• Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!

Pattern Dry July 2024

A rain shower just moved through the GSO area. Sure to cool things off a little, and also turn it into a steam bath.
 
Finally!

b674fa28268132d454db15a73cc8ee80.png



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Wow, that is seriously sketchy. Durham at 97 and RDU at 106??? I didn’t know Durham didn’t have UHI effects, too. If anything, Durham may have more UHI than the RDU airport!
I'm about 15 miles (as a crow flies) north/northeast of the airport. My high so far is 98. We should be much closer with the temperature. The big differences seem to only happen when it's sunny. My temps are much closer when it cloudy, and especially during widespread precipitation events. That article I posted, stated the sensors were over packed clay soils. That would do it.
 
Greg Fishel's response to WRAL met Kat Campbell's Facebook post about RDU hitting 106.

My point is this. The science categorically supports the idea that Man is warming the climate. But bad data is bad data. There isn't a properly sited observation anywhere in Wake County within 5 degrees F of that RDU reading. It's pure and unadulterated trash!
 
Another post from Greg Fishel on Facebook about the readings at RDU.

THIS IS GETTING RIDICULOUS, AND SOME PEOPLE COMMENTING CLEARLY DO NOT KNOW WHAT PROPER SITING STANDARDS ARE FOR INSTRUMENTATION.

Back in the year 1999 when RDU hit 100°F or higher 12 times, the idea that the RDU temperature reading was suspect was first brought to the public's attention. Steve Harned, the then Meteorologist in Charge at the Raleigh National Weather Service office took it upon himself to do a study, by placing temperature sensors at widely varying locations across the airport grounds. His conclusion was the best description of the issue I have ever heard, and I will share it with you now. He stated that the instrumentation was accurately representing a microclimate that was not representative of where anyone lived. Bingo! The instrumentation itself is fine, but it's sited in a terrible location, dictated by the FAA, who rightly insists on a location near the airport runway for aviation safety purposes. But we know for a fact that the instrumentation is not sited for climate purposes, and that when you can't find a properly sited station within 5°F of the airport reading, you know you have a problem. And please, stop with the car thermometer examples! Are those thermometers 2 meters over a grassy surface properly sheltered from the sun? I don't think so. Nobody likes breaking records more than I do, but let's make sure the records are legit, and this one clearly is not!
 
Back
Top