
From Dr. Roy Spencer’s Global Warming Blog
Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
NOTE: Since he has done extensive investigation into some implausibly hot temperatures reported in Death Valley, I asked Bill Reid to comment on my previous blog post where I maintain that the world record 134 deg. F highest recorded air temperature was likely biased warm by about 10 deg., and should not be accepted as a world record. What follows are Bill’s initial thoughts on the subject. Also, based upon his comments, I will likely update the charts found in my previous blog post with more realistic temperature lapse rate values in the early 20th Century when insufficient stations were available to determine accurate lapse rates.
by William T. Reid
A big thank you to Dr. Spencer for investigating the current (very dubious) world high-temperature record and for bringing attention to my Death Valley climate research. There are a handful of ways, both climatologically and meteorologically, to show that Greenland Ranch’s reported maximum of 134F on July 10, 1913, is likely not valid.
Dr. Spencer’s methodology here (comparing the Death Valley maximums to those the closest surrounding stations, with adjustments for station elevation) is indeed a devastating blow to the authenticity of the suspect observations. What it basically demonstrates is that the lower troposphere was not hot enough to support temperatures much above 125F in July, 1913. I have compared regional maximums for all of the hottest summertime events since 1911. In practically all instances (in which the Greenland Ranch and Death Valley reports appear reasonable), ALL of the maximums at the closest surrounding stations lend support to the maximums for Death Valley.
From July 7 to 14 of 1913, when eight consecutive afternoons had reported maximums of 127, 128, 129, 134, 129, 130, 131 and 127F in Death Valley, NONE of the maximums from the closest surrounding stations supported the Greenland Ranch maximums! The departures from average for maximums for the hottest five-day stretch were about +4 to +8 at the closest stations, while maximums at Greenland Ranch were nearly 15 degrees F above the average for July. (see table)
Annual maximums at Greenland Ranch from 1911 to 1960 ranged from 120F to 127F, except for the 134F in 1913. If the reported maximums at Greenland Ranch in July, 1913, were authentic, then the maximums at the closest surrounding stations in that month would have been much higher than reported. In addition, numerous regional heat waves have been hotter than the one during the first half of July, 1913. Why have Death Valley maximums failed to exceed 130F in the interim when three days in July 1913 purportedly reached 134, 130 and 131F?
In his “bias” chart, Dr. Spencer notes the “substantial warm biases in the temperatures reported at Greenland Ranch in the first 10-15 years.” And, he mentions that the observer(s) may have been relying to some extent on thermometers other than the official instrumentation. I do think that the observer was comparing “household thermometer” readings with the official equipment on occasion from spring to summer of 1913. Higher readings off of the poorly-exposed thermometers near the ranch house and under the veranda were probably (and inappropriately) entered onto the official climate form. But, I have not uncovered much evidence of this particular type of deviation from standard observational procedures outside of 1913.
I would contend that the generally higher “bias” numbers from the early years comparably are due primarily to changes at the closest area weather stations which promoted cooler maximums early on and warmer maximums later. For example, two of the closest stations to Greenland Ranch in 1913 were Independence and Lone Pine, in Owens Valley. In 1913, Owens River water was diverted to Los Angeles, and the Owens Valley gradually dried up. Summer maximums increased as Owens Lake evaporated, irrigation was not possible and farmland was abandoned, and desert-like conditions developed. (Roy’s note: The early years had very few stations within 100 miles of Death Valley, and the temperature lapse rates I computed from those few stations appear to be biased as a result. I will correct this in a future blog post, and will provide what should be better estimates of average July daily maximum Death Valley temperatures.)
Also, in the early decades of the 20th century, thermometer shelters were (almost invariably) sited above grass. This resulted in very conservative (i.e., coolish) maximums at desert stations. Low humidities promoted cooling due to evapotranspiration effects. In the early decades of the 20th century, desert weather stations were generally in towns, amidst shade trees and lawns. The resulting maximum temperature reports were very conservative. By mid-century and thereafter, the town weather stations were more likely to be at the airport or at a municipal utility site, fire station or equipment yard. Grass cover and shade trees were usually absent at these locales. Today, desert weather stations in towns and cities are (almost invariably!) above bare ground.
