December 2022

[cleetussnow]

1 minute ago, forkyfork said:

 

this isn't a debate. enjoy being wrong <3 

Whos debating?  Just asking a pro a few questions.  

[forkyfork]

Just now, cleetussnow said:

Whos debating?  Just asking a pro a few questions.  

and i'm not answering them

[hazwoper]

Just now, cleetussnow said:

Whos debating?  Just asking a pro a few questions.  

Then answer the question.  If you speak of warming from 4000 years ago, what process back then was similar to mans releasing of carbon locked in the crust?  The answer, nothing compares in earths history.  NOTHING.

[SnoSki14]

Nam has a weak secondary or meso low ahead of the arctic front for Thursday night. 

It really enhances the winds ahead of the system. And then they'll be another bout of winds with the arctic front itself. 

[EastonSN+]

16 minutes ago, bluewave said:

The pattern near the end month looks like it will be something out of a super La Niña playbook as the +SOI really ramps up.

 

 

I hope the warmth is joined by dry weather so we all can enjoy the outdoors. Nothing worse than 55 and drizzle.

[cleetussnow]

6 minutes ago, forkyfork said:

and i'm not answering them

Yeah no one is.  I think thats problematic.  Its been much warmer than now in human history, and much colder than now.  I dunno.  Seems climate is dynamic even on such short time scales as 200,000 years, or even 10,000!  
 

There are plenty of climate factors in the past worth studying.  Why don’t we?

[NJwx85]

5 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

Nam has a weak secondary or meso low ahead of the arctic front for Thursday night. 

It really enhances the winds ahead of the system. And then they'll be another bout of winds with the arctic front itself. 

Looks like a 2-4 hour period of sustained winds of 30-40MPH with potential for higher gusts around 04-06z Friday. The 12z NAM has very intense convection overhead our area in correlation with max vorticity. 925mb winds peak around 65-70kts. Could get dicey if that is able to mix to the surface in heavy precip.

[forkyfork]

11 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

Nam has a weak secondary or meso low ahead of the arctic front for Thursday night. 

It really enhances the winds ahead of the system. And then they'll be another bout of winds with the arctic front itself. 

i think the se wind threat ahead of the front is overblown. soundings show an inversion

 

[Dark Star]

56 minutes ago, cleetussnow said:

What caused the other warming periods that happened in the last 4,000 years?  Sea levels have risen 40 feet  in that time, averaging a foot every 100 years. 

Or the last 11,000?  Ice has been melting for that long globally.  Its not a new thing.  When should it have stopped?  

It actually did reverse for a time, then peak ice of the last 1000 years was around 1570 ish.  Why did it stop expanding then and reverse?

Should the planet be cooling right now if it weren’t for humans?  Or is there a perfect static temperature we should expect?  

If we don’t think about these things, we may draw a wrong conclusion.  

Asking for a friend.

Good points...

[nycsnow]

21 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

Nam has a weak secondary or meso low ahead of the arctic front for Thursday night. 

It really enhances the winds ahead of the system. And then they'll be another bout of winds with the arctic front itself. 

Hrr has impressive winds starting Thursday  night as well 

[Dark Star]

11 minutes ago, forkyfork said:

i think the se wind threat ahead of the front is overblown. soundings show an inversion

 

Wind threats usually are overblown (no pun intended)

[SnoSki14]

12 minutes ago, nycsnow said:

Hrr has impressive winds starting Thursday  night as well 

We'd likely need convection to overcome the inversion though. I think many will see gusts up to 50 regardless by Friday 

[NJwx85]

3 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

We'd likely need convection to overcome the inversion though. I think many will see gusts up to 50 regardless by Friday 

It looks like we might see some heavy convection, possibly even some thunderstorms late Thursday night. NAM even has some modest mid level lapse rates.

[NJwx85]

The 12z GFS has been very persistent with the potential for a quick burst of snow on Friday afternoon along the arctic front. Mesoscale models don't show much. I personally think that the dry air moves in way too quickly but Western areas could see flakes, especially Ulster/Sullivan/Orange/Warren/Sussex.

[gravitylover]

1 hour ago, Brian5671 said:

Boring place other than snow-many have left the area due to high taxes and poor climate so alot of blight and empty houses

I spend a fair amount of time in the Buffalo metro area during the warm seasons and I find it to be a pretty vibrant, hip, youthful and economically strong zone. 5 years ago it wasn't as strong as it is now and people didn't seem to appreciate it like they do now. Other than a handful of isolated spots around the state the WNY region is more outdoorsy than the rest, it's the strongest bike market outside of the 5 Boros  and outdoor winter recreation is booming. If I was 20 years younger I'd strongly consider living there. 

