Local mais quente de Portugal ? 50°C é possível ?

[frederico]

Na minha opinião, temos falta de mais estações em todo o território. Posso dar o exemplo da minha região. VRSA, durante o Inverno, tem temperaturas mais baixas que o restante litoral do sotavento algarvio, e mesmo no Verão tem mínimas mais reduzidas que outras povoações próximas como Manta Rota ou Cabanas de Tavira. Há uma explicação: o vale do Guadiana é um corredor para os ventos frios de quadrante norte; já a freguesia de Cacela, 10 km para oeste, tem a protecção dos cerros de Cacela e da Conceição, contrafortes das serras de Água de Fusos e da Alcaria do Cume (com 525 metros de altitude). Em apenas 10 km de distância, há uma diferença assinalável na temperatura e na precipitação, pois VRSA é ligeiramente mais seca que as restantes cidades e vilas do sotavento. No entanto, entre Tavira e VRSA, numa distância de 25 km, não há estação. Atendendo aos dados do Levante, em 1931-1960 Tavira teve média anual de 17.8ºC, VRSA teve 17.2ºC. Em 1961-90, Tavira teve em média, por ano, 576 mm, VRSA teve 490 mm. E se Manta Rota ou Cacela Velha mereciam uma estação, o Cabo de Santa Maria também, tal como a ilha da Armona ou a ilha da Culatra. É que há diferenças entre as ilhas barreira e as cidades adjacentes. As ilhas barreira protegem Tavira, Faro ou Olhão dos ventos marítimos. Por outro lado, desde a freguesia de Cacela, até Faro, todo o sotavento está protegido pela serra do Caldeirão, cuja altitude máxima no concelho de Tavira atinge os 541 metros. E depois, há diferenças entre as cidades do litoral e as vilas do barrocal. Moncarapacho, Santo Estêvão ou Estoi estão protegidas dos ventos norte pelos cerros do Caldeirão e de Monte Figo, mas afastadas o suficiente do mar para verem a influência oceânica atenuada: em pleno Inverno, ao meio-dia, hão-de experimentar a força do sol no barrocal.

Para além disso, o Golfo de Cádiz merecia alguns estudos. Já devia haver uma bóia em frente a Monte Gordo ou VRSA.

 

[J.S.]

Há uma coisa que o JS tem que ter em conta.
Se um local é o mais quente numa região inteira, este lugar não pode ser vulgar, nem pode receber metodologias teóricas aplicadas à maioria de outros sítios.
O mesmo se aplica ao lugar mais frio numa região inteira.
Moncorvo tem a mesma temperatura média que Beja nos 2 meses mais quentes do ano ( sensivelmente) e no entanto está muito mais alto e a uma latitude muito mais a norte (lá se vão duas das variáveis utilizadas...). Isto porque esta região não tem um comportamento normal em que se possam aplicar regras gerais e esperar resultados idênticos aos outros locais. Tem que ser feita uma abordagem à escala local e respeitar as suas características específicas.

And how is this remark not mere theory. And I at least calculate things, I am not guessing that (la vão duas das etc.). La vão nada....Vamos a ver.

So we wonder: where does it start. This bigger continentallity? Not in Mirandela it apears, because taking the 2,37 K/100 km throughout the country as I showed gives a very good approximation. From Beja, I calculated 31,99 C for Mirandela. It is 31,8. If it would be much more continental, Mirandela should have had a higher figure at least and not a (marginally) lower. Bragança may be then...I calculated, from Beja data a 28,13 C for Bragança. It is 28,5. So it is 0,37 K difference. Not a much higher continentallity, not 5 K higher which is needed...

I have no data from Moncorvo, but mind you it is not much higher at all. Depending on where they put the station it is 60-160 m higher than Beja.

Besides, I do have data form Miranda do Douro, so we can compare.

But this is what you mix up: 2,37 K is the average in which continentality rises from the coast to the inland. The more inland you go, the slower it rises.
If you would go from lisboa to Madrid, the number would not be 2,37 K. It would be less because the rapid rise you get at the first 20 km from the sea has less influence on a 100 km than a 400 km journey.
Moncorvo IS more continental. It is 180 km from the sea and Beja 110 km or so (SW-W-NW). But its continentality just doesn't rise any faster because from 110-180 km the number is more constant than from 0-110 km...Remember, this is in summer.

Another point. This is about Tmaximas. Now you start to talk about somehting different. Look again at Miranda do Douro.

