i have made many arguments in this space rejecting the theory that ssws are caused by "planetary waves" moving upwards. this theory is not permitted by thermodynamics. energy should only move downwards. for that reason, i hold to an alternate cause for ssws, namely solar effects in conjunction with the greenhouse effect. this isn't completely relevant, immediately speaking. i'm just being transparent - i don't accept the theory, here, i think it's wrong.
i do accept the data and i have been to his site many times. he puts a lot of effort into what he does. i want to focus my critique on generating bounds around his modelling, and reinterpreting it.
his models are actually projecting no polar vortex formation this year and he's having difficulty working that out, conceptually, or articulating it. that's what i see in his presentation - 2026/2027 is the first year with no polar vortex on record. it could come back next year. maybe. he's connected the yearly break up of the polar vortex to bursts of cold air but what he's describing is that not happening.
the temperature in banff right now is not polar vortex cold, not at that latitude or that altitude. polar vortex cold in banff is much, much colder than that. it's a little cooler than seasonal, but if that's the coldest we've got for the year, and there's not going to be a strengthening, or a subsequent collapse, it could mean we could get through the year without substantive bursts of cold air at all.
this would not be caused by el nino. at all. this would be 100% greenhouse gasses and an apparent tipping point sneaking up on us.
it could come back next year but it will still be quite concerning if the polar vortex is unable to organize this polar night. i think that would be a first that we know of.