Breaking Heat records all over by 10 degrees

It has been very Hot !! For those who have not yet discovered the cooling snap towels, TRY one ! These towels are Fantastic and you'll wonder how you ever lived without one once you feel how well they work.

a reply to: MountainLaurel

My local temp was a balmy 67F today.


Might get to 68F tomorrow.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: MountainLaurel

My local temp was a balmy 67F today.


Might get to 68F tomorrow.

Awesome, lucky you ! 104F here, gotta do as many outdoor chores as possible before 9am !

lol... I hear these towels work very good for "hot flashes" too.

a reply to: strongfp

In Montreal over 30 people have died connected to their unusually hot weather, and in the UK it's been reported to be extremely oddly hot as well. 

The jet stream has split in half across the eastern Atlantic. I thought this was common knowledge.

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Not sure what you mean by "split in half" but Arctic warming does seem to have an effect on the polar jet stream.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: rickymouse

Trees absorb the heat from the sun and convert it to wood and leaves. It is way cooler in wooded areas than in fields or cities.

No, they don't absorb heat, they absorb certain wavelengths of solar radiation. And yes, trees do provide shade so it is cooler under them.

But, depending on where they are, it doesn't really seem to do the whole job.
Here's a paper:

Between 1985 and 1997, when overall forest expansion in Switzerland was approximately 4 %, the albedo RF offset the CO2 RF by an average of 40 %.

citeseerx.ist.psu.edu...

So, let's tear down cities and plant trees?

Trees cool the air. onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

I read some more complex articles about this new found phenomenon a while back. The cycle triggered by the heat cools the air. It is not just shade like they used to say. Transpiration requires energy to do which lowers some other cycles of the tree and the tree survives, meaning it has to be getting energy from somewhere without the photosynthesis cycle. Trees also utilize movement from wind to create needed energy for chemical reactions of the tree. Heat can act as a catalyst.

You only say wavelengths but here is a paragraph from Wikipedia. "On the other hand, in an endothermic reaction or system, energy is taken from the surroundings in the course of the reaction. An example of an endothermic reaction is a first aid cold pack, in which the reaction of two chemicals, or dissolving of one in another, requires calories from the surroundings, and the reaction cools the pouch and surroundings by absorbing heat from them. An endothermic system is seen in the production of wood: trees absorb radiant energy, from the sun, use it in endothermic reactions such as taking apart CO2 and H2O and combining the carbon and hydrogen generated to produce cellulose and other organic chemicals. These products, in the form of wood, say, may later be burned in a fireplace, thermostatically, producing CO2 and water, and releasing energy in the form of heat and light to their surroundings, e.g., to a home's interior and chimney gasses."
en.wikipedia.org...

When you say shade, you need to remember, processes in the tree remove the heat and energy from the sun. If it did not remove the heat from the sun's interaction with the leaves, it would be just as hot under the tree as out under an umbrella, it is cooler under a tree than an umbrella. The temperature differences I quoted are real in the thread are real life observations. I compare temperatures many days a year with the daughters and granddaughters. Trees take the energy out of the sunlight, they do not just shade the ground. Photosynthesis is not the only way trees gain energy, how would Pine trees way up north survive during the winter when it is dark four months of the year in places. If it was a pine trees that shed all it's needles, the energy requirement would be less, but most pines way up north do not shed their needles, Tamarack is one tree that does.

a reply to: rickymouse

Trees cool the air.

Your link does not say that. It says this:

Heatwaves are likely to increase in frequency and intensity with climate change, which may impair tree function and forest C uptake.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

Did you link the wrong article?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Not sure what you mean by "split in half" but Arctic warming does seem to have an effect on the polar jet stream.

Okay, I could have worded it better. My point was that the jet stream is completely dodging us right as illustrated here:


Apparently we're getting middle eastern weather conditions.

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Yeah.
But the jet streams are more of a result than a cause. The location of the polar jet stream is determined by the interface between the temperate airmass and the arctic airmass.

It seems that, because the arctic is warming significantly faster than temperate regions, the polar jet stream has gone wonky.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: rickymouse

Trees cool the air.