Tmediadamedias do julho: 21,1 C
BEja: 24,2 C
Difference: 3,1 C

Mediadasmaximas: 28,7.
Beja: 32,8. Difference is 4,1 C
MEdiasdasminimas: 13,5 C
Beja: 15,6 C. Difference: 2,1 C.

So for Moncorvo, something similar wil be true. On averag comparable, higher nighttime and lower daytime temperature.

The smaller difference at night could be due to the fact that the wind abates at night and strentghens at due, due to insolation and the build up of the thermical low pressure area in summer over Iberia.

Butof course, I can calculate Miranda do Douro now. If you are right, we may expect a much higher temperature than my calculations show. Right?

It s 235 km inland, whereas Beja is 120 km (average still SW-W-NW). so that is 115 km difference. 1,15 *2,37= 2,72 degrees warmer.
Altitude difference is a bit diffucult. It depends where Mirando do DOuro station is located. I'd say it is at 600 m height. So it is 360 m higher than Beja.

3,6* -1= -3,6.

And finally, Beja is 380 km to the south. that is 3,8 * 0,6 = -2,28 C cooler.

We get -3,6 -2,28 + 2,72 = 3,16 K cooler. This is very well in accord with the average temperatures BTW. But we ar enot looking or that.

32,8 -3,16 = 29,64 C for Mirando do D. The real temperature is 28,8 C in july. So my calculations are 0,84 K too WARM! Some reasons: it can easily be located higher, continentality changes less and less the more you go inland. So from Beja to Miranda (120-235 km inland this could be lower). If it is situated at 700 m height, it adds up better. Still, as of now: the Douro river interior does not signal a much stronger continentality when compared to the 2,37 K/100 m Portuguese standard. But it is more continental based on its wider distance from the sea.

So I guess you better do the calculations first before you are predicting I and my calculations will go wrong. They will by the way. But not enough to come to the 5,5 K needed. Not even 1 K. Inthis case, it is the other way around...To the disadvantage of what you supposed would happen.

É evidente que o Alto Douro, tem uma eficiência térmica estival acima do normal. Não se pode dizer que um local no Alto Douro há mesma distância do mar que um local no Interior do Alentejo, tenha o mesmo nível de continentalidade, pois o Alto Douro tem montanhas de mais de mil metros tanto a Norte como a Oeste, por exemplo, que o Alentejo não tem. Claro que também a Oeste, o litoral norte tem mais humidade e frescura, que o litoral alentejano, mas também logo pouco depois da costa, a influência marítima esbarra com montanhas que actuam com barreiras de condensação e como senão bastasse, o cortejo de montanhas não se fica por aí, indo praticamente até aos bordos da bacia do Alto Douro, multiplicando a aridez e a continentalidade, sobretudo no verão. As precipitações médias anuais atingem níveis baixíssimos nesta região, bem mais baixos até que no interior mais cálido e árido do Alentejo. Isso aliado ao facto de estar rodeado de montanhas, concentra ali níveis de calor bastante elevados.
É evidente que muito provavelmente existem fohen, ventos secos e quentes, aridez, irradiações a níveis que muitos de nós nem faz muito ideia, por isso parece-me mais prudente, incutir o debate sobre QUAIS os locais provavelmente mais quentes, para então poder fazer umas medições.

Now this is theory. These are all words, a rougher estimation you cannot get. I do the calculations, I do so clearly. You know how I do it and it adds up all the time. It clearly does very well when I use Beja as a basis to calculate the temperatures in these Douro situated places: Mirandela (+0,19 K error), Bragança (-0,37 K error), Pinhão (-0,2 K error), Miranda do Douro (+0,84 K error). "+"= My calculations showed too high temperatures, "-"=
my calculations showed the station to be too cold. It needs to be 5,5 to 8 K too cold to come to your values. I come no further than 0,37 K too cold....
in Bragança BTW. Not in any valley...

I guess this Douro story in Portugal is based ontwo things.

1) Compared to the many, higher situated places there the Douro valley is exceptionally hot. People there noticed that and talked about it.
The difference there is much bigger than in Alentejo, where we see all values within 2 K from oneanother. 32,8 in Beja, 33,6 in Elvas (found it too, so my calculation in the prior message was spot on again) and 34,7 or so in Amareleja. That is considerably less than 28,5 in Braganca to 33,5 in Pinhão or even 31,8 in Mirandela.

