The Lake Mendota Wisconsin lake freeze season was similar to last year. Well below the long-term average despite the relatively cold winter. Similar story at the 2 other Madison Lakes.

https://climatology.nelson.wisc.edu/first-order-station-climate-data/madison-climate/lake-ice/history-of-ice-freezing-and-thawing-on-lake-mendota/

17 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

No matter how you slice it using either the raw or altered adjusted data. The gap is clearly widening between PHL and Chester County

But it does matter how you slice it; and, you continue to cherry pick favorable comparisons and ignore the rest. I stated above that the slope difference between NCEI and PHL between 2000 and 2025 was not statistically different. Expanding the yaxis doesn't change that result.

Looking over a longer period and re-normalizing the yaxis, we see that the delta between Chester County and the Philadelphia Airport has stayed the same since 1970. The delta goes up and down but without a long-term trend; 2000 just happens to be a minimum. Doesn't matter whether you use NCEI or high quality sites like Coatesville, Avondale USCRN, and DEOS. The answer is the same. 

On 5/22/2026 at 12:42 PM, ChescoWx said:

So let's go ahead and use the adjusted NCEI average annual temperatures for Chester County PA from NCEI this century. These are the adjusted altered figures Charlie....what does this tell us?  Even after adjustments by NOAA PHL is indeed warming almost 70% faster than Chester County PA - the PHL UHI is a problem even NOAA shows it....

The difference in slope is not statistically significant. That said, wouldn't be surprised if PHL had a some warming enhancement from UHI; but, based on comparisons to other sites it is small compared to the region-wide warming in recent decades. More data is needed to make the case though. Note that the Avondale USHCRN station has a higher slope than PHL. Are you saying that the warming there is due to UHI?

20 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

Bad assumption only using the warmest station which is Phoenixville 1E - to better determine the true Chesco average you should add in the nice mix we have today of high and low elevations to capture the true average Chester County average temperature. Heck the averages I derive from these stations is in reality supports almost exactly the calculated average temperatures posted by NCEI on their site for their recent Chester County PA average temperatures. If NCEI develops an average temperature for the county that is statistically the same as what I calculate from the raw stations. See below since 2004. NCEI must think the mix of stations I use is strong correct? 

I have no problem with your current set of stations. As you say it provides good coverage and matches NCEI. The problem isn't the current stations, its the difference between the current stations and the older stations. There isn't a single current station in the county that is as warm as any of the 3 county stations in 1945. You can't get our climate history right without properly accounting for the changes in county stations with time. Note also that consistency is much more important than coverage when tracking long term changes in temperature. 

18 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

 Your amateur altered facts and fake math do not change the facts. To just prove it to you yet again - let's simply take the next period of time after all those changes that you think made such an impact. Let's target the modern era from 1970 through 2025. Again clear as it can be that PHL is clearly and statistically warming faster than Chester County both the trend line and the slope prove this as fact. The gap due to PHL UHI continues to widen - just wait to see by 2036 how much further apart these get!

No station moves  is an improvement, but you are still using "fake math" by not maintaining a constant baseline in Chester County. Its very simple. Your simple averaging method only maintains a constant baseline if the stations stay exactly the same, no station moves; and, no station additions/deletions.  For instance, if the network is Phoenixville and West Chester; and, Warwick is added. then the station average will cool independent of any weather effect.

There is only one station from the 1970 network that remains in 2025 and the number of stations is much larger in 2025. On average the the 2025 stations are colder: DEOS vs COOP, or East Nantmeal vs Devault for instance. This distorts the Chester County raw data and creates an apples to oranges comparison with Philadelphia. My table on-the-other hand is an unbiased apples to apples comparison, exactly the same data treatment for Chesco and Philly. That shows no difference in warming between Chesco and Philly Airport.

20 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

Fortunately Charlie we have the facts and math to prove clearly how much faster PHL is warming than Chester County PA from 1941 through 2025. Since the growth rate not just to the eye but based on the slope certainly shows that PHL has a much steeper warming growth line than Chester County. Charlie as you can plainly see it is not even close. PHL is warming much faster than Chesco! The facts show this gap has never been wider....well not until we finish this year! 

Your amateur "facts and math" are distorting the raw data by not accounting for the large changes in the Chesco station network with time. In 1941 all the Chester County COOP stations were much warmer than the county average. Phoenixville was had excessive 95+F days vs other local stations; while, both Coatesville and West Chester were located in built up areas. By not accounting for station location you have Chester County's past way too warm, as warm as the Philly Airport in 1941-45 on your chart.

