TheClimateChanger

For a more evidence-based analysis, NCEI shows January has warmed at a rate of about 2F/century on average in the whole of Southeast Michigan. Why the divergence between your numbers? None of them, except the Ann Arbor data is from a single site. According to your analysis (I didn't independently verify), the Ann Arbor data is exactly flat over the last 100 years. But reviewing the data, the time of observation moves from 5 pm to early morning. There is also a bias from the switch to MMTS, both of which are corrected in the NCEI data. The other sites are all amalgamations of distinct stations. Toledo and Detroit go from rooftop stations in downtown [and, in the case of Toledo, very near Lake Erie, which has a warming influence in the winter] to suburban (DTW) or even downright rural (TOL) airport locations, with proper siting on the ground.

You are something else. I love how you always do what you accuse me and @bluewaveof doing. Let me try to understand this: Co-op data good when it shows less warming, co-op data bad when it shows more warming? Am I doing this right? And you always claim I ignore data I don't like but are CONSTANTLY doing the same: "The data is suspiciously cold." My man, this is data collected by the University of Michigan. At least the older data collection was probably handled by the earth sciences department. Are you saying the University of Michigan doesn't/didn't know how to properly collect temperatures and precipitation? It's funny because if I doubt an old record high temperature that's way out of line with surrounding observations, you accuse me of doing this. Now, you are out here complaining about old temperature records from a top public research university. In the hierarchy of things, I always give the most weight to records collected by the Weather Bureau/NWS at first-order sites, followed by universities, experimental farms and state/national forests and parks, since these are the sites that were manned by meteorologists, agronomists, or park rangers [i.e., people with an earth science background]. You also like to go on about cherrypicking start dates (1960s & 70s). I like to use these as a baseline since the data is more consistent [i.e., fewer station moves and less biases] and more relevant to current trends. But you say its cherrypicking. But now, you throw out the observations from the 1800s because you don't like the trend, and insist on showing the trend from 1920s? How is that not considered cherrypicking? Warming since 1880, significant warming since 1960/1970 - oh, but we must only consider the trend from exactly the 1920s, where there is little warming?

Additionally, a number of locations were within a degree or two of record high minimum temperatures. If not for the scattered convection, there probably would have been more records. Rain seems more effective at cooling than nighttime in 2025.

Wow, looks like 95F at Portsmouth, New Hampshire. Some of the highest temperatures observed during the recent heat wave in New England:

Has anyone heard anything about tropical remnants coming next week? I saw a post on Reddit talking about some models showing up to 8 inches of rain from Invest 93L?

Just knew we were due for a good rain bomb.

All I'm saying is the normal is 1F higher than the mean (which I explicitly demonstrated above by comparing the two). Why? I don't know. Doesn't seem to be the case anywhere else, so that's why I was speculating it may be piloting a new method of calculating normals to factor in warming climate. Other than that, I have no more to offer on the topic.

I'm saying the normal was raised by that amount above and beyond what the mean of the 30-year average was observed to be. Not that the normal was increased by that amount relative to 1981-2010. It increased by the amount of the observed increase, plus an extra degree or two at those locations. Other stations also had smaller extra bumps. I don't think this was done elsewhere. Generally, the normals line up with the calculated mean.

I just posted two examples above, where the normal is 1F and 1.9F above the 1991-2020 mean.

You can see this phenomenon in the 1991-2020 normals for Cleveland and Toledo. You can see they tack on an extra ~1F to every month at Cleveland and extra ~2F to every month at Toledo. Must be some sort of program they are planning on rolling out nationwide with the 2001-2030 normals. I guess they think if they just jack up what is normal, people won't notice how abnormal it is? If that was the goal, it doesn't seem to be working too well - as it is still almost always above normal at those locations, just not by as much as other locations nearby.

Not saying it is the case there, but I know NOAA plays fast and loose with some of these normals. Not enough to raise what is "normal" every 10 years... I know in northern Ohio, they just decided to tack on another degree or two above the calculated 30-year means and call that "normal." Not sure if they are piloting new climate normals that are supposed to factor in climate change or what. Very misleading.

