Remarkable Run of Arctic Outbreaks along the Front Range

[Front Ranger]

"Pretty much" unprecedented is like saying "kind of" Olympic champion.

 

Do you ever consider past performance and reread some of these posts before you post them and think "am I going to sound like myself here?"  I knew after the first paragraph that you had oversold things by at least a measurable amount.  

 

So you knew before actually looking at the stats, huh? Doesn't sound very scientific.

 

What I wrote was an honest assessment based off of the stats. It really has been a remarkable stretch of Arctic outbreaks here, one of the most impressive in the modern era. Statman and snowman will even (begrudgingly) admit that. There is nothing being oversold. It is what it is.

[Deweydog]

So you knew before actually looking at the stats, huh? Doesn't sound very scientific.

 

What I wrote was an honest assessment based off of the stats. It really has been a remarkable stretch of Arctic outbreaks here, one of the most impressive in the modern era. Statman and snowman will even (begrudgingly) admit that. There is nothing being oversold. It is what it is.

 

Sometimes science is just about knowing the source.  

[BLI snowman]

My primary claim was that it's been a remarkable stretch for Arctic outbreaks around here. That was backed up by the lengthy post with details of the events, all stats taken from reliable stations I chose before embarking on the research.

 

In other threads like this, you and wxstatman have contributed with additional stats about the period/events being discussed. Not a bit of that in this one...all of your focus was on other periods. Odd, and disappointing given your collective knowledge and love of climate research.

 

Do you want us to just expand on recent details for the sake of expanding? What more do you want to know about the recent events? 

 

Like I said, I appreciate the fact that your initial post was discussing the impressive highlights of recent events, but if your goal was to properly contextualize it or come to some conclusion about it, then it was seriously lacking. 

[Front Ranger]

Sometimes science is just about knowing the source.  

 

Please show me how the source made any incorrect claims, if you're going to assert that. Burden of proof is on you.

 

Saying: "It's gotta be wrong because I think the source is exaggerating" is not scientific. This post was based on stats, please stick to stats.

[Front Ranger]

Do you want us to just expand on recent details for the sake of expanding? What more do you want to know about the recent events? 

 

Like I said, I appreciate the fact that your initial post was discussing the impressive highlights of recent events, but if your goal was to properly contextualize it or come to some conclusion about it, then it was seriously lacking. 

 

I don't know, in other similar threads you both have provided additional stats about the events being discussed. You know, other stations and what they saw with those events. Wxstatman in particular has done that quite a bit. Instead, all of your posting in here was in an effort to discredit something I never even claimed in the original post! 

 

I think I provided plenty of context about why I called it a remarkable stretch. Could I have explained in full detail how it compared to other 6 year stretches in modern history? Sure, but the post was already pretty long!

[Deweydog]

Please show me how the source made any incorrect claims, if you're going to assert that. Burden of proof is on you

 

1.  incredible:  beyond belief or understanding; unbelievable.

 

Really?  

 

2.  unprecedented:  never done or known before.

 

Pretty much?  Well is it or isn't it?  What aspects were unprecedented?  

 

It came off like a lot of your efforts of the past.  Couple it with some of your efforts yesterday to minimize/trivialize the runaway warmth in the west since last spring and you know the drill...

[Front Ranger]

1.  incredible:  beyond belief or understanding; unbelievable.

 

Really?  

 

2.  unprecedented:  never done or known before.

 

Pretty much?  Well is it or isn't it?  What aspects were unprecedented?  

 

It came off like a lot of your efforts of the past.  Couple it with some of your efforts yesterday to minimize/trivialize the runaway warmth in the west since last spring and you know the drill...

 

Serious nit-picking, man. Really? You're going to dissect the meaning of superlatives I used? There is no objective way to judge that, but I did actually find the stats pretty incredible. As would any climate junkie with knowledge of this area. I stand by that. 

 

I could have gone into more detail about why I said the three top-tier events in one year were "pretty much unprecedented", but the post was freaking long as it was. It really seems like you're going out of your way to find something to pick on here. Seriously, you realize that if this standard were applied to every post on here, no one would be able to have any actual discussion because of the level of nitpicking?

