Winter El Nino Tracking Thread 2023-2024

[nw baltimore wx]

6 hours ago, FPizz said:

What is the timeframe used when making these maps?  Do they update it like the temp charts (1990-2020)?  

You’re quoting the wrong person. I don’t know.

@CAPE? Mets?

[stormy]

9 hours ago, nw baltimore wx said:

World is on fire.

SST's are up in the oceans for many reasons. SST's are far below normal in Superior for reasons. "The world is on fire" is somewhat extreme when the majority of the United States was cooler than normal for both May and June.

[CAPE]

7 hours ago, FPizz said:

What is the timeframe used when making these maps?  Do they update it like the temp charts (1990-2020)?  

 

22 minutes ago, nw baltimore wx said:

You’re quoting the wrong person. I don’t know.

@CAPE? Mets?

Didn't see it specified on that site. TT still uses 1981-2010 climo for SSTs, so that might be an indication.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

We've seen 4 straight days of 90s across the area, with not much agreement in upper latitude pattern. -NAO now looks to persist next 10 days, this has correlated with extended ridge down the EC lately. The problem I have with 65-66 analog is the -NAO really dug into -PNA SE ridge, forcing trough. The NAO is not even in the same ballpark of pattern these days: we need pacific-forced cold, but a -nao may give us bigger storms to work with. Either way I think the STJ will be pretty juicy as the pattern is macro, Hard to imagine we get a lot of rainstorms if there is a Moderate+ Nino this Winter. 

[CAPE]

10 hours ago, stormy said:

SST's are up in the oceans for many reasons. SST's are far below normal in Superior for reasons. "The world is on fire" is somewhat extreme when the majority of the United States was cooler than normal for both May and June.

Oceans are a heat sink, and there is more heat so..

[CAPE]

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ocean-warming/

[stormy]

1 hour ago, CAPE said:

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ocean-warming/

Thanks CAPE!  That was an interesting read.

Here is another interesting read that partially disputes the assumption in your piece that hurricane frequency and intensity are increased by warming.  https://www.sciencenews.org/article/hurricanes-frequency-danger-climate-change-atlantic        Also, the possibility exists that cleaner air today may be exacerbating warming compared to the mid 20th century.  Did we actually increase global warming by cleaning up the air??

The more we know the more we realize that we have a lot to learn.

[BTRWx's Thanks Giving]

2 hours ago, stormy said:

Thanks CAPE!  That was an interesting read.

Here is another interesting read that partially disputes the assumption in your piece that hurricane frequency and intensity are increased by warming.  https://www.sciencenews.org/article/hurricanes-frequency-danger-climate-change-atlantic        Also, the possibility exists that cleaner air today may be exacerbating warming compared to the mid 20th century.  Did we actually increase global warming by cleaning up the air??

The more we know the more we realize that we have a lot to learn.

That effect would be too localized.

[stormy]

2 hours ago, BTRWx's Thanks Giving said:

That effect would be too localized.

"The amount of soot and sulfate particles over the Atlantic Ocean was much higher in the mid 20th century than now; by blocking and scattering sunlight, those particles temporarily cooled the planet enough to counter act greenhouse gas warming.  That cooling is also thought to have temporarily suppressed hurricane activity in the Atlantic".

[BTRWx's Thanks Giving]

4 hours ago, stormy said:

"The amount of soot and sulfate particles over the Atlantic Ocean was much higher in the mid 20th century than now; by blocking and scattering sunlight, those particles temporarily cooled the planet enough to counter act greenhouse gas warming.  That cooling is also thought to have temporarily suppressed hurricane activity in the Atlantic".

I was referring to cleaning the air. That has only happened regionally.

[psuhoffman]

On 7/7/2023 at 8:57 AM, CAPE said:

Just for the hell of it, current SST anomalies compared to early July 2009:

https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/Products/ocean/sst/anomaly/

 

 

The warm and cold anomalies are all in the right places...and I am cautiously optimistic...but the whole background state is much warmer and we just don't know what impact that might have...but unfortunately it likely won't be good.  

ETA:  When I say it likely won't be good I mean compared to what happened in 2009/10.  It's very likely to still be better than the utter crap we've been used to lately.  

