Diversidade climática

[mesogeiakos]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

Não, o AEMET não usa a referência dos 47,8ºc.
Só usa a referência dos 47,2ºc.
Acho que este assunto devia ser discutido noutro tópico.

Resumen de Extremos Climatológicos de España (actualizado al 31 de diciembre de 2007). AEMET:

"Ateniéndonos a los datos registrados a partir del año 1900, y teniendo en cuenta que tanto la instrumentación como las características de los emplazamientos de observación se estandarizaron durante las tres primeras décadas del siglo pasado, podemos decir que el valor más alto de temperatura es 47.2ºC, registrado en Murcia (Alfonso X) el 4 de julio de 1994"

"Sin embargo si se considera la totalidad de estaciones climatológicas donde se hacen o se han hecho observaciones de temperatura, el valor extremo de Murcia es superado en algunas de ellas, pero estos datos son muy dudosos."

Si además se incluyen en el estudio los datos registrados en el siglo XIX, aparecen valores de temperaturas por encima de los 47,2 ºC de Murcia . Pero también se duda de su validez pues se desconocen las condiciones en que se hacían las medidas.

Así encontramos datos como el registrado en Sevilla, Iglesia de la Anunciación, de 49.8 ºC medido el 11 de julio de 1873. Allí también se midieron 48.5 ºC el 15 de agosto de 1893 y 46.8 ºC el 19 de junio de 1897, e incluso hay referencias de una temperatura de 51.0 ºC el 30 de julio de 1876. Este dato no se halla registrado en la Base de Datos Climatológica pero sí se encuentra en el anuario de las observaciones meteorológicas de la Península de dicho año. Sin embargo parece que las medidas se hicieron en condiciones deficientes con instrumental instalado en la cúpula de la iglesia, donde había un termómetro en una garita tipo facistol y protección de tipo Montsuris, y no fue hasta 1912 cuando se instaló una garita estándar."

Nah,nah!They say that the 47.8C in Murcia DID HAPPEN compared to the Sevilla temps etc...now whether we can confirm a temp from last centrury or not is a different ballgame...The point is that AEMET accepts the 47.8C as the official national record!

Here you go

http://www.aemet.es/es/elclima/datosclimatologicos/efemerides_extremos?o=7182C&v=TMX&m=13

 

[belem]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

Nah,nah!They say that the 47.8C in Murcia DID HAPPEN compared to the Sevilla temps etc...now whether we can confirm a temp from last centrury or not is a different ballgame...The point is that AEMET accepts the 47.8C as the official national record!

Here you go

http://www.aemet.es/es/elclima/datosclimatologicos/efemerides_extremos?o=7182C&v=TMX&m=13

Então há aqui contradições muito estranhas...
Por um lado dizem que não é esse o recorde, por outro aparece nessa lista.
Recordes antes de 1900, foram quase certamente registados em condições não standard.

«Ateniéndonos a los datos registrados a partir del año 1900, y teniendo en cuenta que tanto la instrumentación como las características de los emplazamientos de observación se estandarizaron durante las tres primeras décadas del siglo pasado, podemos decir que el valor más alto de temperatura es 47.2ºC, registrado en Murcia (Alfonso X) el 4 de julio de 1994"

É muito claro aqui que apenas o recorde de 47,2ºc é tido em conta pelo AEMET.



«Si además se incluyen en el estudio los datos registrados en el siglo XIX, aparecen valores de temperaturas por encima de los 47,2 ºC de Murcia . Pero también se duda de su validez pues se desconocen las condiciones en que se hacían las medidas.»

Validez duvidosa, daí apenas os 47,2ºc foram tidos em conta.

 

[mesogeiakos]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

Whether Athens is that very warm place or not, is not sure. There is evidence to at least have reserve and not to scream it out in a (to me) sensationalist style.

The reasons for reserve are:
- Peerreviewed research that shows a little effect on the average maxima and a strong effect on the minima by the city heatisle
- Unknown sensorscreen type, unknown surroundings
- You and I have shown that WMO is no guarantee whatsoever (De Bilt, San Pablo and many others).
- And as this is a intercomparison, we need to know equipment en sensortypes are used of both stations when we intercompare. Nothing is known about the greek stations

Your remarks about Murcia:
- If its orography is so special, why did it not reach the same temperature as Amareleja for more than 150 years now. If the orography gives way to superdynamics, is it gone? There is no proof of it
- I do have proof here however that it measures in a Stevensonscreen in a meteorological garden, which is a garden with a large building at about 30 m and a hedge of trees (low trees) at 20 m. Despite that, nothing above 46 C in the last 30 years. Amareleja and Cordoba went above that value various times.

