July 2025 Discussion-OBS - seasonable summer variability

[LibertyBell]

18 hours ago, donsutherland1 said:

JFK has been warmer than Central Park on a number of occasions in July. The last such time was 2009 (JFK: 73.68° and Central Park: 73.66°) The largest difference was 0.3° in 1969 (JFK: 75.0° and Central Park: 74.7°). It's only happened during cool July cases. 2025 would be the first very warm July case where JFK was warmer.

I would have thought they would have done it in July 2010 when JFK had three 100+ days in a four day stretch.

 

[LibertyBell]

17 hours ago, Dark Star said:

Unfortunately, the world is still dangerous.  Technology has outpaced the advancement of human nature.  Though we wish to see a utopian world, it cannot be achieved until we are ALL ready...

we really need a world government.... I dont see that happening for a long time.

[LibertyBell]

23 minutes ago, Sundog said:

AI says over 300 million Chinese don't have indoor plumbing. 

They want their government to build as many coal plants as possible, climate change is very low on their priority list. 

I have to constantly remind people that climate change only becomes an issue for people only after all their basic needs have been met, and because the West has basically done that, you see the most activitism for climate change from Western countries. 

The main issue that no one really talks about is countries like China and India simply have too many people.  It's simple math really, when you have billions of people on a planet, the amount of resources available per person is much less.  Most of the problems we face today (including climate change) would be far less daunting if we had a smaller world population.

 

[LibertyBell]

9 minutes ago, Sundog said:

Why are they even building coal plants then? This isn't 1960.  

 

we also need to get India sped up, they have 3x our population and half the renewable capacity?

 

[LibertyBell]

18 minutes ago, Sundog said:

It's ok, China is allowed to build coal power plants at a furious pace because they emit lower emissions per capita. 

They also industrialized later than us so even though all modern clean energy technology exists for all the people of the world, they're allowed to build a million coal plants for the next 50 years. 

The Earth understands. 

 

China doesn't care about helping to *save* the world, no altruistic philosophy there.  They are clearly using an *all of the above* approach which means more fossil fuel plants as well as more renewable energy.  It's probably because their population is so high they can't be all renewable.  It's too bad nuclear is being phased out, because it would help solve the CC problem and meet the capacity needs.

and this is something I always like to tell people who think nuclear fission is too *toxic*-- did you know that the radioactive pollution from coal plants exceed the radioactive pollution from nuclear plants?

 

[LibertyBell]

13 minutes ago, Sundog said:

Basically zero coal plants have been built in Western countries over the last 20 years. 

China has built between 200 and 300 coal plants in the last 10 years 

Lol come on guys 

I think Germany is the unfortunate exception to that. I read somewhere that Germany was shutting down nuclear plants and building more coal plants too.

[LibertyBell]

8 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

The main issue that no one really talks about is countries like China simply have too many people.  It's simple math really, when you have billions of people on a planet, the amount of resources available per person is much less.  Most of the problems we face today (including climate change) would be far less daunting if we had a smaller world population.

 

There's actually a mathematical formula that quantifies this, according to that we currently consume in 6 months the amount of resources the planet produces in 1 year.  In other words, we are heavily involved in removing resources from the planet's *savings bank*-- which are quickly being depleted.  We passed the tipping point (of using the same amount of resources in 1 year that the planet produces in 1 year) back in the early 70s.  And now we're using them twice as quickly as we did back then.

[SACRUS]

24 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

1995: An intense heat wave affected much of the Midwest for a 4-day period beginning on this day. The worst effects of the heat were noted in the Chicago metropolitan area, where 583 people died from the heat. Temperatures across the region reached as high as 104 degrees, overnight lows on falling to the upper 70s to low 80s. Dew point temperatures in the upper 70s to low 80s created heat indexes peaking at 125 degrees. Electricity and water usage reached record levels, causing periodic outages.

This was the peak of the heat in 1995, centered on Chicago (similar to how the peak of the heat in 1980 was centered on St Louis, with similar lethal results.)

 

The high in Chicago was 106 on back to back days, Tony??

