January 2020 Discussion

[CoastalWx]

45 minutes ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

The point is climate change is impacting winters as a whole.  

I think there is a point, but you’ll need like 50 years of data to really see. It may be effect things like ENSO analogs etc, but you can’t pinpoint things to specific winters. The climate is very complicated and small scale things will always Trump background AGW for the near future. For example, the winters of 13-14 and 14-15 were brutal in the US. People blamed a warm pool in the GOA, but those warm pools do little to effect the pattern. Naturally cold water that is a few degrees above normal has little power to disrupt hemispheric patterns. However, if you dig deep..you would see that we had a low frequency standing wave pattern with the MJO that was conducive to 500mb ridging over west coast US. That in turn led to warm GOA sea temps.  We all rushed to blame CC, but the real answer seemed to be in the tropics. Now can CC effect MJO? Perhaps and you’d need to spend some time on that. So, CC tells us to expect more things like warm temps and storms, however small scale details like ENSO, solar, PV placement etc really drive the bus. 

[Baroclinic Zone]

6 minutes ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

The point is climate change is impacting winters as a whole.  

Ok.  So far the only negative impact I've seen has been the rise in coastal impacts (ie flooding).  That does not occur only in Winter.  That's year round.

[Great Snow 1717]

https://boston.cbslocal.com/2019/12/26/warmest-decade-record-for-boston-area-blue-hills-observatory

Link to the article by Eric Fisher

[CoastalWx]

5 minutes ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

https://boston.cbslocal.com/2019/12/26/warmest-decade-record-for-boston-area-blue-hills-observatory

Link to the article by Eric Fisher

Yep there is no question it’s been warm and things like that are likely related to CC. I’m just approaching from a social science standpoint.  It’s easy to have recent confirmation bias and blame CC. Small scale things however (like a time scale of a few months) really drive the bus. 

[Torch Tiger]

The best we can hope for are storms cutting way west and getting the convective side

[cut]

14 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

I understand what you are saying /mean ... I think..

But for the general reader: one has to be careful with the above line of reasoning. It's used/abused, to negate the impacts of climate change to liberally...almost as a rationalization and denial of truth, because most in the business of doing so have too much to gain or maintain, in not admitting that it is a problem - more over, that it is a problem that all science included, most definitely appears to be human attributed.

That said, there is another danger in the above line of reasoning; it also negates the necessity to use climate trend analysis in the setting of expectations.  If the climate is demonstrating a logorithmic change ( accelerating one...) in either a negative or positive direction, wrt to any metric, it is wise to consider that ensuing period of time in question might exhibit that same tendency in that metric.

Otherwise, there is no problem - the way I see it ... - it assuming events and systems in a case by case basis, independent of that expectation. People have trouble separating those two... but, it's really more like ... if a case ends up warm, and the climate curve is accelerating warmer, ...the probability was > 50% for that in the first place. 

The real problem here is that climate masks causality.  People use that against the climate signal, which is false.

Not you per se... but these are aspects pertinent to the present World, and one's that irk me.

There was an article (Sports Illustrated maybe?? Not sure, can't remember) about the impact of warming on outdoor sports, specifically hockey. They focused on Canada and the number of 'skate days' if you will. That is to say the number of skate able, outdoor rinks per winter day. The decline in skate days was depressingly remarkable. Im sure if applied the same thing to say, snow mobile days we would find similar results. I know skiing here in CT isn't what it used to be and Many places have folded.

[moneypitmike]

Just now, cut said:

There was an article (Sports Illustrated maybe?? Not sure, can't remember) about the impact of warming on outdoor sports, specifically hockey. They focused on Canada and the number of 'skate days' if you will. That is to say the number of skate able, outdoor rinks per winter day. The decline in skate days was depressingly remarkable. Im sure if applied the same thing to say, snow mobile days we would find similar results. I know skiing here in CT isn't what it used to be and Many places have folded.

Skiing in CT has always been a myth. 

[CapturedNature]

Just now, cut said:

There was an article (Sports Illustrated maybe?? Not sure, can't remember) about the impact of warming on outdoor sports, specifically hockey. They focused on Canada and the number of 'skate days' if you will. That is to say the number of skate able, outdoor rinks per winter day. The decline in skate days was depressingly remarkable. Im sure if applied the same thing to say, snow mobile days we would find similar results. I know skiing here in CT isn't what it used to be and Many places have folded.

