Central Pa. Summer 2024

[Jns2183]

101/63

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[canderson]

101 at 2:15.

[Itstrainingtime]

100.0 on the nose in Maytown. 

[Itstrainingtime]

Elliott: Severe weather likely tomorrow, longer-term the drought likely gets much worse:

https://www.millersville.edu/weathercenter/forecasts/weather-discussion.php

[canderson]

It's also pretty dang windy. Westerly winds around 18 and gusts into the 30s. 

Makes it feel like standing in front of a giant hair dryer. 

[Bubbler86]

4 minutes ago, Itstrainingtime said:

Elliott: Severe weather likely tomorrow, longer-term the drought likely gets much worse:

https://www.millersville.edu/weathercenter/forecasts/weather-discussion.php

Elliott has conceded:

The persistent heat and humidity have even been too much for me, and that's saying something.

[Itstrainingtime]

7 minutes ago, Bubbler86 said:

Elliott has conceded:

The persistent heat and humidity have even been too much for me, and that's saying something.

I noticed that shortly after that comment, he said he's looking forward to the temporary break from the heat. I'm guessing he isn't in the "no more big heat in July" camp. 

[Itstrainingtime]

If I can get to 102.2 (current reading is 100.7) it will be the hottest day since we moved to Maytown in 2000. 

[mahantango#1]

3 minutes ago, Itstrainingtime said:

I noticed that shortly after that comment, he said he's looking forward to the temporary break from the heat. I'm guessing he isn't in the "no more big heat in July" camp. 

Well have to wait to confirm this with DT!

[Bubbler86]

Not counting today, MDT has reached 100 or higher in July 44 times in its history.   74 is the normal inverse to 100 on most days of July which feature a normal high of 87.    There are few days at the start and end of July where the norm is 86.    MDT has stayed 74 and below in July over 125 times in its history making it the much more common extreme temp using today's normal but....it has only happened 16 times since the year 2000 with the vast majority of the 74 and under days coming before 2000.    

 

The closer compare for the Number of 100 days stat, is July days MDT has stayed below 70 all time which is 38. 

[Bubbler86]

6 minutes ago, Itstrainingtime said:

I noticed that shortly after that comment, he said he's looking forward to the temporary break from the heat. I'm guessing he isn't in the "no more big heat in July" camp. 

I guess the definition of big heat would need defined.    Is 90-93 big heat?  3-6 degrees AN?

[Jns2183]

Not counting today, MDT has reached 100 or higher in July 44 times in its history.   74 is the normal inverse to 100 on most days of July which feature a normal high of 87.    There are few days at the start and end of July where the norm is 86.    MDT has stayed 74 and below in July over 125 times in its history making it the much more common extreme temp using today's normal but....it has only happened 16 times since the year 2000 with the vast majority of the 74 and under days coming before 2000.    
 
The closer compare for the Number of 100 days stat is July days MDT has stayed below 70 all time which is 38. 

That's because temperatures don't follow a normal distribution.

This asymmetry suggests a left-skewed distribution, where lower temperatures are more frequent than higher temperatures.

A possible statistical distribution for this kind of data could be:

Log-Normal Distribution
A log-normal distribution is suitable for data that are positively skewed. It is used when data can be thought of as the exponential of a normally distributed variable.

Gamma Distribution
The gamma distribution is another option, which is flexible for modeling skewed data and can accommodate the higher frequency of lower temperatures and the occasional high-temperature values.

Weibull Distribution
The Weibull distribution is useful for modeling skewed data and can be adjusted to fit the asymmetry observed in the temperature data.

Empirical Distribution
Given the specific frequencies of certain temperatures, an empirical or histogram-based approach could be the most accurate. This would involve constructing a probability distribution directly from the observed frequencies without assuming an underlying theoretical distribution.

To summarize, based on the provided data and the observed asymmetry, a log-normal distribution or a gamma distribution would likely be more appropriate than a normal distribution for modeling the temperatures in Harrisburg in July. However, for the most accurate representation, an empirical distribution based on the actual observed data might be the best approach.









Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Jns2183]

Officially hit 102 at KCXY

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Mount Joy Snowman]

38 minutes ago, Itstrainingtime said:

100.0 on the nose in Maytown. 

I'm stuck in Harrisburg but my wife sent me a pic of our station reading exactly the same.  Today lived up to the hype, and still on the rise in many places. 

[Bubbler86]

5 minutes ago, Jns2183 said:

That's because temperatures don't follow a normal distribution.

This asymmetry suggests a left-skewed distribution, where lower temperatures are more frequent than higher temperatures.

A possible statistical distribution for this kind of data could be:

Log-Normal Distribution
A log-normal distribution is suitable for data that are positively skewed. It is used when data can be thought of as the exponential of a normally distributed variable.

