Thunderstorms Early Morning

June 25th, 2013 at 3:45 am by under Bill's Blog, Weather

MD1216 Thumbnail Image  3:45 AM – Meso-Discussion for Thunderstorms moving into Michigan during the early morning.  Use the links in the threads below.   The storms did produce a 58 mph wind gusts at Janesville WI.  Watch for strong, gusty winds, esp. SW of G.R. and heavy rain.   This batch of showers/storms WILL make it across Lake Michigan.  Once this batch passes, we’ll see if we can heat up and be in the right spot for more storms late in the day or for Tue. night.  The overnight European model continues the trend of giving Grand Rapids measurable rain each of the next 7 days and it also says we go thru June without hitting 90 degrees.  Temperatures will go back to average or slightly below average and stay there from late this week through much of next week.

84 Responses to “Thunderstorms Early Morning”

  1. Jack says:

    Add….First….3 for 3… teee heeee… ;-)

  2. tinainvbcounty says:

    A fair amount of rain and frequent lightning, but thankfully no heavy winds…very glad for that, as we just replaced the roof of our barn from the freak tornado we had on the 13 th. Lots of damaged limbs still dangling, waiting for a good wind to finish them off.

    1. SBPortage002 says:

      Almost continuous thunder here and needed rain. Nice little storm to wake up to.

      1. SBPortage002 says:

        what a LIGHT SHOW out there…WOW!!

        1. tinainvbcounty says:

          Wow, this batch actually seems to be intensifying a bit, because here comes some more that weren’t just there! Still nothing too rowdy, other than lots of lightning! Wonder what the lightning count is…

  3. kentwoodchicken says:

    BWAAK! Hope the coop is truly rain proof!

  4. SBPortage002 says:

    Looks like a double whammy down here. Another line of storms heading this way.

  5. SBPortage002 says:

    Interesting how that line over the lake moving east caught up with the one moving northeast to create a north pointing “bow”.

    1. Cliff (Scotts) says:

      Your not joking about the lightning, lots of loud close strikes

  6. Ben (Kalamazoo) says:

    Severe weather report-

    Not really severe, unless you count the rather frequent and close lightning strikes. I’ve seen several strike close to my vicinity. I did hear hail earlier. Not a lot of wind, a lot of rain though. We lost power here and all of downtown was dark. Only lights I saw were emergency lights and car tail-lights.

    I actually have some photos to share:

    http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/474/zzfn.png

    Well here is more hail again. They are saying pea sized, however I have seen nickle sized.

    Just a lot of loud and frequent and close lightning, spouts of waterfall like rain and hail… and that power outage.

  7. tinainvbcounty says:

    No power. Yuck. Just got done replacing food from last week. Hopefully will be back on soon!!!

  8. Judy says:

    Lots of lightening. We just caught the north side of it in Fennville. Did see some cool lightening driving into Portage after the storm.

    Bill…..what causes the low-lying clouds that are white after a storm has gone through? They usually seem to be going a different direction than the storm. There were also some dark clouds as well.

  9. Resourceful Nana says:

    Just emptied the largest quantity of rain from the gauge for the entire year (we never got the real heavy stuff in April). Blessed with 1.8″ here in early a.m. and looks like a good coverage, so the center pivots are shut down for a few days:)

  10. Mike[kalamazoo county] says:

    2.4″ this morning

    1. GunLakeDeb says:

      Wow, Mike!! I only got around 1/3″ – the worst of the storms didn’t go directly overhead; so it was MY idea of a perfect storm: distant thunder and a nice soaking rain :-)

  11. INDY says:

    LOVE THEE RAIN…WE NEED MORE GRASS IS GETTING DRY OUT AT THEE YARDofBRICKS……INDYY..

  12. Yup (Grandville) says:

    Good soaking rain, should help the lawn quite a bit!

  13. DF (SE Mich) says:

    No GR bubble today. =)

    This is a decent rain event, we need it.

    1. fixxxer says:

      the “bubble” only effects severe & strong storms, don’t you know that? never was an issue for rain or snow.

  14. DF (SE Mich) says:

    Travis, how can Saginaw be -0.1° still and Flint be +1.8° for June?… pretty strange for 30 miles separation. There must be a MD-80 warming up next to the Flint weather station once a day =)

    1. Travis (Oakland County) says:

      They stood by their numbers after I contacted them.

      Flint hit 91 degrees on Sunday!

      1. DF (SE Mich) says:

        I saw that, Detroit and GR 89°.

      2. Bill Steffen says:

        Through Tuesday, G.R. is still 0.2 deg. cooler than average for June. We’ve got a couple more warm minimums than back to cooler than average this weekend. If June winds up cooler than average, that’s four of five months cooler than average and July certainly isn’t going to be anything like last year.

