Autumn And Winter

[Snowly does it]

:blush: Thanks sm, I almost missed that one. No doubt the Aleutian Times will be jam-packed with GW stories after seeing that output !

Local Newspaper headlines read

'Aleutian Chain fries as rest of hemisphere freezes. Is THIS more evidence of a climate in chaos????'

I hope they come up with a reasoning for it, even if its just 'we messed up', Its got a real cult status to it now!

[kold weather]

Very intresting post GP. As for the ECPC I'd strongly suspect its a faulty run to be honest judging by the way most of the southern half of the southern hemisphere is very above average while the rest is to its north is uniformally below which simply couldn't happen!

I really haven't got much in the ay of ideas as to what this winter will be like but I'd take a guess at a fairly classic zonal December with quite above average temps. As for the other months, I really haven't even thought about it yet!

[Snowly does it]

Dispiriting, cold-wishers, I know, but cold realism.

Paul

No argument with you about the recent history Paul. However a pattern change from 2005 would not correlate to that period, only to the period since 2005, just saying.

In addition, the last 3 years have shown a declining CET. A very small decline I know but on a local level the MOST recent information is for CET hitting a crest and starting to trickle down. Is very possible this year will see a lower CET again than the preceeding 3 years.

None of this proves anything and is set against a backdrop of rising global temperature and so in isolation cannot be relied upon. However it remains a current fact and therefore is worth looking at. It is also reasonable to look at possible reasons for this aside from mere statistical spread.

No-one can predict this far out with any accuracy you are quite right, but the 70/20/10 is not a forecast, its just a statistic and personally I would amend it the nearer I am to target with relevant local and global conditions to factor in. A coin toss is 50/50 but I still call tails every time.

Cold lovers by their nature will look for cold signals, and why not? Its perfectly reasonable to do so, as long as one does not ignore the Bartlett when it arrives (if).

All I would say is that whilst you have raw statistics on your side, it is not until after the fact that any forecast or theory can be discounted.

[moses]

Completely potty.

The chances of this winter being colder than average are about 20% The chances of it being warmer than average are about 70%.

Since 1990, this percentage of warm as opposed to cold has actually been exceeded. There is nothing, apart from some highly iffy LRFs, that indicate anything different, The Met office reckon it will be a milder than average winter, but, quite frankly, I don't actually believe them either. Long-range forecasting is not good enough to predict the coming winter.

I can't see why on earth people who are desperate for a cold winter get all stirred up about this when, actually........no one knows. You are hope-casting. No more.

Damien; you really must qualify these, quite ridiculous assertions that you make that there is actually evidence for people to believe a cold winter is in the offing. It may be; but the odds are well in favour of it not being colder than average. I'd trust them.

Paul

Interestingly, when did the met office forcast last winter as being colder than average etc. I remember end of october - but not September - what evidence do they have again?

[Snowyowl9]

The thing about the majority of the 90`s including 1989 is all that raging zonality with huge storms and they were huge then, but I`ve noticed as the years progressed they are getting smaller yes there still powerful winds but the sheer size of the lows has diminished.

And of course the patteren change in 2005 when we`ve had the best easterly acutualy since 1986 that what I read recently,no the real cold air wasn`t over russia then but it was last year. :blush: and it`ll come closer this year hopefully.

The patteren change has started before 2005 but gradually I feel to slightly more blocking because we actually had n/n.w. again they were few and far between.

2004 was not your normal summer at all,with all those lows tracking along way south especially that one in July which produced n.e. gales.

That`s what I think.

That was a great post GP made this morning though very promising for the winter.

S9.

[Nick F]

And of course the patteren change in 2005 when we`ve had the best easterly acutualy since 1986 that what I read recently,no the real cold air wasn`t over russia then but it was last year. :blush: and it`ll come closer this year hopefully.

The late Feb/early March 2005 Easterly spell may have been the longest in duration since Feb 1986, but IMO it wasn't the best Easterly spell since then in terms of coldness and snowiness - what about the infamous Jan 1987 spell? Also the Easterly of New Year 1997 - (which was somewhat colder -but equally snowy as the Easterly of late Dec '05 in the SE). Feb 1991 had a cold spell of origins to the East aswell, though winds tended to be from the NE on that occasion.

