.5 degrees warmer than CT is). So yeah, the empirical evidence just simply doesn't support it. That is a fact. However, the one caveat is the climate models say we're going to accelerate going forward...so that leaves the door open that maybe New Hampshire will become CT in our lifetimes. Given that we haven't seen acceleration yet and that any future acceleration would have to be literally produce 5x the current rate to get NH equal to CT's climate within 40 years, put me down in the "under" camp when everyone places their bets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

NH winters (and most states in the region) are warming at 0.4F per decade since 1950 (similar trend if you compress it down to last 25 years if you choose to have a shorter, but more recent sample). Want the really long term trend from 1900? 0.4F per decade.

 

CT winters have a baseline of 8 degrees warmer than NH. So at the current rate, it would take 200 years to have NH equivalent to CT....nevermind NJ which would take at least another century (about 4.5 degrees warmer than CT is). So yeah, the empirical evidence just simply doesn't support it. That is a fact. However, the one caveat is the climate models say we're going to accelerate going forward...so that leaves the door open that maybe New Hampshire will become CT in our lifetimes. Given that we haven't seen acceleration yet and that any future acceleration would have to be literally produce 5x the current rate to get NH equal to CT's climate within 40 years, put me down in the "under" camp when everyone places their bets.

Well... to be fair, when I said "..What 20 or 40 years"  ...that's is a pattern of speech that infers the hypothetical.  Fine, 50 60 a 100 years. whatever.

Second, I agree that 8 degrees seems absurd.  I also offer that the use of NJ to NH (in general) in Henson's discussion with the NPR may also have been a figurative one. If you want to argue that some individuals may 'use' that to blow things up - heh, can't say I disagree there. But, I don't think it was intended to mean the same as DC to NYC... Which I "think" has a comparatively less differential - but is about the same distance as the crow flies.  The point he was making was clearly that observing these warm intrusions this early is likely to increase in the future - maybe.  

Also, many don't consider acceleration nearly enough, part of which...if we read the papers fully, and objectively, includes the possibility if not plausibility of "crossing climate thresholds" - you bounce at those points and herald in new geologic eras. There are core samples form Greenland ice that show there have been sudden whiplash climate events that took place in mere decades.   Just fyi if the general readers cares to dig those up.  interesting.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CapturedNature

CapturedNature

Posted
  • Author
Posted

This popped up this morning on my Google alerts and I thought it was kind of funny:

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/34625553/warm-winters-crippling-maple-syrup-production

It's basically a combination of different stories amalgamated into one.  The one that caught my eye was the guy who said that he was producing 75 gallons of maple syrup in 2000 and he's down to producing 20 now.  That's almost the opposite of every producer that I know that produces more now than they did.  Not to mention that technology is extending the season, not climate and that the season is not even over by a long shot.  The warm weather jump started things but syrup will still be being produced a month from now.

I bring this up because this is a similar argument to the "we'll have a NJ climate in 20 years" argument except that now they are trying to panic people that we won't be able to produce maple syrup.  Maple syrup is still produced TN, MO and many other places well south of here and production is at an all time high making a headline like that a little disingenuous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Well... to be fair, when I said "..What 20 or 40 years"  ...that's is a pattern of speech that infers the hypothetical.  Fine, 50 60 a 100 years. whatever.

Second, I agree that 8 degrees seems absurd.  I also offer that the use of NJ to NH (in general) in Henson's discussion with the NPR may also have been a figurative one. If you want to argue that some individuals may 'use' that to blow things up - heh, can't say I disagree there. But, I don't think it was intended to mean the same as DC to NYC... Which I "think" has a comparatively less differential - but is about the same distance as the crow flies.  The point he was making was clearly that observing these warm intrusions this early is likely to increase in the future - maybe.  

Also, many don't consider acceleration nearly enough, part of which...if we read the papers fully, and objectively, includes the possibility if not plausibility of "crossing climate thresholds" - you bounce at those points and herald in new geologic eras. There are core samples form Greenland ice that show there have been sudden whiplash climate events that took place in mere decades.   Just fyi if the general readers cares to dig those up.  interesting.  

