Excessive heat warning issued for Ann Arbor; high of 105 possible
With record heat expected today, the National Weather Service has issued an excessive heat warning effective from 11 a.m. today until 11 p.m. tonight.
The high temperature this afternoon is expected to range anywhere from 98 to 105 degrees with a heat index between 103 and 110 expected.
Temperatures topping 100 degrees today are likely to send many Ann Arbor residents to area pools.
If the thermometer climbs above 100 degrees, it will mark the third time it has done so this summer.
The National Weather Service, which had earlier issued an excessive heat watch, warned residents that heat-related illnesses, such as heat stroke, heat exhaustion and dehydration are possible for those exposed to the high temperatures.
The weather service urged those who work or spend time outside to take these precautions:
- Schedule strenuous activities for early morning or evening.
- Know the signs and symptoms of heat exhaustion and heat stroke. Wear lightweight and loose-fitting clothing when possible.
- Drink plenty of water.
- When working outside, schedule frequent rest breaks in shaded or air-conditioned environments.
The weather service said anyone overcome by heat should be moved to a cool and shaded location. Heat stroke is an emergency, call 911.
Heat stroke warning signs may include:
- Body temperature of 103°F or higher
- Red, hot and dry skin (no sweating
- Rapid, strong pulse
- Throbbing headache
- Dizziness
- Nausea, confusion or unconsciousness
For more information on heat-related illness, visit www.ewashtenaw.org/heat
Scattered thunderstorms are possible after 6 p.m., the weather service said, and some of those storms could be severe.
Temperatures will moderate a bit Wednesday when the high is expected to be 90 degrees. Highs in the low 80s are expected Thursday and Friday.
For updated conditions and forecasts anytime, visit AnnArbor.com's weather page.
Comments
martini man
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5 p.m.
I know ..we poor ol' schmucks just need to put our lives in the hands of all you geniuses, knowing you'll do what's best for us. So ..bring on the higher taxes, stricter regulations, and ya gotta love dem windmills. Then the scientists and professors and liberal elitists can sit back in their mansions and chalets, and feel good about saving the planet. There are just too many of us regular hard working, tax paying, meat eating, truck driving,folks,and not enough geniuses. What's this world coming to ???? Climate-a-geddon ? I feel sooo guilty !!!!
Michael K.
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4:20 a.m.
I'm glad you all are so well versed in science that you are able to argue persuasively against the 99.8% of climate professionals at the PhD level who are convinced - based on data, not politics - that man made global climate change is real. Why, your intellectual prowess knows no bounds! Just yesterday, you were the same folks who so elequently explained macro economics based solely on your own political persuasion. Maybe time to made educated, data driven decisions, rather than purely emotionally based ones? That is what science is all about.
brb11
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 7 p.m.
Thank you. The people arguing against climate change here are showing such little understanding of the actual science, it's embarrassing. These are people who have likely never read a single scientific paper on the topic, yet they dismiss scientific findings outright. Don't comment about it (at least not authoritatively) if you don't understand the topic very well or even how science publishing/funding works. The thing I don't understand is why do people have strong opinions about the science of it? Sure, debate about proposed solutions all you want (and there is plenty of debate to be had there, for sure). But the science is solid. It's happening, and we're causing the majority of it. Now debate until you're blue in the face about what to do about it. All this talk about ice ages and local weather patterns is cringe-worthy.
Macabre Sunset
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:06 a.m.
Of course, because there were never severe droughts in the first several million years the Earth existed. Not a one. Just last year, the medieval warming period was dismissed as a really bad case of knight flatulence.
Jake C
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4:55 a.m.
brian: complicated global weather patterns combined with 50+ years of massive global fossile fuel emissions + poorly understood farming & irrigation methods.
brian
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4:29 a.m.
So, what was the cause of one of the worse droughts in America 56 years ago?
brian
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4:19 a.m.
Okay, enough of summer. Come on Fall weather and Football.
djacks24
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 9:21 p.m.
With all of the deleted comments on this site, why can't the global warming comments be deleted? Can't even post a weather article on this site without all of the global warming crazies turning this into a huge global warming debate. Doesn't placing blame go against the commenting guidelines, since these people are blaming humanity for the warm temperatures?
Urban Sombrero
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 8:12 p.m.
I just picked my daughter up from day camp at Montibeller park. I'm not sure how accurate the temperature gauge on my minivan is, but on our way home, it read 105. Crazy hot!
Becky H
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 7:19 p.m.
"It's so cooooooooold in the D." - T-Baby
Forever27
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 7:17 p.m.
