Jump to content

Welcome to our forums!

Sign In or Register to gain full access to our forums. By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Welcome!

Thanks for stopping by the Weather Forums! Please take the time to register and join our community. Feel free to post or start new topics on anything related to the weather or the climate.


Photo

October 2016 Observations and Model Discussion for the Pacific Northwest

* * * * * 1 votes

  • Please log in to reply

#4801
Front Ranger

Posted 02 November 2016 - 11:12 AM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

Oh, I'm sure it has some effect..it has to, actually. Basic thermodynamics, all that lower level warmth doesn't just vanish after a SSW. Agree 100% there.

However, given the cooling observed in the upper troposphere and stratosphere, and the dynamics responsible for delivering those frigid, O^3/H^2O/CO^2 starved airmasses out of the polar upper levels, I'm not sure the effect has been very significant on a high frequency, airmass-to-airmass basis. That's very complicated and each airmass is unique, IMO.

Note how "historically significant" airmasses continue to occur around the globe periodically, despite the warmer background. The severity of those airmasses is determined by chemical processes largely independent of lower tropospheric temperatures. Though they've definitely decreased in frequency overall as the tropospheric circulations themselves are inhibiting the southward propagation of mobile polar high trains.

 

Right, and if it were as simple as the Arctic being the source, this would be next to impossible, since the Arctic has run so much warmer than the past during the last decade or so.

 

What's more, the Arctic was actually quite a bit colder in the 1980s and 1990s than it is today, and yet the PNW still struggled to see top tier cold in January over that time frame. Going back to the regional aspect of the conversation.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4802
Phil

Posted 02 November 2016 - 11:19 AM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13163 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

Makes sense in some respects, but still doesn't explain why it's been mainly a mid winter phenomenon. The air masses that impacted PNW in Nov 2010, Feb 2011, and Dec 2013 were all upper level based.


Yeah, I don't have the answers, obviously. Was mostly just a thought experiment on my part. I think there's also an argument for back luck w/ midwinter timing.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#4803
Front Ranger

Posted 02 November 2016 - 11:41 AM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

Yeah, I don't have the answers, obviously. Was mostly just a thought experiment on my part. I think there's also an argument for back luck w/ midwinter timing.

 

I absolutely think luck is part of it. The fact that major early season events have become more common backs that up. Not to mention the fact that climate/weather has a real tendency to go in streaks.


  • Phil likes this

Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4804
wx_statman

Posted 02 November 2016 - 12:56 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2468 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

Right, and if it were as simple as the Arctic being the source, this would be next to impossible, since the Arctic has run so much warmer than the past during the last decade or so.

 

What's more, the Arctic was actually quite a bit colder in the 1980s and 1990s than it is today, and yet the PNW still struggled to see top tier cold in January over that time frame. Going back to the regional aspect of the conversation.

 

Is there a reason why you're saying this? That statement doesn't appear to fit into the discussion in this thread. 



#4805
Jesse

Posted 02 November 2016 - 12:59 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15831 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

Is there a reason why you're saying this? That statement doesn't appear to fit into the discussion in this thread. 

 

He has been trying to frame the argument that way for a few days now. Still not quite sure why.


  • wx_statman likes this

#4806
wx_statman

Posted 02 November 2016 - 01:22 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2468 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

He has been trying to frame the argument that way for a few days now. Still not quite sure why.

 

It definitely wasn't a claim that I made. 



#4807
Front Ranger

Posted 02 November 2016 - 01:43 PM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

He has been trying to frame the argument that way for a few days now. Still not quite sure why.

 

Because multiple people said it.

 

I didn't come up with "the Arctic is the source for cold air masses, therefore a warmer Arctic means less cold air masses."


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4808
Front Ranger

Posted 02 November 2016 - 01:47 PM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

Anyone else concerned about the low sea ice on the arctic? Northern north America is running way above normal and destroying records. Meanwhile Asia is way below normal from Ukraine to Japan. I hope the pattern flips soon. We need a cold source for the winter and right now the arctic is downright balmy.

