By Steve Goddard
New high temperature records have been set for Philadelphia:
RECORD EVENT REPORT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE MOUNT HOLLY NJ
805 AM EDT THU JUL 8 2010
...RECORD TEMPERATURES AT PHILADELPHIA PA WEDNESDAY JULY 7 2010...
A RECORD HIGH TEMPERATURE OF 103 DEGREES WAS SET AT PHILADELPHIA PA
ON WEDNESDAY JULY 7TH. THAT BROKE THE OLD RECORD OF 98 SET IN 1994.
THE WARMEST TEMPERATURES EVER AT PHILADELPHIA WERE 106 ON AUGUST 7
1918. IT WAS 104 ON JULY 3 1966 AND JULY 10 1936 FOLLOWED BY THE
103 HERE YESTERDAY WHICH ALSO OCCURRED IN SEVERAL OTHER YEARS.
ADDITIONALLY THE LOW OF 80 YESTERDAY WAS ALSO A RECORD WARM MINIMUM
TEMPERATURE FOR THE DATE...SURPASSING THE PREVIOUS RECORD OF 79 IN
1999.
THE AVERAGE TEMPERATURE OF 91.5 YESTERDAY WAS 4TH WARMEST IN
PHILADELPHIA WEATHER HISTORY DATING BACK TO 1872. THE WARMEST
AVERAGE TEMPERATURE WAS 94 DEGREES ON AUGUST 7 1918.
THE TWO CONSECUTIVE DAYS OF 100 DEGREE HEAT WAS THE 4TH WARMEST TWO
DAY PERIOD FOR PHILADELPHIA.
Charles Peirce kept detailed temperature records for Philadelphia from 1790 to 1847
This is what he wrote about July, 1830:
The medium or average temperature of this month was 80; and it was an intensely hot month. At mid-day the mercury rose to 90 and above, on twelve days.
So far this July, Philadelphia has had five days over 90, and the average temperature has been 80.
July, 2010 has been very hot in Philadelphia so far. Just as hot as it was 180 years ago – during the Little Ice Age when CO2 levels were 280 ppm.
mjk
If you have a 99 year temperature record with 1000 stations, you should break 3,652 high temperature records and 3,652 low temperature records during the 100th year.
After ignoring the very cold snowy winter, you folks are crowing about five hot days in July.
mjk:
Who is denying what? UHI is UHI, Asphalt is Asphalt, instrument changes are instrument changes. You are also correct, a record is also a record. But there is a larger context. For example, Michael Mann made explicit reference to this heat wave as supporting his view of AGW … which provides context for some of the commentary here and elsewhere. Does your comment apply to him as well?
If a weather station has 100 years of homogeneous observations, that is, no change to the station’s location, instrumentation, or surroundings, a daily maximum or minimum record temperature could be expected to be broken on average about seven days during that year. Natural variation will cause this number to vary each year but should average about seven days over several years. Or for a given day, it would take 12,367 years for 10 new records to occur. During the first 10 years of record keeping approximately three new records will have occurred. However as the station’s observations increase over time, it will become harder for new records to be established. This of course assumes that climate variation occurs as a normal probability distribution:
1 – (1 – 2/N) to the nth power
The n is the number of weather elements under consideration and N is the number of years of available weather data. More records will be established quicker if more weather elements are being considered.
ref: Ralph Boas, Weatherwise (April 1980), pg. 60-64
Jan:
Of course the big question is how accurate is the assumption that “that climate variation occurs as a normal probability distribution:
1 – (1 – 2/N) to the nth power
The n is the number of weather elements under consideration and N is the number of years of available weather data. More records will be established quicker if more weather elements are being considered.”
The normality assumption assumes no trends, no cycles, no nothing. As a shorthand it is ok, but it is a shorthand that disguises our underlying ignorance of weather and climate processes.
Matt Briggs at http://www.wmbriggs.com (link is on the blogroll on this site) has many interesting things to say about the limitations of traditional statistics – for example, http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=2512
Jan Curtis
Those statistics you quoted are misleading.
It is not significant which day the record occurs on or in which city. If Kalispell, Montana breaks a record (high or low)on August 17, Romm will report as being due to global warming. The interesting statistic is the total number of expected high temperature records set during a year for the entire data set.
In a 100 year record with 1000 stations, we expect to see 3,652 high temperature records set per year. The math is simple. On any given day at any given station, the odds are 100/1 of breaking a record.
365.25/100 * 1000 = 3652.5
Why is the weather service denying the data recorded by Charles Pierce? Are they skeptical of his measurements?
A very cold winter was ‘weather’ not climate – or so we were earnestly told… but 7 hot days? That’s “Climate Change” ! We’re all dooomed 🙂
Ref – mjk says:
July 9, 2010 at 8:01 am
“You guys sure do make for a good laugh. The simple fact that a hot weather record was broken sends most of you into a nervous tail spin –with loud cries of “this could not be true”…”
______________________________
You’re probably right, or perhaps I should say ‘correct’, the sarcasm does get a little think around here and it’s no doubt probably very difficult for some who delve beneith the bottom line to detect just how thick it is on any given article on any random day. Stick around, you’ll get the hang of it; we’re not always as dense (aka ‘sarscastic’) as we sound – sometimes.
stevengoddard says:
July 9, 2010 at 10:53 am
Jan Curtis
Those statistics you quoted are misleading.
It is not significant which day the record occurs on or in which city. If Kalispell, Montana breaks a record (high or low)on August 17, Romm will report as being due to global warming. The interesting statistic is the total number of expected high temperature records set during a year for the entire data set.
In a 100 year record with 1000 stations, we expect to see 3,652 high temperature records set per year. The math is simple. On any given day at any given station, the odds are 100/1 of breaking a record.
365.25/100 * 1000 = 3652.5
Steven,
I’m having a bit of heartburn over that statement of “we expect to see 3,652 high temperature records set per year.”
That begins to sound an awful lot like the climate propagandists way of saying that no matter what, the temperature is going to rise and we’re all doomed!
The equation you employ comes off as ‘math in a vacuum,’ i.e., a purely theoretical construct which bears no relation to the real world.
What happens when the records aren’t being set, and conversely are greater in number than the proposition put forth by the equations?
Thank you for your time on this.
Philip Foster
The AGW crowd is thrilled. They no longer have to rely on the three week long 2003 European heat wave to prove that the global climate is heating out of control.
They now also have a mini heat wave in a few eastern states to add to their spectacularly lame arsenal.
899
If you had a random number generator which you had run 99 times, the 100th run would have one chance out of a hundred of being the largest number in the group.
So in an environment of no warming, you would expect to see 3652 high temperature records over 1000 stations. In a warming environment, you would expect to see more. In a cooling environment, you would expect to see less.
I just had to share yesterday’s daily dose of alarmism from Australia’s national broadcaster, this one entitled “Hot,Hot,Hot” For those interested in an assault on the senses please check out http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2010/s2949403.htm.
I don’t think the ABC was at all receptive to Anthony’s recent tour here.
Ah! The famous heat wave that killed 36,000 people in France! Sadly this was for the most part due to the French habit of going ‘sur vacances’ during August and leaving the elderly behind in the flat – whoops – apartment/house – a bit like leaving the cat with food left out for it. Unable to get out easily or summon help many perished like pets left in a hot car.
Of course nearly five times as many elderly perish during the winter from cold. But let’s not mention that.
What is shown for actual high and low temperature July 9th 2010 in Philadelphia shows 75 and 75 degrees F. It me appears to me that this missed the actual high, due to having at that time only temperatures recorded early in the morning. The temperature in Philadelphia that day did make it at least to about 85, probably the upper 80’s. The actual average temperature for 7/9/2010 was probably 80-81.5, definitely much warmer than 75.
More news from So Cal in the ‘weather isn’t climate’ department courtesy of the NWS.
RECORD EVENT REPORT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE LOS ANGELES/OXNARD CA
330 AM PDT FRI JUL 9 2010
…MANY RECORD LOW MAXIMUM TEMPERATURES SET AGAIN YESTERDAY…
YESTERDAY WAS ANOTHER IN A STRING OF VERY COOL EARLY JULY DAYS
IN SOUTHWESTERN CALIFORNIA. MANY NEW DAILY RECORD LOW MAXIMUM
TEMPERATURE RECORDS WERE SET OR TIED YESTERDAY.