If I go out and take a different picture of someone dealing with hot weather, will you guys at aa.com please use it? How many articles about the heat can you use the same picture for?
boo
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 7:06 p.m.
is it me or is hot out here?
Top Cat
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 6:21 p.m.
"A high of 105 would tie the all-time high-temperature record in Ann Arbor, set July 24, 1934." I wonder what the man made Global Warming advocates were saying back in 1934.
Jake C
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4:53 a.m.
Trick question: back then everyone just blamed it on God punishing Mankind for not following The Lord's Rules.
WalkingJoe
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 7:07 p.m.
Top Cat, I have thought the same thing. But I think they were just old fashioned and said uninformed things like "Hot enough for ya?", or "Well, come January we'll be wishing we had summer back."
MRunner73
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 6:27 p.m.
Thumbs up! Funny how some folks just skip over the date of the all time record high and what it actually means.
Macabre Sunset
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 6:20 p.m.
A question for those who "believe" we need to take immediate action. It's well demonstrated that there have been periodic "ice ages" throughout history. One of these ice ages would cause incredible suffering, as the band where people could grow food and/or live comfortably would be significantly reduced. America would likely cease to be a word power of any kind. There would be mass starvation throughout the world. Would it be worth taking steps to artificially prevent another ice age? If so, then can't we agree that the problem is climate change in a world where climate change is inevitable. And stop arguing whether it's caused by barbeques, cars or cow poop. We just don't know. We know that many so-called scientists get funding because they confuse science for politics. But what's more important is that if the planet rises a few degrees, this will cause suffering. Let's address what causes the suffering (overpopulation, drought) rather than punishing those who are trying to produce using the only cost-effective methods of production, which will end up causing more suffering. Let's take the politics out of it. Because we should be able to agree on two things: 1) Natural extreme climate change of some sort will happen some day, even if what's happening now is either not-natural or not all that extreme. And 2) We should take steps to address climate change itself, not punish those who are not politically correct in an all-in desperation hope that past climate-change, pre-Industrial Revolution, never happened or never will happen again.
Macabre Sunset
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:30 p.m.
What we do have is significant evidence that this consensus only exists because the process itself is rigged. In other words, publication of dissenting opinion is difficult in the major journals and funding is difficult if you don't present a grant application for a study on human causes of warming. This has become a political issue, and not a scientific one. The issue needs to be studied. I can't say that I know either way, or even that I care other that in the understanding that many millions will suffer economically if recommended plans are put in place. What's clear right now is that one political group has a stronghold on consensus, and the media is doing a great job feeding upon it and amplifying it.
Bonsai
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:10 p.m.
you don't have a solution because you're not a climate scientist, yet you don't trust the scientific consensus on climate change -- sounds like you're the one with a preexisting condition... I mean "fixed theory"
Macabre Sunset
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:03 a.m.
1) I don't have a solution because I don't study climate change. I don't think the cause matters, any more than whether we have to use a bulldozer to remove ancient dirt or a 50-year-old apartment building when constructing a new house. And it is necessary to take action to prevent millions of deaths if we can. The question there being whether this is a religious belief (i.e., like religion saves souls) or there's a scientific consensus (and not a rigged one based on control of certain journals). 2) I would say that a "real" scientist is one who lets the evidence lead to a theory rather than creating a theory and altering or skewing evidence to fit that theory. The emails from East Anglia make it very clear that the latter is happening in this branch of science. The difference between religion and science is where the theory fits. If you have a fixed theory and all you do is try to find evidence for that theory, discarding what's inconvenient, you're a religious leader, not a scientist. I don't pretend to know the truth, but I am concerned enough with the actions of the world leaders of long-term temperature studies that I don't see how we can treat this science as even remotely settled.
Jake C
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4:52 a.m.
Macabre sunset, a few questions for you: 1) What is your solution to climate change? Does it differ whether it's man-made or nature-made? Does it really matter if the end-result is that millions of people die because of something that we could potentially prevent? 2) Why do you keep calling most scientists "so-called"? Are there some "scientists" that you consider "real scientists"? Are they just the scientists that you happen to agree with politically?
LXIX
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 11:01 p.m.
I absolutely agree - know the problem and solve it. However, no intelligent beings will ever know anything for certain except the unknown. It is all a crap-shoot so at some point expert consensus must decide what to do. The consensus today is that maybe the planet is worth more than a few temporary profiteers. Overpopulation is correct - how about a two-child policy or pay an extra baggage fee?
Macabre Sunset
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 9:21 p.m.
