February to Forget Volume 2 - 2020

[Damage In Tolland]

1 hour ago, weatherwiz said:

This March could very well yield a pattern similar to that of 2012...the way everything is structured now and how it seems to evolve is a bit similar...obviously some displacements of key anomalies but I think we're heading into the direction of a warm month. 

Yup. Everything is pointing to that. Even have ridging poking up into E Canada. Nothing to stop the warmth 

[ineedsnow]

Maybe we can warm sea surface temps up enough and get a cat 3 in August or September to make up for this crappy year!

[weatherwiz]

2 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Yup. Everything is pointing to that. Even have ridging poking up into E Canada. Nothing to stop the warmth 

Let start cranking those SST's and limit marine taint once severe season ramps up here 

[TalcottWx]

20 hours ago, SouthCoastMA said:

19" here YTD, somehow. But I've learned to easily detach from investing too much time, espcially now that I'm married and have a toddler. 

This winter sucks, but winters like 06/07, 10/11, and 11/12 were worse for me because I was younger and more emotional. Being on the wrong side of a rain/snow line back then was rage inducing.  I listed 10/11 because...well look where I lived. 

And if by SE you meant like the mid atlantic, then yeah me neither. 

My girlfriend does her best to make me feel like I'm married. At least she provides structure and I'm no longer a shmuck LOL.

[Typhoon Tip]

55 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

At this point it’s comical. Literally nothing has gone right inside 5 days since early December. Maybe Dave got 4” instead of 3”  in some random event, but overall....pretty bad. Just have to laugh. 

Well you know, if it is that consistent it's probably something systemically mechanical about the physical handling of flow entities by the models, et al. 

I saw a notification/post on LinkedIn the other day by some Met that's managed into my network but whom I have no formal affiliation to - such is usually the case for anyone in the social media realm.  He presented a model verification comparison between the Euro and GFS for beyond D5; it was astounding how similar they were over our quatrahemispheric scope, AND, how awful they were.  Way worse than the collective no-how of operational Met and/or educated enthusiasm are really used to in personal/common experience. 

So, what is it ?  

I think it's the fast flow man.  I see a plausible-causal relationship there, because velocity 'around' wave spaces in the atmosphere, may not be handled/integrating properly with velocities 'inside' the wave spaces.  Maybe the the failure is in the diabatic vs adiabatic thermodynamics and latent heat after condensation then releasing to meld into larger surrounding R-wave phenomenon .. I can come up with plausible, convincing science fiction that may or may not be proven more veracious than not.  But, one thing I have noticed about storm-modeled behavior is: regardless of cyclone tracking in guidance, they are always over-amplified in the D5+ compared to what has transpired, save for a few sporadic bombs ( NF a month back ... Etc. ) or the deal up in the UK last week. The Euro nailed the NF low some 6.5 days out - I know, because I diligently monitored that CCB event because the model kept putting out like 20 isobars spread out over 200 miles and it was fantastic modeling cinema to see that. One could have taken a veritable Sharpie to the weather chart, and just drawn a big fat black ink channel - sure enough...they were sustaining Category 2 shattered ice froth. 

Not sure how the models handled the UK event/cyclone leading....My hunch is they did reasonably to above normal.  Usually ( you know all this...just arm-chair quarterbacking over coffee) big deep mechanically exhaustive bombs have equally charming leading indicators, so the models tend to see those early.  Like primitive by comparison, the 1993 so-dubbed "Super Storm"  I recall as much as 10 days ahead and TWC was airing how the ensembles of the MRF were beginning to "hint at something very large in the atmosphere" ( I literally can still hear it in my head).  And, well, it never really deviated after that.  That even was like an 'atmospheric rogue-wave' but I digress...

I think the clue to the "nothing has worked out" appears to be hidden in the daily function modeling programs, probably right down to the geo-physical scale, too.  Because they are all doing it, and never not doing it... again, save of extremes, suggesting there are inabilities or crude aspects lurking in the models that are acting like "limitation rails"  Fast flows tend to strip storm depth because the speed out paces the Coriolis parameter...and that's the stretching of the field - well, stretched fields mean less curvature, so we end up negating the curvature term in the difluence ... --> mass balance handling error emerges and the models may be introducing too much curvature for fast flow out in time, and then correcting ...even sort of surreptitiously flatter, then ends up with more progressive weakening trends.  That sets up a whole host of other issues, because a weaker system then interacts ( integral above? ) with the surrounding field differently in terms of positive or negative/constructive/destructive feedbacks... and on and so on.... 

Another sort of 'gestaltian' perspective ...as an indirect metric perhaps pertaining to this: the number of record setting intercontinental ground-based velocities being reported by various commercial airline flights.  Seems there is a weird kind of emergent non-correlating coincidence between the frequency of those being reported, and the dimming skill of the models over recent years. It seems there is some tantalizing evidence that links velocities of the planetary maelstrom to the modeling performance in the mid ranges. 

[WinterWolf]

1 hour ago, weatherwiz said:

Wasn't it pretty shattering too...especially considering we were Nino free? 

