Occasional Thoughts on Climate Change

[bluewave]

1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said:

https://phys.org/news/2024-06-extreme-summer-climate-weather.html

You know... just an extending comment on this article above.   I was particularly intrigued by this statement/excerpt,

"... Very large and strong heat domes, like the Northeast event—which reached higher into the atmosphere than any previous June event— "

I was suspecting that this was true - relative to climate.  We've seen excessive ridge heights tower to nearly 600 dam in the past, but not prior to July.  Certainly ... not to 40 N.  I hadn't bothered to find any sources that keep track of that metric, historically.  This article indirectly makes the comparison/assertion. 

But what makes this interesting is that in the case of June 2024, this heat dome did not appear to receive an inject of elevated kinetic air layer from the west.   I've referred to these type of phenomenon as "Sonoran heat release" - a geographical region that is perhaps more usefulness as an identifier. Probably just southwest heat release would be more precise. ... anyway,  there is an all but codified hallmarked synoptic evolution that transpires, leading to a release event.

+PNA traps air in the SW that is subjected to very high daily insolation. We can get a feel for this by looping WV imagery on satellite, during the +PNA mode, and noting the anticyclonic motion to the atmosphere over that region of the continent.  

Changes upstream in the Pacific than send a d(index) significant enough to alter the signature over the downstream continental mid latitudes, effectively bringing a heights falls toward the west coast --> dislodging the erstwhile trapped ultra hot air layers and sending them down stream. 

If/when that happens and the NAO is entering or is in a stasis +NAO ( rising escape latitudes of the westerlies, as well as tending to make the flow zonal through the Canadian Maritime ),  the combination of these hemispheric scaled changes teleconnects to geopotential ridge eruption over the eastern mid latitude continent.  

We saw this series leading the June 2024 heat wave, but interestingly ... there wasn't a very highly charged air mass available from the SW in this case.  Idiosyncratically, there was an early quasi monsoonal response taking place during the 'ejection phase', and this interfered with daily clouds and convection over the source region in keeping the 850 mb ~ lower.  

It's really the difference between the more common 97 type high temperature results in June 2024, versus "hot Saturday" in 1975, or the July 2011. 

This historically hot ridge ( or "dome" ), really left about 5 to 7 pesos on the field... Notwithstanding, the attribution aspects with CC were never really tested (imho) with the June 2024 event. A perhaps limited "syntergistic heat wave" is what really took place from the TV to NE regions.  Simplest conclusion, it could have been hotter!  Not only that, there is an identifiable series in the pathway to making that happen that appeared to be missing.

The northeast is very fortunate that we haven’t seen a warm season ridging event yet reach the magnitude above all previous seasonal climatology as 2-20-18 did when parts of the Northeast reached 80° for the first time in winter. This was a full 4°-5° degrees warmer than any previous winter day. Such a jump above past summer warmth would result in areas of the Northeast reaching or exceeding 110°. The Pacific Northwest heatwave of a few years ago exceeded their previous all-time highs by around 5° to 8°. So while we have seen numerous warm season heat and 500mb records in recent years, they have paled in comparison to what has happened during the cold season in the past decade. December 2015 going +13.3° in portions of the Northeast was one of the most extreme cold season departures relative to past climatology experienced anywhere in the U.S. That December finished around 50° near NYC which was warmer than many Novembers have been at around the 15th warmest November. We have had 9 warmer than average to record warm winters in a row. While the summers have been impressive also, it has been 7 out of 9 above normal to record warm. 

 

 

[bdgwx]

The NBM forecasts for portions of California look potentially historic. It shows Redding, CA with a 30% chance of hitting an all time record high of 120 F on Saturday. The previous record is 118 F.

 

[ChescoWx]

Here in the Philly burbs of Chester County PA only good for 15th warmest June since 1893. More interesting is 13 of the 20 (yellow highlights) warmest June's occurred prior to 1980. Back before our current warmer cycle....