You shouldn't have to "believe in" the science. That's what politicizing this movement has done - created a religion rather than a science. That's why when someone who knows very little about the actual methodology makes a heavily scientific claim, it sounds much more like proselytizing than anything else. We're in the infancy of the study of climate change, yet people who know nothing about the science are absolutely passionate about demanding that governments spend trillions to limit the influence of something that may or may not have any impact. But what we do know for certain is that trillions in spending will mean millions of lost jobs around the world and millions one step closer to starvation. I'm agnostic when it comes to climate change. I want to know more, but I don't trust the "so-called" scientists running the show right now because we have considerable proof (mainly through the email dump) that there is a lot of control over publication from a small group of people who have heavy financial incentive to prove global warming has a human cause. They have demonstrated the desire and ability to eliminate dissenting argument in peer-reviewed journals. This means we're talking more about a religion than a science.
Bonsai
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 8:29 p.m.
Those are real loaded questions. The goal is not to "control the climate," it is to limit the human activity that has been proven to have an adverse effect on the environment. (Whether you believe in science is beside the point.) Another goal is to prevent suffering, yes. If we see that an ice age is coming, we should do everything possible to prevent people from freezing to death.
Ghost of Tom Joad
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 8:16 p.m.
so anyone who thinks that you're generalizing by disparaging scientists is "indoctrinated'?
Macabre Sunset
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 8:05 p.m.
That's the response I expected from the indoctrinated. But these are real questions. Is it only acceptable to try and control the climate if evidence indicates mankind is the cause of the climate change. Or is the goal to try and prevent suffering no matter what the cause?
Ghost of Tom Joad
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 7:49 p.m.
When you say things like "so-called" scientists, you completely destroy any credibility that you may have originally had.
Swimmer
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 6:06 p.m.
Are you paying the guy in your "stock hot-weather-story image" appearance fees?
Major
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 5:39 p.m.
Bring on the heat, going into the Huron River @ Bandemer today with a scuba in the hopes of retrieving pricey sunglasses that went overboard, won't be hot down there...but will there be visibility?
AySquared
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 12:01 p.m.
Major- I would too! I just bought a pair of Oakley's myself and they are never out of my sight!
Major
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 6:12 p.m.
lol @ treetowncartel...love it!! AySquared...wish my $600 Oakley's were down there, instead of the bottom of Portage!
AySquared
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 5:59 p.m.
Major- Let me know if you find a nice pair of Oakley's or Ray Bans.
treetowncartel
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 5:52 p.m.
For a minute there I read that as saying you were going in by Furstenberg with your tuba.
martini man
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 4:13 p.m.
Global Warming is not as much the liberal catch phrase as it once was. Altho it sure is hot here in Michigan today. They needed a phrase that would serve all types of conditions, no matter what happened.Thus "Climate Change" ..." Climatic Disruption" (human induced of course ) and in case nothing at all happens ..something like "Human Induced Climatic Stagnation". All solvable by higer taxes, more regulation, and lots and lots of windmills . So whether you are Roasting in Ann Arbor, freezing at the British Open, Dried out in Iowa, or flooded in AZ ..just remember ..it's ALL YOUR FAULT !!!
Jake C
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4:49 a.m.
"Funny, how each hour of this day, as it gets hotter, more comments are pro global warming. " It's also funny how, each hour of the day, as it snows during the winter, more comments are anti global warming. After all, if it's snowing, how can the earth be getting hotter?
LXIX
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 10:33 p.m.
"The summer of 1936 stands out as one of the hottest summers felt across the entire United States". "The summer of 1930 also set the record for number of days where temperatures reached or exceeded 100°F at 11 days". - WashingtonPost This was the beginning of the Dust Bowl - the well-known man-made disaster. During that time A huge dust cloud was predicted to hit D.C. but Congress didn't believe it. Right after it hit, legislation was immediately passed to change U.S. farming practices.
MRunner73
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 6:22 p.m.
There were more days with summer temps in the 90s during the entire decade of the 1930s than any other period, since the data began in the 1870s. Extreme drought and heat go together. Aerial size of the drought also plays a huge role in the amout of heat that can generated. Funny, how each hour of this day, as it gets hotter, more comments are pro global warming. This is not about a closed mind or closed case but a perspective in a larger historical sense. Fact is, the intense heat events we've had thus far are only on par with 1988, some 24 years ago. Thus, a 1 in 24 event isn't very good odds.
Rabid Wolverine
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 5:06 p.m.
No. It is still a very liberal catch phrase. The difference is that most people with even-keeled minds understand that there is simply not enough data to reach a conclusion on if we are in a cyclical weather pattern or if there is definite permanent climate change.
