Death Valley Temperatures, Part 3: Twelve Years of July Daily Tmax Estimates and the 134 deg. F Record

From Dr. Roy Spencer’s Global Warming Blog

by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

In Part 1 I claimed that using stations surrounding Death Valley is a good way to “fact check” warm season high temperatures (Tmax) at the Death Valley station, using a correction for elevation since all surrounding stations are at higher (and thus cooler) elevations. In July of each year, a large tropospheric ridge of high pressure makes the air mass in this region spatially uniform in temperature (at any given pressure altitude), and daily convective heating of the troposphere leads to a fairly predictable temperature lapse rate (the rate at which temperature falls off with height). This makes it possible to estimate Death Valley daytime temperatures from surrounding (cooler) stations even though those stations are thousands of feet higher in elevation than Greenland Ranch, which was 168 ft. below sea level.

Lapse Rates Computed from Stations Surrounding Death Valley

If I use all available GHCN daily stations within 100 miles of Greenland Ranch (aka Furnace Creek, aka Death Valley N.P.) in each July from 1911 to 2024 to compute the month-average lapse rate (excluding the Death Valley stations[s]), I get the results in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. Lower tropospheric temperature lapse rate estimated from all stations within 100 miles of Greenland Ranch, Death Valley, CA. The number of available stations for these calculations range from several in the early years to 25 or more in the later years. Here I will assume a constant lapse rate of -0.004 during the 20th Century. The 4th order polynomial fit to the data would be another way to assume how the lapse rate changes over time.

The computed lapse rates in all years fall between the dry adiabatic value and the U.S. standard atmosphere value. Given the few stations available in the early years, I will base the calculations that follow on an assumed lapse rate of -0.004 deg F per ft. for the first half of the record, and will assume that the observed steepening of the lapse rate after the 1980s is real, with a value of -0.0048 deg. F per ft. in the early 2020s. In Part 1, I used the actual values in Fig. 1 in each year to estimate Death Valley temperatures. This time I’m using average lapse rate values over many years, keeping in mind the early decades had few stations and so their values in Fig. 1 are more uncertain.

Daily Estimated July Tmax at Death Valley: 2021-2024

How accurately can we estimate daily Tmax temperatures in Death Valley from surrounding high-elevation stations? The following plot (Fig. 2) shows how the July daily observed Tmax temperatures in Death Valley (2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, orange for Death Valley N.P.) compare to estimates made based upon surrounding, high-elevations stations (blue), assuming a lapse rate of -0.0048 deg. F per ft (see Fig. 1).

Fig. 2. Daily estimated July Tmax temperatures for Death Valley N.P. from surrounding stations (blue) compared to those observed (orange, 194 ft. below sea level) for 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024.

In each year the daily estimates from surrounding stations (blue) are reasonably close (within a couple of degrees) to the observed values at both Death Valley N. P. (orange) and at the nearby station Stovepipe Wells. For example, on July 7, 2024 the observed “near record” value of 129 deg. F degrees agrees well with the lapse-rate estimated value of 128 deg. F. Note there were many (27 of 28) stations within 100 miles of Death Valley available to make these estimates during these years.

Daily Estimated July Tmax at Death Valley: 1935-1938

Next, let’s travel back to the 1930s, when there were fewer stations to do these estimates (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3. Daily estimated Tmax temperatures for Death Valley during 1935, 1936, 1937, 1938 from surrounding stations (blue) compared to those observed at Greenland Ranch (orange, 168 ft. below sea level) and Cow Creek (grey, 151 t. below sea level).

Despite only having 7 or 8 stations from which to estimate Death Valley temperatures, the agreement is still reasonably good in 1935, with no bias between observed and estimated, but 1-3 deg. F bias at Greenland Ranch vs. estimated in the following 3 years. There are also a few low temperature outliers in 1937-38 at Greenland Ranch and Cow Creek; I don’t know the reason for these.