Highs:

EWR: 99 (2011)
NYC: 99 (1966)
LGA: 98 (1966)
JFK: 98 (2011)

I didn't know NYC had a 99 day in 1966, did they have 5 99+ days in 1966, matching the total from 1949? Of course the heat in 1966 was more intense since 4 of those days were 100+

 

2011: High humidity levels and dew points were higher during the summer 2011 compared with 2010, resulting in unusually warm nighttime temperatures. A low temperature of 81 at Richmond on July 12th was the first ever daily low of 80 and above. A steady southwest wind overnight also contributed to this event. (Ref.NWS, Wakefield, Virginia - A New Record High Minimum Temperature)
 

I also didn't remember this early bout of heat in 2011, I thought the heat was centered around July 22-23 when we went way above 100 all around the region??

1996: Hurricane Bertha makes landfall near Wrightsville Beach, NC with maximum winds of 105 mph, but the storm surge dealt the most devastation. The U.S. Virgin Islands, along with North Carolina, were declared federal disaster areas. Surveys indicate that Bertha damaged almost 2,500 homes on St. Thomas and St. John. For many, it was the second hit in the ten months since Hurricane Marilyn devastated the same area. The primary effects in North Carolina were to the coastal counties and included storm surge flooding and beach erosion, roof damage, piers washed away, fallen trees and damage to crops. Over 5,000 homes were damaged, mostly from storm surge. Storm total rainfall amounts ranged from 5 to 8 inches along a coastal strip from South Carolina to Maine. Overall, as many as 12 deaths resulted with 8 in the U.S. and territories.

I remember this hurricane well, it was a Cat 3 just before landfall and tracked up the coast passing right over JFK! It was a weekend and I was in the Poconos, where we had 7 inches of rain!  I didn't see rain like this again until Floyd came up here in 1999, ending a summer drought with 10 inches of rain in Eastern PA and NJ.

 

1936: The hottest three-day periods up to this time in United States history occurred beginning on this date as the average temperature was 88.5°; the second warmest such period occurred three days earlier. (Ref. Wilson Wx. History)

simply wild how hot this summer truly was and widespread conus heat.

 

1842: One of the most severe hurricanes in the history of the coastal Carolinas struck the Outer Banks of North Carolina on the evening of the 12th into the 13th. The entire village of Portsmouth was destroyed except for one building. The storm apparently passed inland near Norfolk, VA and caused massive flooding from Virginia into Pennsylvania. (Ref. Wilson Wx. History)

 

Tony, do you have any info on how strong this early TC was and on its track, I assume it passed inland west of us?

 

The first documented hurricane of 1842 severely affected coastal North Carolina from Wilmington to Currituck on July 12. Its center likely remained just east of Cape Hatteras as it washed away houses, drowned livestock, and wreaked havoc on shipping interests.[6] Nearly 30 ships ran aground near Ocracoke Inlet, and two unidentified vessels were wrecked on the shoals near Cape Hatteras with all hands lost; seven more men drowned while trying to salvage goods from the shipwrecks.[7] In late October, a message in a bottle was recovered at Bermuda with an account of the storm from the captain and first mate of the imperiled schooner Lexington, presumed lost at sea.[7] In total, around 40 ships were lost.[8] Although sparse records preclude an accurate death toll, the National Hurricane Center lists the cyclone among those that may have caused 25 or more fatalities.[9]

Described by one writer as "one of the worst in the history of coastal Carolina", the storm reportedly demolished all but one structure in the village of Portsmouth. Further inland, at Washington, damaging gale-force winds continued through July 13 and 14, and boats in the Albemarle Sound broke free of their moorings. Part of the Wilmington and Raleigh Railroad was washed out, preventing mail from reaching Charleston, South Carolina. After its close pass to North Carolina, the storm moved toward the northwest and made landfall near Norfolk, Virginia. Torrential rainfall affected the Mid-Atlantic states, with flooding reported along major rivers; the Schuylkill River in Philadelphia, for instance, rose 5 ft (1.5 m) over its banks.[7]

[LibertyBell]

1 minute ago, SACRUS said:

 

The first documented hurricane of 1842 severely affected coastal North Carolina from Wilmington to Currituck on July 12. Its center likely remained just east of Cape Hatteras as it washed away houses, drowned livestock, and wreaked havoc on shipping interests.[6] Nearly 30 ships ran aground near Ocracoke Inlet, and two unidentified vessels were wrecked on the shoals near Cape Hatteras with all hands lost; seven more men drowned while trying to salvage goods from the shipwrecks.[7] In late October, a message in a bottle was recovered at Bermuda with an account of the storm from the captain and first mate of the imperiled schooner Lexington, presumed lost at sea.[7] In total, around 40 ships were lost.[8] Although sparse records preclude an accurate death toll, the National Hurricane Center lists the cyclone among those that may have caused 25 or more fatalities.[9]