[chubbs]

On 6/30/2024 at 12:36 PM, donsutherland1 said:

The regression analysis I ran also showed a clear bias at Phoenixville relative to nearby sites. The 1915-48 period there is unreliable. I am strongly confident that Phoenixville never got close to 44 95° days.

I've looked at a couple of the individual months, July 1934 shown below. In addition to an overall warm afternoon bias. Phoenixville also must have flipped the max/min thermometer in the late afternoon, allowing hot days to be double counted. When the weather tuned cooler, Phoenixville often missed or lagged the cooling observed at other sites. Note that the difference vs neighboring sites was largest on the coolest days. A good illustration of time of day bias.

Despite the obvious warm season bias at Phoenixville in the mid-20'th Century, this June was the 6'th warmest ever at Phoenixville and, as shown below, the year to-date is running #2 behind 2012. Strong evidence that Phoenixville (and Chester County) is warmer now than the 20'th century.

[TheClimateChanger]

 

[TheClimateChanger]

1 hour ago, chubbs said:

I've looked at a couple of the individual months, July 1934 shown below. In addition to an overall warm afternoon bias. Phoenixville also must have flipped the max/min thermometer in the late afternoon, allowing hot days to be double counted. When the weather tuned cooler, Phoenixville often missed or lagged the cooling observed at other sites. Note that thr difference vs neighboring sites was largest on the coolest days. A good illustration of time of day bias.

Despite the obvious warm season bias at Phoenixville in the mid-20'th Century, this June was the 6'th warmest ever at Phoenixville and, as shown below, the year to-date is running #2 behind 2012. Strong evidence that Phoenixville (and Chester County) is warmer now than the 20'th century.

It looks like they reset at 4 pm, so yes they would have been double counting many high temperatures. That’s near peak heating. I thought these were standard time, but it looks like it was 4 pm eastern daylight saving time.

[TheClimateChanger]

3 hours ago, chubbs said:

I've looked at a couple of the individual months, July 1934 shown below. In addition to an overall warm afternoon bias. Phoenixville also must have flipped the max/min thermometer in the late afternoon, allowing hot days to be double counted. When the weather tuned cooler, Phoenixville often missed or lagged the cooling observed at other sites. Note that the difference vs neighboring sites was largest on the coolest days. A good illustration of time of day bias.

Despite the obvious warm season bias at Phoenixville in the mid-20'th Century, this June was the 6'th warmest ever at Phoenixville and, as shown below, the year to-date is running #2 behind 2012. Strong evidence that Phoenixville (and Chester County) is warmer now than the 20'th century.

You can really see the impact of TOBs on the 8th. This looks at high temperatures on a few of the days with a big discrepancy. TOBs also impacts low temperatures because you lose midnight lows, which are surprisingly common in the summertime due to cool fronts and evening showers & thunderstorms. While @ChescoWxclaims there's no impact from TOBs, this is obvious BS. His analysis was at 8 pm [standard, daylight?], whereas some stations like Phoenixville were taking daily observations as early as 4 pm daylight time. As you can see, errors can be high as 20F (or more) on the daily maximum temperature. A single error of 20F would add about 0.6 to 0.7F to the mean maximum temperature.

 

The high on the 7th was reported to be 102F, with a 4pm observation of 97F. The high on the 8th was 97F - obviously registered the previous day at 4 pm. But the 4 pm temperature on the 8th was 75F. This temperature was not a rain-cooled reading. Rain fell from 8 pm to 9:45 pm, and from 11:20 pm to 1 am., likely associated with a cold frontal passage the night prior. As such, the actual high on the 8th was likely in the mid to upper 70s, perhaps near 80. This would jive well with @chubbsgraphic, which shows that all of the neighboring stations were in the mid 70s that day. 

Looking at your graphic, the 22nd and 23rd depart significantly from the surrounding sites. We can see TOBs impacting that on both days.

The high on the 21st was reportedly 101F, with a 4 pm observation of 100F. The high on the 22nd was reported as 101F, with a 4 pm observation of 92F. Skies were clear. Most likely, the mercury ticked back up a degree after the 4 pm observation on the 21st, and the high on the 22nd was in the mid 90s. We can see neighboring locations ranged from the mid 80s to low 90s.

