74 F. average high for September 10.
89 F. high on September 10, 2011.
40 mph wind gusts possible over southern Minnesota today.
Red Flag Warning posted, meaning a high risk of rapidly-spreading brushfires. Details below.
31. Today should be the 31st day this year at or above 90 F. in the Twin Cities, the most since 1988 (44).
"...As a Republican business owner, entrepreneur, meteorologist and father of two upbeat, optimistic boys, I may not fit the stereotype of a "global warming alarmist." I'm an Evangelical Christian. I'm enthusiastic about streamlining government and letting the markets work. But unlike some, I see no inherent struggle between my faith and the ability of science to improve our understanding of the world. The Creator gave me a brain, to think and reason, and react to facts on the ground. And I'm disillusioned, because some in my party are pro-science-denial, and on the wrong side of history..." - excerpt of a story I wrote for Huffington Post; details below.
Historic Weather on September 10 (source: local Twin Cities NWS Office)
1980: 3.35 inches of rain fell in the St. Cloud Area.
1942: A line of thunderstorms raced across Minnesota at 70 mph, destroying 651 barns in a 30 mile wide, 180 mile long path.
1931: Summer still had its grip on Minnesota with 111 degrees at Beardsley.
1931: The daytime high in St. Cloud was 96 degrees.
1900: The soggy remains of the Galveston Hurricane brings 6.65 inches of rain to St. Paul over two days.
1807: Thick smoky weather noted at Pembina.
I am therefore now releasing the names of those 4 remaining bloggers:
- Dr Roger Pielke Jr (he replied to the initial contact)
- Mr Marc Morano (Climatedepot; he replied to the initial contact)
- Dr Roy Spencer (no reply)
- Mr Robert Ferguson (Science and Public Policy Institute, no reply)"
Denial-trolls will call me a RINO (Republican In Name Only). I could care less. I'm saying what a number of TV meteorologists would like to say, but can't, because of ignorant news directors, ratings pressures and research concerns (every on-air "talent" is constantly tracked and evaluated; their "Q Scores" help to determine if their contracts ultimately get renewed). Antagonize too many viewers by including climate science in your weathercast and you may not have a job for long. It's sad it's come to this, but that's reality.
20 years from now I hope to be able to look back and conclude that I did everything in my power to help alert readers to the trends - and implications for their families. If I can do that, then all the name-calling will have been well worth it. Alarmist? If you're not yet alarmed by what's going on, worldwide, you're not paying attention. Here's an excerpt from my latest Huffington Post article: "During the Republican National Convention in Tampa, climate change became a punch line. "President Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet" Mitt Romney said.
(Pause for polite laughter)
"My promise is to help you and your family."
All well and good. But denying climate change won't help any American family or our fledgling economy. And looking at the world with carbon-colored glasses, or using Solyndra as an excuse to snub renewables and clean-tech, is not only short-sighted, but makes America less competitive on the world stage. According to the World Economic Forum, America's global competitiveness fell from 1st to 7th place since 2007. Should we just accept that most breakthrough energy technologies are originating in China and Europe, where there is no more "debate" about climate trends? Why is America still questioning the science? For political entertainment? Something tells me Mother Nature may get the last laugh...."