Daily Estimated July Tmax at Death Valley: 1912-1915

Finally we examine the period in question, when the 134 deg. F world record temperature was recorded on July 10, 1913 (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4. Daily estimated Tmax temperatures for Death Valley during 1912, 1913, 1914, 1915 from surrounding stations (blue) compared to those observed at Greenland Ranch (orange, 168 ft. below sea level).

During these years there were only 3 to 7 stations from which to compute Death Valley Tmax. In 1912, despite only 3 stations, the reported temperatures averaged only 3 deg. F above those estimated from surrounding stations. But in 1913 (the year of the record) the observations averaged an astounding 9 deg. F warmer than the surrounding 5 stations would have suggested. On July 10, the excess was 15 deg. F!

That second week of July 1913 was indeed unusually hot, and it was during this time that the ranch foreman (Oscar Denton) responsible for making the temperature readings from an official instrument shelter provided by the U.S. Weather Bureau in 1911 might have replaced the official values with values that more accorded with the heat he and his supervisor (Fred Corkill) were feeling on his veranda, away from the USWB instrument shelter which was sited next to an irrigated field. Bill Reid covers the details of correspondence between Corkill and a USWB official in San Francisco regarding the shelter temperatures and how much cooler they were compared to what was measured by a second thermometer farther away from the irrigated field. Reid believes (and I agree) that the shelter temperatures were, at least for a time while Denton was responsible for tabulating the daily measurements, replaced with measurements from a separate thermometer having uncertain quality and siting away from hot surfaces exposed to the sun.

So, How Much Hot Bias Exists in the 134 deg. F “World Record”?

We will never know exactly how much warm bias exists in the world record value. But from comparison to the biases in 1912 and 1914, I would say 9 to 12 deg. F is a reasonable estimate.

Of course, this might be adjusted somewhat if one assumes a slightly different lapse rate than the -0.004 deg. F per ft. I have assumed here (see Fig. 1). For instance, what if the air mass on July 10, 1913 had an exceptionally steep lapse rate, such that an even greater adjustment for elevation needed to be made to estimate the hot temperature in Death Valley? If I use use the lapse rate estimated from the 5 surrounding stations on July 10, 1913 (see Fig. 5), that lapse rate value is indeed “steeper”, at -0.0053 deg. F per ft. But if we use that value to estimate the Death Valley temperature, it is still 10 deg. cooler than the 134 deg. F recorded value. This is still within the 9 to 12 degree bias range I mentioned above.

Fig. 5. The world record value of 134 deg. F (red) is 10 deg. F warmer than that suggested by the surrounding higher-elevations stations’ temperature variations with elevation.

Conclusion

The 134 deg. F world record hottest temperature from Death Valley is likely around 10 deg. F too high, compared to elevation-adjusted temperatures from surrounding stations. The most likely cause is that the ranch foreman’s reported measurements were (we shall say) unacademically recorded. I find it rather remarkable that the world record hottest temperature from Death Valley was not revised many years ago, since the methods for “fact checking” the record are fairly simple, and based upon meteorological principles know for well over 50 years.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
5 8 votes
Article Rating
18 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
November 11, 2024 2:25 pm

Well, it is an outlier.

dk_
November 11, 2024 2:58 pm

Wouldn’t bias be demonstrable in Tmin, and therefore in the daily average temperature?

Reply to  dk_
November 12, 2024 8:32 am

Bias would be, what Spencer and Reid are alleging is the guy faked his data.

November 11, 2024 2:59 pm

A guy in 1913 replaced the measured temperature with what he thought it should be based on his feeling that it was hotter than hell. We’re much more sophisticated today. Climastrologists use computer models to generate temperatures that they think it should be to replace the measured ones, based on their feeling that the planet is going to hell.

November 11, 2024 4:01 pm

Harold the Organic Chemist Says:

ATTN: Roy and Everyone.
RE: Hypothesis: CO2 Does Not Cause Warming of Air.

