Typhoon Tip

It'll be 83 to 85 with dps ~ 62 tomorrow Saturday and Sunday in the interior away from weakening marine contamination. That actually edges above climo at this time. what do we mean by "deep" ?

Ho, great ... https://phys.org/news/2025-08-ozone-planet-thought.html

The idea of tree and/or vegetation modulation on heat is again water vapor related. There's also a component of straight shade helping to block the sun. These two factors are important in that whole idea. Vegetation "sweats." It's called transpiration when it sources from plants. Water evaporates from that source, and that lowers the temperature. Although that does add water to the atmosphere in the form of vapor, but you'll end up with slightly elevated DPs in the vicinity of vegetation, with slightly lowered temps. As that is ongoing, the cooler resulting air is drawn downward because of course cooler air is denser. This principle is illustrated well in the bottom photo - although I can't attest to those actual numbers, but in so far as getting the point across.. that's the idea there. Contrasting, the upper photo doesn't have this process. This is a local cooling effect, however. The temperatures in those respective schematics are in the micro meteorology. Which, per course ... what one experiences in a city/urban setting on a hot day is in fact within a micro-meteorological realm. That would be neighborhood vs neighborhood... Unless the given cityscape is pervasively and comprehensively forested and so forth, it calls into questions the efficacy of offsetting a UHI effects. The collection of sun-exposed concrete surfaces, such as downtown, parking lots... the edifices of the buildings too, to mention the heat output from industrial scaled AC exhaust. It's a tricky math. Lot of summing multiple separate integrals in that calculus. My personal belief is that the UHI capacity goes up with warming CC, and goes back down with cooling CC. I suspect the growth may not be entirely linear, either ( as in going up together). Because different materials have different storing capacitance ... so that changes the contribution into the "UHI bubble" based on different energy source and sinks. It's a coupling of material sciences, with atmospheric science, which is not likely trivial. But intuitively, doesn't seem like that's a swift calculation to make. Just hypothetically... a sunny day in Phoenix AZ on July 10, 1972 may calculated a UHI factor of some 15F over the surrounding country, but that may be closer to 20F in 2025 given the same initial conditions and sunny day. See, the climate is 1C warmer, but there is a disproportionately larger UHI response.

It's a weak ass PRE if that were the case.

Yeah, I lean away ... but admit to some similarities. I tried to provide a little analysis but just sayn' ... we probably can't positive eliminate it altogether.

It looks like a coincidence to me. The exact machinery for PRE, compared to a flat open fast moving S/W in the field, are different. We have the latter. It is far less clear whether the mechanics of PRE are also embedded in that - if perhaps entangled and not easy to parse out. Can't rule it out. I would suggest from what I'm observing that this rain is being generated by a spat of overrunning pulled into vicinity of a right entrance jet escaping through CNE. This will cause this overrunning band without PRE. But its happenstance with an Erin sitting down there. It may give that allusion. Also, Erin is more than 600 miles away. It's closer to 1000 miles away at this time. Not that precise distance has to be a debate ender... just saying that distance does also stress the notion that PRE is involved here.

It hasn't come down hard via those echoes training down Rt 2 down may way. Not anywhere close to enough to make those modeled/graphic numbers people chose to post I'm up to .19" and looking up stream on rad, this is all over with by 3 or 4 oclock. Maybe .5 total unless this steps up

anyway... the bold is a good question. There's a lot of complexity in there but the simplest explanation is water vapor. When there is more water vapor that has been heated, the total atmosphere holds more energy that way - needs more energy to keep water in gaseous form. That keeps the temperature up at night. However, in the day, it can also hold the temp down some, because it takes more energy to heat WV than dry air. The complexity is the relativity of those two. It's still 100/72 on July 10 in Boston ...and that's enough to roast one's nuts.. but, a profile of 104/66 has about the same thermodynamic quotient. Ha ha ... wasn't intending to be all guilty like. It's really more a frustration pointed at the general circumstance. It's a numbers game. Let's think about this logically for a minute. There are 8+ billion human brains walking the Earth. What are the odds that 100% of them are completely capable of objectively intellectualizing CC, and then responding to it with a cogent sanity that is reflected in their response to it and behaviors after the fact? The answer is 0% .... In other words, there is 0% chance that 100% will get it. So that leaves us in a predicament that some portion of 8+ billion are incapable of getting it. What is that number? If it is even 10 percent, we're still talking 800,000,000+ brains powered by carbon fartin' industrialized environmental destruction. This predisposition leads to reticence to the concepts and acceptance of CC caused by carbon fartin', less likely to react proactively in prevention. And, 800,000,000+ is still enough people that even if the remaining 7+ billion were to completely accept and adapt their technology and principles of living around preventing anthropomorphic GW, we're all still doomed... They are doomed because 800,000,000+ is enough to ensure environmental collapse still takes place in spite of everyone else. It's kind of a scary untenable scenario really.

