I wouldn't mind betting there is quite an interesting periodicity in
all this when the relevant interactive effects are plotted in. One
that will show that rather than cyclones progressing toward the North
Pole, they move up and down like blobs in a lava lamp.

Difficult to prove of coourse. And it doesn't help that synoptic
charts for Asia are missing Russian and Chinese resources. If I could
find them I recon I'd be home and dry inside a year.

Certain basics still apply no matter how much spin the various low
Pressure areas impart to the overall model. Nor how much the various
blocking Highs detract from the rotation.

In fact I think it might be the way these extra powerful storms or
unusually large, deep highs behaves that allows the timing of these
overall cycles to be plotted overall as cycles.

There always seems to be this movement of cyclonic weather west to
east over the USA at lunar phase times like these, for example.

And then there comes the blocking high as regions of High pressure
that tend to occur with them in the centre of the continent are
prevented from leaving to join the Bermuda High. These instead go
north to the channel called the Davis Straight and build over
Greenland.

Since the tendency is then not very low Los in the North Atlantic, why
don't they go into the Arctic?

Or is the fact they ARE blocking Highs the reason that the Lows are
not that low?

Whatever the principle thew factual is that the blocking high extends
down to something Liek 40 to 30 North eventually and sooner or later
there is a Low parcel that breaks through at the 60 to 70 th parallel.

It's always the same way. Probably there is always the same
geophenomena too such as snow in Britain -which would explain its
rarity and presence occasionally in summer.

And volcanic eruptions which would explain the coincidence with Lows
of 1000 1010 when such eruptions occur. (If I am right. I notice that
I have attracted fleas to my once more. They seem to love to join in
when things get vicious. Serves me right for casual caustic
irrelevances I suppose.)

But if I am wrong, these same detractors should be able to do my
research for me should they not. And thus have real dirt to enlighten
me with.

I suppose I aught to pull my finger out and do it myself. But I only
do this sort of thing for pleasure. I don't like the paperwork
involved. I don't wish to prove me correct.

I prefer to just wait and see. I am a thaumaturge. If I was a
meteorologist or a geologist I would feel constrained to dig a little
deeper. And I would expect to get paid for it. Things take on a new
light when you have to turn up to work every day and find things to do
so that people will give you money.

The onus isn't there when you sit at home pointing out the obvious and
attempt to string it all together. But then what are enemies for if
not to judge you?

Let them do it if it is possible. And if I am right, keep silent on
that matter.