Gamma Distribution
The gamma distribution is another option, which is flexible for modeling skewed data and can accommodate the higher frequency of lower temperatures and the occasional high-temperature values.

Weibull Distribution
The Weibull distribution is useful for modeling skewed data and can be adjusted to fit the asymmetry observed in the temperature data.

Empirical Distribution
Given the specific frequencies of certain temperatures, an empirical or histogram-based approach could be the most accurate. This would involve constructing a probability distribution directly from the observed frequencies without assuming an underlying theoretical distribution.

To summarize, based on the provided data and the observed asymmetry, a log-normal distribution or a gamma distribution would likely be more appropriate than a normal distribution for modeling the temperatures in Harrisburg in July. However, for the most accurate representation, an empirical distribution based on the actual observed data might be the best approach.









Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
 

All that said, it is more likely for MDT to be 13 degrees BN for a high than it is for them to be 13AN using the current adjusted norms.  This is surely (Don't call me Shirley) due to clouds and rain most days, has the factor of MDT moving their recording site and the Norms changing which is why I compared out the 69 and below number which is the much more closely aligned with hitting 100 as to historical chances.

[Jns2183]

@Bubbler86 this is the answer to your question of why no one cares when we have a plus 15 temperature differential in winter time. Because essentially it's three to five times harder have a plus 15 temperature differential and summer or a -15 temperature differential in winter than the inverse for each season

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Bubbler86]

2 minutes ago, Jns2183 said:

@Bubbler86 this is the answer to your question of why no one cares when we have a plus 15 temperature differential in winter time. Because essentially it's three to five times harder have a plus 15 temperature differential and summer or a -15 temperature differential in winter than the inverse for each season

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
 

I am not sure I thought no one cares when we have a 15AN in the winter.  My assumption is that the 13AN in the summer's uncomfortability and possible risk for heat exposure is the reason behind more people caring.  I was just more interested in the variability and chances for either side.  

[Jns2183]

All that said, it is more likely for MDT to be 13 degrees BN for a high than it is for them to be 13AN using the current adjusted norms.  This is surely (Don't call me Shirley) due to clouds and rain most days, has the factor of MDT moving their recording site and the Norms changing which is why I compared out the 69 and below number which is the much more closely aligned with hitting 100 as to historical chances.

Sure we can create a chart that uses the equivalent probabilities instead of temperature differential

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Jns2183]

I am not sure I thought no one cares when we have a 15AN in the winter.  My assumption is that the 13AN in the summer's uncomfortability and possible risk for heat exposure is the reason behind more people caring.  I was just more interested in the variability and chances for either side.  

It's not that no one cares it's just about the rarity of events. I'm sure +20 in winter is order a backlitude some more likely than -20 temperature differential

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Itstrainingtime]

6 minutes ago, Jns2183 said:

@Bubbler86 this is the answer to your question of why no one cares when we have a plus 15 temperature differential in winter time. Because essentially it's three to five times harder have a plus 15 temperature differential and summer or a -15 temperature differential in winter than the inverse for each season

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
 

 

4 minutes ago, Bubbler86 said:

I am not sure I thought no one cares when we have a 15AN in the winter.  My assumption is that the 13AN in the summer's uncomfortability and possible risk for heat exposure is the reason behind more people caring.  I was just more interested in the variability and chances for either side.  

These quotes speak to the spirit of the conversation I was trying to have a month or so ago, primarily with Bubbler:

Normal high in mid January is 36 - how many January days feature highs around 50?

Normal high for mid July is 87 - how many July days feature highs around 101?

Both are equal in terms of their respect to normal. But this kind of heat in mid summer "seems" much more rare than a 50 degree day in January. 

[Itstrainingtime]

11 minutes ago, Mount Joy Snowman said:

I'm stuck in Harrisburg but my wife sent me a pic of our station reading exactly the same.  Today lived up to the hype, and still on the rise in many places. 

It is now a legit 101 - 101.2 to be exact.   

[Bubbler86]

17 minutes ago, Jns2183 said:

Sure we can create a chart that uses the equivalent probabilities instead of temperature differential

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
 

Let's take Jan then and use 39 as the number since the normal high is 38-40 each day...and use 13 again for the deviation.  That would mean days 52 and over vs. days 26 and below.  The numbers are closer though the deviations are much more frequent. 

MDT Days 52 and over in Jan:  375ish

MDT Days 25 and below in Jan: 550ish

 

[Bubbler86]

3 minutes ago, Itstrainingtime said:

 

These quotes speak to the spirit of the conversation I was trying to have a month or so ago, primarily with Bubbler:

Normal high in mid January is 36 - how many January days feature highs around 50?

Normal high for mid July is 87 - how many July days feature highs around 101?