Be interesting to see if Easterlies do reoccur again this winter whether they can source a cold enough source that would be meaningfull in terms of cold temperatures and snow, rather than being marginal like the case of late Feb/early March 2005. The late December 2005 Easterly spell was half-way there to being something of a resemblance of the colder and snowier Easterlies of the past, though it didn't last long enough for the cold to really build and the snow it brought was rather concentrated to favoured areas of the East and SE.

[Stratos Ferric]

Take your seats ladies and gentlemen (with the popcorn!) when Daniel reads this we will be in for an epic "I told you so." and when SF reads what Daniel posts his reply will be rib-ticklingly funny. Honestly this is more entertaining than the Oscars!

You don't think that Daniel's been doing some temping down the Ministry of Far Fetched Winter Forecasts do you?

[Scorcher]

No argument with you about the recent history Paul. However a pattern change from 2005 would not correlate to that period, only to the period since 2005, just saying.

In addition, the last 3 years have shown a declining CET. A very small decline I know but on a local level the MOST recent information is for CET hitting a crest and starting to trickle down. Is very possible this year will see a lower CET again than the preceeding 3 years.

None of this proves anything and is set against a backdrop of rising global temperature and so in isolation cannot be relied upon. However it remains a current fact and therefore is worth looking at. It is also reasonable to look at possible reasons for this aside from mere statistical spread.

No-one can predict this far out with any accuracy you are quite right, but the 70/20/10 is not a forecast, its just a statistic and personally I would amend it the nearer I am to target with relevant local and global conditions to factor in. A coin toss is 50/50 but I still call tails every time.

Cold lovers by their nature will look for cold signals, and why not? Its perfectly reasonable to do so, as long as one does not ignore the Bartlett when it arrives (if).

All I would say is that whilst you have raw statistics on your side, it is not until after the fact that any forecast or theory can be discounted.

Can you be more specific about the 'declining CET' in the last 3 years? This seems like complete make-believe to me. In the past 3 years we've witnessed the warmest month on record, the 2nd warmest October on record and the January record high temperature was broken amongst many other events that seem to point to unprecedented warmth, except to those who wish to see colder conditions prevailing. It seems to me that we're approaching the point where sub 10C yearly CETs will be a rare occurence.

[Dawlish]

HI Damien,

What happened to the Easterlies that you told us all about on the other thread, that you spotted at the edge of reality on the T+300gfs and which were supposed to be another strand in the continuation of this pattern change to Easterly domination from last winter.

You were so excited about it that you posted 5 gfs charts to illustrate it.

I'd just like to know where they have gone and if you are ever going to refer to having ramped them dreadfully and been hopelessly wrong. It was white noise you saw - not reality.

They've gone Damien. T=300+ now shows a zonal Westerly flow. Bet you don't link that to the coming winter.......because it doesn't fit what you are hoping for. I bet you'll wait, again, to ramp something that does, instead of watching carefully and talking about the real possibilities, or normal randomness, of the models that far out.

Paul

Edited September 5, 2006 by Dawlish

[Snowly does it]

Can you be more specific about the 'declining CET' in the last 3 years? This seems like complete make-believe to me. In the past 3 years we've witnessed the warmest month on record, the 2nd warmest October on record and the January record high temperature was broken amongst many other events that seem to point to unprecedented warmth, except to those who wish to see colder conditions prevailing. It seems to me that we're approaching the point where sub 10C yearly CETs will be a rare occurence.

Certainly, the point I was making was re the annual CET thus

2002 10.60

2003 10.50

2004 10.48

2005 10.44

2006 ????

We are currently a cumulative 0.9 degrees cooler than this stage in 2005. My feeling would be an October like last year will probably mean a warmer year this time around what with November last year colder than of late. However a more average October may well see us in another year of lower CET.

