Death Valley Dethrones Impostor As Hottest Place On Earth 175
Hugh Pickens writes "Adam Nagourney reports that after a yearlong investigation a team of climate scientists announced that it is throwing out a reading of 136.4 degrees claimed by the city of Al Aziziyah, Libya on Sept. 13, 1922 making the 134-degree reading registered on July 10, 1913, at Greenland Ranch in Death Valley the official world record as the hottest place on earth. 'It's about time for science, but I think we all knew it was coming,' says Randy Banis. 'You don't underestimate Death Valley. Most of us enthusiasts are proud that the extremes that we have known about at Death Valley are indeed the most harsh on earth.' The final report by 13 climatologists appointed by the World Meteorological Organization, the climate agency of the United Nations, found five reasons to disqualify the Libya claim, including questionable instruments, an inexperienced observer who made the reading, and the fact that the reading was anomalous for that region and in the context of other temperatures reported in Libya that day. 'The more we looked at it, the more obvious it appeared to be an error,' says Christopher C. Burt, a meteorologist with Weather Underground who started the debate in a blog post in 2010."
What if... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Then they'd be dead and no one would have heard about it!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Why not switching to celcius? Except for the US and Jamaica, the whole world has...
http://i.imgur.com/ucOQh.jpg [imgur.com]
Re:What if... (Score:5, Informative)
Why not switching to celcius? Except for the US and Jamaica, the whole world has... http://i.imgur.com/ucOQh.jpg [imgur.com]
Liberia, Myanmar, and the U.S. actually [wikipedia.org]. Jamaica uses Celcius for temperature (definitely when I was there in the 1980s and 1990s).
Re: (Score:3)
Hmmmm... modern democracies !
Re: (Score:2)
The funny thing about the United States is that HR 596 was passed by the 39th congress in 1866 which authorized its use.
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/laws/metric-act-bill.html [colostate.edu]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's kinda pointless to switch just temperature measurement to celsius unless you're going to switch to the metric system entirely.
Re: (Score:2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_system
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see why you couldn't use Celsius temperature along with English units, or for that matter Fahrenheit along with Metric units. Both scales are pretty arbitrary as it is.
Re: (Score:3)
The reason that the old system still holds is that it makes more sense to the people who are not scientists.
100 degrees F = HOT!
0 degrees F = COLD!
1 inch = thumb
1 foot = foot
1 yard = 1 persons stride
1 Rod = 1 oxe in length
1 furlong = distance a oxe could plow without resting
1 acre = amount of land an oxe can plow in one day
1 mile = 8
1 cup = 1 glass of liquid
1 pint = beer
1 quart = 2 beers
1 gallon = drunk
1 lbs = 1 Rock
1 grain = 1 grain of sand
I could go on, but basically the reason that its hard to do away w
Re: (Score:2)
Opps
1 mile = 8 furlongs
Re:What if... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What if... (Score:4, Insightful)
1 meter == fraction of the earths surface, just as much as a mans's stride as a yard, differs by 3 inches(76 mm). fuckoff.
1 milliliter == 1 cubic centimeter
1 gram == that same cc filled with water.
0 Celsius - water friezes
100 Celsius - water boils.
as far as your beers go, you'd be much happier man drinking them liter size like they do in europe.
no one uses oxen to plow fields anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
most common are the
Germany, you get beer in milk crates, with
there is no
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
all beer is sold in bottles I believe.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bartenders says the deutche equiv of "weights and measures" doesn't fuck around, and mispouring a beer is a serious offense.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not saying this makes sense to -me- I was saying this is what you have to overcome. People created the imperial system after things they could visualize. Over time the system became a part of the culture. At that point its almost impossible to change, in order to hack culture, you have to overload and redefine the symbols and the rituals of that culture. This has been the chief problem with the Metric system, its hard for the common man to know if 1 Kg of a substance for $10 is a better deal that 1
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes it takes moving overseas for an American to truly realize how dumb the country's rejection of the metric system was. Then again, that's true for more than just measurements.
Re:What if... (Score:5, Informative)
Try reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit
It goes over what how and why Fahrenheit set his temperature scale the way he did, and you know what, the human feelings had nothing to do with it, though the temperature of human blood was used for part of it. I find that kind of creepy, but a lot of people were obsessed about that kind of stuff in the early 1700s.
So again, Fahrenheit isn't based on what a human might think is hot or cold, it's based on some arbitrary points and scaling by it's creator. For that matter, so is the Celsius scale, but in a lesser extent because it based the whole thing on a consistent set of arbitrary stuff. (The Freezing and boiling of water broken into 100 degrees.)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
there, in the UK, where distance is still measured in that archaic unit, the "mile".
Get with it UK, it's called KILOMETERS.
-- your snooty offspring, Canada
Re:What if... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
How about Celsius or even kelvin? Most of the world preferably use these units, even here in the UK, home of the imperial system. Seriously, join the 20th century!