[Deweydog]

Serious nit-picking, man. Really? You're going to dissect the meaning of superlatives I used? There is no objective way to judge that, but I did actually find the stats pretty incredible. As would any climate junkie with knowledge of this area. I stand by that. 

 

I could have gone into more detail about why I said the three top-tier events in one year were "pretty much unprecedented", but the post was freaking long as it was. It really seems like you're going out of your way to find something to pick on here. Seriously, you realize that if this standard were applied to every post on here, no one would be able to have any actual discussion because of the level of nitpicking?

 

Should have thought about that before you chose such intense wording.  

 

No doubt some of the anomalies are very impressive though.  We've seen some nice pattern variability over the last 13 months or so.  

[Front Ranger]

 

Since 2008, the Colorado Front Range region, along with parts of WY to the north, have seen an incredible number of major Arctic cold waves. The period is remarkable not just for the number of events (7), but for the magnitude of cold they produced. This culminated in three top-tier cold waves in 2014, which is pretty much unprecedented.

 

Ok, so an explanation of this.

 

I couldn't find any other year in the modern record with three top-tier cold events on the level of 2014. By top-tier, in this case I am referring to top five for the time it occurred, so within 2 weeks either way.

 

1962 had one in January (probably #2 January outbreak of all time), and another in late February. None the rest of the year.

 

1959 also had two.

 

As did 1960 (though they were really the result of the same pattern in end of Feb/beginning of Mar).

 

1969, 1955, 1959, and 1971 all arguably had two.

 

I can't find any other year that managed three outbreaks on the level of Feb 2014, Nov 2014, and Dec 2014 for this region, at least in the modern airport era. As far as I can tell, pretty much unprecedented.

[Front Ranger]

Also, what about the late 1950's-early 1960s?

 

1/4/1959: -28 in Pueblo, second coldest January reading on record

4/10/1959: -6 in Longmont, coldest so late in spring

2/28/1960: -11 in Denver, second coldest so late in winter behind 2/28/1962

3/3/1960: -8 in Denver, coldest March reading since 1886

1/10/1962: -24 in Denver, many all-time record lows in NM

2/28/1962: -18 in Denver, by far the coldest on record so late in winter

1/12/1963: -25 in Denver, many all-time record lows across the SW

 

Wxstatman agrees that each of those years had two top-tier events.

[Deweydog]

Ok, so an explanation of this.

 

I couldn't find any other year in the modern record with three top-tier cold events on the level of 2014. By top-tier, in this case I am referring to top five for the time it occurred, so within 2 weeks either way.

 

1962 had one in January (probably #2 January outbreak of all time), and another in late February. None the rest of the year.

 

1959 also had two.

 

As did 1960 (though they were really the result of the same pattern in end of Feb/beginning of Mar).

 

1969, 1955, 1959, and 1971 all arguably had two.

 

I can't find any other year that managed three outbreaks on the level of Feb 2014, Nov 2014, and Dec 2014 for this region, at least in the modern airport era. As far as I can tell, pretty much unprecedented.

So the somewhat semantic-based frequency was "pretty much" unprecedented but the events themselves not so much.

[Black Hole]

Lets try and keep the arguing to a minimum please. And also Front Ranger, some of the guys you have been arguing with are about as smart as they come with this kind of stuff. It would be useful to try and learn something from them. I'm not saying you didn't have any good points, but take it easy.

[BLI snowman]

I don't know, in other similar threads you both have provided additional stats about the events being discussed. You know, other stations and what they saw with those events. Wxstatman in particular has done that quite a bit. Instead, all of your posting in here was in an effort to discredit something I never even claimed in the original post! 

 

I think I provided plenty of context about why I called it a remarkable stretch. Could I have explained in full detail how it compared to other 6 year stretches in modern history? Sure, but the post was already pretty long!

 

I don't really agree, but to each their own.

 

I'm not sure what more you're looking for with the recent stuff. IMO, the November 2014 event and the October 2009 event stand out the most on a regionally historic level. Other events you listed, including the recent one, were fairly standard and not altogether historic IMO but could be impressive as parts of a bigger whole. The February 2011 event was probably among the most impressively anomalous events in the U.S. since 1990, but alas it was confined to a more southern area than what was being discussed. Amazing event for AZ/NM/OK/West TX as well as northern Mexico and decent for CO/WY. 