Shown in the graphic (See below) are plots of temperature in Death Valley at Furnace Creek from 1922 to 2001. In 1922 the concentration of CO2 in world air was 303 ppmv (i.e., 0.595 g of CO2/cu. m. of air), and by 2001, it had increased to 371 ppmv
(i.e., 0.729 g/ of CO2/cu. m. of air), but there was no corresponding increase the temperatures of the dry air at this arid desert site. The reason CO2 does not cause warming of air is quite simple: There is too little CO2 in the dry air.

On the basis of this empirical data from this arid field site, I have concluded that the hypothesis is confirmed. Is my conclusion correct? Moreover, can I concluded that CO2 does cause not global warming? Does this data and analysis show that the IPCC since 1988 has been lying to us about CO2 causing global warming?

I live in Burnaby, BC, where the carbon tax is now $80 per tonne of CO2 equivalent.
This tax has to go. To date my son and I have spent $8,100 just on food.

NB: The graphic was obtained from the late John Daly’s website:
“Still Waiting For Greenhouse” available at: http://www.John-Daly.com. From the homepage scroll down to the end and click on the tab “Station Temperature Data” to access data from many weather stations around the world. His data showed that there was no global warming up to ca. 2002.

death-vy
Editor
Reply to  Harold Pierce
November 11, 2024 7:38 pm

I’m always happy to see references to John Daly’s site, as I’m the person keeping it alive. For better or worse, I have no time to “improve it.” Mostly better.

Reply to  Ric Werme
November 11, 2024 11:43 pm

Good Evening Ric!

Last mid-July, I was greatly disappointed to find that JD’s website had disappeared from the net. Around the first of August or shortly thereafter, I was perusing appinsys.com/GlobalWarming, and I found to my surprise that JD’s website was in the list and was back on the net. I was now able to mention it my comments posted to the articles here on CO2 and global warming. The value of JD’s is the wealth of temperature data and the essays.

Unfortunately, I rarely get a reply to the above comment and I wonder if it is too technical. My message is simple: There is too little CO2 in the air to cause global warming and the IPCC is perpetrating scientific fraud. Look what this fraud has done to the UK, Germany and California, etc.

I would really like to obtained the temperature data from the Furnace Creek weather station for Death Valley for the interval 2003 to 2023, but I don’t
know how to do this. If the temperature plots remain flat, we have additional empirical data that CO2 does not cause warming of air and hence global warming. Presently, the concentration of CO2 at the MLO is 422 ppmv.

I believe that if everyone learned of JD’S websites all this global warming and climate change nonsense would vanish in an instant.

BTW1: There was a biographical website on John Daly and his accomplishments. Do you know what happened to it?

BTW2: Could you send your email address to harold.d.pierce at proton.me?

BTW3: Do think you could write a review of JD’s website and post here?

Reply to  Ric Werme
November 12, 2024 1:03 am

Good Morning Ric!

Use Bing to obtain the essay: “Climate Change Reexamined” by
Joel M. Kauffman. The essay is 26 pages and can be down loaded for free.
He reviews the climate literature through 2007.

Shown in Fig. 7 is the IR absorption spectrum (See below) of Philadelphia inner city air from 400 to 4,000 wavenumbers. Integration of the spectrum determined that H2O had absorbed 92% of the IR light and CO2 only 8%.

Since the sample was city air, it is likely that the concentration of CO2 was greater than that of a remote sight such a rural area. In 1999 the concentration of CO2 at the MLO was ca. 367 ppmv. Kauffman didn’t measure the concentration of CO2 in the city air.

In the air at 28 deg. C with a RH of 76%, the concentration of H2O was
ca. 28,044 ppmv. If it is assumed that concentration of CO2 in the city air was about 367 ppmv, the amount of the greenhouse effect (GHE) due to H2O is:

GHE for H2O = 28,044 ppmv / 28044 ppmv+367 ppmv = 0.987 or 98.7%

As mentioned above the concentration of CO2 in the air was probably greater than 367 ppmv. Thus, amount of the greenhouse due to H20 would be slightly lower. The spectrum shows that H2O is the major greenhouse and CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas We do not have to worry about the minor greenhouse gas CO2.