The only thing worse than sticking with Imperial is winding up with whatever weird mish-mash you have with over there.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm in the UK and I tend to think in terms of celsius for low temperatures and fahrenheit for high temperatures - i.e, if it's close to or below 0 it's cold (thinking in celsius), and if it's in the 80s or 90s it's hot. I think it's the appeal of zero for freezing, coupled with the still common use of fahrenheit in the media to report hot weather.
What if Death Valley was in Kelvin? (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe people on SlashDot will finally learn that scientific notation and the metric system make it easier to not make stupid mistakes while communicating measurements. Really, "136.4 degrees" ? Come on, put some scale with that, n00b.
Even if they had specified degrees fahrenheit, it would still be wrong, since the original measurement didn't have that level of precision. It's the same mistake that has everyone thinking that normal body temperature is exactly 98.6 degrees F.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, because 136.4C (277.52F) is sooooo much more plausible.
Re: (Score:2)
Would it really kill the editors to put degrees F? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Or even degrees C, which is what scientists use...
Re:Would it really kill the editors to put degrees (Score:5, Informative)
Or even degrees C, which is what scientists use...
Actually, the SI unit of temperature is the Kelvin.
Re:Would it really kill the editors to put degrees (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh for pity's sake... (Score:3, Insightful)
Jesus H. M. F. Christ people!
If it were 136.4 Kelvins it would NOT be anything like the hottest temperature recorded on Earth, in the great outdoors, we, humans, would consider it bitterly fucking cold. So unless you're not a human, or you're a moron, you're just splitting hairs. Ditto on the question of whether it's Celsius/Centigrade or Fahrenheit. If the outdoor temperature hits 136.4 or even 134 degrees C, referring to the ambient atmospheric temperature, without counting anywhere or any occasion whe
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This is 'Murca goddamnit.
Re: (Score:2)
What for? It's already completely obvious that the units are degrees Fahrenheit, even to people from outside of the United States, such as myself. 136.4 degrees Celsius is 36.4 degrees above the boiling point of water; it's unlikely that good record keeping would have been done in such a climate :P
Waste of science (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah we all know governments prefer to fund bad-news-tastic climate science over nationalistic dick-waving.
Conversion to Celsius (Score:5, Informative)
(courtesy of the program in my sig's link).
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed 58 degrees is what is published in the report. It seems likely that the Libyan report was in integer Celsius degrees.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect you really missed the point ...
OP is pointing out that 37C is basically to nearest 1C accuracy, so it is pointless to call it 98.6F ie spurious accuracy
No sure why you needed to correct that ?
Re: (Score:2)
Except it isn't the human body temperature is 37.0 C. Of course that's an average and it varies amongst people and by about 0.5 C during the day in an individual.
But there's a .0 there, it's three sginificant figures and so 98.6 F is not spurious accuracy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it closer to one a third of a circle? .. unless you are talking about Farhrenheit and not degrees.
Re: (Score:3)
I have over a thousand 'litmus' test sums, but I can't test every single possibility for obvious reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
I called the factorial method naive because the multiple recursions used to calculate the multiple factorials is also more expensive than the single recursion necessary, ie.. it has no redeem
Re: (Score:2)
If you won't accept any reward money, then at least email me, and I'll send you a link for the full version. If you wish of course - not sure if it's gone up in your estimation since 'crappy'
Dead Heat (Score:3, Interesting)
Hot is hot (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This is temperature in the shade.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right, of course - but what if the only shade you can find is your own shadow? How does that affect something like trying to record the temperature? I guess we could just say "hotter than hell" and leave it at that.
Re: (Score:2)
then you build something to get some shade.
Re: (Score:2)
A sand castle! Good idea!
Re: (Score:2)
Near where I am there is a local government park that had the trees and grass replaced with dark coloured paving, and the local newspaper found that the temperature of a thermometer placed on that paving was at around those Death Valley temperatures while the official figure measured at the airport
Re: (Score:2)
I worked roofing for awhile, here and there. Take any metal tool, be it a framing square, a hammer, a screwdriver, and lay it on the hot asphalt shingled roof for just a few minutes. The actual temp may only be high seventies, but on a clear sunshiny day, picking that metal tool up after ten minutes can blister your hands. (Of course, I use degrees F, that would be high 20's for you?) I wasn't scientific about it, but a lighter colored roof didn't seem to cook those tools quite so quickly. Color was a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As another poster pointed out, the temperature must be in the shade, and that matters.
To demonstrate just how much a little environmental change can adjust heat though, and hence why the standard must be that the temperature is taken in shade, even here in the UK, in my greenhouse with no fans running for better airflow, my thermometer has recorded 56.5C (133F) even with the vents open. A simple glass structure with windows open can trap drastically more heat relative to the outside temperature in the shade
W00t! (Score:5, Funny)
Hugh Pickens... (Score:2)
Hugh Pickens... The new Roland Piquepaille [wikipedia.org]?
Pimping his "blog" for page views...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You might have an argument if was decided by a US organization rather than the World Meteorological Organization. Note the word "World".
