January 2024 -- Discussion

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 minute ago, Volcanic Winter said:

I actually agree with you, to a point. However IMHO if this is your position, elaborate, explain, and defend your position instead of dropping one or two line posts that are taken in an inflammatory manner whether or not they were intended that way. 

This is a science discussion forum, and the discussion part is key. From my perspective I appreciate and respect the posters who elaborate and defend their positions, even if I don’t like or don’t agree with their positions. 

Snowman has done a much better job with that this year, and I enjoy his posts for that reason. 

I mean you do you, but I’m actually curious for you to elaborate on these little brief one or two line comment drops you do because I’m genuinely curious about your position, but need more than a snippy sound bite. 

Exactly.

I have no issue with Snowman, aside from the fact that he seems to be partial about what info he reports

[ORH_wxman]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Yes. The polar domain is the only aspect of that analog that I didn't like...otherwise, it was great.

The problem is we hardly have any El Niños that look like 72-73 with a good polar domain. It’s a pretty unique year. Maybe 68-69 but that was a weakish Nino…it did have the deep -PDO and -PNA, but obviously huge blocking eventually overcame it. (Not after a horrific Jan ‘69 though) 

[weatherwiz]

14 minutes ago, qg_omega said:

Not sure what posting a composite from years with no relevance in our new climate normal proves anything, sorry.

That's ridiculous. Let's look at Jan 1958, for example and compare to the 1921-1950 climatology vs. the 1991-2020 climatology. Sure there are some differences with the anomalies being tempered back a bit, but we're not looking at drastic changes which make older analogs obsolete. They absolutely are still relevant.

 

EDIT: some differences may also exist here as I am using two different data sets but this is because NCEP/NCAR only goes back to 1948 so to make 1921-1950 climatology I had to use 20CRv3. 

 

[Damage In Tolland]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Exactly.

I have no issue with Snowman, aside from the fact that he seems to be partial about what info he reports

Could that be the only correct one ?

[Typhoon Tip]

28 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

MJO is screaming along way faster than guidance keeps progging. I think it’s going to be hard to lock in a pattern until we get one of those standing waves. Remember when it was stalling it in phase 7 until well after Xmas? Now it’s going to into phase 3 on or just after new years. They are trying to drag it in phase 3 for like 10 days right now but my guess it is does not do that and moves right along. 
 

The weird thing is that despite model guidance showing a prolonged phase 3, it’s still trying to dig that trough in the west which is the opposite of phase 3 during January El Niño. Esp for higher amplitude waves…wonder if we’ll see guidance try to correct a bit as we get closer if that wave stays strong like all the previous ones have. 

I agree with this assessment re the MJO.  

Basically what it boils down to, the forcing needs time in the given phase/correlation space in order for it's momentum to substantively integrate. 

As an aside, I argue that the propagation fast(slow) rate is also related to whether a given wave space is destructively(constructively) interfering. Why say this:  ... perhaps the next time a wave pops out of the N/S region in phase 8 and moves through phase 1 and 2 in less than 5 days, we might say ...gee, that's a red herring signal.  

I mean, the wave slows down entering phase 4 and takes twice as long to creep around phase 5 - even if doing so at a low amplitude,  time kills you. It is integrating a lot more forcing.  It's worth it to consider the physical/plausible aspect of that in using MJOs ...which frankly, since all along I haven't been too keen on using MJO to really conduct much because it's ability to correlate is subjected too much to the surrounding 'harmonics' .  However, in this case ... the dwindling +PNA toward a -PNA by mid month, with zip EPO responses, that's a pretty decent harmonious assent in favor of constructively interfering. 

I'm curious how all that interferes with the ENSO - my guess is destructive .. .which is interesting.

[40/70 Benchmark]

Just now, ORH_wxman said:

The problem is we hardly have any El Niños that look like 72-73 with a good polar domain. It’s a pretty unique year. Maybe 68-69 but that was a weakish Nino…it did have the deep -PDO and -PNA, but obviously huge blocking eventually overcame it. (Not after a horrific Jan ‘69 though) 

Yes and I understand why CC makes it more difficult for the arctic to overcome a poor Pacific, but February is still the best bet in an El Nino season.

[CoastalWx]

8 minutes ago, NittanyWx said:

I think the EC Weeklies are again showing a +EPO reward of NE.  Given all I've discussed about this lately, I don't think it's something you can ignore outright in favor of seasonality and hard transition to +PNA.  There's a transitional window you're gonna need to deal with and there is a risk of more Pac air.

 

Hence my comment about last 10 days of Jan.

Yeah I wasn’t saying it would be a rapid change, but I’d like to see that to help lock in a good airmass.  We could have a GOAK low for a time as the weeklies show.

[40/70 Benchmark]

5 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

The Pacific jet is one pathway towards a ruined winter....I can appreciate that without expecting it. This is all I am asking of the other school of thought. Some folks here seem to be close minded.

 

1 minute ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Could that be the only correct one ?

 

[iceman1]

24 minutes ago, weathafella said:

Another mid November day in December.  No sun, no snow, just straight up dank.

ct muddy season seams to last all winter now 

[Hazey]

21 minutes ago, jbenedet said:

That’s a well timed Canadian surface HP showing up on the 6z GFS. Watch this trend.
 

Pay attention Mid Atlantic/extreme southern New England.

I'm hoping that this catches the Maritimes as well. We watch. 

