2024-2025 La Nina

[michsnowfreak]

1 hour ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I think if that pattern persisted into much of December it would be telling, as well.

The cold November/mild December pattern has been very common the last decade. Snow-wise, December has been BY FAR the month that has suffered the most the past decade, even though we have lucked out with several white Christmases. I would LOVE a cold November AND December. We are definitely due for a front loaded, not back loaded winter.

Its staggering to see that since 2014, 6 of the 10 years saw November outsnow December at Detroit. For reference, average snowfall in November is 1.9" & December 8.9".

2014: Nov- 4.0", Dec- 0.1"

2015: Nov- 6.2", Dec- 1.3"

2018: Nov- 6.7", Dec- 0.5"

2019: Nov- 9.5", Dec- 2.7"

2021: Nov- 7.1", Dec- 3.3"

2023: Oct- 0.2", Nov- 2.2", Dec- 0.1"

 

[40/70 Benchmark]

16 minutes ago, bluewave said:

We have seen some counterpoints to the traditional AMO and PDO cycle discussions in recent years. The first one was when the AMO began shifting negative around 10 years ago especially more so on the Klotzbach index he developed. We noticed a strong warming of the NW Atlantic east of New England around this time which didn’t let the developing -AMO really take shape. Instead we shifted to all-time Atlantic warmth in the last few years which exceeded any historic precedent during +AMOs. Then we got the sharp and rapid shift to one of the strongest +PDO patterns in terms of SST and +NPM overlap in 13-14 into 15-16. Then this pattern suddenly reversed and transitioned to one of the strongest -PDOs off all time. But just as the warming of the NW Atlantic was different for past -AMOs, this is the first -PDO defined by the 2nd eof and record SST warmth to the east of Japan and south of the Aleutians. So in effect competing marine heatwaves have altered past -PDO, +PDO, -AMO, and +AMO expectations. My guess is that we continue to see competing marine heat waves alter past expectations of ENSO, AMO, and -PDO. While these indices can sway from negative to positive, it may not look like what we used to get in the past.

Well, considering that we had only been in the cold PDO phase for 15 years and the warm AMO phase for 14 years, no one should have expected that the respective cycles were changing phases last decade. Looking back throughout history into the 1800s, there have always been smaller scale fluctuations that were counter to the concurrent multidecadal trend. As for CC altering the versions of the cycles as we know them, talk to me in 10 years, but for now that is something straight out of a Rod Sterling adaptation.

[40/70 Benchmark]

11 minutes ago, PhiEaglesfan712 said:

Yeah, the AMO/PDO flip is going to look something like 2012-16. If something is underway, I think 2024-25 would be the 2012-13 stage. Next summer/fall is when the PDO would be starting to flip. The flip will be apparent by the summer of 2026. Crazy as it sounds, I think we could get the modoki el nino the CanSIPS was showing, but maybe for 2026-27, and that would be the lead up to the super el nino event in 2027-28. Only difference is that the PDO/AMO doesn't flip back like it did in 2016-17.

Would probably kick start the warm Phase of the PDO and lead into the pants tent INVO solar mind near the turn of the decade.

[michsnowfreak]

All seasonal forecasts should be taken with a grain of salt. Cansips and CFS are clearly colder than the Euro for this winter for the northern tier. 

[bluewave]

20 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

there have always been smaller scale fluctuations that were counter to the concurrent multidecadal trend.

Not in the manner which has manifested since around 2010. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

Not in the manner which has manifested since around 2010. 

Looks like to me there may been back in the 1800s.

[40/70 Benchmark]

I think its logical to conclude that maybe we don't see a -AMO cycle reach the depths of what we have in the past....

[snowman19]

23 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I think its logical to conclude that maybe we don't see a -AMO cycle reach the depths of what we have in the past....