[psuhoffman]

On 7/7/2023 at 9:12 AM, nw baltimore wx said:

World is on fire.

Careful someone will be along soon to say how this is an exaggeration

On 7/7/2023 at 1:37 PM, Terpeast said:

Yeah that’s what we want, but hoping it does not continue trending weaker. Otherwise nino effects will get washed out with background warming

Have to thread that needle don't we...

On 7/7/2023 at 6:53 PM, stormy said:

SST's are up in the oceans for many reasons. SST's are far below normal in Superior for reasons. "The world is on fire" is somewhat extreme when the majority of the United States was cooler than normal for both May and June.

Right on schedule...do we really have to do this again? 

7 hours ago, stormy said:

"The amount of soot and sulfate particles over the Atlantic Ocean was much higher in the mid 20th century than now; by blocking and scattering sunlight, those particles temporarily cooled the planet enough to counter act greenhouse gas warming.  That cooling is also thought to have temporarily suppressed hurricane activity in the Atlantic".

Your arguments don't even have internal logical consistency... 

[Terpeast]

13 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Careful someone will be along soon to say how this is an exaggeration

Have to thread that needle don't we...

Right on schedule...do we really have to do this again? 

Your arguments don't even have internal logical consistency... 

thread the needle seems to be the theme, not just with individual coastal storms but with ssts. 

I’m keeping an eye on RONI/MEI as those take into account background ocean warming. These were never sufficiently positive after 2015-16, almost consistently negative which correlates well with the crap winters we’ve been getting. 

Cautiously optimistic we flip the script this year, but we need to get it strong enough to start with. 

[Maestrobjwa]

1 hour ago, psuhoffman said:

The warm and cold anomalies are all in the right places...and I am cautiously optimistic...but the whole background state is much warmer and we just don't know what impact that might have...but unfortunately it likely won't be good.  

ETA:  When I say it likely won't be good I mean compared to what happened in 2009/10.  It's very likely to still be better than the utter crap we've been used to lately.  

Kinda like we have to throw away whatever worked before and just put it in a big unknown...storm by storm. Quite frankly I'm not sure anybody has any business making any prediction now...Isn't this like brand new territory with no reliable analogs?

[psuhoffman]

1 hour ago, Maestrobjwa said:

Kinda like we have to throw away whatever worked before and just put it in a big unknown...storm by storm. Quite frankly I'm not sure anybody has any business making any prediction now...Isn't this like brand new territory with no reliable analogs?

Just predict “warmer than normal with below normal snow” and you will be right 80% of the time. 

[CAPE]

7 hours ago, psuhoffman said:

The warm and cold anomalies are all in the right places...and I am cautiously optimistic...but the whole background state is much warmer and we just don't know what impact that might have...but unfortunately it likely won't be good.  

ETA:  When I say it likely won't be good I mean compared to what happened in 2009/10.  It's very likely to still be better than the utter crap we've been used to lately.  

The notably warmer oceans overall now compared to then was the primary point of the post. Still hoping for a moderate Nino, more CP based, for the test case.

[stormy]

10 hours ago, psuhoffman said:

Careful someone will be along soon to say how this is an exaggeration

Have to thread that needle don't we...

Right on schedule...do we really have to do this again? 

Your arguments don't even have internal logical consistency... 

For the record, those two comments were not intended to be related to one another in any way. They were 9,999,999 miles apart.

Now, with that out of the way, I do have rain with embedded convective elements only 25 miles away on a heading of 70 degrees at 15 mph.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

20 hours ago, psuhoffman said:

Just predict “warmer than normal with below normal snow” and you will be right 80% of the time. 

I'll take that one. The way the pattern is flowing, I can envision tracking several storms that could be snow. Winter ridges are not supported by anything in the upper level pattern, and above average snowfall is favored, imo. -PNA's are getting sheared out on MR/LR models May-July. We just really missed it hardcore last year. The Nina was about as strong as it could get relative to global average rising temperature. It's a macro pattern though, favoring just one good track the whole Winter, i.e. smaller events are less likely. Everything seems to run as one unit globally, unlike times like 97-98, meaning a +PNA or GOA low should correlate to trough/storm. That's the pattern. 