You can imagine the difference in maximums between desert stations above oft-irrigated grass and those above bare ground. (Roy’s note: In my experience, unless the vegetation area is rather large, and there is almost no wind, a weather station’s daily maximum temperature will still be largely determined by air flowing from the larger-scale desert surroundings. But note… this is different from, say a poorly sited thermometer next to a brick wall or heat pump where hot air from an isolated source can elevate the daily maximum temperature recorded).
The Greenland Ranch station was originally sited above a patch of alfalfa grass, immediately adjacent to forty acres of cultivated and irrigated land.
It is my belief that the new observer in 1913 (Oscar Denton) was rather disillusioned with the conservative maximums from the official station above grass and next to the evaporatively-cooled farmland. I think he felt compelled to fudge the maximums upwards in 1913. Photographs of the Greenland Ranch weather station show that it was above bare ground by about 1920 (see example photo at top of post).
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.


This is more of a comment that many older temperature readings are as suspect as newer readings at airports or near AC condensers. So, barring s time machine, there is no good way to tell.
Apparently, Oscar Denton was almost 100 years ahead of his time.
If you ever see an image of the writing on the temperature records, you’d cry its so beautiful. This is the hand of a very meticulous person; not the chicken scratchings of some slob. I take that as a sign of character, this guy was meticulous in recording the temperature measurements, he was likely meticulous in everything.
Reid should not be insulting the worker .
Is he that liberal ???
Reid has never voted for a Democrat and he was an avid listener to Rush Limbaugh for 30 years. I don’t mix climatology with politics. Do you think it is possible that Denton could 1) have nice handwriting and 2) bend the truth now and then?
Why are you saying Denton is a liar ??
I said that he fudged the numbers and he strayed from regular observing protocol. In his book “Deep Enough,” Frank Crampton reports that Denton was indeed one to share lies with the visitors to the ranch. Look it up!
From “Deep Enough”:
“It was not often that more than one or two of the old timers, prospectors, or desert rats were at the Furnace Creek Ranch at the same time, but Oscar was a good listener, and he passed the latest stories and the best lies to the next to come for the regular clean-up and supplies.”
If Denton told lies is it okay to call him a liar?
I haven’t read the book, but you recognize that is probably a complement, right? That is how you say someone was generally a good host, fun to be with, and capable of telling entertaining stories. That’s what people had before radio, TV, movies, and cable news came along to tell the lies.
One of the things I like about reading Roy Spencer’s work is that he is open to comments and corrections.
I disagree on three points.
Go back and compare not the daily highs, but the overnight lows and the daily highs. If you notice the night before, the night of the 13th, the overnight low was about 15 degrees above the mean for overnight lows. I think a cloud layer rolled in blocking heat from escaping (water vapor blocks long wave radiation).
Independence, Lone Pine, Tonopah are in completely different environments than Death Valley. Independence and Lone pine are at 3,000′ elevation, Tonopah is 6,000′ elevation. Compare this to Death Valley at 178′ below sea level. Adiabatic Lapse Rate (change in temp due to elevation) is 5.4F according to the NWS. There’s your 15 degrees change between Independence, Lone Pine, and Green Valley Ranch.
My last point, is that modern weather stations are likely to be adjacent to large expanses of asphalt, especially at airports. Large airports for heavy aircraft are likely to have tens of feet deep concrete for aircraft parking. That’s a lotta heat sink to cool down every night, along with big metal buildings (i.e. reflective solar cookers).
I want to restate the Adiabatic Lapse Rate is 5.4F per thousand feet elevation change.
Lone Pine and Independence being 3,000 feet higher than Green Valley Ranch are expected to be 5.4 * 3 degrees cooler or about 16.2 degrees cooler just due to Adiabatic Lapse Rate.
I agree with on this! I live in the north Mojave Desert and all of these “nearby” locations range from somewhat different to totally different to Death Valley! See Ron Long’s post, you have to experience it, there is something special about that place
As I posted on Part !. The Indian Wells Valley had three 119F days in 1988, 1993, 2021, all in the month of July. The elevation is 2.250 feet – that’s 2450′ higher than Greenland Ranch. The dry air lapse rate (it’s as dry here as DV!) calcs to +13.2F. On those 119F days, 132F in DV, if the lapse rate applies.