I did state in my original post that this is proof of nothing but remains a current fact and is worth looking at, you are correct that I want a return to colder weather but I don't for one moment claim a 3 year slight fall in CET proves anything, its merely something to look at (and yes, even this 'declining' baseline is way above the pre-80s).

So, in summary, the decline in CET annually for the past 3 years is not make-believe, but of course there have been individual months and dates that have broken heat records, these are more common it seems of late.

All that being said, anything working to moderate the rise in temperatures will not be apparant until after the event and anything that flies in the face of incessant warming should be considered. It is simply not good enough to say 'its warmer' and leave the debate at that, all angles need looking at.

Edited September 5, 2006 by snowmaiden

[Stratos Ferric]

Can you be more specific about the 'declining CET' in the last 3 years? This seems like complete make-believe to me. In the past 3 years we've witnessed the warmest month on record, the 2nd warmest October on record and the January record high temperature was broken amongst many other events that seem to point to unprecedented warmth, except to those who wish to see colder conditions prevailing. It seems to me that we're approaching the point where sub 10C yearly CETs will be a rare occurence.

The yearly CET has "declined" by about 0.15C over the past three years, however given a measurement error of +/-0.1C then in the great scheme of things it's hardly cause to get excited about a potential reversal in the recent dramatic warming. At this rate it will take about 35 years to get back down to the recent low trend level of the mid 80s. I suspect, at present, the odds would be slightly better on this being a pause in upward movement, rather than the start of a major correction, but it is certainly a glimmer of light for those who hate the prospect of diminishing winter.

[The PIT]

Well speaking for Sheffield the average temp hasn't generally been below 10C bar one year and seems to have stabilised

At least this year has seen the halt of consective above average months which may indicate a switch too cooling or just a blip in the general warming.

Edited September 5, 2006 by The PIT

[VillagePlank]

The yearly CET has "declined" by about 0.15C over the past three years, however given a measurement error of +/-0.1C then in the great scheme of things it's hardly cause to get excited about a potential reversal in the recent dramatic warming. At this rate it will take about 35 years to get back down to the recent low trend level of the mid 80s. I suspect, at present, the odds would be slightly better on this being a pause in upward movement, rather than the start of a major correction, but it is certainly a glimmer of light for those who hate the prospect of diminishing winter.

I agree, SF.

Due to the nature of the data being 'real-world' in nature, I would expect downward trends, pauses and upward trends. I'm not looking forward to a strong but shortlived downward trend that, if you look at the historic CET record, is virtually certain; imagine the soothsayers of imminent UK glaciation dealing with that

That said, the same can be attributed to those who strongly believe the 'UK will turn to hell' camp when we get a very strong, but shortlived, upward spike.

These spikes, whether down, or up, is noise. The climate is comparing todays (smoothed) mean to that of a previous instance. We are, after all, looking for signals over a century that are less than a degree in significance (I apologise profusely for the pun) It is of course the case, that overall, the CET is going (very slowly) upwards. It will take around 10 years of 'pause' or temperature 'retraction' to even sense a small signal in such large noise - I'll concede that we're around 50% through this period, though.

If this data conformed to the wonderful bell curve diurnally, seasonally, and annually, I doubt there would be very much interest in the weather at all!

Edited September 5, 2006 by Wilson

[Dawlish]

I agree, SF.

Due to the nature of the data being 'real-world' in nature, I would expect downward trends, pauses and upward trends. I'm not looking forward to a strong but shortlived downward trend that, if you look at the historic CET record, is virtually certain; imagine the soothsayers of imminent UK glaciation dealing with that

That said, the same can be attributed to those who strongly believe the 'UK will turn to hell' camp when we get a very strong, but shortlived, upward spike.

These spikes, whether down, or up, is noise. The climate is comparing todays (smoothed) mean to that of a previous instance. We are, after all, looking for signals over a century that are less than a degree in significance (I apologise profusely for the pun) It is of course the case, that overall, the CET is going (very slowly) upwards. It will take around 10 years of 'pause' or temperature 'retraction' to even sense a small signal in such large noise - I'll concede that we're around 50% through this period, though.