Same story on the 23rd. The high was 93F, but at 4 pm, it was just 85F with clear skies all day. Likely the 93F occurred the day prior shortly after the 4 pm observation, and the actual high was in the mid to upper 80s. Neighboring sites were all in the mid 80s that day.

 

 

[TheClimateChanger]

20 minutes ago, TheClimateChanger said:

You can really see the impact of TOBs on the 8th. This looks at high temperatures on a few of the days with a big discrepancy. TOBs also impacts low temperatures because you lose midnight lows, which are surprisingly common in the summertime due to cool fronts and evening showers & thunderstorms. While @ChescoWxclaims there's no impact from TOBs, this is obvious BS. His analysis was at 8 pm [standard, daylight?], whereas some stations like Phoenixville were taking daily observations as early as 4 pm daylight time. As you can see, errors can be high as 20F (or more) on the daily maximum temperature. A single error of 20F would add about 0.6 to 0.7F to the mean maximum temperature.

 

The high on the 7th was reported to be 102F, with a 4pm observation of 97F. The high on the 8th was 97F - obviously registered the previous day at 4 pm. But the 4 pm temperature on the 8th was 75F. This temperature was not a rain-cooled reading. Rain fell from 8 pm to 9:45 pm, and from 11:20 pm to 1 am., likely associated with a cold frontal passage the night prior. As such, the actual high on the 8th was likely in the mid to upper 70s, perhaps near 80. This would jive well with @chubbsgraphic, which shows that all of the neighboring stations were in the mid 70s that day. 

Looking at your graphic, the 22nd and 23rd depart significantly from the surrounding sites. We can see TOBs impacting that on both days.

The high on the 21st was reportedly 101F, with a 4 pm observation of 100F. The high on the 22nd was reported as 101F, with a 4 pm observation of 92F. Skies were clear. Most likely, the mercury ticked back up a degree after the 4 pm observation on the 21st, and the high on the 22nd was in the mid 90s. We can see neighboring locations ranged from the mid 80s to low 90s.

Same story on the 23rd. The high was 93F, but at 4 pm, it was just 85F with clear skies all day. Likely the 93F occurred the day prior shortly after the 4 pm observation, and the actual high was in the mid to upper 80s. Neighboring sites were all in the mid 80s that day.

 

 

Honestly, if I'm doing climate forensics here, the data @chubbsposted looks like a solar heating problem, not a miscalibration. If the thermometer was simply reading too high, you'd expect it to be pretty consistent, but there was a stretch from about the 9th through 16th where it was largely in line with its neighbors. This was a very wet period. Although the cloud cover reported by the observer was mostly clear on the majority of those days, you can tell he was very lenient. Because several of the "clear" days had rainfall near or over 1 inch, with hours long thundershowers.

Probably poor siting impacted by radiant heat from a nearby building or surface and/or poor maintenance of the shelter allowing filtered sun to reach the thermometer. Previous research by Anthony Watts has shown that even failing to maintain the whitewash paint can cause a not insignificant warm bias by allowing the shelter housing itself to radiate heat to the thermometer. Needless to say modern automated stations are definitely superior.

[chubbs]

36 minutes ago, TheClimateChanger said:

Honestly, if I'm doing climate forensics here, the data @chubbsposted looks like a solar heating problem, not a miscalibration. If the thermometer was simply reading too high, you'd expect it to be pretty consistent, but there was a stretch from about the 9th through 16th where it was largely in line with its neighbors. This was a very wet period. Although the cloud cover reported by the observer was mostly clear on the majority of those days, you can tell he was very lenient. Because several of the "clear" days had rainfall near or over 1 inch, with hours long thundershowers.

Probably poor siting impacted by radiant heat from a nearby building or surface and/or poor maintenance of the shelter allowing filtered sun to reach the thermometer. Previous research by Anthony Watts has shown that even failing to maintain the whitewash paint can cause a not insignificant warm bias by allowing the shelter housing itself to radiate heat to the thermometer. Needless to say modern automated stations are definitely superior.