Your last point is at best misinformed, or is simply bullchips. Airport ramps, aprons, taxiways and runways are at most 18 inches thick for “heavy” aircraft (wide body).
https://www.futureproofwithconcrete.com.au/CWL/CWL/Resources/Case_Studies_folder/New_concrete_runway_in_New_York.aspx
Furthermore, smaller airports only serving narrow body aircraft, the thickness is only 11 inches.
Therefore your “tens of feet deep concrete” statement is completely out to lunch. Furthermore, the concrete area of an airport is a fraction of the total area an airport occupies. Here is PBI or Palm Beach International, in Florida:
https://skyvector.com/airport/PBI/Palm-Beach-International-Airport
The total area of the airport is 2120 acres, and the area of the runways, taxiways, ramps is 302.45 acres. Therefore this typical medium sized airport has a mere 14.3% of the area it occupies as concrete. (runway and taxiway area from the FAA chart, the ramps from Google earth regards area)
50% of PBI area is grass, 14.3% is concrete and the rest is buildings or parking areas.
I posit that airports are not terribly different than urban areas of single family homes on grass lots. And certainly more green area than big city centers with high rise buildings. Airport weather stations are essential for aviation safety, but are typically returning slightly higher temps than surrounding stations. But they remain necessary for aviation safety, and are not fit for purpose of climate analyses. But they have records published every 1/2 to 1 hour, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year for the last 75 years so are an easy target for data analysis.
There is nothing you can do to make the past readings more accurate than they were factually written down as. Every adjustment runs the risk of adjusting in the wrong direction. By playing this game, you are arguing that the constant cooling off of the past temperatures that the global warming alarmists participate in to the detriment of science.
Past temperatures are recorded, that is historical, and it is the official records. They need to be left alone officially.
If you want to play around on the sidelines and make up stories, by all means, enjoy your stories.
Let me run this through the leftist view point. Hey, they are using adiabatic lapse rate to adjust past temperatures based on nearby station data. You know, let me see how that makes current warming look scarier if I do the same thing on a much wider scale where I always take the lowest temperature/altitude measurements and bring the rest of the stations in line with that cherry picked station? Hey, look at that, I was about do drop past temperatures by another 2 degrees celsius! Hey, guys, look what I did. Check, peer reviewed, now it is part of the scientific dataset, oh look, all my global warming buddies are using my study, locking it into place, and well, looky there, global warming has been much more solidly locked in as the scientific truth. Time to get rid of energy!
“It is my belief that the new observer in 1913 (Oscar Denton) was rather disillusioned with the conservative maximums from the official station above grass and next to the evaporatively-cooled farmland. I think he felt compelled to fudge the maximums upwards in 1913.”
Can’t be hotter than today …!
😉
The Met Office makes it up. Using non existent stations.
Despite repeated requests for comment, the Met Office has remained silent on the matter.
What both parts one and two suggest Is something I concluded in 2014 essay ‘When Data Isn’t’ In ebook Blowing Smoke. The historical surface temperature measurements are not fit for climate purpose. There are many ways to show this. Surface Stations showing numerous microsite issues. Heller showing the past was cooled by adjustments. BOM fiddling with pristine Rutherglen Ag Research Station. BEST algorithm fiddling with Amundsen Scott. Scarcity of coverage in South America and Africa. Trade route biased SSTs.
This has several big climate consequences.
As someone that drove, in the summer of1989, from Beatty, Nevada, to Furnace Creek, Death Valley (re-named Greenland?), in a dark blue Blazer with a black Vinyl top, as we turned south toward Furnace Creek the motor overheated so bad we turned the air conditioner off and turned the heater on full blast, then the dash cracked in half, and we only saved ourselves by pouring cold survival fluids over ourselves, I can only describe the temperature by remembering the comment from “Good Morning, Vietnam”: it’s hot, fool, were you born on the sun?
I have lived in the southwest for a good portion of my life, and “too hot to run the air conditioning” is something I have experienced on many occasions.
From the post:”I think he felt compelled to fudge the maximums upwards in 1913.”
Accusing a dead person of lying is low.
I accused him of fudging the data. How would you convey the notion that a long-deceased person was not a good observer and was fast-and-loose with the truth?
Fudging data is lying. I would hope I stayed away from the personal comments and stuck with the known facts.
Oscar Denton was said to pass “the best lies” with visitors to the ranch in Crampton’s book “Deep Enough.” Here is the excerpt:
“It was not often that more than one or two of the old timers, prospectors, or desert rats were at the Furnace Creek Ranch at the same time, but Oscar was a good listener, and he passed the latest stories and the best lies to the next to come for the regular clean-up and supplies.”