I agree. The -PDO/-AMO patterns of the past are just that, the past. I remember seeing a Joe Bastardi CNN interview clip that someone shared a few years ago from 2003 I think it was? Anyway, he said we were going back into the exact weather pattern of the 1940’s-1970’s. Replica. Was absolutely sure about it, convinced. Good lord was that an epic fail

[40/70 Benchmark]

3 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

I agree. The -PDO/-AMO patterns of the past are just that, the past. I remember seeing a Joe Bastardi CNN interview clip that someone shared a few years ago from 2003 I think it was? Anyway, he said we were going back into the exact weather pattern of the 1940’s-1970’s. Replica. Was absolutely sure about it, convinced. Good lord was that an epic fail

There will probably be some variations moving forward, so I see what Chris is saying on some level.....but I highly doubt a discontinuation of the cycles.

[40/70 Benchmark]

I think a lot of this is perfectly valid to call into question, but this idea of the West PAC warm pool permanently altering things should still be viewed as the alternative viewpoint...IOW, assume large scale oscillations will continue to operate relatively similiarly to how they have for the past 200 years plus until proven otherwise. Its akin to being up 3-0 in a series and feeling like you have the upperhand when you win one in a best-of-seven. You're still down 3-1 and are probably losing. If we hit the early 2030's and nothing has changed and Bluewave continues to prance nude in phase 5 unabated, then perhaps we have the 2004 Red Sox on our hands.

[michsnowfreak]

28 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

I agree. The -PDO/-AMO patterns of the past are just that, the past. I remember seeing a Joe Bastardi CNN interview clip that someone shared a few years ago from 2003 I think it was? Anyway, he said we were going back into the exact weather pattern of the 1940’s-1970’s. Replica. Was absolutely sure about it, convinced. Good lord was that an epic fail

Anyone to say we are going into "an exact" weather pattern of "x" years is a downright fool. However I wouldnt necessarily say an "epic fail". Winters circa 2004-2015 definitely had 1970s vibes, while winters since 2016 have had 1950s vibes. And by vibes, i mean similarities, not replicas.

[bluewave]

36 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

There will probably be some variations moving forward, so I see what Chris is saying on some level.....but I highly doubt a discontinuation of the cycles.

I said alteration or reinterpretation filtered through competing marine heatwaves but not necessarily a discontinuation in a traditional sense.

[michsnowfreak]

1 hour ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Looks liketo me there may been back in the 1800s.

I have no idea what any indicies were, but I do know that there were absolutely WILD swings from 1874-1882. In that 8 winter stretch, winters alternated from very warm to very cold each year. Not talking slightly above or below avg, im talking huge departures. Ive always been fascinated by what could have caused that.

150 years later, the winters STILL stand (at Detroit) as:

1874-75: 2nd coldest

1875-76: 19th warmest

1876-77: 19th coldest

1877-78: 16th warmest

1878-79: 14th coldest

1879-80: 12th warmest

1880-81: 13th coldest

1881-82: 1st warmest

[40/70 Benchmark]

3 minutes ago, bluewave said:

I said alteration or reinterpretation filtered through competing marine heatwaves but not necessarily a discontinuation in a traditional sense.

Yea, that is reasonable for as long as said heat waves remian as presently constituted.

[40/70 Benchmark]

2 minutes ago, michsnowfreak said:

I have no idea what any indicies were, but I do know that there were absolutely WILD swings from 1874-1882. In that 8 winter stretch, winters alternated from very warm to very cold each year. Not talking slightly above or below avg, im talking huge departures. Ive always been fascinated by what could have caused that.

150 years later, the winters STILL stand (at Detroit) as:

1874-75: 2nd coldest

1875-76: 19th warmest

1876-77: 19th coldest

1877-78: 16th warmest

1878-79: 14th coldest

1879-80: 12th warmest

1880-81: 13th coldest

1881-82: 1st warmest

Elephant in the room.....the omniprescent issue within the context of all atmospheric research is the relative dearth of data/sample size.