Described by one writer as "one of the worst in the history of coastal Carolina", the storm reportedly demolished all but one structure in the village of Portsmouth. Further inland, at Washington, damaging gale-force winds continued through July 13 and 14, and boats in the Albemarle Sound broke free of their moorings. Part of the Wilmington and Raleigh Railroad was washed out, preventing mail from reaching Charleston, South Carolina. After its close pass to North Carolina, the storm moved toward the northwest and made landfall near Norfolk, Virginia. Torrential rainfall affected the Mid-Atlantic states, with flooding reported along major rivers; the Schuylkill River in Philadelphia, for instance, rose 5 ft (1.5 m) over its banks.[7]

Message in a bottle, wow those were the days.....

Sounds like it had a coastal hugger kind of track? Lots of rain and surge up to Long Island on a southerly flow? No mention of wind speeds or lowest pressure though....

 

[SACRUS]

26 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

 

 

The high in Chicago was 106 on back to back days, Tony??

Highs:

EWR: 99 (2011)
NYC: 99 (1966)
LGA: 98 (1966)
JFK: 98 (2011)

I didn't know NYC had a 99 day in 1966, did they have 5 99+ days in 1966, matching the total from 1949? Of course the heat in 1966 was more intense since 4 of those days were 100+

 

 

 

Chicago was 106 On this date Jul 12 , 1995


NYC 1966

 

June 1966 New York City Weather

Day	High (°F)	Low (°F)	Precip. (inches)	Snow (inches)
June 1	70	52	0.00	0.0
June 2	74	52	0.00	0.0
June 3	84	56	0.00	0.0
June 4	90	63	0.00	0.0
June 5	95	71	0.00	0.0
June 6	90	72	0.00	0.0
June 7	86	70	0.36	0.0
June 8	87	70	0.00	0.0
June 9	86	69	0.00	0.0
June 10	82	58	0.60	0.0
June 11	72	53	0.00	0.0
June 12	70	57	0.02	0.0
June 13	74	58	0.00	0.0
June 14	89	68	0.01	0.0
June 15	86	67	0.00	0.0
June 16	85	68	0.00	0.0
June 17	83	63	0.14	0.0
June 18	84	63	0.00	0.0
June 19	77	65	0.00	0.0
June 20	88	64	0.00	0.0
June 21	93	68	0.00	0.0
June 22	86	68	0.00	0.0
June 23	94	65	0.00	0.0
June 24	94	75	0.00	0.0
June 25	88	64	0.00	0.0
June 26	82	64	0.00	0.0
June 27	101	70	0.00	0.0
June 28	93	76	0.00	0.0
June 29	92	73	0.04	0.0
June 30	94	73	0.00	0.0

July 1966 New York City Weather

Day	High (°F)	Low (°F)	Precip. (inches)	Snow (inches)
July 1	87	73	0.00	0.0
July 2	100	72	0.00	0.0
July 3	103	76	0.00	0.0
July 4	98	77	0.00	0.0
July 5	88	71	0.00	0.0
July 6	91	71	0.00	0.0
July 7	93	74	0.00	0.0
July 8	91	68	0.04	0.0
July 9	91	66	0.00	0.0
July 10	91	71	0.00	0.0
July 11	94	74	0.00	0.0
July 12	99	74	0.00	0.0
July 13	101	78	0.00	0.0
July 14	95	77	0.00	0.0
July 15	88	66	0.01	0.0
July 16	83	63	0.00	0.0
July 17	85	64	0.00	0.0
July 18	95	66	0.00	0.0
July 19	92	67	0.56	0.0
July 20	81	62	0.00	0.0
July 21	85	61	0.00	0.0
July 22	90	63	0.00	0.0
July 23	88	67	0.00	0.0
July 24	87	66	0.00	0.0
July 25	88	67	0.00	0.0
July 26	97	70	0.00	0.0
July 27	85	67	0.10	0.0
July 28	81	71	0.05	0.0
July 29	89	70	0.49	0.0
July 30	77	65	0.00	0.0
July 31	85	64	0.00	0.0