Both are equal in terms of their respect to normal. But this kind of heat in mid summer "seems" much more rare than a 50 degree day in January. 

It is much more common in the winter on both sides BUT the percentage of times it gets that far AN in the winter is much closer to the percentage of times it gets that far BN.  I was using MDT's Normal of 39.    Yes, it is much rarer to get to 100 but its deviation from normal is a very common occurrence...both sides of the fence, I guess. 

[Itstrainingtime]

6 minutes ago, Bubbler86 said:

Let's take Jan then and use 39 as the number since the normal highs is 38-40 each day...and use 13 again for the deviation.  That would mean days 52 and over vs. days 26 and below.  The numbers are closer though the deviations are much more frequent. 

MDT Days 52 and over in Jan:  375ish

MDT Days 25 and below in Jan: 550ish

 

Thanks. I would never have guessed that was the case. My memory says that winter highs in the teens/low 20s was a somewhat common occurrence prior to 2000 but much more infrequent since. I feel like in recent years we don't even have that many sub-freezing highs outside of stormy days. (which would explain why bodies of water never seem to freeze over anymore)

[Jns2183]

Let's take Jan then and use 39 as the number since the normal high is 38-40 each day...and use 13 again for the deviation.  That would mean days 52 and over vs. days 26 and below.  The numbers are closer though the deviations are much more frequent. 
MDT Days 52 and over in Jan:  375ish
MDT Days 25 and below in Jan: 550ish
 

First issue is that standard deviation is the language of a normal distribution which we do not have here. More likely we have either a gamma or about normal one or some Frankenstein like combination of the two. I will try to plug all the numbers in next week or so see what it comes up with for the distribution and following equation. That should allow me to produce a charge that roughly states what AN value a specific BN temperature corresponds to according to a relative frequency in relation to a mean temperature (most likely mean January temperature).

In a short, in a real rough generation, 1 std dev will have different values depending on whether it is BN/AN

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Bubbler86]

 

 

19 minutes ago, Itstrainingtime said:

Thanks. I would never have guessed that was the case. My memory says that winter highs in the teens/low 20s was a somewhat common occurrence prior to 2000 but much more infrequent since. I feel like in recent years we don't even have that many sub-freezing highs outside of stormy days. (which would explain why bodies of water never seem to freeze over anymore)

All of that is true as to the ice and such.  I think the longevity of the cold is as much to blame as actual deviation on a day-to-day basis.  We seem to rarely string together a real cold snap anymore. 

So, since 2000 here are the charts for Jan days it has stayed 26 and below and 21 and below.   Then the same for the 1970's when you were growing up (as was I).   Sample size is larger for the 2000's of course.   I think these numbers show it was more common in the 1970's but not a ton IMO (especially the 26 and below stat.)  The 2000's had a handful of years it did not happen. 

 

 

 

[Bubbler86]

Just now, Jns2183 said:

First issue is that standard deviation is the language of a normal distribution which we do not have here. More likely we have either a gamma or about normal one or some Frankenstein like combination of the two. I will try to plug all the numbers in next week or so see what it comes up with for the distribution and following equation. That should allow me to produce a charge that roughly states what AN value a specific BN temperature corresponds to according to a relative frequency in relation to a mean temperature (most likely mean January temperature).

In a short, in a real rough generation, 1 std dev will have different values depending on whether it is BN/AN

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
 

But, a lot of people do not care about that.  These numbers are what Joe Weather watcher cares about (non-Met people).    I am not trying to say the average at MDT is wrong vs. explain what the everyday person sees and feels regardless of how often.  100% agreed that the 13AN in July is much less common than the one in Jan but so is the 13 BN day...the ratio is just drastically different. 

[Mount Joy Snowman]

4 minutes ago, Jns2183 said:

First issue is that standard deviation is the language of a normal distribution which we do not have here. More likely we have either a gamma or about normal one or some Frankenstein like combination of the two. I will try to plug all the numbers in next week or so see what it comes up with for the distribution and following equation. That should allow me to produce a charge that roughly states what AN value a specific BN temperature corresponds to according to a relative frequency in relation to a mean temperature (most likely mean January temperature).

In a short, in a real rough generation, 1 std dev will have different values depending on whether it is BN/AN

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
 

JNS, it takes one to know one, so tell me, where did you study your Statistics?  Mine was at Penn state, where I also tutored Stats courses, but that was many moons ago and I'm losing my touch with every passing year.  I've been impressed with your statistical knowledge displayed on this board. 

[canderson]

Nerd talk not going away. 

It’s 102. I believe that is the hottest it’s ever been since I moved here in 06.  

[Mount Joy Snowman]

Windy as all get-out here in Harrisburg with cells popping all around but looks like downtown will be missed.