Agree, probably shelter-related. Easy with a non-aspirated thermometer. The whole region gets the same day-to-day weather so there's a wealth of information in the coop data that's revealed by inter-comparing sites. Been telling Chesco that for years.

[ChescoWx]

41 minutes ago, chubbs said:

Agree, probably shelter-related. Easy with a non-aspirated thermometer. The whole region gets the same day-to-day weather so there's a wealth of information in the coop data that's revealed by inter-comparing sites. Been telling Chesco that for years.

So, I went back and looked at the time of observation temps for July 1934 and only on 1 day the 8th during the entire month was their an issue. In fact in all other 30 days the high temp the following day was higher than the 4pm observation reset. There was no TOBs impacting either the 22nd or 23rd as the high temp on those days was higher than the 4pm reading the previous day. So overall TOBs as we can clearly see had a relatively minor impact on the overall Chester County average temps in July 1934

[TheClimateChanger]

9 minutes ago, ChescoWx said:

So, I went back and looked at the time of observation temps for July 1934 and only on 1 day the 8th during the entire month was their an issue. In fact in all other 30 days the high temp the following day was higher than the 4pm observation reset. There was no TOBs impacting either the 22nd or 23rd as the high temp on those days was higher than the 4pm reading the previous day. So overall TOBs as we can clearly see had a relatively minor impact on the overall Chester County average temps in July 1934

The temperature can rise after 4 pm, you know? The high on both of those days was 1F higher than the reset, whereas the 4 pm observation the day of the reading was several degrees lower without any rain. 4 pm is near peak heating. It is not uncommon at all for the temperature to rise at some point after 4 pm particularly if there is varying cloud cover.

Moreover, at 1F, it could have been the same reading just rounded in different directions. If it was in between 92 and 93, he may have called it 92 and then looked at it the next day and called it 93. These were being read off a mercury thermometer. Or it could have been just slightly higher than 92, warmed even a couple of tenths, exceeding 92.5F and then called 93 when read the following day. Either way, it is not at all uncommon for temperatures to vary by a few tenths or even a degree or so after 4 pm. Including only days when the temperature was exactly the same as the reported reset temperature is not a reasonable assumption in this case.

 

[ChescoWx]

17 minutes ago, TheClimateChanger said:

The temperature can rise after 4 pm, you know? The high on both of those days was 1F higher than the reset, whereas the 4 pm observation the day of the reading was several degrees lower without any rain. 4 pm is near peak heating. It is not uncommon at all for the temperature to rise at some point after 4 pm particularly if there is varying cloud cover.

Moreover, at 1F, it could have been the same reading just rounded in different directions. If it was in between 92 and 93, he may have called it 92 and then looked at it the next day and called it 93. These were being read off a mercury thermometer. Or it could have been just slightly higher than 92, warmed even a couple of tenths, exceeding 92.5F and then called 93 when read the following day. Either way, it is not at all uncommon for temperatures to vary by a few tenths or even a degree or so after 4 pm. Including only days when the temperature was exactly the same as the reported reset temperature is not a reasonable assumption in this case.

 

Certainly possible but not proven by the written observation evidence we have....a non-issue

 

[TheClimateChanger]

1 hour ago, chubbs said:

Agree, probably shelter-related. Easy with a non-aspirated thermometer. The whole region gets the same day-to-day weather so there's a wealth of information in the coop data that's revealed by inter-comparing sites. Been telling Chesco that for years.

I always cringe when they trot out these old state records that make no climatological sense. Today, we have to analyze every record with a fine tooth comb, but take everything in the past as absolute fact - even when it's completely out of line with all other stations. I always find it funny how these EXTREME temperatures always avoided the WBAN sites [weather bureau, army, navy] that would have been especially well maintained, despite the fact that many of the WBAN sites were in center cities and on biased rooftops.

111F on July 9 and 10th, 1936 at Phoenixville, but 103F on both dates at Harrisburg [WBAN] and 103F and 104F at Philadelphia [WBAN].  103F & 105F at West Chester. 