There's a lot more factors involved in that than just snowfall.  Skiing and ski areas have just changed over the years.

[CapturedNature]

2 minutes ago, moneypitmike said:

Skiing in CT has always been a myth. 

http://www.nelsap.org/ct/ct.html

[cut]

1 minute ago, MetHerb said:

http://www.nelsap.org/ct/ct.html

Surprised to see Powder Ridge - glad they were able to open again. I remember as a kid always hearing about Blue Hill in North Carolina. Are they still open?

[moneypitmike]

Just now, cut said:

Surprised to see Powder Ridge - glad they were able to open again. I remember as a kid always hearing about Blue Hill in North Carolina. Are they still open?

Hop on the quad two-rope. 

[Great Snow 1717]

Just now, cut said:

There was an article (Sports Illustrated maybe?? Not sure, can't remember) about the impact of warming on outdoor sports, specifically hockey. They focused on Canada and the number of 'skate days' if you will. That is to say the number of skate able, outdoor rinks per winter day. The decline in skate days was depressingly remarkable. Im sure if applied the same thing to say, snow mobile days we would find similar results. I know skiing here in CT isn't what it used to be and Many places have folded.

I recall reading similar articles. I have family and friends who live in Canada. And all agree that the "pond"" and/or home hockey rink season has become shorter. The city of Lawrence for many years flooded the Playstead to make an outdoor ice skating rink. Often times the skating was good from December into March.  I do not recall when the city stopped flooding the Playstead BUT it is very unlikely that the ice rink would be around for as long as it was during the 60's and 70's.

 

[cut]

5 minutes ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

I recall reading similar articles. I have family and friends who live in Canada. And all agree that the "pond"" and/or home hockey rink season has become shorter. The city of Lawrence for many years flooded the Playstead to make an outdoor ice skating rink. Often times the skating was good from December into March.  I do not recall when the city stopped flooding the Playstead BUT it is very unlikely that the ice rink would be around for as long as it was during the 60's and 70's.

 

My son plays hockey and we have a ton of friends who used to set up the outdoor rinks but they don't bother any more. That being said we have had some really good seasons for that recently - except these last two have been awful. I think last year there were about 10 skate able days and this year none yet - and none in the foreseeable future either.

[CoastalWx]

37 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

I understand what you are saying /mean ... I think..

But for the general reader: one has to be careful with the above line of reasoning. It's used/abused, to negate the impacts of climate change to liberally...almost as a rationalization and denial of truth, because most in the business of doing so have too much to gain or maintain, in not admitting that it is a problem - more over, that it is a problem that all science included, most definitely appears to be human attributed.

That said, there is another danger in the above line of reasoning; it also negates the necessity to use climate trend analysis in the setting of expectations.  If the climate is demonstrating a logorithmic change ( accelerating one...) in either a negative or positive direction, wrt to any metric, it is wise to consider that ensuing period of time in question might exhibit that same tendency in that metric.

Otherwise, there is no problem - the way I see it ... - it assuming events and systems in a case by case basis, independent of that expectation. People have trouble separating those two... but, it's really more like ... if a case ends up warm, and the climate curve is accelerating warmer, ...the probability was > 50% for that in the first place. 

The real problem here is that climate masks causality.  People use that against the climate signal, which is false.

Not you per se... but these are aspects pertinent to the present World, and one's that irk me.

The natural human behavior to use any reasoning above as a way to deny or prove CC just shows you are dumb we are as a society and that we live in the dumbest time possible in our lives. We’ve become polarized with this topic and it’s become a with us or against us mentality. It’s really sad.  I just want to know what is happening without being polluted by agendas. Unfortunately it’s tough Get non-biased information these days. But I digress.

[cut]

1 minute ago, CoastalWx said:

The natural human behavior to use any reasoning above as a way to deny or prove CC just shows you are dumb we are as a society and that we live in the dumbest time possible in our lives. We’ve become polarized with this topic and it’s become a with us or against us mentality. It’s really sad.  I just want to know what is happening without being polluted by agendas. Unfortunately it’s tough Get non-biased information these days. But I digress.

