From the article: 'If the urban heat island theory is correct then instruments should have recorded a bigger temperature rise for calm nights than for windy one

From the article: 'If the urban heat island theory is correct then instruments should have recorded a bigger temperature rise for calm nights than for windy ones, because wind blows excess heat away from cities and away from the measuring instruments. There was no difference between the calm and windy nights, and one study said that "we show that, globally, temperatures over land have risen as much on windy nights as on calm nights, indicating that the observed overall warming is not a consequence of urban development."' This is really surprising to me. Not least because, on a sunny day, SF can go from pleasant to brutal as soon as a breeze kicks up.