Even if it has been is 0.4 C warmer than Amareleja in 189x and it is correct, is this what extreme dynamics do? Is that what gets you excited. Is it this 0.4 C difference between places that makes one much more capable of reaching 2 C more and the other not?

Then your attitude during discussions and why you discredit yourself. You use facts in two ways:
You mention them on one forum when they suite you and forget about them when they don't. Do you know what a nice description of reason is? It is that you use the same principle in similar discussions.
You don't, you use them when they suite you and that is unreasobale: You use double standards.
Examples are:
- A high maximum average is boring, but a high daytime average is in fact what your comparison is based on and what you seem to be excited about. These two things are in direct conflict with one another.
- You mention Catania as also easily "outperforming" the Guads regions when it comes to extreme maxima, while you in fact asked the Italian metoffice for a definitive answer and it was 45.6 in Bari, not Catania. You mention this in a discussion with some Italian guy, that was the official max according to you. That is lying by omission.
In this discussion you however use unoffical values to prove your point and start talking about Catania. If others use unoffical values, you do everything to discredit them. But it is okey for you to use them whenit suits you.
- You raise eyebrows about remarks of WMO stations measuring totally wrong, while you proved that point yourself already on another forum (San Pablo)and happily stated that this was a ridiculous way of measuring the climate. Which yu did before and during this issue became an argument over here.
Again it is easy to see that it suited you there, but it does not suit you in a discussion where WMO station in general are not accepted just like that but someone (like me) asks for more info about screentype, place in a field or near buildings etcetc....
- You say you don't care about what other think, yet your mission is to deconstruct myths. Myths are things in peoples minds, not buildings. The only thing you are trying is changing peoples minds. It is therefor of the utmost importance what do think, if you want to change a myth..

And this is all is easy to understand why: because it is your goal, as can be read on other forums as well, to get rid of the myth about the heath in the Guadalquivir region. Whenever you can, whenever you can use an argument that suits you, you use it. Catania debunked there, but used as proof here. Average is boring here, but remarkable in Athens etcetc.

Meteorologists and amateurs alike are impressed, for years by the constant daytime maximuma in the Andalusian Guadalquivir basin. I think you stand little chance of changing that. Certainly when I look at the outcome of the various discussions you had on various fora.

Come on mate as if you are going to have me from all people on the defence for Catania!Let me rephrase ''as we have seen Murcia and Athens at an official level surpass Andalusia and Portugal in terms of absolute maxes yet research needs to be done on the Catania plains due to reports of inner valley higher temps''

Now again spare me my ''lying by ommision''! While I do accept that my way of expressing myself can be provocative at times,I would say that a strategic crash test at times requires building up of tension so one can aggravate the most responses possible.That is one strategy.The other one is to be condesending and risk no attention.This does not mean anything on who I am as a person in my real life.

The point to be raised is that areas in Europe outside the inland areas of Iberia have shown a more remarkable track record much closer to the sea when it comes to absolute maxes.Be it Attica or Murcia by the sea or Catania plains that defenetelly needs research.While you might get impressed with a star falling from the sky I am merely pinpointing what scientifically means warmer...and this corresponds to mean 24hour temp...in this aspect a peninsula by the sea outperforms every area in the inside plains of Iberia systematically in the summer

 

[mesogeiakos]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

Então há aqui contradições muito estranhas...
Por um lado dizem que não é esse o recorde, por outro aparece nessa lista.
Recordes antes de 1900, foram quase certamente registados em condições não standard.

«Ateniéndonos a los datos registrados a partir del año 1900, y teniendo en cuenta que tanto la instrumentación como las características de los emplazamientos de observación se estandarizaron durante las tres primeras décadas del siglo pasado, podemos decir que el valor más alto de temperatura es 47.2ºC, registrado en Murcia (Alfonso X) el 4 de julio de 1994"

É muito claro aqui que apenas o recorde de 47,2ºc é tido em conta pelo AEMET.