Pretty concerning stuff 

Oh GOD....I'm so Concerned LMAO.  Meanwhile the ICE in the Arctic as Steve pointed out has increased..but nobody wants to talk about that lol. 

[weatherwiz]

2 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

Oh GOD....I'm so Concerned LMAO.  Meanwhile the ICE in the Arctic as Steve pointed out has increased..but nobody wants to talk about that lol. 

Yes it's increased but still well below what it should be.

Meanwhile, in Antarctica ice sheets bigger than big cities are breaking off.

anyways, I know this stuff belongs in climate change (and for obvious reasons) but this is always a subject that people will agree-to-disagree on but at the end of the day people's opinions on the subject mean absolute crap b/c what is occurring will continue to occur whether people want to believe it or not. People's opinions aren't going to change how climate will continue to evolve moving forward or that ramifications it will have. 

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

18 minutes ago, DotRat_Wx said:

My girlfriend does her best to make me feel like I'm married. At least she provides structure and I'm no longer a shmuck LOL.

If you need a woman to provide structure BEFORE marriage then you’ll struggle while married...and eventually have a mid life crisis of buying a sports convertible at 50 while balding. 

[OSUmetstud]

7 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

Oh GOD....I'm so Concerned LMAO.  Meanwhile the ICE in the Arctic as Steve pointed out has increased..but nobody wants to talk about that lol. 

It should increase in a +ao regime. Even with the uptick this winter due to that it's still on the very low side compared to norms. 

[Ginx snewx]

3 minutes ago, OSUmetstud said:

It should increase in a +ao regime. Even with the uptick this winter due to that it's still on the very low side compared to norms. 

It is good news though. I am sure the wildlife and populations that were affected by the lack of ice and were considered threatened by open water benefitted. 

[Ginx snewx]

49 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Yup. Everything is pointing to that. Even have ridging poking up into E Canada. Nothing to stop the warmth 

You made this up 

[OSUmetstud]

Just now, Ginx snewx said:

It is good news though. I am sure the wildlife and populations that were affected by the lack of ice and were considered threatened by open water benefitted. 

I guess it's how you look at it. The fact that were in a historic +ao regime but still low on ice is a bad sign too. 

[Ginx snewx]

Just now, OSUmetstud said:

I guess it's how you look at it. The fact that were in a historic +ao regime but still low on ice is a bad sign too. 

Finding good news doesn't always have to be bad. I like to think nature finds a balance perhaps it will. 

[OSUmetstud]

1 minute ago, Ginx snewx said:

Finding good news doesn't always have to be bad. I like to think nature finds a balance perhaps it will. 

I hope so. 

[Ginx snewx]

13 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

If you need a woman to provide structure BEFORE marriage then you’ll struggle while married...and eventually have a mid life crisis of buying a sports convertible at 50 while balding. 

I dont think this is anywhere close to true. Having a relationship often cools the jets of a young person. Slows the partying,  develops structure,  develops non narcissistic behavior.  Good for Jay glad he is happy 

[Ginx snewx]

Just now, OSUmetstud said:

I hope so. 

What's your snow depth?

[OSUmetstud]

1 minute ago, Ginx snewx said:

What's your snow depth?

0 I'm in augusta ga lol. 

The airport has embarrassingly bad obs sometimes...reporting 15". Its wrong. The mt pearl cocorahs is reporting 49" lol. 

[Typhoon Tip]

59 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Finding good news doesn't always have to be bad. I like to think nature finds a balance perhaps it will. 

Therein, is the problem: what goes into that verb ( bold ) right there -

What do you think 'find' will mean? 

Look around you everywhere and all facets, at all scales and dimensions in nature, nature restores ( balance) violently ( breakdown of existing paradigms).

Perception is beguiling... If it happens at a slow rate, that is not benign -necessarily.  To see things otherwise smacks of non-sophistication and shockingly simplistic assumption about what it will take to restore any system that is being usurped. As repeating evidence in nature shows, usually the arrival of the new, balanced result has wiped out the pre-existing paradigm(s) in favor of the new matrix.   

You "like to think nature finds a balance"?  I applaud ... because absolutely:  everything in nature, including the sentient capability to even perceive nature, happens because of the perpetual restoration of forces at all scales.   But that restoring process has big big big component of entropy, when restoring forces are unintended - and that loss of order and increase in chaos when big forces are in play, is like stampede of elephants through a daisy farm -

[Ginx snewx]

3 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Therein, is the problem: what is goes into that verb ( bold ) right there -

What do you think 'find' will mean? 

Look around you everywhere and all facets, at all scales and dimensions in nature, nature restores ( balance) violently.   Anything else is a stark lack of sophistication and shockingly simplistic assumption about what it will take.   You "like to think" nature finds a balance?  I applaud ... because absolutely:  everything in nature, including the sentient capability to even perceive nature, happen because of perpetual restoration of forces at all scales.   But that restoring process has big big big component of entropy - and that loss of order and increase in chaos when big forces are in play, is like stampede of elephants through a daisy farm -

Yin yang. Nature loves equilibrium, how it gets there is undetermined,we are only temporary visitors on the rock. There are alternative views. 

https://judithcurry.com/2020/02/13/plausible-scenarios-for-climate-change-2020-2050/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

[Ginx snewx]

5 minutes ago, OSUmetstud said:

0 I'm in augusta ga lol. 

The airport has embarrassingly bad obs sometimes...reporting 15". Its wrong. The mt pearl cocorahs is reporting 49" lol. 

