If you're blaming legacy news weather segments for increasing distrust in science, more than blatant right wing political smokecreening; i.e. politicians paid out by oil demagogues bringing snowballs into congress live on CSPAN; then in my humble opinion, you're barking up the wrong tree. Fox News and Exxon and Sinclair basically keep the entire "skeptic" foundation afloat. Without them, then CNN throwing ignoring UHI or using footage of microbursts as evidence of climate change, wouldn't be so damaging to climate science. That's not me trying to "make it political" either. I think we as a weather forum can set bias aside and understand what political smokescreening is, and how damaging that is toward public trust.

This is true. DC much more than Baltimore though. Our family home back in Cabin John is surrounded by old growth forest on three sides, and when driving to DCA you don’t leave the trees until you basically get to the airport. It’s an under appreciated aspect of this region that I do enjoy.

There’s actually very little greenery in that part of the city (around that Light St./St. Paul St. Corridor). The sensor itself is immediately downwind of the worst of the concrete jungle on the hottest days (which have W/NW flow). Sometimes the Bay breeze breaks through and brings it back to parity, but these nasty heat domes usually have stronger westerly downsloping winds that pin the bay breeze out over the water.

ORD only managed 92 today. Noticed the dewpoints didn't mix down quite as much as most models suggested they would, so that likely explains the underperformance on temps. Wonder if the same thing will happen tomorrow, though I would expect it to end up a little warmer than today as temps look slightly warmer aloft and it should be a somewhat warmer start to the day.

Then make sure that context is provided when covering the issue to the general public. Because people that don’t live in UHI riddled concrete jungles (and almost every else) are tuning out climate scientists en masse.