Someone might object and say "oh, well it was 110F at Corry on July 14, 1936." That temperature is so ridiculous and off, I bet the observer [a local fire hall] just made it up for clout and to try to get a mention in the local media. Corry should be one of the coldest locations in the state... the town is situated at about 1400 feet, with 1700 feet plus hills just off to the east, in the far northwest corner just downwind of Lake Erie.

The nearest stations had highs that day of: 92, Erie WB; 98, Titusville; 98, Warren; 95, at Jamestown, NY. 

The "112F" state record at Martinsburg on July 11, 1936. It was 98F at Hagerstown, Maryland, no more than 20 miles away, on the same date.

Nonetheless, always trotted out to minimize climate change and fool the people. Don't get me wrong, the 1936 heat wave was insanely hot with widespread temperatures in the upper 90s and low to mid 100s. But a lot of these crazy high records from that era are certainly questionable.

[TheClimateChanger]

 

[TheClimateChanger]

20 minutes ago, ChescoWx said:

Certainly possible but not proven by the written observation evidence we have....a non-issue

 

The overall impact can be proven. Even Judith Curry addressed it in a guest post by Zeke Hausfather, who analyzed all USCRN [climate reference network, i.e. the top tier sites] between 2004 & 2014 to determine the impact by starting the "climate day" at different hours relative to midnight to midnight. It's not like they just pulled it out of a hat.

Understanding Time of Observation Bias | Climate Etc. (judithcurry.com)

[bdgwx]

Relevant to the discussion is [Vose et al. 2003] which found that TOB is a significant problem. For example, 4pm and 6am observation times translate into +0.6 C and -0.4 C biases in the US average temperature. So as stations move from PM to AM observations gradually the TOB can effectively cancel 1.0 C of warming making it appear as a zero trend.

[bdgwx]

25 minutes ago, ChescoWx said:

Certainly possible but not proven by the written observation evidence we have....a non-issue

 

9 minutes ago, TheClimateChanger said:

The overall impact can be proven. Even Judith Curry addressed it in a guest post by Zeke Hausfather, who analyzed all USCRN [climate reference network, i.e. the top tier sites] between 2004 & 2014 to determine the impact by starting the "climate day" at different hours relative to midnight to midnight. It's not like they just pulled it out a hat.

Understanding Time of Observation Bias | Climate Etc. (judithcurry.com)

TheClimateChanger beat me to the punch. It is interesting that Hausfather's analysis matches Vose et al. 2003's analysis almost exactly. That is a change from 4pm to 6am observations equates to the cancellation of 1.0 C worth of potential warming. Clearly this is anything but a non-issue.

[ChescoWx]

What about Coatesville's obs time in July of 1934 at 8am and 8pm?

[ChescoWx]

5 minutes ago, bdgwx said:

You beat me to the punch. It is interesting that Hausfather's analysis matches Vose et al. 2003's analysis almost exactly. That is a change from 4pm to 6am observations equates to the cancellation of 1.0 C worth of potential warming. Clearly this is anything but a non-issue.

grasping at straws....no proof just assumptions without data

[ChescoWx]

Credit and reference to Chris Martz for his 10 questions for the many climate doomers in this forum: Can you answer all of them??

➊ To the nearest tenth of a degree Celsius, what is the “correct” global mean surface temperature (GMST)?

➋ What does a “perfect” climate look like? If so, when did we have one and what was it like? Usually, activists will say “pre-industrial.” But, why?

➌ What is the “correct” amount of bad weather? How many tropical cyclones, tornadoes, thunderstorms, hailstorms, droughts, floods, heatwaves, cold waves and wildfires should there be per year globally? Please provide exact numbers and then explain why.

➍ Why do you think temperature departures from the 1850 climatic baseline mean is the sole metric which determines human welfare? Why would the climate of the Little Ice Age be preferable than today's climate? What was better about the climate in 1850 than that of 2024? Is today's climate too dangerous? If so, why? Provide data and evidence to support your reasoning.