NB: Fig. 7 was prepared Australian sherro01.

kaufman
Kevin Kilty
November 11, 2024 5:11 pm

Figure 2, years 2021 and 2022 are identical right down to the smallest details. Something isn’t right.

Editor
Reply to  Kevin Kilty
November 11, 2024 7:50 pm

I reposted this on Roy’s blog, good catch, though note there is one difference – the two graphs mention different biases. Looks like Roy accidentally reused a graph for the blog/paper, then added the commentary for the right graph.

November 11, 2024 6:01 pm

Am I the only one who gets a bit frowny-faced at the suggestion to adjust a measurement so it matches what we expect based on surrounding stations a bit better?
Wouldn’t it be better to flag the value with an asterisk and a comment to explain why the value is suspect?

Reply to  Chris Nisbet
November 12, 2024 8:01 am

No, no your are not.

antigtiff
November 11, 2024 7:45 pm

It was much less CO2 in 1913……..The 1% who use private jets were not around contributing 2.5% of CO2…..see?

Richard Greene
November 11, 2024 9:02 pm

Speculating about one afternoon TMAX record in 1913 is the ultimate data mining.

Perhaps the next article should be a family history of the man who recorded the number?

Was he a good person?

Did he have a criminal record?

Was he ever caught plagiarizing in school?

Did he take bribes to fudge the temperature?

What were his politics?

Three articles on this subject meets my definition of insanity.

1913 has nothing to do with the global warming after 1975. If 134 degrees in 1913 is overstated, then the current US records are:

August 16, 2020: 129.9°F (54.4°C)
July 9, 2021: 130.0°F (54.4°C)
July 10, 2021: 129.4°F (54.1°C) 

These modern TMAX records are much better propaganda for climate scaremongering than the alleged 134 degrees in 1913.

Why go back to only 1913?

Earth was usually in a hothouse (greenhouse_ climate much warmer than today for a majority of its existence.

According to most scientific consensus, the Earth has been in a “greenhouse state” for roughly 85% of its history. This means that for the majority of Earth’s existence, there were no continental glaciers and the planet experienced significantly warmer temperatures due to higher levels of greenhouse gases.

November 12, 2024 7:57 am

I get really skeptical when people start trying to throw out measured data points. Doc, I think you’ve done some pretty good math here, but all it shows is the data point is an outlier. This i think everyone agrees with.

From your post:

“There are also a few low temperature outliers in 1937-38 at Greenland Ranch and Cow Creek; I don’t know the reason for these.”

As you note, Variability and outliers exist for unknown reasons. Data should only be changed or removed if you can show definite assignable cause (note: assignable, not probable). This post guesses at a cause. Possibly, yes; probably, maybe; justification to adjust or remove a data point, not even close.

November 12, 2024 4:02 pm

When the US Army got around to running telegraph lines to it’s installations in Arizona, it was the telegraphists duty to walk out to the thermometer at midday,read it, and send that information to Head Quarters. At least one such individual recorded in his memoirs that in summer he would stand in the door of his station, “It’s hot out there, feels like 113 degrees, that’s what I’ll send.”

[Sherman, as General of the Army, inspected the Western Division not long after the Civil War. In Tucson someone remarked, “All Arizona needs is a little more water and a little less heat”. Shermans reply, “That’s all Hell needs”]

November 13, 2024 1:28 am

Death Valley means a lot to me. Back when the late, great John Daly was posting, he was concerned about Death Valley temperatures. It was also during a rather large El Nino–about 1998. So I captured the data back then and plotted it.

comment image

You will notice that there are three low temperatures, and the last one was during the high El Nino. Why is El Nino high and Death Valley low?

A few years later, I again captured the Death Valley temperatures, and it looked different.

comment image

I then compared the two datasets.

It’s subtle, but you can see that the earlier temperatures are lower and the later temperatures are higher. These climate buffoons are modifying the temperature data to conform to their beliefs. It’s clear fraud.

comment image

Anthony Banton
Reply to  Jim Masterson
November 13, 2024 2:18 am

Showing 2 unattributed graphs is proof of nothing.
How about a link to the source of the data?