NJ Strong Weather Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Wx Banter Thread 2.0

+37
Snowfall
frank 638
oldtimer
NYCSNOWMAN2020
chief7
Radz
sabamfa
toad strangler
aiannone
UnionWX
algae888
RJB8525
dkodgis
CPcantmeasuresnow
skinsfan1177
HectorO
Grselig
NjWeatherGuy
devsman
weatherwatchermom
jimv45
Taffy
GreyBeard
Math23x7
snow247
rb924119
jmanley32
billg315
Snow88
nutleyblizzard
Dunnzoo
docstox12
Dtone
Frank_Wx
Quietace
sroc4
amugs
41 posters

Page 1 of 40 1, 2, 3 ... 20 ... 40  Next

Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by amugs Mon Sep 14, 2015 10:08 am

Mount Aso erupts in Southern Japan spewing Ash and  debris over 1 mile into the sky.
Could have an impact on our weather going forward

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/14/japanese-volcano-mount-aso-on-island-of-kyushu-erupts

_________________
Mugs 
AKA:King: Snow Weenie
Self Proclaimed
WINTER 2014-15 : 55.12" +.02 for 6 coatings (avg. 35")
WINTER 2015-16 Total - 29.8" (Avg 35")
WINTER 2016-17 : 39.5" so far
amugs
amugs
Advanced Forecaster - Mod
Advanced Forecaster - Mod

Posts : 12202
Reputation : 211
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 51
Location : Hillsdale,NJ

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by sroc4 Mon Sep 14, 2015 10:16 am

From Dr. Maue on Weather Bell. The GEFS ens getting an upgrade:

New supercomputing power at NCEP will finally yield an upgraded ensemble prediction system similar to the ECMWF EPS. This is excellent news for us at WeatherBELL as a properly calibrated GEFS can be used in concert with the ECMWF system to provide blended forecasts e.g. 1-5, 6-10, 11-15 day averaged temperature anomalies.
Expected implementation is October 13, 2015.
First, the resolution of the GEFS (thru Day 10) will be increased to T574 which is coincidentally the previous 27-km grid spacing that we had with the "old GFS" -- now at 13-km globally. There are still 20-perturbed ensemble members and a low-resolution control. But, since the model itself has been upgraded, the GEFS actually includes 22 total members with the following setup:
1 high resolution control = GFS deterministic at 13-km
1 low resolution control = GEFS control at 27-km
20 perturbed members = GEFS at 27-km
The ECMWF system has 52 ensembles where the HRES or deterministic is at 14-km while the ensembles are around 25-km.
I'm pulling in the parallel feed of data from NCEP. The model completes and then is posted to the FTP server about 3-hours after the operational GEFS run. Of course, once the upgrade is completed, the data will post at its normal time. You can read about the changes in the NWS TIN here: http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/notification/tin15-43gefs.htm
I expect much better 2-meter temperatures, tropical cyclones, and everything else as the overall prediction system will have higher skill than the much older (5-7 years old) system.

_________________
"In weather and in life, there's no winning and losing; there's only winning and learning."
WINTER 2012/2013 TOTALS 43.65" WINTER 2013/2014 TOTALS 64.85"
WINTER 2014/2015 TOTALS 71.20" WINTER 2015/2016 TOTALS 35.00"
WINTER 2016/2017 TOTALS 42.25" WINTER 2017/2018 TOTALS 62.85"
WINTER 2018/2019 TOTALS 14.25" WINTER 2019/2020 TOTALS 6.35"
WINTER 2020/2021 TOTALS 37.75"
Dec 16th/17th 7.25"    
Jan 31st-Feb 3rd 15.5"    
Feb 7th 6"
Feb 10th-11th 2.75"
Feb 18th-19th 6.25"
sroc4
sroc4
Admin
Admin

Posts : 6888
Reputation : 292
Join date : 2013-01-07
Location : Wading River, LI

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by sroc4 Wed Sep 16, 2015 8:57 am

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/09/23/antarctic-sea-ice-hit-35-year-record-high-saturday/

Interesting article. AntArctic Sea ice increasing and setting all time records. I find it amusing that despite model simulations showing Antarctic ice is supposed to be decreasing with the current conditions statements like these are said without entertaining other ideas. “If the warming continues, at some point the trend will reverse,” Zhang said.
This next quote from the article says it all.