 

I like continuity in my analysis of these events, so if I were going to do a more thorough breakdown then I'd start there and look at several I-25 corridor stations with a continuous period of record over the decades (Boulder, Fort Collins, Cheyenne) and examine their year-by-year performance back to 1900 for these types of standout airmasses. Would take some effort and dedication, but it's certainly do-able. This thread has serious potential, but as often is the case it gets wasted on account of agendas and/or laziness. 

[BLI snowman]

Ok, so an explanation of this.

 

I couldn't find any other year in the modern record with three top-tier cold events on the level of 2014. By top-tier, in this case I am referring to top five for the time it occurred, so within 2 weeks either way.

 

1962 had one in January (probably #2 January outbreak of all time), and another in late February. None the rest of the year.

 

1959 also had two.

 

As did 1960 (though they were really the result of the same pattern in end of Feb/beginning of Mar).

 

1969, 1955, 1959, and 1971 all arguably had two.

 

I can't find any other year that managed three outbreaks on the level of Feb 2014, Nov 2014, and Dec 2014 for this region, at least in the modern airport era. As far as I can tell, pretty much unprecedented.

 

Calendar year, or 12 month period? 

 

I would look at 1950-51, 1954-55, 1959 or 1959-60, 1961-62, 1962-63, 1964-65, 1983-84, 1985, 1989, 1990-91, 1993, 1996-97, 2002-03 for other year long periods with multiple huge cold airmass events.

 

I think, again, armchair analysis, that all of these would be comparable to 2014. I bolded the ones that I feel especially stand out in the airport era.

[wx_statman]

Wxstatman agrees that each of those years had two top-tier events.

 

So you're saying I posted stats in this thread????

[wx_statman]

Also, it appears the context of how I used "unprecedented" was lost on both wxstatman and BLIsnowman. I said the number of top-tier Arctic outbreaks in 2014 was "pretty much unprecedented". Referring to last year, and the Feb, Nov, and Dec outbreaks.

 

I didn't say it was definitely unprecedented, and I wasn't referring to the whole 2008-14 period, anyway. That's pretty clear if you re-read the opening paragraph. I should of double checked when wxstatman said that, but I naively assumed he was quoting me accurately.

 

What does that even mean? You naively assumed I had good intentions, when in reality I'm just a big jerk who's out to discredit you?

 

Is that what you're saying?

 

Get a grip.

[wx_statman]

So you knew before actually looking at the stats, huh? Doesn't sound very scientific.

 

What I wrote was an honest assessment based off of the stats. It really has been a remarkable stretch of Arctic outbreaks here, one of the most impressive in the modern era. Statman and snowman will even (begrudgingly) admit that. There is nothing being oversold. It is what it is.

 

Petty.

[Front Ranger]

Lets try and keep the arguing to a minimum please. And also Front Ranger, some of the guys you have been arguing with are about as smart as they come with this kind of stuff. It would be useful to try and learn something from them. I'm not saying you didn't have any good points, but take it easy.

 

I actually acknowledged valid points they made. But as I said, it was a one way street. 

 

I also happen to have lived in this area for 8 years and can guarantee I've spent more time looking at local climate data. It would be useful for everyone in this thread to try and learn from each other.

 

But singling me out and telling me to "take it easy" is really not cool, when the arguing in this thread started with accusations of bias against me. It's one thing to argue the stats, but when you start making needless personal accusations like that, it's never helpful to the discussion.

 

You'll note it's not me telling someone to "get a grip" further up this thread.

[Front Ranger]

So you're saying I posted stats in this thread????

 

You missed the point. You didn't post any additional stats about the events I mentioned, only older events in an attempt to prove something.

 

In other stats-based thread, you've often added your knowledge of the events and provided additional tidbits, instead of putting all your effort into downplaying the events being discussed as you did here.

[Front Ranger]

What does that even mean? You naively assumed I had good intentions, when in reality I'm just a big jerk who's out to discredit you?

 

Is that what you're saying?

 

Get a grip.

 

You misread what I said and misquoted me, and I gave you the benefit of the doubt, instead of double checking. Reading it today, I'm not sure how you misread it, but it happens.