«Si además se incluyen en el estudio los datos registrados en el siglo XIX, aparecen valores de temperaturas por encima de los 47,2 ºC de Murcia . Pero también se duda de su validez pues se desconocen las condiciones en que se hacían las medidas.»

Validez duvidosa, daí apenas os 47,2ºc foram tidos em conta.

Belem please read it better.It says that ''however it was certain that 47.8C did take place in Murcia''

I did the same mistake in the beggining but then I read it carefully and understood what they say

The doubt goes for other high temps of that era.AEMET is not that stupid to accept in it's web site only the 47.8C.They justify it in that pdf file in the paragraph just below

 

[belem]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

Belem please read it better.It says that ''however it was certain that 47.8C did take place in Murcia''

The doubt goes for other high temps of that era.AEMET is not that stupid to accept in it's web site only the 47.8C.They justify it in that pdf file in the paragraph just below

Não, na referência que coloquei eles não mencionam em qualquer parágrafo qualquer referência aos 47,8ºc.
Onde isso aparece é no quadro, mas é uma gralha/erro certamente. E é dada uma pequena nota, para valores altos obtidos antes de 1900, mas em condições não standard.
Em Portugal, temos valores de 49,0ºc para Marinha Grande ( já depois de 1940, logo em condições mais aceitáveis de medição ( mais provavelmente)), mas isto pode ser um erro.

Já tive a consultar o pdf do site da AEMET e vi isto:

«Ateniéndonos a los datos registrados a partir del año 1900, y teniendo en cuenta que tanto la instrumentación como las características de los emplazamientos de observación se estandarizaron durante las tres primeras décadas del siglo pasado, podemos decir que el valor más alto de temperatura medido en las capitales de provincia es 47.2ºC, registrado en Murcia (Alfonso X) el 4 de julio de 1994, seguido por 46.6 ºC registrado en los Aeropuertos de Córdoba y Sevilla el 23 de julio de 1995.
El cuadro siguiente presenta los records de temperaturas máximas superiores a 45.0 ºC, registradas en estaciones principales, que suelen corresponder a las capitales de provincia o en localidades importantes:
RECORDS DE TEMPERATURAS MÁXIMAS SUPERIORES A 45.0 ºC
ESTACION
NOMBRE
PROVINCIA
FECHA
T.MAX.
7182
MURCIA, ALFONSO X
MURCIA
04/07/1994
47,2
5402
CORDOBA (AEROPUERTO)
CORDOBA
23/07/1995
46,6
5783
SEVILLA (AEROPUERTO)
SEVILLA
23/07/1995
46,6
5270
JAEN-INSTITUTO
JAEN
08/07/1939
46,0
4478G
BADAJOZ (UNIVERSIDAD)
BADAJOZ
01/08/2003
45,0


Apenas é válido o registo de 47,2ºc.

Aqui:

http://www.aemet.es/documentos/es/divulgacion/resumen_efemerides/Resumen_extremos.pdf

 

[mesogeiakos]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

balem look here where they justify the 47.8C

They say ''what is certain is that it was extremely hot that day with 44.2 in Madrid, 47.8 in Murcia etc''

And here is how they justify the existance of the 47.8C in their official database.This is the highest they accept in their official database and no other value...

By attaching this document below it means they do accept it.Probably they have some extra data on Murcia regarding this value and probably they were sure on the measurment procedure!Who knows.The point is that they accept it as official even though it seems odd since it is coming from last century

http://www.aemet.es/es/elclima/datosclimatologicos/efemerides_extremos?o=7182C&v=TMX&m=13

http://www.aemet.es/documentos/es/divulgacion/resumen_efemerides/Resumen_extremos.pdf

 

[belem]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

balem look here where they justify the 47.8C

They say ''what is certain is that it was extremely hot that day with 44.2 in Madrid, 47.8 in Murcia etc''

And here is how they justify the existance of the 47.8C in their official database.This is the highest they accept in their official database and no other value...

By attaching this document below it means they do accept it.Probably they have some extra data on Murcia regarding this value and probably they were sure on the measurment procedure!Who knows.The point is that they accept it as official even though it seems odd since it is coming from last century

http://www.aemet.es/es/elclima/datosclimatologicos/efemerides_extremos?o=7182C&v=TMX&m=13

http://www.aemet.es/documentos/es/divulgacion/resumen_efemerides/Resumen_extremos.pdf

Sim eu já vi essa informação e um edit foi feito acima na minha mensagem.
Nesse caso um recorde de mais de 49ºc teria que ser considerado para Sevilha...
Mas não foi e porquê? Não obedece a condições standard.
Assim o único recorde reconhecido está exposto logo no início do artigo como 47,2ºc.