If this data conformed to the wonderful bell curve diurnally, seasonally, and annually, I doubt there would be very much interest in the weather at all!

Well said, but such reasoning will not stop the cold-wishers graping at any and every icicle that comes along that gives them the hope that their desires will be fulfilled.

I have this desire about Kate Bush. It's been there ever since she appered on TOTP (now defunct, of course) singing "Wuthering Heights". If I could see even a glimmer of that desire being fulfilled, I'd be grasping too. I understand, but unrequited desire nags at the soul!

Paul

PS I think the odds on you cold-wishers getting a colder winter, every now and then, are, in fact, probably greater than me and Kate Bush doing what I'd dearly like us to do.

Rats.

Edited September 5, 2006 by Dawlish

[bigboblee]

Please can people stop spoiling this thread with the old wives tales, while there may be truth to some off them, it is better discussed in the general weather section, posts like the ones above mearly serve to detract from otherwise useful information.

Thank You,thats what i tried to say,yes the science can let us down but its a damn sight more reliable than these silly old sayings.

[Snowly does it]

Thank You,thats what i tried to say,yes the science can let us down but its a damn sight more reliable than these silly old sayings.

Well, there's now a thread for weather lore elsewhere within Autumn discussion. I think the difference is that most people know lore is fragile and lets you down, but there is a degree of trust in the unreliable science you talk about which becomes unpalatable when it too falls apart at the seams.

Stick with what you are comfortable with I say, for me its a mixture.

[Damien]

Dawlish, with all due to respects to your previous posts, especially those in the "Arctic Ice watch" section, I can't believe I have just sat and dissected this post.

HI Damien,

What happened to the Easterlies that you told us all about on the other thread, that you spotted at the edge of reality on the T+300gfs and which were supposed to be another strand in the continuation of this pattern change to Easterly domination from last winter.

It was ultimately in FI (but yes, as you say, "the edge of reality" segment of FI; I would agree with you on that) and has thus changed. Your point being... ?

You were so excited about it that you posted 5 gfs charts to illustrate it.

Yes, I was excited about such synoptics showing up on the highly-rated GFS run, even though it was only mired in deepest mid-September, as I need barely spell out the significance of such a synoptic. At the very least it shows us the blocking pattern that we have had so much this year and since February 2005 overall is somewhat still in existence at least as far as one of the major runs (if not more) is concerned.

I'd just like to know where they have gone

Why should I answer such an obvious question; let alone one that I have answered already?

They have changed. It was in FI. Period. You will find this happens with the model runs a lot over the next 6 months (and even the previous 6 for that matter).

and if you are ever going to refer to having ramped them dreadfully and been hopelessly wrong.

Where did I "ramp them up dreadfully"? Where have I been "hopelessly wrong"?

I never "ramped them up dreadfully" - I just pointed them out.

I was never "hopelessly wrong" - we all knew that they were going to change anyway: in fact I believe I even said that they would (and if I didn't on this occasion then you should note that I normally do so and have a good record of doing so on previous occasions).

It was white noise you saw - not reality.

What the hell is this supposed to mean? I saw "white noise"? Yeah, surrre I saw snow (in the East(?)) in mid-September, if that's what you mean. No offence, but if that's what you mean, then you have made a true mistake. Sure, I was "not seeing reality", when I posted on realistic (synoptically, even though it was in FI) runs (backed up by the current overall climatic situation of prevalent blocking out in the Atlantic, as a result of solar minima and other such factors) with realistic conditions with realistic synoptics, not to mention realistic weather, noting also - as I have a valid and viable record of doing - that such runs were likely to change in the future as they normally do, especially in FI (not to mention the rest of the run - just look at yesterday's 06Z and 12Z ensembles for comparisons; I have not yet seen today's as I have come straight into this). And I was "not seeing reality"?

They've gone Damien. T=300+ now shows a zonal Westerly flow. Bet you don't link that to the coming winter.......because it doesn't fit what you are hoping for.

