Hottest Day Evah!
By Paul Homewood
Do they think we are really so gullible?
Tuesday was the hottest single day on Earth in the history of human civilization, according to a combination of global satellite data and historical tree ring analysis. One point in far northern Canada was hotter than Miami. In Siberia, the temperature in Altai hit 94°F. Despite July being mid-winter in the Southern Hemisphere, temperatures in Argentina and Chile soared to more than 86°F (30°C). In the Philippines, Metro Manila recorded its hottest-ever July day. The temperature in Iran, Algeria, and Oman all reached 122°F (50°C).
“It hasn’t been this warm since at least 125,000 years ago, which was the previous interglacial,” Paulo Ceppi, a climate scientist at London’s Grantham Institute, told the Washington Post. Given Earth’s annual temperature cycle typically peaks in late July, this is a record that could be broken several more times this month.
The idea that we know the global temperature today is absurd in itself. But the idea that we actually know what it was on a given day 100 years ago, or 1000 years ago, never mind thousands of years ago is sheer fraud.
And the claim that it is hotter now than 5000 years ago is a total lie – there is abundant evidence that it was much warmer then.
And as always with all of these silly scare stories, they cherry pick some high temperatures in the Arctic, knowing that the public will find them alarming because they assume the Arctic is always freezing normally.
For instance, “One point in far northern Canada was hotter than Miami.”
The link takes us to Kuujjuaq:
And the daily temperature from KNMI shows that temperatures over 90F, 32C, are not uncommon there. The new record of 93F replaces the old record of 92F set in 1999, which is hardly cause for panic!
https://climexp.knmi.nl/selectdailyseries.cgi?id=someone@somewhere
Then there’s Siberia:
“In Siberia, the temperature in Altai hit 94°F.”
But again we learn that temperatures often exceed 90F there; the record of 96F was set in 2000:
And according to the con merchants, there has been record-setting melt of the Greenland ice sheet.
Maybe Eric Holthaus has been holding his graph upside down! Greenland has added 100Gt of ice during June, when it is supposed to be melting.
http://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions/
Naturally the BBC and the rest of the media lackeys have been peddling the same lies and nonsense:
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
A couple of things. First these data will be from satellite data, so only cover the last 40 years and how accurate can these be over such a large area as a planet – particular with cloud and vegetation cover making data-gathering inconsistent. Second, as a matter of common, scientific sense the idea that the calculation of a global average temperature can be made to an accuracy of hundredths of a degree is utter nonsense. If you were to measure the shade temperature in your own garden it would vary by whole degrees from one part to another and from one height to another, so the idea that they know the ‘global average’ temperature was 17.01C or whatever is scientifically illiterate. Where are estimates for accuracy, which I am sure would be + or – several degrees. Finally, the ‘scientist’ quoted clearly has no proper knowledge of palaeoclimatology. There is universal evidence of warmer spells within the time of humans on earth and we know there was the medieval warm spell, the Roman warm spell, not to mention the Holocene warming. All the evidence of a huge quantity of scientific literature estimates the Holocene warmer than the present day – with ice-free arctic, etc.
Even if it is not the satellite data then some records are very short. I was amazed to find that NZ rainfall records start in 1945 – that’s like yesterday in the greater scheme of things.
Unbelievable, how much panic can 10(?) half-wits stir.
Sorry, but they are not misguided fools, unlike the Just Stop Oil useful ignoramuses. We know the scam and they know exactly what they are doing. It is criminality, fraud, as Paul says. Just look at how the MET office is warping the CET record, a gold standard of historical record, to produce their desired temperature rise.
Unlikely.
Actually you are likely correct – which makes the data even less trustworthy. In addition to the UAH satellite based monitoring (which traditionally has noted a lesser increase in temperature over time – and is the graph you show above) there is the RSS (Remote Sensing Systems) satellite monitoring. But in addition there are other datasets from NOAA and GISTEMP and HadCRUT – but these are based on land and sea temperature monitoring and a lot of ‘black box’ computer work to fill in the huge gaps across a lot of the globe!