All 3 Chesco stations experienced cooling moves after WWII: Coatesville in 1946 and 48, Phoenixville in 1948 and West Chester in 1970. Your simple “math” is incorporating these station moves into our weather. The chart below covers the Coatesville and Phoenixville moves after WWII. The station moves are easy to spot because they occurred at different times.  Between 1945 and 1949 both Coatesville and Phoenixville cooled by 2F vs West Chester and other local stations. Note that the Philadelphia Airport matched West Chester and other local stations over this period. The problematic data is in Chester County not the Philadelphia Airport.

The final chart shows the Chesco Coop average vs Philadelphia and Allentown over the 1940-70 station move period. The Chesco Coops started as warm as Philadelphia in 1941, but ended as cool as Allentown by 1970. Meanwhile the Philly Airport matches Allentown and all of the other Mt Holly climate sites. The raw data clearly shows that the difference between Philly and Chesco in your chart is due to station changes in the Chester County Coops. 

There is no evidence to support your airport heat island claim. You have jumped to the wrong conclusion by cherry-picking your "facts". Using a broader range of data from outside of Chester County, shows that the Chester County COOPs and your simple “math” is where the problem lays. 

4 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

PHL still accelerating well above all of Chesco

Nope again. The linear regression trends in Chesco are the same as PHL. Raw data from 18 stations, 1941 to 2024. An apples to apples comparison.

6 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

Charlie you are again misinterpreting the data. The increasing hot years in Philly during recent years is of course the UHI contamination at PHL. 

Nope. The 95F data in Chesco and Philadelphia are in agreement. when you factor in the hot years at Phoenixville and the cooling West Chester move in 1970. Reposting my raw data plots which show the airport warming at the same rate as Chester County. 

19 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

No cherry picking here as fortunately we have climate facts to fall back on - a quick look for example at when many of the records were set in 1936 the 9th and 10th were both 111 degrees at Phoenixville - even eliminating them still has Coatesville and West Chester at 105 and 104 degrees for records still occurring in the 1930's. Surrounding stations were also very hot. Of note the number of hot days across all of PA And NJ is in fact decreasing since the first half of the 20th century not increasing at all!!  

You continue to carefully pick your facts. There are many other days in the chart I posted when Phoenixville had excessive temperatures vs West Chester and Coatesville. For instance: July 22, 1934, Phoenixville 101, West Chester 86, Coatesville 88; or July 13, 1936, Phoenixville 100, West Chester 85, and Coatesville 86. In the 2 months that I posted Phoenixville had 9 days over 100, while West Chester and Coatesville only had 2. Finally the West Chester and Coatesville sites were also warm in this period. Both located in built-up towns. Unlike any site we have today. Very unrepresentative of Chester County as a whole.

Our learnings in Chester County help in interpreting Martz chart: 1) Phoenixville shows that non-aspirated shelters can experience large spurious jumps in 90/95/100F days, and 2)Coop stations had frequent moves. In Chester County stations moved out of towns to cooler locations with time. Comparing Martz chart to the local data. He has fewer hot days in recent years vs Philadelphia and Chester County indicating a cooler station population overall. Meanwhile he has more hot days than Philadelphia or Chester County in the early years, an indication that factors 1 and/or 2 above are present in his data set. I'd like to see the individual station data before drawing any firm conclusions. As we have seen in Chester County simple aggregation of raw COOP data without careful inspection leads to misleading charts.

21 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

Not misleading at all simply presenting the actual climate data for the county. You are just as always attempting to explain away the facts but those facts cannot be changed! The above list of when records occurred is actual and real climate data you cannot somehow recast or redo the above data because it fails to fit a narrative.

But you aren't presenting all the climate data for the county, instead you are cherry picking out the information you like and ignoring the rest. For instance, you are ignoring all the information which comes from comparing stations.  The fact that Phoenixville's daily high temperatures spiked much higher than other local stations in the 1930s and 40s, is not weather-related. Phoenixville didn't suddenly experience different weather. Critical information if you want to understand our climate history.

Same with other information about changes in the station network with time, like the big station moves to cooler locations at Coatesville, Phoenixville and West Chester, between 1946 and 1970. All well documented in this thread. The City of Coatesville produces a much different set of records than Doe Run road, outside of Coatesville, or Warwick. 

17 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

Below is an analysis of when our daily climate records have occurred in the philly burbs of Chester County PA. Temperature, Precipitation and Snow daily records. Of note the decades of the 1930's through the 1950's accounted for 39% of our record high temperature records. The most daily record highs were recorded during the 1940's. The decades of the 1970's through 1990's recorded 40% of all of our daily record low temperatures across the county. With the 1980's recording the most daily record low temperatures. Precipitation wise the 2010's saw the most daily record precipitation records while the 1960's saw the greatest number of daily snow records.