[michsnowfreak]

10 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Elephant in the room.....the omniprescent issue within the context of all atmospheric research is the relative dearth of data/sample size.

When I was younger, I always read my sisters Little House on the Prairie Book "The Long Winter". That book took place on the Dakota prairie during the winter of 1880-81. The next story in the series (idk remember the name) would have taken place during 1881-82. Although the focus of that book was not on the weather as The Long Winter was, there were some blurbs about how they were trying to get extra precautions in place (autumn 1881) because of the disasters the hard winter the year before caused, and instead the winter ended up being springlike and "open".

[40/70 Benchmark]

5 minutes ago, michsnowfreak said:

When I was younger, I always read my sisters Little House on the Prairie Book "The Long Winter". That book took place on the Dakota prairie during the winter of 1880-81. The next story in the series (idk remember the name) would have taken place during 1881-82. Although the focus of that book was not on the weather as The Long Winter was, there were some blurbs about how they were trying to get extra precautions in place (autumn 1881) because of the disasters the hard winter the year before caused, and instead the winter ended up being springlike and "open".

"Snowfall up to thy knickers on the level dissapeared with the hastiness of a summer dress".

[PhiEaglesfan712]

3 minutes ago, michsnowfreak said:

When I was younger, I always read my sisters Little House on the Prairie Book "The Long Winter". That book took place on the Dakota prairie during the winter of 1880-81. The next story in the series (idk remember the name) would have taken place during 1881-82. Although the focus of that book was not on the weather as The Long Winter was, there were some blurbs about how they were trying to get extra precautions in place (autumn 1881) because of the disasters the hard winter the year before caused, and instead the winter ended up being springlike and "open".

In fall 2011, when I was a student at Drexel, I read this book for one of my classes: 

I remember somewhere in the book where they talk about the winter of 1957-58 being very snowy and cold. 

[bluewave]

37 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Elephant in the room.....the omniprescent issue within the context of all atmospheric research is the relative dearth of data/sample size.

We don’t have the luxury of really large sample sizes that we used to enjoy in a much more stable climate of the past. So we just have to do the best with what we have. Non linear or threshold behavior doesn’t really become known until it’s already in the rear view mirror. 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

Of course, 1957-58 is one of those rare cases where everything came together oh so perfectly during a stronger el nino winter: 

[40/70 Benchmark]

31 minutes ago, bluewave said:

We don’t have the luxury of really large sample sizes that we used to enjoy in a much more stable climate of the past. So we just have to do the best with what we have. Non linear or threshold behavior doesn’t really become known until it’s already in the rear view mirror. 

Yes...CC is exacerbating the preexisiting sample size issue.

[40/70 Benchmark]

33 minutes ago, bluewave said:

We don’t have the luxury of really large sample sizes that we used to enjoy in a much more stable climate of the past. So we just have to do the best with what we have. Non linear or threshold behavior doesn’t really become known until it’s already in the rear view mirror. 

Last season was a perfect illustration of this....if you viewed everything through the lens of yesteryear, 1957 looked like a decent analog. This is the trap that I fell into. 

7 minutes ago, PhiEaglesfan712 said:

Of course, 1957-58 is one of those rare cases where everything came together oh so perfectly during a stronger el nino winter: 

 

[GaWx]

1 hour ago, michsnowfreak said:

I have no idea what any indicies were, but I do know that there were absolutely WILD swings from 1874-1882. In that 8 winter stretch, winters alternated from very warm to very cold each year. Not talking slightly above or below avg, im talking huge departures. Ive always been fascinated by what could have caused that.