2) May be the humidity is much higher there as well. At least that is what I was told. This could give a very warm sensation. The higher moisture levels could be seen in the warmer valleys at night and cooler temperayures at day.
This is true for Miranda do Douro and Pinhão. Compared to Amareleja and Beja, the daily amplitude in the Douro is clearly smaller. Moisture is a good way to create this.

Fohn effects you say. 1,0 K /100m IS the fohn effect. The fohn effect does is this big. At one side of the mountain temp drops with 0,6 k/100 m. After 2000 m temp is 12 C lower. The air is dry and begins to ascend with 1,0 K/100m. 2000 lower it is now 20 C. So after 2000 m height difference in this situation, you have gain 8 C. The problem is: this dry air is not confined to the mountain, but in Portugal and certainly in Baixo Alentejo, the air is already very dry. Therefor, there the temperture still rises with 1 K/100m...

 

[belem]

And how is this remark not mere theory. And I at least calculate things, I am not guessing that (la vão duas das etc.). La vão nada....Vamos a ver.

So we wonder: where does it start. This bigger continentallity? Not in Mirandela it apears, because taking the 2,37 K/100 km throughout the country as I showed gives a very good approximation. From Beja, I calculated 31,99 C for Mirandela. It is 31,8. If it would be much more continental, Mirandela should have had a higher figure at least and not a (marginally) lower. Bragança may be then...I calculated, from Beja data a 28,13 C for Bragança. It is 28,5. So it is 0,37 K difference. Not a much higher continentallity, not 5 K higher which is needed...

I have no data from Moncorvo, but mind you it is not much higher at all. Depending on where they put the station it is 60-160 m higher than Beja.

Besides, I do have data form Miranda do Douro, so we can compare.

But this is what you mix up: 2,37 K is the average in which continentality rises from the coast to the inland. The more inland you go, the slower it rises.
If you would go from lisboa to Madrid, the number would not be 2,37 K. It would be less because the rapid rise you get at the first 20 km from the sea has less influence on a 100 km than a 400 km journey.
Moncorvo IS more continental. It is 180 km from the sea and Beja 110 km or so (SW-W-NW). But its continentality just doesn't rise any faster because from 110-180 km the number is more constant than from 0-110 km...Remember, this is in summer.

Another point. This is about Tmaximas. Now you start to talk about somehting different. Look again at Miranda do Douro.

Tmediadamedias do julho: 21,1 C
BEja: 24,2 C
Difference: 3,1 C

Mediadasmaximas: 28,7.
Beja: 32,8. Difference is 4,1 C
MEdiasdasminimas: 13,5 C
Beja: 15,6 C. Difference: 2,1 C.

So for Moncorvo, something similar wil be true. On averag comparable, higher nighttime and lower daytime temperature.

The smaller difference at night could be due to the fact that the wind abates at night and strentghens at due, due to insolation and the build up of the thermical low pressure area in summer over Iberia.

Butof course, I can calculate Miranda do Douro now. If you are right, we may expect a much higher temperature than my calculations show. Right?

It s 235 km inland, whereas Beja is 120 km (average still SW-W-NW). so that is 115 km difference. 1,15 *2,37= 2,72 degrees warmer.
Altitude difference is a bit diffucult. It depends where Mirando do DOuro station is located. I'd say it is at 600 m height. So it is 360 m higher than Beja.

3,6* -1= -3,6.

And finally, Beja is 380 km to the south. that is 3,8 * 0,6 = -2,28 C cooler.

We get -3,6 -2,28 + 2,72 = 3,16 K cooler. This is very well in accord with the average temperatures BTW. But we ar enot looking or that.

32,8 -3,16 = 29,64 C for Mirando do D. The real temperature is 28,8 C in july. So my calculations are 0,84 K too WARM! Some reasons: it can easily be located higher, continentality changes less and less the more you go inland. So from Beja to Miranda (120-235 km inland this could be lower). If it is situated at 700 m height, it adds up better. Still, as of now: the Douro river interior does not signal a much stronger continentality when compared to the 2,37 K/100 m Portuguese standard. But it is more continental based on its wider distance from the sea.

So I guess you better do the calculations first before you are predicting I and my calculations will go wrong. They will by the way. But not enough to come to the 5,5 K needed. Not even 1 K. Inthis case, it is the other way around...To the disadvantage of what you supposed would happen....