 

 

Less intense arctic air masses with a warmer source region that have more difficulty overcoming terrain issues? Yes, most likely.

 

 

Nobody has made that claim. Rather, a warmer Arctic has been sited as one of the contributing factors. And why wouldn't it be? Warmer source airmass = warmer result at lower latitudes. 

 

You guys said it.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4809
westcoastexpat

Posted 02 November 2016 - 02:21 PM

westcoastexpat

    Forum Contributor

  • Meteorologist
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 860 posts
  • LocationBlaine, WA

Right, and if it were as simple as the Arctic being the source, this would be next to impossible, since the Arctic has run so much warmer than the past during the last decade or so.

 

What's more, the Arctic was actually quite a bit colder in the 1980s and 1990s than it is today, and yet the PNW still struggled to see top tier cold in January over that time frame. Going back to the regional aspect of the conversation.

 

I'm not exactly understanding why January not being top tier fits into the discussion. The Arctic could see negative anomalies and the PNW may still see record warmth, because if the pattern is not conducive to bringing that air southward, then it doesn't really matter.

 

I can't speak for everyone else, but my point about a balmy source is that, if the Arctic is very warm, no matter what the pattern, it's going to be difficult to get impressive cold to our latitude. And if the Arctic is cold, then it merely increases the odds.

 

I think think the newest piece of information that I've recently come across is how cold Russia has been... there is certainly a cold source.



#4810
wx_statman

Posted 02 November 2016 - 02:44 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2468 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

Because multiple people said it.

 

I didn't come up with "the Arctic is the source for cold air masses, therefore a warmer Arctic means less cold air masses."

 

I'm not sure exactly where you're coming from here.

 

Nobody claimed its "as simple as the Arctic being the source"....

 

Right, and if it were as simple as the Arctic being the source, this would be next to impossible, since the Arctic has run so much warmer than the past during the last decade or so.

 

What's more, the Arctic was actually quite a bit colder in the 1980s and 1990s than it is today, and yet the PNW still struggled to see top tier cold in January over that time frame. Going back to the regional aspect of the conversation.

 

 

What are you trying to achieve in this discussion, Jared?


  • Jesse likes this

#4811
wx_statman

Posted 02 November 2016 - 02:50 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2468 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

You guys said it.

 

There's no continuity in the argument you're trying to make here.

 

I'm not going to speak for other people, but with regards to my quote (of the three) - I have already addressed the fact that I was talking about specific cold airmasses. I have also addressed my logic behind the statement, and why it applies on a basic level.

 

Again I am left to wonder, what you trying to achieve in this discussion?



#4812
wx_statman

Posted 02 November 2016 - 02:56 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2468 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

I'm not exactly understanding why January not being top tier fits into the discussion. The Arctic could see negative anomalies and the PNW may still see record warmth, because if the pattern is not conducive to bringing that air southward, then it doesn't really matter.

 

I can't speak for everyone else, but my point about a balmy source is that, if the Arctic is very warm, no matter what the pattern, it's going to be difficult to get impressive cold to our latitude. And if the Arctic is cold, then it merely increases the odds.

 

I think think the newest piece of information that I've recently come across is how cold Russia has been... there is certainly a cold source.

 

IMO, this is more pertinent to the PNW but not necessarily to other locations in the mid-latitudes, to piggy-back on the discussion earlier today. 


  • Phil and westcoastexpat like this

#4813
Front Ranger

Posted 02 November 2016 - 03:32 PM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

I'm not exactly understanding why January not being top tier fits into the discussion. The Arctic could see negative anomalies and the PNW may still see record warmth, because if the pattern is not conducive to bringing that air southward, then it doesn't really matter.

 

I can't speak for everyone else, but my point about a balmy source is that, if the Arctic is very warm, no matter what the pattern, it's going to be difficult to get impressive cold to our latitude. And if the Arctic is cold, then it merely increases the odds.

 

I think think the newest piece of information that I've recently come across is how cold Russia has been... there is certainly a cold source.