I imagine that Maurice Strong, now dead in China, would be very happy at the outcome of his movement. The recent hysteria of late seems to suggest that the ‘let’s end Western culture cult is losing its grip.I imagine that the next step will be to introduce alien invasion as final argument in a lost cause. The planet has simply gone back to the levels that were seen before the Mini Ice Age.
According to temperature.global the current ‘world temperature’ is 14.2C (not 17C as claimed by BBC). Every year from 2015 to 2022 has been below normal (past years tab).
https://temperature.global
That’s an interesting website, do you know anything about it and how it gets its data and processes it?
Data sources and processes are in the “About” tab.
>pip, pip, pdp1140.
pdp1145 and pdp1170 here. RSX-11M and M+.
Spotted it on WUWT which was sufficient recommendation
I regularly respond to heat porn posts on Twitter (and there adozens a day) by linking to temperature.global. The alarmists, who usually try to crush any opposition, have had nothing to say about this.
I note that where the ‘high’ temps maybe counterintuitive the report uses Deg F, whereas, when talking of sunnier climes it reverts to C. I guess they think readers would not be impressed with low numbers in C.
MacGrath and the BBC have missed the very important point in the penultimate paragraph.
“Chances are that July will be the warmest ever, and with it the hottest month ever: ‘ever’ meaning since the Eemian which is some 120,000 years ago,” said Karsten Haustein, from the University of Leipzig.
Why was the Eemian warmer than the Holocene, as it obivously was, otherwise they’d have to have gone back to the one before that which was also warmer.
If the science is settled the BBC must know why it’s CO2 and El Niño that are causing the current warmth. Although adding El Niño is a bit of an issue I think. It’s casually thrown in in the hope the great unwashed won’t notice
Do they think we are that stupid? Yes, of course they do. Sadly there is a lot of evidence that many are.
Maybe a bit off topic, here is an old clip of David Iyke (who i thought was nuts), that I got sent today, expounding how corrupt journalists are. He seems to have been proven right.
How can individual readings on one day prove climate change when the UN IPCC definition states:
Climate change
Climate change refers to a change in the state of the climate that can
be identified (e.g., by using statistical tests) by changes in the mean
and/or the variability of its properties, and that persists for an extended
period, typically decades or longer.
The BBC with its constant cherry picking to declare the hottest, driest, wettest, coldest. windiest, coolest on record nonsense does not prove the UN IPCC definition.
Strange how the BBC has not reported the unusually cool, wet spring in California even the Guardian reports, but then injects the wildfire risk due to the increased vegetation :
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/01/california-warm-weather-wildfire-risk
“Do they think we are that stupid? Yes, of course they do. Sadly there is a lot of evidence that many are.”
This guy is definitely not stupid and BV’s point is underpinned by Prof Plimer:
https://watch.adh.tv/cpac-2022/season:2/videos/cpac-2022-prof-ian-plimer
You seem to be conflating two different claims:
“Tuesday was the hottest single day on Earth in the history of human civilization”
from somebody’s blog. You are obviously right that we can’t possible know this.
“Tuesday was the hottest day on record”
which is what all the mainstream media that I can find are reporting. They usually add “according to the US National Centers for Environmental Prediction.”
This is entirely possible. Although there are clearly many different ways of measuring the global temperature.
They both refer to a claim by the NCEP,
eg
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/07/05/hottest-day-ever-recorded/
and
Note the Washington Post writes:
As a result, some scientists believe July 4 may have been one of the hottest days on Earth in about 125,000 years
And the BBC say:
“Chances are that July will be the warmest ever, and with it the hottest month ever: ‘ever’ meaning since the Eemian which is some 120,000 years ago”
This is a classic instance of the media taking a single claim, and inflating it into something absurd, with the help of a few “scientists”
They may both refer to the UNEP claim but one does so accurately, the other does not.
The claim that “Tuesday was the hottest single day on Earth in the history of human civilization” is clearly different from the UNEP claim ” the highest ever recorded”. It is really quite straightforward. One goes back 120,000 years, the other to 1790 something when records began. The UNEP claim is the second.
Obviously “As a result, some scientists believe July 4 may have been one of the hottest days on Earth in about 125,000 years” is again totally different from the claim “Tuesday was the hottest single day on Earth in the history of human civilization”.