This has been said countless times - some by myself too - over the past 5 or 6 winters since 2001/02. I think Ian Brown maybe even mentioned it in one of the model discussion threads just recently. What is the point in saying it any further? Now, however, that we are still - to all extents and purposes and with reasonable evidence - in a period of some considerable blocking from the west (the Atlantic), to see such model output (not to mention from the GFS!) come up in mid-September, as we head towards winter, and after a period of such extreme and prolonged heat (the record heat in the months of June and July), I am sure you would agree that it was quite a notable run and was surely more than worth a mention in the model discussion thread.

I'm not even gonna start on the relevance of a cooler and wetter September than average to our prospects of a colder than average winter ahead(, never mind one that's intertwined with such undeniable positive synoptics).

I bet you'll wait, again, to ramp something that does, instead of watching carefully and talking about the real possibilities, or normal randomness, of the models that far out.

Then I am sure that these words would apply to everyone on the model discussion thread(s), including those on other forums like TWO and UKWW.

I now dare you to post your argument in one of those said threads.

(Sorry about all the highlighted text, folks - this was a one-off. I hope it wasn't too bad.)

Edited September 5, 2006 by Damien

[John Cox]

Hi Damien,

I'm with you all the way.

With all due respects to Paul "He doth protest too much".

I would not call your posts ramping at all. You are just keeping an eager eye out for all of us who would love some more snow this winter.

The signs are indeed there for a great winter.

[Snowly does it]

The yearly CET has "declined" by about 0.15C over the past three years, however given a measurement error of +/-0.1C then in the great scheme of things it's hardly cause to get excited about a potential reversal in the recent dramatic warming. At this rate it will take about 35 years to get back down to the recent low trend level of the mid 80s. I suspect, at present, the odds would be slightly better on this being a pause in upward movement, rather than the start of a major correction, but it is certainly a glimmer of light for those who hate the prospect of diminishing winter.

agree to be fair, its likely a pause. The point remains though that if lets say this year comes in under and the following year.. well, at least locally it would suggest something I would say. I'll only get excited if it continues the trend down to sub 10 and repeats for a year. Sadly sub 10 looks very out of sight for this year!

Naturally it is also important to distinguish between a possible thing going on here and the global position.

[Dawlish]

Dawlish, with all due to respects to your previous posts, especially those in the "Arctic Ice watch" section, I can't believe I have just sat and dissected this post.

It was ultimately in FI...

Much as I enjoy reading your posts, there is a great deal of hopecasting in them; you tend to filter what you don't wish to see and exaggerate some things that you hope will prove that your wishes may be realised. I'll, bet somewhere, deep down, you still believe that we had a spell of Easterlies forecast in mid September. I wouldn't mind betting that, had I not asked where they had gone, you would refer to that non-forecast, during the winter, especially if the winter is colder than average, to back up your wish that a pattern change is under way.

There were no Easterlies forecast. It really was white noise; random static at T=300+, a numerically produced chart which threw up that pattern on two runs. It was never used in a forecast anywhere, as far as I know. There is a big difference between a long-range gfs chart and a forecast. Now if those Easterlies were to reappear and stick, that's another matter. I'd then be interested.....and it could happen, though the odds are against it, as they are with any random chart event making a reappearance and becoming reality.

There is no statistical evidence that a cooler and wetter September should lead to a ceratin type of winter....and this September is unlikely, as it stands today, to produce that.

I do like your posts Damien, don't get me wrong, but there is so much wishing for particular event to occur, that I feel it is clouding your judgement!

Paul

PS I don't quite get your reference to posts in the Arctic ice-watch section?

PPS I've never posted on TWO and I say nothing different on UKww to what I say on here.

Edited September 5, 2006 by shuggee

[Damien]

agree to be fair, its likely a pause. The point remains though that if lets say this year comes in under and the following year.. well, at least locally it would suggest something I would say. I'll only get excited if it continues the trend down to sub 10 and repeats for a year. Sadly sub 10 looks very out of sight for this year!

