|
|
Post by Ariete on Oct 18, 2019 10:20:25 GMT -5
Ok, so here's a new one. I added 5C to all temps in Turku, which results in Copenhaguesque winters, southern Ukraine style summers and interior New England style autumns. Precipitation and sunshine are unchanged. The record lows are quite rediculous for the averages, but let them spice up the chart.
Which one do you fancy?
edit: whoops, spotted a mistake in the Turku June mean. It should of course be 19.4C.
|
|
|
|
Post by AJ1013 on Oct 18, 2019 10:22:20 GMT -5
Turdkuuuuuuuuu
|
|
|
|
Post by tij on Oct 18, 2019 10:28:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by 🖕🏿Mörön🖕🏿 on Oct 18, 2019 10:34:25 GMT -5
Tûrkú
|
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on Oct 18, 2019 10:39:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Speagles84 on Oct 18, 2019 11:12:57 GMT -5
Turku, obviously
|
|
|
|
Post by Lommaren on Oct 18, 2019 12:19:52 GMT -5
Turku.
Tucson is just too damn hot in summer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on Oct 18, 2019 12:37:14 GMT -5
Here's the box including records only since 1981, in order to get rid of some of the rediculous old record lows, and with the correct June mean:
|
|
|
|
Post by Steelernation on Oct 18, 2019 16:09:04 GMT -5
Turku by far.
|
|
|
|
Post by knot on Oct 18, 2019 16:40:27 GMT -5
Turku +5° C, but Tucson's summers are FAR superior to the 17° / 27° C storm-less rubbish of Turku.
So, it's actually quite close! If Tucson's winters were just 4° C cooler (i.e. 0° / 14° C instead of 4° / 18° C), it would've won easily.
|
|
|
|
Post by 🖕🏿Mörön🖕🏿 on Oct 18, 2019 23:23:58 GMT -5
Turku +5° C, but Tucson's summers are FAR superior to the 17° / 27° C storm-less rubbish of Turku. So, it's actually quite close! If Tucson's winters were just 4° C cooler (i.e. 0° / 14° C instead of 4° / 18° C), it would've won easily. Turku actually gets thunderstorms though, so it's NOT stormless ya fucken tablelands sheep fuckannnn wanker! But yes, I am sure Tucson gets far better storms than Turku. But it's incorrect to say that Turku is stormless. |
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on Oct 19, 2019 6:31:38 GMT -5
Turku +5° C, but Tucson's summers are FAR superior to the 17° / 27° C storm-less rubbish of Turku. So, it's actually quite close! If Tucson's winters were just 4° C cooler (i.e. 0° / 14° C instead of 4° / 18° C), it would've won easily.
Stormless? Are you on crack? With those kinds of averages Turku would have a lot of storms.
|
|
|
|
Post by knot on Oct 19, 2019 7:01:59 GMT -5
Righto..how many stormy days does Turku average annually? A rough estimate would suffice, too.
Also, how's the quality of the common storm up that way? No marine-layer tripe, and does most of the summer precipitation fall as a result of thunderstorm activity as opposed to Atlantic tripe? If so, then it gets a much easier win over Tucson...but I will need your word on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by knot on Oct 19, 2019 7:06:56 GMT -5
Turku actually gets thunderstorms though, so it's NOT stormless ya fucken tablelands sheep fuckannnn wanker! But yes, I am sure Tucson gets far better storms than Turku. But it's incorrect to say that Turku is stormless. And that, my good lad, is precisely why I deem Turku storm-less. If it ain't a quality storm, then it simply doesn't count as a "storm" in my book; non-storms include marine-layer tripe, downpours with no convective activity i.e. no lightning/thunder, and anything else of that ilk. |
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on Oct 19, 2019 7:10:05 GMT -5
Righto..how many stormy days does Turku average annually? A rough estimate would suffice, too. Also, how's the quality of the common storm up that way? No marine-layer tripe, and does most of the summer precipitation fall as a result of thunderstorm activity as opposed to Atlantic tripe? If so, then it gets a much easier win over Tucson...but I will need your word on it.
16 with lightning activity (occasional distant rumble doesn't suffice). Of various quality. Some storms are awesome, others are quite lame.
|
|
|
|
Post by knot on Oct 19, 2019 7:14:30 GMT -5
16 with lightning activity (occasional distant rumble doesn't suffice). Of various quality. Some storms are awesome, others are quite lame.
Well in that case...I stand proudly by my initial statement; 16 stormy days comprise a depressing statistic, to say the least. Tucson averages 38 stormy days, all of which yield stellar quality. |
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on Oct 19, 2019 7:21:09 GMT -5
Well in that case...I stand proudly by my initial statement; 16 stormy days comprise a depressing statistic, to say the least. Tucson averages 38 stormy days, all of which yield stellar quality.
Sure, but with those +5C averages it would be way more than 16.
|
|
|
|
Post by knot on Oct 19, 2019 7:36:01 GMT -5
Sure, but with those +5C averages it would be way more than 16.
Perhaps if the latitude was lowered as a result, then aye. |
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on Oct 19, 2019 7:41:51 GMT -5
Perhaps if the latitude was lowered as a result, then aye.
I think the higher temps resulting in more convection, and more importantly - longer thunderstorm season is enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by knot on Oct 19, 2019 7:48:34 GMT -5
I think the higher temps resulting in more convection, and more importantly - longer thunderstorm season is enough.
Higher temps alone do not influence storm activity in any way; for e.g. in my region (Southern NSW), the stormiest areas are the peaks of the Great Dividing Range, which yield the coldest climate in all of Australia. What really influences storm acitivty, comprise factors such as orographic lift and temperature airmass disparity—i.e. the collision of cold and warm airmasses, which is much more prevalent at lower latitudes owing chiefly to the presence of the Hadley Cell. |
|
