Meteorology is at last recognising teleconnections. But only across oceans; nothing likely to account for the relationship of weather and earthquakes and volcanoes in the next 2 or 3 years.
Not that there is any safety in the self congratulatory smugness of Linux. Heartbleeding our activities has seen to that. There is no excuse for smugness. It is a ceiling that has beset scientific research through the ages. One only has to remember Kopernik and Galileo trying to crash their systems into reality to see how pervasive a daft idea can be.
Some poor buggers even managed to get the heads of Christian churches to murder them for producing… of all things: bibles!
What you can see straight away on the SED list (and it goes back several years -300 quakes at a time at the mere click of a button) is the activity of tropical storms and volcanoes mitigate the magnitudes of and the number of earthquakes reported.
Whenever there is an absence of Magnitude 6 earthquakes take a more than cursory look at the list. If there are no (or very few) M.5s then you must go to this site:
There are a number of good volcano reporting sites. This is as good as the best of the rest as far as I know. I’d rather use a News search but to get to the meat that means using Google News. Not HTTPS_Start Page nor DuckDuck Go; they are anonymous but so bland you will end up getting all sorts of news in all sorts of languages. There are reasons for shaped searches. (It’s just despicable that Google wants to be god. (And I don’t want to be caught by the curlies when the inevitable reaction gets equal and opposite.))
The other one to watch are actually a number of sites. I will show you them (in no particular order.) I have them set to open in this order so I can close some of them immediately I have seen them and thus have less clutter in my tabs:
http://www.disaster-report.com/ Hardly the first past the post with news but a good back-up
http://www.spc.noaa.gov/climo/reports/today.html A click of a button takes you back one day at a time.
This is a chart worth saving as there is quite a lot of background to the formation of tornadoes that should be described but is largely ignored by meteorologists. I will detail some of it later.
http://parsonsweather.com/wxtropical.php I have just discovered this site. Not sure I will keep it in my first choice.
I was searching for charts showing how Amanda changed into Boris and how Boris is going to get into the North Atlantic in a day or so. The charts are actually from Weather Underground and caused me to open a blog on there. I will explain that on a different thread. Later. (Very much later.)
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/cyclones/?atlc This one for obvious reasons. It opens in the Pacific first for me.
http://www.opc.ncep.noaa.gov/Loops/?select1=Unified%20Surface%20Analysis&select2=UA_Entire&select3=3&select4=normal&select6=Script Annoying titles to the charts means they are difficult to save in sequence.
http://www.usno.navy.mil/NOOC/nmfc-ph/RSS/jtwc/ab/abiosair.jpg http://www.usno.navy.mil/NOOC/nmfc-ph/RSS/jtwc/ab/abpwsair.jpg These two are from the Joint Typhoon Warning Centre
The JTWC is the US military’s warning system for tropical storms outside North American waters. Not a part of the World Meteorological Organisation’s network (that job belongs to NOAA) damned great site though, overall.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/europe/surface_pressure.html It may miss tornado set-ups OPC catches.
Both the US and the British versions catch most tele-connection issues. At the time of writing, the large cyclone forecast in both sites is showing that a tropical storm of short duration is pending. The Met Office one has useful frontal systems for forecasting volcanic activity.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/europe/surface_pressure.html There is another link I should follow:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/public/weather/surface-pressure/#?tab=surfacePressureColour&fcTime=1401969600 all the more so in light of the occasional correction the first one carries as is available for perusal on the t+48 hour forecast on the former on this day 6 June 2014 (not sure about the latter -I never look at it.)
http://www.opc.ncep.noaa.gov/Loops/ The US analyses of the North Atlantic and North Pacific can be found here.
I generaly tend to ignore these as they are a pain to collect despite the fact the Pacific one (in particular) is extremely informative. I’m always pleasantly surprised with them when I do go for them though. (Of which more later.)
http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/charts/viewer/index.shtml?type=mslp-precip&tz=UTC&area=SH&model=G&chartSubmit=Refresh+View An amazing amount of information on this one.
The BoM chart is composed with very little “good old-fashioned” data and almost no human conflict to the computer models used. The disposition and tone as well as the distance from the Antarctic shore of the cyclones reveal the likelihood of earthquakes of large magnitude and/or tornado -volcanic activity. The various other “set-outs” of the isobar arrangements tell the general set-up of systems in the northern hemisphere (large cyclonic and anticyclonic or small cyclonic and anticyclonic systems) tropical storms and the likelihood of blocking highs.
http://weather.gc.ca/ensemble/naefs/cartes_e.html The North American forecast.
This is composed of data from Mexico, USA and Canada. The charts are a composite of spaghetti. The system uses many varieties of models and many iterations of the composites. All overlaid one on top of the other they resemble a plate of spaghetti.
I don’t know how they sort them out but the way that Low systems are arranged on the final product (and occasionally the Highs) indicate that there will be large earthquakes if only one chart shows the set-up. At the moment and for the greater part of this spell there are three lows in a row. Several such charts indicate a lot of volcanic activity. Intense activity!
One such chart alone, or one like it composed of highs, indicate a large magnitude earthquake.
I could write a book on all this and dedicate an whole chapter to each of the above sites and still need to cross reference their charts to cover information I’d leave out -or forget.