August 1966 New York City Weather

Day	High (°F)	Low (°F)	Precip. (inches)	Snow (inches)
August 1	93	65	0.00	0.0
August 2	82	71	0.14	0.0
August 3	84	62	0.00	0.0
August 4	82	63	0.00	0.0
August 5	88	67	0.00	0.0
August 6	92	65	0.00	0.0
August 7	88	70	0.00	0.0
August 8	87	68	0.00	0.0
August 9	76	70	0.00	0.0
August 10	90	71	0.00	0.0
August 11	92	71	0.43	0.0
August 12	86	70	0.03	0.0
August 13	85	61	0.00	0.0
August 14	83	61	0.28	0.0
August 15	77	61	0.21	0.0
August 16	78	69	0.63	0.0
August 17	87	68	0.00	0.0
August 18	91	66	0.00	0.0
August 19	94	72	0.00	0.0
August 20	86	70	0.00	0.0
August 21	83	66	0.00	0.0
August 22	87	71	0.00	0.0
August 23	85	73	0.15	0.0
August 24	81	65	0.00	0.0
August 25	80	64	0.00	0.0
August 26	85	65	0.00	0.0
August 27	89	65	0.00	0.0
August 28	88	70	0.00	0.0
August 29	87	71	0.00	0.0
August 30	92	73	0.00	0.0
August 31	91	72	0.02	0.0

September 1966 New York City Weather

Day	High (°F)	Low (°F)	Precip. (inches)	Snow (inches)
September 1	87	69	0.00	0.0
September 2	91	70	0.00	0.0

[LibertyBell]

13 minutes ago, SACRUS said:

 

Chicago was 106 On this date Jul 12 , 1995


NYC 1966

 

June 1966 New York City Weather

Day	High (°F)	Low (°F)	Precip. (inches)	Snow (inches)
June 1	70	52	0.00	0.0
June 2	74	52	0.00	0.0
June 3	84	56	0.00	0.0
June 4	90	63	0.00	0.0
June 5	95	71	0.00	0.0
June 6	90	72	0.00	0.0
June 7	86	70	0.36	0.0
June 8	87	70	0.00	0.0
June 9	86	69	0.00	0.0
June 10	82	58	0.60	0.0
June 11	72	53	0.00	0.0
June 12	70	57	0.02	0.0
June 13	74	58	0.00	0.0
June 14	89	68	0.01	0.0
June 15	86	67	0.00	0.0
June 16	85	68	0.00	0.0
June 17	83	63	0.14	0.0
June 18	84	63	0.00	0.0
June 19	77	65	0.00	0.0
June 20	88	64	0.00	0.0
June 21	93	68	0.00	0.0
June 22	86	68	0.00	0.0
June 23	94	65	0.00	0.0
June 24	94	75	0.00	0.0
June 25	88	64	0.00	0.0
June 26	82	64	0.00	0.0
June 27	101	70	0.00	0.0
June 28	93	76	0.00	0.0
June 29	92	73	0.04	0.0
June 30	94	73	0.00	0.0

July 1966 New York City Weather

Day	High (°F)	Low (°F)	Precip. (inches)	Snow (inches)
July 1	87	73	0.00	0.0
July 2	100	72	0.00	0.0
July 3	103	76	0.00	0.0
July 4	98	77	0.00	0.0
July 5	88	71	0.00	0.0
July 6	91	71	0.00	0.0
July 7	93	74	0.00	0.0
July 8	91	68	0.04	0.0
July 9	91	66	0.00	0.0
July 10	91	71	0.00	0.0
July 11	94	74	0.00	0.0
July 12	99	74	0.00	0.0
July 13	101	78	0.00	0.0
July 14	95	77	0.00	0.0
July 15	88	66	0.01	0.0
July 16	83	63	0.00	0.0
July 17	85	64	0.00	0.0
July 18	95	66	0.00	0.0
July 19	92	67	0.56	0.0
July 20	81	62	0.00	0.0
July 21	85	61	0.00	0.0
July 22	90	63	0.00	0.0
July 23	88	67	0.00	0.0
July 24	87	66	0.00	0.0
July 25	88	67	0.00	0.0
July 26	97	70	0.00	0.0
July 27	85	67	0.10	0.0
July 28	81	71	0.05	0.0
July 29	89	70	0.49	0.0
July 30	77	65	0.00	0.0
July 31	85	64	0.00	0.0