 

Where did I call you a jerk?

[Front Ranger]

So the somewhat semantic-based frequency was "pretty much" unprecedented but the events themselves not so much.

 

Frequency and magnitude. I went into plenty of detail about that.

[Front Ranger]

I don't really agree, but to each their own.

 

I'm not sure what more you're looking for with the recent stuff. IMO, the November 2014 event and the October 2009 event stand out the most on a regionally historic level. Other events you listed, including the recent one, were fairly standard and not altogether historic IMO but could be impressive as parts of a bigger whole. The February 2011 event was probably among the most impressively anomalous events in the U.S. since 1990, but alas it was confined to a more southern area than what was being discussed. Amazing event for AZ/NM/OK/West TX as well as northern Mexico and decent for CO/WY. 

 

I like continuity in my analysis of these events, so if I were going to do a more thorough breakdown then I'd start there and look at several I-25 corridor stations with a continuous period of record over the decades (Boulder, Fort Collins, Cheyenne) and examine their year-by-year performance back to 1900 for these types of standout airmasses. Would take some effort and dedication, but it's certainly do-able. This thread has serious potential, but as often is the case it gets wasted on account of agendas and/or laziness.

 

1. The stats I provided argue otherwise. They were not "fairly standard" events. I clearly outlined what made each one significant based on the data from multiple regional stations.

 

2. Again, my focus was on events for the Front Range/southern WY. Not NM, TX, OK, etc.

 

And Black Hole...please read the last sentence and explain why you singled me out. 

[Front Ranger]

Calendar year, or 12 month period? 

 

 

Calendar year. I also made this clear in the initial post. 2014...that's a calendar year.

[wx_statman]

You know what Flatiron, I gave up on this thread yesterday. But then I looked at it today and noticed you were taking jabs at me. I had to say something.

 

I disagree with 95% of what you're saying in this thread, so we're not going to come to any meaningful resolution.

 

Maybe its time you drop it? I don't want to check this thread tomorrow and see you're still taking shots at me while talking to other people.

 

OK?

[Front Ranger]

You know what Flatiron, I gave up on this thread yesterday. But then I looked at it today and noticed you were taking jabs at me. I had to say something.

 

I disagree with 95% of what you're saying in this thread, so we're not going to come to any meaningful resolution.

 

Maybe its time you drop it? I don't want to check this thread tomorrow and see you're still taking shots at me while talking to other people.

 

OK?

 

I wasn't taking shots at you. I was pointing out that you misread something I said early on, and that's where things went downhill. Was hoping that could lead to a starting over point for discussion.

 

It wouldn't be that hard to say: "Oops, you're right, I see that you never said 2008-14 was an unprecedented period. My bad."

[BLI snowman]

Calendar year. I also made this clear in the initial post. 2014...that's a calendar year.

 

Even then, it's not accurate. Look at the years I listed and carefully examine some of the airmasses that affected the Front Range. Several of them had multiple historic, standout events. 

[BLI snowman]

1. The stats I provided argue otherwise. They were not "fairly standard" events. I clearly outlined what made each one significant based on the data from multiple regional stations.

 

2. Again, my focus was on events for the Front Range/southern WY. Not NM, TX, OK, etc.

 

And Black Hole...please read the last sentence and explain why you singled me out. 

 

1. Fairly standard is relative of course but in historic terms I'd say it means that it wasn't an absolute top tier event in the region's history (back to the 1800s). I'm sorry but I don't consider December 2014, December 2013, December 2009, December 2008, or even February 2014 to be absolute top tier events. You can disagree, but unless we're going to objectively quantify this somehow I wouldn't bother. No need for redundantly drawing it out.

 

2. I know, hence the "alas". You're still looking at a wide range of spots and what's historic in Casper is not necessarily historic in Pueblo. 

[Front Ranger]

Even then, it's not accurate. Look at the years I listed and carefully examine some of the airmasses that affected the Front Range. Several of them had multiple historic, standout events. 

 

Multiple, yes. But not three on the level of 2014, as far as I've seen. Feel free to tell me what calendar years you believe did.

 

I live here. I've done a ton of research on the area.