"Ultimately, it’s apparent the relationship between ozone depletion, climate warming from greenhouse gases, natural variability, and how Antarctic ice responds is all very complicated. In sharp contrast, in the Arctic, there seems to be a relatively straight forward relationship between temperature and ice extent."

Bottom line is the idea that humans can definitively prove man made global warming vs natural earthly climate change is preposterous. Just like any argument there are two sides.  The truth typically lies somewhere in the middle.  I personally lean a little right on this one.  For me the truth might be better realized if instead of focusing on study's that prove their stance; rather, have the two sides focus on contradictory information to their stance. Try to prove their stance wrong. They should do it for 5 yrs. Apply that to politics and problems will get solved.

_________________
"In weather and in life, there's no winning and losing; there's only winning and learning."
WINTER 2012/2013 TOTALS 43.65" WINTER 2013/2014 TOTALS 64.85"
WINTER 2014/2015 TOTALS 71.20" WINTER 2015/2016 TOTALS 35.00"
WINTER 2016/2017 TOTALS 42.25" WINTER 2017/2018 TOTALS 62.85"
WINTER 2018/2019 TOTALS 14.25" WINTER 2019/2020 TOTALS 6.35"
WINTER 2020/2021 TOTALS 37.75"
Dec 16th/17th 7.25"    
Jan 31st-Feb 3rd 15.5"    
Feb 7th 6"
Feb 10th-11th 2.75"
Feb 18th-19th 6.25"
sroc4
sroc4
Admin
Admin

Posts : 6888
Reputation : 292
Join date : 2013-01-07
Location : Wading River, LI

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by Quietace Wed Sep 16, 2015 9:21 am

@sroc4 wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/09/23/antarctic-sea-ice-hit-35-year-record-high-saturday/

Interesting article. AntArctic Sea ice increasing and setting all time records. I find it amusing that despite model simulations showing Antarctic ice is supposed to be decreasing with the current conditions statements like these are said without entertaining other ideas. “If the warming continues, at some point the trend will reverse,” Zhang said.
This next quote from the article says it all.

"Ultimately, it’s apparent the relationship between ozone depletion, climate warming from greenhouse gases, natural variability, and how Antarctic ice responds is all very complicated. In sharp contrast, in the Arctic, there seems to be a relatively straight forward relationship between temperature and ice extent."

Bottom line is the idea that humans can definitively prove man made global warming vs natural earthly climate change is preposterous. Just like any argument there are two sides.  The truth typically lies somewhere in the middle.  I personally lean a little right on this one.  For me the truth might be better realized if instead of focusing on study's that prove their stance; rathe, have the global warmists focus on contradictory information to their stance. Try to prove their stance wrong and have the natural climate changers do the exact same. They should do it for 5 yrs. Apply that to politics and problems will get solved.
Interestingly enough i am taking a class on this right now. The professor bypassed the thought of proving Climate Change to the class, instead taking the stance that Climate Change is a undeniable fact and that there is no room for debate. While the texts I have read have the seemingly alarming data, the data they use to support there statements is biased toward there standpoint(i.e. Only using C02 data from the 1970s to present instead of using the data we have from ice cores from the last thousand of years.) That is the issue with this topic as you have pointed out Scott. Both sides of the argument try and manipulate the data to prove there point of view. The one major issue I always take up with NOAA, is the extremely pixelated and low resolution monthly departure map they use. This is manipulation of the data. They have the resources and technology to make a high resolution data set, yet why do they bypass at putting better data out to the public? Just a tiny smidgen of my opinion., though i would like to discuss this further with you.
Wx Banter Thread 2.0 20150610

_________________
Ryan
Ph.D  Candidate at FSU
M.S. in Meteorology from FSU
B.S. in Meteorology from Plymouth State University
Quietace
Quietace
Meteorologist - Mod
Meteorologist - Mod

Posts : 3615
Reputation : 32
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 24
Location : Tallahassee, FL

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by sroc4 Wed Sep 16, 2015 10:47 am

Ryan it would be awesome if the next time your prof is lecturing and implying that man made GW is simply fact you raise your hand in the middle of the lecture and say something like:

