Ju-ply 2026 Obs and Disco - Kicking it off with heat, humidity, and ... severe?

[dendrite]

43 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

how and perhaps what on Earth are you seeing here that looks like anything  

With the MADIS charts you look for step changes or changes in trends. There’s a step change in there around the beginning of October last year. Positive error means the station is running cooler than expected; negative error means it’s running warmer than expected. Traditionally BOS has run positive error (cooler than MADIS “expects”) during the warm season. I marked in blue curves above the nighttime temps centered over the 7/1 plots. This warm season you don’t see that…it’s flatlined in the negative error (warmer than expected). The funny thing is that the max temps are running cooler than expected. The net is a little warmer in the means. I’m not sure what’s going on, but it’s almost like when you mount your sensor on the north side of your house…you’re keeping it in permanent shade during the day, but you’re getting radiative heat from the house at night.

 

[Typhoon Tip]

'normal' is a result of all events mixed together.   Conceptually, even bone-heads ( well.. not Trump supporters) can see that the odds of any future event landing a result squarely on a number that is a mix of everything is thus remote.  That means that actually hitting an arbitrarily occurring value dead on whatever that "normal" value is, is no different than the Lotto.  Very low odds.  Basically ... everything that occurs in nature, perhaps well over 90% likelihood, is going to be ABnormal.  This is particularly true for decimals (to the right) of the whole number - the more of them ... the more likely you will not ever see a 'normal' daily high temperature.  The significance of the abnormality is what is really needed to be evaluated for that ... we can rely in large part on common sense.  If the normal is 82 and it is 104 that quite dope-slapping is obviously more significant that 82.1. 

But it sounds like y'all could use a refresh, or perhaps a first time introduction to what is known in statistical science as 'Chi-Square test'.  A formula that produces a rational value, then interpretive as a method for determining if the frequency differs from expected result and by how much.

It looks like this ...  

                                                                                                         (  ...that outta clear things up )

 

 

[dendrite]

The thing to do would be compare the BOS max and min departures with the other sites going back to spring 2025 and seeing if they start deviating last fall.

[Sey-Mour Snow]

4 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

'normal' is a result of all events mixed together.   Conceptually even a bone-heads ( well.. not Trump supporters) can see that the odds of any future event landing a result squarely on a number that is a mix of everything is remote, that means that actually hitting a normal value dead on is (philosophically) very low odds.  This is particularly true for decimals (to the right) of the whole number

But it sounds like y'all could use a refresh, or perhaps a first time introduction to what is known in statistical science as 'Chi-Square test'.  A formula that produces a rational value, then interpretive as a method for determining if the frequency differs from expected result.

It looks like this ...  

                                                                                                           ...that outta clear things up

 

 

Ya I was about to say the same exact thing, 

[Typhoon Tip]

7 minutes ago, dendrite said:

With the MADIS charts you look for step changes or changes in trends. There’s a step change in there around the beginning of October last year. Positive error means the station is running cooler than expected; negative error means it’s running warmer than expected. Traditionally BOS has run positive error (cooler than MADIS “expects”) during the warm season. I marked in blue curves above the nighttime temps centered over the 7/1 plots. This warm season you don’t see that…it’s flatlined in the negative error (warmer than expected). The funny thing is that the max temps are running cooler than expected. The net is a little warmer in the means. I’m not sure what’s going on, but it’s almost like when you mount your sensor on the north side of your house…you’re keeping it in permanent shade during the day, but you’re getting radiative heat from the house at night.

 

Oh, o-kay. I see.  yeah, and that's going to be dubious for obvious reasons.  

Of course, muah hahaha if it is a climate threshold being breached.   Ha.    I guess that would be easily sussed out though if we looked at all sites and if they all exhibited the same behavior than the ( speak of the devil) significance of that above would be more useful.  

[ma blizzard]

28 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Augdewst looks hotter and hotter each successive ensemble run. Super Ninos love end humid hot summers well into fall

we’ve been trying to tell them 

[weatherwiz]

21 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

'normal' is a result of all events mixed together.   Conceptually, even bone-heads ( well.. not Trump supporters) can see that the odds of any future event landing a result squarely on a number that is a mix of everything is thus remote.  That means that actually hitting an arbitrarily occurring value dead on whatever that normal value is, is no different than the Lotto.  Very low odds.  Basically ... everything that occurs in nature, perhaps well over 90% likelihood, is going to be ABnormal.  This is particularly true for decimals (to the right) of the whole number - the more of them ... the more likely you will not ever see a 'normal' daily high temperature.  The significance of the abnormality is what is really needed to be evaluated for that ... we can rely in large part on common sense.  If the normal is 82 and it is 104 that quite dope-slapping obviously more significant that 82.1. 

