All Activity

That would have to be in direct sun and even then…

18z GFS has a 5" max right near DC ending 12z Tue. We sure need it! ECMWF likes PHL-NYC for the big QPF max. Either way, should be a solid 3 day active period Sat-Mon.

This is 100% what summer is all about. Just like summers of yore 250 years ago. Bonnets and breeches all over the beach at Walden Pond.

pop-up south shore zygote, too

those NNE storms sent out a distinct outflow boundary visible on radar- through here to nearing pike - seems to be interacting with W MA storm(s) now.

I was down in Point Pleasant for a bit this evening. It was somewhat cool with a breeze on the boardwalk but hot and humid with no breeze less than a block inland.

79 now and beautiful

74/72 in McHenry 87/75 in Alexandria brutal

I think in the horrid heaters of 2010,11,12 we had nights where from 10-midnight we were still in the 90’s? Ive “cooled” off nicely from death to warm

I actually see it as purposefully using bad data, not to support climate change, but to discredit it. The point isn’t to cause fear or anxiety, the point is to cause skepticism through intentionally flawed/exaggerated statements. It takes the narrative away from the event, makes it seem like it’s agenda/hype driven, and takes away from legitimate discussion. The dupe isn’t getting you to think everything extreme, the dupe is making everyone overly skeptical so it’s okay to buy into whatever you choose to believe regardless of fact. It’s like dressing up like a clown before having a serious discussion. You aren’t trying to be taken seriously, you’re trying to get people to think that those who hold the position are clowns.

Taking the opportunity to take advantage of these “cool” low 80’s temps to get the backyard ready for the 3rd/4th. Can’t believe it’s 81 at 10:45 at night.

Yes it does. Look at the 390M+ ppl that live in the Middle East. Heat index gets over 140 routinely this time of year, and they do just fine overall. Have so for 1000s of years.

Got to 100 at the house for the first time in years.

Not questing it is nasty for heat index, just let's not get carried away. When big wx is going on, all too often some just deliberately "pile on" the negative b/c they know many are already in a vulnerable state of alert, fear, or anxious. Actually, these days it does not even had to be "big wx" going for this nonsense. "Run-of-the mill wx" does just "fine."

I am absolutely loving this show. Got about 12 mosquito bites taking this though. Little bastards

A whole bunch of rain if those storms start training.

No.

Yeah, you’d think if the state’s HI record was 115F, the post would want to focus on all the sites above that level in this image… not the one showing an erroneous 133F. Numerous sites above that 115F level but they lose the viewer by elevating the highest outlier.

Standing out in grass watering just now and I was fine. At 2 today I had to try and give it a go and made a little trouble for meself

strobe-lightning fest this evening.

the human body acclimates quite well

For some reason MRB stopped hourly updates after 7:53PM (where it was still 96!) 81 IMBY currently... I'm missing those cool mornings in the 50's last month.

Saw this post today (screenshot attached). Posts like this allow us to call out nonsense or hype, or at least question content. This is a good thing b/c the amount of bad or misleading info out there is high. So just take 133 heat index reading "as is" -- no critical thinking or independent thought? 133 does not fit surrounding sites. We all too often assume what all wx sites report are correct. Untrue, and some networks are worse than others. You have so many out there, some just use personal wx stations (PWSs), and you know not all of them are sited or calibrated properly. This same problem exists for some official wx sites as well. And where did this individual get the information for the record of heat index values in NJ? Is there even such a list officially? Also, look carefully. No info on what this network this is, the name of the location, or what time it is at. It also does not give any information on where or when the previous heat index record occurred. This is often done to make it harder to check/validate claims. In addition, it is mentions the highest actual temp recorded in NJ, yet talks about heat index. Inconsistent comparison and irrelevant in this case. And it claims that "much higher humidity" for the heatwave today (compared to the 1936 heat). Is that really true? Ppl just say things for a narrative or hype arbitrarily so much on posts like these w/ no hard evidence to support. Be vague and generic, and hope ppl don't bother checking. Classic clickbait and hype tactic. And when doing posts like this, I always take a screenshot and block out the poster's or site's name. Do not want to make it available for more clicks/likes. Which brings me to another point. Some post bad, incorrect, or exaggerated info on purpose b/c it will get more clicks/likes. It's all about content, facts and accuracy be damned.

Saw this post today (screenshot attached). Posts like this allow us to call out nonsense or hype, or at least question content. This is a good thing b/c the amount of bad or misleading info out there is high. So just take 133 heat index reading "as is" -- no critical thinking or independent thought? 133 does not fit surrounding sites. We all too often assume what all wx sites report are correct. Untrue, and some networks are worse than others. You have so many out there, some just use personal wx stations (PWSs), and you know not all of them are sited or calibrated properly. This same problem exists for some official wx sites as well. And where did this individual get the information for the record of heat index values in NJ? Is there even such a list officially? Also, look carefully. No info on what this network this is, the name of the location, or what time it is at. It also does not give any information on where or when the previous heat index record occurred. This is often done to make it harder to check/validate claims. In addition, it is mentions the highest actual temp recorded in NJ, yet talks about heat index. Inconsistent comparison and irrelevant in this case. And it claimed that "much higher humidity" for the heatwave today (compared to the 1936 heat). Is that really true? Ppl just say things for a narrative or hype arbitrarily so much on posts like these w/ no hard evidence to support. Be vague and generic, and hope ppl don't bother checking. Classic clickbait and hype tactic. And when doing posts like this, I always take a screenshot and block out the poster's or site's name. Do not want to make it available for more clicks/likes. Which brings me to another point. Some post bad, incorrect, or exaggerated info on purpose b/c it will get more clicks/likes. It's all about content, facts and accuracy be damned.

88/79 after a high of 101 here. heat index reached 116