knocker

But getting back to the original point if that did happen it would not contradict the anomaly, merely be further developments with in the umbrella of the upper trough

In that case it would also contradict it's own anomaly output. If the trough stars to lift out right at the end of the run it will not be indicated on ther broader scale anomaly. Doesn't mean they are wrong

The ecm/gfs in same ball park John

Time for a little clarity on this I feel https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-how-do-climate-models-work/

I think 'retrogression' another one for the swear filter

https://www.weather.gov/source/zhu/ZHU_Training_Page/Miscellaneous/Heights_Thicknesses/thickness_temperature.htm#GEOPOTENTIAL

What is worse, imho, are comments along the lines that the ecm does not handle NH patterns being indicated at the moment very well, as a precusor to binning the latest run. Now unless the posters can supply links to scientific evidence supporting the statement, or have done there own in depth research, then comments like this are wrong and will totally mislead punters who are relatively inexperienced in getting to grips with the output. Particularly in the current situation which, to say the least, is quite complex. Put simply they should not be ,made

The ecm is an absolute stonker this evening

I think there is an overwhelming case for 'shortwave' and 'drama' to be put in the swear filter sine die.

I now see things are getting completely out of hand in the mod thread with meteorology actually being dragged into the mix. Where will it all end I ask myself?

Judging from this morning's outputs it is looking more than likely, albeit then slowly improving

More to do wiith the accompanying hype and rapidly losing the will to live.

Over many years a long time and very respected member of this site, who also happens to be a retired senior forecaster, has explained why he has found that the correct use, and I emphasise the word correct, of the anomaly charts is one of the better ways of getting a hang of the medium term outlook, whilst pointing out that not by any stretch of imagination is it full proof. And yet over the years, and it has arisen again recently, people with zilch meteorological training feel free to rubbish this methodology without giving any reasoned explanation. Or if they do it is usually a lot of old pony. I cannot figure out whether it is deliberate or lack of understanding.

They think it's all over..........it is now

That is simply not true with 'stormy' being particularly misleading. If I remember correctly the upper flow was generally south westerly/westerly resulting in very much a north south split with Azores high pressure more influential in the south'. Some randomly selected charts Original post: https://community.netweather.tv/topic/98326-model-output-discussion-into-february/?do=findComment&comment=4809915

That is simply not true with 'stormy' being particularly misleading. If I remember correctly the upper flow was generally south westerly/westerly resulting in very much a north south split with Azores high pressure more influential in the south'. Some randomly selected charts

An objective and reasoned analysis of the model outputs is of course off the table.

Cracking ecm this evening. Bank.

The ten day precipitation for NW Europe this morning https://charts.ecmwf.int/products/medium-rain-acc?base_time=202302180000&projection=opencharts_north_west_europe&valid_time=202302280000

With all the hullabaloo over SSW phasing with the teleconnections and Mars in a retrograde orbit it is perhaps worth remembering that many parts of the country have had very little rainfall of late and this is likely to continue for the next couple of weeks and possible much longer.. Some reservoir levls are quite low now which could mean some tricky problems ahead if we get a dry Spring/summer.

It remains a complete mystery why so many, quite correctly, say that it is very dangerous to assume the affects in the trop. of a SSW, and then go on to do so, repeatable. Although after further thought perhaps it isn't.

Quite so Pete and over many years the evidence confirms that as a general rule of thumb after five days the model output becomes less reliable. Which is why you rarely see day ten charts posted in here

The BFTE should have been put in the swear filter a while ago as the continuing thought of it is getting dangerously close to tipping those of a cold peruasion over the edge..........................they have been teetering for a while.

Discussion is fine as long it does not morph into incessant repetition............ oh hang on

Unlikely to be the coffee