«Ateniéndonos a los datos registrados a partir del año 1900, y teniendo en cuenta que tanto la instrumentación como las características de los emplazamientos de observación se estandarizaron durante las tres primeras décadas del siglo pasado, podemos decir que el valor más alto de temperatura medido en las capitales de provincia es 47.2ºC, registrado en Murcia (Alfonso X) el 4 de julio de 1994, , seguido por 46.6 ºC registrado en los Aeropuertos de Córdoba y Sevilla el 23 de julio de 1995.
El cuadro siguiente presenta los records de temperaturas máximas superiores a 45.0 ºC, registradas en estaciones principales, que suelen corresponder a las capitales de provincia o en localidades importantes:
RECORDS DE TEMPERATURAS MÁXIMAS SUPERIORES A 45.0 ºC
ESTACION
NOMBRE
PROVINCIA
FECHA
T.MAX.
7182
MURCIA, ALFONSO X
MURCIA
04/07/1994
47,2
5402
CORDOBA (AEROPUERTO)
CORDOBA
23/07/1995
46,6
5783
SEVILLA (AEROPUERTO)
SEVILLA
23/07/1995
46,6
5270
JAEN-INSTITUTO
JAEN
08/07/1939
46,0
4478G
BADAJOZ (UNIVERSIDAD)
BADAJOZ
01/08/2003
45,0


Apenas se tornou standard nas primeiras 3 décadas a partir de 1900.

Se não fosse assim, teria que se considerar valores ainda mais altos.

 

[Skizzo]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

Mesogaikos, you're starting to border on obsessive. Who cares really? It's becoming annoying.

 

[mesogeiakos]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

Balem there is a problem bsc they draw a line between centuries.So for the 20th century they accept 47.2C again in Murcia and for the 19th they accept 47.8C...there is a fine line between all the other records and this 47.8C since they say it was certain it did occur and since it appears on their database.

Skizzo hey.I am being pedantic I know but you know how difficult it is to access a record value so I am trying to make it as less ambiguous as possible on what the national authorities accept.Unfortunatelly ALL the high temps will be open to scrutiny when it comes to RECORDS,that is why we have no other option other than to accept what authorities say!

 

[belem]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

Balem there is a problem bsc they draw a line between centuries.So for the 20th century they accept 47.2C again in Murcia and for the 19th they accept 47.8C...there is a fine line between all the other records and this 47.8C since they say it was certain it did occur and since it appears on their database.

Pronto, eu explico-lhe tudo novamente.
Antes de 1900 as estações não eram standard, daí que o AEMET as tenha excluído, como é visível logo ao início, dos registos considerados fiáveis.
A standardização apenas ocorreu nas primeiras décadas do século XX. Ou seja de 1900 em diante. Não antes.
Dos registos de antes de 1900, figuram valores até de 49,8ºc para Sevilha... Não viu esse valor também? Ele é considerado recorde?
Para isso tinhamos em Portugal, Marinha Grande com 49ºc a partir de 1940, já após standardização ( provavelmente) e por aí até seria considerado mais fiável que todos esses valores. E esta estação registou mais valores elevados. Vejo outro de 44ºc. Contudo este valor de 49ºc não foi creditado. Nem os 50,5ºc para Riodades.
As coisas têm que ser vistas com calma.
Após a standardização oficial das estações meteorológicas, Murcia registou 47,2ºc e não 47,8ºc.

 

[mesogeiakos]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

Pronto, eu explico-lhe tudo novamente.
Antes de 1900 as estações não eram standard, daí que o AEMET as tenha excluído, como é visível logo ao início, dos registos considerados fiáveis.
A standardização apenas ocorreu nas primeiras décadas do século XX. OU seja de 1900 em diante. Não antes.
Dos registos de antes de 1900, figuram valores até de 49,8ºc para Sevilha... Não viu esse valor também? Ele é considerado recorde?
Para isso tinhamos em Portugal, Marinha Grande com 49ºc a partir de 1940, já após standardização ( provavelmente) e por aí até seria considerado mais fiável que todos esses valores. E esta estação registou mais valores elevados. Vejo outro de 44ºc. Contudo este valor de 49ºc não foi creditado. Nem os 50,5ºc para Riodades.
As coisas têm que ser vistas com calma.
Após a standardização oficial das estações meteorológicas, Murcia registou 47,2ºc e não 47,8ºc.

yes I agree for the standardization but if you look closely it their database in their website they do not accept the 49.8C or other values from the last century BUT they accept and include in their database the 47.8C in Murcia,the values in Madrid etc.