"Prof Joe Mamma (yes thats his/her name in this example), you speak as if the idea that global warming is man made is cut and dry.  I have read contradictory information or information that does not exactly agree with the theory behind that position.  For example, regarding the arctic sea ice extend current observations would suggest that there is a linear relationship relative to warming SST and decreasing arctic sea ice extent; however, there is a recent article in the Washington post stating that the Antarctic sea ice is at record high levels despite warmer SST.  It seems over the years the models used to simulate/forecast the antarctic sea ice extent show it should be decreasing given the past and current data; however, the current observations seem to contradict that.  Now Im not saying man made global warming doesnt exist, but dont you think that given contradictory observations like this exists warrants an approach that at the very least entertains the idea that other theories or an integration of other ideas on climate change are plausible instead of teaching us that man made global warming is a fact, cut and dry?"

If you do Ryan please have someone video your profs reaction as well as the students reaction because that would be awesome.  Maybe its arrogant of me to make a comment on that.  But maybe not.  Maybe if more people took a similar approach to any debatable topic out there, ie: where are the holes/contradictions to my argument first, followed by what I can prove to my argument; lastly why the opposing argument is wrong, instead of bog ourselves down with 'prioritizing why the opposing argument is wrong first and second, followed by why Im right third; then ignoring the holes/contradictions and preetending they dont exist in my argument altogether.  Take this approach and we might actually get "stuff" done. just saying.

_________________
"In weather and in life, there's no winning and losing; there's only winning and learning."
WINTER 2012/2013 TOTALS 43.65" WINTER 2013/2014 TOTALS 64.85"
WINTER 2014/2015 TOTALS 71.20" WINTER 2015/2016 TOTALS 35.00"
WINTER 2016/2017 TOTALS 42.25" WINTER 2017/2018 TOTALS 62.85"
WINTER 2018/2019 TOTALS 14.25" WINTER 2019/2020 TOTALS 6.35"
WINTER 2020/2021 TOTALS 37.75"
Dec 16th/17th 7.25"    
Jan 31st-Feb 3rd 15.5"    
Feb 7th 6"
Feb 10th-11th 2.75"
Feb 18th-19th 6.25"
sroc4
sroc4
Admin
Admin

Posts : 6888
Reputation : 292
Join date : 2013-01-07
Location : Wading River, LI

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by amugs Wed Sep 16, 2015 2:13 pm

@Quietace wrote:
@sroc4 wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/09/23/antarctic-sea-ice-hit-35-year-record-high-saturday/

Interesting article. AntArctic Sea ice increasing and setting all time records. I find it amusing that despite model simulations showing Antarctic ice is supposed to be decreasing with the current conditions statements like these are said without entertaining other ideas. “If the warming continues, at some point the trend will reverse,” Zhang said.
This next quote from the article says it all.

"Ultimately, it’s apparent the relationship between ozone depletion, climate warming from greenhouse gases, natural variability, and how Antarctic ice responds is all very complicated. In sharp contrast, in the Arctic, there seems to be a relatively straight forward relationship between temperature and ice extent."

Bottom line is the idea that humans can definitively prove man made global warming vs natural earthly climate change is preposterous. Just like any argument there are two sides.  The truth typically lies somewhere in the middle.  I personally lean a little right on this one.  For me the truth might be better realized if instead of focusing on study's that prove their stance; rathe, have the global warmists focus on contradictory information to their stance. Try to prove their stance wrong and have the natural climate changers do the exact same. They should do it for 5 yrs. Apply that to politics and problems will get solved.
Interestingly enough i am taking a class on this right now. The professor bypassed the thought of proving Climate Change to the class, instead taking the stance that Climate Change is a undeniable fact and that there is no room for debate. While the texts I have read have the seemingly alarming data, the data they use to support there statements is biased toward there standpoint(i.e. Only using C02 data from the 1970s to present instead of using the data we have from ice cores from the last thousand of years.) That is the issue with this topic as you have pointed out Scott. Both sides of the argument try and manipulate the data to prove there point of view. The one major issue I always take up with NOAA, is the extremely pixelated and low resolution monthly departure map they use. This is manipulation of the data. They have the resources and technology to make a high resolution data set, yet why do they bypass at putting better data out to the public? Just a tiny smidgen of my opinion., though i would like to discuss this further with you.
Wx Banter Thread 2.0 20150610