[psuhoffman]

4 hours ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

I'll take that one. The way the pattern is flowing, I can envision tracking several storms that could be snow. Winter ridges are not supported by anything in the upper level pattern, and above average snowfall is favored, imo. -PNA's are getting sheared out on MR/LR models May-July. We just really missed it hardcore last year. The Nina was about as strong as it could get relative to global average rising temperature. It's a macro pattern though, favoring just one good track the whole Winter, i.e. smaller events are less likely. Everything seems to run as one unit globally, unlike times like 97-98, meaning a +PNA or GOA low should correlate to trough/storm. That's the pattern. 

In fairness I said you would be right 80%. This winter might be one of the 20%. I’d probably go above normal snow right now if I had to predict…which I don’t. 

[psuhoffman]

9 hours ago, stormy said:

For the record, those two comments were not intended to be related to one another in any way. They were 9,999,999 miles apart.

Are you sure about those exact calculations?  Maybe you should show your work. I’m gonna need verification on this data. 

[stormy]

46 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Are you sure about those exact calculations?  Maybe you should show your work. I’m gonna need verification on this data. 

Your verification is in the link of the 8:29 am post Saturday.

I need verification of rationality with your answer to Stormchaserchuck1.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

QBO is almost negative already!

2023  12.50   9.80  10.93  12.89   9.26   0.72-999.90-999.90-999.90-999.90-999.90-999.90

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/qbo.u30.index

Meaning it's probably going to be a solidly -QBO Winter. 

[pazzo83]

On 7/7/2023 at 6:53 PM, stormy said:

SST's are up in the oceans for many reasons. SST's are far below normal in Superior for reasons. "The world is on fire" is somewhat extreme when the majority of the United States was cooler than normal for both May and June.

lol - the US is like 5% of the Earth's surface area.

[pazzo83]

On 7/8/2023 at 8:29 AM, stormy said:

Thanks CAPE!  That was an interesting read.

Here is another interesting read that partially disputes the assumption in your piece that hurricane frequency and intensity are increased by warming.  https://www.sciencenews.org/article/hurricanes-frequency-danger-climate-change-atlantic        Also, the possibility exists that cleaner air today may be exacerbating warming compared to the mid 20th century.  Did we actually increase global warming by cleaning up the air??

The more we know the more we realize that we have a lot to learn.

lol - he posts something from one of the premier scientific institutions on the planet, and you respond with some random internet garbage.

[stormy]

9 hours ago, pazzo83 said:

lol - he posts something from one of the premier scientific institutions on the planet, and you respond with some random internet garbage.

My goodness, take the time to educate yourself.  That is so important in life.  You may possibly become a more rounded and happier person.  Sciencenews is not garbage:  https://www.sciencenews.org/  

[brooklynwx99]

can't be mad at this

[understudyhero]

9 hours ago, stormy said:

My goodness, take the time to educate yourself.  That is so important in life.  You may possibly become a more rounded and happier person.  Sciencenews is not garbage:  https://www.sciencenews.org/  

I have no dog in this fight, but you can't use the site (and just the homepage at that) to defend the same site you are trying to defend.

I am an expert, ask me. -> they aren't garbage, ask them. same difference.

[psuhoffman]

1 hour ago, understudyhero said:

I have no dog in this fight, but you can't use the site (and just the homepage at that) to defend the same site you are trying to defend.

I am an expert, ask me. -> they aren't garbage, ask them. same difference.

He is a clown. Don’t over think it. 

[psuhoffman]

On 7/9/2023 at 7:11 PM, stormy said:

Your verification is in the link of the 8:29 am post Saturday.

I need verification of rationality with your answer to Stormchaserchuck1.

I’m sure Chuck would be glad to explain it to you. 

[Stormchaserchuck1]

You guys aren't going to like the -PDO after the next 15 or so days.. last monthly reading was -2.54. There is a strong correlation Sept-Nov with the following Winter's conditions (more than random chance) so it could weaken after mid-July if we are going to see a good Winter, but it looks like re-strengthening -PDO should occur mid to late-July.