“Chances are that July will be the warmest ever, and with it the hottest month ever: ‘ever’ meaning since the Eemian which is some 120,000 years ago” is, as the BBC made clear, a quote from Karsten Haustein. This is about the whole of July, not July 4th, and therefore obviously a prediction not a report. It is unprovable and I am sure Haustein didn’t intended it as a report. It is, however, not an unreasonable conjecture as most of the last 120,000 years has been taken up with an ice age. The only serious rival was the Holocene maximum about 8,000 years ago.
It is no coincidence that most of the media carries the same claims about 120,000 years ago, eg the Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/05/tuesday-was-worlds-hottest-day-on-record-breaking-mondays-record
Whether its daily or monthly is irrelevant, it is still nonsense, whether it is a prediction or not.
This is not science
And don’t forget that the “blog” you refer to that says “It hasn’t been this warm since at least 125,000 years ago, which was the previous interglacial”, is actually a comment by another climate scientist, Paolo Ceppi, which originally appeared in the Washington Post. Don’t blame it on some nutty blogger
Of course it is not a coincidence. They are repeating the same quote from Haustein – presumably at some kind of press conference. I just think you should be more careful about who/what you are criticising – but that’s enough of that.
How did they collect, obtain and calculate the temperature of the whole world within 24 hours?
Or did they just select a few sites and extrapolate?
The BBC includes this in today’s Hotest Ever report
On Thursday the US weather service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said it could not confirm records that come partly from computer simulations, according to Associated Press.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66120297
I stilled complained about hysterical reporting of a report even NOAA can’t accept
They should rename the ‘National Centers for Environmental Prediction’ to the ‘National Centers for Anthropogenic Climate Change Fearmongering’.
The instructions to the fawning obsequious gits from the politburo right now are simple and clear.
“Comrades! PROMOTE RECORDS even if you have to make them up. Include the opinions of authority figures to add gravitas to your prose and to avoid questions. As long as they have a title use them regardless of relevance to the subject because the plebs are always impressed. Never provide data or source of data, especially when promoting twaddle, sorry studies based on models designed to support our righteous and just cause”. We are confident that we will win this war and your efforts promoting our cause in the fight will be recognised and rewarded.
It is still time to compile a table for July temps. so as to be able to pile on the ridicule at the end of the month. Easy copy for publishers who are not ‘bought’ by some fund or other.
More shocking still is the fact that there exists no statistically significant empirical data of any kind which supports claims and assertions that CO2 released returned to the Carbon Cycle by the actions of man during the last 150 years has in any measurable way been shown to be responsible for any part of or all of the current warming, the fourth such warming in recent human history. This lack of data is not surprising because the geological record is quite clear in that there exists no correlation over geological time between atmospheric CO2 concentration and surface temperature, none at all (combination of work by Scotese Temperature 1999, Berner CO2 2001) and Davis 2017.
Quite right. We have the 18 year long pause in any increase in their global temperature anomaly while CO2 continued rising. And currently we are in another 8 year long pause as shown by the UAH records.
In the article it gives a link called “global satellite data”. I thought that would be interesting but that leads you to another site about something called Climate Forecast System. In the end all this is is another climate model which this article and the NOAA is taking as fact. As far as I know, which admittedly isn’t much, satellites measure sea temperatures and from this you can guess the air temperature. The margin for error must be quite high I would have thought.
I am afraid my non scientific response to this dramatic news was
“So f**king what?”
Note that the article also refers to the Mann-ometric tree-ring fantasy science. Which, of course removes the MWP etc from history, hence now is always hotter that a re-written history: true 1984 style.
“But Met Office spokesman, Grahame Madge, told Express.co.uk the chances of reaching 40C this summer are one percent.”
Hang on, the world is currently experiencing a new hottest day evah with every passing day, yet there is only a 1% chance of getting near last year’s temperatures when the world was significantly cooler.
Hmmmmm!
I have just been banned from posting on the BBC News website for posting almost exactly the same thing as you are pointing out. (Apparantly after a cetain number of deletions this happens) The truth seems to hurt them.
Be careful with that. The Met Office likes to pre-plan its conclusions. When (if) it reaches 40, they will say “despite there being only a 1% chance…climate change is worse than we thought.”