1 hour ago, MJO812 said:

Watertown for me

Talk about worn out... 

[Brian5671]

1 minute ago, gravitylover said:

I spend a fair amount of time in the Buffalo metro area during the warm seasons and I find it to be a pretty vibrant, hip, youthful and economically strong zone. 5 years ago it wasn't as strong as it is now and people didn't seem to appreciate it like they do now. Other than a handful of isolated spots around the state the WNY region is more outdoorsy than the rest, it's the strongest bike market outside of the 5 Boros  and outdoor winter recreation is booming. If I was 20 years younger I'd strongly consider living there. 

Talk about worn out... 

Interesting-was not aware-haven't been there in a long time...that's actually good to hear-cost of living certainly alot less than around here... 

[WestBabylonWeather]

1 hour ago, cleetussnow said:

What caused the other warming periods that happened in the last 4,000 years?  Sea levels have risen 40 feet  in that time, averaging a foot every 100 years. 

Or the last 11,000?  Ice has been melting for that long globally.  Its not a new thing.  When should it have stopped?  

It actually did reverse for a time, then peak ice of the last 1000 years was around 1570 ish.  Why did it stop expanding then and reverse?

Should the planet be cooling right now if it weren’t for humans?  Or is there a perfect static temperature we should expect?  

If we don’t think about these things, we may draw a wrong conclusion.  

Asking for a friend.

The planet does have natural warming and cooling cycles. 
 

the question now is, is this a normal warming cycle that we are ENHANCING and making worse with greenhouse emissions. OR is all the current warming only due to the greenhouse emissions. 

[cleetussnow]

Just now, WestBabylonWeather said:

The planet does have natural warming and cooling cycles. 
 

the question now is, is this a normal warming cycle that we are ENHANCING and making worse with greenhouse emissions. OR is all the current warming only due to the greenhouse emissions. 

Agree.

[Volcanic Winter]

55 minutes ago, wishcast_hater said:

The Science is settled.  Except it’s not, and that statement is anything but scientific. Science demands debate.

Saying “it was warmer in the past” isn’t an argument nor is it a counter to the fact that CO2 emissions are explosively accelerating warming of this planet right now in the present. The climate ebbs and flows naturally over long periods of time in lockstep with, yes, the PPM of CO2 in the atmosphere. Except this change occurs over thousands to millions of years, with more abrupt changes following catastrophic global events like bolide impacts or flood basalt eruptions, the latter which still takes thousands of years to cause dramatic change. An example of the latter is the Permian mass extinction where the planet was very nearly sterilized as oceans exceeded 40C following eruption of the Siberian Traps, one of the largest continental flood basalt eruptions known. We are mimicking that sort of CO2 release, except on a much shorter timescale. The planet naturally switches between several states of higher and lower CO2 levels and temperature due to various feedback mechanisms. We are interfering with and essentially hijacking it at an unprecedented short term timescale  

It actually speaks to the fact that you are naive to the physics involved, or you wouldn’t think bringing up paleoclimate conditions is a relevant argument. Did you know the earth in the Hadean was so warm it was molten? Fun to think about, but it has nothing to do with AGW.

 

[jm1220]

1 hour ago, forkyfork said:

i think the se wind threat ahead of the front is overblown. soundings show an inversion

 

Hopefully the coastal flood threat would be too. Major flooding predicted in some of the back bays here. New moon doesn't help. 

[bluewave]

This is a super front with a near record 40°drop in around 12 hrs.

 

[jm1220]

3 minutes ago, bluewave said:

This is a super front with a near record 40°drop in around 12 hrs.

 

NAM might be too cold but it's still showing NYC getting below 10 and high of around 17 on Christmas Eve with still gusty WSW wind. Damn shame it can't be with some snow. I doubt there'll be a flash freeze, 95% of the precip will be with the warm front. 

[crossbowftw3]

Meanwhile, Dillon, Montana dropped 26 degrees in three minutes:

 

 

 

[TheClimateChanger]

23 minutes ago, crossbowftw3 said:

Meanwhile, Dillon, Montana dropped 26 degrees in three minutes:

 

 

 

Interesting. Is the reported temperature averaged over a certain interval of time, while the dewpoint is an instantaneous measure on this equipment? Why did the dewpoint drop so substantially before the temperature especially with fairly substantial precipitation falling?

[jm1220]

20 minutes ago, bluewave said:

I am seeing several models with a Christmas Eve high under 20° In NYC which hasn’t happened since 1872.