 

I don't necessarily disagree with many of your points....but when people use comparisons like NJ to NH or CT to NH, those aren't usually figurative to the listeners. They actually believe that they will have a new jersey climate within several decades. I find those statements pretty disingenuous. I've seen articles posted in mainstream news media that claim Boston will average like 20 inches of snow in just a couple decades. Is it possible? Sure, it's also possible that Hansen's cooling occurs too due to Greenland meltwater into the North Atlantic and we actually have colder winters by mid 21st century....but likely? The evidence doesn't really support it. So while a pretty wide range of climates are plausible in several decades, puppeting the less likely scenarios never sits well with me when we're in an age where we are having trouble convincing enough people about climate change as it is....there is no reason to make the science less credible by making those type of claims that turn out to be a lot of conjecture moreso than science. We've already seen it with hurricanes, the NAO/AO (remember when climate change caused -NAOs a few years ago?), and tornadoes (the 2011 outbreak was the beginning of climate change taking over!!), etc. Not to mention, the literature admits how poor the climate modeling has been in predicting seasonal/spatial trends particularly on a regional basis.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wx2fish

wx2fish

Posted
Posted
57 minutes ago, MetHerb said:

This popped up this morning on my Google alerts and I thought it was kind of funny:

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/34625553/warm-winters-crippling-maple-syrup-production

It's basically a combination of different stories amalgamated into one.  The one that caught my eye was the guy who said that he was producing 75 gallons of maple syrup in 2000 and he's down to producing 20 now.  That's almost the opposite of every producer that I know that produces more now than they did.  Not to mention that technology is extending the season, not climate and that the season is not even over by a long shot.  The warm weather jump started things but syrup will still be being produced a month from now.

I bring this up because this is a similar argument to the "we'll have a NJ climate in 20 years" argument except that now they are trying to panic people that we won't be able to produce maple syrup.  Maple syrup is still produced TN, MO and many other places well south of here and production is at an all time high making a headline like that a little disingenuous.

Its so sensitive to the weather in any particular year its impossible to show a steady decrease like that. Maybe if you cherry picked 2000 and 2016, but thats not a trend. Who even knows if they are using the same amount of taps as 2000 because it doesn't say.

Im sure you know it well but, in 2015 I didn't even tap until March 10th because it was so cold. Then last year the season was largely over by March 10th. You need to adapt to each year, knowing long range modeling is a huge help.

I like also this....

Sen. Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire fears that her state is going to lose one of its most valuable agricultural products. The ideal temperatures are 20s and night and 40s during the day, she said. When the temperatures don’t fall below freezing at night, the sap doesn’t run to the taps but to the top of trees, causing them to bloom.

This happens every year, the trees have to bud eventually haha. So are we no longer going to have winters in NH? or Maple trees?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OceanStWx

OceanStWx

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

I don't necessarily disagree with many of your points....but when people use comparisons like NJ to NH or CT to NH, those aren't usually figurative to the listeners. They actually believe that they will have a new jersey climate within several decades. I find those statements pretty disingenuous. I've seen articles posted in mainstream news media that claim Boston will average like 20 inches of snow in just a couple decades. Is it possible? Sure, it's also possible that Hansen's cooling occurs too due to Greenland meltwater into the North Atlantic and we actually have colder winters by mid 21st century....but likely? The evidence doesn't really support it. So while a pretty wide range of climates are plausible in several decades, puppeting the less likely scenarios never sits well with me when we're in an age where we are having trouble convincing enough people about climate change as it is....there is no reason to make the science less credible by making those type of claims that turn out to be a lot of conjecture moreso than science. We've already seen it with hurricanes, the NAO/AO (remember when climate change caused -NAOs a few years ago?), and tornadoes (the 2011 outbreak was the beginning of climate change taking over!!), etc. Not to mention, the literature admits how poor the climate modeling has been in predicting seasonal/spatial trends particularly on a regional basis.

Part of the problem is that extreme events and extreme wording is used to get a rise out of people. You get very little action from a 0.5 degree per decade temp rise. But if you tell someone to expect a NYC winter in CON, then it becomes more serious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...