    2. Doug in GH says:

      As a former resident of that area, my theory is Saginaw’s proximity to the bay accounts for the difference in weather. I used to work in Flint and live in Midland, and you ofter would see big changes in the weather around the area of the Z-bridge.

      1. SlimJim NW GR (1) says:

        For the most part Saginaw and Bay City being “cooler” then Flint happens more often with a NE wind then a south or southwest wind….In fact with a SW wind the tri cities area gets down slopping and becomes warmer then Flint. Also the mean average temps for the two stations show that the difference between the two are not that different.

        http://www.crh.noaa.gov/dtx/cms.php?n=monthlynormals

        Here are Flints average mean temps for since 2000

        http://www.crh.noaa.gov/dtx/display_climate.php?file=fnt2000.htm

        BTW I lived in Bay City for over 35 years before coming to GR.
        SlimJim

        1. SlimJim NW GR (1) says:

          And here are the average mean temps for Saginaw since 2000

          http://www.crh.noaa.gov/dtx/display_climate.php?file=mbt2000.htm

          SlimJim

      2. Travis (Oakland County) says:

        Saginaw is almost 40 miles north of Flint. Of course, there are going to be differences. It’s like comparing Holland to Muskegon.

        1. Slimjim says:

          There is less difference then you think!
          Slimjim

        2. Travis (Oakland County) says:

          On a normal day, not too much difference. But those outlier days can make all the needed impact to sway the numbers.

          Just like on those rare days when Holland in the mid 80′s while Muskegon is stuck 10-15 degrees cooler.

    3. DF (SE Mich) says:

      The abnormalities readings are compared to themselves not other locations.

  15. Matt in New Era says:

    Bright and sunny here in New Era at 8:25!!!!!!

  16. Bill, would you call the wind event from yesterday a derecho? I don’t think it was technically one myself, but the Weather Channel is going nuts about the “derecho” yesterday.

  17. marianne says:

    boom boom boom hurray and it is raining wonderfully..no high winds accompanying it here in south haven just delicious rain…delightful!

  18. Travis (Oakland County) says:

    Two thunderstorms last evening, and a heavy shower with some rumbles so far this morning.

  19. INDY says:

    http://radar.weather.gov/radar.php?product=NCR&rid=mkx&loop=yes Round 3 about to move in…What a great summer 4 storms…..INDYY..

  20. Crayfish (Sparta) says:

    New mesoscale discussion out includes southern counties.

    1. DF (SE Mich) says:

      Here is the real link before the spam man wakes up.
      http://www.spc.noaa.gov/products/md/md1217.html

      1. Yup (Grandville) says:

        Zach’s site is clean DF. Stop surfing porn so much ;)

        1. DF (SE Mich) says:

          My mistake ;)

          There is no reason to not go straight to the official NWS source…

      2. Jenn (Orangeville) says:

        Thank you! :)

      3. INDY says:

        lol…INDYY..

      4. GunLakeDeb says:

        Thanks, DF – every time I click on one of his links, my computer locks up or does something stupid….

        1. DF (SE Mich) says:

          Exactly what happened to me long ago when I fell for it.

  21. Cliff (Scotts) says:

    Well we got inch and 4 tenths from this first batch, much needed for the crops. Bring on the rain!!!

  22. INDY says:

    Going to Holland beach …Should be a good spot to watch the next storm roll in….INDYY…

    1. Yup (Grandville) says:

      Gets some good pics!

  23. Travis (Oakland County) says:

    Finally found the global May data we were talking about earlier. Very warm globally. Here’s some tidbits:

    May 2013 was the globe’s 3rd warmest May since records began in 1880, according to NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (NCDC).

    The year-to-date period of January – May has been the 8th warmest such period on record.

    The Northern Hemisphere snow cover extent during May 2013 was the 3rd lowest in the 47-year period of record, and the lowest May extent on record over Eurasia.

    Arctic sea ice extent during May reached its tenth lowest extent in the 35-year satellite record, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC).

    1. Rumrunner says:

      Thanks for the info.

    2. DF (SE Mich) says:

      You have to be kidding that +0.07°C is “very warm globally”… right???

      1. Travis (Oakland County) says:

        3rd warmest May globally since records began in 1880 would be considered very warm, yes.

        I knew you’d love this information, DF, and try to fit it in the cold twist somehow ;)

        And we’re tracking pretty warm for 2013 so far too. Couldn’t find the updated US numbers though.

        1. Bill Steffen says:

          Global temperatures have been flat for over 10 years: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.C.gif

          Even Hansen admits it: The five-year mean global temperature has been flat for the last decade… – James Hansen et al.

          Remember Kevin Trenberth’s famous Climategate email: “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”

        2. Travis (Oakland County) says:

          You are “flat” because your starting year was so hot. Playing the numbers again.