150 years later, the winters STILL stand (at Detroit) as:

1874-75: 2nd coldest

1875-76: 19th warmest

1876-77: 19th coldest

1877-78: 16th warmest

1878-79: 14th coldest

1879-80: 12th warmest

1880-81: 13th coldest

1881-82: 1st warmest

Fwiw, I added ENSO as per Webb’s table:

1874-75: 2nd coldest    weak Nina

1875-76: 19th warmest      neutral

1876-77: 19th coldest      weak Nino

1877-78: 16th warmest     Super Nino

1878-79: 14th coldest      cold neutral

1879-80: 12th warmest    weak Niña 

1880-81: 13th coldest       weak Nino

1881-82: 1st warmest.        neutral

[GaWx]

19 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I don't really care whether or not Phil endorses it.....I have seen enough to be confident that high solar caps ACE.

 

 

 As you know I’ve been hoping to see actual research papers backing up the idea of a connection of very high sunspot numbers and the recent quiet in the Atlantic basin to supplement my own analysis of the actual numbers and your confidence. Fortunately, I just became aware of a good number of papers thanks to @jconsorwritten dating back to 2008 suggesting a partial negative correlation between sunspots and hurricane activity. The idea is (as we’ve already suspected) that when the sun has an increasing level of sunspots, the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere immediately get warmer (more of a rise than lower down) thus increasing atmospheric stability in a general sense.

 Of course proving this relationship isn’t easy due to other variables. But the authors discuss this and seem to have done well taking these other variables into account.

 (I was first made aware of a possible direct connection only last week by Joe D’Aleo and seconded by Bastardi.)

 The August SSN of 215 is the highest of the active era for any August. And August had only two NS (even though both were hurricanes). Furthermore, since Ernesto it has been exceedingly quiet relative to climo. In light of the following papers, this is probably a major contributor to the quiet:

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1029/2008GL034431

https://myweb.fsu.edu/jelsner/PDF/Research/HodgesElsner2010.pdf

http://myweb.fsu.edu/jelsner/temp/PDF/Research/ElsnerJaggerHodges2010.pdf

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.5402/2012/517962

https://sci-hub.ru/10.1016/j.jastp.2009.09.012

https://ephyslab.uvigo.es/publica/documents/file_358JASTP_2015.pdf

@snowman19

Edit: though not as high as most of August, sunspots are still quite high with an avg of 184 so far this month. The dailies will be worthwhile to monitor throughout the month to see whether a significant drop occurs:

2024 09 01 2024.668 180  16.2  26  33
2024 09 02 2024.671 197  19.4  24  31
2024 09 03 2024.673 180  22.4  19  22
2024 09 04 2024.676 179  29.7  19  23
2024 09 05 2024.679 180  13.7  13  16

[snowman19]

 As you know I’ve been hoping to see actual research papers backing up the idea of a connection of very high sunspot numbers and the recent quiet in the Atlantic basin to supplement my own analysis of the actual numbers and your confidence. Fortunately, I just became aware of a good number of papers thanks to [mention=88]jconsor[/mention]written dating back to 2008 suggesting a partial negative correlation between sunspots and hurricane activity. The idea is (as we’ve already suspected) that when the sun has an increasing level of sunspots, the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere immediately get warmer (more of a rise than lower down) thus increasing atmospheric stability in a general sense.
 Of course proving this relationship isn’t easy due to other variables. But the authors discuss this and seem to have done well taking these other variables into account.
 (I was first made aware of a possible direct connection only last week by Joe D’Aleo and seconded by Bastardi.)
 The August SSN of 215 is the highest of the active era for any August. And August had only two NS (even though both were hurricanes). Furthermore, since Ernesto it has been exceedingly quiet relative to climo. In light of the following papers, this is probably a major contributor to the quiet:
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1029/2008GL034431
https://myweb.fsu.edu/jelsner/PDF/Research/HodgesElsner2010.pdf
http://myweb.fsu.edu/jelsner/temp/PDF/Research/ElsnerJaggerHodges2010.pdf
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.5402/2012/517962
https://sci-hub.ru/10.1016/j.jastp.2009.09.012
https://ephyslab.uvigo.es/publica/documents/file_358JASTP_2015.pdf
[mention=13098]snowman19[/mention]
Edit: though not as high as most of August, sunspots are still quite high with an avg of 184 so far this month. The dailies will be worthwhile to monitor throughout the month to see whether a significant drop occurs:

2024 09 01 2024.668 180  16.2  26  332024 09 02 2024.671 197  19.4  24  312024 09 03 2024.673 180  22.4  19  222024 09 04 2024.676 179  29.7  19  232024 09 05 2024.679 180  13.7  13  16

Here comes the next surge in sunspots….