➎ What is the “correct” atmospheric carbon dioxide level? What dry-air volume or a range of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations would be optimal for plant growth? Show me data and explain why.

➏ The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) was popularized as the biggest piece of climate legislation in history. But, since it was signed into law, climate activists say climate change has only gotten worse. Why?

➐ Trillions of taxpayer dollars have been spent on so-called “climate action” over the past 35-years. When will that give us that perfect climate, and when it does how will we know? What measure?

➑ If the U.S. spends hundreds of trillions of dollars to decarbonize our economy to achieve “net zero” by the year 2050, then how much will it reduce GMST by the year 2100, assuming the climate models are accurate? Please round your answer to the nearest tenth of a degree Celsius and show your math!

➒ If you can't provide me with an answer to question eight, then here's my follow-up: If you don't know how much net zero emissions in the U.S. would reduce GMST by 2100, are we supposed to just spend all that money and see what happens?

➊⓿ Why do efforts to mitigate exclusively center on reducing carbon emissions, and ignore more effective strategies such as building weather-resilient infrastructure and enforcing stricter zoning codes?

Nobody has ever answered these questions, at least not in a clear and concise manner.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[TheClimateChanger]

I think it might work on Mobile - not sure if it’s still messed up on the PC. Anyways, those are a bunch of straw men questions. I have never said the climate of 1850 is superior or preferable. And rarely if ever address those political questions about addressing the issue. I usually just post statistics to track and compare changes in the climate over time. It seems simply stating or discussing data about climate change makes one an “alarmist” or “doomer” in your opinion.

But to answer your questions… in some ways, climate change has probably been beneficial to an extent. But it does seem like with the recent increases in wildfires, floods, and other extreme weather events, we may be pushing that boundary. Of far greater concern is future warming which, if nothing is done to address the causes, could be of a magnitude far greater than the warming experienced to date.

[donsutherland1]

1 hour ago, TheClimateChanger said:

I think it might work on Mobile - not sure if it’s still messed up on the PC. Anyways, those are a bunch of straw men questions. I have never said the climate of 1850 is superior or preferable. And rarely if ever address those political questions about addressing the issue. I usually just post statistics to track and compare changes in the climate over time. It seems simply stating or discussing data about climate change makes one an “alarmist” or “doomer” in your opinion.

But to answer your questions… in some ways, climate change has probably been beneficial to an extent. But it does seem like with the recent increases in wildfires, floods, and other extreme weather events, we may be pushing that boundary. Of far greater concern is future warming which, if nothing is done to address the causes, could be of a magnitude far greater than the warming experienced to date.

It’s only working on my phone.

[bluewave]

That 111° record at Phoenixville in July 1936 looks like another obvious error which wasn’t corrected. There has never been another instance of Phoenixville running 7° warmer than Philadelphia during a July heatwave with Philadelphia reaching 101° or higher. All other occasions of Philadelphia reaching 101° in July when Phoenixville temperatures were also available were within a 0 to 3° difference.

July…1966

Philadelphia…104°

Phoenixville…104°

July….1936

Philadelphia……104°

Phoenixville…....111°

July….2010

Philadelphia….103°

Phoenixville…..103°

July……1995

Philadelphia…..103°

Phoenixville…..100°

July……1930

Philadelphia…..103°

Phoenixville…..106°

July…..1988

Philadelphia……102°

Phoenixville……99°

July…..1954

Philadelphia….102°

Phoenixville…..104°

July…….1917

Philadelphia…..101°

Phoenixville……99°

 

[donsutherland1]

21 minutes ago, bluewave said:

That 111° record at Phoenixville in July 1936 looks like another obvious error which wasn’t corrected. There has never been another instance of Phoenixville running 7° warmer than Philadelphia during a July heatwave with Philadelphia reaching 101° or higher. All other occasions of Philadelphia reaching 101° in July when Phoenixville temperatures were also available were within a 0 to 3° difference.