Can I consider this a known fact and share it with you? Does this help to some degree in determining whether Denton might have been prone to bending the truth, and perhaps even manipulating the temperature reports?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t the previous “all time” record high in Libya?
A thorough investigation found errors such as siting issues. But the biggie was that, compared to surrounding records, it was surmised that “the new guy” recording the temp record the top of the little iron bar instead of the bottom?
The bottom was the max the mercury in the thermometer, the actual high temp for day, pushed up the little rod.
(When the temperature dropped, the rod would hang up at the highest temp.)
So they lowered the Libya temp by the height of the little rod.
The #2 record was the Death Valley record.
Yes, the observer in Libya likely read the top of the indicator instead of the lower part. That was a difference of 7 degrees Celsius. The exposure and nature of the ground surface at the Libya station might have made it a local hot spot, but the reading was 99.99 percent problematic due to observer error. These are my opinions!
The FASCINATION WITH one hot afternoon in 1913 is very bizarre.
There is no way to know how far off the claim is from what would have been measured with modern 2024 instruments. In that heat I’d be surprised that anyone would even walk outside to read a thermometer. It would be easier to guess a number. Is the 134 too high? Maybe. But so what if is?
There are plenty of other TMAX records in other nations. Are they all wrong? Summer desert TMAX is actually not very important for greenhouse warming which most affects TMIN in colder climates in colder months of the year.
AFRICA
The hottest temperature ever reliably measured in Africa was 124.3°F (51.3°C) in Ouargla, Algeria on July 5, 2018. This was the result of a historic heat wave that affected northern Africa.
ASIA
The hottest temperature ever recorded in Asia was 54 °C (129 °F) on June 29, 2017 at Ahvaz Airport in Iran. This temperature was also recorded in Tirat Zvi, Israel on June 21, 1942.
EUROPE
The hottest day ever recorded in Europe was August 11, 2021, when an automated weather station in Syracuse, Sicily recorded a temperature of 48.8°C (119.8°F). This broke the previous record of 48°C (118.4°F) set in Athens and Elefsina, Greece in 1977.
SOUTH AMERICA
The hottest temperature ever recorded in South America was 48.9°C (120°F) in Rivadavia, Argentina on November 12, 1905.
AUSTRALIA
Only one day back in 1960 saw a confirmed reading match that sizzling high-mercury mark. Not only does a 50.7°C (123.26 F)reading stand as Australia’s hottest-ever temperature, but it’s also the highest confirmed reading ever observed in the southern hemisphere.
ANTARCTICA
The hottest day ever recorded in Antarctica was February 6, 2020, when the temperature reached 18.3°C (64.9°F) at Esperanza Base on the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula. This broke the previous record of 17.5°C (63.5°F) set at the same location in March 2015.
NORTH AMERICA
The 134 is controversial and may be overstated. But In July 2023, Death Valley experienced a heat wave and an unofficial reading of 130°F was recorded.
Jul 12, 2021 — On Sunday, the high temperature at Stovepipe Wells hit 128.6 degrees Fahrenheit (53.7°C) – one of the hottest U.S. temperatures ever measured.
How hot is it?
Good Morning Vietnam- Its Damn Hot!.mov
Cool for other places maybe, but the all time recorded high for little spot on the globe (Columbus Ohio) is 106*F set July 14, 1934.
(The previous 4 days also set record highs for those calendar days that same year. Talk about a heat wave!)
I wonder what Furnace Creek hit that day – it’s 200′ lower. Ridgecrest hit 119F the day before – on the 11th.
I asked a question in Part I and no one responded, so I will ask it again:
That is, do we expect extrema to always compliantly fit on the estimated lapse-rate regression line, or are they more probably extrema precisely because something anomalous is causing them to deviate from their predicted value, such as local nocturnal clouds causing the sunrise temperature to be higher than at the proximate stations? How can we be sure that the temperatures recorded at the other stations were uniformly of higher quality, particularly since Reid has remarked about the city trees and grassy areas under the shelters. I previously remarked about California commonly having NS isotherms, during heat waves, that parallel the crest of the Sierra Nevada. What happens on the other side; what do the isotherms look like? Are the stations representative random samples?