Why would they do this?Probably they must have had some extra details that we do not have or they must have some records that are undisputable.
Off course I agree that it is odd but they do make a line between the 44.2 in Madrid and the 47.8C in Murcia compared to the 49.8C of Seville.

At least at an official level they do accept the 47.8C even though it was from the 19th century

 

[belem]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

yes I agree for the standardization but if you look closely it their database in their website they do not accept the 49.8C or other values from the last century BUT they accept and include in their database the 47.8C in Murcia,the values in Madrid etc.

Why would they do this?Probably they must have had some extra details that we do not have or they must have some records that are undisputable.
Off course I agree that it is odd but they do make a line between the 44.2 in Madrid and the 47.8C in Murcia compared to the 49.8C of Seville.

At least at an official level they do accept the 47.8C even though it was from the 19th century

Bom, já lhe foi explicado que esse registo de 47,8ºc é duvidoso e não tem condições para ser considerado fiável ( simplesmente porque os regulamentos oficiais só foram estipulados depois de 1900).
Aliás a razão pela qual eu me apercebi que assim era, foi devido ao Pek, membro espanhol aqui do forum que explicou-nos a razão pela qual apenas os 47,2ºc são considerados em Espanha e não os de 47,8ºc.
Se quiser achar que os valores de 47,8ºc são fiáveis, por mim está à vontade ( pouca diferença me faz), nesse caso então ficará sujeito a analisar dados não standard de outras estações.

«Sin embargo si se considera la totalidad de estaciones climatológicas donde se hacen o se han hecho observaciones de temperatura, el valor extremo de Murcia es superado en algunas de ellas, pero estos datos son muy dudosos.
Si además se incluyen en el estudio los datos registrados en el siglo XIX, aparecen valores de temperaturas muy por encima de los 47,2 ºC de Murcia . Pero también se duda de su validez pues se desconocen las condiciones en que se hacían las medidas.

 

[mesogeiakos]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

Bom, já lhe foi explicado que esse registo de 47,8ºc é duvidoso e não tem condições para ser considerado fiável ( simplesmente porque os regulamentos oficiais só foram estipulados depois de 1900).
Aliás a razão pela qual eu me apercebi que assim era, foi devido ao Pek, membro espanhol aqui do forum que explicou-nos a razão pela qual apenas os 47,2ºc são considerados em Espanha e não os de 47,8ºc.
Se quiser achar que os valores de 47,8ºc são fiáveis, por mim está à vontade ( pouca diferença me faz), nesse caso então ficará sujeito a analisar dados não standard de outras estações.

«Sin embargo si se considera la totalidad de estaciones climatológicas donde se hacen o se han hecho observaciones de temperatura, el valor extremo de Murcia es superado en algunas de ellas, pero estos datos son muy dudosos.
Si además se incluyen en el estudio los datos registrados en el siglo XIX, aparecen valores de temperaturas muy por encima de los 47,2 ºC de Murcia . Pero también se duda de su validez pues se desconocen las condiciones en que se hacían las medidas.

Τhe problem is how each might ''translate'' those temperatures.This is problematic since AEMET says that it was certain that those temps in Madrid and Murcia etc took place..so purely from an official standpoint regardless of how we as units translate this the record of 47.8C is OFFICIALLY accepted in Spain by AEMET as you can see in their official database.

If it was not officially accepted then I do not see the reason it would be included in their database.As we have seen the trully dubious records like the 49.8C are not included but the 47.8C does not seem dubious from AEMET officially and thus it is included.

And I quote

Lo que si es cierto es que ese día, 30 de julio de 1876, fue extremadamente caluroso pues en Madrid se midieron 44.2ºC, 47.8ºC en Murcia, 42.5ºC en Bilbao y 41.0ºC en Salamanca.

