• Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!

Pattern December to Remember

Webberweather53 said:
There’s a reason that discussion thread is “forgotten”, I don’t think you wanna open up that Pandora’s box in here. Might as well consider the GW thread a political one, most non-mets’ opinions on AGW are motivated and reinforced by politics, most have little interest in understanding the actual science behind it or are willing to change their opinions, even when the evidence is downright overwhelmingly in favor of man-made climate change, with no other viable theory coming anywhere close to explaining the extremely rapid climate change we’ve seen in the past few hundred years. Some will of course say that earth was warmer in the past, while true, it’s very unusual to warm at the rate it’s doing so today, which makes adaptation damn near impossible and that’s really the cause for concern amongst most climate scientists. In any case, Dr. Roy Spencer is a fringe scientist that isn’t taken very seriously by most of his own peers and for good reason. I take whatever he says with a truckload of salt.
Click to expand...
The point is it can be discussed in that thread, fact/fiction/science/political views of it, etc etc.... threads get "pushed down" on the list when no new post are added and it does get forgotten. We started that thread, just like many others, to keep the main weather threads clear of those discussions because many do not wish to read them or be involved in that discussion, which is perfectly fine.
 
metwannabe said:
The point is it can be discussed in that thread, fact/fiction/science/political views of it, etc etc.... threads get "pushed down" on the list when no new post are added and it does get forgotten. We started that thread, just like many others, to keep the main weather threads clear of those discussions because many do not wish to read them or be involved in that discussion, which is perfectly fine.
Click to expand...

Well, yes it can be discussed in that thread but not in here, that's my point. No need to start bringing the climate change discussion into this thread, you'll probably regret doing so.
 
Webberweather53 said:
Well, yes it can be discussed in that thread but not in here, that's my point. No need to start bringing the climate change discussion into this thread, you'll probably regret doing so.
Click to expand...
But you basically discussed GW and your views in the post that supposedly was saying it can be discussed in that thread. But I digress, any further GW discussion needs to go in the appropriate thread, thanks
 
Webberweather53 said:
There’s a reason that discussion thread is “forgotten”, I don’t think you wanna open up that Pandora’s box in here. Might as well consider the GW thread a political one, most non-mets’ opinions on AGW are motivated and reinforced by politics, most have little interest in understanding the actual science behind it or are willing to change their opinions, even when the evidence is downright overwhelmingly in favor of man-made climate change, with no other viable theory coming anywhere close to explaining the extremely rapid climate change we’ve seen in the past few hundred years. Some will of course say that earth was warmer in the past, while true, it’s very unusual to warm at the rate it’s doing so today, which makes adaptation damn near impossible and that’s really the cause for concern amongst most climate scientists. In any case, Dr. Roy Spencer is a fringe scientist that isn’t taken very seriously by most of his own peers and for good reason. I take whatever he says with a truckload of salt.
Click to expand...
The middle of this paragraph is exactly why I directed the conversation to continue further in another thread. There's really no reason to bring that tension into this thread regardless of one's stance.
 
SD said:
The middle of this paragraph is exactly why I directed the conversation to continue further in another thread. There's really no reason to bring that tension into this thread regardless of one's stance.
Click to expand...

But you posting a link to it in here is inviting that kind of conversation in here. I'm just asking that we stay on topic and leave it be.
 
metwannabe said:
But you basically discussed GW and your views in the post that supposedly was saying it can be discussed in that thread. But I digress, any further GW discussion needs to go in the appropriate thread, thanks
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong but, it was actually a mod, not me that tried to steer this thread off the rails by bringing up a post about AGW, don't even try to pin the blame on me and tell me that I should be the one to stay on topic when you're not doing the same. Shrug
 
Webberweather53 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but, it was actually a mod, not me that tried to steer this thread off the rails by bringing up a post about AGW, don't even try to pin the blame on me and tell me that I should be the one to stay on topic when you're not doing the same. Shrug
Click to expand...
You are wrong.
 