Moncorvo mesmo estando mais para o interior, tem a clara desvantagem de estar mais alto e bem mais a norte.
Claro que pode arranjar exemplos em que a continentalidade não influe tanto no Alto Douro, pois está a usar exemplos que o beneficiam nesse aspecto, também eu posso e qualquer um pode. O que acontece é que estamos a falar das regiões mais quentes, não de Mirandela ou do Miranda do Douro. Os seus cálculos já demonstraram ser erróneos e não substituem de forma alguma dados medidos no sítio.
Dizer que que as regiões mais quentes do Alto Douro têm a mesma continentalidade em igual distância em relação ao mar que o Alentejo é um erro que se paga caro.

Now this is theory. These are all words, a rougher estimation you cannot get. I do the calculations, I do so clearly. You know how I do it and it adds up all the time. It clearly does very well when I use Beja as a basis to calculate the temperatures in these Douro situated places: Mirandela (+0,19 K error), Bragança (-0,37 K error), Pinhão (-0,2 K error), Miranda do Douro (+0,84 K error). "+"= My calculations showed too high temperatures, "-"=
my calculations showed the station to be too cold. It needs to be 5,5 to 8 K too cold to come to your values. I come no further than 0,37 K too cold....
in Bragança BTW. Not in any valley...

2) May be the humidity is much higher there as well. At least that is what I was told. This could give a very warm sensation. The higher moisture levels could be seen in the warmer valleys at night and cooler temperayures at day.
This is true for Miranda do Douro and Pinhão. Compared to Amareleja and Beja, the daily amplitude in the Douro is clearly smaller. Moisture is a good way to create this....

Só com dados concretos é que pode fazer uma afirmação dessas. De facto nunca me ocorreu dizer que numa zona muito mais árida e com menos vegetação existem maiores níveis de humidade ( se sim vêm de onde?), mas já vi que os seus exemplos só se aplicam a locais onde você já sabe quais são os valores de temperatura. Claro que assim é fácil fazer cálculos. Mas um local que é muito quente, do qual ainda não há dados, certamente não se comporta de forma idêntica a todos os outros senão não seria o mais quente. O mesmo se aplica para um local muito frio. Não entendo a dificuldade em compreender isto...
Estou à espera dos seus cálculos para aquelas localidades de Córdoba.

Fohn effects you say. 1,0 K /100m IS the fohn effect. The fohn effect does is this big. At one side of the mountain temp drops with 0,6 k/100 m. After 2000 m temp is 12 C lower. The air is dry and begins to ascend with 1,0 K/100m. 2000 lower it is now 20 C. So after 2000 m height difference in this situation, you have gain 8 C. The problem is: this dry air is not confined to the mountain, but in Portugal and certainly in Baixo Alentejo, the air is already very dry. Therefor, there the temperture still rises with 1 K/100m...

Você claramente não tem em conta, quais os dias em que esse vento sopra, mas usa essa variável como se fosse uma variável constante. Além do fohen também podem existir outros ventos que você nem sabe quais são.
A climatologia não funciona com valores constantes funciona com valores dinâmicos. Claro que daí se pode tirar valores médios climatológicos.
As contas são teoria, que na prática, neste caso, são algo impraticáveis.
O tema de conversa já não são os seus cálculos, são quais os locais que podem ser os mais quentes.

 

[J.S.]

Looked up july data for several Guadalquivir stations

I have checked about 7 stations in Guadalquivir basin. Those are agroclimatic station. The pictures show that some are a shletered and others are not. The funniest thing is that the height does not seem to fit. Insome cases, you cannot be sure. But in the case of Adamuz (6 km SE of Montoro...interesting place) they are wrong. Google Earht never gets lower than 140 m within at least 30 km of the station. The agromclimatic data says it is at 90 m. They also gave the exact coordinates. Used them: same: 140 m.
Checked google Earth for FOia: 898 m
Checked it for Torre: 1992 m
So it does very well.

So even though there are some peculiarities, I found these temperatuyres for this month of juli, considered one of the hottest ever in Spain and the hottest part partly passes the Guadalquivir region. It was at least 1-2 C warmer than normal in any station (look at the INM site and the summury of july).


So what did I find as average daytime maximum for july 2010 source: (consejeria de agricultura y pesca).

As a comparison, here are the data for Cordoba INM
38,0 C
And Sevilla INM:
37,7 C.