Wow, look at these minimum temperature departures! Lots of +5-7s showing up.

Just an incredible torch. I'm not even worried about the rankings. A lot of these have big site discontinuities. But tons of places at +4 - even some +5s and 6s. I didn't even know it was possible to get such big departures in July.

Yeah, just saw that on Twitter/X. Professor Jacobson noted it. So much for all that cooling... although, looking at the actual numbers, it does look to be a little low hanging fruit compared to the weeks before and after.

Boston tied its daily record high minimum temperature of 74F yesterday.

New daily record high for July 14 in the GLSEA database. Prior record for today's date is shown in red trace (2005). The coldest for today's date is highlighted in green (2001).

Checking in on the lake temperatures. Very favorable swimming conditions, with the exception of Superior. Lake Erie looks like its cooking this year.

I must point out that, in a rather shocking turn of events, the proverbial mercury fell to 63F last night shortly before midnight standard time, and continued slipping all the way to 59F, as a northwesterly flow filtered in cooler, drier, but rather filthy air from Canada. This is certainly nothing unusual for the city of Cleveland in July, but it did bring about the end of this streak at 23 consecutive days with a low at or above 65F. Looking at the higher streaks, it's worth pointing out that the official observations didn't move to the airport until June 1, 1941, but records date back to 1938. There was no 27-day streak at the airport in 1938, that's for sure... not even close. And, in 1872, the thermometer was housed in a recessed window on the north side of a building downtown. So, yeah, I don't really think that's comparable to modern measurements. While Cleveland Hopkins International Airport saw the temperature drop to 59F this morning. The observed low at Burke Lakefront Airport was 66F.

This is a good point. In Texas and out west, they are fighting climate change by seeding the hell out of all of their clouds. I don't know why they don't implement a rain depletion program in the east. Like yesterday was a disaster waiting to happen with those slow-moving heavy thunderstorms. Then, it's like - oh no, the subway is flooding... the NJ Turnpike is submerged! I wonder if they could have zapped the clouds with directed electromagnetic energy or laser beams to heat the surrounding atmosphere up, potentially weakening the advancing storm system? Has there been any research into this?

Wow! Hopefully, these superheated lake and sea surface conditions add enough moisture to the atmosphere to keep such high temperatures at bay for the next heat dome!

The all-time record high is 80F, set on July 25, 2011, August 4, 2011, and August 14-16, 1988. I think that could be the next domino to fall.

Looks like the water temperature at the Buffalo crib site (water intake for the city of Buffalo) on Lake Erie reached a scorching 77F this morning, which exceeds the daily record by 1F (continuous record since 1927). Keep in mind, this reading comes from a depth of 30 or 40 feet below the water surface, so the nearshore temperature could be several degrees higher. 139FZUS51 KBUF 151403NSHBUFNearshore Marine ForecastNational Weather Service Buffalo NY1003 AM EDT Tue Jul 15 2025For waters within five nautical miles of shoreWaves are the significant wave height - the average of the highest1/3 of the wave spectrum. Occasional wave height is the average ofthe highest 1/10 of the wave spectrum.LEZ020-152100-Upper Niagara River and Buffalo Harbor-1003 AM EDT Tue Jul 15 2025.THIS AFTERNOON...Light and variable winds. Sunny..TONIGHT...Light and variable winds. Mainly clear..WEDNESDAY...South winds 10 knots or less becoming southwest. Achance of showers and thunderstorms..WEDNESDAY NIGHT...Southwest winds 10 knots or less. A chance ofshowers and thunderstorms in the evening, then a chance ofshowers overnight..THURSDAY...Southwest winds 5 to 10 knots becoming northwest.Showers likely with a chance of thunderstorms..FRIDAY...North winds 5 to 10 knots becoming light and variable.Mostly cloudy, then clearing..SATURDAY...Southeast winds less than 10 knots becoming south. Achance of showers Saturday night.Winds and waves higher in and near thunderstorms.The water temperature off Buffalo is 77 degrees.