vortex95

Understood. Standard deviations is one of a number of ways to gauge measure an event. Also, not all significant standard deviations, regardless of what wx parameter you chose, result in the same sensible wx or societal impact. Such as anomalously high 500 mb heights. That works for the heat in the Desert SW currently, but many times do not b/c first, we do not live at 500 mb, and second, what goes on at the near and the sfc is what matters. You can have record high 500 mb heights, but nothing special as to deviations for sfc temp b/c the strength and position of the sfc high relative to your location.

Not bad for daytime accumulation in late March!

I said this about flawed premise: And the concept of "wins the debate" is a flawed premise. What matters in science are facts and the truth. It does not care about who "wins" or "loses." I was not talking about the definitions from the norm or anomalies. I was talking about the idea of "win" or "lose" and that concept bring brought into a scientific discussion. So your reply is a non-sequitur.

That is correct. I never it is wasn't a record breaking air mass. Local contamination from infrastructure is common even in sparely populated areas. Parking lots, vehicle traffic, solar panel arrays, AC units, etc. all contribute. And the digital thermometers have a warm bias compared to glass thermometers b/c they record instantaneous temp and react quickly to any changes in the air. ASOS use 5-min avg temp to mitigate this, but sensors and equipment out there are far from standardized, never mind not all ideally located (look the areal view of the official temp sensor in Death Valley, parking lots and solar arrays all around). So it's not just UHI that skew temp records. It's all too easy to get caught up in it all when big wx events occur. I get that. It is our passion for wx that drives it. However, we should not let that cloud our judgement when talking about caveats and shortcomings that just happen to "deflate" that excitement or how impressive it is. Taking everything as face value and acting there is nothing to question or analyze is not a good scientific position.

UHI does impact daytime highs (Baltimore/Inner Harbor is perhaps the most egregious example). Also, local airport infrastructure and sensor placement impact highs, regardless of UHI.

I never said the primary urban heat island effect was not at night. 1-2 F per day biased warmed max is huge for long-term climate records. esp. when you consider we think we can get avg regional or global temps correct/accurate down the the 100th of degree, and we obsess when we "beat" a record by a fraction of degree, not mentioning the uncertainty at all. Using precision to give an illusion of accuracy. Bad science. And some sites have a huge warm bias during the day. Look at Baltimore/Inner Harbor (KDMH). You often see it 7 F warmer for maxes than BWI, and this is an official climate location and gets reported as fact.

Absolute values given taken snapshot are not the same as longer-term values. In the end, it's what occurs over a long period of time and how it all averages out, rather than individual events. And what you chose as a period of time matters. We tend to think in very short time periods, contaminated by recency bias and the lack of full knowledge of wx history. And the concept of "wins the debate" is a flawed premise. What matters in science are facts and the truth. It does not care about who "wins" or "loses."

You forget about HAARP!!!

W/ the strong UHI bias that occur here even during that day, it is very likely that PHX would not have hit 105 F for the past 3 days (105 F is the max the last 3 days). You can't leave this out of the discussion and act like this is not a factor. Otherwise, it is a lie of omission. PHX is located in the heart of the downtown, not typical for a major airport, but that's how it is. As a result, a warm bias exists strongly. Ever look how PHX has grown since 1870? It is among the fastest-growing cites out there, and still is. Look at population growth alone in the mid-20th century, and at the same time a significant spike in avg temps occurred that does not exist nearly to this extent outside the city. A similar issue exists in LAS. So you really can't compare many records of today as objectively hotter/hottest when a concrete jungle leads to a consistent warm bias. And this systematic bias exists in various degrees at many climate stations around the world b/c they are located in populated areas that experience growth over time.

I'm taking about the MSM in general, not this group. Not saying the heat in the Desert SW is not impressive and record-breaking, but one needs to hear the entire story and know history for proper perspective to make good assessments and reasonable opinions. A major problem is that narratives and stories are all too often one-sided.

I don't see how that is relevant. Picking one type of record w/o looking at the big picture does not tell the entire story. But if you want to use that notion, has Phoenix or any other climate location in the Lower 48 have had such persistent, long-term cold all winter that has set records for duration/frequency? Or how did 40 of 50 states set their all-time March record 50+ years ago and most 95+ years ago? And that is more telling and representative b/c it was not a single heat event and it was spread out over much of the country. Also, March 1879 had a similar high heat in the Desert SW. PHX hit 100 F on March 3, 1879, 15 days earlier that the official first 100 set on March 18 this month, and that same month, PHX hit 112 F on March 30, 4 F higher than any temp in this current heat wave, and this was before any UHI, which PHX is among the worst placed sites for UHI bias for a U.S. climate site (Baltimore/Inner Harbor is likely the worst). The start of official continuous PHX records is 1895, but that does not mean you ignore what occurred before any climate station period of record (this data can be found at NCEI). That would be like ignoring the major 1635 and 1815 hurricanes that hit SNE b/c BOS official climate record starts in 1872. Or the Great Snow of 1717.

Regarding the West heat... Ever notice that the opposite is largely ignored? How about central AK this winter? FAI records in infographic attached that still continue currently (31 days now w/ lows -40 or below and now up to 140 in a row not exceeding 32). FAI is running -22.6 F for the month so far. Or the extent of below avg temps across North America earlier in the week? You can't focus on just one area and run w/ that. Or how about all-time state record March highs? The attached map is not updated for the new state records in CA/NV/AZ/UT and the 98 in MA I think is off, but take note that 40 of 50 states set their March all-time record highs 50+ years ago, and most them 95+ years ago. What caused it all then? All valid points here.

The winter of the "strong" clippers. Can't recall so many clippers over-performing in a winter here.

"12 Inches of Snow" How creative for an album title given his name! LOL.

I was looking at CLI sites mainly. I know some areas less, but also some areas more!