        3. Travis (Oakland County) says:

          When people say ‘no warming in 15 years’, they’re cherry picking the timeframe to begin in an abnormally hot year. It’s like arguing that your car must have broken down because it hasn’t moved in the 15 seconds while you’ve been stopped at a red light. The argument selects a short timeframe that’s not representative of the whole.

        4. Bill Steffen says:

          First of all – I don’t say 15 years…I don’t take it back to 1998. I do take it back to 2002:

          http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.C.gif

          Just look at the graph, it’s obvious.

          Hansen agrees with me…so you’re even farther out on the limb than he is: “The five-year mean global temperature has been flat for the last decade…” – James Hansen et al.

        5. Travis (Oakland County) says:

          So you start with the hottest year on record and compare that to every year going forward? And that’s science?

          That’s playing with the numbers and ignoring longer term trends.

          If by flat, you mean we were as hot in 2012 as the hot years in 1998… then I guess that’s “flat.”

        6. Bill Steffen says:

          There is NO other conclusion but to say that global temperatures have been flat since 2002. CO2 is not the primary driver of global temperature. I don’t believe the “adjusted” temperatures. I think the NASA global IR data is a much better data base for global temperatures.

          The truth is…you guys have made bad predictions. It’s not getting warmer (and hasn’t for 10 years), the Arctic ice is increasing right now and the Antarctic ice is at the greatest extent since we have been observing it.

          The “solution” of “skyrocketing” utility rates and $9 a gallon “European level” gasoline prices…of making everyone buy carcinogen-filled light bulbs and riding around in less safe weeniemobiles is not only silly – it’s a tragic burden on the lower and middle class and could ultimately cost lives!

        7. Travis (Oakland County) says:

          So, by your own logic then you are admitting both global surface temperatures and global ocean temperatures have steadily increased over the last 50-100 years.

          Because, by your logic, I could cherry pick any starting year going back 100 years, and 95% of the timeframes would show a marked increase from the starting date to the ending date.

          It’s funny how you pick the 5% of years that would show it being flat and then say I’m the biased one. And disregard the long term trend and 95% of the other starting periods you could have picked.

        8. Travis (Oakland County) says:

          Have you really never seen this chart and realize what you are doing when you keep playing with the math and repeating that we’ve been flat for 10 years?

          http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/plugged-in/files/2013/04/Screen-Shot-2013-04-04-at-4.12.02-PM1.png

          The conclusion is that you could have said that 50 years ago and completely missed the longer term picture.

        9. Bill Steffen says:

          Global temperatures rose (a little, less than 1 deg. C) beginning around 1980 (and this was well predicted by Dr. Bill Gray when all the climate profiteers were on the global cooling side – same solution – higher taxes, higher utility bills, burdensome regulation on the poor and middle class) mostly because the PDO and AMO went warm. There were “adjustments” made to the raw temperature data to purposefully make the past cooler and the present warmer: http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/data-tampering-at-ushcngiss/ If you look at weather stations that have not been subject to urbanization, there is very little temperature change: http://www.seafriends.org.nz/issues/global/goodridge_1996_ca-uhi_county.jpg (graph done by the State Climatologist of California) The Climate models, as Dr. Judith Curry has stated are “deeply flawed”: http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/CMIP5-global-LT-vs-UAH-and-RSS.png

        10. Travis (Oakland County) says:

          Those are some obscure studies you’re relying on and thin data. Old too. That graph you posted only goes to 1996. And it still shows an increase in temps over the last century.

          I’m about as conservative as they come, but it baffles my mind when people won’t admit temps have warmed fairly dramatically over the past 120 years or keep manipulating the data saying we’re flat over the past such and such period.

          I make no predictions going forward and do not believe this rise in temps is specifically a result of man.

    3. DF (SE Mich) says:

      This is a great resource that monitors the stations Travis is referring to.
      http://www.surfacestations.org/

      This is why I stick to satellite data for global temperature abnormality, since 1979. Urban sprawl and pavement did it the credibility of the surface stations long ago.

      1. Travis (Oakland County) says:

        If you’re looking for global warming/cooling trends, I would strongly encourage looking at not only surface temps over land, but ocean temps, atmospheric temps, and ice.

        90% of the earth’s warming/cooling is a result of ocean temps – which have been accelerating rapidly.

        1. Cliff (Scotts) says:

          That’s why we have so many hurricanes in the past years!!! Do ohhh hasn’t happened.