--------------------------------------
Adamuz, Cordoba, 140 m: 38,43 C
Torreblascopedro, Jaen, 288 m: 38,42 C
Ecija, Sevilla, 125 meter: 38,25 C
Lora del Rio, Sevilla, 40 m: 38,18 C
Honachuelos, cordoba, 157 m: 38,09 C
Palma del rio, Cordoba 55 m: 37,77 C
-------------------------------------

Now look 'm up: they cover the area well, they also go further inland than Montoro or Andujar. They remain at virtually the lowest possible.

I did a calculation between Torreblasopedro and Adamuz and it went really well. The same for Adamuz to Cordoba Aerpuerto. Within 0,1 of 0,2 K correct.
You see the more inland you go, the higher it gets and this canceles out virtually the increased continentality. Even so we see that Torreblasopedro is already pretty high, but its enhanced continentallity makes it keeping pace.

Just to calculate that one for you. Torreblp is 70 km more inland and 150 m higher. 0,7*2,37= 1.659 warmer, 1,5*1,0= -1,5 K. SO it should be 0,169 warmer. It is exactly as warm.

Of course, this is just one month so day to day differences wil have an effect.

But is is not to be expected in a homogenous region with relatively short distances that we'll see big differences. The anomaly map of the Spanish IM has not seen any of peculiar anomalies.

So the calculations fit time and time again.

And:

No, there are no very special places in the Guadalquivir that become suddenly much warmer than others. Everything is easily deduced form calculations at the table..

 

[belem]

Re: Looked up july data for several Guadalquivir stations

I have checked about 7 stations in Guadalquivir basin. Those are agroclimatic station. The pictures show that some are a shletered and others are not. The funniest thing is that the height does not seem to fit. Insome cases, you cannot be sure. But in the case of Adamuz (6 km SE of Montoro...interesting place) they are wrong. Google Earht never gets lower than 140 m within at least 30 km of the station. The agromclimatic data says it is at 90 m. They also gave the exact coordinates. Used them: same: 140 m.
Checked google Earth for FOia: 898 m
Checked it for Torre: 1992 m
So it does very well.

So even though there are some peculiarities, I found these temperatuyres for this month of juli, considered one of the hottest ever in Spain and the hottest part partly passes the Guadalquivir region. It was at least 1-2 C warmer than normal in any station (look at the INM site and the summury of july).


So what did I find as average daytime maximum for july 2010 source: (consejeria de agricultura y pesca).

As a comparison, here are the data for Cordoba INM
38,0 C
And Sevilla INM:
37,7 C.

--------------------------------------
Adamuz, Cordoba, 140 m: 38,43 C
Torreblascopedro, Jaen, 288 m: 38,42 C
Ecija, Sevilla, 125 meter: 38,25 C
Lora del Rio, Sevilla, 40 m: 38,18 C
Honachuelos, cordoba, 157 m: 38,09 C
Palma del rio, Cordoba 55 m: 37,77 C
-------------------------------------

Now look 'm up: they cover the area well, they also go further inland than Montoro or Andujar. They remain at virtually the lowest possible.

I did a calculation between Torreblasopedro and Adamuz and it went really well. The same for Adamuz to Cordoba Aerpuerto. Within 0,1 of 0,2 K correct.
You see the more inland you go, the higher it gets and this canceles out virtually the increased continentality. Even so we see that Torreblasopedro is already pretty high, but its enhanced continentallity makes it keeping pace.

Just to calculate that one for you. Torreblp is 70 km more inland and 150 m higher. 0,7*2,37= 1.659 warmer, 1,5*1,0= -1,5 K. SO it should be 0,169 warmer. It is exactly as warm.

Of course, this is just one month so day to day differences wil have an effect.

But is is not to be expected in a homogenous region with relatively short distances that we'll see big differences. The anomaly map of the Spanish IM has not seen any of peculiar anomalies.

So the calculations fit time and time again.

And:

No, there are no very special places in the Guadalquivir that become suddenly much warmer than others. Everything is easily deduced form calculations at the table..

Gostaria que o JS tivesse em conta o que eu lhe perguntei e não essas localidades e os valores de apenas 1 ano ( 2010). Claro que já tendo valores como referência tudo é mais fácil bater certo.
Será possível calcular as temperaturas médias máximas para os 3 meses mais quentes ou até apenas o mais quente, tendo em conta os valores de outras estações de Córdoba, para Montoro e Puente Gentil?

 

[J.S.]