 

Regarding the first bolded part, yes, this has been my point all along. The pattern is paramount. Not how warm/cold the Arctic is.

 

Overall, the Arctic has been very warm the past decade. The warmest of the warm periods has been in the fall, as the open water freezes up. That's been the case this year as well. And yet, even though the Arctic has been very warm pretty much every fall, the most impressive cold air masses to hit the PNW the past 10 years have almost all occurred early in the cold season - while the Arctic has still been quite warm!

 

When there is a -AO (as there has been this month), the Arctic will almost always be quite warm. And yet, as you acknowledge, Russia and much of Asia has been quite cold. That's not a coincidence - and they didn't need the Arctic to get real cold before they did.

 

Logically, we can see and cite many examples of times when lower latitudes got very cold, but the Arctic was not very cold (anomaly-wise) first. So it should become obvious that a cold Arctic does not directly correlate to colder temps in lower latitudes, or vice versa. 

 

However, when there is a prolonged +AO period and the Arctic gets very cold, and then there is a sudden disruption and flip to Arctic blocking as there was in early 1989, sometimes that can lead to the most impressive cold air outbreaks, because you have a massive polar vortex suddenly on the move south. But that's only one way to get impressive cold, not all big Arctic outbreaks are preceded by +AO and a cold Arctic.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4814
Front Ranger

Posted 02 November 2016 - 03:42 PM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

There's no continuity in the argument you're trying to make here.

 

I'm not going to speak for other people, but with regards to my quote (of the three) - I have already addressed the fact that I was talking about specific cold airmasses. I have also addressed my logic behind the statement, and why it applies on a basic level.

 

Again I am left to wonder, what you trying to achieve in this discussion?

 

My argument has been consistent from the beginning. You often take this tactic in discussions of trying to obfuscate matters rather than stick to the actual arguments, and I'm not going to play along and repeat everything I've said. Sorry.

 

There is simply no other way to read what you said, or what the others said, other than referring to the Arctic as the specific source of cold air masses. All three quotes, including your own, equated the Arctic as the source region. 2 + 2 does in fact = 4.

 

I am left to wonder, what are you trying to achieve in this discussion? I am not the one backpedaling, obfucating, and telling other members they aren't educated enough to contribute to the discussion. It seems, as is too often the case, you are making this personal. Not a productive approach.

 

We all have things to learn from each other.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4815
Phil

Posted 02 November 2016 - 03:58 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13163 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

I'm not exactly understanding why January not being top tier fits into the discussion. The Arctic could see negative anomalies and the PNW may still see record warmth, because if the pattern is not conducive to bringing that air southward, then it doesn't really matter.

I can't speak for everyone else, but my point about a balmy source is that, if the Arctic is very warm, no matter what the pattern, it's going to be difficult to get impressive cold to our latitude. And if the Arctic is cold, then it merely increases the odds.

I think think the newest piece of information that I've recently come across is how cold Russia has been... there is certainly a cold source.


The warm Arctic stuff is very much overplayed sometimes.

This is one of the most expansive Eurasian icebox patterns since the 1970s, to go along with the second highest Eurasian snowcover extent since 1966. Colder than average from the Arctic circle all the way down to Hong Kong and the Philippines on the latest modeling, and this deep freeze only looks to grow in spatial area over the next 2 weeks.

06F00D46-A38C-4402-8C6A-21B6C660CEC0_zps
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#4816
snow_wizard

Posted 02 November 2016 - 04:08 PM

snow_wizard

    The Snow Wizard

  • Mods
  • 10631 posts
  • LocationCovington, WA

The warm Arctic stuff is very much overplayed sometimes.

This is one of the most expansive Eurasian icebox patterns since the 1970s, to go along with the second highest Eurasian snowcover extent since 1966. Colder than average from the Arctic circle all the way down to Hong Kong and the Philippines on the latest modeling, and this deep freeze only looks to grow in spatial area over the next 2 weeks.