July…1966

Philadelphia…104°

Phoenixville…104°

July….1936

Philadelphia……104°

Phoenixville…....111°

July….2010

Philadelphia….103°

Phoenixville…..103°

July……1995

Philadelphia…..103°

Phoenixville…..100°

July……1930

Philadelphia…..103°

Phoenixville…..106°

July…..1988

Philadelphia……102°

Phoenixville……99°

July…..1954

Philadelphia….102°

Phoenixville…..104°

July…….1917

Philadelphia…..101°

Phoenixville……99°

 

I agree. Even worse, that incorrect reading is recognized as the state record.

[chubbs]

On 7/2/2024 at 11:58 AM, bdgwx said:

Relevant to the discussion is [Vose et al. 2003] which found that TOB is a significant problem. For example, 4pm and 6am observation times translate into +0.6 C and -0.4 C biases in the US average temperature. So as stations move from PM to AM observations gradually the TOB can effectively cancel 1.0 C of warming making it appear as a zero trend.

This blog has a nice chart which shows how the daily average temperature changes as the obs time changes. Its based on several years of data at Boulder, CO. The chart is fully consistent with Vose et.al.

https://moyhu.blogspot.com/2014/07/tobs-pictured.html

[ChescoWx]

What makes an alarmist or doomer are the folks who continually state that "the climate crisis is an existential threat to the world" They will then usually conflate weather events with climate change and tout these events as "driven or fueled by climate change" "unprecedented heat or floods" but of course when we look back at climate history we find few events have been unprecedented during our current warmer cycle. If our climate warms by 2 more degrees over the next 100 years the earth will handle it.....just as it has always effectively and efficiently handled the past warm and cold cycles.

[ChescoWx]

That should not be a state record with such an obvious error. Just to add other stations bolded to the above post:

July…1966

Philadelphia…104°

Phoenixville…104°

West Chester 105

July….1936

Philadelphia……104°

West Chester 105

Coatesville 104

Phoenixville…....111°

July….2010

Philadelphia….103°

Phoenixville…..103°

West Chester 102

Glenmoore 101

July……1995

Philadelphia…..103°

Phoenixville…..100°

Chadds Ford / Devault / West Chester 100

July……1930

Philadelphia…..103°

West Grove 103

Coatesville 102

Phoenixville…..106°

July…..1988

Philadelphia……102°

Morgantown/ Honey Brook / West Chester 101

Phoenixville……99°

July…..1954

Philadelphia….102°

Coatesville 100

Phoenixville…..104°

July…….1917

Philadelphia…..101°

Coatesville 101

Sadsburyville 100

Phoenixville……99°

 

[Bhs1975]

What makes an alarmist or doomer are the folks who continually state that "the climate crisis is an existential threat to the world" They will then usually conflate weather events with climate change and tout these events as "driven or fueled by climate change" "unprecedented heat or floods" but of course when we look back at climate history we find few events have been unprecedented during our current warmer cycle. If our climate warms by 2 more degrees over the next 100 years the earth will handle it.....just as it has always effectively and efficiently handled the past warm and cold cycles.

It's gonna be more like 6 degrees C or more which would be a massive change for life on Earth with a collapse of modern civilization before 2050. Enjoy. But yeah the Earth will be around for billions of years.


.

[ChescoWx]

28 minutes ago, Bhs1975 said:

It's gonna be more like 6 degrees C or more which would be a massive change for life on Earth with a collapse of modern civilization before 2050. Enjoy. But yeah the Earth will be around for billions of years.


.

You sound scared.....and I would have to put you in the above defined "doomer" category. You sound kind of similar to a certain climate activist....

[ChescoWx]

Below is the average July temperatures by decade for complete decades in Chester County since 1900. The actual averages are in blue and in red you can see the machine adjusted NOAA/NCEI revised averages. These adjusted averages as we have noted before are continuing with their consistent chilling of older decades and now the warming of our most recent decades. Of note in just the last 3 years 2020-2023 they have already adjusted the July average temperature up by 0.7 degrees for this decade of the 2020's...this includes the massive 1.1 degree warming they applied to July 2022.