WunderBlog Archive » Category 6™

Category 6 has moved! See the latest from Dr. Jeff Masters and Bob Henson here.

Space Station Captures Spectacular Images of Typhoon Maysak

By: Jeff Masters 9:22 PM GMT on April 01, 2015

Category 4 Typhoon Maysak is headed west-northwest towards the Philippines, after pounding the islands of Yap State in Micronesia's Caroline Islands on Tuesday. At 2 pm EDT Wednesday the Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC) put Maysak's top sustained winds at 140 mph, and the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) put Maysak's central pressure at 935 mb. Maysak underwent an eyewall replacement cycle early on Wednesday, when the inner eyewall collapsed and was replaced by a larger-diameter eyewall that formed from a spiral band. This process weakened the storm's winds by 20 mph, and satellite loops showed a shrinking of the storm's heavy thunderstorms, along with a warming of the cloud tops. However, on Wednesday afternoon, the cloud tops began cooling and the area of heavy thunderstorms was expanding, showing that Maysak had recovered from its eyewall replacement cycle and might be ready to intensify once again. Maysak has moderate wind shear of 10 - 20 knots and a large area of ocean with sea surface temperatures of 28°C (82°F) to work with until landfall. As Maysak approaches the Philippines, wind shear will rise to the high range (20 - 30 knots), and there is some dry air surrounding the storm that will likely get driven into the core by the high wind shear. The total heat energy in the ocean will decrease, which should also help allow weakening to occur. The Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC) is predicting that Maysak will be a Category 1 storm when it hits Luzon Island in the Philippines. The 12 UTC Wednesday runs of the GFS and European models predicted that the center of Maysak would come ashore in Luzon near 21 UTC (5 pm EDT) Saturday.




Figure 1. Some of the most spectacular images ever captured of a tropical cyclone from space: Category 5 Super Typhoon Maysak as seen from the International Space Station at approximately 6 pm EDT Tuesday March 31, 2015 (just after dawn local time.) At the time, Mayask had top winds of 160 mph as estimated by the Joint Typhoon Warning Center, and a central pressure of 905 mb, as estimated by the Japan Meteorological Agency. I brightened the images and flipped them 180 degrees using Photoshop to better show them off. Image credit: Terry W. Virts.

Maysak was the strongest typhoon (by pressure) so early in the year
At its peak strength on Tuesday, the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) put Maysak's central pressure at 905 mb, the lowest pressure they have estimated for any typhoon occurring so early in the year (previous record: 930 mb for Typhoon Mitag of March 2002, Typhoon Alice of January 1979, and Typhoon Harriet of January 1959.) The earliest in any year we've seen a typhoon stronger than Maysak was in 1971, when Super Typhoon Amy deepened to 890 mb on May 2. JTWC gave Maysak a Category 5 rating with 160 mph winds on Tuesday, making it one of only three Category 5 typhoons ever observed in the Northwest Pacific prior to April (the other two were Super Typhoon Ophelia of January 1958 and Super Typhoon Mitag of March 2002, both with 160-mph winds). According to intensity estimates from the Joint Typhoon Warning Center, 2015 is the first year on record to have three Category 5 storms form in the Pacific Ocean during the first three months of the year. The other two Category 5 storms in 2015 were Tropical Cyclone Pam (165 mph winds), which devastated Vanuatu in mid-March, and Tropical Cyclone Eunice (160 mph winds), which affected ocean areas in the South Indian Ocean. Reliable satellite records of Southern Hemisphere tropical cyclones extend back to the early 1990s, so we only have about a 25-year period of good records for global tropical cyclones. Earth averaged 4.6 Category 5 storms per year between 1990 - 2014, with 59% of these occurring in the Northwest Pacific.

Maysak causes heavy damage to Chuuk and Yap
At least 5 deaths and extensive damage have been reported on Chuuk State (Micronesia), where Maysak passed through over the weekend as a Category 1 typhoon. Up to 90% of the homes were reportedly damaged or destroyed by the storm. On Tuesday, Maysak's northern eyewall passed over the sparsely populated islands of Fais and Ulithi in the Yap State of Micronesia while the storm was close to its top strength, and damage was likely severe to catastrophic on those islands. Chuuk and Yap should keep an eye on a new tropical disturbance, Invest 99W, which is organizing near where Maysak formed. The latest 12Z UTC Wednesday runs of the GFS and European models show 99W becoming no worse than a weak tropical storm, though, and the JTWC is giving 99W low odds of developing.

Bob Henson will have a post Thursday on the results of California's crucial April 1 snow survey.

Jeff Masters

Hurricane

The views of the author are his/her own and do not necessarily represent the position of The Weather Company or its parent, IBM.

Reader Comments

No fooling with this post, that eye photo is real!

Wow! Awesome pictures for sure.
Figure 1. Some of the most spectacular images ever captured of a tropical cyclone from space: Category 5 Super Typhoon Maysak as seen from the International Space Station at approximately 6 pm EDT Tuesday March 31, 2015 (just after dawn local time.) At the time, Mayask had top winds of 160 mph as estimated by the Joint Typhoon Warning Center, and a central pressure of 905 mb, as estimated by the Japan Meteorological Agency. I brightened the images and flipped them 180 degrees using Photoshop to better show them off. Image credit: Terry W. Virts.


Something Im very good at...
Thanks Doc M.
Incredible views of Maysak from the International Space Station
ACE of 219 last year in the Northeast Pacific? Is that correct?
Quoting 5. pablosyn:

ACE of 219 last year in the Northeast Pacific? Is that correct?


It should be around 198
dr m why wait too where you can update now has come thursday that will be old news


Bob Henson will have a post Thursday on the results of California's crucial April 1 snow survey.

Jeff Masters

Gov. Brown issues statewide mandatory water reductions

Sierra survey finds lowest snowpack ever recorded

Watch report: Snow survey dismal; Gov. Brown imposes water restrictions

Standing in dry, brown grass at a site that he said normally would be snow-covered this time of year, Brown announced he had signed an executive order requiring the State Water Resources Control Board to implement measures in cities and towns to cut the state's overall water usage by 25 percent compared with 2013 levels.

The move will affect residents, businesses, farmers and other users.

"We're in a historic drought and that demands unprecedented action," Brown said at a news conference at Echo Summit in the Sierra Nevada, where state water officials found no snow on the ground for the first time in their manual survey of the snowpack. "We have to pull together and save water in every way we can."

Brown's order follows previous cutbacks imposed by the water board. It will require campuses, golf courses, cemeteries and other large landscapes to significantly cut water use; direct local governments to replace 50 million square feet of lawns throughout the state with drought-tolerant landscaping; and create a temporary rebate program for consumers who replace old water-sucking appliances with more efficient ones.

"We're in a new era; the idea of your nice little green grass getting water every day, that's going to be a thing of the past," Brown said.

The order calls on local water agencies to implement tiered water pricing that charges higher rates as more water is used and requires agricultural users to report more water use information to state regulators.

Brown's office said that would boost the state's ability to enforce laws against illegal water diversions and water waste.

The order also prohibits new homes and developments from using drinkable water for irrigation if the structures lack water-efficient drip systems. In addition, the watering of decorative grasses on public street medians is banned.

The snowpack has been in decline all year, and Wednesday's survey showed the statewide snow water is equivalent to 5 percent of the historical average for April 1 and the lowest for that date since the state began record-keeping in 1950.

Snow supplies about a third of the state's water, and a lower snowpack means less water in California reservoirs to meet demand in summer and fall. There was no snow at the site of Wednesday's manual survey near Echo Summit, about 90 miles east of Sacramento.

"It is such an unprecedented lack of snow, it is way, way below records," said Frank Gehrke, chief of snow surveys for the California Department of Water Resources.

Brown previously declared a drought emergency and stressed the need for sustained water conservation, but the Democratic governor has come under increasing pressure to be more aggressive as the state enters its fourth year of drought.

In the past year, the state water board has imposed mandatory water-saving restrictions on urban users that prohibit sprinklers running off onto pavement, bans residents from watering lawns two days after rain, and bars restaurants from serving water unless customers ask for it.

Wednesday's order has fewer provisions addressing the state's biggest user of water: agriculture.

There is no water reduction target for farmers, who have let thousands of acres go fallow as the state and federal government slashed water deliveries from reservoirs. Instead, the order requires many agricultural water suppliers to submit detailed drought management plans that include how much water they have and what they're doing to scale back.

After the previous drought, state officials acknowledge that some suppliers did not submit similar required plans in 2009. Mark Cowin, director of the Department of Water Resources, said the state will provide money to make sure the plans are written and may penalize those who do not comply.

The state is not aiming to go after water-guzzling crops such as almonds and rice the same way Brown has condemned lawns.

"We're not at the point yet where we are going to declare the irrigation of any particular crop 'waste and unreasonable use,'" Cowin said



from KCRA Link
Thanks dok!

thanks for the blog update remember floyd in the northern bahamas. he was a beast too.
Wow. It would be so awesome to be in a hot air balloon in the middle of that eye. Bucket list #1. Best way to kick the bucket. LOL
Quoting 5. pablosyn:

ACE of 219 last year in the Northeast Pacific? Is that correct?



NOAA has 150, which does not include the Central Pacific, your number probably does.
99W is a such a healthy looking tropical disturbance, thankfully like Dr. M says, it has low probabilities. That's good the Caroline islands need a break.





Quoting 5. pablosyn:

ACE of 219 last year in the Northeast Pacific? Is that correct?


No, it's not. I've corrected it.
I wouldn't doubt if a major cyclone affects Tahiti, Bora Bora before May First(Let's hope not)!
Dr. Masters - Anchorage just closed it's books for snow fall season and it is destined to be the least snowiest since records were maintained.

It's not only California that is having low numbers.

Link

http://www.adn.com/article/20150401/single-day-me asurable-snowfall-march-anchorage-closes-low-snowf all-record
Those images are incredible. The second image reminds me of the Maelstrom storm Starbuck (Battlestar Galactica) descended into and died. Yeah, quite nerdy...I'm aware.

Big storms over the Midwest this evening as the sun sets:

According to intensity estimates from the Joint Typhoon Warning Center, 2015 is the first year on record to have three Category 5 storms form in the Pacific Ocean during the first three months of the year. The other two Category 5 storms in 2015 were Tropical Cyclone Pam (165 mph winds), which devastated Vanuatu in mid-March, and Tropical Cyclone Eunice (160 mph winds), which affected ocean areas in the South Indian Ocean.


There should have been four Category 5 storms this year, Bansi included over the Southwest Indian Ocean with 140 kt winds.
http://tropic.ssec.wisc.edu/real-time/satcon/2015 05S.html

According to Meteofrance Bansi was a very intense cyclone with maximum winds of 120 kts averaged over 10 minutes and gusts up to 170 kts.
http://www.meteofrance.re/cyclone/saison-en-cours /dirre/BANSI
Quoting 15. Dakster:

Dr. Masters - Anchorage just closed it's books for snow fall season and it is destined to be the least snowiest since records were maintained.

It's not only California that is having low numbers.

Link

http://www.adn.com/article/20150401/single-day-me asurable-snowfall-march-anchorage-closes-low-snowf all-record

That's pretty amazing. Lexington, KY had over 30" this winter
In the eye of the typhoon that Jeff Masters posted at the intro to the blog, I can definitely see the face of a dog or a stone troll looking guy
Lightning really lighting up the night sky here north of Orlando. These storms are about 50 or so miles north of me.

Quoting Tazmanian:
dr m why wait too where you can update now has come thursday that will be old news


Bob Henson will have a post Thursday on the results of California's crucial April 1 snow survey.

Jeff Masters

Gov. Brown issues statewide mandatory water reductions

Sierra survey finds lowest snowpack ever recorded

Watch report: Snow survey dismal; Gov. Brown imposes water restrictions

Standing in dry, brown grass at a site that he said normally would be snow-covered this time of year, Brown announced he had signed an executive order requiring the State Water Resources Control Board to implement measures in cities and towns to cut the state's overall water usage by 25 percent compared with 2013 levels.

The move will affect residents, businesses, farmers and other users.

"We're in a historic drought and that demands unprecedented action," Brown said at a news conference at Echo Summit in the Sierra Nevada, where state water officials found no snow on the ground for the first time in their manual survey of the snowpack. "We have to pull together and save water in every way we can."

Brown's order follows previous cutbacks imposed by the water board. It will require campuses, golf courses, cemeteries and other large landscapes to significantly cut water use; direct local governments to replace 50 million square feet of lawns throughout the state with drought-tolerant landscaping; and create a temporary rebate program for consumers who replace old water-sucking appliances with more efficient ones.

"We're in a new era; the idea of your nice little green grass getting water every day, that's going to be a thing of the past," Brown said.

The order calls on local water agencies to implement tiered water pricing that charges higher rates as more water is used and requires agricultural users to report more water use information to state regulators.

Brown's office said that would boost the state's ability to enforce laws against illegal water diversions and water waste.

The order also prohibits new homes and developments from using drinkable water for irrigation if the structures lack water-efficient drip systems. In addition, the watering of decorative grasses on public street medians is banned.

The snowpack has been in decline all year, and Wednesday's survey showed the statewide snow water is equivalent to 5 percent of the historical average for April 1 and the lowest for that date since the state began record-keeping in 1950.

Snow supplies about a third of the state's water, and a lower snowpack means less water in California reservoirs to meet demand in summer and fall. There was no snow at the site of Wednesday's manual survey near Echo Summit, about 90 miles east of Sacramento.

"It is such an unprecedented lack of snow, it is way, way below records," said Frank Gehrke, chief of snow surveys for the California Department of Water Resources.

Brown previously declared a drought emergency and stressed the need for sustained water conservation, but the Democratic governor has come under increasing pressure to be more aggressive as the state enters its fourth year of drought.

In the past year, the state water board has imposed mandatory water-saving restrictions on urban users that prohibit sprinklers running off onto pavement, bans residents from watering lawns two days after rain, and bars restaurants from serving water unless customers ask for it.