 

Time Series Summary for NY CITY CENTRAL PARK, NY
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.

Rank	Ending Date	Lowest Max Temperature Dec 24 to Dec 24	Missing Count
1	1872-12-24	13	0
2	1906-12-24	20	0
3	1989-12-24	22	0
-	1983-12-24	22	0
-	1897-12-24	22	0
-	1896-12-24	22	0
-	1892-12-24	22	0
-	1878-12-24	22	0
-	1876-12-24	22	0

It'll be a wild 48-72 hours. Heavy rain, 50-60mph winds for most of us, crash freeze (hopefully not flash freeze since the cold front might have little precip) and high below 20 on Christmas Eve. 

[Stormlover74]

9 minutes ago, jm1220 said:

It'll be a wild 48-72 hours. Heavy rain, 50-60mph winds for most of us, crash freeze (hopefully not flash freeze since the cold front might have little precip) and high below 20 on Christmas Eve. 

I think we'll make it to 23 or 24

[weatherpruf]

3 hours ago, cleetussnow said:

Yeah no one is.  I think thats problematic.  Its been much warmer than now in human history, and much colder than now.  I dunno.  Seems climate is dynamic even on such short time scales as 200,000 years, or even 10,000!  
 

There are plenty of climate factors in the past worth studying.  Why don’t we?

There are plenty of journal articles on these topics. This forum is about the upcoming weather. If you really want to know the answers you can find plenty of good information from legitimate sources online or in your local library. You don't even have to search for them, the librarian will do it for you. 

[bluewave]

The 12z Euro goes from the mid 50s Friday morning to the low 10s in NYC at night. Has the strongest wind gusts from 50-60 mph with the cold front during the day on Friday. Highs only in the low 20s for Christmas Eve which hasn’t happened since 1989.

 

 

Time Series Summary for NY CITY CENTRAL PARK, NY
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.

Rank	Ending Date	Lowest Max Temperature Dec 24 to Dec 24	Missing Count
1	1872-12-24	13	0
2	1906-12-24	20	0
3	1989-12-24	22	0
-	1983-12-24	22	0
-	1897-12-24	22	0
-	1896-12-24	22	0
-	1892-12-24	22	0
-	1878-12-24	22	0
-	1876-12-24	22	0
4	1975-12-24	23	0
5	1884-12-24	24	0
-	1870-12-24	24	0

[JustinRP37]

3 hours ago, cleetussnow said:

Yeah no one is.  I think thats problematic.  Its been much warmer than now in human history, and much colder than now.  I dunno.  Seems climate is dynamic even on such short time scales as 200,000 years, or even 10,000!  
 

There are plenty of climate factors in the past worth studying.  Why don’t we?

I hope this does not get deleted because I do think it is important information. I am an ecologist that teaches both ecology and some climate science at a university. 

The amount of warming we are seeing right now is beyond what we have even seen in the past. People think in such short time scales. Even when you talk about 200,000 to 10,000 years those are massive time scales and yeah 4-8 degrees is huge (200,000 years is over 1,500 current human generations!). We are currently talking about 3-4 degrees in UNDER 300 years. The only major thing to change this fast is fossil fuel combustion. It seems so hard to fathom that the Model T will turn 115 years old next year. Think about what the world looked like just 115 years ago prior to the Model T. Further, for people born in the 1950s, there were just 2.5 billion people on the planet. We hit 8 billion just before Thanksgiving this year. Tremendous levels of growth at all scales. Physics CANNOT be denied. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, yet some want to make it seem like combusting millions of tons of carbon by humans cannot possibly change and destabilize the climate. That is completely incorrect. Also, when you do see massive temperature swings on the planet they are usually around mass extinction events. Humans won't be around forever, but as it is now we have hardly been 'around' compared to the planet. 

Further something that a lot tend to gloss over is the ocean does store a lot of our carbon, which in turn leads to ocean acidification. We have already seen over a 30% increase in acidity of the ocean since the Industrial Revolution. This is putting a lot of stress on anything that creates a shell and also corals. The science is out there and it is not political in the least. It is literally simple physics from the laws of physics. Happy to discuss on other threads.

As for climate factors worth studying. We do study them. We also have quite a few models that can model the climate based on atmospheric gases in the past. Currently, warming is not occurring faster than even some of the more aggressive models have forecasted. 

[CIK62]

Been looking this way for 10 days.      Keep dropping a day at one end and still getting the same output by adding a day.       Worse than that is the fact that the whole probability, or what there is of it, comes from the 23rd---which we know is a fail.