06F00D46-A38C-4402-8C6A-21B6C660CEC0_zps

 

Wow!  That is an astounding area of cold air.  I really think we're going to have some serious fun this winter.  I've felt good about it for a long time.


Death To Warm Anomalies!
 
winter.jpg

Winter 2016-17 Stats

Total snow = 9.8"
Days Min 32 or below = 61
Days Max 32 or below = 1
Days Max Below 40 = 29
Coldest Min = 16

#4817
Phil

Posted 02 November 2016 - 04:08 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13163 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.
Imagine every square inch of the North American continent running colder than average, from Canada to Mexico, to Greenland. That'd be roughly analogous to what has/will be ongoing across the Eurasian domain, and then some?
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#4818
snow_wizard

Posted 02 November 2016 - 04:14 PM

snow_wizard

    The Snow Wizard

  • Mods
  • 10631 posts
  • LocationCovington, WA

As for why the NW has been unable get serious midwinter cold...500mb anoms...

 

Below are the composites for January from 1947 to 1957 and 2004 - 2014 (the latest 11 year period available).   Pretty easy to tell why the cold has been unable to dig into the West.  Also notice the East was warmer 1947 to 1957 than 2004 - 2014.

 

 

 

Attached Files


Death To Warm Anomalies!
 
winter.jpg

Winter 2016-17 Stats

Total snow = 9.8"
Days Min 32 or below = 61
Days Max 32 or below = 1
Days Max Below 40 = 29
Coldest Min = 16

#4819
snow_wizard

Posted 02 November 2016 - 04:16 PM

snow_wizard

    The Snow Wizard

  • Mods
  • 10631 posts
  • LocationCovington, WA

Imagine every square inch of the North American continent running colder than average, from Canada to Mexico, to Greenland. That'd be roughly analogous to what has/will be ongoing across the Eurasian domain, and then some?

 

My jaw hit the floor when I saw the scope of that cold.  Truly amazing!


Death To Warm Anomalies!
 
winter.jpg

Winter 2016-17 Stats

Total snow = 9.8"
Days Min 32 or below = 61
Days Max 32 or below = 1
Days Max Below 40 = 29
Coldest Min = 16

#4820
wx_statman

Posted 02 November 2016 - 04:27 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2468 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

My argument has been consistent from the beginning. You often take this tactic in discussions of trying to obfuscate matters rather than stick to the actual arguments, and I'm not going to play along and repeat everything I've said. Sorry.

 

There is simply no other way to read what you said, or what the others said, other than referring to the Arctic as the specific source of cold air masses. All three quotes, including your own, equated the Arctic as the source region. 2 + 2 does in fact = 4.

 

I am left to wonder, what are you trying to achieve in this discussion? I am not the one backpedaling, obfucating, and telling other members they aren't educated enough to contribute to the discussion. It seems, as is too often the case, you are making this personal. Not a productive approach.

 

We all have things to learn from each other.

 

Outside of the last sentence, this post is nonsense. 



#4821
Phil

Posted 02 November 2016 - 04:45 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13163 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

As for why the NW has been unable get serious midwinter cold...500mb anoms...

Below are the composites for January from 1947 to 1957 and 2004 - 2014 (the latest 11 year period available). Pretty easy to tell why the cold has been unable to dig into the West. Also notice the East was warmer 1947 to 1957 than 2004 - 2014.


Maybe you should tune for ENSO?
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#4822
Front Ranger

Posted 02 November 2016 - 04:53 PM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

Outside of the last sentence, this post is nonsense. 

 

So you have nothing to say. Then say nothing.

 

It's obvious when you don't want to address real points. I've made plenty that you've ignored in this discussion, choosing instead to focus on nothings. That's not contributing.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4823
Front Ranger

Posted 02 November 2016 - 04:55 PM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

The warm Arctic stuff is very much overplayed sometimes.

This is one of the most expansive Eurasian icebox patterns since the 1970s, to go along with the second highest Eurasian snowcover extent since 1966. Colder than average from the Arctic circle all the way down to Hong Kong and the Philippines on the latest modeling, and this deep freeze only looks to grow in spatial area over the next 2 weeks.