Your chart shows how the county station network that you are curating has changed over the years. Not surprising high temperature records peaked in the 1930+40s.. Phoenixville's high temperatures spiked in the 1930+40s, much higher than nearby stations. Low temperatures are impacted by the movement of COOP stations from built-up towns after World War II. The current station set contains many stations in remote locations with good radiating conditions. Shows how much recent warming Chester County has had that cold nighttime stations like Warwick they can't beat the suburban COOP lows from the 1980s and 90s.

On-the-other hand precipitation isn't as strongly impacted by station changes as temperature and the station network picks up the wet conditions in recent decades. Not sure about network changes impacting snow as many of the temperature stations don't measure snow. We aren't getting much snow this decade despite the number of higher elevation stations that we didn't have in the past, your house a good example.

Chester County is a great example of how misleading simple analysis methods can be when the station population changes. 

11 hours ago, GaWx said:

 The following is very interesting as regards the controversial topic of potential significant deep ocean heating from sources independent of AGW such as deep ocean seismic activity:

Apr 28, 2026

An anomaly in global sea level rise is explained by deep ocean heating

by David Appell, Phys.org

Scientists found that up until 2016 that the global mean sea level (GMSL) "budget," accounting for all the energy flows that create sea level rise, was "closed," but since then it has developed a hole in it. The budget is no longer closed, at least according to ocean heat data, down to 2,000 meters. Where was the missing cause for the latest sea level rise?

Now a new examination of sea level in the global ocean since 2016 has closed the GMSL budget and brought the sea level books back into order. The new researchappears in the journal Earth's Future. The paper is important for showing that deep ocean heating can no longer be ignored when considering sea level rise and its acceleration.

Deep ocean heat's growing role

In particular, the researchers, with lead author Anny Cazenave, an emeritus scientist at the Laboratory of Space Geophysical and Oceanographic Studies (LEGOS) at Toulouse, France, found that accounting for sea level rise from expansion due to added heat in the deep ocean, below 2,000 meters, allowed the GMSL budget to be "almost closed" since 2016.

"The next step," they write, "will be to determine whether the recent deep ocean change is due to internal climate variability, forced anthropogenic response or a combination of both."

https://phys.org/news/2026-04-anomaly-global-sea-deep-ocean.html

———————————————

 

@donsutherland1, @chubbsand others, your thoughts? Does this imply that deep ocean seismic activity MAY actually be an independent nontrivial source of ocean warming after all? Perhaps this may help explain the pockets of extreme ocean warming such as has been the case in the W PAC? Keep in mind that David Appell is not at all an AGW skeptic.

Manmade warming spreading from the upper ocean is the most likely cause of deep ocean warming. As implied by the following statement in the abstract: This finding reveals that deep ocean warming is gaining importance and that ocean heat uptake has now reached several regions below 2,000 m depth, notably the Northwestern Atlantic Ocean and Southern Ocean.  Figure 7 in the paper shows where the deep warming is occurring. The warming regions are associated with ocean overturning circulations not seismic activity. The paper discussion mentions that the added heat in the deep ocean is needed to better match satellite measurements of the earth's energy imbalance. Finally the underlying paper doesn't mention seismic activity at all. 

A while ago I linked a report that concluded that solar+batteries were becoming cost competitive in sunny locations for 24-hour a day firm power. Here's another report with the same findings. Solar/batteries are competitive now and will only become cheaper in the future. 

https://www.irena.org/Publications/2026/May/24-7-renewables-The-economics-of-firm-solar-and-wind

Another large positive net radiation balance in February, further increasing the running 12-month average. Should be near an enso peak in the running 12-month avg, as the transition to nino is underway. Combination of high net radiation and nino transition should fuel a healthy rise in global temperatures for the rest of the year. We will see.

https://ceres-tool.larc.nasa.gov/ord-tool/jsp/EBAFTOA421Selection.jsp

This chart shows where daily satellite SST is at record levels. Biggest feature is the large area of record warmth in the PMM area extending west of North America. An important area with nino conditions developing.  There are also less extensive record temperatures in the southern hemisphere Pacific south of the enso region.

https://cyclonicwx.com/sst/

16 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

Due to multiple requests below for comparison I have added the recast National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) temperature data that includes the chilling adjustments to the older data. That chart is now below the actual raw data. I split our weather database almost down the middle to compare how our climate here in Chester County has changed compared to the first 66 years of climate data (1893-1959) vs. the last 67 years of data (1960-2025). With the actual data we see that 7 of our months have trended cooler - 3 have trended warmer and 2 have remained about the same. Overall, on an annual basis the actual raw data has trended cooler by 0.2 degrees during our most recent half of climate data 1960-2025. However, once NCEI applies their adjustments it paints a very different picture. We see clear warming in each and every month during our more recent climate history from 1960-2025. This aligns well with the expected warming narrative.