Moncorvo mesmo estando mais para o interior, tem a clara desvantagem de estar mais alto e bem mais a norte.
Claro que pode arranjar exemplos em que a continentalidade não influe tanto no Alto Douro, pois está a usar exemplos que o beneficiam nesse aspecto, também eu posso e qualquer um pode. O que acontece é que muitas regiões não funcionam assim. Os seus cálculos já demonstraram ser erróneos e não substituem de forma alguma dados medidos no sítio.
Dizer que o Alto Douro tem a mesma continentalidade em igual distância em relação ao mar que o Alentejo é um erro que se paga caro.

You assume a lot, but do little. Now you assume that I use specific station for the area. I have used all I have available from IM data. You can get that data as well via IM. I have used Pinhão (50 m height), Mirandela (230 m or so), Bragança (700 m) and Miranda do Douro (600 m or so). And they all ad up nicely within a couple of thens of degree.

Só com dados concretos é que pode fazer uma afirmação dessas. De facto nunca me ocorreu dizer que numa zona muito mais árida e com menos vegetação existem maiores níveis de humidade ( se sim vêm de onde?)

It is of no interest for the argument, and I was just guessing why the Douro valley has its name for being so hot.

mas já vi que os seus exemplos só se aplicam a locais onde você já sabe quais são os valores de temperatura. Claro que assim é fácil fazer cálculos.
Estou à espera dos seus cálculos para aquelas localidades de Córdoba.

Are you in the business of mindreading? If so, you do a lousy job. And cordoba and co.: I already did. And how about doing something usefull yourself other than assuming and debunking other persons data. I am open, I have told you how I do it and you can do it yourself. But you don't. Apart from what you believe and holding on to "I believe the IM is right" you do nothing else.
You do no go into arguments.

Você claramente não tem em conta, quais os dias em que esse vento sopra, mas usa essa variável como se fosse uma variável constante. Além do fohen também podem existir outros ventos que você nem sabe quais são.
A climatologia não funciona com valores constantes funciona com valores dinâmicos.
As contas são teoria, que na prática, neste caso, são algo impraticáveis.
O tema de conversa já não são os seus cálculos, são quais os locais que podem ser os mais quentes.

If you do not have weatherstations, you have to interpolate if possible to get the result. And if you interpolate, you have a formula and you test it many times against places where you DO have data available for. And if these calculations are within a reasonable margin of error, you can use the calculation. The calculation shows that the warmest places in Portugal are to be expected near Moura, right at the valley floor and they will be 35,0 +/- 0,5 K. In teh Douro this will be 34,0 +/- 0,5 K. And in the Tejo area this will be: 34,0 +/- 0,5 K.
In Spain, it is the area between Cordoba and Andujar, al show 36,0 +/- 0,5 K as the most likely outcome.

And this is for the warmest month of the year. Not for the summer in total.

My calculations do well at hill tops (Portalegre, Bragança, Beja) as well as in valley bottom all over Southern Spain and Portugal. It is all well within 1 K.
Even if it was 1K, than everstill that it is nowhere near the 5K tot locally 8 K that is needed to explain the IM maps.

Other than one work by the IM, which I have shown to make mistakes over
2 K in an easy to control and calculate situation, there is not a single shred of evidence that there are special places in Portugal or Andalusia that are significantly hotter.

I have witnessed this before: enthousiast who are NUTS for extreme temperatures. Like 50 C or more in Portugal or extreme warm averages. And if someone shows them this is very unlikely, they keep on saying it is possible without doing any work themselves other than suggestions to add anything to the discussion.

Still, as I said before, it has learned me where to find the hottest place on the Peninsula. It is where it expected and that is the interior part of the Guadalquivir region, between Cordoba and Andujar.At least in summer.
It is slightly warmer than the warmest parts of the Guadiana valley between near Moura.

 

[J.S.]

Re: Looked up july data for several Guadalquivir stations

Gostaria que o JS tivesse em conta o que eu lhe perguntei e não essas localidades e os valores de apenas 1 ano ( 2010).
Será possível calcular as temperaturas médias máximas para os 3 meses mais quentes de tendo em conta os valores de outras estações de Córdoba para Montoro e Puente Gentil?

We know these values and we know the anomaly for the region this month. The whole region was 2 to no more than 3 C warmer than normal. Best gues would be 2-2,5 C.
It is enough to exclude any daytime max temperature in the region of 37 C on average for the warmest month, let alone the summer in total.

http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/agriculturaypesca/ifapa/ria/servlet/FrontController?action=Static&url=coordenadas.jsp&c_provincia=41&c_estacion=9

Now it is not so difficult. Get those data I show you an just subtract 2 to 3 C and see what you come up with..