Re: (Score:2)
You might have an argument if was decided by a US organization rather than the World Meteorological Organization. Note the word "World".
What, like in World Series?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see what that has to do with weather.
Re: (Score:2)
It has to do with use of the word "World", and the assumption that it always involves the actual world rather than an expansive term applied to a parochial event.
Slashdot Quote: (Score:3)
In response to the article about Death Valley, Slashdot generated this quote:
It'll be just like Beggars' Canyon back home. -- Luke Skywalker
Indeed, except all the womp rats are dead, and not even a moisture farmer can make a living there. You nerf herders have it easy...
"...the most harsh on earth." (Score:2)
Nonsense. Compare to Dome A in Antarctica.
America 1st again (Score:2)
Good, America is first again.
AMERICA FUCK YEAH!
It's funny how they do not take into account the nationalist usian bias in the analysis.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you might want to consider looking at the paper (not the article).
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, harshest place in the world.
Perhaps, but isn't there something good to be said of making it in a tough place?
It was a wake up call for me (Score:2, Offtopic)
Well, I visited some African country that lies straight on the Equautor. As an individual from the west, I arrived with my prejudices that this country would be nautrally hotter than my home land.
I was wrong! The temperature, right at the equator was no more than 28 degrees celcius (82.4 degrees F). I was suprised. The locals told me it had to do with their altitude, which is much higher.
When I called my family, they had sympathy for the "hot weather". My repeated advice to them that my homeland (Texas) wa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, of course elevation has everything to do with temperature. Proximity to the seacoast is the other big determinant.
Quito, Ecuador is within 25 km of the equator, but is at an elevation of 2850 m. For each of the twelve months of the year, independently, the average high varies between 18 and 19 C, and the average low, 9 and 11.
Puerto Bolivar, Ecuador is at an elevation of only 27 m, and the corresponding highs are 27-32 and the lows are 20-22. It is right on the coast, which serves to moderate the temp
Dubious pride (Score:4, Insightful)
This seems to me to be a really dumb thing to be proud of.
Short-lived record? (Score:2)
Record in Death Valley is bullshit (Score:2)
its not 110 degress, which it gets in west texas either.
Re:Record in Death Valley is bullshit (Score:4, Funny)
That hot temperatures are never published. It would drive all the toerists away.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder where those measurements (of temperature) were taken. Were they "official temperatures" -- e.g. taken in the shade? Temperatures sampled using a different methodology (e.g. out in the sun, on a tarmac, etc, etc) can certainly exceed the official temperatures, and temperature records.
Re: (Score:2)
Is that in the sun, or in the shade.
"Underestimating the Death Valley" (Score:2)
When I was there is was raining. Quite disappointing.
Proof (Score:2)
Well here is proof enough that history is indeed written by the victor.
Got a reading that doesn't tell the right story? Just delete it. That is how they do in the new world of climatology. First they vanish the Mideveal Warming Period and now this.
Not the hottest place (Score:2)
Not, as the misleading title suggests, the hottest place, just the hottest properly recorded single temperature reading
big emphasis on single temperature reading - one reading a day/week/year does not make.
Properly recording temperature isn't simple or intuitive - it's also kind of hard to do in some parts of the world because it's so damn hot.
The hottest place on the planet most years is in the Danakil Desert, which not surprisingly is a bit of a ghost town. Death Valley is about 86 metres below sea level,
Re:Extreme! (Score:4, Funny)
And strangely you're proud of that. Weird.
Re: (Score:3)
Difference of 162F [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Well, my first post was just for Winnipeg, but if we're going all in:
Hottest: 44.4 C [wikipedia.org]
Coldest: 52.8 C [wikipedia.org]
Difference (C): 97.2C or 206.96F
Re: (Score:2)
Most temperature data collected over the years should be disqualified for those and other various reasons including the data fabrication that is done by GISS, NOAA and others.
For a number of articles on the topic that show the data fabrication see: http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/data-tampering-at-ushcngiss [wordpress.com].
Showing graphs without the data to support them, and claim operations have been applied without specifying the operations is quite frankly horse shit. Back up your assertions or go away.
Re: (Score:2)
Time to go back under the bridge troll.
That cherrypicked crap has been denounced and debunked time and again.
Even Monckton doesn't resort to using it
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, piss off with your regurgitated denialist spew, ABC (Anonymous Batshit Coward)
I've been following the science behind climate change for 25 yrs and it's only getting more and more solid.
That's not to say there aren't still significant uncertainties but the groundwork has long been laid.
We have lost so much time to the cooligans that it's just sickening.
Re: (Score:2)
Many of the articles show the data.
BS. Missed that? Bullshit. In Canada most climate data is based on extrapolations on 30-35 year windows because there is no other data, because it doesn't exist. Any other data that existed was based on sites that weren't even close, or were from 400+KM away. Most of our weather network didn't even exist until 1977, and only cities, military bases and outposts did weather recording. Or landlocked ships.
Re: (Score:2)
We should just settle this once and for all and call him "Crazy Stubble Mustache"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)