Excellent post Paisan and Kid Jr. Everything has a BIAS to it with this - more so on those who are"Warmers" or as I like to say "Warners". I have read two books one by a IIPC leading scientist who removed herself from the discussion and work of Climate Change and one from a Met. WE have to recognize the facts and not blow this out of proportion as mainstream media does - SUPER Nino - really? My other point here being our data only goes back about 40 years of true data with all of this so how the h do we know? Everything else gets sketchy. Also, the reporting stations are very minimal today than 30 years ago as well - ask your prof about that one hmm? That can skew the temps big time if your not getting collaborative reports from all areas not just the urban zones. Good luck at Plymouth State kid and keep passing along the information that you learn along with Alex if you read this.

_________________
Mugs 
AKA:King: Snow Weenie
Self Proclaimed
WINTER 2014-15 : 55.12" +.02 for 6 coatings (avg. 35")
WINTER 2015-16 Total - 29.8" (Avg 35")
WINTER 2016-17 : 39.5" so far
amugs
amugs
Advanced Forecaster - Mod
Advanced Forecaster - Mod

Posts : 12202
Reputation : 211
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 51
Location : Hillsdale,NJ

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by Guest Wed Sep 16, 2015 9:36 pm

Please Hear me out here.

I say this to my students at school as well.

Long Island was formed by a glacier pushing sediment and large boulders south from the arctic during a period of time on earth where it was very cold. Then as it got warmer the ice retreated/melted leaving behind the traffic infested polluted overcrowded mess I now live on. Humans were not here for this event, nor were we for the other dozen or so scientifically proven super hot and or super cold periods that have happened on our planet for millions of years. Now all of a sudden it's getting warmer on some parts of the planet (not all) and humans are to blame!! Mad Mad Mad Just some more media hysteria/liberal bias.
Natural climate fluctuations have been going on for millions of years. To now blame humans and even worse off to believe this crap means you are just another brainwashed sheep drinking the media cool-aid that is liberalism or are still suffering the effects of the psychedelic mushrooms you ate in college. There I said It!! Twisted Evil Twisted Evil Twisted Evil

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by amugs Wed Sep 16, 2015 10:04 pm

syosnow94 wrote:Please Hear me out here.

I say this to my students at school as well.

Long Island was formed by a glacier pushing sediment and large boulders south from the arctic during a period of time on earth where it was very cold.  Then as it got warmer the ice retreated/melted leaving behind the traffic infested polluted overcrowded mess I now live on.  Humans were not here for this event, nor were we for the other dozen or so scientifically proven super hot and or super cold periods that have happened on our planet for millions of years.  Now all of a sudden it's getting warmer on some parts of the planet (not all) and humans are to blame!! Mad Mad Mad   Just some more media hysteria/liberal bias.
Natural climate fluctuations have been going on for millions of years.  To now blame humans and even worse off to believe this crap means you are just another brainwashed sheep drinking the media cool-aid that is liberalism or are still suffering the effects of the psychedelic mushrooms you ate in college.  There I said It!! Twisted Evil Twisted Evil Twisted Evil

Here here Syo and this is what I have preached too. Right on brother. cyclops

_________________
Mugs 
AKA:King: Snow Weenie
Self Proclaimed
WINTER 2014-15 : 55.12" +.02 for 6 coatings (avg. 35")
WINTER 2015-16 Total - 29.8" (Avg 35")
WINTER 2016-17 : 39.5" so far
amugs
amugs
Advanced Forecaster - Mod
Advanced Forecaster - Mod

Posts : 12202
Reputation : 211
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 51
Location : Hillsdale,NJ

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by Frank_Wx Thu Sep 17, 2015 7:53 pm

syosnow94 wrote:Please Hear me out here.

I say this to my students at school as well.