It would depend on the lads from Coningsby having to scramble to shoo off a Russkie Tu-95 ‘Bear’ at the appropriate moment.
All these reported hot days are Northern hemisphere, so I checked Alice Springs, expecting to find it was a very cold winters day … but no, here are the daily maxima: 22nd July 2022: 25.3C, 23rd: 27.6C, 24th: 28.7C.
They had a heatwave in winter.
Oops, got the wrong year, thought this was about last years big heatwave, data for Alice Springs not yet available from BoM.
And the UK ‘marine heatwave’ is definitely cooling off, some of the SSTs around the UK are now below ‘normal(!)’, all looks to be below +2C at a glance, none of the supposedly lethal +5C boiling.
According to 1440 – a daily news update which strives to be strictly neutral.
So it is not some “measurement” it is a projection from models run through a simulator.
“The measurement is technically unofficial—the data were taken by the University of Maine’s climate simulator, a platform that incorporates global satellite data and numerous computer simulations and is used by federal agencies in climate projections. Worldwide, measurements showed an average temperature of 62.9 degrees Fahrenheit, about 1.8 degrees above the 1979-2000 average (the analysis uses records dating back to 1979).”
But what’s in the average? I’m betting about 50% of the years are above average.
I am pretty sure they are taking the arithmetic mean not the median – so it is by no means certain 50% of years are above average.
The mean would still imply 50% above and 50% below.
It depends how skewed the data is. E.g if there are 10 measurements:
14
14.1
14.1
14.2
14.2
14.3
14.2
14.3
14.9
15.2
The arithmetic mean is 14.35 – so only two of them are above average.
Shouldn’t you always use Kelvin for numeric comparisons of such a nature, Mark?
It makes no difference whether you use Kelvin, Centigrade or Fahrenheit.
Since we are being picky, it is ‘kelvins;’ plural, with a small k.
“…record melt in Greenland…”
Of course it is. That is BECAUSE it has been snowing. If snow fell today in London, it would be gone tomorrow. ‘Record melt in July in London’ would be correct.
It does not matter. The existing fools will continue to fool themselves. The real problem is that the school-children are being successfully brainwashed every day.
” So it is not some “measurement” it is a projection from models run through a simulator. ”
If I’ve understood this correctly, the medjia claim that July 6th 2023 was the hottest day “since records began” is based on a simulation based on projections from various models that are based on data recorded since 1979. Lots of potential variables there.
From NASA
https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/49/which-measurement-is-more-accurate-taking-earths-surface-temperature-from-the-ground-or-from-space/
Contains this gem:
” Since satellites technically measure neither temperature nor the surface (where people live), it’s safe to say that ground thermometers are more accurate than satellite measurements. ”
I doubt if most of the surface temperature of the oceans is measured by thermometers.
Well there are around 4000 Argo floats and if you go to the site you will see them dotted onto a small global map that makes it look like they are covering everywhere in the oceans. In reality each float operates in an area the size of Portugal
And of course weather satellites (which are not the same as the MSU satellites). Although, like every method, they have their own problems. https://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Eduspace_Weather_EN/SEMMCPVO1FG_0.html#:~:text=Satellites%20measure%20sea%20surface%20temperature,the%20greater%20the%20radiant%20energy.
Thanks Dave Andrews, every day is a school day !
This was written:
“It hasn’t been this warm since at least 125,000 years ago, which was the previous interglacial,” Paulo Ceppi, a climate scientist at London’s Grantham Institute, told the Washington Post. Given Earth’s annual temperature cycle typically peaks in late July, this is a record that could be broken several more times this month.
According to Greenland Ice Core Records most of the most recent ten thousand years was warmer than now.
Greenland ice cores are only a proxy for local temperatures in the holocene and have been much abused (https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-what-greenland-ice-cores-say-about-past-and-present-climate-change/). Nevertheless, it seems likely temperatures were higher at times during the holocene than they are now.
hmmm yes, and the Abuser in Chief was that legendary atmospheric physicist Al Gore parroting the nonsense his arts graduate science experts fed him.
Grantham is just climate change propaganda. If they are saying it, it’s false.