06F00D46-A38C-4402-8C6A-21B6C660CEC0_zps

 

What other years have featured an expansive Asian ice box in the fall?


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4824
Phil

Posted 02 November 2016 - 05:00 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13163 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

What other years have featured an expansive Asian ice box in the fall?


I'll have to go look, was just thinking about it actually. I know several of the late 1970s years were comparable, as were a few more recent years like 2009/10 and 2014/15 which were both Niño regimes.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#4825
snow_wizard

Posted 02 November 2016 - 05:01 PM

snow_wizard

    The Snow Wizard

  • Mods
  • 10631 posts
  • LocationCovington, WA

Maybe you should tune for ENSO?

 

Both periods featured quite a few Ninas so it should be a decent match already.  The point stands that January has lacked sharp blocking over the GOA/ Aleutians in recent years so that's why it hasn't gotten cold in that month.  I know the point is obvious, but some people don't seem to get it.


Death To Warm Anomalies!
 
winter.jpg

Winter 2016-17 Stats

Total snow = 9.8"
Days Min 32 or below = 61
Days Max 32 or below = 1
Days Max Below 40 = 29
Coldest Min = 16

#4826
snow_wizard

Posted 02 November 2016 - 05:05 PM

snow_wizard

    The Snow Wizard

  • Mods
  • 10631 posts
  • LocationCovington, WA

I'll have to go look, was just thinking about it actually. I know several of the late 1970s years were comparable, as were a few more recent years like 2009/10 and 2014/15 which were both Niño regimes.

 

I think Bastardi was saying 1976 featured something like that.  Monumental cold in the East that winter, but it was a Nino.  It would be interesting to see if it has happened with cold ENSO.  The cold was so expansive in 1976-77 that even in Landsburg January was colder than any we have had since 1993


Death To Warm Anomalies!
 
winter.jpg

Winter 2016-17 Stats

Total snow = 9.8"
Days Min 32 or below = 61
Days Max 32 or below = 1
Days Max Below 40 = 29
Coldest Min = 16

#4827
BLI snowman

Posted 02 November 2016 - 05:05 PM

BLI snowman

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5151 posts
  • LocationRidgefield, WA

What other years have featured an expansive Asian ice box in the fall?


2012, 1999, 1980, 1975, 1966, 1952, 1944

Good roster of years.

#4828
Front Ranger

Posted 02 November 2016 - 05:17 PM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

2012, 1999, 1980, 1975, 1966, 1952, 1944

Good roster of years.

 

I think you forgot 1957 and 1963.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4829
BLI snowman

Posted 02 November 2016 - 05:25 PM

BLI snowman

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5151 posts
  • LocationRidgefield, WA

I think you forgot 1957 and 1963.


Both were established Ninos, poor matches. 1960 and 2001 are close, though. Some nice similarities.

Nice to see real analogs finally coming into focus for us.
  • Front Ranger likes this

#4830
Front Ranger

Posted 02 November 2016 - 06:11 PM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

From another site...more evidence that low Arctic sea ice likely leads to a weaker polar vortex and -AO. Given the weak ENSO state, +QBO, and what we've seen this fall, extensive high latitude blocking this winter seems probable.

 

This just out (behind a paywall) . Timely for this fall's unusual arctic circulation. Note positive feedback between sea ice loss and circulation changes leading to increased heat transport to arctic.

On the atmospheric response experiment to a Blue Arctic Ocean

Tetsu Nakamura1,2,*, Koji Yamazaki1,2, Meiji Honda3, Jinro Ukita3, Ralf Jaiser4, Dörthe Handorf4 and Klaus Dethloff4

