World records hottest day for third time in a week?
By Paul Homewood
h/t Ian Magness
The world’s average temperature has reached a new high for the third time in a week, unofficial records show.
Data analysed by a group of US scientists shows the global average temperature on Thursday was 17.23C.
It breaks the 17.01C record set on Monday, surpassed just a day later when the average temperature reached 17.18C.
The temperature readings come from a tool called Climate Reanalyzer. Scientists at the University of Maine use a combination of readings from surface, air balloon and satellite observations as well as computer modelling to assess average global temperatures.
The readings are not an official government record, but they are closely watched as an indicator of how temperatures are fluctuating.
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
This report really does undermine the credibility of the claims. The idea that global temperatures could shoot up by 0.22C in the space of three days is physically impossible, El Nino or not. And given that it is all based on computer modelling and used as a propaganda tool makes the whole thing worthless.
Meanwhile back in the real world, satellites continue to indicate that global temperature anomalies last month were well below the 1998 and 2016 El Nino peaks:
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Their lies and fake numbers are getting more insane .http://temperature.global/
The real temperature has been 14 odd degrees . But if you just use specially selected readings and computer generated figures , I suppose you can get whatever figure you ” WANT”
Yeah, if you torture the data hard enough it will tell you anything you want!!!
(NOAA) said it could not confirm records that come partly from computer simulations…
What was also left out is the fact that none of the data prior to satellite era coverage beginning in 1979 was included. El-Nino? It is barely above the +0.5°C threshold anyway and peak sea surface temperatures are unlikely to appear until the end of the year.
Remarkably misleading journalism.
How could any thinking human being believe that climate change – a macro event could causes an abrupt weather change – a micro event? Was there a volcanic eruption or a climate change conference?
Do you see parallels with the behaviour in the US and the climate scam? Unaccountability runs through them all. Outlandish claims are made against “enemies” and when serious questions are asked they are just ignored. This is how the rancid left behave, how they always have behaved
First warm day of July yesterday in my corner of Surrey. Back down again today. This time last year we were approaching the heatwave hysterics.
‘World records hottest day for third time in a week’
No it didn’t!
Scientists at the University of Maine did. The world is rather passive about it.
My concern is that they are increasingly using these figures to double down on the designation of climate emergency….. Join up the dots …. The World Health Organisation is already getting a lot of countries to sign up to the idea that if there is a health ’emergency’ in future individual nations will surrender their power to the WHO. I can sense that we are being pushed into a similar situation in which if they can get an emergency declared for climate the UN will be allowed to take over power from individual countries and electorates…
F*** they will in the U.S. The next pandemic even the Federal government might be cut out of the decision-making process given its track record of lies.
Excuse my ignorance, this is a real question. A change of 0.22C would be about 0.4F, correct? Why is it not possible for the global temp to vary that amount in three days? Thanks.
Probably a couple of million Hiroshimas!
Temperature isn’t the same as heat, or energy, content. The oceans warm and cool far more slowly than the land. Therefore if there’s less cloud, and hence more infrared radiation reaching the surface, over land the temperature measured over land will rise by quite a lot. Even if more cloud over land meant less over the oceans they wouldn’t cool that much due to the heat capacity of water. Therefore it might be theoretically possible for a spatial shift in cloud cover to change global temperatures by a few tenths of a degree in a couple of days.
Having said that the claims of hottest day ever are pure rubbish. For the first 3 months of last year climate reanalyzer had global temperature anomalies varying between roughly +0.3 and -0.1 degrees. For the first 3 months of this year they rarely dropped below +0.5 degrees and yet the UAH data had the average temperature anomaly for the first 3 months of both years almost identical. Therefore I think that University of Maine changed the computer algorithms they use so that they show higher temperatures.
“University of Maine changed the computer algorithms”…
All it takes is for a change of personnel to yet another rabid alarmist who is being PAID to alter the parameters in their simulations.
bnice2000 It wouldn’t require anyone to be paid. If someone is convinced that the Earth is warming rapidly and their model didn’t show this then they may well believe the model is faulty and change it so it corresponded with what they think is reality.
Mick,
It would be perfectly possible for 10 times or more of that figure in a local area, possibly even over a whole country but these figures are supposed to be global – a different ball game. Heatwaves in one area inevitably involve cooler areas elsewhere and, as Paul has pointed out, this figure would involve an astounding amount of extra energy in the climate system.
I could go on but, really, such a figure in such a timeframe is utterly ridiculous on a global scale.
But I don’t believe that’s what they are measuring. Aren’t they taking maximums over a 24 hour period rather than the temperature everywhere at say midday GMT? Thus the “heat” moves as the globe turns and they measure it multiple times.
Phoenix, nothing would surprise me in this world of fakery.