Is there any reason based on these maps and july data I gave you to think that also in Guadalquivir, just at on spot where there are no station it is several degrees warmer? Those are beginning to look like miraculous places because they are nowhere to be found in stationdata.....And no indication for that anomaly whatsover.

I have answered you questions more than I should, I am not here to address vague suggestions and I am not on a search for data that simply does not exist. Data that somehow confirms you assumptions. All based on one, flawed map of the IM.

I get the strong feeling you just don't like the things I write down. You do not react to what I bring up, you keep asking different and other things. Well, with that attitude I don't think you'll learn a lot. You learn more if you open yourself up for other thoughts and most of all think about it. You do not. Your manner is to trade one assumption for another and than another etc...Even simple calculations, like subtracting a an anomaly from a measured value seems too much for you.

I have seen this with people when it comes to the greenhousetheory. Only debunking research wihtout anything else than assumptions. And not ever doing anything themselves. Repeating the same, old data over and over again. I see it here too, with you. You sit there and wait for others to do the work and then start nitpicking...That is very helpfull...

So go and do some work yourself! It is about time.

 

[belem]

You assume a lot, but do little. Now you assume that I use specific station for the area. I have used all I have available from IM data. You can get that data as well via IM. I have used Pinhão (50 m height), Mirandela (230 m or so), Bragança (700 m) and Miranda do Douro (600 m or so). And they all ad up nicely within a couple of thens of degree. .

Eu não assumo nada, eu apenas quero ver mais provas. Você usou estações que não representam as zonas mais quentes ou com mais potencial térmico.
Mas aqui estamos a falar dessas regiões. Qual é a dificuldade em compreender isso, JS?

I already did. And how about doing something usefull yourself other than assuming and debunking other persons data. I am open, I have told you how I do it and you can do it yourself. But you don't. Apart from what you believe and holding on to "I believe the IM is right" you do nothing else.
You do no go into arguments..

Você tem dificuldade clara em compreender o que é variação espacial.
Usa exemplos de locais que não estão relacionados com o tema deste tópico e partir daí tenta tirar conclusões. Eu não preciso de fazer cálculos para deduzir logo à partida que isso é algo perigoso.

My calculations do well at hill tops (Portalegre, Bragança, Beja) as well as in valley bottom all over Southern Spain and Portugal. It is all well within 1 K.
Even if it was 1K, than everstill that it is nowhere near the 5K tot locally 8 K that is needed to explain the IM maps.
Other than one work by the IM, which I have shown to make mistakes over
2 K in an easy to control and calculate situation, there is not a single shred of evidence that there are special places in Portugal or Andalusia that are significantly hotter.

I have witnessed this before: enthousiast who are NUTS for extreme temperatures. Like 50 C or more in Portugal or extreme warm averages. And if someone shows them this is very unlikely, they keep on saying it is possible without doing any work themselves other than suggestions to add anything to the discussion..

Eu acho que você teoriza demais e tem dificuldades em compreender o que é variação espacial.
Outra coisa é ignorar valores pluviométricos e o seu efeito nas temperaturas. No Alto Douro até há locais com menos de 300 mm mas você ignora isto constantemente.
A meu ver é grave.

 

[belem]

Re: Looked up july data for several Guadalquivir stations

We know these values and we know the anomaly for the region this month. The whole region was 2 to no more than 3 C warmer than normal. Best gues would be 2-2,5 C.
It is enough to exclude any daytime max temperature in the region of 37 C on average. Not the summer of course.

look here.
http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/agriculturaypesca/ifapa/ria/servlet/FrontController?action=Static&url=coordenadas.jsp&c_provincia=41&c_estacion=9

Now it is not so difficult. Get those data I show you an just subtract 2 to 3 C and see what you come up with..

Ok, já percebi que não dá valores concretos.

 

[J.S.]

Re: Looked up july data for several Guadalquivir stations

Ok, já percebi que não dá valores concretos.

You start to talk about explicit data I don't have. Apparantly you know about better stations to use thanthose I used, because these are wrong. So, it would be helpfull if you show me the data for Moncorvo for instance. Average daytime maxtemperature and tell me at which altitude the station is exactly situated.
Same for those Andalusian station you refer to. Thnaks in advance.