Long Island was formed by a glacier pushing sediment and large boulders south from the arctic during a period of time on earth where it was very cold.  Then as it got warmer the ice retreated/melted leaving behind the traffic infested polluted overcrowded mess I now live on.  Humans were not here for this event, nor were we for the other dozen or so scientifically proven super hot and or super cold periods that have happened on our planet for millions of years.  Now all of a sudden it's getting warmer on some parts of the planet (not all) and humans are to blame!! Mad Mad Mad   Just some more media hysteria/liberal bias.
Natural climate fluctuations have been going on for millions of years.  To now blame humans and even worse off to believe this crap means you are just another brainwashed sheep drinking the media cool-aid that is liberalism or are still suffering the effects of the psychedelic mushrooms you ate in college.  There I said It!! Twisted Evil Twisted Evil Twisted Evil

Amen

_________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

CLICK HERE to view NJ Strong Snowstorm Classifications
Frank_Wx
Frank_Wx
Godzilla Seeker
Godzilla Seeker

Posts : 20010
Reputation : 312
Join date : 2013-01-05
Age : 29
Location : Morris Plain, NJ

http://njstrongweather.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by Dtone Fri Sep 18, 2015 11:01 am

Who remembers Hurricane Floyd
All the basement apts on my block at the time were severely flooded.

http://www.weather.gov/images/okx/facebook/facebook1.png

Dtone
Wx Statistician Guru
Wx Statistician Guru

Posts : 1738
Reputation : 9
Join date : 2013-08-26
Location : Bronx, NY

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by Quietace Fri Sep 18, 2015 3:23 pm

Guys hand drawing Temp Analysis is pretty fun....Tedious, but as my professor said "You see things the computer misses 100% of the time"... Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Img_2410
Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Img_2411

_________________
Ryan
Ph.D  Candidate at FSU
M.S. in Meteorology from FSU
B.S. in Meteorology from Plymouth State University
Quietace
Quietace
Meteorologist - Mod
Meteorologist - Mod

Posts : 3615
Reputation : 32
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 24
Location : Tallahassee, FL

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by docstox12 Fri Sep 18, 2015 4:02 pm

@Dtone wrote:Who remembers Hurricane Floyd
All the basement apts on my block at the time were severely flooded.

http://www.weather.gov/images/okx/facebook/facebook1.png

Remember it very well.10 inches of rain, flooding all over.Ramapo river turned into a Bay in some spots.
docstox12
docstox12
Wx Statistician Guru
Wx Statistician Guru

Posts : 7243
Reputation : 214
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 70
Location : Monroe NY

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by Dunnzoo Fri Sep 18, 2015 8:05 pm

Wow Ryan, pretty cool!

_________________
Janet

Snowfall winter of 2020-2021  51.1"

Snowfall winter of 2019-2020         8.5"
Snowfall winter of 2018-2019     25.1"
Snowfall winter of 2017-2018     51.9"
Snowfall winter of 2016-2017     45.6"
Snowfall winter of 2015-2016     29.5"
Snowfall winter of 2014-2015     50.55"
Snowfall winter of 2013-2014     66.5"
Dunnzoo
Dunnzoo
Senior Enthusiast - Mod
Senior Enthusiast - Mod

Posts : 4377
Reputation : 66
Join date : 2013-01-11
Age : 59
Location : Westwood, NJ

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by nutleyblizzard Sat Sep 19, 2015 9:53 pm


This program back in the 80's made me into the weather geek that I am today. Sure brings back memories.
nutleyblizzard
nutleyblizzard
Senior Enthusiast
Senior Enthusiast

Posts : 1717
Reputation : 41
Join date : 2014-01-30
Age : 55
Location : Nutley, new jersey

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by Dunnzoo Sun Sep 20, 2015 7:36 am

Mention of the World Series, the year the Mets won!

_________________
Janet

Snowfall winter of 2020-2021  51.1"

Snowfall winter of 2019-2020         8.5"
Snowfall winter of 2018-2019     25.1"
Snowfall winter of 2017-2018     51.9"
Snowfall winter of 2016-2017     45.6"
Snowfall winter of 2015-2016     29.5"
Snowfall winter of 2014-2015     50.55"
Snowfall winter of 2013-2014     66.5"
Dunnzoo
Dunnzoo
Senior Enthusiast - Mod
Senior Enthusiast - Mod

Posts : 4377
Reputation : 66
Join date : 2013-01-11
Age : 59
Location : Westwood, NJ