Correct P44! Got to keep the BS flowing to sell more wood pellets for Drax.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-implications-of-the-world-recording-its-hottest-day-ever-on-July-3/answer/TL-Winslow
It wasn’t very hot in South of Scotland.
Cloud cover?
North wind
“combination of global satellite data and historical tree ring analysis”
Tree ring analysys taken from Mann’s Hokey Schtick dataset, no doubt.
Also, bet my next months salary they do not show the “join” between the two totally separate sources of data neither will they show the different data error margins associated with each.
Everything in arts graduate fantasy climate world is 100% absolute
Not sure if its been mentioned , but there was a gem of an interview with a climate activist on GBNews this morning ….. Brilliant how they take the p**s out of his “facts”
Boil in the bag, anyone?
Bogus statistical analyses and bilge effluent pouring out from the alarmist sewer pipers.
Observe, the wef and the corporate world just ramping up the climate bodge propaganda.
They lie, we see it a mile off.
Of course, the weather site at Kuujjuaq wouldn’t just happen to be right next to the new airport building and carpark, would it. 😉
All that lovely hot air wafting off the asfalt/ concrete, just what they need because the only other option they have is to falsify the data which is already being done but easier and less comeback if they use inappropriate data
Clearly they do and from the nonsensical discussions I often find myself involved in, it is working.
My guess is that as July is the time of year the Earth orbit is closest to the Sun, probably the closest for 125k years then an objective interpolation (guess) that it might be the hottest day for 125k years is sort of OK if it fits the narrative.
Other than that it might be bollocks.
July is when the earth is furthest from the sun. It is closest in January.
https://earthsky.org/tonight/earth-comes-closest-to-sun-every-year-in-early-january/#:~:text=So%2C%20Earth%20is%20closest%20to,during%20our%20Northern%20Hemisphere%20summer.
Thanks for clarification. Not sure what happened.
At least the month begins with J.
At the time of the early Holocene climate optimum, seven thousand years ago, the Earth was closest to the Sun in July.
Paul, you have mentioned in the past the WMO’s 5 categories of sites for temperature recording stations, 4 of which the MO say they think are OK to use. I’ve looked at past posts and all over the WMO website referring to data recording but can’t find a direct link to the table you mention. I must admit though that I’ve pretty crap at research so it’s no surprise to me.
I’d love you to repost the table for me and, if possible, give me the WMO link. Thanks.
It’s in the Met Office & Porthmadog post Mike
I’m out cycling at no, but will copy the link later
Many thanks. Enjoy the ride. Be careful of those record temperatures.
They all failed to note that the Antarctic temperatures were well negative regardless, but it is also apparent that any warming we see rebounding from the medieval ice age is apparent at the low end of the scale meaning slightly warmer winters but no apparent warming which is highly buffered by natural processes. If you look at the ice core data we are just in the noise of natural variation.
Groundhog hottest day evah.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66120297
but it was on the BBC so it must be correct ! yeah
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/people/p.ceppi
Ceppi is at Imperial Grantham, as opposed to LSE.
“Dr Paulo Ceppi is a Lecturer in Climate Science at the Grantham Institute. His main interest is in understanding future climate change at global scales. He has gained an Imperial College Research Fellowship, which gives him four years of independent research funding.
In his past research, Paulo has investigated the processes responsible for changes in the circulation of the atmosphere and in clouds as greenhouse gas concentrations rise and the planet warms. Paulo is the recipient of the University of Reading’s 2018 Best Research Output Prize, awarded yearly in recognition of an outstanding journal publication by an early-career researcher.
He is currently pursuing two main lines of research. One is on understanding how the position of the jet streams and weather systems changes as the planet warms. The second research focus addresses the processes that determine the climate sensitivity, i.e. the amount of global warming due to a doubling of carbon dioxide concentrations”
Note the mantras presented as fact: “as greenhouse gas concentrations rise and the planet warms”, “changing the position of the jet stream” Wonderful stuff, CO2.
I was pleased to discover that Ceppi’s pronouns are “they” and “them”,
Dr Robin Lamboll goes one better. A research associate in climate science and policy at the Grantham Institute “Robin’s” pronouns are they/he/she.