Very important to remove the station changes in Chester county. The county stations moved frequently and bigger changes were cooling. The station population has cooled with time mainly due a shift from towns to more rural sites. Our older stations are warmer than the county as a whole, particularly in the 1930-48 period when Phoenixville was much warmer than other local stations on summer afternoons; and, West Chester and Coatesville were in built-up towns. 

I can match NCEI perfectly by; 1) excluding the 3 big station moves: Coatesville in 1946+48, Phoenixville in 1948 and West Chester in 1970; and, by removing the temperature difference between stations by taking station anomalies to a common period. Raw data without the contamination of station changes.

The chart below shows that NCEI has met their objective of taking out station changes to reveal the weather and climate signal in the raw data. Of course, if you leave in all the station changes you won't match NCEI or any other scientific analysis. This thread is a strawman based on bad analysis and confirmation bias.

1 hour ago, GaWx said:

Current RONi equivalent is ~+0.1 though it’s risen ~0.4 the last 4 days. So, in a few days it would be up a few more tenths if the same rise rate were to hold.

 How does +0.1 compare to RONI equivalent for the other 3?

1982/97: +.0.4

2015: +0.9 but it had a head start vs others

 

 So, it could be near 82/97 soon IF the rapid rise continues.

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/rel_wksst9120.txt

April RONI - 1982 - 0.48 and 1997 - 0.49. Closer to ONI as expected since tropics were cooler 

Recent rise in Nino 3.4 SST is similar in timing and magnitude to last 3 super ninos. Chart below shows 1982, 1997 and 2015 along with this year.

So far 2026 has been running cooler globally than 2024 and 2025, but warmer than 2023. If 2026 warms as much in the remainder of the year as 2023, then a yearly global record is likely. However, warming in 2023 was unusually large for an el nino onset year. We will need to see monthly records begin to be broken in the summer to have a chance of breaking a yearly record. Will be a good test of whether the unusual warmth in 2023 was anomalous or caused by the large earth energy imbalance.

20 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

"That is a clear sign of a major station change, probably at Morgantown." That would be incorrect Charlie no station changes took place at all during the period that temperatures were reported by the NWS Coop observer. There were some moves after those temperature obs ended and they moved to just precip and snow obs. 

 

Raw data determines whether there was a station change not NCDC documentation, which can be incomplete. The 2F cooling of Morgantown relative to Coatesville is clearly a station change of some kind. The Morgantown site was didn't operate for 5 months in the summer of 1966, station changes in Chester County that I have investigated usually coincided with station shutdowns.

21 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

Even vs. Morgantown a few hundred feet higher we see the same telltale pattern of chilling the past - altering those stations below what any actual station shows for the area. 

First of all no data is altered. That is a false, misleading claim on your part. The adjustments are merely a step in the climate data analysis process. They are never purported to be actual measurements. Second the adjustments make sense if you know how they are calculated and used. 

Plotting the data in your table shows that Coatesville and Morgantown do not agree at times on the year-to-year temperature changes. The largest discrepancy, roughly 2F, is between 1966 and 67. That is a clear sign of a major station change, probably at Morgantown. Congratulations you've identified another major COOP station change ,

The station change doesn't mean that the data is bad. Only that station change needs to be accounted for when estimating long-term temperature trends. Otherwise roughly 2F of bias will be introduced. Also note that a change between 1966 and 67 would trigger station adjustments in all the prior years. That's why you find so many large positive adjustments in the older West Chester, Phoenixville and Coatesville data. All of the stations experienced moves from warmer to cooler sites between 1946 and 1970.

19 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

Thank you! You finally admit you don't know which stations were used from the 1930's thru 1980's to make those chilling adjustments to the one specific station (Coatesville 1SW) for each of those adjustment years!!

It only took several years LOL!!!

The exact stations are immaterial. Very easy to spot the large station moves using the Chester County stations. The proof is in the pudding. NOAA matches the raw Chesco data once the big moves are removed, particularly the overall warming in the past 130 years.