Wednesday's order has fewer provisions addressing the state's biggest user of water: agriculture.

There is no water reduction target for farmers, who have let thousands of acres go fallow as the state and federal government slashed water deliveries from reservoirs. Instead, the order requires many agricultural water suppliers to submit detailed drought management plans that include how much water they have and what they're doing to scale back.

After the previous drought, state officials acknowledge that some suppliers did not submit similar required plans in 2009. Mark Cowin, director of the Department of Water Resources, said the state will provide money to make sure the plans are written and may penalize those who do not comply.

The state is not aiming to go after water-guzzling crops such as almonds and rice the same way Brown has condemned lawns.

"We're not at the point yet where we are going to declare the irrigation of any particular crop 'waste and unreasonable use,'" Cowin said



from KCRA Link
Thanks Doc so love the blog..
Quoting 21. StormTrackerScott:

Lightning really lighting up the night sky here north of Orlando. These storms are about 50 or so miles north of me.



Evening, Scott. I was wondering why the radar shows CDT, not EDT? Any idea?

And that's odd...just as I went to preview my comment it switched to EDT....and during a second preview it switched back to CDT...
Quoting 17. TropicalAnalystwx13:

Big storms over the Midwest this evening as the sun sets:




Study up on your geography. That are the Great Plains.
:)


MESOSCALE DISCUSSION 0181
NWS STORM PREDICTION CENTER NORMAN OK
0825 PM CDT WED APR 01 2015

AREAS AFFECTED...PORTIONS OF WRN IA...ERN/SRN NEB...AND N-CNTRL KS

CONCERNING...SEVERE THUNDERSTORM WATCH 15...

VALID 020125Z - 020300Z

THE SEVERE WEATHER THREAT FOR SEVERE THUNDERSTORM WATCH 15 CONTINUES.

SUMMARY...THE PRIMARY THREATS OF DAMAGING WINDS AND LARGE HAIL SHOULD GENERALLY REMAIN CONFINED TO THE SOUTHERN HALF OF WW 15 OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL HOURS.

DISCUSSION...RECENT RADAR TRENDS DEPICT A QUASI-LINEAR STRUCTURE TO THE CONVECTION THAT HAS FORMED ALONG A COLD FRONT ACROSS NWRN IA AND ERN NEB. WITH DEWPOINTS STILL IN THE 40S TO LOWER 50S ACROSS THIS AREA...MLCAPE OF 500-1000 J/KG ESTIMATED BY THE 01Z RAP MESOANALYSIS SEEMS GENEROUS. 00Z SOUNDING FROM OAX SHOWS A DEEPLY MIXED BOUNDARY LAYER...WITH A SMALL AMOUNT OF CONVECTIVE INHIBITION CENTERED AROUND 700 MB...AND MLCAPE AROUND 350 J/KG. THUNDERSTORMS ACROSS THE NRN HALF OF WW 15 HAVE STRUGGLED IN THIS MARGINAL THERMODYNAMIC ENVIRONMENT...AND OUTFLOW FROM THIS LINE OF THUNDERSTORMS HAS SURGED AHEAD OF THE LINE...WHICH SUGGESTS THE WIND THREAT MAY BE LESSENED ACROSS THIS PORTION OF THE WATCH. HOWEVER...ISOLATED LARGE HAIL MAY STILL BE POSSIBLE. A SLIGHTLY BETTER THERMODYNAMIC ENVIRONMENT EXISTS ACROSS S-CNTRL NEB/N-CNTRL KS WHERE A CLUSTER OF THUNDERSTORMS SW OF HASTINGS NEB MOVING NEWD AHEAD OF THE COLD REMAINS CAPABLE OF LARGE HAIL/DAMAGING WINDS IN THE SHORT TERM.

..GLEASON.. 04/02/2015
Everyone around here (the southern part of that MD) calls it the Midwest, so it seems like semantics to me.

Keeping my fingers crossed that we actually get the ~.75" rain we're forecast. It's so dry around here. Suppose that's the story for everywhere that isn't the Northeast, though.
Quoting 17. TropicalAnalystwx13:

Big storms over the Midwest this evening as the sun sets:




Those are some really cold cloud tops.

Guys.

I've been F5ing the last blog because the last comment said there was a new blog even though the bot didnt post it.

So I thought it was an April Fools joke so I've been there for almost an hour.

Thanks for unintentionally fooling me all of Wunderground.
Quoting 27. 882MB:



Those are some really cold cloud tops.




satellite looks worse than reality
No tornado threat to speak of, and not too many hail or wind reports out yet in the area where the storms are shooting off
Quoting 26. BleachwaterFox:

Everyone around here (the southern part of that MD) calls it the Midwest, so it seems like semantics to me.

Keeping my fingers crossed that we actually get the ~.75" rain we're forecast. It's so dry around here. Suppose that's the story for everywhere that isn't the Northeast, though.

I always thought the definition was a little 'flexible'. Wiki had this, and the caption is "The Midwest as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau":



In looking at the map beell just posted, I guess it depends on the entity defining it.
Quoting 26. BleachwaterFox:

Everyone around here (the southern part of that MD) calls it the Midwest, so it seems like semantics to me.

Keeping my fingers crossed that we actually get the ~.75" rain we're forecast. It's so dry around here. Suppose that's the story for everywhere that isn't the Northeast, though.


Yeah, maybe so, I don't get many chances to yank TA's chain. I couldn't help it.
;-)

In quite a few of the text products issued by the SPC/WPC, they tend to stick fairly close to those areas delineated on the map at post 30.
Quoting 29. nwobilderburg:



satellite looks worse than reality
No tornado threat to speak of, and not too many hail or wind reports out yet in the area where the storms are shooting off



Trust me I know that, I Checked radar. Some storms are warned, quarter sized hail and 60MPH winds, doesn't seem like much. But if you were under one of the cells, you will be thinking otherwise. ;)
Quoting 12. 882MB:

99W is a such a healthy looking tropical disturbance, thankfully like Dr. M says, it has low probabilities. That's good the Caroline islands need a break.







JTWC actually just bumped the probabilities of development for 99W up to medium per their latest outlook.



ABPW10 PGTW 012330
MSGID/GENADMIN/JOINT TYPHOON WRNCEN PEARL HARBOR HI//
SUBJ/SIGNIFICANT TROPICAL WEATHER ADVISORY FOR THE WESTERN AND
/SOUTH PACIFIC OCEANS REISSUED/012330Z-020600ZAPR2015//
REF/A/MSG/JOINT TYPHOON WRNCEN PEARL HARBOR HI/011951ZAPR2015//
AMPN/REF A IS A TROPICAL CYCLONE WARNING.//
RMKS/
1. WESTERN NORTH PACIFIC AREA (180 TO MALAY PENINSULA):
A. TROPICAL CYCLONE SUMMARY:
(1) AT 011800Z, TYPHOON 04W (MAYSAK) WAS LOCATED NEAR 12.1N
134.7E, APPROXIMATELY 814 NM EAST OF MANILA, PHILIPPINES, AND HAD
TRACKED WEST-NORTHWESTWARD AT 10 KNOTS OVER THE PAST SIX HOURS.
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED SURFACE WINDS WERE ESTIMATED AT 120 KNOTS GUSTING
TO 145 KNOTS. SEE REF A (WTPN31 PGTW 012100) FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
(2) NO OTHER TROPICAL CYCLONES.
B. TROPICAL DISTURBANCE SUMMARY:
(1) THE AREA OF CONVECTION PREVIOUSLY LOCATED NEAR 2.6N
162.0E, IS NOW LOCATED NEAR 3.8N 160.7E, APPROXIMATELY 240 NM
SOUTHEAST OF POHNPEI. ANIMATED INFRARED SATELLITE IMAGERY DEPICTS A
BROAD AREA OF TURNING THAT HAS IMPROVED AND CONSOLIDATED OVER THE
PAST 6 HOURS WITH DEEP CONVECTIVE BANDING ON THE EASTERN AND WESTERN
PERIPHERIES. A 012021Z SSMIS 37GHZ PARTIAL PASS MICROWAVE IMAGE
SHOWS THE IMPROVED CONSOLIDATION OF THE LOW LEVEL CIRCULATION CENTER
(LLCC) AND THE CURVED CONVECTIVE BANDING ALONG THE EASTERN
PERIPHERY. A 012220Z SCATTEROMETER PASS SHOWS 15 TO 20 KNOT WINDS
BEGINNING TO WRAP INTO THE LLCC FROM THE EASTERN QUADRANT. UPPER
LEVEL ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS HAVE ALSO IMPROVED WITH 10 TO 20 KNOT
VERTICAL WIND SHEAR OFFSET BY EXCELLENT DUAL CHANNEL OUTFLOW AS
EVIDENT ON WATER VAPOR IMAGERY. GLOBAL MODELS INDICATE DEVELOPMENT
OF THIS DISTURBANCE IN THE NEXT 36 HOURS.
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED SURFACE
WINDS ARE ESTIMATED AT 15 TO 20 KNOTS. MINIMUM SEA LEVEL PRESSURE IS
ESTIMATED TO BE NEAR 1007 MB. DUE TO THE CONSOLIDATION OF THIS
SYSTEM, THE POTENTIAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SIGNIFICANT TROPICAL
CYCLONE WITHIN THE NEXT 24 HOURS IS UPGRADED TO MEDIUM.

(2) NO OTHER SUSPECT AREAS.
2. SOUTH PACIFIC AREA (WEST COAST OF SOUTH AMERICA TO 135 EAST):
A. TROPICAL CYCLONE SUMMARY: NONE.
B. TROPICAL DISTURBANCE SUMMARY: NONE.
3. JUSTIFICATION FOR REISSUE: UPGRADED AREA IN PARA 1.B.(1) TO
MEDIUM.//
NNNN
Quoting 35. 1900hurricane:


JTWC actually just bumped the probabilities of development for 99W up to medium per their latest outlook.



ABPW10 PGTW 012330
MSGID/GENADMIN/JOINT TYPHOON WRNCEN PEARL HARBOR HI//
SUBJ/SIGNIFICANT TROPICAL WEATHER ADVISORY FOR THE WESTERN AND
/SOUTH PACIFIC OCEANS REISSUED/012330Z-020600ZAPR2015//
REF/A/MSG/JOINT TYPHOON WRNCEN PEARL HARBOR HI/011951ZAPR2015//
AMPN/REF A IS A TROPICAL CYCLONE WARNING.//
RMKS/
1. WESTERN NORTH PACIFIC AREA (180 TO MALAY PENINSULA):
A. TROPICAL CYCLONE SUMMARY:
(1) AT 011800Z, TYPHOON 04W (MAYSAK) WAS LOCATED NEAR 12.1N
134.7E, APPROXIMATELY 814 NM EAST OF MANILA, PHILIPPINES, AND HAD
TRACKED WEST-NORTHWESTWARD AT 10 KNOTS OVER THE PAST SIX HOURS.
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED SURFACE WINDS WERE ESTIMATED AT 120 KNOTS GUSTING
TO 145 KNOTS. SEE REF A (WTPN31 PGTW 012100) FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
(2) NO OTHER TROPICAL CYCLONES.
B. TROPICAL DISTURBANCE SUMMARY:
(1) THE AREA OF CONVECTION PREVIOUSLY LOCATED NEAR 2.6N
162.0E, IS NOW LOCATED NEAR 3.8N 160.7E, APPROXIMATELY 240 NM
SOUTHEAST OF POHNPEI. ANIMATED INFRARED SATELLITE IMAGERY DEPICTS A
BROAD AREA OF TURNING THAT HAS IMPROVED AND CONSOLIDATED OVER THE
PAST 6 HOURS WITH DEEP CONVECTIVE BANDING ON THE EASTERN AND WESTERN
PERIPHERIES. A 012021Z SSMIS 37GHZ PARTIAL PASS MICROWAVE IMAGE
SHOWS THE IMPROVED CONSOLIDATION OF THE LOW LEVEL CIRCULATION CENTER
(LLCC) AND THE CURVED CONVECTIVE BANDING ALONG THE EASTERN
PERIPHERY. A 012220Z SCATTEROMETER PASS SHOWS 15 TO 20 KNOT WINDS
BEGINNING TO WRAP INTO THE LLCC FROM THE EASTERN QUADRANT. UPPER
LEVEL ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS HAVE ALSO IMPROVED WITH 10 TO 20 KNOT
VERTICAL WIND SHEAR OFFSET BY EXCELLENT DUAL CHANNEL OUTFLOW AS
EVIDENT ON WATER VAPOR IMAGERY. GLOBAL MODELS INDICATE DEVELOPMENT
OF THIS DISTURBANCE IN THE NEXT 36 HOURS.
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED SURFACE
WINDS ARE ESTIMATED AT 15 TO 20 KNOTS. MINIMUM SEA LEVEL PRESSURE IS
ESTIMATED TO BE NEAR 1007 MB. DUE TO THE CONSOLIDATION OF THIS
SYSTEM, THE POTENTIAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SIGNIFICANT TROPICAL
CYCLONE WITHIN THE NEXT 24 HOURS IS UPGRADED TO MEDIUM.

(2) NO OTHER SUSPECT AREAS.
2. SOUTH PACIFIC AREA (WEST COAST OF SOUTH AMERICA TO 135 EAST):
A. TROPICAL CYCLONE SUMMARY: NONE.
B. TROPICAL DISTURBANCE SUMMARY: NONE.
3. JUSTIFICATION FOR REISSUE: UPGRADED AREA IN PARA 1.B.(1) TO
MEDIUM.//
NNNN



Well look at that, satellite presentation has been improving. I just hope this doesn't become another major and if it does, let it stay north of the islands. And thanks for the update. :)
Doc M,
Sure glad someone turned the photos "right-side-up." Especially the larger view of Maysak.
Thanks.