Vacation?

[WinterWolf]

Just now, Ginx snewx said:

Yin yang. Nature loves equilibrium, how it gets there we are only temporary visitors on the rock.

Amen.   Nobody, No government is going to change anything.  It's a cycle that will play out just as all the other cycles have played out over Millions of years before humans were even here.  We'll all be dead and gone and so will our kids when it does whatever it's going to do.  No worrying needed. 

[CoastalWx]

Oh brother.  

[Ginx snewx]

4 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

Amen.   Nobody, No government is going to change anything.  It's a cycle that will play out just as all the other cycles have played out over Millions of years before humans were even here.  We'll all be dead and gone and so will our kids when it does whatever it's going to do.  No worrying needed. 

Being a good steward of the planet is important.  Understanding processes through science and research is vitally important. Fear mongering and finding every which way to end humanity is how some live their life. Odds are it's a microscopic bug that does us in. 

[weatherwiz]

16 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Finding good news doesn't always have to be bad. I like to think nature finds a balance perhaps it will. 

I strongly agree here...in fact, I think one could argue that the result of some of what is going on is tied into the balance trying to be re-stored. I know the Earth goes through cycles and the Earth has gone through periods of extreme warmth before...but when you account for the population now compared to back then the scale of the impacts are much more extreme. 

Obviously it can be argued whether humans are directly related to the changes in climate or not...but whether humans are to blame doesn't really change the fact that changes in climate are resulting in significant disruptions to lives/nature. Australia is a great example...now perhaps centuries or thousands of years ago the Hadley cell went through a similar shift to what is occurring now and human-induced climate change isn't to blame...but that's minute. At the end of the day millions of people and wildlife are being impacted. 

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

13 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

I dont think this is anywhere close to true. Having a relationship often cools the jets of a young person. Slows the partying,  develops structure,  develops non narcissistic behavior.  Good for Jay glad he is happy 

Maybe for some I guess. I didn’t need one to cool the jets down, it happened on my own. Then my wife and I got together. I am a firm believer people shouldn’t get into serious relationships until their 30’s or whenever they are mature enough to do so. Relying on someone else to help you slow down is unhealthy and could lead to potential issues. Everyone is different and no two scenarios are the same, some folks need it, but psychologists and studies tend to paint the same picture. 

[Damage In Tolland]

10 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

Amen.   Nobody, No government is going to change anything.  It's a cycle that will play out just as all the other cycles have played out over Millions of years before humans were even here.  We'll all be dead and gone and so will our kids when it does whatever it's going to do.  No worrying needed. 

WALK ON HOME BOY

 

 

[Typhoon Tip]

1 minute ago, weatherwiz said:

I strongly agree here...in fact, I think one could argue that the result of some of what is going on is tied into the balance trying to be re-stored. I know the Earth goes through cycles and the Earth has gone through periods of extreme warmth before...but when you account for the population now compared to back then the scale of the impacts are much more extreme. 

Obviously it can be argued whether humans are directly related to the changes in climate or not...but whether humans are to blame doesn't really change the fact that changes in climate are resulting in significant disruptions to lives/nature. Australia is a great example...now perhaps centuries or thousands of years ago the Hadley cell went through a similar shift to what is occurring now and human-induced climate change isn't to blame...but that's minute. At the end of the day millions of people and wildlife are being impacted. 

The statement has value because nature always is a process seeking balance - 

nothing else. 

Human 'conceit' seems to have the restoring as somehow taking place protecting us over all else ... ?   Good luck - 

No, the balancing will happen where ever the gradient that is unbalance is given space and time to motivate - if aquatic and land-based biomes are in the way, there's no morality there - that's a human conception.  If we get what that means in super Universal objectivity?  That means your ass!!

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

Please...no mas, no mas. 

[OSUmetstud]

16 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Vacation?

Visiting my brother his wife and my niece at fort gordon. But yeah. 

[Ginx snewx]

8 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

I strongly agree here...in fact, I think one could argue that the result of some of what is going on is tied into the balance trying to be re-stored. I know the Earth goes through cycles and the Earth has gone through periods of extreme warmth before...but when you account for the population now compared to back then the scale of the impacts are much more extreme. 

Obviously it can be argued whether humans are directly related to the changes in climate or not...but whether humans are to blame doesn't really change the fact that changes in climate are resulting in significant disruptions to lives/nature. Australia is a great example...now perhaps centuries or thousands of years ago the Hadley cell went through a similar shift to what is occurring now and human-induced climate change isn't to blame...but that's minute. At the end of the day millions of people and wildlife are being impacted. 

You know that Australian wildfires have occurred which burned more acres right? We get in the way by not allowing open burns trying to control the natural way. Same with building on barrier beaches.  Sand moves.  The problem is us and our decisions. Being smarter is tough when people make decisions based on money or fear.