One of the key problems that is brushed under the carpet by the “Modellers” is that up to around 1980, temperatures were taken manually and recorded in whole degrees Fahenheight. From around 2000 they are virtually universally taken mechanically, in Degs C and recorded with one or two decimal places. Over the period 1980 to 2000 that slow change had its effect on the data.
If a temperature is recorded today as, say, 10.4C, that would convert to 50.72F. In the “Olden Days” that same temperature would have been recorded as 50F. This can be misinterpreted by the usual suspects as a 0.72 rise – in the real world it is, of course, nothing of the sort but the effect can be seen in the graphs covering the “hockey stick” period – and it does explain the “post 2000” flattening of the data. Not that you would get the usual suspect to agree !
What’s the betting that the BBC’s “Fact checker” will rule on this pseudo-science? Rhetorical question!
There does seem to be a deliberate ramping up the global warming hysteria, using basically lies and data distortion. It must coordinated at some high level to get all the MSM reporting in unison.
I feel that the push backs against net zero, particularly in Europe, have got the green blob rattled so they are resorting to more outlandish claims and using flawed statistical analysis to keep the global warming emergency going.
They cry WOLF so many times and to be honest, nothing much actually happens that the majority of people just shrug their shoulders and think “So what”.
I already posted as groundhog hottest day.
But you’re already out of date.
We’re up to 4 times now.
You think someone might start to ask why these ‘models’ or whatever they are keep posting record global and sea temperatures?
Obviously they are deliberately biased, or in error, or otherwise just not credible.
I pretty much agree with all the above comments but even if the claims are true, what’s the surprise? We all agree that climate changes as it always has done – block of ice to tropical forest stuff etc – so why not a warmer spell? But that’s not the issue. All the hysteria is about the contribution of CO2 which, as so many have said for so many years, is completely hypothetical.
This has jogged my memory from a few decades ago. Temperature readings showed a massive increase. This was investigated and found to be because the readings were taken from an airport, even worse, from the black asphalt heat island effect. To compound the error even further, the site was next to where commercial aircraft take off and the jet engines are slowly wound up, with the aircraft brakes engaged to aid take off over a short distance.
Another memory was the “Great Pause” when satellites could measure atmospheric temperatures at varying heights with great precision due to Platinum Resistance Thermometers. The Great Pause lasted for 18 years with no significant warming that was detectable. Of course the fraudsters, stopped using that data and reverted to data from primitive helium balloons!
A H , and then when the readings did not show what they wanted , they adjusted the figures to change from a 0.03 increase per decade , up to a 0.14 increase .
https://notrickszone.com/2023/01/09/hadcrut-data-manipulation-changes-2000-2014-warming-trend-from-0-03c-to-0-14c-per-decade/
.
Don’t you just love a global temperature to two decimal places. 17.23±4C would be more like it.
And these are maximums I believe, jot at a single time, so the “heat” shifts from place to place and is thus recorded multiple times.
It’s utterly unscientific.
I absolutely agree, they never mention the error margin, do they? It must be massive.
And we mustn’t forget that temperature is an intensive property, so the very idea of a global average temperature is pure nonsense.
As Hansen eventually admitted. “Not a useful metric”were his words, I seem to recall! Understatement if ever …
“The temperature readings come from a tool called Climate Reanalyzer.”
Forgive me while I have a giggle! Really this baloney is so unbelievable I’m even surprised that the BBC falls for i!
“The temperature readings come from a tool” would be more apt.
I hadn’t stopped to think what his name was. Is he one of these AI chatbot things we are hearing about?
Chris Packam believes in man-made climate change as he can see and probably feel the Earth heating up. He wasn’t asked in the interview how he knows that.
The technical name, for these pseudo-facts, is (or was – before academic science had degraded into total farce) ARTEFACTS.
He clearly has the same super-senses the beloved Greta has who can SEE CO2 !!
According to the “Telegraph”,1930,August 30.a temp. of 122F(50 deg C)was recorded inthe Loire region of France.
The book “There is no climate crisis” by David Craig ,is very informative.
To Phillip above:I agree.
Water cannons will increase humidity and make the warm air seem worse. Why would that be done?
I would normally ignore such trash reporting, but because the idiots at the WEF and their ilk want uncontrolled power over everyone, I have to speak out. I wouldn’t care about what the BBC reports; they’re really a joke, but the WEF, etc., will keep ramping up the hysteria until some loony-toon government, like Biden et al, will use it as justification for declaring marshal law and climate lockdowns, all in the name of saving us from ourselves. If they do, they will catch all bloody hell from us at last.
Biden is a non-entity. The real drive for all this crap comes from Schwab and his co-criminals at Davos and the WEF.
Yeah, I realize that, but Biden’s so easily manipulated the old fool will do anything he’s told.
The ‘climate analyser’ put a ‘special notice’ on its website. I am sure the MSM will ignore it:
” The increase in mean global temperature since the start of July, estimated from the Climate Forecast System, should not be taken as an “official” observational record. ”
https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/t2_daily/