Regardless, all I have seen is an argument that provides reasons why the 134 deg record could be wrong. However, it is lacking what I would call irrefutable evidence that it is wrong! Rather than disavowing the validity, perhaps it would be sufficient to just add an asterisk and note that there are reasons to be concerned about the validity — as there is for ALL historical records.
I spent my senior Summer Field Mapping in the foothills of the White Mountains, east of Lone Pine, camping in Mazourka Canyon, along with 20 other young men. I was there for the the entire month of July in 1969. It was blistering hot every day, particularly once the sun came up from behind the crest of the White Mountains about 7:00 AM. I only wore boots, shorts, and a hat all day; it is probably the reason I’ve had some patches of skin cancer removed from my shoulders, starting about the time I was 30. What I observed, first hand, was that despite the assumption of a uniform high pressure system over the area, the temperatures varied perceptibly from one day to the next. Therefore, how does one rule out the possibility of some local variation actually resulting in a DV temperature actually warmer than in subsequent years? Doubt is not the same thing as proof.
Maximum temperatures in the Death Valley region on typical summer afternoons are governed, controlled and largely determined by the temperature of the air 1000s of feet above the surface. Maximums at adequately-sited stations will depend mostly on the station elevation. Some desert stations have a cool bias due to nearby moisture sources and vegetation, and some have warm biases due to bare ground and poor ventilation through the station. Most, if not all, desert stations back in 1913 were above grass.
A lack of wind will help to bump a maximum up a little higher if the instrumentation is above bare ground. In 1913, the Greenland Ranch shelter was above a patch of alfalfa/grass and adjacent to cultivated land.
All I can do is collect all of the available information and show that the 134F report in July, 1913, at Greenland Ranch is a climatological outlier, and the meteorology does not support such a high temperature (based on the other stations). The investigators for the Libya record pretty much said the same about that record (136F in 1922), and they threw it out. It is good that you are contemplating what to do about the 134F at Greenland Ranch, You can decide for yourself whether the 134F report looks good or bad based on my research or the thoughts of someone else or from your own experience.
As a climatologist who has become very familiar with how maximums behave in the Death Valley region in summer, I confidently say that the reports of 127 to 134F from Greenland Ranch in July, 1913, are almost certainly invalid.
Climate stations are generally sited in places which well-represent the local area. However, the Greenland Ranch station from 1911 to 1913 was in a very conservative spot if one is hoping to measure very high temperatures. One could say that the early maximum temperature data from Greenland Ranch have a very cool bias.
You might find my measurements this past July 9th of interest.
The operative word here is “typical.” I’m asking a philosophical question about expectations for conditions leading to atypical measurements. It seems to me that when one is considering extreme temperatures (hot or cold), they are not ‘typical,’ by definition. The problem of dealing with outliers in science is something that one always encounters. There are two ways of dealing with it: 1) automatically delete any measurements more that +/-2 standard deviations from the mean; 2) try to understand what contributed to the outlier (such as transposing digits or electronic noise) and see if there is actually some important information to be found in what appears to be wrong. There is the old description of the difference between a technician and a scientist that is applicable. The technician looks at the data and sees an outlier and deletes it because it is ‘obviously’ wrong. The scientist looks at the data and says, “That is interesting! I wonder why that happened?”
It seems to me that to make a compelling case for the temperature(s) at Greenland Ranch being fraudulent, one has to perform due diligence, of the same depth as was done for the Greenland station, for the veracity of the other stations used in creating the lapse rate graph.
You state above, “What it basically demonstrates is that the lower troposphere was not hot enough to support temperatures much above 125F in July, 1913.” However, you also say, “In the early decades of the 20th century, desert weather stations were generally in towns, amidst shade trees and lawns. The resulting maximum temperature reports were very conservative.” Thus, you seem to be providing a reason to believe that the lapse rate should be shifted upward for 1913.
You and Roy may very well be correct in your assessment. However, one of the practical applications is in estimating the range in natural temperatures prior to significant anthropogenic influences, and being able to anticipate maximum terrestrial temperatures in the future. By advocating removal of events of obvious low probability, it leads to support of the claim that humans will cause such temperatures in the future, while there is a finite probability that they have already happened.
I have more than a passing interest in this discussion because Roy and I have the same surname, and I had a maternal uncle named William Reid. 🙂