Days above 90 in the year you were born vs now (recorded, city)

[Joe90]

There were no 90F days in 1963 where I was born, and there were none this summer - 90F would be about once in every six or seven years.

[Vision67]

Phoenix, Az.....154 days in 1960 and 167 days now.

Hated it then and it's worse now. Furthermore, I think Arizona will run out of water.

So glad to be in Colorado at 6700 ft.

[yankeefan93]

Monroe, CT
1993: 5
2018: 4


Racine, WI (Where I was born)
1993: 1
2018: 1


Very interesting I might add.

[nmdesert]

Thanks for the link, and it's interesting to read other's areas.

This could be a useful tool, but I now question the NY Times data at least for the few locations I entered data. Starting with significantly incorrect data compared to actual NOAA statistics is problematic.

Comparing NY Times numbers to NOAA averages (https://wrcc.dri.edu/summary/sodusa.html) the 1st place I pulled up seemed off. The 2nd place was even further off, so one might want to verify their data first. That may take some extrapolation and time looking to get your birth year vs. the official NOAA period of record, so I just assumed my birth year fell in the middle of the longer period of climate record.

Omaha NE (where I was born):
1966 - 26
2018 - 30
1948-2012 NOAA average - 34.4 (NY Times is under 4-8 days...-17.4%)

Denver CO (where I lived after Omaha and 8th grade thru HS):
1966 - 10
2018 - 15
1948-2012 NOAA average - 35.4 (NY Times is under 20-25 days...-63.5%)

Albuquerque NM (where I lived 21 years):
1966 - 37
2018 - 56
1914-2012 NOAA average - 60.0 (NY Times is under 4-23 days...-22.5%)

El Paso TX (close to where I now live, but with consistent NOAA data):
1966 - 72
2018 - 96
1947-2012 NOAA average - 108.1 (NY Times is under 12-36 days...-22.2%)

There's an obvious bias in my above examples that I'm familiar with, where solid long-term temperature data is available. This has me question using the NY Times link, as I've also discovered very incorrect historic and comparative data with other climate change tools in Climate Central and 1 or 2 other online sources.

Hopefully your locale's data vs. NY Times data are much closer than my examples.

[Marie Joseph]

Syracuse NY:

0 days in 1970

1 day average over 90 currently

3 days average over 90 by the time I'm 80

Current city of Erie was basically the same except it predicts 2 days over 90 by the time I hit 80

[GeoffD]

It says I don’t see 90 where I live. Yep. 90 is pretty unusual. Too close to salt water.

[Neptunepenguins]

Conroe, Texas

1997: 94 days
2017: 105 days

[wawa1992]

Originally Posted by wawa1992

White House, TN:

31 days in 1992
43 days today

Expecting 73 days in 2072, range of 55 to 95.

95 days, on average, hitting 90 F / 32 C or higher, 54 years from now? Yeah flippin' right. That would mean July average highs would probably be 97 F / 36 C, a good 8 F / 4 C higher than the present. I could see 55 easily, maybe 73 at most. We'll probably have an abnormally warm year that will exceed 95 days above 90 by the end of the century.

...And we had 99 days of 90+ in 2019.

[TCHP]

Interestingly hypothetical, but unless it accesses records, its somewhat flawed. I know my birth city had days at 90 the year I was born, despite this saying they didn't. Knowing the actual from the past compared to present, there is only a small change of a few days. The future, is still a swag.

[The Grandeur]

Birth place is different. Starting to walk place is different. Primary school place is different. Secondy school place is different. High school place is different. University place is different.

I grew up in too many different provinces in Turkey. I am from no city but a country. However, since the age of 18, I lived in the same city.

Am I supposed to talk of the city in which I live currently for these 2 different times?

Since met officice shows current conditions, I wouldnt know. I would be unable to check it when I am new born