Webberweather53 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but, it was actually a mod, not me that tried to steer this thread off the rails by bringing up a post about AGW, don't even try to pin the blame on me and tell me that I should be the one to stay on topic when you're not doing the same. Shrug
Click to expand...
Wrong, he posted a link to the thread in an effort to get the discussion that was already ongoing to move to that thread. It's been done numerous times in the main threads and not just the GW thread, we've shared the whamby thread many times for that same reason. This needs to be the end of this discussion because, since you won't let it go, this thread continues to go off the rails.
 
metwannabe said:
Wrong, he posted a link to the thread in an effort to get the discussion that was already ongoing to move to that thread. It's been done numerous times in the main threads and not just the GW thread, we've shared the whamby thread many times for that same reason. This needs to be the end of this discussion because, since you won't let it go, this thread continues to go off the rails.
Click to expand...

And it got completely pushed off the rails by multiple mods, I'm just along for the ride.
 
SD said:
You are wrong.
Click to expand...

Rain Cold (moderator) (Yesterday @ 934pm) "Yes, 100%. Let it get cold up there and let the snow pack build up. We have 3.5 months ahead of us to get cold and snow, plus a few days before that window opens up. There are going to be many model runs, like there are every single winter, that show reds over the SE. What's the big deal? People are way too scared of LA Ninas.

Will it ever get cold again? No. No it won't. The Pacific will never be favorable. Or the Atlantic. Or the MJO. Or the stratosphere. Or ENSO. Or Climate Change. We're in a 2nd year Nina. Ninas are front loaded, you know. And since there's so much red being posted for the foreseeable future, we should just assume that we're going to be wall to wall warm. Oh well. On to winter 2056."
 
Well, first week of December coming up and it looks discouraging from a cold/snow perspective. Not expecting excitement in December but I like to look for good patterns leading up to January. My hope is the modeled +AO / +EPO / +NAO is not the theme for January. Cold on this side of the world is good I guess. But the conus being hosed with zonal pacific air will not make a good winter.

Going forward I'd like to see somehow the mjo gets into 7/8 and we pop a ridge in Alaska toward the end of the month. Until then I think it's enjoy outdoor weather. Pacific has been such an issue for quite sometime now, I'm not getting my hopes up.

gfs-ens_z500a_nhem_34.png
 
"Im dreaming of a White Christmas."
Place yout bets. Heres an article from a Charlotte news outlet last year. Good read.
Over 140 years,Charlotte has recorded snow for 12 of them.

www.cbs17.com

Dreaming of a white Christmas? Here are the odds for the Carolinas seeing snow Christmas morning

(FOX 46 CHARLOTTE) – Here in the Carolinas, we rarely see measurable snowfall on Christmas day. It’s been 20 years since our last white Christmas in Charlotte and that year we only got four-t…
www.cbs17.com www.cbs17.com
 
NCSNOW said:
"Im dreaming of a White Christmas."
Place yout bets. Heres an article from a Charlotte news outlet last year. Good read.
Over 140 years,Charlotte has recorded snow for 12 of them.

www.cbs17.com

Dreaming of a white Christmas? Here are the odds for the Carolinas seeing snow Christmas morning

(FOX 46 CHARLOTTE) – Here in the Carolinas, we rarely see measurable snowfall on Christmas day. It’s been 20 years since our last white Christmas in Charlotte and that year we only got four-t…
www.cbs17.com www.cbs17.com
Click to expand...

Hmm, they claim 2010 was a "white christmas" in Charlotte but it definitely was not.

"...which was 63 years before our last white Christmas in 2010."

Rain changed to snow after midnight on Boxing Day/Dec 26 in Charlotte. (see NWS RAH's analysis below)

accum.20101225.and.20101226.separate.gif
 
Webberweather53 said:
Hmm, they claim 2010 was a "white christmas" in Charlotte but it definitely was not.

"...which was 63 years before our last white Christmas in 2010."

Rain changed to snow after midnight on Boxing Day/Dec 26 in Charlotte. (see NWS RAH's analysis below)

accum.20101225.and.20101226.separate.gif
Click to expand...

I think this might be my favorite snow storm ever, even more than the Carolina Crusher of Jan 2000.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top