The other day Discovery News was talking about bombogenisis and the bomb cyclone.
I’m guilty of it, but it always makes me chuckle when people fret and fuss about going to school or work because it’s kinda dangerous out there, and the minute school and work get called off everyone is out plowing through snow drifts to get to the party.
When I was a kid, a local weatherman would talk about a"Trough aloft" that would let the jet stream move to the south and bring cold weather to Arkansas. 
That isn’t true, on every level. The scientific term is circumpolar vortex, which refers to the constant circular flow of winds around the poles of the planet. Definition of polar vortex.
They have always existed, as far as we know. The one around Antarctica is much larger and stronger, and quite another subject. The polar vortex commonly means the north polar circumpolar flow, and is the subject of much research, and both terms have been used since the 1940s. Here is a NASA page about itfrom 2010.
The popular media introduced the term again during the extreme winter of 2013, but if you were old you would remember it being used during the brutal winters back in the 1970s, when it was used to explain why the winters were so unusual, though the correct term circumpolar vortex was used then. Link to Time article using the term. Note that the reason for the extreme outbreaks of arctic air was thought to be global cooling.
The terminology is sort of new, as is the reasoning to explain it. Previous extreme outbreaks of very cold arctic air descending were attributed to the arctic being very cold. Now it is blamed on the arctic being very warm. There is a lot of research on the circumpolar vortex.
Once again, the terms are not new at all.
here is an article about the polar vortex which includes the winter of 1977, a winter that makes the last two US winters look like a sunny day at the beach. (haha just kidding)
here is another article about the PV
Here is a book talking about the polar vortex of 1979.
No thanks. It’s now a english word. We pluralize those by adding a “s”. Anything else is either pretentious or confusing or both. Like “octopi” which is wrong on several fronts.
It helps a lot to mislabel a thing a “polar vortex” when it’s not. E.g., the cold blast in the US this week isn’t but is frequently called one. That certainly ups the occurence of the name.
Similarly, a “Chinook wind” is a warm, wet southerly winter wind that comes off the Pacific on the PNW coast. It’s been taken over as a term for a dry, warming wind (i.e., a foehn wind) coming down off the east slope of the Rockies now. So the people in Denver never used to hear about a Chinook wind, but now they get them all the time.
At any rate, “vortexs” is incorrect. If you do not like “vortices,” try “vortexes,”
Exactly.
What’s the plural of “mouse”?
Except, interestingly, on the front of “everyone understanding what you meant” 
Müesli.
You cant figure out octopuses? 
For that one, I think you can blame the Canadians. They’ve been calling the foehn winds in Alberta by the name of Chinook for a long time. Looks like the term has moved south.
Its hard enough to figure out one, let alone EIGHT!
Aaaargh! You mean “blue norther”.
The fuss over “polar vortex” mirrors the crapola over “El Nino/Nina”, as if these cyclic changes were brand new.
We’ve had downsurges of cold air from the Arctic/Canada for a very long time in the U.S. Places in the upper South have had to deal with unusually low winter temperatures on a semi-regular basis, at least every dozen years or so (for example, when I lived in Kentucky some years ago we hit -20F, which is a bit colder than usual. :))
In addition to being hailed (falsely) as proof of climate change (remember, every unusual weather event is due to climate change :dubious:), media hyping of the “polar vortex” is part of the general wussification of our culture. A wire service article on the current cold snap breathlessly noted the fact that snow had fallen in Minnesota (in November!!!*) and that it was accompanied by sleet (with its pellets “stinging the exposed skin” of hapless pedestrians). It is enough to make one cry in sympathy, or would have if we hadn’t had a brief bout of sleet in my neck of the woods a month ago, no doubt prompting the Ohio National Guard to be called out to rescue civilians caught in it.
*snow this time of year in Minnesota has got to be a virtually annual event. But acknowledging that doesn’t sell papers or drive website traffic.
I think that got co-opted by the gum people. Hard to drum up fear over saying it’s going to be wintery fresh outside tomorrow.
Know what would be awesome? A polar bear vortex. Someone pitch that to Syfy.
Haven’t noticed any difference on that where we are.
Sharknado III: Polar Bear Vortex?
Sure, why not.
No, read the quote:
This means everyone understands what you mean if you say “octopi”
I don’t see how you can parse it to think it means “no one understands what you mean when you say octopodes”