Quoting 20. Trouper415:

In the eye of the typhoon that Jeff Masters posted at the intro to the blog, I can definitely see the face of a dog or a stone troll looking guy

(I can see) Ancestor troll in Maysak eye. :)

Image credit Terry Virts as photoshopped by JeffMasters
TXPQ27 KNES 012110
TCSWNP

A. TROPICAL DISTURBANCE (99W)

B. 01/2032Z

C. 4.5N

D. 160.2E

E. FIVE/MTSAT

F. T1.0/1.0/D1.0/24HRS

G. IR/EIR/VIS

H. REMARKS...DT=1.0 BASED ON .2 BANDING ON LOG10
SPIRAL. PT=1.0. MET=1.0. FT IS BASED ON DT.

I. ADDL POSITIONS

NIL


...SCHWARTZ



e-TRaP

Awaiting Forecast and/or Microwave Imagery(K)

MTCSWA

MTCSWA Image


99W/XX/XX
Quoting 38. KEEPEROFTHEGATE:





The clouds cleared up pretty quickly in STL in the past few hours. Hopefully tomorrow I'll finally see severe weather for the first time this year.
Quoting 33. 882MB:



Trust me I know that, I Checked radar. Some storms are warned, quarter sized hail and 60MPH winds, doesn't seem like much. But if you were under one of the cells, you will be thinking otherwise. ;)

true...
I'm a Californian, and I've been in 3 thunderstorms in my life, and one tiny hailstorm, so I guess I don't know what real severe weather feels like
Quoting LAbonbon:

Evening, Scott. I was wondering why the radar shows CDT, not EDT? Any idea?

And that's odd...just as I went to preview my comment it switched to EDT....and during a second preview it switched back to CDT...
Those must have been some big thunderstorms.The only source of lighting was a very small cluster of storms (since dissipated) NE of Gainesville. That's about 120 air miles north of Orlando. There is some lighting from storms about 200 miles west of Florida in the Atlantic but nothing else in Florida. The sole action here was a tiny cluster of thunderstorms (since dissipated) a little north of Birmingham. I couldn't see any lightning.
welcome to the California desert south west of the rockies and snowless sierra's mountains


Analog for next weeks severe weather
Quoting 882MB:


Those are some really cold cloud tops.

Lots of lightning and hail with that line in Nebraska and Kansas. Interestingly, the most intense lighting (150 strokes per minute) is in that smaller MCS that has formed in Arkansas. There's also a of of lighting in the MCS that's passing north of St. Louis although it's not producing any warnings right now. The MCS in Arkansas is expanding into Missouri but I don't think it will get to St. Louis. It's not often we have such well developed storms with no tornado reports. There has been some straight line winds reported but the vast majority of reports have been hail, some large.
Five feet of sea level rise - what it looks like:

Galveston sinks


Miami Beach? Fuhgeddaboutit


Tampa Bay pushes inward by a mile. MacDill is submerged.


Louisiana delta vanishes. The Gulf meets Lake Ponchartrain.


NYC avoids major damage at this stage. LaGuardia airport begins sinking. Industrialized areas of New Jersey are submerged (thank goodness).
Quoting 44. sar2401:

Those must have been some big thunderstorms.The only source of lighting was a very small cluster of storms (since dissipated) NE of Gainesville. That's about 120 air miles north of Orlando. There is some lighting from storms about 200 miles west of Florida in the Atlantic but nothing else in Florida. The sole action here was a tiny cluster of thunderstorms (since dissipated) a little north of Birmingham. I couldn't see any lightning.

There was a line on the radar posted, not sure where to find archived JAX radar, but you can see it on this archived US radar from IEM: Link
Quoting nwobilderburg:


Analog for next weeks severe weather
That supposed analog is showing storm reports at 0700 CDT on April 6, meaning the vast majority of the storms would have occured on Sunday, April 5. That is simply not a believable scenario. Given the large mass of stable polar air in place Saturday and Sunday and the very poor return flow off the Gulf, the chances of any kind of organized outbreak of severe weather is very low. Things improve for Monday and Tuesday as the cold air mass begins to modify and Gulf return flow is less modified as it spreads north but any severe weather should remain fairly isolated. When we are looking out five days, the type of air mass in place over the Midwest and Plains and quality of the Gulf return flow will give you more to go on than an analog.
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
welcome to the California desert south west of the rockies and snowless sierra's mountains



thats not funny
Quoting Tazmanian:
dr m why wait too where you can update now has come thursday that will be old news


Bob Henson will have a post Thursday on the results of California's crucial April 1 snow survey.

Jeff Masters

Gov. Brown issues statewide mandatory water reductions

Sierra survey finds lowest snowpack ever recorded

Watch report: Snow survey dismal; Gov. Brown imposes water restrictions

Standing in dry, brown grass at a site that he said normally would be snow-covered this time of year, Brown announced he had signed an executive order requiring the State Water Resources Control Board to implement measures in cities and towns to cut the state's overall water usage by 25 percent compared with 2013 levels.

The move will affect residents, businesses, farmers and other users.

"We're in a historic drought and that demands unprecedented action," Brown said at a news conference at Echo Summit in the Sierra Nevada, where state water officials found no snow on the ground for the first time in their manual survey of the snowpack. "We have to pull together and save water in every way we can."

Brown's order follows previous cutbacks imposed by the water board. It will require campuses, golf courses, cemeteries and other large landscapes to significantly cut water use; direct local governments to replace 50 million square feet of lawns throughout the state with drought-tolerant landscaping; and create a temporary rebate program for consumers who replace old water-sucking appliances with more efficient ones.

"We're in a new era; the idea of your nice little green grass getting water every day, that's going to be a thing of the past," Brown said.

The order calls on local water agencies to implement tiered water pricing that charges higher rates as more water is used and requires agricultural users to report more water use information to state regulators.

Brown's office said that would boost the state's ability to enforce laws against illegal water diversions and water waste.

The order also prohibits new homes and developments from using drinkable water for irrigation if the structures lack water-efficient drip systems. In addition, the watering of decorative grasses on public street medians is banned.

The snowpack has been in decline all year, and Wednesday's survey showed the statewide snow water is equivalent to 5 percent of the historical average for April 1 and the lowest for that date since the state began record-keeping in 1950.

Snow supplies about a third of the state's water, and a lower snowpack means less water in California reservoirs to meet demand in summer and fall. There was no snow at the site of Wednesday's manual survey near Echo Summit, about 90 miles east of Sacramento.

"It is such an unprecedented lack of snow, it is way, way below records," said Frank Gehrke, chief of snow surveys for the California Department of Water Resources.

Brown previously declared a drought emergency and stressed the need for sustained water conservation, but the Democratic governor has come under increasing pressure to be more aggressive as the state enters its fourth year of drought.

In the past year, the state water board has imposed mandatory water-saving restrictions on urban users that prohibit sprinklers running off onto pavement, bans residents from watering lawns two days after rain, and bars restaurants from serving water unless customers ask for it.

Wednesday's order has fewer provisions addressing the state's biggest user of water: agriculture.

There is no water reduction target for farmers, who have let thousands of acres go fallow as the state and federal government slashed water deliveries from reservoirs. Instead, the order requires many agricultural water suppliers to submit detailed drought management plans that include how much water they have and what they're doing to scale back.

After the previous drought, state officials acknowledge that some suppliers did not submit similar required plans in 2009. Mark Cowin, director of the Department of Water Resources, said the state will provide money to make sure the plans are written and may penalize those who do not comply.

The state is not aiming to go after water-guzzling crops such as almonds and rice the same way Brown has condemned lawns.

"We're not at the point yet where we are going to declare the irrigation of any particular crop 'waste and unreasonable use,'" Cowin said



from KCRA Link
Quoting LAbonbon:

There was a line on the radar posted, not sure where to find archived JAX radar, but you can see it on this archived US radar from IEM: Link
Just go to Jacksonville radar here and set the frames to 40. You can see the the small line of storms that have now dissipated. The southernmost storm looks like it was in the middle of Marion County, which is about 70 miles north of Orlando. Like I said, they must have been pretty big storms.
Quoting 53. sar2401:

Just go to Jacksonville radar here and set the frames to 40. You can see the the small line of storms that have now dissipated. The southernmost storm looks like it was in the middle of Marion County, which is about 70 miles north of Orlando. Like I said, they must have been pretty big storms.

Just tried, and the max is 10 frames?
Quoting wxgeek723:
Five feet of sea level rise - what it looks like:

Galveston sinks


Miami Beach? Fuhgeddaboutit


Tampa Bay pushes inward by a mile. MacDill is submerged.


Louisiana delta vanishes. The Gulf meets Lake Ponchartrain.


NYC avoids major damage at this stage. LaGuardia airport begins sinking. Industrialized areas of New Jersey are submerged (thank goodness).
In every dark cloud, there's a silver lining. :-)

The estimates of sea level rise by 2100 seem to range from 2 feet to 4 feet. The higher number includes a 20-30% melt in the Greenland and Antarctic glaciers. A bigger melt means a bigger rise. The tricky thing about sea level estimates for any one place is kind of like the SPC saying we're going to have an outbreak of severe storms. They usually get that right, but they aren't able to predict with any accuracy if I'm going to have severe storms, and that's 24 hours out. Some places, like south Florida, will probably see a bigger rise than average. It now seems the New England and the eastern Canadian coast may see less of a rise due to topography. My point is that people who live on the coast and see those inundation maps shouldn't take it as gospel. Some places may get lucky and see a smaller rise while other may not be so lucky and see a much larger rise, all due to factors that are not fully understood now. I live 120 miles from the Gulf so I don't think I'll end up with coastal property but I really don't know what people who do live on the coast now should do about this. Sell now, wait and see what happens, hope the government figures something out, let the grandkids worry about it...I really don't know. Some rise is certain now regardless of what we do about global warming. I'm glad I don't have to make that decision.
Quoting LAbonbon:

Just tried, and the max is 10 frames?
Really? I went here (the Nexrad radar) and at the bottom where the "animate" drop down box is located, I can choose 40 frames in the classic and new site. Maybe you're looking at a different radar presentation. I haven't spent a lot of time hunting around the new site just because of things like this. They give you so many choices you kind of get lost.
Quoting 56. sar2401:

Really? I went here (the Nexrad radar) and at the bottom where the "animate" drop down box is located, I can choose 40 frames in the classic and new site. Maybe you're looking at a different radar presentation. I haven't spent a lot of time hunting around the new site just because of things like this. They give you so many choices you kind of get lost.

I have no clue what the difference is, but I tried 'new' and classic, both 10 frames for me.

Any idea why the time zone was toggling on the radar? That was my original question - I find that more perplexing than the number of frames issue. Do you think it's WU or the radar changing it?
Just realized this 24-hour archive is underneath the radar...there is a lot to this site that I'm still learning about.

<>img src="Jacksonville radar loop for April  1, 2015">
Quoting 58. LAbonbon:

Just realized this 24-hour archive is underneath the radar...there is a lot to this site that I'm still learning about.

img src="Jacksonville radar loop for April  1, 2015">


I always try to use it to find (in)famous hurricanes... usually doesn't work.
http://weather.cod.edu/satrad/nexrad/

find long term radar loops here... and the period between frames is shorter as well
Quoting 50. sar2401:

That supposed analog is showing storm reports at 0700 CDT on April 6, meaning the vast majority of the storms would have occured on Sunday, April 5. That is simply not a believable scenario. Given the large mass of stable polar air in place Saturday and Sunday and the very poor return flow off the Gulf, the chances of any kind of organized outbreak of severe weather is very low. Things improve for Monday and Tuesday as the cold air mass begins to modify and Gulf return flow is less modified as it spreads north but any severe weather should remain fairly isolated. When we are looking out five days, the type of air mass in place over the Midwest and Plains and quality of the Gulf return flow will give you more to go on than an analog.


yeah I just found it interesting... the analog data always seems to be greatly exaggerated for me.
Quoting LAbonbon:

I have no clue what the difference is, but I tried 'new' and classic, both 10 frames for me.

Any idea why the time zone was toggling on the radar? That was my original question - I find that more perplexing than the number of frames issue. Do you think it's WU or the radar changing it?
Sounds like you may have something in your cache that's not displaying things properly. Assuming you're using Chrome, go here for information on clearing your cache. You just want to clear your cookies and site data for WU, not everything. Clear the WU data out, do a cold restart, and then see if the issues go away.
Quoting nwobilderburg:
http://weather.cod.edu/satrad/nexrad/

find long term radar loops here... and the period between frames is shorter as well
I've used that before. It has a lot more options than the WU radar including being able to control the animation speed. The 24 hour radar here is useful but the animation is just too fast for me and it can't be adjusted. The radar presentation on the COD site is a little more primitive than WU. You can't get rid of the clutter on that site, and the clutter on the Romeoville radar is bad tonight.
Quoting nwobilderburg:


yeah I just found it interesting... the analog data always seems to be greatly exaggerated for me.
I really dislike analogs. I'm not a great believer in the idea that you can ever match up today's weather based on what happened on similar days in the past. Big convective systems are the worst, since small change in instability or if there's a cap can completely change the outcome of today compared to the analog. It's also using input into the analog that I don't necessarily agree with but I can't control. We've now had two days of our "best" widespread severe weather days this year and the results haven't been too good if you're looking for tornadoes, although it's been great for hail. Anytime I see something like this is the storm reports : EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT REPORTS A COUPLE OF SHINGLES BLOWN OFF A FARM HOUSE WEST OF LEBANON. (SGF) - you know things weren't that bad. :-) Looking at the next five days, there's really nothing out there that screams a big change in the atmosphere.
Quoting 62. sar2401:

Sounds like you may have something in your cache that's not displaying things properly. Assuming you're using Chrome, go here for information on clearing your cache. You just want to clear your cookies and site data for WU, not everything. Clear the WU data out, do a cold restart, and then see if the issues go away.

That appears to have worked, time zone appears to be static now. Thanks! :)

Quoting 60. nwobilderburg:

http://weather.cod.edu/satrad/nexrad/

find long term radar loops here... and the period between frames is shorter as well

Thank you!
Good evening everyone...

Looks like spring is starting up here. Still have some ice to thaw - as the day time temps are always above freezing now. The night time temps are still dipping below freezing.