[bluewave]

1 hour ago, GaWx said:

 As you know I’ve been hoping to see actual research papers backing up the idea of a connection of very high sunspot numbers and the recent quiet in the Atlantic basin to supplement my own analysis of the actual numbers and your confidence. Fortunately, I just became aware of a good number of papers thanks to @jconsorwritten dating back to 2008 suggesting a partial negative correlation between sunspots and hurricane activity. The idea is (as we’ve already suspected) that when the sun has an increasing level of sunspots, the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere immediately get warmer (more of a rise than lower down) thus increasing atmospheric stability in a general sense.

 Of course proving this relationship isn’t easy due to other variables. But the authors discuss this and seem to have done well taking these other variables into account.

 (I was first made aware of a possible direct connection only last week by Joe D’Aleo and seconded by Bastardi.)

 The August SSN of 215 is the highest of the active era for any August. And August had only two NS (even though both were hurricanes). Furthermore, since Ernesto it has been exceedingly quiet relative to climo. In light of the following papers, this is probably a major contributor to the quiet:

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1029/2008GL034431

https://myweb.fsu.edu/jelsner/PDF/Research/HodgesElsner2010.pdf

http://myweb.fsu.edu/jelsner/temp/PDF/Research/ElsnerJaggerHodges2010.pdf

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.5402/2012/517962

https://sci-hub.ru/10.1016/j.jastp.2009.09.012

https://ephyslab.uvigo.es/publica/documents/file_358JASTP_2015.pdf

@snowman19

Edit: though not as high as most of August, sunspots are still quite high with an avg of 184 so far this month. The dailies will be worthwhile to monitor throughout the month to see whether a significant drop occurs:

2024 09 01 2024.668 180  16.2  26  33
2024 09 02 2024.671 197  19.4  24  31
2024 09 03 2024.673 180  22.4  19  22
2024 09 04 2024.676 179  29.7  19  23
2024 09 05 2024.679 180  13.7  13  

Solar influence isn’t strong enough to cause the disparity we saw this season since this is the greatest difference between the upper levels and surface since 1950.

 

[mitchnick]

Euro seasonal does now show a solid weak Niña fwiw. Bye-bye 19/20 lol

[bluewave]

21 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

Euro seasonal does now show a solid weak Niña fwiw. Bye-bye 19/20 lol

Warmer SSTs from Japan across to south of the Aleutians. Also stronger warm pool east of New England. More defined colder ENSO signal in Nino 3.4 and 4.

 

 

[GaWx]

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

Solar influence isn’t strong enough to cause the disparity we saw this season since this is the greatest difference between the upper levels and surface since 1950.

 

The idea is that high solar, which itself apparently contributes to atmospheric stability, may very well be a major contributing factor, not the sole factor.

 Was this stability forecasted? Anyone know? And can stability caused by high solar even be predicted by wx models?

[GaWx]

47 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

Euro seasonal does now show a solid weak Niña fwiw. Bye-bye 19/20 lol

That is ~-0.7 ONI low point, which compares to -0.3 last month and -0.1 two months back, but was similar to what the May and March runs were suggesting. It looks like it is correcting its typical warm bias and perhaps is also responding to the recent 3.4 drops and the new +SOI.

 The implied RONI based on my recent analysis of RONI minus ONI is that it would probably dip to ~-1.0 to -1.2 (moderate Nina) if the ONI were to actually dip to -0.7.