Truthfully I think social media and peoples ability to now surround themselves with like minded people who lack the objectivity to debate the scientific facts is a big reason. I have friends that are skeptics and I say there used to be glaciers on Kilmanjaro and snow on that year round and they don't really have a response.

[moneypitmike]

2 minutes ago, cut said:

Truthfully I think social media and peoples ability to now surround themselves with like minded people who lack the objectivity to debate the scientific facts is a big reason. I have friends that are skeptics and I say there used to be glaciers on Kilmanjaro and snow on that year round and they don't really have a response.

This is a knife that cuts deeply both ways.

[cut]

Just now, moneypitmike said:

This is a knife that cuts deeply both ways.

Totally agree. As a species we will lose our ability to communicate face to face - without syntax and context. Kind of like the people on the spaceship in WallE - but our social skills will the thing that turns to mush instead of our bodies. I am being deliberately over the top here but I am wondering what our next step is in how we communicate and receive information.

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

1 hour ago, CoastalWx said:

It’s tough to say. On paper it’s dam ugly. But we’ve seen setups that were ugly, shift subtlety with day to day changes to something more favorable. Who knows. Prepare for boredom and hope for the best. All you can do. Hopefully the 7-8 works out. 

It is and I am not saying it won’t snow either. But locked and loaded month...it is not. 

[Spanks45]

6 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

The natural human behavior to use any reasoning above as a way to deny or prove CC just shows you are dumb we are as a society and that we live in the dumbest time possible in our lives. We’ve become polarized with this topic and it’s become a with us or against us mentality. It’s really sad.  I just want to know what is happening without being polluted by agendas. Unfortunately it’s tough Get non-biased information these days. But I digress.

I just wish everything now a days wasn't so political, especially regarding science....It would be nice if the world could come together and share data, ideas, hypotheses, etc with getting so darn upset and taking everything personal. We probably could have saved the planet by now if we did. As a scientist, it drives me nuts that we can't just use the simple 5 step scientific method without stomping out of the room because one's private donors tell them what they should believe not what the data actually shows...sorry for the banter

[cut]

Going skiing in February - at this point Im just routing for the mountains of VT to be in good shape for then as it seems they are shite right now.

[moneypitmike]

7 minutes ago, cut said:

Totally agree. As a species we will lose our ability to communicate face to face - without syntax and context. Kind of like the people on the spaceship in WallE - but our social skills will the thing that turns to mush instead of our bodies. I am being deliberately over the top here but I am wondering what our next step is in how we communicate and receive information.

Brain implants for telepathy.

[Great Snow 1717]

3 minutes ago, Spanks45 said:

I just wish everything now a days wasn't so political, especially regarding science....It would be nice if the world could come together and share data, ideas, hypotheses, etc with getting so darn upset and taking everything personal. We probably could have saved the planet by now if we did. As a scientist, it drives me nuts that we can't just use the simple 5 step scientific method without stomping out of the room because one's private donors tell them what they should believe not what the data actually shows...sorry for the banter

 

4 minutes ago, Spanks45 said:

I just wish everything now a days wasn't so political, especially regarding science....It would be nice if the world could come together and share data, ideas, hypotheses, etc with getting so darn upset and taking everything personal. We probably could have saved the planet by now if we did. As a scientist, it drives me nuts that we can't just use the simple 5 step scientific method without stomping out of the room because one's private donors tell them what they should believe not what the data actually shows...sorry for the banter

I think things have always been political to some extent but the difference is  the political battles on all topics are front and center today.  

[PWMan]

First time posting this season... I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the pages of climate-change discussion indicate a lack of snow threats in the immediately foreseeable future.

[NorEastermass128]

Just now, PWMan said:

First time posting this season... I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the pages of climate-change discussion indicate a lack of snow threats in the immediately foreseeable future.

You are correct. We snooze for a while. 

[Baroclinic Zone]

Snooze and booze

[Great Snow 1717]

7 minutes ago, PWMan said:

First time posting this season... I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the pages of climate-change discussion indicate a lack of snow threats in the immediately foreseeable future.

Have you ever worked for The Psychic Friends Network?????

[PWMan]

2 minutes ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

Have you ever worked for The Psychic Friends Network?????

In the words of the great Steven Wright, I'm a peripheral visionary.

[ORH_wxman]

8 minutes ago, MetHerb said:

There's a lot more factors involved in that than just snowfall.  Skiing and ski areas have just changed over the years.