It rained a bit today, but overall the days are awesome here. And they are already quite long.
Quoting wxgeek723:
Five feet of sea level rise - what it looks like:

Galveston sinks


Miami Beach? Fuhgeddaboutit


Tampa Bay pushes inward by a mile. MacDill is submerged.


Louisiana delta vanishes. The Gulf meets Lake Ponchartrain.


NYC avoids major damage at this stage. LaGuardia airport begins sinking. Industrialized areas of New Jersey are submerged (thank goodness).

Source please . or can you explain shading significance. I m pretty sure what Miami is going to look like with 5 ft + and its not quite like that.
Quoting 47. sar2401:

Lots of lightning and hail with that line in Nebraska and Kansas. Interestingly, the most intense lighting (150 strokes per minute) is in that smaller MCS that has formed in Arkansas. There's also a of of lighting in the MCS that's passing north of St. Louis although it's not producing any warnings right now. The MCS in Arkansas is expanding into Missouri but I don't think it will get to St. Louis. It's not often we have such well developed storms with no tornado reports. There has been some straight line winds reported but the vast majority of reports have been hail, some large.



Did someone say lightning? :D
I only got a little rain earlier. I may see severe weather this evening though.
Good morning fellow bloggers!

Maysak is continueing to weaken, and as expected the next storm is on the horizon. Tropical depression 99W was given moderate chances of becoming a tropical storm within the next 24 hours, I would move that closer to high. Reasons being that the island of Pohnpei is already taking sustained winds of 15MPH and they are about 50-75 Miles from the core of the storm. Granted they are in the most dangerous sector of this storm at this time, but that is a good indication that it has already reached minimal tropical storm strength. Also the barometric pressure being measured there at this time is 29.70, this would put the storm around 105.8mb, again they are 50-75 miles from the center of the storm. On last advisory from ABPW10 PGTW 012330 had it at around 1007mb. So the storm has already intensified significantly from last advisory, or there guess was way off. Either way, this storm looks like it is settling into its own. outflow on all sides of the storm are looking better than yesterday, cloud tops are cooling, and it has appeared to push away from both disturbances to its south west and east that were interfering with its development. It would not surprise me at all if this was a named storm on next advisory.

In the Indian Ocean a system that was a weak tropical wave has migrated into cooler waters and is now forming an impressive storm on satellite. Days away from Australia it could be nothing, or it could merge with a trough coming across Africa's horn and become a massive storm system. Won't see anything on this until 48-72 hours out still. It's unlikely, but if it does it will be worth watching.

In the United States there is a nasty storm system that could spawn some more tornadoes in The Great Plains. I'd watch the dry line moving up from west Texas/Oklahoma. These dry lines tend to create the storm cells that spawn tornadoes. As of right now the majority of the storms are located in the northern plains, but it may not stay that way all night. If I had to I'd put a pin in Oklahoma/kansas and say sleep in the basement.

Alls quite in the Atlantic. There is a low pressure system that is a few days away from African coast that looks pretty impressive, though it won't stay that way for long this early in the season. One thing that I was looking at this morning were that Ocean surface temps around the canary Islands off Africa look like they might be slightly cooler. If they are I would attribute this to the strong storm system that went trough Europe, Niklas. On the back side aiding Niklas' winds was a strong High pressure that was sitting off the coast of Spain. Along with those high winds it has been pushing cooler surface waters south along the north African coast for the last few days. This might push back the start of the Atlantic Hurricane season if this trend continued as it would impede the development of storms coming off the coast of Africa.

The eastern PAC had been dominated by High pressure for a couple of weeks now, and interestingly enough this High is sitting just south of Panama. I say that is interesting because this high is spreading cooler surface water temps across the eastern Pacific.

Thanks again for your time! Hugo5

And Like if you felt this provided good information.
Quoting 47. sar2401:

Lots of lightning and hail with that line in Nebraska and Kansas. Interestingly, the most intense lighting (150 strokes per minute) is in that smaller MCS that has formed in Arkansas. There's also a of of lighting in the MCS that's passing north of St. Louis although it's not producing any warnings right now. The MCS in Arkansas is expanding into Missouri but I don't think it will get to St. Louis. It's not often we have such well developed storms with no tornado reports. There has been some straight line winds reported but the vast majority of reports have been hail, some large.


Because it hasn't been that hot here and we've also had a fairly stable atmosphere. If it got up to 80F+ and the front hit (especially in the sunshine part of the day), we'd have to worry a bit more.
I heard it's going to rain next week in California...
Good morning all

eye's gone
Quoting 14. weatherbro:

I wouldn't doubt if a major cyclone affects Tahiti, Bora Bora before May First(Let's hope not)!


I hope not as well. I am going to Tahiti in June.
Quoting MaxWeather:
Good morning all

eye's gone


I must be drunk.

Under an enhanced risk of severe thunderstorms today. YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YES!!!!!!!!!!!!
Quoting tampabaymatt:


Holy papa pear saga!!!!!!!!!!!

The flood watch certainly is justified.
Quoting 75. 62901IL:



I must be drunk.

Under an enhanced risk of severe thunderstorms today. YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YES!!!!!!!!!!!!

if you're in South Illinois you will hear the rumble!
Thanks Dr Henson and Masters.
Quoting 73. MaxWeather:

Good morning all

eye's gone


Looks like the wind shear became too much for Maysak... he(or she?) is going right through the shredder.


06Z GFS shows things will continue to be dry in FL. Although, you have to take this with a grain of salt because the GFS seems to always show that FL will be dry.
Sub surface warm pool continues to grow. Very impressive to say the least.

ESPI now up to 0.89. This is very important as that value is in moderate El-Nino territory.

Quoting wxgeek723:
Five feet of sea level rise - what it looks like:
People often look at maps such as these, or any of the other many sea level rise visualizers, and say, "Well, the water doesn't come up to my block or street, so I'll be okay."

That's not quite true.

Five feet of sea level rise by 2100--which is entirely within the realm of possibility--wouldn't put, say, Miami completely under water. There would be many areas left high and (relatively) dry. However, consider what that five feet *would* submerge: the airport would be gone (and don't think of boating up to Fort Lauderdale to catch a flight, because that airport would be submerged, as well). Downtown, where so many are employed, would be gone. Miami's great beaches, magnet for hundreds of millions in annual tourism dollars, and thus infrastructure-supporting taxes, would be gone. The area's agricultural areas would be useless seabed. The Keys would be just a few random dots of disconnected coral reachable only by boat, since the Overseas Highway would be underseas. In short, SE Florida would be a thin, waterlogged, unlivable peninsula terminating at Homestead, and bordered on the west by a brackish arm of the ocean that used to be called the Everglades. There'd be no more pumpable fresh water, no more tourism, very little commerce. Of course, some of these issues could be mitigated to a greater or lesser degree. But where are the hundreds of billions of dollars to move and replace infrastructure going to come from? Where will the millions of displaced Floridians move? Where will they work? What tourists will they service?

So, yes, sea level rise maps may show that your home will remain far from any invading coast--but if anyone thinks that losing vast stretches of heavily-populated, heavily-industrialized America over the next 80 or so years won't affect them because they live high above sea level, they are woefully mistaken.
Latest CFSv2 as of April 1st rivals the 1997 El-Nino. Here is the December outlook.

Good Morning. Missed the post yesterday afternoon on the space pics of the Typhoon; that image of the eye is the most amazing one I have seen.

In terms of Conus today, here is part of the WPC short term forecast and current SPC outlook:


Short Range Forecast Discussion
NWS Weather Prediction Center College Park MD
330 AM EDT Thu Apr 02 2015

Valid 12Z Thu Apr 02 2015 - 12Z Sat Apr 04 2015

...There is a slight risk of severe thunderstorms over parts of the
Middle/Lower Mississippi Valley and the Ohio Valley...

...Heavy rain possible from parts of the Middle Mississippi Valley into
the Ohio Valley...

A front extending from the Upper Great Lakes to the Southern High Plains
will move eastward to the Lower Great Lakes to the Lower Mississippi
Valley/Western Gulf Coast by Friday evening. Moisture from the Gulf of
Mexico will pool along the boundary producing showers and thunderstorms
over parts of the Middle Mississippi Valley/Western Ohio Valley that will
move eastward to the Central Appalachians to the Lower Mississippi Valley
by Friday. In addition, light to moderate rain will develop over parts of
the Great Lakes on Thursday afternoon and move eastward off the Northeast
Coast by Friday morning. By Friday evening, a new area of light to
moderate rain will develop over parts of the Northeast.


Quoting 55. sar2401:

In every dark cloud, there's a silver lining. :-)

The estimates of sea level rise by 2100 seem to range from 2 feet to 4 feet. The higher number includes a 20-30% melt in the Greenland and Antarctic glaciers. A bigger melt means a bigger rise. The tricky thing about sea level estimates for any one place is kind of like the SPC saying we're going to have an outbreak of severe storms. They usually get that right, but they aren't able to predict with any accuracy if I'm going to have severe storms, and that's 24 hours out. Some places, like south Florida, will probably see a bigger rise than average. It now seems the New England and the eastern Canadian coast may see less of a rise due to topography. My point is that people who live on the coast and see those inundation maps shouldn't take it as gospel. Some places may get lucky and see a smaller rise while other may not be so lucky and see a much larger rise, all due to factors that are not fully understood now. I live 120 miles from the Gulf so I don't think I'll end up with coastal property but I really don't know what people who do live on the coast now should do about this. Sell now, wait and see what happens, hope the government figures something out, let the grandkids worry about it...I really don't know. Some rise is certain now regardless of what we do about global warming. I'm glad I don't have to make that decision.
Why would south Fl see a "bigger" rise than average??
Grand parents had same property since 1959 in aqualane on 16th ave s. in Naples and there has been no rise whatsoever on the original seawall. Our beaches on Englewood property which is 1 acre sea to sea has a bigger beach now than in the last 30 years. If the sea level has risen in the last 50 years it's sure not making itself felt here in SW FL.
I've spent on average 300-330 days a year in, near or on the water for the last 40 plus years and can tell you if it's been rising it's within a few milimeters.
I understand the rise will be exponential but to say we will see a 6 inch rise in the next 20 years (video 2 brians last night) is IMO a stretch. The good news is I will be able to verify that personally God willing.
I am not doubting the seas are rising as they have since the end of the last ice age......just doubting the pace and ferocity which is being thrown out by our beloved models.

The current convective look and relative position of the jet per GFS:


Doppler Radar National Mosaic
Incredible photo! Thanks, Dr. M!
Quoting 84. Neapolitan:

People often look at maps such as these, or any of the other many sea level rise visualizers, and say, "Well, the water doesn't come up to my block or street, so I'll be okay."

That's not quite true.

Five feet of sea level rise by 2100--which is entirely within the realm of possibility--wouldn't put, say, Miami completely under water. There would be many areas left high and (relatively) dry. However, consider what that five feet *would* submerge: the airport would be gone (and don't think of boating up to Fort Lauderdale to catch a flight, because that airport would be submerged, as well). Downtown, where so many are employed, would be gone. Miami's great beaches, magnet for hundreds of millions in annual tourism dollars, and thus infrastructure-supporting taxes, would be gone. The area's agricultural areas would be useless seabed. The Keys would be just a few random dots of disconnected coral reachable only by boat, since the Overseas Highway would be underseas. In short, SE Florida would be a thin, waterlogged, unlivable peninsula terminating at Homestead, and bordered on the west by a brackish arm of the ocean that used to be called the Everglades. There'd be no more pumpable fresh water, no more tourism, very little commerce. Of course, some of these issues could be mitigated to a greater or lesser degree. But where are the hundreds of billions of dollars to move and replace infrastructure going to come from? Where will the millions of displaced Floridians move? Where will they work? What tourists will they service?

So, yes, sea level rise maps may show that your home will remain far from any invading coast--but if anyone thinks that losing vast stretches of heavily-populated, heavily-industrialized America over the next 80 or so years won't affect them because they live high above sea level, they are woefully mistaken.


Well over 90 percent of the worlds commerce travels by ship. So a global five foot rise in seal level would render most of the worlds sea ports mostly if not completely unusable. This would result in a severe reduction in the availability of just about everything, just about everywhere (no more cheap crap from China). Perhaps those who thrive on shipping will do something about it, but it costs a crap ton of money and every time the ocean goes up, the seaports have to go up as well. Then of course the ocean currents may shut down (which has occurred in the past) or a super volcano pops its cork and these events have been noted to cause a drastic drop in global temps, thus lots more ice and then the ocean drops and then all those seaports that were raised are now completely useless.

A really long term plan is for coastal areas to be able to adjust to fluctuating sea levels over hundreds of feet, not just five. Unfortunately, the foundations of all our coastal infrastructure was laid down back in the later part of the 19th century when the history of how much this planet can change was still a new, cutting edge realm of science.
87. Abacosurf
8:43 AM EDT on April 02, 2015


That is a really good point as to seawalls. Topography will often determine the impact of any sea level rise or fall in any given point as well as the traditional tidal (high and low) flow. The relative level of the tide (high and low tides) measured against the top of a seawall that has been around for a long time is a good measure for any particular spot over time. However, you also have to take into account how sediments are deposited, or eroded over time, in the area surrounding the particular seawall as well over time.

I have mentioned that the high and low tide at my specific wade-fishing spot for the last 10 years has risen a few inches in recent years (gauged by my ankles-waist) but that could also be the result of the flat that I always stand on slowly eroding over the last several years making the waters appear to rise and the result of actual sea level rise.
Quoting 81. tampabaymatt:



06Z GFS shows things will continue to be dry in FL. Although, you have to take this with a grain of salt because the GFS seems to always show that FL will be dry.


Once the pattern locks into place then it will stay wet thru the end of April. It appears that next week is going to be the transition week to one that will feature a very active southern jet. Before we get there though we have to continue to chip away at this dominate SE Ridge that has been plaguing FL for over 30 days now. Good news is today the interior of FL could see some good rains in areas where this storms fire the trade off will be potential for large hail and strong downburst winds as 500mb temps are at -15C which very damm impressive for this time of year.
Quoting 86. weathermanwannabe:

Good Morning. Missed the post yesterday afternoon on the space pics of the Typhoon; that image of the eye is the most amazing one I have seen.