20 hours ago, ChescoWx said:

So show us the exactly which "other stations" you are referencing that were used for the calculation? You say Coatesville 1SW results/raw vs the NCEI adjusted figures above for Coatesville 1SW don't provide evidence about the adjustments. Agreed that is what I am looking for evidence and the underlying calculation based on the "other stations" you reference so we can tie down those annual adjustments from the raw to the adjusted/altered figures. Those adjustments above are unique to the Coatesville 1SW station so show us the reference stations used to make the call to adjust lower than Morgantown and in many cases lower than any reporting station at all in Chester County. You never show any of that data...you simply keep saying just believe that NCEI "could be right"

I don't know which stations were used. However the number is more than adequate. There is a dense network of stations in this area.

Below is a comparison of raw data to NOAA.  The raw data is the same chart that was posted above; but, with Avondale, 10 DEOS stations and E Nantmeal added. As described above, I've taken out the important post -war station moves: Coatesville (46+48), Phoenixville (48), and West Chester (70). I've also removed the temperature difference between stations by taking an anomaly. The anomaly period has been shifted to 2012-24 since all stations except West Chester pre-1970 operated in this period. Anomalies for West Chester are obtained using the 2.1F difference between 2012-24 and 1949-69 from the Phoenixville and Coatesville records.

Removing the large post-war station moves and the differences between stations is sufficient to bring the raw data and NOAA into very good alignment for the long-term climate trend.. Not surprisingly, there are short-term differences between between the raw data and NOAA, mainly Phoenixville and Coatesville, between 1960 and 1990, when these stations had periodic adjustments. This shows that for the big picture long-term trend, most of the NOAA adjustments don't move the needle.  Only the big moves, with roughly 2F cooling, obscure the warming. 

NOAA's goal is to remove station changes from the raw data leaving only weather and climate. This comparison shows that NOAA has met their objective in Chester County. If you aren't matching NOAA, you aren't getting the county climate right.

9 minutes ago, ChescoWx said:

Charlie again you are not following! If after the 1948 move it was colder than the City of Coatesville riddle me why they continued the same chilling adjustment to the newer chillier location? Not just for 1 year but for every year but 1 from 1948 through 1971. Even more bizarre can you explain why those NCEI number in 15 of the 20 years from 1952 thru 1971 were actually adjusted by NCEI to averages even lower than the high elevation station in Morgantown? Where is the control arm station that figures let's cool down the new chiller station location to even colder than a higher elevation further north station? There is absolutely zero support for these adjustments!

1948	51.2	50.0	(1.1)
1949	53.4	52.6	(0.8)
1950	51.1	50.8	(0.3)
1951	52.2	51.2	(1.0)
1952	52.4	51.6	(0.8)
1953	53.7	52.8	(1.0)
1954	52.3	51.8	(0.6)
1955	52.3	51.9	(0.5)
1956	51.3	49.6	(1.7)
1957	52.6	52.0	(0.6)
1958	50.2	50.2	0.0
1959	53.5	51.8	(1.8)
1960	51.7	51.2	(0.5)
1961	52.3	50.4	(1.9)
1962	51.0	49.8	(1.2)
1963	50.7	49.5	(1.2)
1964	51.8	49.8	(2.0)
1965	51.8	50.3	(1.5)
1966	51.4	50.3	(1.2)
1967	51.1	49.6	(1.5)
1968	51.9	50.8	(1.1)
1969	51.5	50.2	(1.3)
1970	51.5	49.8	(1.7)
1971	51.7	50.7	(1.0)

No I can follow your argument. You are making an argument of incredularity, a common logical fallacy. You can't believe that NCEI could be right. The problem is you don't understand how adjustments are estimated. There is an easy explanation for your list of #. The 1946 and 48 moves are not the only station change at Coatesville. Other station changes occurred before 1948.  Adjustments start at the present and work backwards. The most recent Coatesville 1SW data is from 1982. You have to start in 1982 and work back in time. To evaluate the adjustments you have to compare Coatesville to raw data from other stations. Station changes are identified when Coatesville doesn't match other regional stations.  Coatesville results by themselves, as you have listed, don't provide any evidence about station adjustments. 

19 minutes ago, ChescoWx said:

Easily disproved by the actual NCEI adjustments made - see below. Based on what you show above there was no need for cooling from 1941-1946 yet look at what NCEI did...actual raw on left adjustment on left.

47	1940	49.1	47.6	(1.5)
48	1941	53.8	51.6	(2.2)
49	1942	53.6	51.3	(2.3)
50	1943	53.4	50.4	(3.0)
51	1944	53.8	51.2	(2.7)
52	1945	53.6	50.8	(2.8)
53	1946	53.5	51.3	(2.2)

You don't understand how adjustments work. A single station move triggers adjustments for every year before the move. The City of Coatesville was warmer than Doe Run Road in 1946, 1945 , 1944, 1943 and so on. Clearly seen from the chart. That's how we know the cooling was move-related. The effect is persistent.