 

Yeah agreed.... the skiing stuff is crap....mom and pop ski areas used to function sometimes for like 20-30 days out of the winter...whenever they had natural snowfall, and they'd be closed when a cutter wiped it out. Most of them closed because of a combo of interstate highways making the larger mountains more accessible and the rise of lawsuits which small areas mostly couldn't afford to deal with. CC had very little to do with it....most of them actually closed during a very cold period in the 1970s. I learned to ski on absolute garbage in the 1990-1992 timeframe. We had bare ground on half of the killington ski trails and the ones that had snow were like icy death ribbons. I could only have been so lucky to learn to ski in the 2010s when ski trails have been mostly packed to brim with snow.

 

This myth that we had some sort of skiing utopia where Joe's ski hill in Southington CT could be open 90 days a winter with full cover is totally a figment of climate weenie's imagination.

 

Being critical of that 20th century utopia narrative does NOT make one a climate denier either...I hear that garbage all the time too from climate weenies...usually in an attempt to shut down the debate...it's easier to paint one with a pejorative than actually read some literature or look at data. Hyping up a narrative is just as bad as discounting climate change exists....both are anti-science.

 

CC makes a torch more likely...events like March 2012 are more likely due to CC as well as torch winters like 2015-2016, and those record warm months that come with such winters. But on the flip side, this seems to be offset somewhat by more snowfall in recent years. Could be a result of more moisture and also an increase in frequency of the "warm arctic, cold continents" pattern. The temperature increase is also not uniform. The minimum temperatures are increasing about 40% faster than maximum temperatures mostly due to radiational cooling on clear nights....and because of this, it will have less impact on a snowstorm or snow retention versus if the temperature increase was uniformly increasing. Whether we radiate to 12F versus 14F or 15F isn't going to impact a snowstorm as much as maximum temperatures in cloudy/precipitation situations. Our winter time maximum temperatures are warming at roughly 0.35F per decade while the minimum temps are like 0.4 to 0.5F per decade.

The mid-level temps for New England in the D,J,F period have warmed even slower than the surface and this is important since mid-level temps are more important to our snowfall than sfc temps...as far back as we can go (1949), the trend has only been about 0.13C per decade, which comes out to about 0.23F per decade converted into Fahrenheit....even slower than our maximum sfc temp rise and about half the rate of the minimum sfc temp rise.

 

 

 

 

In the literature, extratropical storm tracks overall have shifted slightly poleward in our area since the middle 20th century, but not enough to explain a cutter over Buffalo versus a redeveloper over Cape Cod...that difference is way beyond the net effects of CC. I think the easiest way to think of CC is that it is an underlying trend that gets dwarfed on a seasonal and sub-seasonal basis by natural variability. We can't get our coldest month of all time (Feb 2015) in a world where CC warming overwhelms natural variability on that type of timescale. The months like February 2015 become less likely in a warming world, but they still obviously happen. It happened in 1934....and we somehow repeated those temps (and then some) 81 years later. Likewise, 1949 is still the warmest summer on record in Massachusetts....CC warming will eventually ensure that we break that record, but we haven't broken it yet because natural variability still reigns supreme for the time being.

[Great Snow 1717]

1 minute ago, PWMan said:

In the words of the great Steven Wright, I'm a peripheral visionary.

Awesome comedian!!

"I spilled spot remover on my dog and now he's gone"

[A Moonlit Sky]

22 minutes ago, Spanks45 said:

I just wish everything now a days wasn't so political, especially regarding science....It would be nice if the world could come together and share data, ideas, hypotheses, etc with getting so darn upset and taking everything personal. We probably could have saved the planet by now if we did. As a scientist, it drives me nuts that we can't just use the simple 5 step scientific method without stomping out of the room because one's private donors tell them what they should believe not what the data actually shows...sorry for the banter

As others have mentioned, politics has always been in everything. What you're describing is a combination of the flattening of the meaning of knowledge and political belief being used as a proxy for personal morality. The hyper-availability of knowledge via the internet has placed the traditional gatekeepers of knowledge (i.e. experts or those with professional qualifications) on a level playing field with literally anyone and their Mom. Combine that with elevating "I'm just asking questions" and the idea that everything is always debatable and...well, here we are.