In terms of Conus today, here is part of the WPC short term forecast and current SPC outlook:


Short Range Forecast Discussion
NWS Weather Prediction Center College Park MD
330 AM EDT Thu Apr 02 2015

Valid 12Z Thu Apr 02 2015 - 12Z Sat Apr 04 2015

...There is a slight risk of severe thunderstorms over parts of the
Middle/Lower Mississippi Valley and the Ohio Valley...

...Heavy rain possible from parts of the Middle Mississippi Valley into
the Ohio Valley...

A front extending from the Upper Great Lakes to the Southern High Plains
will move eastward to the Lower Great Lakes to the Lower Mississippi
Valley/Western Gulf Coast by Friday evening. Moisture from the Gulf of
Mexico will pool along the boundary producing showers and thunderstorms
over parts of the Middle Mississippi Valley/Western Ohio Valley that will
move eastward to the Central Appalachians to the Lower Mississippi Valley
by Friday. In addition, light to moderate rain will develop over parts of
the Great Lakes on Thursday afternoon and move eastward off the Northeast
Coast by Friday morning. By Friday evening, a new area of light to
moderate rain will develop over parts of the Northeast.





One of the best images I have seen of a typhoon.
-ORLANDO HAD AN AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURE OF 72.9 DEGREES
FAHRENHEIT, WHICH WAS 6.0 DEGREES ABOVE NORMAL. THIS RANKS AS THE
3RD WARMEST MARCH ON RECORD FOR THIS SITE.
Quoting 90. tlawson48:



.... So a global five foot rise in seal level would render most of the worlds sea ports mostly if not completely unusable....


Sounds unlikely, many places have a 2 or 3 feet tide anyways. Do you have a peer reviewed research paper for this assertion ?
Quoting 94. StormTrackerScott:

-ORLANDO HAD AN AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURE OF 72.9 DEGREES
FAHRENHEIT, WHICH WAS 6.0 DEGREES ABOVE NORMAL. THIS RANKS AS THE
3RD WARMEST MARCH ON RECORD FOR THIS SITE.



Tampa had either it's 3rd or 4th warmest March on record as well.
Quoting 80. Huracan94:


Looks like the wind shear became too much for Maysak... he(or she?) is going right through the shredder.

Honestly... I don't know the gender of these names... if they have any

Haiyan: boy or girl? or none?
Yolanda (by pagasa): Girl!

Bopha: girl?
Pablo: boy!
Quoting 94. StormTrackerScott:

-ORLANDO HAD AN AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURE OF 72.9 DEGREES
FAHRENHEIT, WHICH WAS 6.0 DEGREES ABOVE NORMAL. THIS RANKS AS THE
3RD WARMEST MARCH ON RECORD FOR THIS SITE.



And yet "Climate Change" is against the law...
Quoting 98. Eeik5150:



And yet "Climate Change" is against the law...


Which Law, exactly ?
Quoting MaxWeather:

if you're in South Illinois you will hear the rumble!

YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!

Quoting tampabaymatt:


06Z GFS shows things will continue to be dry in FL. Although, you have to take this with a grain of salt because the GFS seems to always show that FL will be dry.

Should I take it with a grain of salt too? It's showing 'eavy rain for me.
Remember my blog will be open for any severe weather related things.
Link
Quoting 81. tampabaymatt:



06Z GFS shows things will continue to be dry in FL. Although, you have to take this with a grain of salt because the GFS seems to always show that FL will be dry.
That's a lot of rain for me. WOW!!!!
Quoting 95. MahFL:



Sounds unlikely, many places have a 2 or 3 feet tide anyways. Do you have a peer reviewed research paper for this assertion ?


So you are implying, if I understand it correctly that somehow the tide, offsets the ocean rising? You understand that most seaports are only a few feet above high tide? That would imply that we could only ship goods at low tide. I like that idea, it shows complete understanding of the situation.
Quoting 95. MahFL:



Sounds unlikely, many places have a 2 or 3 feet tide anyways. Do you have a peer reviewed research paper for this assertion ?
Mah...not to be disrespectful...but you do realize tides will continue to go up and down regardless of sea level rise. It will be 5 feet higher from the original high or low tide. There has to be a constant to verify a measurement.
Quoting Abacosurf:
Why would south Fl see a "bigger" rise than average??
Grand parents had same property since 1959 in aqualane on 16th ave s. in Naples and there has been no rise whatsoever on the original seawall. Our beaches on Englewood property which is 1 acre sea to sea has a bigger beach now than in the last 30 years. If the sea level has risen in the last 50 years it's sure not making itself felt here in SW FL.
I've spent on average 300-330 days a year in, near or on the water for the last 40 plus years and can tell you if it's been rising it's within a few milimeters.
I understand the rise will be exponential but to say we will see a 6 inch rise in the next 20 years (video 2 brians last night) is IMO a stretch. The good news is I will be able to verify that personally God willing.
I am not doubting the seas are rising as they have since the end of the last ice age......just doubting the pace and ferocity which is being thrown out by our beloved models.

The thing is, memory and personal recollection are no match for scientific observation. Since just the early 1990s--lets call it 20 years--sea levels have risen globally by about 3.2mm (0.13 in) per year, for a total of about 64mm (2.6 in). Now, the amount experienced locally depends on various other factors: subsidence, groundwater extraction, currents, etc. But Naples, home to some of the most expensive real estate in the US, is one of the cities most likely to suffer severe damage due to sea level rise. And there's a reason for that.

FWIW, by 2100--a short 85 years from now--we can expect seas to rise by between 0.8 and 2 meters. However, there are indications it could be substantially higher. For instance, if the Greenland ice sheet were to melt entirely, not likely, but nevertheless with a non-zero chance of happening, sea levels would increase by 7 meters/23 feet.

For a sobering look at things, check out this article: Goodbye, Miami. Then remember that Naples is but a stone's throw away...
Threat levels

Tornadoes

Low----------Medium--------High
------->

Damaging winds

Low----------Medium--------High
-------------------------->

Large Hail

Low----------Medium---------High
------------------------->

Heavy Rain

Low---------Medium---------High
--------------------------------->

108. MahFL
Quoting 104. Abacosurf:

Mah...not to be disrespectful...but you do realize tides will continue to go up and down regardless of sea level rise. It will be 5 feet higher from the original high or low tide. There has to be a constant to verify a measurement.



On another note, many new container ports/terminals are seeing large slumps in profits due to the global slowdown. Those ports that flood will be replaced by ones that are higher. After all the 5 feet so called rise will take 20 or 30 years right, it's not going to happen next year....
Quoting 105. Neapolitan:

The thing is, memory and personal recollection are no match for scientific observation. Since just the early 1990s--lets call it 20 years--sea levels have risen globally by about 3.2mm (0.13 in) per year, for a total of about 64mm (2.6 in). Now, the amount experienced locally depends on various other factors: subsidence, groundwater extraction, currents, etc. But Naples, home to some of the most expensive real estate in the US, is one of the cities most likely to suffer severe damage due to sea level rise. And there's a reason for that.

FWIW, by 2100--a short 85 years from now--we can expect seas to rise by between 0.8 and 2 meters. However, there are indications it could be substantially higher. For instance, if the Greenland ice sheet were to melt entirely, not likely, but nevertheless with a non-zero chance of happening, sea levels would increase by 7 meters/23 feet.

For a sobering look at things, check out this article: Goodbye, Miami. Then remember that Naples is but a stone's throw away...
So...lets re visit this in 20 years and see where we are at. My guess is no higher than one inch higher mean water level or 5 times greater than the past 20 years.
What's your guess for mean water level rise in Naples by April 2nd 2035?
edit...just saw your 3.2 mm per year for the last 20...I call BS on that measurement. Do you realize the power of water? We would not have a beach if that were true.
Quoting MahFL:


On another note, many new container ports/terminals are seeing large slumps in profits due to the global slowdown. Those ports that flood will be replaced by ones that are higher. After all the 5 feet so called rise will take 20 or 30 years right, it's not going to happen next year....


Sea level rise 5ft in 20 years in Florida?

In my area of S.W. Florida sea level has only gone up 2.4 mm (Millimeters)in the past 48 years.
That's less than 1ft. (around 8" or so) in 100 years.
Quoting Sfloridacat5:


In my area of S.W. Florida sea level has only gone up 2.4 mm (Millimeters)in the past 48 years.
That's less than 1ft. in 100 years.
Source?
Quoting Neapolitan:
Source?


Link

Naples, FL
8725110
The mean sea level trend is 2.4 mm/year with a 95% confidence interval of /- 0.48 mm/year based on monthly mean sea level data from 1965 to 2013 which is equivalent to a change of 0.79 feet in 100 years.

Good morning.

Hi MaxWeather.Add me to your poll with 10/6/2.
Quoting 108. MahFL:



On another note, many new container ports/terminals are seeing large slumps in profits due to the global slowdown. Those ports that flood will be replaced by ones that are higher. After all the 5 feet so called rise will take 20 or 30 years right, it's not going to happen next year....


Go back and read my original post on this subject, endlessly replacing a port every time the sea level goes up or down IS NOT a way to do business. We are talking seaports where simply building one pier, seven feet higher costs close to 100 million dollars. The reason? It can be thousands and thousands of feet long, has to support the weight of giant portal cranes, trucks and trains, plus hundreds of acres of storage for shipping containers and miles and miles and miles of water, gas, fuels, steam, air, electrical, sewage and other utilities. Building just one of these piers can quite literally take decades to complete as the engineering alone can years to complete before the first pile of dirt is moved. Ask the US Navy, they have been in the process of raising the piers at the Norfolk Navy base since the early nineties. The reason? The ocean down there is rising faster than anywhere else on the eastern seaboard.

And if you wonder how I know this, its because I worked for the US Navy as a civilian engineering officer on a resupply ship and while we were tied up at the Navy base, we had to listen to the pile drivers all day and all night for months on end (and that was 13 years ago - a quick look on Google earth shows they are STILL working on it). As to the engineering side of the house, I worked for an engineering design firm that did work for all sort of different projects, from seaports to power plants. The company would design for years before the first construction contract was awarded. If we (as a society) fart around and think we can quickly adapt, we are fooling ourselves
Naples current linear trend is 2.4mm/year



The bigger issue is sea level rise is not a linear function.
Quoting 112. Sfloridacat5:



Link

Naples, FL
8725110
The mean sea level trend is 2.4 mm/year with a 95% confidence interval of /- 0.48 mm/year based on monthly mean sea level data from 1965 to 2013 which is equivalent to a change of 0.79 feet in 100 years.


Sea level rise is never an even rise.....
I'll repeat this. Sea level rise is not linear. Using linear trends for extrapolation is not a good idea.
Quoting 117. Naga5000:

I'll repeat this. Sea level rise is not linear. Using linear trends for extrapolation is not a good idea.


If nature were linear, life would be easy.....
A better picture of projected sea level rise under different scenarios.

Quoting Sfloridacat5:


Link

Naples, FL
8725110
The mean sea level trend is 2.4 mm/year with a 95% confidence interval of /- 0.48 mm/year based on monthly mean sea level data from 1965 to 2013 which is equivalent to a change of 0.79 feet in 100 years.
Oh, I see. You stated, "In my area of S.W. Florida sea level has only gone up 2.4 mm (Millimeters)in the past 48 years," when you clearly meant 2.4mm per year. Ok. But two important and related things to remember:

1) The rate of rise has been increasing with time, and...

2) That rate of rise is expected to continue to increase, so straight line extrapolations that don't take that increase into consideration are entirely invalid. Some scientists predict that by 2100, the global rate will be closer to 30mm per year.
Be realistic.
I find it hard to believe you guys really think sea level will rise 5ft. across Florida in the next 20 years.
In my area there is a 0% chance of that happening.
Quoting 121. Sfloridacat5:

Be realistic.
I find it hard to believe you guys really think sea level will rise 5ft. across Florida in the next 20 years.
In my area there is 0% chance of that happening.



In 20 years, no, probably not, in 100 years, a resounding hell yes. In twenty years, somewhere between six inches and a foot is probably closer to the mark.
123. jpsb
Quoting 108. MahFL:



On another note, many new container ports/terminals are seeing large slumps in profits due to the global slowdown. Those ports that flood will be replaced by ones that are higher. After all the 5 feet so called rise will take 20 or 30 years right, it's not going to happen next year....


Well it is certainly a good thing that Greenlands' ice sheet is not going to melt any time soon.

Germany’s Max Plank Institute for Meteorology

"These findings suggest that aerosol radiative forcing is less negative and more certain than is commonly believed."



A break down of the study by Cato Institute
You Ought to Have a Look: Climate Sensitivity

"This basically eliminates the possibly of catastrophic climate change—that is, climate change that proceeds at a rate that exceeds our ability to keep up. "

Quoting 121. Sfloridacat5:

Be realistic.
I find it hard to believe you guys really think sea level will rise 5ft. across Florida in the next 20 years.
In my area there is 0% chance of that happening.


eh boy...realistic is a tough one...get your hard hat on. :)
Quoting tlawson48:


In 20 years, no, probably not, in 100 years, a resounding hell yes. In twenty years, somewhere between six inches and a foot is probably closer to the mark.


Now I can go with that. That is in the ball park of what I would expect.
Currently running at about a 2" in 20 year rise. That could increase to 6" or a little higher in 20 years.
Quoting 121. Sfloridacat5:

Be realistic.
I find it hard to believe you guys really think sea level will rise 5ft. across Florida in the next 20 years.
In my area there is 0% chance of that happening.