Abstract

We demonstrated atmospheric responses to a reduction in Arctic sea ice via simulations in which Arctic sea ice decreased stepwise from the present-day range to an ice-free range. In all cases, the tropospheric response exhibited a negative Arctic Oscillation (AO)-like pattern. An intensification of the climatological planetary-scale wave due to the present-day sea ice reduction on the Atlantic side of the Arctic Ocean induced stratospheric polar vortex weakening and the subsequent negative AO. Conversely, strong Arctic warming due to ice-free conditions across the entire Arctic Ocean induced a weakening of the tropospheric westerlies corresponding to a negative AO without troposphere-stratosphere coupling, for which the planetary-scale wave response to a surface heat source extending to the Pacific side of the Arctic Ocean was responsible. Because the resultant negative AO-like response was accompanied by secondary circulation in the meridional plane, atmospheric heat transport into the Arctic increased, accelerating the Arctic amplification.

http://onlinelibrary...070526/abstract


  • Phil likes this

Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4831
bainbridgekid

Posted 02 November 2016 - 06:14 PM

bainbridgekid

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2426 posts
  • LocationMountlake Terrace, WA (510 feet)

 

From another site...more evidence that low Arctic sea ice likely leads to a weaker polar vortex and -AO. Given the weak ENSO state, +QBO, and what we've seen this fall, extensive high latitude blocking this winter seems probable.

 

Given the mechanism behind the Polar Vortex, this seems almost inarguably true.


  • Front Ranger likes this

2016-17 snowfall: 12"

 

12/8-9: 3.5"

12/23: 0.25"

12/31: 0.25"

2/3: 0.5"

2/5-6: 4"

2/26: 0.25"

2/27: 1.5"+0.5"+0.25"

2/28: 0.25"

3/7/17: 0.5"

3/8/17: 0.25"

 

 


#4832
wx_statman

Posted 02 November 2016 - 06:38 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2468 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

So you have nothing to say. Then say nothing.
 
It's obvious when you don't want to address real points. I've made plenty that you've ignored in this discussion, choosing instead to focus on nothings. That's not contributing.


You're right. I have nothing else to say to you.

My only hope is that you see the irony in your last two replies to me.
  • Front Ranger likes this

#4833
Jesse

Posted 02 November 2016 - 07:02 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15831 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

My argument has been consistent from the beginning. You often take this tactic in discussions of trying to obfuscate matters rather than stick to the actual arguments, and I'm not going to play along and repeat everything I've said. Sorry.

There is simply no other way to read what you said, or what the others said, other than referring to the Arctic as the specific source of cold air masses. All three quotes, including your own, equated the Arctic as the source region. 2 + 2 does in fact = 4.

I am left to wonder, what are you trying to achieve in this discussion? I am not the one backpedaling, obfucating, and telling other members they aren't educated enough to contribute to the discussion. It seems, as is too often the case, you are making this personal. Not a productive approach.

We all have things to learn from each other.


The first three paragraphs almost describe to a tee what you have been doing for the duration of this discussion.

#4834
Front Ranger

Posted 02 November 2016 - 07:09 PM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

The first three paragraphs almost describe to a tee what you have been doing for the duration of this discussion.

 

No, I've tried to focus on the actual points of discussion, as seen in paragraph two you quoted. You just don't like what I'm saying.  :) You cannot fairly accuse me of backpedaling, obfuscating, or telling other members they need to educate themselves more before contributing.

 

Way too much taking sides. Let's focus more on actual points, logic, and science, and less on this vague, silly personal stuff.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4835
snow_wizard

Posted 02 November 2016 - 08:29 PM

snow_wizard

    The Snow Wizard

  • Mods
  • 10631 posts
  • LocationCovington, WA

Both were established Ninos, poor matches. 1960 and 2001 are close, though. Some nice similarities.

Nice to see real analogs finally coming into focus for us.

 

2001 had a dry October.  Certainly not a good match at all in that regard.  This one is kind of on its own I think.


Death To Warm Anomalies!
 
winter.jpg

Winter 2016-17 Stats

Total snow = 9.8"
Days Min 32 or below = 61
Days Max 32 or below = 1
Days Max Below 40 = 29
Coldest Min = 16

#4836
Geos

Posted 02 November 2016 - 10:42 PM

Geos

    Special Contributor

  • Mods
  • 5908 posts
  • LocationKirkland, WA (north)

A whopping 10.15" of rain here for the month. 1.05° above normal.