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by nutleyblizzard Sun Sep 20, 2015 8:04 am

@Dunnzoo wrote:Mention of the World Series, the year the Mets won!
As a longtime Yankee fan and Mets hater, I knew you would pick up on that! Mad
nutleyblizzard
nutleyblizzard
Senior Enthusiast
Senior Enthusiast

Posts : 1717
Reputation : 41
Join date : 2014-01-30
Age : 55
Location : Nutley, new jersey

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by docstox12 Sun Sep 20, 2015 8:11 am

@nutleyblizzard wrote:
This program back in the 80's made me into the weather geek that I am today. Sure brings back memories.

Nutley, this is excellent! Love the metal tipped pointer showing the features on the map.I think Gloria Okon, a weather icon in the early 60's used one of those.This 1986 weather program is clear and concise, so much better than today's Weather Channel.Can't believe this is nearly 30 years ago! Cripes!!!
docstox12
docstox12
Wx Statistician Guru
Wx Statistician Guru

Posts : 7243
Reputation : 214
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 70
Location : Monroe NY

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by docstox12 Sun Sep 20, 2015 8:13 am

@nutleyblizzard wrote:
@Dunnzoo wrote:Mention of the World Series, the year the Mets won!
As a longtime Yankee fan and Mets hater, I knew you would pick up on that! Mad

LOL, for you to pick up on that clearly shows you have a terminal case of MDS. (Met Derangement Syndrome).
docstox12
docstox12
Wx Statistician Guru
Wx Statistician Guru

Posts : 7243
Reputation : 214
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 70
Location : Monroe NY

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by Snow88 Sun Sep 20, 2015 10:04 am

I hope we get a storm of this magnitude again this upcoming winter. This time, hope it pans out for everyone.

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 2hp4s5f
Snow88
Snow88
Senior Enthusiast
Senior Enthusiast

Posts : 2118
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2013-01-09
Age : 32
Location : Brooklyn, NY

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by billg315 Sun Sep 20, 2015 9:10 pm

@nutleyblizzard wrote:
This program back in the 80's made me into the weather geek that I am today. Sure brings back memories.

I used to watch this program every morning before school. It was before I had the Weather Channel (and needless to say the Internet) and when local news programs didn't put as much emphasis on the weather as they seem to do today so this was the best outlet to get somewhat more detailed weather information for a kid who was just starting to become fascinated by the weather.
billg315
billg315
Advanced Forecaster - Mod
Advanced Forecaster - Mod

Posts : 3643
Reputation : 182
Join date : 2015-01-24
Age : 47
Location : Flemington, NJ

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by nutleyblizzard Sun Sep 20, 2015 9:21 pm

@Snow88 wrote:I hope we get a storm of this magnitude again this upcoming winter. This time, hope it pans out for everyone.

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 2hp4s5f
What a heartbreak of a storm that was. The heavy snow bands came within 20 miles of me. Damn dry air intrusion! Mad
nutleyblizzard
nutleyblizzard
Senior Enthusiast
Senior Enthusiast

Posts : 1717
Reputation : 41
Join date : 2014-01-30
Age : 55
Location : Nutley, new jersey

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by sroc4 Tue Sep 22, 2015 1:04 pm

Interesting fodder for the brain to ponder from JB today.

Can Global Warming Cause Both More and Less Rain
September 22 10:47 AM

Yes, but....



Here is the idea. The warmer it gets, the more evaporation off the ocean surface so the more water vapor, The more water vapor, the more it can rain. It rains because up strong upward motion There has to be compensating sinking to offset the upward motion, so the wet areas can get wetter, the dry areas drier unless of course there is no rain there to begin with.

There are reasons to believe this is true in real life. The monks that lived in the West Indies understood that very clear days with increasing swells meant a hurricane was roaming the Atlantic relatively close by ( within 500 miles) The air was quite clear because of the subsidence outside the hurricane compensating for the upward motion in the hurricane. In fact the clear eye is an even better example... its there because of the intense upward motion surrounding it.

So in theory yes, but facts take aparts such things.

First of all, I have not been able to find an accurate assessment of the increase in water vapor over any period of time on a global scale. We know that the bulk of the global warming has been in arctic winters and that has precious little effect on the entire global water vapor picture... so that is in the noise.