Naturally it is also important to distinguish between a possible thing going on here and the global position.

Just out of interest what's this year on course for being so far?

And what's this years current CET when compared again the then-CET for September 5 2005-1999?

Thanks John C. - yes, the signs are there again, but the signs are also "not there" again - ENSO in unfavourable, NAO in purportedly unfavourable, admitted warming trends in North-West Europe (coupled somewhat with NAO and colder conditions in parts of Europe like Central and South-East) are unfavourable, a point I of course made in one of my previous posts.

I have however discovered the other day that that Arctic Oscillation (AO) is favourable for us this year, as it is expected to be westerly-tracking (I think), which means that colder air is more likely to be pushed down into the far North Atlantic as opposed to being lodged up in Greenland and East Siberia. So myself, Steve M. and others can add this to our lists of "positives" - because I know that some of the Metcheck forecasters rate events in the Arctic as highly crucial to what our winter may bring (albeit with questionable success IMHO - as with the January 2005 forecast).

[Snowly does it]

Just out of interest what's this year on course for being so far?

And what's this years current CET when compared again the then-CET for September 5 2005-1999?

At present we are a cumulative 0.9 degrees cooler than at end August last year, meaning that if we got the same Sept, Oct, Nov and Dec, the CET would be about 0.08 celcius lower again.

A cooler October with similar other months (bearing in mind how warm oct was last yeasr) might see a 0.2 drop, but if Sept and Oct are warm we may well nudge up..

[VillagePlank]

Just out of interest what's this year on course for being so far?

And what's this years current CET when compared again the then-CET for September 5 2005-1999?

Thanks John C. - yes, the signs are there again, but the signs are also "not there" again - ENSO in unfavourable, NAO in purportedly unfavourable, admitted warming trends in North-West Europe (coupled somewhat with NAO and colder conditions in parts of Europe like Central and South-East) are unfavourable, a point I of course made in one of my previous posts.

I have however discovered the other day that that Arctic Oscillation (AO) is favourable for us this year, as it is expected to be westerly-tracking (I think), which means that colder air is more likely to be pushed down into the far North Atlantic as opposed to being lodged up in Greenland and East Siberia. So myself, Steve M. and others can add this to our lists of "positives" - because I know that some of the Metcheck forecasters rate events in the Arctic as highly crucial to what our winter may bring (albeit with questionable success IMHO - as with the January 2005 forecast).

Damien,

I've looked at the teleconnections this year and even at this range the forecast looks promising. I think rather than prolonged cold, and it's associative dryness (NAO), it is perhaps better to bet on very cold spells turning (slowly) into weather that comes from long sea-tracks such as anywhere from our W clockwise to our N; this, I believe, would be deliver the 'goodies' for those with a love of snow. The best, synoptically, I guess under this idea is weeks of days of northerlies (Am) followed by shortbursts of Westerlies to deliver the moisture which translates into blocking (omega bridging over Greenland would be good ) followed by autumnish lows breaking through from the GIN.

Hopecasting, for sure, but if this winter coincides with an intermittent shift back to a more W'ly feed, then we could have periods of snow.

This (specious, speculative, and ill-informed) hypothesis of mine concurs nicely with warmer air from all sources, and correlates with current predicted teleconnections, and is the sort of pattern we should be looking for this year - maybe?

Edited September 5, 2006 by Wilson

[The Enforcer]

The yearly CET has "declined" by about 0.15C over the past three years, however given a measurement error of +/-0.1C then in the great scheme of things it's hardly cause to get excited about a potential reversal in the recent dramatic warming. At this rate it will take about 35 years to get back down to the recent low trend level of the mid 80s. I suspect, at present, the odds would be slightly better on this being a pause in upward movement, rather than the start of a major correction, but it is certainly a glimmer of light for those who hate the prospect of diminishing winter.

Moreover using TWS snowiness index, the pattern change/levelling off of CET has not brought any appreciable increase in snowfall:

1996/97 13

1997/98 11

1998/99 16

1999/2000 15

2000/01 22

2001/02 16

2002/03 12

2003/04 17

2004/05 16

2005/06 18

The last snowy winter was 1995/96, which managed a score of 26. If we get a score approaching 30 this winter then these arguments will start to gain some substance.