August 1966 New York City Weather

Day	High (°F)	Low (°F)	Precip. (inches)	Snow (inches)
August 1	93	65	0.00	0.0
August 2	82	71	0.14	0.0
August 3	84	62	0.00	0.0
August 4	82	63	0.00	0.0
August 5	88	67	0.00	0.0
August 6	92	65	0.00	0.0
August 7	88	70	0.00	0.0
August 8	87	68	0.00	0.0
August 9	76	70	0.00	0.0
August 10	90	71	0.00	0.0
August 11	92	71	0.43	0.0
August 12	86	70	0.03	0.0
August 13	85	61	0.00	0.0
August 14	83	61	0.28	0.0
August 15	77	61	0.21	0.0
August 16	78	69	0.63	0.0
August 17	87	68	0.00	0.0
August 18	91	66	0.00	0.0
August 19	94	72	0.00	0.0
August 20	86	70	0.00	0.0
August 21	83	66	0.00	0.0
August 22	87	71	0.00	0.0
August 23	85	73	0.15	0.0
August 24	81	65	0.00	0.0
August 25	80	64	0.00	0.0
August 26	85	65	0.00	0.0
August 27	89	65	0.00	0.0
August 28	88	70	0.00	0.0
August 29	87	71	0.00	0.0
August 30	92	73	0.00	0.0
August 31	91	72	0.02	0.0

September 1966 New York City Weather

Day	High (°F)	Low (°F)	Precip. (inches)	Snow (inches)
September 1	87	69	0.00	0.0
September 2	91	70	0.00	0.0

excellent thanks Tony, so 5 99+ days just like 1949, but in 1949 only 2 of those days were 100+ in 1966 4 of those days were 100+ (in three separate heatwaves wow).

JFK had three consecutive 100+ days in July, including on the 4th, on the day NYC peaked at 98.

In 1966, 35 total 90+ days at NYC Tony? That's very high (around the same as 1944)!!

[forkyfork]

3 minutes ago, Sundog said:

Why are they even building coal plants then? This isn't 1960.  

 

[WestBabylonWeather]

The mostly sunny thing isn’t working out 

[bluewave]

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

I thought the strongest WAR happens when there isn't a sea breeze? Take 1993 for example.  The WAR was so strong, it came inland over NC and gave us a westerly flow for most of the summer.

In recent summers, the WAR has been less strong, allowing more fronts to get hung up here and being further offshore thus causing the onshore flow.  In the 90s those fronts would be hung up over the Midwest instead of here, that's why you got the Great Flood of 1993, the WAR was so strong it kept the fronts a thousand miles away from us and enveloped us in a westerly flow all summer long

 

When the WAR pushes into New England from the east we get more high pressure there leading to onshore flow here. Back in the old days we would get a strong ridge over the Great Lakes leading to more westerly flow here. But these days that area gets more troughs over the summer. 

 

[FPizz]

28 minutes ago, WestBabylonWeather said:

The mostly sunny thing isn’t working out 

Wow a weather post. Same here, about 20% sun.  Warm though, 87/72.  

[Sundog]

58 minutes ago, forkyfork said:

I'm not sure what this has to do with what I said. 

What incentive does China have today to keep building so many coal plants when there are so many other alternatives that weren't available in years past?

[forkyfork]

2 minutes ago, Sundog said:

I'm not sure what this has to do with what I said. 

What incentive does China have today to keep building so many coal plants when there are so many other alternatives that weren't available in years past?

[Brian5671]

partly sunny here all day...84

[Wannabehippie]

2 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

Thorium reactors have a bright future too.

Thorium, molten salt, lead cooled. sodium cooled, gas cooled, Gen IV reactors all are supposed to produce the more energy with the same amount of fuel as existing reactors. Some can even be re-fueled while still online. Waste products decay in centuries, rather than thousands of years. So far only China has brought 1 Gen IV reactor online.

 

[Sundog]

1 hour ago, forkyfork said:

Not sure how you continually posting per capita emissions and historic emissions helps anything. 

The US can disappear tomorrow and 90% of the problem will still be there. 

Good luck on solving that 90%. 

 

[TWCCraig]

Down to 75

Actually a very light mist, crummy day. Unfortunately tomorrow looks the same

[forkyfork]

1 minute ago, Sundog said:

Not sure how you continually posting per capita emissions and historic emissions helps anything. 