Univ. of WI Parkside Geosciences (environmental conc.), GIS - 2011

 

2016-2017 snowfall: 14.0"

Total moisture 2017: 17.44" 03/31

Elevation: 460 ft
 


#4837
Front Ranger

Posted 03 November 2016 - 07:51 AM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

What's more, the Arctic was actually quite a bit colder in the 1980s and 1990s than it is today, and yet the PNW still struggled to see top tier cold in January over that time frame. Going back to the regional aspect of the conversation.

 

 

Overall, the Arctic has been very warm the past decade. The warmest of the warm periods has been in the fall, as the open water freezes up. That's been the case this year as well. And yet, even though the Arctic has been very warm pretty much every fall, the most impressive cold air masses to hit the PNW the past 10 years have almost all occurred early in the cold season - while the Arctic has still been quite warm!

 

When there is a -AO (as there has been this month), the Arctic will almost always be quite warm. And yet, Russia and much of Asia has been quite cold. That's not a coincidence - and they didn't need the Arctic to get real cold before they did.

 

There are a number of points brought up here that no one really responded to. Would be interesting to hear thoughts on these.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4838
Jesse

Posted 03 November 2016 - 07:54 AM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15831 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

There are a number of points brought up here that no one really responded to. Would be interesting to hear thoughts on these.


I can't speak for the others, but I checked out of this conversation awhile ago. Not going to waste my energy arguing "counterpoints" to a point I was never making in the first place. :)

#4839
Front Ranger

Posted 03 November 2016 - 08:14 AM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

I can't speak for the others, but I checked out of this conversation awhile ago. Not going to waste my energy arguing "counterpoints" to a point I was never making in the first place. :)

 

So clarify - what point were you trying to make in the first place?

 

My original comment in this discussion was in response to what westcoastexpat  said, and he hasn't denied that point as far as I'm aware. So keep in mind that while you were part of the discussion, you weren't who I was originally responding to about a warmer Arctic leading to less Arctic outbreaks.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4840
Jesse

Posted 03 November 2016 - 08:23 AM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15831 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

So clarify - what point were you trying to make in the first place?

My original comment in this discussion was in response to what westcoastexpat said, and he hasn't denied that point as far as I'm aware. So keep in mind that while you were part of the discussion, you weren't who I was originally responding to about a warmer Arctic leading to less Arctic outbreaks.


Not the only cause but probably plays a role.

Earth shattering.

#4841
Front Ranger

Posted 03 November 2016 - 08:36 AM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

Not the only cause but probably plays a role.

Earth shattering.

 

And I never claimed you said it was the only cause. But the warmer Arctic and how much it affects PNW Arctic outbreaks...that was what the discussion started with.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#4842
Jesse

Posted 03 November 2016 - 10:05 AM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15831 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

And I never claimed you said it was the only cause. But the warmer Arctic and how much it affects PNW Arctic outbreaks...that was what the discussion started with.


I don't think you or anybody else here is skilled enough to quantify that with any degree of precision.

#4843
Front Ranger

Posted 03 November 2016 - 11:59 AM

Front Ranger

    Special Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9465 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

I don't think you or anybody else here is skilled enough to quantify that with any degree of precision.

 

Of course, just like many other topics we discuss here.

 

I was just, from the beginning, addressing the general supposition that seems to exist - "the Arctic is warmer, therefore it's harder to get decent Arctic outbreaks in the mid latitudes, because the Arctic is the source region. Duh." Note that this supposition does not state the Arctic is exclusively the reason, but it assumes a warmer Arctic automatically is a factor for less or weaker Arctic outbreaks, because it's "the source". In the case of westcoastexpat, he clearly was concerned about this upcoming winter because "the source region" is so warm right now. For reasons I gave, I didn't find this an especially valid concern.

 

The resulting discussion has provided some good information and thoughts from several people, I think, despite a couple pointless sidetracks.


  • Jesse likes this

Cool anomalies soothe the soul.