[summer blizzard]

And what's this years current CET when compared again the then-CET for September 5 2005-1999?

Thanks John C. - yes, the signs are there again, but the signs are also "not there" again - ENSO in unfavourable, NAO in purportedly unfavourable, admitted warming trends in North-West Europe (coupled somewhat with NAO and colder conditions in parts of Europe like Central and South-East) are unfavourable, a point I of course made in one of my previous posts.

I have however discovered the other day that that Arctic Oscillation (AO) is favourable for us this year, as it is expected to be westerly-tracking (I think), which means that colder air is more likely to be pushed down into the far North Atlantic as opposed to being lodged up in Greenland and East Siberia. So myself, Steve M. and others can add this to our lists of "positives" - because I know that some of the Metcheck forecasters rate events in the Arctic as highly crucial to what our winter may bring (albeit with questionable success IMHO - as with the January 2005 forecast).

The current CET compared to the same period from 1997 is:

1997: 11C

1998: 10.9C

1999: 11C

2000: 10.7C

2001: 10.2C

2002: 11.1C

2003: 11.2C

2004: 10.9C

2005: 10.8C

2006: 10.7C

Clear cooling trend since 2003.

As for El Nino, the August value is not available yet however the July value was consistent with a weak El Nino, if we look for other years with a weak El Nino value in July (0.5 to 1), we get the following anologues, i have also added the following winter CET...

2002: 4.7C - 0.2C above average

1994: 5.9C - 1.4C above average

1980: 4.5C - Average

1977: 4.1C - 0.4C below average

1976: 3.3C - 1.2C below average

1958: 3.6C - 0.9C below average

1957: 4.2C - 0.3C below average

1951: 3.9C - 0.6C below average

Interestingly, of those anologues, only 1994 did not feature at least one below average winter month.

1957, 1994 and 2002 featured a moderate El Nino the following winter.

1951, 1976 and 1980 featured a neutral El Nino the following winter.

1977 and 1958 featured a weak El Nino the following winter.

Based on El Nino trends, i think that we can discount 2002, 1980, and 1958 as they all observed falling values in July.

Based on El Nino alone, i would give the following odds...

4 to 1 in vavour of a below average winter

2 to 1 in favour of a close to average but below average winter

2 to 1 in favour of a cold winter (CET below 4C)

4 to 1 against an above average winter

http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/Correlation/mei.data

As for the AO, while it is true that the Polar Vortex is iin the eastern Artic allowing a buildup of cold air in Siberia, i am not convinced that this has any reevance for a cold winter because it will mean nothing if the cold air is not displaced to mid-lattitudes through a negative AO.

One forcer of the AO is the QBO, so i am going to try correlate the QBO anologues for 2006 with the AO value the following winter.

http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/Correlation/qbo.data

http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/Correlation/ao.data

Unfortunately, monthly AO values are only available until 2002, therefore all anologues from 2002 onwards will be discluded.

The QBO anologues for 2006 are:

1995: -0.1 - neutral

1973: 0 - neutral

1971: 0 - neutral

1961: 0.7 - weakly positive

In regards to the anologues, i was looking for a August value between 5 and 10 (weak westerly) and a downward trend from July, i also added in the AO values for the following winter.

From a AO prespective, this is not good news however this may be explained by the QBO values for those winters, those were:

1995: Weakly negative (easterly)

1973: Neutral

1971: Weakly positive (Westerly)

1961: Neutral

Aside from the winter of 1996, all the other three winters were above average however all four winters featured at least one below average winter month.

To my knowledge, a easterly QBO supports a negative AO, while a westerly QBO value supports a positive AO, so i would favour a neutral AO this winter, it is also believed by some people that El Nino also favours a positive AO, depite favouring a positive PNA.

My conclusions from this reasearch is that at least one below average winter month is favoured although winter as a whole could turn out above or below average.