        2. DF (SE Mich) says:

          Hence SATELLITE data… which does not go back to 1880 in case you were confused =)

        3. Bill Steffen says:

          Here’s global sea surface temperatures, which peaked about 2009 (then the PDO turned cool) and are now steady to falling. Note that we have ups and downs in the record, but not the linear warming that the warmingistas suggest: http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/figure-13.png

        4. Travis (Oakland County) says:

          Cherry picking the numbers again, Bill and missing the larger picture

          http://lh4.ggpht.com/_pQyvcBbJ0Fs/TCq54nJvwgI/AAAAAAAAB_s/zyas5EzQdxA/image5.png?imgmax=800

        5. Bill Steffen says:

          First of all – you’re graph isn’t labeled. What is it? U.S. land temperatures? Global temperatures (and if it’s global, how can you compare the present to 100 years ago when temperatures were only measured over about 10% of the Earth’s surface? Do you know if and how urban warming has been factored out of the data.

          Also, they use the 1971-2000 climate data average. The current average is 1981-2010. Why use old averages except to force an intended conclusion.

        6. Travis (Oakland County) says:

          That graph is a long-term graph of global ocean temperatures.

          Clearly, anyone can see the long-term trend is up even though you can cherry pick the numbers and try to say we are flat from some high point in the past.

          And the averages in the graph isn’t even relevant. Just look at the long-term trend.

        7. Bill Steffen says:

          After ClimateGate (“use Mike’s Trick to Hide the Decline”), I don’t automatically trust every graph that’s thrown at me. I’d like the raw data and to know how it was acquired (or I bet “estimated”). I’m sure there were very few global sea temperatures taken relative to the entire globe in in the early 1900s. Until the satellite era, there were huge blocks of ocean without reliable and timely temperature data.

          http://i27.tinypic.com/kbuets.png You can see the huge spike with the 1998 El Nino – when the oceans warm, the land warms and global temperatures go up. The PDO has gone cool and global temperatures have leveled off. What do you think is going to happen when the AMO goes into a cool phase?

        8. Travis (Oakland County) says:

          I don’t think you could find me one long-term graph that doesn’t show a dramatic rise in global sea temperatures. And if you don’t believe that, then you can rely on global sea levels that are much more reliable.

          The oceans have risen about 9″ since the 1920′s. Well documented. No way to trick or fool that data.

          Who knows what the future will bring or why the earth does what it does, but the trend of the past 120 years was certainly a marked increase in temps.

          When you say the past 10 years has been flat or that ice levels are higher this year than last year’s record heat, you are playing the math and missing the long-term trends.

    4. Bill Steffen says:

      It’s interesting the spin that Travis puts on the Arctic ice…10th lowest extent in 35 years. First, does that sound like a catastrophe that necessitates “skyrocketing” utility costs and taxing gasoline to “European levels”? 10th warmest in 35 years? Imagine what that will do to the poor and middle class. Another way to word the Arctic ice extent is The Arctic ice extent is the greatest in the last 10 years. Also, Travis and the climate profiteers don’t mention the Antarctic ice, do they? Let’s look at some links:

      http://www.natice.noaa.gov/ims/images/sea_ice_only.jpg Greatest Arctic ice extent since at least 2004.

      http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png Note that there is a LOT more ice in the Arctic now than there was one year ago.

      http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_timeseries.png Antarctic ice extent is much greater than average and much greater than it was one year ago

      http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png Antarctic ice has been increasing steadily for 25 years! It’s also way above average extent and it’s the middle of summer in Antarctica!!

      1. Travis (Oakland County) says:

        Easy, Bill. I’m not a climate profiteer. Just linking to data I found.

        1. Travis (Oakland County) says:

          Well, apparently that makes me putting spin on it and a climate profiteer. Nice. When I’m linking to long-term trends and most of those links are only one year.

        2. Bill Steffen says:

          I said “Travis and the climate profiteers”. That separates you from them.

  24. Jeff (Richland) says:

    First round of storms gave me 1.4″ of rain…not sure about the second batch as I was out the door by then. Awesome display of lightning and MUCH needed rain!!

  25. Sandi says:

    Rain!!! Lovin’ it!

  26. Swatz_Zoo(Cedar Springs) says:

    I wonder if this line will survive the lake, to me all the green blob ahead of it once it hits the middle of the lake it starts up the shredder. http://www.intellicast.com/Local/WxMap.aspx?latitude=43.22&longitude=-85.55&zoomLevel=8&opacity=1&basemap=0014&layers=0039

  27. cliff(kzoo) says:

    this next batch has a finger pointed right at grand rapids like its next lol

  28. SlimJim NW GR (1) says:

    So far I have received 0.29″ of rain. With that finger that Cliff mentioned point right at me. And reports of heavy thunderstorms across the Lake.
    SlimJim

  29. mr. negative says:

    SE GR – a few rumbles of thunder, borrowed from more fortunate areas, and 2/10 of an inch of rain overnight. We could use a rain day.

  30. Cliff (Scotts) says:

    Up to 77 as of now, sunny poking in and out

Leave a Reply