Completely agree here ... I said this myself yesterday or the day before. Consideration of straight up climatology, we've topped the curve thus we must be descending. You know it's my fault? ha. Seriously though, I'm the one that first coined that expression like 15 years ago ...'summer's back is broken,' and now I hate it. Mainly because its use is abused. Perfect. However, I don't take anything in here 'literally', nothing from the social media-sphere for that matter. Most of the time I pass over it and let it be/choose not to involve in it. There's no one to defend someone in here - no one comes to anyone's rescue. So I'm saying this shit in my own defense: I post vastly more with Meteorological information, and/or attempt substance worth the time ( for some..) in here in general, compared to the amount of ongoing back-and-forth semantic chicanery that wastes it for most... So once in a while, when reading someone pushing across a concept as fact , when it's merely what they want/bias, it's hard to resist responding - if that's a failing, meh. There are far worse representations and examples out there amongst humanity, too many of them. And if for nothing else, it's just fun to shatter illusions. Although, it's probably a delusion to think it's making any difference.

It just gets exhausting trying to explain this to the people that can’t synthesize global perspectives; probably as a native intellectual limitation. Which unfortunately is precisely what is needed if somebody’s going to understand how global warming works Dimes to donuts the majority of the people in the denier frame of mind are narrow perspective types

This is a childish perspective though Meteorology is not relegated to a single regions like that we are not decoupled from the continental circumstance. But in the end, this is all just subjective anyway. If the wind switched southwest, that heat would be available to this region. The back of summer being broken should to me mean is no more heat is available or likely to occur. Neither of those circumstances are true at this time and you know why… Because it’s only August 18.

Not surprised we made the mid 70s today

if that asshole has any proxy in the matter, no one will survive the cold and flu season anyway

I'd like to see less than 3/4ths of the mid latitude continent actually below 90F before I'd declare summer's "back broken" - whatever that purely subjective expression really means.. We had a cool week back in July, too - just bear that in mind.

More drought brings earlier autumn leaf fall, Northern Hemisphere study finds

76. incredible out there with < 50 dps and no wind and no cloud.

70 here...

There's all kinds of possibilities re the pattern next week. no one's more likely than the other at this time given what's available via the indexes, as well as poor continuity with the larger synoptic aspects coming from the guidance.

59 low 66 at the moment... Very little air movement for now but some breeze is likely. Full sun has taken over as a sharp clearing line has moved S this last hour. Should make a run at about 72 or 73 for a stellar day. Subjectively a top 10er if this were April. Not so sure in mid August when folks expect 80, tho. Warm enthusiasm may take minor exception, while cold enthusiasm exaggerates significance without awareness that they are (lol) . This air mass is sneaky over-performing cold; not sure folks are really aware of that, nor why. If you look at the surface chart alone, you'd say ...well, you have a polar high bubble-no-trouble in Ontario pressing in. But that structure belies the fact that it is occurring as an anomaly relative to the hydrostatic heights - those being what is commonly referred to as "thickness". Both those, and the non-hydrostatic heights, are still positive. So we have a disproportionately cool low level relative to these metrics. It's more typical on a sunny day in mid August, when thicknesses are 567 dm, to have a surface T in the area of 82. The significance of that analysis is not hugely important to the everyday. However, I see evidences of this kind of warm anomaly ( "echo" ) occurring all the time, if perhaps hidden. Often masked by synoptic noise and/or hidden by a sensible appeal that suspends observing. It feels cool = gloat and don't look any deeper. As a digression... I've often mused that CC's biggest hurdle to overcome is the lack of impact it has to the actual five senses. It doesn't hurt enough? If it was at least more inconvenient. But being a "perceptively invisible" agent, or one that's not inconvenient enough either way, isn't helping it's case. If you want to appeal to the population, which as a bulk density that is too "dense" to anticipate via scientific interference (let alone, if the implication means they have to modulate their life), you need more than warnings from a scientific ambit that whatever reason is always the butt of jokes instead.

Climo's begun the slow decent ... At some point ... January is still going to happen whether summer wants it to or not. It's just a matter of how the speed bumps orient between now and then. those that want that to happen will exaggerate the progress right away. those that don't will ignore the signs as being any kind of descent. somewhere in between reality resides. That means it can still be 100 for a couple or three weeks, but getting lesser possible with time. It also means there can be a cooler air masses with mirror increasing probabilities with time.

Two days ago ... both the numerical teleconnectors, and the spatial-synoptic evolution, from all three ens means, looked "shot across the bow"-esque with the post August 20 range... As Scott also mentioned, there's a signal now to confined that more to just the third-ish week. The last week of the month reverses. I remember commenting a month ago, that I didn't like the August cool idea being floated at the time - memed to death by the usual X suspects - because there has been this leitmotif to lower Pacific NW heights. We may still end the month more marginal-AN. It'll be close. Regardless, whenever the models this season have showed more ridging in Pac NW outlooks, it was proven unstable. Within short days ... new height crash and troughs were digging down the B.C. coast. So long as that return base-state behavior is there, that's a non-linear indicator where the forcing the hemisphere wants to really be - it's your "correction vector". Here we are again... We'll see, but as of this moment starting to characterize as a mere pattern reset.

It’s not impossible, but Id be more willing to bet sea-surface wind stressing patterns over time forced the distribution of thermal anomalies - I’d want to rule that out first. He’s making conjecture so I’m not really faulting him per se but if there’s going to be a formal science out of it, that’s gotta happen. That and any other plausible forces … Eliminate the possibilities to back into the theoretical premise as the remaining explanation.

slightly more dusk light though.

you said "it wouldn't take much" It would take a lot for that - that should be a clue to the extreme unlikeliness without even touching theory.