Your link does not say that. It says this:

Heatwaves are likely to increase in frequency and intensity with climate change, which may impair tree function and forest C uptake.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

Did you link the wrong article?

With photosynthesis cut down, where is the energy coming from to cool the tree. Although, I could have linked the wrong article, I had six or seven of them open I was choosing from to show that heat energy is part of radiant energy that plants can use for processes. It is after one am here, I could have linked one wrong. Time to go to bed, when I was young, one in the morning on a Friday night was early. Although, my brain was only running at half throttle those days, Friday nights were usually always party nights.

a reply to: rickymouse
Happy Independence Day.
Or week.


I chose to make it week.

Just another day in Tx.

I wish I had some Punkah wallah's.

a reply to: Gothmog

The 30 year requirement that is mentioned in the link that Phage provided is a "minimum" requirement for any station that is used to acquire data.

Some of the stations used to create the historical temperature record have been operating for many decades beyond the minimum of 30 years.

-dex

I would imagine geo-engineering programs contribute to climate change much more than my car. 20 years ago, I would never see hazy grid patterns where I live(Seattle area), now I get excited when I see a deep blue sky. Seriously every other clear day has a white haze and I can easily notice the sunlight is dimmed, accompanied by a rainbow halo around the sun. This is a recent phenomenon and no mainstream mention of it even though is blatantly obvious

originally posted by: DBCowboy
As an engineer, I cannot take the global temperature crisis seriously because I have done due diligence on the subject.


What equipment was used to measure the temperatures?
What variance studies were conducted to ascertain the differences in equipment over time?
What calibrations were done on the equipment?
Who collected the data? Were they vetted?

You must be one of those engineer types. But these are fair questions.

It took a little while to find the specification, I had to search through 5 different FAA regulatory documents that all referenced one another. But this FAA regulation provides the requirements for non-FAA Automated Weather Observing Systems (AWOS). I believe these requirements are similar to those required by standard FAA systems. See section 3.7 for specific details of approved temperature sensors.

It should also be noted that the FAA requires these systems to be maintained on an annual basis using a test instrument that has been calibrated to NIST standards within the last 2 years.

The FAA also has a significant set of certification criteria for anyone who uses or maintains the equipment and for anyone who publishes or otherwise releases the data acquired from the device.

These standards have been in place since at least 1995. I don't know what the requirements were before that date. Presumably there were standards in place before that time.

-dex

a reply to: DexterRiley

Presumably?

And what about any variance studies to determine any drift in data caused by equipment change?


Nice find though.

I just want to add that before we can talk about "the numbers" we must first ascertain the validity of "the numbers".

Charts and graphs are fine and they look pretty especially when they're in color.

But if we don't look at who is collecting the data, how the data is collected, then we are putting blind faith into the message.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: DexterRiley

Presumably?

Yep. "Presumably" is the best I can do after I uncrossed my eyes after reading through all that redundant government regulation gobbledy-goop. I suppose if I could keep my head from exploding, I could eventually find specs from before 1995. But I'm still twitching a little from that last search, so I'll save that research for a really rainy day.

And what about any variance studies to determine any drift in data caused by equipment change?

There are whole sections in this specification, and a couple others that I looked at, that detail procedures for equipment changes. The tight calibration requirements of the devices should insure only trivial variances, if any, in measurements from one device to the other.

Nice find though.

Thanks. Sometimes I get these ADD-driven fits of masochism and it yields a useful result. Unfortunately, oftentimes it leads to my banging my head against the wall and chewing on the furniture.


-dex

originally posted by: CymaticA
I would imagine geo-engineering programs contribute to climate change much more than my car. 20 years ago, I would never see hazy grid patterns where I live(Seattle area), now I get excited when I see a deep blue sky. Seriously every other clear day has a white haze and I can easily notice the sunlight is dimmed, accompanied by a rainbow halo around the sun. This is a recent phenomenon and no mainstream mention of it even though is blatantly obvious

Increases in air travel and atmospheric pollution are causing global dimming, which has reduced energy reaching the surface by somewhere between 7% and 30%, depending on where.