I find it hard to believe you think sea level rise is linear. I have nowhere stated 5 feet is realistic. The range for SW Florida is 1 to 4 feet by 2100, given current rates of increase. Notice this is way above the linear projection because sea level rise isn't linear. This is basic stuff.
Quoting 122. tlawson48:



In 20 years, no, probably not, in 100 years, a resounding hell yes. In twenty years, somewhere between six inches and a foot is probably closer to the mark.
LOL
On my way to pier with measuring tape and water level in hand. Let's meet back in 20 and I'll prove it to you.
Quoting 123. jpsb:



Well it is certainly a good thing that Greenlands' ice sheet is not going to melt any time soon.

Germany’s Max Plank Institute for Meteorology

"These findings suggest that aerosol radiative forcing is less negative and more certain than is commonly believed."



A break down of the study by Cato Institute
You Ought to Have a Look: Climate Sensitivity

"This basically eliminates the possibly of catastrophic climate change—that is, climate change that proceeds at a rate that exceeds our ability to keep up. "




I found your problem, you are letting CATO, a free market think thank interpret science for you. Oops.
Quoting 85. StormTrackerScott:

Latest CFSv2 as of April 1st rivals the 1997 El-Nino. Here is the December outlook.


Good morning Scott..That chart does not show how this episode will be larger or more potent than 1997,s.. Please post some numbers for comparison.
the useless rain was in full action during December.Now it is no where to be found when the pollen has now come out and is running rampant.
Quoting 126. Naga5000:



I find it hard to believe you think sea level rise is linear. I have nowhere stated 5 feet is realistic. The range for SW Florida is 1 to 4 feet, given current rates of increase. Notice this is way above the linear projection because sea level rise isn't linear. This is basic stuff.
Naga...gentlemans bet...20 bucks? april 2nd 2035?? My call...under 3 inch rise. Your call at least a foot.
Re-iterating what I mentioned a few days ago, this is about as classic of a pattern as you'll see for a major/violent tornado outbreak in the medium range as the weakening jet, shortening wavelengths & intraseasonal tropical forcing force the jet to collapse into the western US...


Quoting 131. Abacosurf:

Naga...gentlemans bet...20 bucks? april 2nd 2035?? My call...under 3 inch rise. Your call at least a foot.


No, I don't gamble on 20 year bets, 1 to 4 foot increase is by 2100. Under 30 away there is too much noise and variability. Bad bet based on bad thinking.
Quoting jpsb:


Well it is certainly a good thing that Greenlands' ice sheet is not going to melt any time soon.

Germany’s Max Plank Institute for Meteorology

"These findings suggest that aerosol radiative forcing is less negative and more certain than is commonly believed."



A break down of the study by Cato Institute
You Ought to Have a Look: Climate Sensitivity

"This basically eliminates the possibly of catastrophic climate change—that is, climate change that proceeds at a rate that exceeds our ability to keep up. "

Non sequitur much?

1) The first piece you cited was a science article suggesting that aerosol radiative forcing may be less negative than commonly believed. That says absolutely nothing about Greenland's ice sheets or sea level rise.

2) The second piece you cited is an opinion piece written by a pair of pro-pollution anti-science types working for a conservative "think" tank. And, silly as it is, it, too, says nothing about Greenland's ice sheets or sea level rise.

So, please help us out: what point were you trying to make?
Quoting Abacosurf:
LOL
On my way to pier with measuring tape and water level in hand. Let's meet back in 20 and I'll prove it to you.


My friend has a house on the intercoastal waterway and I'll have him set up a yard stick for us.
So far the sea level rise on his property has been unnoticeable (but based on NOAA's readings it should have gone up about 2" in the past 20 years).

On April 2, 2035 and I will report back with a 20 year update.
I'm going to wade in here (no pun intended) on the discussion of sea level rise. According to the last IPPC Report (AR5), these are the ranges of sea level rise for different scenarios by 2100:


Fig. 1. Past and future sea-level rise. For the past, proxy data are shown in light purple and tide gauge data in blue. For the future, the IPCC projections for very high emissions (red, RCP8.5 scenario) and very low emissions (blue, RCP2.6 scenario) are shown. Source: IPCC AR5 Fig. 13.27. Source

Of course, this only shows the next 85 years. Past 2100 sea level rise is worse, as ice sheet melting comes more in to play.

There is discussion in the IPCC report about the role of Antarctica's marine ice sheets (Marine Ice-Sheet Instability), which could trigger faster melting and therefore greater sea level rise. There has been research about this published since the last IPCC report was issued. Is this where the 5-foot discussion is coming from? Or is it coming from the geologic record or modeling of the last interglacial (5-10 m higher global mean sea level)?

(I know recent research findings have been posted on this blog about this, but I've focused more on the whys/hows of MISI than on actual projections. )

Edit: added caption to figure and source link
Quoting 71. FnlPrblm:



Because it hasn't been that hot here and we've also had a fairly stable atmosphere. If it got up to 80F+ and the front hit (especially in the sunshine part of the day), we'd have to worry a bit more.



Wait... are you from St. Louis too? :D
Quoting 135. Sfloridacat5:



My friend has a house on the intercoastal waterway and I'll have him set up a yard stick for us.
So far the sea level rise on his property has been unnoticeable (but based on NOAA's readings it should have gone up about 2" in the past 20 years).

On April 2, 2035 and I will report back with a 20 year update.
I am on your side here sfl...I don't see more than 1-3 inch rise and that's pushing it...
What i want to know is where this so called scientific observation point is that they have been measuring near Naples.
Is this satelite derived data?? If so I call BS.
Our beaches would be completely gone if there were a 2.6 inch increase in the last 20 years. The power of water would dictate this.
different dogs but we seen the shore almost every day for 30 yrs. i dont see any sign of water level change. e cen fl.
Quoting 135. Sfloridacat5:



My friend has a house on the intercoastal waterway and I'll have him set up a yard stick for us.
So far the sea level rise on his property has been unnoticeable (but based on NOAA's readings it should have gone up about 2" in the past 20 years).

On April 2, 2035 and I will report back with a 20 year update.


I'll stick with the NOAA station data, thanks. We all know how accurate a few guys with a yard stick can be.
141. MahFL
Quoting 114. tlawson48:



... endlessly replacing a port every time the sea level goes up or down IS NOT a way to do business. ...


Actually through out human history that is what has occurred, and we humans are still here, and we still have plenty of cheap imports.
It's obvious you are not in the shipping business.
Also the people who design and build ports will be happy with the business.
Quoting 90. tlawson48:



Well over 90 percent of the worlds commerce travels by ship. So a global five foot rise in seal level would render most of the worlds sea ports mostly if not completely unusable. This would result in a severe reduction in the availability of just about everything, just about everywhere (no more cheap crap from China). Perhaps those who thrive on shipping will do something about it, but it costs a crap ton of money and every time the ocean goes up, the seaports have to go up as well. Then of course the ocean currents may shut down (which has occurred in the past) or a super volcano pops its cork and these events have been noted to cause a drastic drop in global temps, thus lots more ice and then the ocean drops and then all those seaports that were raised are now completely useless.

A really long term plan is for coastal areas to be able to adjust to fluctuating sea levels over hundreds of feet, not just five. Unfortunately, the foundations of all our coastal infrastructure was laid down back in the later part of the 19th century when the history of how much this planet can change was still a new, cutting edge realm of science.


If only there was some way to reduce port construction/modification time from what must certainly currently be in the thousands of years for this to be a problem, to something less than, say 100 years.
Quoting 139. islander101010:

different dogs but we seen the shore almost every day for 30 yrs. i dont see any sign of water level change. e cen fl.


I previously linked to the paper on your part of e can florida that explains the discrepancy based on unique topography. I haven't seen snow in quite some time, but I've been assured it exists.
Sky gazers, take note; the world will witness the shortest lunar eclipse of the century this Saturday. Look to the skies in the early morning to see a show that you won't want to miss.The total eclipse of the moon, which is scheduled for Saturday, April 4th, will be the third in the current "tetrad" of four in a row at half-year intervals, according to Sky & Telescope. The total eclipse itself will last for a scant four minutes and 43 seconds, which makes it the shortest one of the century. Those who live west of the Mississippi River will have the best view of the eclipse. However, a partial eclipse will be visible across the nation. If you're on the East Coast, get up before sunrise to catch some of the show. It should start at 5:35 a.m., though the sunrise will largely interrupt the eclipse. The total lunar eclipse will be easily seen by the naked eye. However, a telescope or binoculars will obviously give you a better view. The moon will appear to take on a reddish glow since sunlight has passed through Earth's atmosphere, which filters out most of its blue light.
The next lunar eclipse that we should expect to see will occur on Sept. 28 of this year, according to NASA.
146. jpsb
Quoting 134. Neapolitan:

Non sequitur much?

1)

So, please help us out: what point were you trying to make?


1 + 1 = 2

If the cooling effect of aerosols is less then thought then the warming effect of CO2 is less then thought. See how easy that was? I will leave it as an exercise in critical thinking as to why the above is true.


Quoting 145. hydrus:



Hope this doesn't pan out. Shows 7-8" here :o
I will be 73 on April 2, 2035; God willing (Me still alive and the blog still running) I will check in and expect your reports on the actual sea level rise at the noted locations........ :) Realistically, no one knows what the actual results will be depending on which models you are looking at extrapolation or otherwise. Too many things can happen between now and then that can impact sea level rise............We will actually need another 20-30 years of observations to get a better handle on the issue....................No need to split hairs on this one at the moment IMHO.
ocean water level? my projection till 2100 (estimated on my last 30 yrs observation) is a flat line.
Two words... "Giant Hovercraft"
;)
151. jpsb
Quoting 135. Sfloridacat5:



My friend has a house on the intercoastal waterway and I'll have him set up a yard stick for us.
So far the sea level rise on his property has been unnoticeable (but based on NOAA's readings it should have gone up about 2" in the past 20 years).

On April 2, 2035 and I will report back with a 20 year update.


My house is right on Galveston Bay and I've lived right on the water for many years. No noticeable rise in sea level. Where I kept my sail boat for many many years did not have a floating dock. Again no noticeable rise in sea level.
Quoting 141. MahFL:



Actually through out human history that is what has occurred, and we humans are still here, and we still have plenty of cheap imports.
It's obvious you are not in the shipping business.
Also the people who design and build ports will be happy with the business.


What you have said about replacing ports is entirely true ..... when piers were made of wood (or stone - which they DIDN'T move), ships were much smaller, drew less water, there were no utilities, the amount of cargo transported was infinitesimally small compared to now.

And yes, I was in the shipping business: a licensed marine engineer aboard ocean going vessels (tanker, bulk coal freighter, US Navy oiler, roll-on/roll-off, car carrier) and whether or not a ship can make it into port based on tides, depth of channel, height of the pier, services provided, weather, blah, blah, blah all factor into it.
I guess sea level only rises in Miami......




"Certified measurements of sea level have been taken at the University of Miami’s Rosenstiel School on Virginia Key since 1996 (Virginia Key is a small island just south of Miami Beach and east of downtown Miami)[1]. Simple linear trends drawn through annual averages of all high tides, low tides, and the mean sea level are shown below, and all three lines are about 3.7″ higher in 2014 than they were in 1996."


From
FWIW, by 2100--a short 85 years from now--we can expect seas to rise by between 0.8 and 2 meters. However, there are indications it could be substantially higher. For instance, if the Greenland ice sheet were to melt entirely, not likely, but nevertheless with a non-zero chance of happening, sea levels would increase by 7 meters/23 feet.

For a sobering look at things, check out this article: Goodbye, Miami. Then remember that Naples is but a stone's throw away...




you want to set the acceptance of AGW back...then keep printing articles such as what is in rolling stones and then citing it on blogs....it's BS...plain and simple...the article states over the past 100 years the ocean has risen 9 inches...guess they use the same ruler some men do......as depending on what study you look at...you'll find ranges from under 5 to about 8 inches....as for the 6 feet rise by 2100 claim...although it's shown as possible...the estimated range given by most scientific journals is 1 to 4 feet...and the best estimate by the ipcc...was just under 2'...you want to stop hearing the phrase "prophets of doom and gloom"....well....then stop hyping what is already bad enough....might have to add StormTracker in front of all your names......

i know you guys like your links...here's a couple

http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/our-changi ng-climate/sea-level-rise

http://www.columbia.edu/~mhs119/SeaLevel/

https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/ipcc_far _wg_I_chapter_09.pdf
Quoting 151. jpsb:



My house is right on Galveston Bay and I've lived right on the water for many years. No noticeable rise in sea level. Where I kept my sail boat for many many years did not have a floating dock. Again no noticeable rise in sea level.


I'll let NOAA know that the measured linear trend of 6.62mm/year for Galveston is incorrect.



After all, some guy on the internet eye balled the water line, or measured it with a stick, or whatever you guys think is a better measurement than the actual gauges.
156. jpsb
Quoting 152. tlawson48:



What you have said about replacing ports is entirely true ..... when piers were made of wood (or stone - which they DIDN'T move), ships were much smaller, drew less water, there were no utilities, the amount of cargo transported was infinitesimally small compared to now.

And yes, I was in the shipping business: a licensed marine engineer aboard ocean going vessels (tanker, bulk coal freighter, US Navy oiler, roll-on/roll-off, car carrier) and whether or not a ship can make it into port based on tides, depth of channel, height of the pier, services provided, weather, blah, blah, blah all factor into it.


Well we could always build one of these


source
Quoting 154. ricderr:

FWIW, by 2100--a short 85 years from now--we can expect seas to rise by between 0.8 and 2 meters. However, there are indications it could be substantially higher. For instance, if the Greenland ice sheet were to melt entirely, not likely, but nevertheless with a non-zero chance of happening, sea levels would increase by 7 meters/23 feet.