[Front Ranger]

1. Fairly standard is relative of course but in historic terms I'd say it means that it wasn't an absolute top tier event in the region's history (back to the 1800s). I'm sorry but I don't consider December 2014, December 2013, December 2009, December 2008, or even February 2014 to be absolute top tier events. You can disagree, but unless we're going to objectively quantify this somehow I wouldn't bother. No need for redundantly drawing it out.

 

2. I know, hence the "alas". You're still looking at a wide range of spots and what's historic in Casper is not necessarily historic in Pueblo. 

 

1. Once again, I'm not going back to the 1800s. If you need to, re-read the initial post again. I was looking at the modern, airport era. As much as possible, I wanted to use stations with a continuous period of record to present.

 

2. Hey, if you want to create a thread about events in the greater Mountain West/Plains/whatever, go ahead. I chose to focus on this local region, since that's where I live and all the recent events affected that whole area, though obviously not every event was top-tier at every location.

[BLI snowman]

Multiple, yes. But not three on the level of 2014, as far as I've seen. Feel free to tell me what calendar years you believe did.

 

I live here. I've done a ton of research on the area.

 

Depends on where you're looking at.

 

I highlighted a few of them, but I would make the wager that:

 

1989 (February, September, December) 

1985 (Late January and early February, late September, November) 

1965 (Mid March, late March, September)

1962 (Mid January, Late January, February) 

1951 (late January and early February, early June, November)

 

all had a comparable number of historic airmasses for a number of locations in CO/WY. 

[wx_statman]

I wasn't taking shots at you. I was pointing out that you misread something I said early on, and that's where things went downhill. Was hoping that could lead to a starting over point for discussion.

 

It wouldn't be that hard to say: "Oops, you're right, I see that you never said 2008-14 was an unprecedented period. My bad."

 

I'm not going to waste my time and quote your posts from earlier today where you took jabs at me. You can go back and take a look yourself.

 

As for you not calling 2008-14 unprecedented, you're right. I misread that. But it doesn't change where I stand. I still question how much you actually researched past events before calling 2014 "unprecedented," or before calling 2008-14 "remarkable." Neither superlative looks entirely justified. That seems to be what is driving the back and forth between you and everyone else in this thread, my reading comprehension aside.

[Front Ranger]

Depends on where you're looking at.

 

I highlighted a few of them, but I would make the wager that:

 

1989 (February, September, December) 

1985 (Late January and early February, late September, November) 

1965 (Mid March, late March, September)

1962 (Mid January, Late January, February) 

1951 (late January and early February, early June, November)

 

all had a comparable number of historic airmasses for a number of locations in CO/WY. 

 

I'm not including summer events in an "Arctic" thread. Sep 1989 was impressive, but low 40s highs and low 30s lows does not belong here. Same thing goes for Sep 1965 and early June 1951.

 

Late September 1985 was a legit Arctic air mass, though. But late Jan/early Feb 1985 was not quite top-tier...both Denver and Cheyenne had colder days in Feb 2014. Nov 1985 was fairly impressive, but no where near Nov 2014.

 

The second Jan 1962 event was not top-tier, in my opinion, though it's close. However, like March 1965, it was really two events part of one pattern. Something indisputably impressive about 2014 was the fact that it produced 3 top-tier events out of 3 completely different and separate patterns.

[BLI snowman]

1. Once again, I'm not going back to the 1800s. If you need to, re-read the initial post again. I was looking at the modern, airport era. As much as possible, I wanted to use stations with a continuous period of record to present.

 

2. Hey, if you want to create a thread about events in the greater Mountain West/Plains/whatever, go ahead. I chose to focus on this local region, since that's where I live and all the recent events affected that whole area, though obviously not every event was top-tier at every location.

 

1. I'm talking in absolute terms here, so as far back as records go. None of those airmasses were all time historic in absolute terms for when they occurred. December 2014 may indeed have been (-6/-34 at Laramie) but otherwise I'd safely say no. 

 

2. Colorado and Wyoming are both huge states with a lot of variety in their records. This is the kind of methodology that opens the door to a ton of subjectivity and cherry-picking in this thread.

[Front Ranger]

I'm not going to waste my time and quote your posts from earlier today where you took jabs at me. You can go back and take a look yourself.