Beth
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 3:15 p.m.
Any news on possible Rec and Ed cancellations for tonight? My kids have gymnastics in the upper gym at Scarlett, which doesn't seem to have air conditioning, and I'm thinking it will be unbearable in there...
Beth
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 7:11 p.m.
Got a call from Rec and Ed - the class is cancelled, and I'm guessing other Rec and ed classes and programs may be cancelled as well?
treetowncartel
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 5:51 p.m.
Its ok if they miss a day on your own volition, or send them with plenty of water and toughen em up for a future in the real world of working.
MRunner73
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 1:33 p.m.
For all of the Global Warming folks: Tune in on the British Open and see the very cool and often wet conditions there. Folks with umbrellas and wearing thick jackets in the U.K. Case closed.
Soothslayer
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 6:43 p.m.
Its called climate change. Warming trend for the globe means changing weather patterns and more intense release of weather energy. It doesn't mean warming just here in your backyard (that's not how it works or is calculated).
Griffin
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 4:49 p.m.
I think you're oversimplifying a bit.
bedrog
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 4:30 p.m.
mrunner: you confuse "case' and "mind'
BornInA2
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 3:30 p.m.
The Gulf Stream, which carries warm ocean water north to Great Britain and western Europe, is slowing. There is evidence that it has, in the past, stopped entirely. If this happens, these areas will turn into tundra and be unable to grow crops to feed themselves. And yes, this is an effect of climate change. Global warming doesn't mean it gets hotter everywhere, it means the climate on the planet is less able to support humans.
Matt Peckham
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 3:29 p.m.
Global warming means an overall increase in average global temperatures, yes, but manifests as greater incidence of extreme weather patterns, both hot and cold.
Brad
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 1:56 p.m.
Mind closed.
LXIX
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 1:31 p.m.
XMO Who doesn't love the Barbi in Michigan in July? When it costs $100 just to light her up,though, people will discover the new joy of a Solar-powered-SuiziQ (yet to be invented). PS - A2 Weatherunderground stock is worth a heck of a lot more than facebook...
harry
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 1:12 p.m.
This is all Obama's fault
xmo
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 1:08 p.m.
LXIX: We can trace this hot weather to me cooking on the grill outside all weekend long. I released so much CO2 that it caused the green house gases to form and not we have this Hot weather! I love love it when I can link excessive weather change to events in my life!
Ghost of Tom Joad
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 7:50 p.m.
If only you could link comprehensible language to your posts...
AySquared
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 12:51 p.m.
Guess I'm going to have to take my winter coat back off..
LXIX
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 12:45 p.m.
Climate change days like this are no longer news in Michigan and scientists are now starting to connect specific weather events to the carbon waste stream (oil & coal). What will be news is when Michigan power oujtages, crop damage, job/school disruption, and as outlined here, ill health ieffects, and their costs are directly sharged to the profit parties responsible.. The free market forces will then rectify the problem. Prediction - it will rain at least once during the Art Fair - or this is really bad weather.
Sparty
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 3:43 a.m.
It's Obamas fault, right? ROFL
EyeHeartA2
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 4:44 p.m.
So when we set a record low this winter, by the same logic, will you be on these boards repealing your comment? Didn't think so. One way only. Got it.
WalkingJoe
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 2:48 p.m.
"Resistance is futile". Really, are you now saying the Borg is going to assimilate us?
WalkingJoe
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 2:45 p.m.
LXIX, Don't worry about climate change. According to another group the world comes to an end in December when the Mayan calender runs out.
LXIX
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 2:44 p.m.
Law of Conservation in science is pretty real - action v. reaction, entropy v life, or as the WTO head says (in her very french accent) 'balance'. This natural "free market" force is more real than any Libertarian fantasy - it is more real than Hayek, Lenin, and the long march of Penn. Ave. puppet think tanks combined. It is our collective human brain. Resistance is futile.
jcj
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 1:33 p.m.
I assume you will be charged as well since you more than likely drive a car, take the bus, run an air conditioner and cook all your organic food!
MRunner73
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 1:31 p.m.
The term Climate Change is overused and misinterpreted. Heat and drought episodes were worse in the early 1950s and 1930s on a national scale. FYI: Climate changes in Michigan four times year and we call it winter, spring, summer and fall.
Peter
Tue, Jul 17, 2012 : 1:23 p.m.
The 'free market' isn't real. It's a wishful fantasy of libertarians who want to be John Galt, and it certainly isn't going to rectify these problems at all.