For a sobering look at things, check out this article: Goodbye, Miami. Then remember that Naples is but a stone's throw away...




you want to set the acceptance of AGW back...then keep printing articles such as what is in rolling stones and then citing it on blogs....it's BS...plain and simple...the article states over the past 100 years the ocean has risen 9 inches...guess they use the same ruler some men do......as depending on what study you look at...you'll find ranges from under 5 to about 8 inches....as for the 6 feet rise by 2100 claim...although it's shown as possible...the estimated range given by most scientific journals is 1 to 4 feet...and the best estimate by the ipcc...was just under 2'...you want to stop hearing the phrase "prophets of doom and gloom"....well....then stop hyping what is already bad enough....might have to add StormTracker in front of all your names......

i know you guys like your links...here's a couple

http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/our-changi ng-climate/sea-level-rise

http://www.columbia.edu/~mhs119/SeaLevel/

https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/ipcc_far _wg_I_chapter_09.pdf


The IPCC range for all emissions scenarios is about .28 meters (.91 feet) to .98 meters (3.21 feet). Interestingly enough, actual measurements have been on the high side of the envelope so far. I personally think 2 feet is likely, I like to stick close to the mean and I think we will eventually remove our heads from our behinds and really limit CO2.
158. jpsb
Quoting 155. Naga5000:



I'll let NOAA know that the measured linear trend of 6.62mm/year for Galveston is incorrect.




yes please do, thanks. A 5 inch rise would have wiped out my little beach at high tide over the last 20 years. Happily my little beach is doing just fine at high tide. I'll post a pic if you like. The beach is lots of fun when the Ship waves (Houston Ship Channel) roll in.
Quoting 156. jpsb:



Well we could always build one of these


source


I have actually been thinking along those lines, it would certainly make a whole lot more sense than the conventional fixed design. Probably coast a lot more, but not only would it completely mitigate headaches associated with the tide, it would also alleviate problems with long term sea-level fluctuations.
Quoting Naga5000:


I'll let NOAA know that the measured linear trend of 6.62mm/year for Galveston is incorrect.



After all, some guy on the internet eye balled the water line, or measured it with a stick, or whatever you guys think is a better measurement than the actual gauges.
The fact that we are very likely facing the greatest societal upheaval in human history due to climate change is A Very Scary Thing indeed, so it's really no wonder people don't want to admit how swiftly things are going to change, and just how bad things are going to get.
Quoting 158. jpsb:



yes please do, thanks. A 5 inch rise would have wiped out my little beach at high tide over the last 20 years. Happily my little beach is doing just fine at high tide. I'll post a pic if you like. The beach is lots of fun when the Ship waves (Houston Ship Channel) roll in.


Unless there was an increase in sediment deposit on your little beach, or a myriad of other issues that make your observation invalid. But I'm sure you measured that too, right? The NOAA's methodology for measuring sea level rise based in years of scientific research on the subject can't possibly be correct because your single data point with no quality control is obviously more accurate.
Quoting 158. jpsb:



yes please do, thanks. A 5 inch rise would have wiped out my little beach at high tide over the last 20 years. Happily my little beach is doing just fine at high tide. I'll post a pic if you like. The beach is lots of fun when the Ship waves (Houston Ship Channel) roll in.


Is your beach experiencing net gain or net loss of sand? The beach near where I live is gaining lots of sand at one end and losing it rapidly at the other end. In the middle its about the same, but the dune grass there keeps getting eaten away during the winter storms a little more each year. We are way too poor to get sand trucked in to replenish what is lost at the far end of the beach. The result is that every two to three years or so another house falls into the ocean. They have dumped tons of rocks down there around the small town to the point that even on a low drain tide, there is no beach at all. Twenty years ago the beach was 100 feet wide at high tide. Granted, most of this is due to how beaches behave naturally, but in this case even a small rise in sea level simply exacerbates an already bad situation.
Quoting 158. jpsb:


yes please do, thanks. A 5 inch rise would have wiped out my little beach at high tide over the last 20 years. Happily my little beach is doing just fine at high tide. I'll post a pic if you like. The beach is lots of fun when the Ship waves (Houston Ship Channel) roll in.


As someone that sails Galveston Bay on a 43 foot boat with an 8 foot keel, please bring on the sea level rise! Last weekend I couldn't get out of my slip at Seabrook Shipyard - too little water....
Quoting tlawson48:


I have actually been thinking along those lines, it would certainly make a whole lot more sense than the conventional fixed design. Probably coast a lot more, but not only would it completely mitigate headaches associated with the tide, it would also alleviate problems with long term sea-level fluctuations.
Again, the problem isn't just the seaport. You'll have to build new roads. New bridges. New rail lines. New distribution centers. New utility connections. There'll be no water. There'll be few places for workers to live. And where will the money to build such a facility and make such improvements come from? Good luck passing yet another bond to people who are watching thousands of homes become unlivable. Outside investment? From where? Who will loan out several billion dollars to build such a boondoggle.

Shorter: designing and building a floating seaport will solve problem #176 from a list of 10,000. Which should we tackle next?
Good morning all! Having lurked for many a global warming argument on this blog, and commenting sporadically, I just wanted to provide an observation, and perhaps a piece of advice, to those who use highly questionable sources to support highly questionable views! Part of pursuing an education is learning HOW to research! Doing a Google search and reading what comes up is NOT research! You must actually use inference and analysis! In fact, the first step before you read is to take note of your author and identify that author's inherent biases. Then, check the publisher of the piece. For example, people who do have an advanced education would recognize CATO as a political think tank that is funded by very conservative, wealthy men, men who fear change and what change will do to their wealth and power! If you can at least take these two steps, then you at least achieve some sense of perspective of the purpose of the work! Oh, and stop using Wikipedia as a go-to source for information. If you look through the endnotes of an article, I guarantee you it is never cited! And do not present yourself as an expert who has proven that warming is make-believe, because you know how to search Google. Even my 5-year-old can do that, so it really can't count as a professional qualification!
166. flsky
Didn't I see your boat up on the freeway after Gustav?
Quoting 163. Greg01:



As someone that sails Galveston Bay on a 43 foot boat with an 8 foot keel, please bring on the sea level rise!



Quoting 160. Neapolitan:

The fact that we are very likely facing the greatest societal upheaval in human history due to climate change is A Very Scary Thing indeed, so it's really no wonder people don't want to admit how swiftly things are going to change, and just how bad things are going to get.
I do not even try to explain to some what is actually happening. I wasted to much time already. Those who do listen or understand the research data usually do not need someone to outline it for them. Ignorance is going to play a part , but greed and false information will do far more damage in the long run.
Quoting 166. flsky:
Didn't I see your boat up on the freeway after Gustav?


Pretty sure Gustav did not hit Houston...
170. jpsb
Quoting 161. Naga5000:



Unless there was an increase in sediment deposit on your little beach, or a myriad of other issues that make your observation invalid. But I'm sure you measured that too, right? The NOAA's methodology for measuring sea level rise based in years of scientific research on the subject can't possibly be correct because your single data point with no quality control is obviously more accurate.


Excellent summation, I enjoy reading that. You get a + from me!

I have another data point at low tide. An old piling sticking out of the mud and an old sunken row boat If you like I can post pics of those too. The row boat is fairly reacent (Hurricane Ike) but the old piling has been there forever.
Eric Blake @EricBlake12 · 53m 53 minutes ago

Disappointing budget cuts-- losing 2/3rds of budget money for HFIP-- no realtime experimental forecasts either-yuck.
Quoting Abacosurf:
Link
Thanks. So despite several anecdotal stories to the contrary, the rise in Naples is indeed measurable, and accelerating:



Quoting 164. Neapolitan:

Again, the problem isn't just the seaport. You'll have to build new roads. New bridges. New rail lines. New distribution centers. New utility connections. There'll be no water. There'll be few places for workers to live. And where will the money to build such a facility and make such improvements come from? Good luck passing yet another bond to people who are watching thousands of homes become unlivable. Outside investment? From where? Who will loan out several billion dollars to build such a boondoggle.

Shorter: designing and building a floating seaport will solve problem #176 from a list of 10,000. Which should we tackle next?


Just let me have my little burst of optimism before I settle back into the pit of reality! :)
Amazing pictures! I was wondering about the scale in the pictures, particularly the top one.
175. jpsb
Quoting 163. Greg01:



As someone that sails Galveston Bay on a 43 foot boat with an 8 foot keel, please bring on the sea level rise! Last weekend I couldn't get out of my slip at Seabrook Shipyard - too little water....

8 foot draft? Lol, all you do is bounce on the bottom every time you tack! I had a J-24, 4' 2" draft and I occasionally hit bottom. Seabrook Shipyard is nice. I kept my J-Boat there.
Quoting 147. LAbonbon:


Hope this doesn't pan out. Shows 7-8" here :o
Greetings Bon..There are big changes coming with the shifting pattern. I believe many areas including yours are going to get soaked. The severe potential is increasing also, especially in your region in about 7 to 10 days , and you could get rough weather before then. A wet pattern will materialize, how much severe weather, too early to say.
Sigh
Quoting 158. jpsb:



yes please do, thanks. A 5 inch rise would have wiped out my little beach at high tide over the last 20 years. Happily my little beach is doing just fine at high tide. I'll post a pic if you like. The beach is lots of fun when the Ship waves (Houston Ship Channel) roll in.
I assume the chip channel is dredged. Where does the dredge spoil get dumped -- beside the channel in the water? In any case the wakes of the ships would tend to move sand toward shore, so that as water level rises the beach would be built with dredge spoil brought in by the wakes, so "noticeable" change would be pretty hard to eyeball. Now if you had set up a solidly-mounted laser level theodolite at your house and had an assistant to take a surveyor's rod down to the springtide wave zone at each new moon and recorded the reading of the rod, over the past 20 years, you would then have a decent record from which to state "there has been no change". However...
Most recent images of Maysak; nice to finally see it weaken considerably as it heads towards Luzon island as a minor storm after the deaths earlier; what a difference 72 hours have made.

Quoting 175. jpsb:

8 foot draft? Lol, all you do is bounce on the bottom every time you tack! I had a J-24, 4' 2" draft and I occasionally hit bottom. Seabrook Shipyard is nice. I kept my J-Boat there.


Tuxedo?
LOL
Quoting 177. Gearsts:

Sigh

That is huge.
Quoting 178. CaneFreeCR:

I assume the chip channel is dredged. Where does the dredge spoil get dumped -- beside the channel in the water? In any case the wakes of the ships would tend to move sand toward shore, so that as water level rises the beach would be built with dredge spoil brought in by the wakes, so "noticeable" change would be pretty hard to eyeball. Now if you had set up a solidly-mounted laser level theodolite at your house and had an assistant to take a surveyor's rod down to the springtide wave zone at each new moon and recorded the reading of the rod, over the past 20 years, you would then have a decent record from which to state "there has been no change". However...

Solidly mounted....like on this dock in the mud that NOAA uses??
Link

Maybe a better study would be how fast our docks are sinking....
Quoting 98. Eeik5150:



And yet "Climate Change" is against the law...


Climate Change is a huge threat to our culture, our ecology and our species. However a warm March in Fl is

.. wait for it ..

..... Weather ......

My March in DC metro was cold. This does not mean that GW has reversed. More Weather.


185. jpsb
Quoting 165. ProphetessofDoom:

Good morning all! Having lurked for many a global warming argument on this blog, and commenting sporadically, I just wanted to provide an observation, and perhaps a piece of advice, to those who use highly questionable sources to support highly questionable views! Part of pursuing an education is learning HOW to research! Doing a Google search and reading what comes up is NOT research! You must actually use inference and analysis! In fact, the first step before you read is to take note of your author and identify that author's inherent biases. Then, check the publisher of the piece. For example, people who do have an advanced education would recognize CATO as a political think tank that is funded by very conservative, wealthy men, men who fear change and what change will do to their wealth and power! If you can at least take these two steps, then you at least achieve some sense of perspective of the purpose of the work! Oh, and stop using Wikipedia as a go-to source for information. If you look through the endnotes of an article, I guarantee you it is never cited! And do not present yourself as an expert who has proven that warming is make-believe, because you know how to search Google. Even my 5-year-old can do that, so it really can't count as a professional qualification!


I do tire of the endless "attack the messenger" debate tactic popular here. Also for the record CATO is not a conservative think tank it is a libertarian think tank.

The article makes two claims and then draws a conclusion.

* magnitude of the cooling effect from anthropogenic aerosol emissions during the late 19th and 20th century was less than currently believed

* climate models rely on the cooling effects from aerosol emissions to offset a large part of the warming effect from greenhouse gas emissions

> magnitude of the aerosol forcing is less—means the amount of greenhouse gas-induced warming must also be less



Now instead of attacking CATO or calling me names why not address what the article actually says?

Normal to have this much SAL off Africa this time of the year until the rain patterns move a little North as the African monsoon/ITCZ rises. Here is the current activity across Africa and the monsoon/ITCZ from Africa across to South America; I am thinking this healthy train is going to help contribute to a very robust E-Pac season this year.


Latest IR-Loop
187. jpsb
Quoting 180. Greg01:



Tuxedo?
Wiki Wiki 2
Quoting 187. jpsb:
Wiki Wiki 2

Yes - I thought Wiki Wiki immediately after my post. I used to race on Low Rent with Dave.

I know that a lot of folks here are quick to dismiss personal observations as unscientific and biased, but my personal observations of Galveston Bay over the last 35 years yields no change. As sailors we pay particular attention to wind and tides and I for one keep meticulous logs - and I sail just about every week-end!
Michael Ventrice @MJVentrice · 2h 2 hours ago
The African Monsoon has begun its seasonal slow northward lift in advance of the 2015 Atlantic Hurricane Season.
Quoting 144. WaterWitch11:

Sky gazers, take note; the world will witness the shortest lunar eclipse of the century this Saturday. Look to the skies in the early morning to see a show that you won't want to miss.The total eclipse of the moon, which is scheduled for Saturday, April 4th, will be the third in the current "tetrad" of four in a row at half-year intervals, according to Sky & Telescope. The total eclipse itself will last for a scant four minutes and 43 seconds, which makes it the shortest one of the century. Those who live west of the Mississippi River will have the best view of the eclipse. However, a partial eclipse will be visible across the nation. If you're on the East Coast, get up before sunrise to catch some of the show. It should start at 5:35 a.m., though the sunrise will largely interrupt the eclipse. The total lunar eclipse will be easily seen by the naked eye. However, a telescope or binoculars will obviously give you a better view. The moon will appear to take on a reddish glow since sunlight has passed through Earth's atmosphere, which filters out most of its blue light.
The next lunar eclipse that we should expect to see will occur on Sept. 28 of this year, according to NASA.


my birthday is 610 am that day and the last of the four blood moons
Quoting 185. jpsb:



I do tire of the endless "attack the messenger" debate tactic popular here. Also for the record CATO is not a conservative think tank it is a libertarian think tank.