 

As for you not calling 2008-14 unprecedented, you're right. I misread that. But it doesn't change where I stand. I still question how much you actually researched past events before calling 2014 "unprecedented," or before calling 2008-14 "remarkable." Neither superlative looks entirely justified. That seems to be what is driving the back and forth between you and everyone else in this thread, my reading comprehension aside.

 

It just seems funny to me that superlatives, one of which is really just a subjective descriptor, are the source of so much anxiety here.

 

Anyhow, I've made my case for why I said what I did. I've never been the type to make statements like that without doing my homework first. There will always be things up for debate, of course, but it's not like I was trying to make an ordinary period seem extraordinary here. I only created this thread because after the latest Arctic outbreak, I decided to dig deeper and realized the historic nature of what's been going on.

 

Have a good night.

[Front Ranger]

1. I'm talking in absolute terms here, so as far back as records go. None of those airmasses were all time historic in absolute terms for when they occurred. December 2014 may indeed have been (-6/-34 at Laramie) but otherwise I'd safely say no. 

 

2. Colorado and Wyoming are both huge states with a lot of variety in their records. This is the kind of methodology that opens the door to a ton of subjectivity and cherry-picking in this thread.

 

1. Ok. But then you're talking about something different than I was. I never claimed these were the coldest air masses of all time. There's good reason for why I chose to mainly include stations that have a record to the present, I don't have to explain that to you.

 

2. There was no cherry-picking. Being very familiar with this climate, I know that most major Arctic air masses around here produce similar results from Casper to Denver, the I-25 corridor. Geographically, it makes sense. Just because I chose to focus on a certain area does not make it cherry-picking.

 

Good night.

[BLI snowman]

I'm not including summer events in an "Arctic" thread. Sep 1989 was impressive, but low 40s highs and low 30s lows does not belong here. Same thing goes for Sep 1965 and early June 1951.

 

Late September 1985 was a legit Arctic air mass, though. But late Jan/early Feb 1985 was not quite top-tier...both Denver and Cheyenne had colder days in Feb 2014. Nov 1985 was fairly impressive, but no where near Nov 2014.

 

The second Jan 1962 event was not top-tier, in my opinion, though it's close. However, like March 1965, it was really two events part of one pattern. Something indisputably impressive about 2014 was the fact that it produced 3 top-tier events out of 3 completely different and separate patterns.

 

Ah, moving the goal posts I see. Not sure why summer troughs shouldn't matter if they are historic.  Also not sure why September 1965 fails to be considered arctic? A high of 27 at Casper on September 17 isn't an arctic airmass simply because it's September 17? Seems pretty selective and subjective.

 

I disagree with your January 1962 analysis. Cheyenne had a 0/-24 day on January 19, 1962 and a -10/-20 day on January 21, 1962. How is that not historic but what they just had is? 

 

And the event in early 1985 was very comparable to what was seen this past year, IMO. Maybe slightly less impressive, but extremely close. -25 at Cheyenne and a high of 1 in Denver. 

[BLI snowman]

1. Ok. But then you're talking about something different than I was. I never claimed these were the coldest air masses of all time. There's good reason for why I chose to mainly include stations that have a record to the present, I don't have to explain that to you.

 

2. There was no cherry-picking. Being very familiar with this climate, I know that most major Arctic air masses around here produce similar results from Casper to Denver, the I-25 corridor. Geographically, it makes sense. Just because I chose to focus on a certain area does not make it cherry-picking.

 

Good night.

 

I would say focus on one station at a time and complete this analysis back as far as you can (preferably the early 1900s). Focus on the whole year and find a way to judge how many historic events took place in each year at that station. That's the best way to objectively measure this. 

[wx_statman]

It just seems funny to me that superlatives, one of which is really just a subjective descriptor, are the source of so much anxiety here.

 

Anyhow, I've made my case for why I said what I did. I've never been the type to make statements like that without doing my homework first. There will always be things up for debate, of course, but it's not like I was trying to make an ordinary period seem extraordinary here. I only created this thread because after the latest Arctic outbreak, I decided to dig deeper and realized the historic nature of what's been going on.

 

Have a good night.

 

Who's anxious?

[Black Hole]

Everything is historic because it happened. Can we agree on that?

[Jesse]

This thread is depressing.