Secondly Le Chateliers principle, which for some reason is rarely used as an argument against AGW fanaticism but should be states it clearly::



Le Châtelier's principle states that if a dynamic equilibrium is disturbed by changing the conditions, the position of equilibrium shifts to counteract the change to reestablish an equilibrium. If a chemical reaction is at equilibrium and experiences a change in pressure, temperature, or concentration of products or reactants, the equilibrium shifts in the opposite direction to offset the change.

But here is the kicker. If you want to use the extreme weather argument, its a sign of the above principle at work! Why? Because the condensation processes are slower when its warmer. If it truly was warming, then 1 of two things should be going on 1) there is less rain because its warming and there is not enough cooling to cause the extra condensation or 2) There is no change in the extremes. Oddly enough the argument that an increase in extreme weather is a sign of climate change is correct, its just not a sign of GLOBAL WARMING.. ITS A SIGN THE CLIMATE IS FIGHTING BACK, AS WOULD BE EXPECTED UNLESS ONE WISHES TO SIMPLY DISREGARD KNOWN PRINCIPLES.

So more and less rain ( and I guess snow, though snow breeds snow and snow breeds cold, so warming means more snow and colder) sure its possible. But its not a sign that we are heading for an atomospheric apocalypse. Quite the contrary, if there is the mythical increase in extreme weather, then its being driven by a fight back. There is no rout. And since the climate has always changed naturally and always will, trying to pin it down to a trace gas renders it as part of the noise, not what is making the noise



_________________
"In weather and in life, there's no winning and losing; there's only winning and learning."
WINTER 2012/2013 TOTALS 43.65" WINTER 2013/2014 TOTALS 64.85"
WINTER 2014/2015 TOTALS 71.20" WINTER 2015/2016 TOTALS 35.00"
WINTER 2016/2017 TOTALS 42.25" WINTER 2017/2018 TOTALS 62.85"
WINTER 2018/2019 TOTALS 14.25" WINTER 2019/2020 TOTALS 6.35"
WINTER 2020/2021 TOTALS 37.75"
Dec 16th/17th 7.25"    
Jan 31st-Feb 3rd 15.5"    
Feb 7th 6"
Feb 10th-11th 2.75"
Feb 18th-19th 6.25"
sroc4
sroc4
Admin
Admin

Posts : 6888
Reputation : 292
Join date : 2013-01-07
Location : Wading River, LI

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by Frank_Wx Tue Sep 22, 2015 6:28 pm

JB is my hero

_________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

CLICK HERE to view NJ Strong Snowstorm Classifications
Frank_Wx
Frank_Wx
Godzilla Seeker
Godzilla Seeker

Posts : 20010
Reputation : 312
Join date : 2013-01-05
Age : 29
Location : Morris Plain, NJ

http://njstrongweather.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by Quietace Tue Sep 22, 2015 6:30 pm

This is a map with a large amount of stations on it. I have to convert from metar code for each one and plot it as a station model. After that I will draw isotherms in and maybe isobars depending on if the instructor thinks its ok. Its actually from after Sandy made landfall so its would be a tough draw to do both. The second picture at the top right is a example of how big each plot has to be. Ill upload a pic when its finished.
Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Img_2412Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Img_2415

_________________
Ryan
Ph.D  Candidate at FSU
M.S. in Meteorology from FSU
B.S. in Meteorology from Plymouth State University
Quietace
Quietace
Meteorologist - Mod
Meteorologist - Mod

Posts : 3615
Reputation : 32
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 24
Location : Tallahassee, FL

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by Frank_Wx Tue Sep 22, 2015 7:08 pm

Holy crap that's sick!! Looks awfully tedious, too.

_________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

CLICK HERE to view NJ Strong Snowstorm Classifications
Frank_Wx
Frank_Wx
Godzilla Seeker
Godzilla Seeker

Posts : 20010
Reputation : 312
Join date : 2013-01-05
Age : 29
Location : Morris Plain, NJ

http://njstrongweather.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Wx Banter Thread 2.0 Empty Re: Wx Banter Thread 2.0

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 40 1, 2, 3 ... 20 ... 40  Next

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum