Ian Duncan writes on Facebook:
‘France has its hottest recorded temperature ever’.
But they don’t mention that where it was recorded was next to a concrete drain, and a steel chain mesh fence close to a bitumen (asphalt) highway.
So much for only using correctly placed instruments in a Stevenson Screen in a open space away from unnatural heat source.
You can see the station here:
https://goo.gl/maps/hF4KbSoXTt6WZfLr6
Here is the fun part – it might be the “greenhouse effect” /sarc
Seriously though, who knows what effect those greenhouses might have had on the high temperature? What we do know is that greenhouses accumulate heat and raise the temperature. Depending on wind direction that day, they may have vented waste heat in the direction of the thermometer shelter. The same could be true for the asphalt highway.
As for the heat wave itself, Dr. Roy W. Spencer adds:
When Saharan air reaches Europe, it’s going to be hot. Regarding record-high measurements, it is legitimate to ask about the placement of temperature sensors, as well as the length of temperature records.
For a record length of, say, 100+ years and NO long term warming trend, it is still expected from random weather variations that new record high temperatures will be recorded from time to time.
The recent record high in Miami, FL was made in the middle of a vast concrete jungle that did not exist 100 years ago, and now averages 10 deg. F warmer at night than rural surroundings.
One other thing to consider – Stevenson screens that are easily accessible like that are prone to biases (or forcings, if you will) that “real climatologists” don’t usually consider – like vehicles being parked next to them. Look at the satellite view: (station circled in red)
Remember this fiasco in Scotland a couple of years ago? An ice-cream truck with generators constantly running was the cause of a “man-made climatological event”.
Friday Funny: Scottish “record high temperature” caused by Ice Cream Truck
So is the new French absolute all time high temperature record valid? I’m surmising it is not. There’s just too many influences to consider.
Certainly, the measurement environment there is far different than that of 100 years ago. And, who knows if somebody parked a vehicle next to that French station on June 28th? Maybe a lunch wagon/food truck frequents there to cater to the nursery workers.
UPDATE: 6/29/19 11:40AM From comments, there’s some question as to whether this is “the station” or not. Regardless, the station shown above is in fact poorly sited. I’ll do more checking this evening. -Anthony
UPDATE2: 6/29/19 11:56AM It seems that it may not even be an “all time record”.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
https://www.infoclimat.fr/observations-meteo/temps-reel/gallargues-le-montueux/000OZ.html
There is a third photo ( scroll next to first two ) which clearly shows a close-up taken on the roof. It seems clear that the temperature sensor is on the tiles roof.
The “record” was the “feely” temperature not the temperature of the air and there was ZERO wind. Recorded air temp was 44.1 deg C.
The record was due to advection of warm air off a tiles roof plus a “felt as” adjustment. USELESS for anything but hype.
Looks like a rain gauge to me. As the documentation says.
https://www.davisinstruments.com/solution/vantage-pro2/
No, it is an all-in-one Davis Vantage pro 2 and the finned bit is the radiation shield of the temperature sensor.
Sadly the M.F. contact page does not work so no way to get a clarification ( how convenient ).
Here are said to be close-ups of the equipment on the ground nearby. Certainly looks like temperature gear. And the doc says temp is measured on the ground, rain on the roof.
https://twitter.com/hashtag/Gallargues?src=hash
Thanks Nick.
A local TV meterologist running several web sites can presumably be trusted to know which is which. I would imagine he pays to have access to the data. So he, unlike the rest of us, can presumably see the figures at the “secondary” M.F. site.
Basically you need pay for an annual subscription just to get to read the new national record from a direct official source.
Trust us, would the govt lie to you ?
It appears on the face of it that it was a coincidence that the “feely” warmth of the amateur station was exactly the same as the air temp in the official one.
This is why I was cautioning Petit-Barde against hroughing accusation before having concrete facts rather than suspicions and assumptino.
The specific tweet is here
https://twitter.com/DorianDziadula/status/1144648997346435074
It’s a Davis VP2 or 2+. It’s Davis’s higher end weather station. I have one. https://photos.app.goo.gl/MyzhTL3yHPQhV6pCA
Don’t you realise you are supposed to put it on your roof ?! How do you expect to get any climate records like that ?
But if we have a very cold day, all the Iiberal Ieft media will be shouting… “don’t you know the difference between climate and weather….?”
R
I see that some commenters are trying to pooh pooh the 1930 newspaper reports. “All we have is that some Australian newspapers, which I have never heard of”
It was reported worldwide, including newspapers in the US and New Zealand.
One source used by newspapers was the US based United Press Wire Service, at the time one of the worlds largest newsagencies.
https://mobile.twitter.com/DarrylKing74/status/1144808121094868992
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Press_International?wprov=sfla1
Doesn’t get us any closer to where it was actually measured, or by whom, or in what situation.
Hey, if we can’t find that info for two days ago what chance is there for 1930 !?
Pooh pooh?
Err no. The point is that now records are routinely questioned and investigated.
In some cases the sensors will be imponded and checked for calibration.
A newspaper report isn’t evidence. In fact they are very often reliant on the same suspect report.
A good examle is here around 1 minute in
https://youtu.be/ntv3gaduGRM?t=87
Read that article.
270 miles north of the arctic circle?
That’s funny because the reports from her autobiography and other sources put the journey
as making it either 200 miles or 250 miles.
Stopped by “marshland”?
Other sources ( again autobiographical) explain that they ran out of road.
90F in the shade? where exactly? what time exactly? measured by what exactly?
The point is simple. you cannot simply trust the press. you shouldnt ignore the reports, but they
are not reports made by qualified personell.
A good skeptic would be AS SKEPTICAL of the newspaper as he is of any other sort of source.
but you are not a real skeptic
A newspaper report is most certainly evidence. The only issue is the quality of the evidence. That remains to be seen but then the quality of the evidence for yesterdays temperature is at best questionable.
Even if the 122F measurement used 1930s accuracy and was 5F out it still comfortably exceeds yesterdays temperatures. The newspaper reports also detail previous heatwaves that resulted in the Rhine and Seine drying up. Are you suggesting this should just be dismissed because accurate thermometers didn’t exist then?
The truth is that all modern records like this are meaningless because they are only using data that goes back a small number of years, before which measurement could not be done and those using them as evidence of climate change, let alone man caused climate change are at best naive.
Heller list another newspaper report of 122F in 1773.
Checking the history books ( written in 1846) the temperature was actually 102
Bottom Line
1. the MSM jumped the gun in announcing the record
2. Skeptics jumped the gun DENOUNCING the record.
the WMO will take their time and certify the record. because the are true skeptics
not arm chair experts
In any case it doesnt mean much, we know the world is warming.. that means more warm
records and fewer cold records.
Here is a tweet from WMO. The earlier announcement from meteo france is here.
“A newspaper report isn’t evidence. In fact they are very often reliant on the same suspect report.”
I would say a newspaper account is more reliable and accurate than a tree ring.
Newspapers when reporting the local temperatures of the day use an official source for their data. They don’t just make it up out of thin air, at least, they didn’t back before CAGW became such a big business. Back then, they had no reason to exaggerate high temperatures, they were just reporting the facts as they knew them.
The reason Alarmists don’t like newspaper history is because it puts the lie to the CAGW fraud.
Oh dear, Meteo France looks as corrupt as the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) in Australia!
It’s Australia’s biggest export, data fabrication. Well, we no longer make anything anymore.
…. apart from “dirty coal” . LOL
This event has nothing to do with climate anyway. It is a weather phenomenon. For me the issue here is whether Meteo France are presenting “feely” adjusted roof top readings as climate records.
ie are they as duplicitous as BoM ?
Australia has always dug stuff out of the ground and sent it off to have value added. We don’t do nasty stuff like that in Australia anymore. We are now in to “soft” industries where we can simply make stuff up. Harry read me, the BoM, the ABC, you name it…we simply make it up and export it.
Keep it up and maybe some day you’ll get to be like the USA, where anything of value as an export – movies, music, microcode (tip o’ the hat to Neal Stephenson) requires enormous amounts of energy, is easily reproduced (ie. pirated), and adds no actual value to the world.
“Greg June 30, 2019 at 2:18 am
…. apart from “dirty coal” . LOL
This event has nothing to do with climate anyway. It is a weather phenomenon. For me the issue here is whether Meteo France are presenting “feely” adjusted roof top readings as climate records.”
Our coal is the best. I am keen to know if this “hottest eva temp” was from a non-MetroFrance device and, as you suggest, from a “private” roof top device. I know it will be quickly dismissed in the media.
How can you pretend that?
Here is Meteo France source page
The first thing I note is it gives other sites with almost as high temperature
I wonder if these are amateur sites ?
http://www.meteofrance.fr/actualites/73726667-canicule-nombreux-records-absolus-battus
00ced, how do you relate that to the temps on their web site? Since they do not give a station ref, they just leave everyone guessing and hyperventilating.
Can you give a link to the data corresponding to those metadata and photos, all I seem to get form M.F. look more like it comes from the private, roof-top station.
As additional information and as it was added under meteo paris web site, it wasn’t an official meteo station but a secondary station whish reported this record (the secondary stations are listed under StatiC and located on the roof)
thanks can you provide a link to where you see that info?
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/29/frances-new-hottest-recorded-temperature-ever-is-in-question-guess-where-it-was-measured/#comment-2734008
I was asking for your Paris Meteo web site source, so I could read what they actually said. You do not seem to understand French very well.
Chm: (the secondary stations are listed under StatiC and located on the roof)
No the secondary network is called Randome ( very confidence inspiring ) , is classed as part of the “secondary” Meteo.France network and is NOT accessible without payment. This has nothing to do with StatiC which is amateur and freely accessible.
So they have recorded a nation record temperature but no one is allowed to see directly recorded and have to rely on hearsay as to what it was. That is a large part of the uncertainty and confusion which has surrounded this issue.
A fine waste of everyone’s time and total lack of transparency and accountability.
Hey we are from the govt. would we lie to you?
After more investigation,
I have to apology following some updates added on the site since.
A page was added under meteo paris with some updates telling that the station located on the roof is not part of professional secondary network stations (initially it wasn’t told about pro or not pro secondary station !
More info here :
http://reseaumeteofrance.fr/wxfeeds3.php
Météo France stations are part of Radome network (réseau)
Stations with free access are listed under infoclimat.
I could find a CSV file about free acces (under Static) of radome stations though google and taken from donneespublique.meteofrance.fr
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=11&ved=2ahUKEwif74fhl5HjAhUH8BoKHZU6AsMQFjAKegQIARAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdonneespubliques.meteofrance.fr%2Fdonnees_libres%2FStatic%2FlisteStationsPackRadome.csv&usg=AOvVaw0_jEaKVCci4Mp1AlkCUCdo
It seems to have to pay to get the datas of station ID 30123001 !
I’ve doubt now and may be the station isn’t the one supposed to be. Station ID 30123001 is not part of RADOME but ETENDU (extented) whish could be understand as secondary
List of available real time stations (2014)
https://donneespubliques.meteofrance.fr/client/document/20140701_liste_stations_temps_reel_141_154.xls
As you can read it from wxfeed3 link, this station is classified at level 3 due to not responding 30m from water (16m here) and it is written that the direction of the wind can have a big impact on the values. The 28 aug at the given time 16h20 – 4:20PM, the wind came from 74° whish is nord-est ( from google maps, the wind goes than through a big warehouse with probably many trucks in front of it !)
This make the station not a precise station !
https://www.coordonnees-gps.fr/satellite/@43.714833,4.171667,17
“Numbers of cases of collapse are reported from the Loire region, where a temperature of 122 degrees was registered”
That’s 50 Celsius
https://realclimatescience.com/2019/06/50c-in-france/
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7940008,4.091085,3a,74.9y,-11.87h,91.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sHwjHD0UKAnYiT7uElVVOGw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DHwjHD0UKAnYiT7uElVVOGw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D217.0711%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656
I checked out one of the other top three locations Villevieille , just outside Sommier. Went past last year. This seems to be well sited at the edge of a vineyard.
https://donneespubliques.meteofrance.fr/?fond=contenu&id_contenu=37
id=30352002
map location matches what seems to be a stevenson screen in street view and “satellite” photo. Can’t see state of screen but site looks good.
Here the pics and the status
https://donneespubliques.meteofrance.fr/metadonnees_publiques/fiches/fiche_30352002.pdf
BR
MFKBoulder
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sudexp%C3%A9+-+Site+De+Marsillargues/@43.6346261,4.1698838,96m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m13!1m7!3m6!1s0x0:0x0!2zNDPCsDM4JzA1LjAiTiA0wrAxMCcxMS4wIkU!3b1!8m2!3d43.6347222!4d4.1697222!3m4!1s0x12b69bf363824a2d:0xcdca64f8147188ac!8m2!3d43.6332283!4d4.1703938
#2 Marseillargues also looks to remain a good clear rural site.
id=34151005
Greg
I think you said you live close to the site. there is a lot of heat and smoke here so can you confirm exactly where the site is located (photo?) the actual temperature and at what time, and also when ‘official’ French records started on which the record claim is based?
Any thoughts on the much higher record being claimed from 1920’s or so?
thanks
Tonyb
Firstly it is not a claim based on the longevity of that specific record. They are claiming “never before seen in France”.
I can not confirm anything since they do not make the record publicly available. that is my main gripe with all this. They claim an all time record but then hide it so no one can see it or look at the rest of the record from that station. We are expected to accept hear-say science.
Nimes-Courbessac is quite close ( 20 km ? ) and is an available reference station.
The TV meteorologist who runs meteo-ville and meteo Paris, has the clearest statements on all this.
http://reseaumeteofrance.fr/wxfeeds3.php
We have no choice but believe he is accurately relating the facts and have no means ( short of a few hundred euros ) to see the quality and consistency of the record at that site.
The canal makes a low quality site but probably was down wind in this case. The lorry part next was upwind and only about 50m away. That makes not acceptable as WMO site.
http://reseaumeteofrance.fr/wxfeeds3.php
I note that all the other temperature he provides as record temps are around 44.4 deg. C or less.
The three nearest are all airport site. Montpellier in particular can be ignored since the station is on the edge of a large car park. I may get out and take a shot of that.
It’s all a lot of huffing and puffing and of course has nothing to tell us about climate, only about a fairly rare and strong incursion of saharan air.
We often get hot periods due to such southerly winds and sand filled rain storms. It’s rare that they are this wide spread and persistent. The last big event was in 2003 and lasted fully 15 days. That was tough for those who were working and not on holiday.
Temps around 35 deg C and it’s July tomorrow. Nothing too unusual there.
Figures don’t lie, but liars figure!
A newspaper report is most certainly evidence. The only issue is the quality of the evidence. That remains to be seen but then the quality of the evidence for yesterdays temperature is at best questionable.
Even if the 122F measurement used 1930s accuracy and was 5F out it still comfortably exceeds yesterdays temperatures. The newspaper reports also detail previous heatwaves that resulted in the Rhine and Seine drying up. Are you suggesting this should just be dismissed because accurate thermometers didn’t exist then?
The truth is that all modern records like this are meaningless because they are only using data that goes back a small number of years, before which measurement could not be done and those using them as evidence of climate change, let alone man caused climate change are at best naive.
“Even if the 122F measurement used 1930s accuracy and was 5F out it still comfortably exceeds yesterdays temperatures.”
And it might be worthwhile to check the temperatures reported by the newspaper for the preceding few days and the following few days to see if they are consistent with such a temperature.
Newspaper accounts of the weather say the 1930’s were as warm or warmer than the temperatures of today. This means we are not expeiencing unprecedented warming today, and that means we are not experiencing any CAGW (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming) today.
That’s why alarmists reject newspaper accounts. Newspaper accounts blow up their CAGW promotion. The alarmists can tamper with the surface temperature record to make the 1930’s warmth look insignificant, but they can’t change the newspaper accounts.
And the alarmists made the mistake of leaving the original surface temperature records so we can see just how much they have been bastardized. They just couldn’t erase all that stuff.
Tom Abbott
“Newspaper accounts of the weather say the 1930’s were as warm or warmer than the temperatures of today.”
For the probably umpteenth time: this is valid for yearly averages of CONUS maxima temperatures only, and for nothing else.
Well, I could say the same thing and will: “For the probably umpteenth time:” The warm 1930’s is *not* restricted to the continental United States only. Every unmodified historical surface temperature chart from around the world has the same temperature profile as the United States, i.e, the 1930’s show to be as warm as current-day temperatures. That’s before the Climategate charlatans tampered with and changed the data.
None of these unmodified charts resemble the “hotter and hotter” temperature profile of the bogus, bastardized Hockey Stick charts.
Here is a depiction of the real global temperature profile, the U.S. temperature chart, and the bogus, bastardized Hockey Stick chart. The chart on the left is the U.S. surface temperature chart and every unmodified surface temperature chart from around the world resembles the U.S. temperature profile, where the temperatures warm for a few decades and then cool for a few decades and then warm again. As President Trump says, “The temperatures go “up and down”.
The chart on the right is the bogus, bastardized Hockey Stick chart which was created by the Climategate Charlatans to make it appear that the 1930’s warmth was insignificant and that temperatures have not been going “up and down” but have been going up, up, up, and getting hotter ad hotter and now we are at the hottest point in human history. It’s all a Big Lie created to sell the CAGW fraud!
When you look at a Hockey Stick chart you are looking at the evidence for the biggest science fraud in history.
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/
Are these hot European areas experiencing drought? If so, that would explain the high temps due to lack of transpirational cooling (which, if active, produces a 90F (32C) high-temp limit here in forested western MD, USA). In severe drought, temps in this area have reached 110F (43C) — July 1936.
This is the explanation from Meteo France official website
http://www.meteo-paris.com/actualites-meteo/45-9-c-a-gallargues-quelles-conditions-de-mesure-30-juin-2019.html
This link is not from “meteo France” but a site owned by BFMTV weather presenter Guillaume Sechet.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillaume_S%C3%A9chet
http://www.meteo-paris.com/guillaume-sechet.html
Why do you declare that to be the “Meteo France official website” ?
You do not need to speak french to realise that “Meteo-Paris” does not mean “Meteo France” .
If you scan down the copyright and ownership stuff you also see it is not mentioning “Meteo France”.
The guy is a TV weather man , like our host was. He owns several such sites. That does not mean Anthony works for NOAA or the govt.
Guillaume Séchet does a fairly good job of explaining where all this comes from , but that does not mean he works for Meteo France or that this is an “official” explanation.
Why Today’s and Past Heat Waves Have Nothing to do with CO2
CO2 and its Greenhouse Gas Effect thermalize OUTGOING Longwave Infrared Radiation between 13 and 18µ wavelength. The GHG effect can never cause a short-term spike in temperatures, and it will never cause record high temperatures. The reason is simple, the GHG effect slows cooling, it never adds additional energy to a system. The earth has to be warmed FIRST before its outgoing radiation can be thermalized.
The only way CO2 and the GHG effect could contribute to record high temperatures was if in fact CO2 “trapped” heat in the atmosphere, preventing it from leaving the system. That mechanism would be much like stepping on a hose, where the pressure (temperature) behind the foot would increase, and any additional water would simply add to the pressure. That doesn’t happen, CO2 doesn’t “trap” heat, and in fact, Europe was setting record cold temperatures just last winter.
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2019/06/30/why-todays-and-past-heat-waves-have-nothing-to-do-with-co2/
“… and in fact, Europe was setting record cold temperatures just last winter.”
This is a ridiculous claim, and I think you are perfectly aware of it.
The last two winters in Western Europe were predicted months before by NOAA as ‘extremely mild’, and exactly that happened here, CO2Fan!
In Northeastern Germany, where there had been lots of snow and temps below -12 °C until 2014, we have now winters with nearly no snow, and with mostly temps above 0 °C.
Why do you persist in publishing such nonsense? Instead of behaving like a hard CO2 ideologist, would it not be preferable to simply consult thermometers like we do at home?
Confirmed, very mild winter with only one relatively limited cold snap in south of France.
Greg
Et voici pour ainsi dire la confirmation de la confirmation.
Top 20 of an ascending sort of monthly GHCN daily station anomalies wrt 1981-2010 for 1900-2019 in FR:
1956 2 -7.69
1940 1 -5.67
1933 12 -5.66
1942 2 -5.61
1945 1 -5.38
1929 2 -5.21
1963 1 -5.20
1941 1 -5.18
1942 1 -5.17
1901 2 -5.15
1917 12 -4.87
1914 1 -4.85
1940 12 -4.79
1905 10 -4.64
1912 8 -4.41
1963 2 -4.40
1900 3 -4.33
1941 5 -4.22
1919 10 -4.20
1911 1 -4.11
I remember very well Feb 1956, the snow cover was higher than me at that time.
2018/9 appear far far below at positions 446 and 662 of 1433.
But this does not mean that they would conversely appear e.g. on top 5 of the descending sort of the same data. Top 20:
1926 2 3.53
1990 2 3.29
2003 8 3.27
1966 2 3.03
2015 12 2.98
2003 6 2.96
1949 9 2.89
1934 12 2.73
2018 1 2.68
2006 7 2.66
2018 4 2.62
2017 6 2.58
2007 4 2.56
2011 4 2.49
1911 8 2.41
1921 10 2.40
1937 2 2.35
1929 9 2.35
2002 2 2.33
1945 4 2.31
Interesting here: normally, top 20 of anomalies prefer to show winter months.
2003, 2006, 2017 broke the rule in France.
Similar things would appear when showing the same kind of data for Germany.
Bonne nuit
J.-P. D.
Like alarmists, I’m interested in finding correlations. Europe has of course ramped up its renewable energy generation capability enormously – France is shooting for 23% next year for example. Therefore:
More use of renewable energy sources = more intense heat waves.
Another free statistic to the Climate Commisariat from your truly!
Michael H Anderson
“More use of renewable energy sources = more intense heat waves.”
Jesus! This is one of the greatest equations evah.
I’m sure Anthony will welcome a great head post of yours about that.
Ah, you’re too kind. Just seems hilarious to me that no matter what’s done in terms of throwing billions at “climate change mitigation,” the weather just keeps being the weather.
I can see mass lynchings of world leaders in the future, having gone 100% renewable (yeah, right) and still getting droughts, floods, heat waves, cold snaps, and hurricanes at random. A bunch of demented King Canutes screaming at the weather to do what they want it to. Jesus wept…
Michael H Anderson
“… no matter what’s done in terms of throwing billions at “climate change mitigation,” the weather just keeps being the weather. ”
Like so many people, you confound “right now” with “in 50-100 years”.
So for you stopping to worry, I recommend heaviest use of fossile burning (or, if you aren’t intimidated by radioactive waste silently growing everywhere, of nuclear plants).
*Like many people* I have followed this non-issue with intense interest and scrutiny for over twenty years. My conclusion was UNAVOIDABLY (and barring apocalypse-level revelation will remain) that it is entirely about money and power.
So go troll somewhere else, why don’t you? Nobody here (or likely anywhere else) gives a rat’s left ball what you think about anything, and if you were an adult you’d understand that. Take a hike, you lightweight.
Michael H Anderson
“So go troll somewhere else, why don’t you? Nobody here (or likely anywhere else) gives a rat’s left ball what you think about anything, and if you were an adult you’d understand that. Take a hike, you lightweight.”
Like commenter Greg, I recommend you to become a little more polite.
I did not insult anybody here.
But YOU ARE. You simply lack self-control.
And it’s up to anybody to decide who of us is the real troll…
Rgds
J.-P. D.
Many people consider me a warmist, and ha ha haa: I love to help them in getting more and more convinced of their opinion.
We had on the weather web site a max prediction of 37 °C for today, 2019 June 30, and our thermometer indeed showed (only) 35.
{ For the eternal ignorants: weather stations are protected against not only solar radiation, but also… wind (what our thermo-guy on the terrace of course isn’t). }
*
Since a few weeks this year, we experience something certainly known by people living in hot countries, but which was for us unprecedented: bees land on a water bowl intended for birds and drink whatever they can. Up to 6 at at time.
Last year, there were no bees yet in June. But end of July, we suddenly saw a huge hornet landing on the shell, pumping itself full of water and disappearing. Only eight minutes later it was back, and so it went from morning to evening for a week.
*
Since the GHCN daily record contains, near temperatures, info about precipitation and wind as well, it might be interesting to construct, for our region, a gridded time series of the product of the three.
I found some stats about Met France accuracy on their site. In short is was false alarms < 16% ; missed events < 2%. Clearly they have a strategy to mild exaggeration in forcasts to avoid being attacked for not warning people. I usually subtract 2 deg C on the rare occasions I even look at weather forecasts.
What a poor argument. The position of a measurement systeem can change a lot, ok. But when it stays in the same place year after year… every year it has the chance to beat a record. Only now it did. What’s the problem?
Vive la asphalt!
I ride mountain bike 400 miles a month. My Garmin plots the temps. It hit 108 on the street 2 weeks ago and hottest weather underground reading in the area was 92 degrees. So I ride a mile and get a cross wind and watch it fall into the 90’s.
The picture showing where the weather station would be does not seem right.
It is in fact in a field far from any highway.
It a class 3 station (heat sources at more than 10 m, vegetation less than 25 cm, less than 1°C due to overheat after recent inspection of vegetation growth).
See :
http://www.meteo-paris.com/actualites/45-9-c-a-gallargues-quelles-conditions-de-mesure-30-juin-2019.html
Pierre M.
I’m afraid this info won’t interest pseudoskeptics very much.
Ah, I get it: alarmists pretending to be skeptics; pointing out logical fallacies, inconsistencies, conclusion-jumping or in my case JOKES – might be we have a language issue here – and calling their targets “pseudoskeptics.” I see. Almost sorta clever.
Yup…almost. Insert sound of slow, measured, heavy clapping in a big empty hall.
Or maybe you’re trying to “help” the skeptical community by weeding out those not up to your *exacting standard*. Here’s a thought: restrain yourself. We need everyone of voting age on board we can get, kindly don’t bloody alienate anyone, thanks very much for nothing.
Not sure what you are ranting about here but seems like you need to take few deep breathes and stop spitting flames and insults. It’s been a pretty well mannered discussion up until now.
I’m “ranting” (wtf?) about the troll Bindidon. Take a few breaths yourself, read his posts, then read what I wrote again. And kindly don’t preach to me about manners when I’m addressing people who want to bankrupt the western world – my family and I live there.
PS Geez, you’d make a lousy detective Greg. If I was flaming and insulting, you’d know it, believe me. I’m speculating about why someone claiming to be a skeptic would come here to shoot people down and call them “pseudoskeptics.” Same question applies to Steven Mosher BTW. What the hell is this, a skepticism pissing contest?
People conducting these little purges at WUWT made my eyebrows go up, that’s all.
Locating meteo stations can be a real pain. I tried for a number of them in Northern Italy and sometimes the satellite photo shows what looks like the station within a few meters of the marker at the given coordinates.
Other times, the station is much farther from the given coordinates and not seldom it just cannot be found within a reasonable distance. Being in another continent I can only rely on Google and similar services, so that’s a serious limitation to locate stations, I know. There are also few metadata available like instrumentation specs, site classification according to WMO and station moves history.
On a different note, the comparison of rural or semi-rural and urban stations in Northern Italy these days show more or less the same highs, but sensibly higher lows for the urban stations.
Cities are concrete condoms.
http://www.meteofrance.fr/actualites/73782443-canicule-les-premiers-40-c-atteints-mercredi
“Cette valeur est 16 degrés au-dessus de la normale de fin juin.”
Yeah. 16 °C above or below normal: too much, whichever the direction.
During the peak of a warm interstadial (meaning a less cold 10k to 40k year period during our current glacial period), there is some kind of a record temperature set for whatever reason along a road in some far away or close by spot on the globe. Yawwwwwwwwnnnnnn. Wake me when we all start the slide down to a stadial period, or at least dig me up.
It never ceases to amaze me when scientists who know better think their current job is to alarmingly save humanity from an interstadial. We are in a glacial period and should be on our knees thanking the heavens above for our good fortune of living during this pleasant less cold period!
Idiots.
I second that.