A RECORD LOW MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE IS SET WHEN THE HIGHEST
TEMPERATURE ON A CERTAIN DATE IS COOLER THAN ON THAT DATE
IN ANY PREVIOUS YEAR.
THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF THE RECORDS SET OR TIED FOR
JULY 7TH…ALONG WITH THE OLD RECORD AND THE YEAR IN
WHICH IT OCCURRED.
STATION NEW OLD
RECORD (2010) RECORD YEAR
LOS ANGELES DOWNTOWN/USC 70 71 1916
LOS ANGELES AIRPORT 65 67 1987
BURBANK AIRPORT 72 76 1944
SAN GABRIEL 72 80 1944
UCLA 66 69 1960
SANTA MONICA PIER 63 (TIED) 63 1965
SANTA MARIA 66 (TIED) 66 1956
SAN LUIS OBISPO CAL POLY 67 69 1974
I live near the San Gabriel station where the record was broken by 8 degrees.
It’s a drag having to wear a sweat shirt around the house during the summer!
But, if your in Phili, don’t even think of moving here. Earthquake on Tuesday, riots on Thursday, and Eco-wackos all year round.
Abc australia just like BBC, manipulated garbage for news. The guy mentioned who heads the PM show had a father who was an Mi5 agent, if I recall correctly, and my gut tells me that he is an knowing operative for the elite. The Abc has more and more morphed into an Orwellian mechanism of disinformation. Also our weather is being mucked around with. US deputy secretary of defence Cohen in a doorstop interview of 1999 said that we are now at war with the weather, I think those details are correct and also that its reported that various secret weather manipulation bills have been passed.Then there is the something like 10,000 HAARP stations around the world as well as chemtrail spraying that effects the weather. Those two things, chemtrail spraying and HAARP may very well, at least in part, work together, as there is strong evidence that one aspect of chemtrail spraying is working on the electrical properties of the atmosphere/biosphere? Also we have the suggestion that extreme weather events are being stage managed, hurricane Katrina, I think was involved in some unheard of manouvering and also showed what is possibly another signature of manipulation, the hexagram? shape evidenced from satelite pictures around the eye, I think Richard Hoagland is interested in this? All the time here, in Australia, we are bombarded with global warming propaganda: due to the intentional drying up of our rivers and dams as well as this programmed mind control people are being deluded.
Anthony,
FYI…. William Penn back in the 1600’s kept temperature records. Philly has an extensive temperature record.
William Penn said in a letter to England. “This lands weather is most remarkable… Not in it’s highs or lows but it’s great variety.”
This is from memory YMMV…. It’s from the Pennsylvania Weather book.
Here is a link to it.
http://www.amazon.com/Pennsylvania-Weather-Book-Ben-Gelber/dp/0813530563
In the mean time on the west coast, we’re having cool days and cold nights. Overcast at the morning hours.
All this is just about heat from the tropical Gulf of Mexico headed to the pole to be vented and the ‘hot blob’ rising up the East coast while the ‘cold blob’ is falling down the West coast.
And that’s the problem with looking at temperatures, it doesn’t capture heat flow.
The heat flow is net leaving the planet. So it gets how somewhere on it’s way past. So what. It’s the snows in South Africa, New Zealand, etc. that are telling the tale of cold (and the chilled coffee in Brazil). For latent heat in the ocean, it will take a few years to dump it. And it will go north via the East coast. No real surprise there.
I live in the mnts in Central PA and while it’s been pretty brutal the last week, it certainly isn’t anything that doesn’t happen at least once every year or two. Philly is known for hot, muggy summers, it pretty much sucks. No one mentioned however that the highs right before this heatwave were in the low, mid 70s for a week. That was probably just weather though.
Bill S made a comment on July 7, 2010. Regarding the mention of a high temperature and the contradiction in the next paragraph.
It is funny how stupid people make themselves look.
If he bothered to read what he was commenting on, he would see that the first record was for a specific day. The higher mention of a record was for a all time yearly record. They were two different records with different criteria for each one which is why one was higher. Pay attention bill, to what you are reading before being critical of someone else. LOL.