[ORH_wxman]

7 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Yes and I understand why CC makes it more difficult for the arctic to overcome a poor Pacific, but February is still the best bet in an El Nino season.

Yeah if you get a good arctic it’s likely going to work out unless you have a really bad pattern out west. Hell, even a couple years ago the areas near NYC got 40”+ in a few weeks from the below pattern (strong -PNA) but that NAO block was key…and they have a less wiggle room on temps than we do

 

 

[qg_omega]

19 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

General el Nino climo is not significantly altered due to CC.....sure, hedge warmer on surface temps, but the fact that el Nino is more favorable in February is still valid. That is just idiotic to suggest otherwise....Omega is either a moron or a troll, and judging from the balance of his/her posts, its clearly the latter.

Nice words Ray, my posts over the past many months have been dead on accurate but nice to see the personal attacks are back from you

[moneypitmike]

2 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I feel great about the balance of this winter.

 

1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said:

None of these fuggin sources were .. jesus - cancel January if these first couple of opportunities fail. 

It's a wind blown -PNA/Chinook look in the 500 mb with positive hgt N-NE of Hawaii and a broad open trough through the west.  Not sure I see how that ends well for the E.   And it's not just that spatial version of it, either.  The numerical telecons have -PNA/+EPO, which makes it difficult to argue against. 

The only thing that would save that is the -AO/-NAO.   I would say 30 years ago ... not so sure with the climate now.  It's just one in many nuanced ways in which these circulation modes are being modulated by CC that I personally cannot ignore any longer.  However subtle or gross notwithstanding, it more than merely seems that when in a dilemma of diametric signals ( cold vs hot ) ... hot wins.  It's just a matter of by how much of a margin.

I'm looking at the 06z GFS and feeling satisfied eating shit (so to speak..).  Because yeah, made the call that there should be systems in place around those time intervals last week. Wee... but the jokes on us because, has anyone noticed that the 0 C 850 mb isotherm is always on the NW periphery of system structures?   It's never really IN the storm.  It's like the storms are oil and cold side is water

[cleetussnow]

[Damage In Tolland]

17 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

 

 

[ORH_wxman]

Just now, qg_omega said:

Nice words Ray, my posts over the past many months have been dead on accurate but nice to see the personal attacks are back from you

You should be more honest with yourself and I think people would give you more benefit of the doubt. 

I specifically asked you a couple weeks ago why you thought no changes as far as the eye can see and you told me because were going to stall the MJO in phase 7…well not only did that not happen, we screamed through phases 8/1/2 in a span of like 2 weeks. So…correct for the wrong reason? Make your case for why we shouldn’t treat you as the warm/snowless version of JB…you were pulling this act back in snowy 2010s winters too which is how you earned your post limit. You used to be a decent poster your first few years and then decided it was more fun to troll. 

[moneypitmike]

4 minutes ago, cleetussnow said:

 

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

42 minutes ago, NittanyWx said:

I'd also say that I'd adjust +1 C from any analog in the 50s.  Gotta be honest with the current state of our climate and account for it if you're gonna use it as a forecaster.  This is the type of stuff that trips up the cold crowd on WxTwitter

Do not make Wolfie ambush us from his den today please. Lets be safe.

[40/70 Benchmark]

19 minutes ago, qg_omega said:

Nice words Ray, my posts over the past many months have been dead on accurate but nice to see the personal attacks are back from you

I called you a passive aggressive troll. Yes.

[STILL N OF PIKE]

9 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

Do not make Wolfie ambush us from his den today please. Lets be safe.

I think he is in N Maine 

32 and Snow today for Caribou 

[Damage In Tolland]

3 minutes ago, STILL N OF PIKE said:

I think he is in N Maine 

32 and Snow today for Caribou 

Tubing down the Aroostook River?

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

5 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Tubing down the Aroostook River?

[40/70 Benchmark]

32 minutes ago, moneypitmike said:

 

He is implying January is over if we extended the pattern from early January throughout the rest of the month, which is a sentiment that I would probably agree with. But I don't feel that paradigm will persist through the entirety of the season.

[Damage In Tolland]

3 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

[WinterWolf]

4 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

You guys are crazy bastards…really

 

At least it’s 30 degrees and snowing right now up there…we rebuild/we replenish.  Our cabin/house we rent was ready for us on 12/26.  We have it through 3/31.  So we wait a little longer.  First trip last year wasn’t until 1/27.  

[jbenedet]

46 minutes ago, Hazey said:

I'm hoping that this catches the Maritimes as well. We watch. 

I am skeptical; I think it’s one of these that occludes around Virginia’s latitude and slides ENE.

Worth watching though.

[WinterWolf]

12 minutes ago, jbenedet said:

I am skeptical; I think it’s one of these that occludes around Virginia’s latitude and slides ENE.

Worth watching though.

Often they come north a little more than progged…let’s hope this is one of those times, so we can get on the board with a little something.  

[dryslot]

12 minutes ago, jbenedet said:

I am skeptical; I think it’s one of these that occludes around Virginia’s latitude and slides ENE.

Worth watching though.

I had mentioned back a week or so that when the cold got here, That suppression of the storm track could happen.

[40/70 Benchmark]

Looks like January 1987 got going on January 2 and 1966 on January 8th....2005 on the 5th, 2015 didn't have a significant event until the 20th, but got a couple of inches on the 3rd, so I would agree......def. want to get on the board by mid month

[40/70 Benchmark]

Even 1973 got a couple of inches on the 3rd