But it sounds like y'all could use a refresh, or perhaps a first time introduction to what is known in statistical science as 'Chi-Square test'.  A formula that produces a rational value, then interpretive as a method for determining if the frequency differs from expected result and by how much.

It looks like this ...  

                                                                                                         (  ...that outta clear things up )

 

 

 

Did a few assignments in my Quantitative Analysis class using R recently. Fun stuff...interesting programming language. 

[tamarack]

12 hours ago, Damage In Tolland said:

There’s posters here ( ACATT) as an example .. that think this is chilly and below normal and that the month of July is and will finish BN. It’s hard to understand or fathom , but just look at their posts 

I lean ACATT by preference (not forecasting) but think we'll finish July AN, thanks to its first 4 days.  7/1-4 was 10.3° AN while the next 19 days have run 0.6° BN and I think the remainder will be close to norms here.

Enter August 2, 1975!

PWM: 103     BGR: 102    BHB:  100 at water's edge.  All 3 all-timers.
Since my first swim in Maine salt water (August 1952), Hot Saturday is my only time of swimming in actual warm salt water here, just south of Otter Cliffs in Acadia.

[Typhoon Tip]

10 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

Did a few assignments in my Quantitative Analysis class using R recently. Fun stuff...interesting programming language. 

heh...some afterthoughts..

It's primarily used in experimenting theorems - create a model based upon a theory that describes how whatever in nature being observed, works.  Then, feed it inputs, test the output for significance (chi test) against the other result that occurred naturally.  If the output ( as it goes...) lands on .05, and in particular, there was pig ton of data going into the the test ( sample size) then one's theory that describes the system is robust.  

Blah blah blah, but what is fascinating about the the last 20 years of human folly we lovingly refer to as "civility" ... arguably the more advanced technologically we are getting, "civility" as a qualitative distinction is eroding in proportion... That's A.   B, the reason for that is that ( perhaps conjecture) is the law of lessening returns ...together with perhaps the natural low of least physical action.  Together, human kind expresses there background forcing as having spontaneously created this refrain that if one does not understand complexity, than it is automatically insignificant - therefore, they don't have to obey any rationalism that should merely even suggest they deviate their course.   

Which leads us perhaps to C,  the precise mechanism in the Fermi Paradox explanation that our species is now on a collision course with...

[Psychguy]

37 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

'normal' is a result of all events mixed together.   Conceptually, even bone-heads ( well.. not Trump supporters) can see that the odds of any future event landing a result squarely on a number that is a mix of everything is thus remote.  That means that actually hitting an arbitrarily occurring value dead on whatever that "normal" value is, is no different than the Lotto.  Very low odds.  Basically ... everything that occurs in nature, perhaps well over 90% likelihood, is going to be ABnormal.  This is particularly true for decimals (to the right) of the whole number - the more of them ... the more likely you will not ever see a 'normal' daily high temperature.  The significance of the abnormality is what is really needed to be evaluated for that ... we can rely in large part on common sense.  If the normal is 82 and it is 104 that quite dope-slapping is obviously more significant that 82.1. 

But it sounds like y'all could use a refresh, or perhaps a first time introduction to what is known in statistical science as 'Chi-Square test'.  A formula that produces a rational value, then interpretive as a method for determining if the frequency differs from expected result and by how much.

It looks like this ...  

                                                                                                         (  ...that outta clear things up )

 

 

Used in calculating if there is a significant difference in expected vs. observed frequencies… or as I tell my students, inferential statistics tests, such as this, the t-test, or a Mann-Whitney tell you if your results actually mean something or if you got them by accident… 

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

12 hours ago, kdxken said:

How much did it set you back to fill up your truck with freedom fuel today?

Lol. You tank up for $150 and you receive a free testosterone injection from  drunken Pete. What a deal for real ‘Mericans..

[cleetussnow]

20 hours ago, forkyfork said:

"the heat feels less hot later in summer" is something i've never heard a normal person say

Are you new here?

[dendrite]

4 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

Lol. You tank up for $150 and you receive a free testosterone injection from  drunken Pete. What a deal for real ‘Mericans..

A nice plate of liver to fill you up before you head home too.

Can you imagine winter in here with everyone having high T? Not sure I want to be here for that. 

[Damage In Tolland]

43 minutes ago, ma blizzard said:

we’ve been trying to tell them 

And all they do is smoke bongs, saw logs , and copy cold summer tweets they find . When will they admit the obvious?