 

[J.S.]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

Come on mate as if you are going to have me from all people on the defence for Catania!Let me rephrase ''as we have seen Murcia and Athens at an official level surpass Andalusia and Portugal in terms of absolute maxes yet research needs to be done on the Catania plains due to reports of inner valley higher temps''

Now again spare me my ''lying by ommision''! While I do accept that my way of expressing myself can be provocative at times,I would say that a strategic crash test at times requires building up of tension so one can aggravate the most responses possible.That is one strategy.The other one is to be condesending and risk no attention.This does not mean anything on who I am as a person in my real life.

The point to be raised is that areas in Europe outside the inland areas of Iberia have shown a more remarkable track record much closer to the sea when it comes to absolute maxes.Be it Attica or Murcia by the sea or Catania plains that defenetelly needs research.While you might get impressed with a star falling from the sky I am merely pinpointing what scientifically means warmer...and this corresponds to mean 24hour temp...in this aspect a peninsula by the sea outperforms every area in the inside plains of Iberia systematically in the summer

You wrote this "That is why you see Murcia,Catania and Athens being on the top of the list in the highest temps ever recorded in Europe".
That is you rlie by omission, you wrote this just yesterday while you were aware of Bari's 45.6 since april after havin a cheat with the
Italian metoffice.

Four days ago you showed that Sevilla San Pablo, a WMO station, is measuring in a pathetic way when it comes to guidelines.
Yet one day after that on this forum you insist that WMO stations are to be trusted and ALL other are not. That is lying by omission.

Heatisle..It is clear you have gone through a lot of literature. If you would be fair, you would have mentioned both sides of the story.
This research was easily foun by me. When confronted with peerreviewed research, you do not adjust your tone but keep on insisting
there is no heatisle. This was peerreviewed research, unlike the older research you showed us. Yet here you do not listen tot the highest
authority. Again, there are double standards.

I have also shown with various research that various screens introduce different errors, stevensonscreen being prone to the
largest in more modern times regardless of how it is positioned on a field. That is why most metoffices are changing them.
There is one greek station you mention and it indeed uses a stevensonscreen.

So given the very peculiar behaviour of stations only in the Attican basin (not Murcia, not near Sparta nor anywhere else),
we need to know this for sure:
- Is there a heatisle or not
- How is each station you mention positioned at the airfield or any other field for that matter (San Pablo tells us why we need
to know that..)
- Which radiationshields/sensorscreen are used

And this of course opposes what you need in order to get us believing you:
- We must accept, inspite of research showing the opposite, that Athens and the other stations are not affected by heatisles
- We must accept WMO stations on face value, even though we already know that WMO id's guarantee us nothing
- We must accept that there some sort of brutal dynamica AND that this dynamics explains everything in the Attica region
even though I have not seen a single study that proves the high temps in Attica are caused by this phenomenon solely.

It seems clear to me we don't. A tactic in which someone loses credibility because of double standards, single sided stories
and debunking others is not going to help anybody if that person wants to be believed. Quite the opposite.

 

[belem]

Re: Seguimento Europa 2010

Τhe problem is how each might ''translate'' those temperatures.This is problematic since AEMET says that it was certain that those temps in Madrid and Murcia etc took place..so purely from an official standpoint regardless of how we as units translate this the record of 47.8C is OFFICIALLY accepted in Spain by AEMET as you can see in their official database.

If it was not officially accepted then I do not see the reason it would be included in their database.As we have seen the trully dubious records like the 49.8C are not included but the 47.8C does not seem dubious from AEMET officially and thus it is included.

OK, como já disse pouca diferença me faz.
Acredita no que quiseres.
Eu já fiz um quote muito importante, onde esse assunto é abordado em particular:

«Sin embargo si se considera la totalidad de estaciones climatológicas donde se hacen o se han hecho observaciones de temperatura, el valor extremo de Murcia es superado en algunas de ellas, pero estos datos son muy dudosos.
Si además se incluyen en el estudio los datos registrados en el siglo XIX, aparecen valores de temperaturas muy por encima de los 47,2 ºC de Murcia . Pero también se duda de su validez pues se desconocen las condiciones en que se hacían las medidas.»

O que é facto é que desde que as medições oficiais e standard from aplicadas, Murcia registou 47,2ºc e não mais que isso.
Para se fazer uma comparação correcta e justa, tem que se comparar valores medidos nas mesmas condições standard e oficiais.