The article makes two claims and then draws a conclusion.

* magnitude of the cooling effect from anthropogenic aerosol emissions during the late 19th and 20th century was less than currently believed

* climate models rely on the cooling effects from aerosol emissions to offset a large part of the warming effect from greenhouse gas emissions

> magnitude of the aerosol forcing is less%u2014means the amount of greenhouse gas-induced warming must also be less



Now instead of attacking CATO or calling me names why not address what the article actually says?

Quoting 185. jpsb:



I do tire of the endless "attack the messenger" debate tactic popular here. Also for the record CATO is not a conservative think tank it is a libertarian think tank.

The article makes two claims and then draws a conclusion.

* magnitude of the cooling effect from anthropogenic aerosol emissions during the late 19th and 20th century was less than currently believed

* climate models rely on the cooling effects from aerosol emissions to offset a large part of the warming effect from greenhouse gas emissions

> magnitude of the aerosol forcing is less%u2014means the amount of greenhouse gas-induced warming must also be less



Now instead of attacking CATO or calling me names why not address what the article actually says?





First of all, in no way did I call you a name - perhaps you just provided proof that your own critical reading skills are lacking! Second of all, in today's political spectrum, libertarians have aligned themselves with the GOP, as Sen. Rand Paul has demonstrated, and, let's be honest, perverted the definition of libertarian! Third, weeks ago, I very civilly asked you why you don't believe our climate is warming! Your response: I'll get back to you! You never did, and now you take a generalized posting that was NOT directed towards you at all, and make it personal! A lack of critical reading, writing, and researching skills is an academic issue across the board, not just for you! If you do want me to make it personal, I will point out that you have NEVER once posted real, actual scientific proof to support your theory; you consistently mistake ideology for evidence! (Baaaa to you!)

Besides, if you need to cite an article by CATO to provide evidence to a scientific query, then you - and I mean the general you - obviously lack an understanding of the scientific method! Politicians, especially today's politicians and those who prop them up - are not exactly legitimate sources of support!

Sorry for the rant, and in the future, I will remember to never enter into a battle of wits with someone who is completely unarmed! And now, I will accept my first-ever ban for the subtle insult, regardless of its topicality!

Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:


my birthday is 610 am that day and the last of the four blood moons
Early happy birthday, Keep. I hope it thaws up there too.
I will give my numbers towards the first week of May. somehow looking at the SST in the eastern pacific and the slow nature of the atmosphere to react to what appears to be an El NINO episode . I am still of the opinion that there will not be a significant EL NINO,and the numbers will not be below the average .
Quoting 192. sar2401:

Early happy birthday, Keep. I hope it thaws up there too.
we break 60 today maybe
right now 54
thundershowers to herald in the beginning of the warmer air later this afternoon
then slight cool down with more rain on good Friday changing to some snowflurries sat and sunday as we get back down into mid 30 's for highs during the holiday weekend to finish up
Quoting tlawson48:


Just let me have my little burst of optimism before I settle back into the pit of reality! :)
There's nothing wrong with a little burst of enthusiasm. I really don't care what number a problem is on a list. Doing something is still better than nothing. Floating ports in the long run are a reasonable answer to lots of issues, sea level rise being just one of them. It won't be cheap, and it won't be easy, but that's why the US has some of the best engineers in the world. The only other option I see is to throw up our hands, say we're all doomed, and then I can have a big party where I stuff my face with Ding Dongs and don't worry about the consequences. :-)
SPC should really issue a watch or something.



Storms are firing.
"Also for the record CATO is not a conservative think tank it is a libertarian think tank."

There are tons of political spectrum graphics, but here's a pretty basic one:




On the weather front, it's 81, partly cloudy, and a bit breezy here this morning in Baton Rouge.
SPC Issued an MD for my area. YEAH!!!!!!




MESOSCALE DISCUSSION 0185
NWS STORM PREDICTION CENTER NORMAN OK
1150 AM CDT THU APR 02 2015

AREAS AFFECTED...SE MO...FAR SRN IL...WRN KY...WRN TN AND NE AR

CONCERNING...SEVERE POTENTIAL...WATCH POSSIBLE

VALID 021650Z - 021815Z

PROBABILITY OF WATCH ISSUANCE...40 PERCENT

SUMMARY...A SEVERE THREAT MAY DEVELOP OVER THE NEXT FEW HOURS FROM
THE NE AR NEWD INTO WRN KY AND FAR SRN IND. ISOLATED LARGE HAIL AND
WIND DAMAGE ARE EXPECTED TO BE THE PRIMARY THREATS. WW ISSUANCE WILL
BE POSSIBLE ACROSS THE MCD AREA EARLY THIS AFTERNOON.

DISCUSSION...THE LATEST SFC ANALYSIS SHOWS A COLD FRONT ACROSS CNTRL
MO WITH SOUTH SOUTHWESTERLY FLOW ACROSS MUCH OF THE MID MS VALLEY. A
CORRIDOR OF LOW-LEVEL MOISTURE IS IN PLACE ALONG THE MS RIVER NEAR
THE BOOTHEEL OF MO WHERE SFC DEWPOINTS ARE IN THE MID 60S F. AS SFC
TEMPS HAVE WARMED OVER THE LAST FEW HOURS...MODERATE INSTABILITY HAS
DEVELOPED ACROSS THE MCD AREA WITH MLCAPE NOW ESTIMATED NEAR 1500
J/KG RANGE. SATELLITE SHOWS PARTIAL CLEARING ACROSS WRN KY AND WRN
TN SUGGESTING INSTABILITY WILL CONTINUE TO INCREASE THERE OVER THE
NEXT FEW HOURS. IN ADDITION...WATER VAPOR IMAGERY SHOWS A SUBTLE
SHORTWAVE TROUGH MOVING THROUGH WRN IL AND ECNTRL MO. LIFT
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS FEATURE SHOULD AID THUNDERSTORM DEVELOPMENT
EARLY THIS AFTERNOON ACROSS THE MID MS VALLEY. SHORT-TERM MODEL
SOLUTIONS INCLUDING THE HRRR AND NAM APPEAR TO DEVELOP A BAND OF
CONVECTION FROM SRN IL SWWD INTO SE MO ALONG THE WRN EDGE OF THE
STRONGEST INSTABILITY. THE INSTABILITY COMBINED WITH 30 TO 40 KT OF
DEEP-LAYER SHEAR...EVIDENT ON REGIONAL WSR-88D VWPS...SHOULD BE
SUPPORTIVE OF SEVERE STORMS AND POSSIBLY SUPERCELLS. THE
INSTABILITY...SHEAR AND COLD AIR ALOFT SHOULD BE FAVORABLE FOR
ISOLATED LARGE HAIL. WIND DAMAGE WILL ALSO BE POSSIBLE ESPECIALLY IF
A COLD POOL CAN ORGANIZE.

..BROYLES/HART.. 04/02/2015


ATTN...WFO...LMK...OHX...IND...PAH...ILX...MEG...L SX...LZK...
SGF...

LAT...LON 35198944 35099044 35309108 35679151 36569131 38328926
38828701 38258629 37618644 36848771 35968879 35198944
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
we break 60 today maybe
right now 54
thundershowers to herald in the beginning of the warmer air later this afternoon
then slight cool down with more rain on good Friday changing to some snowflurries sat and sunday as we get back down into mid 30 's for highs during the holiday weekend to finish up
Maybe you can have a weekend with no snowflakes one of these days. The last Easter I was in Cleveland, which would have been 1967, we finally got up to 70 or so. I put down the top of my almost new 1966 MGB and was enjoying the warm air...until I got near Lake Erie. The danged thing was still frozen right up to the shoreline and the temperature plunged from 70 to 40 in a few miles. That alone cemented my plan to get out. If I remember right, we had a tornado outbreak the week after that.
201. jpsb
Quoting 191. ProphetessofDoom:



While I did quote you we are not having a one on one conversation. I am conversing with all here that do not have me set to ignore. And I do get called names quite often. LOl, anyway I would like to note that my first link Germany’s Max Plank Institute for Meteorology was to the scientific paper itself. It is very dry reading. The CATO paper is much more fun to read so I linked to it too. I hope that is OK with all interested parties.

I also note that it did not take you long to get into name calling mode and have yet to address the "facts" presented nor the conclusion drawn. Hmmm, why is that I wonder?
JeffMasters has created a new entry.
no one saw the factors that negated the so called active season forecast in 2013,after all the predictors has pointed to one. Now with ten weeks to the start of the 2015 season I still have doubts of a slow season
Special weather statement in effect for:
•City of Toronto

Risk of thunderstorms today.

A warm front associated with a low pressure system will move eastward through Southwestern Ontario, Central Ontario, and the Golden Horseshoe today. A few thunderstorms are likely near the trough. Localized rainfall up to 25 mm is possible in isolated thunderstorms. None of the thunderstorms are expected to be severe.

The public is advised to monitor future forecasts and warnings as warnings may be required or extended.

Please monitor the latest forecasts and warnings from Environment Canada at www.weatheroffice.gc.ca.
Quoting KEEPEROFTHEGATE:
Except in far north Alabama, none of that green stuff on the radar is rain reaching the ground. We have a very dry layer in the mid-levels of the atmosphere that's sucking the moisture out of these cells before they can develop. It looks like whatever storms can develop over the next two days are going to affect north and north central Alabama. The best I ever do is a 30% chance of thunderstorms Friday night. SE Alabama is literally going to be left high and dry (and hot) again.
Quoting 182. hydrus:

That is huge.
It's also April 2nd.
Quoting 136. LAbonbon:

I'm going to wade in here (no pun intended) on the discussion of sea level rise.Snip)

Edit: added caption to figure and source link


Stefan Rahmstorf followed that RealClimate article with a survey of sea level experts, the survey, Sea-level rise: What the experts expect was posted in RealClimate.

Excerpt

In the long run, sea-level rise will be one of the most serious consequences of global warming. But how fast will sea levels rise? Model simulations are still associated with considerable uncertainty – too complex and varied are the processes that contribute to the increase. A just-published survey of 90 sea-level experts from 18 countries now reveals what amount of sea-level rise the wider expert community expects. With successful, strong mitigation measures, the experts expect a likely rise of 40-60 cm in this century and 60-100 cm by the year 2300. With unmitigated warming, however, the likely range is 70-120 cm by 2100 and two to three meters by the year 2300.

Sea-level: a bit of context

For context, the following figure from the current IPCC report summarizes the sea-level evolution:


Figure 1: Sea level rise according to the IPCC report of 2013. Shown is the past history of sea level since the year 1700 from proxy data (sediments, purple) and multiple records from tide gauge measurements. Light blue are the satellite data (from 1993). The two future scenarios mentioned in the text (RCP8.5 and RCP2.6) are shown in red and blue, with their “likely” uncertainty range according to the IPCC (meaning a 66 % probability to remain inside this range). Source: IPCC AR5 Fig. 13.27.

...The survey results

The following graph shows what the surveyed experts expect for these two scenarios up to the year 2100:



Figure 2: Sea level rise over the period 2000-2100 for two warming scenarios (red RCP8.5, blue RCP3). The ranges show the average numbers given across all the experts. The inner (darker) range shows the 17 to 83 percentile values, the outer range the 5 to 95th percentiles. For comparison we see the NOAA projections of December 2012 (dashed lines) and the new IPCC projections (bars on the right). Since this graph shows the increase from the year 2000, about 25 cm should be added for a direct numerical comparison with the previous graph.

The experts gave a median rise of 40-60 cm for the blue climate scenario and 70-120 cm for the red scenario. Most of the experts thus expect a higher rise than the IPCC – about two-thirds (65%) give the upper limit for the red ‘likely’ range a higher value than the IPCC, even though the IPCC has increased its projections by ~60% since its last report of 2007. In expert circles the IPCC reports are widely considered to be conservative; this is empirical confirmation.


My bold

The experts' opinions are for significantly more sea level rise than the IPCC
208. vis0

Quoting 118. tlawson48:



If nature were linear, life would be easy.....
(agree+) add to that Nature is a multitude of spirals. Was going to demonstrate with  my spiralfoil game "cogs" but to busy playing kerPlunk, go study Mayan/Mian drawings its there.
209. vis0
Quoting 60. nwobilderburg:

http://weather.cod.edu/satrad/nexrad/

find long term radar loops here... and the period between frames is shorter as well
5 sites can give one retro radars, most are from schools so i prefer not to burden their severs directly by posting links (don't wxuMail me i don't reply since 2014) on an active post but try checking my links (here), or my other sites that still show links...if anyone saved those site. One site gives one the opportunity to retroradar back to the late 1990 (1995 nexrad) BUT you need a program to decipher the raw data, program is "openlayers v330") search for that site iof one really wants those retroradrs.
Quoting sar2401:
There's nothing wrong with a little burst of enthusiasm. I really don't care what number a problem is on a list. Doing something is still better than nothing. Floating ports in the long run are a reasonable answer to lots of issues, sea level rise being just one of them. It won't be cheap, and it won't be easy, but that's why the US has some of the best engineers in the world. The only other option I see is to throw up our hands, say we're all doomed, and then I can have a big party where I stuff my face with Ding Dongs and don't worry about the consequences. :-)
Yeah, floating ports are awesome. But you completely failed to address a single other issue I brought up. Who will pay for them? How will people get to them? Who will they service? "Doing something" so you're not "doing nothing" has another word: panic. And of course engineers will be happy to make bank coming up with expensive and illogical boondoggles. But the answer isn't floating ports, or 1200-mile-long seawalls, or bedrock-grounded subterranean coffer dams surrounding South Florida. The answer is cutting out our use of fossil fuels.