The US can disappear tomorrow and 90% of the problem will still be there. 

Good luck on solving that 90%. 

 

how many cars do you own

[LibertyBell]

6 minutes ago, TWCCraig said:

Down to 75

Actually a very light mist, crummy day. Unfortunately tomorrow looks the same

Looks like those forecasts for sunshine didn't work out.

The plague of the stalled front because the Bermuda High isn't strong enough to keep the fronts well to our west.

 

[LibertyBell]

1 hour ago, FPizz said:

Wow a weather post. Same here, about 20% sun.  Warm though, 87/72.  

Some of us make a large mix and variety of posts, from weather to climate to sports etc lol-- it keeps things interesting

 

[LibertyBell]

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

When the WAR pushes into New England from the east we get more high pressure there leading to onshore flow here. Back in the old days we would get a strong ridge over the Great Lakes leading to more westerly flow here. But these days that area gets more troughs over the summer. 

 

But when we had heatwaves back in years like 1993 and 1999 that lasted 7-11 days, was that because the Bermuda high was strong enough to hold back fronts to our west instead of letting them stall over the area leading to all this cloudy weather, Chris?

[LibertyBell]

2 hours ago, WestBabylonWeather said:

The mostly sunny thing isn’t working out 

Definitely not.

The old forecast of cloudy Saturday and partly sunny Sunday might work out after all.

[LibertyBell]

2 hours ago, forkyfork said:

Interesting to see Malaysia way up on this list.  Didn't know they had a high fossil fuel consumption, I do know about their deforestation efforts and corrupt palm oil plantations (similar to Indonesia.)

 

[LibertyBell]

41 minutes ago, Sundog said:

Not sure how you continually posting per capita emissions and historic emissions helps anything. 

The US can disappear tomorrow and 90% of the problem will still be there. 

Good luck on solving that 90%. 

 

It's definitely a human nature thing not a US vs rest of the world thing.

The fossil fuel cartels are large multinational corporations and they hold sway over most of the world's governments -- this is why you see their lobbyists even at UN climate conventions.

If you want to see real decisive action against climate change (or against anything else that is a problem in society today), you need to ban corporate lobbyists completely just like we did with big tobacco lobbyists.  And corporate lobbying is a global problem that extends far beyond this country.

I realized that when I started reading stories coming out of the UK about judges imprisoning peaceful climate change activists, including college professors and climate scientists at the behest of fossil fuel companies.  The judges put these scientists and professors in prison even before they went on trial (if there even was a trial) as a way to silence them from protesting.  They were released in a few days to a few weeks, kept in prison long enough to try to teach them a lesson not to protest.

[TWCCraig]

36 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Looks like those forecasts for sunshine didn't work out.

The plague of the stalled front because the Bermuda High isn't strong enough to keep the fronts well to our west.

 

Most models I was looking at had us partly to mostly cloudy for today and tomorrow, between 50-90% cloud cover approximately, so not far off. I saw some TV forecasts that didn't even mention the cloud cover though.

We are stuck in this perpetually moist airmass with dews constantly near 70 and above. It seems lows dont even drop into the 60s anymore in July here because it's so humid. Guess we should be thankful, there's so many fires burning right now in Canada that if we got a cool dry Canadian airmass right now our skies would still be gray lol

[bluewave]

36 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

But when we had heatwaves back in years like 1993 and 1999 that lasted 7-11 days, was that because the Bermuda high was strong enough to hold back fronts to our west instead of letting them stall over the area leading to all this cloudy weather, Chris?

Our longest heatwave around the area was 20 days from 7-29-88 to 8-17-88 at Newark. The ridge axis and strongest 500mb height anomaly was centered over the Great Lakes. At the surface the Bermuda high was pressed to our south with lower pressure over New England keeping the flow more SW. 

 

 

 

Data for NEWARK LIBERTY INTL AP, NJ
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.

1988-07-29	95
1988-07-30	99
1988-07-31	90
1988-08-01	91
1988-08-02	94
1988-08-03	93
1988-08-04	92
1988-08-05	90
1988-08-06	90
1988-08-07	93
1988-08-08	90
1988-08-09	92
1988-08-10	93
1988-08-11	97
1988-08-12	95
1988-08-13	98
1988-08-14	98
1988-08-15	99
1988-08-16	92
1988-08-17	90