 

[belem]

Re: Looked up july data for several Guadalquivir stations

You start to talk about explicit data I don't have. Apparantly you know about better stations to use thanthose I used, because these are wrong. So, it would be helpfull if you show me the data for Moncorvo for instance. Average daytime maxtemperature and tell me at which altitude the station is exactly situated.
Same for those Andalusian station you refer to. Thnaks in advance.

Apenas estou a ser prudente e a ver até onde as suas teorias podem levar-nos.
De Moncorvo não tenho aqui nada, por isso se alguém tiver dados, seria excelente se os colocasse aqui.
Sobre Puente Gentil já coloquei as coordenadas e a altitude, uns posts acima.
Se quiser coloco também as de Montoro.
Como referência, sempre pode usar os dados de Córdoba.

 

[J.S.]

Você tem dificuldade clara em compreender o que é variação espacial.

Some data to support that? Some stations that you know of, have data of so I can test my calculation for it? If not: how do you know?

Usa exemplos de locais que não estão relacionados com o tema deste tópico e partir daí tenta tirar conclusões. Eu não preciso de fazer cálculos para deduzir logo à partida que isso é algo perigoso.

You disqualify every station, even within the Douro valley if the data don't suit you yet you have not given me any data on any station that does. I guess the station that suits you needs to be invented yet. But you said Moncorvo. So I am awaiting that data (+source).

Eu acho que você teoriza demais e tem dificuldades em compreender o que é variação espacial.
Outra coisa é ignorar valores pluviométricos e o seu efeito nas temperaturas. No Alto Douro até há locais com menos de 300 mm mas você ignora isto constantemente.
A meu ver é grave.

If you want to talk about precipitation, please do so. Any data from those places with less than 300 mm BTW? Sounds interesting. But it is not about temperatures. So not for this discussion

 

[J.S.]

Re: Looked up july data for several Guadalquivir stations

Apenas estou a ser prudente e a ver até onde as suas teorias podem levar-nos.
De Moncorvo não tenho aqui nada, por isso se alguém tiver dados, seria excelente se os colocasse aqui.
Sobre Puente Gentil já coloquei as coordenadas e a altitude, uns posts acima.
Se quiser coloco também as de Montoro.
Como referência, sempre pode usar os dados de Córdoba.

Aha....how did you call that.."Ok, já percebi que não dá valores concretos".
Your words, not mine.

So what do we have here: I am using all available data from a valley with the follwing height difference 40-230-600 and 700 m. You say: those are the wrong stations and I chose them....You say Moncorvo is better....
It turns out you haven't got a clue what you are talking about as you have no data on that one, yet you critisize me for using available data????
Wat kind of argument is that? You need no data to prove your point, I can never have enough data to prove mine. Is that it?

Now it is Montoro...I already did the calculation, there is no station at Montoro I am aware of. Adamuz is at 140 m just 6 km SE of Montoro with only the river valley between them. What do you expect?? Puente GEnil: 185 m high instead of 100 m of Ecija. It is 31 km to the SE with only the valley in between them: what do you expect. Why on Earth should Puente Genil be warmer dan Andujar, Ecija, Hornachuelos. I already looked at the available data of this month, I know the anomaly. I know how to subtract. I know that none of these places have average maximumtemperatures of 37 C or higher in Juli. One month of data itself, you are correct, says nothing in itself. But if you have the anomaly (whihc IS based on 30 year averages) than that month is all you need. Is it really so difficult to understand? Do you see anywhere a much smaller anomaly in the region? Now suppose it is 1-2 C. The 2 C is touching Hornachuelos. So it is 38,42-2= 36,42 C. Is it really so difficult to see that. Is it difficult to understand that those place would be special only if just there, there would be 0 C anomaly? But there is no such place, not anywhere in Spain. It is 2-3 C warmer than normal. 2-3 in the whole region. And the warmest in the whole region was 38,43 C. Agrostations, mind you, are warmerin general because WMO standards for those stations are much lower.
Anyway: 38,42 -2 is 36,43 at most. Not so difficult. And not anywhere in Spain we see some odd locations that had 0 C anomalies. SO nowhere in Spainthere is any place warmer than that place and who knows, Merida. I don't think so, bu t I have no data..

You do not need rocketscience to do these simple calculations.

 

[belem]

Re: Looked up july data for several Guadalquivir stations

Aha....how did you call that.."Ok, já percebi que não dá valores concretos".
Your words, not mine..

Exacto, quero ver aonde vão as suas teorias de interpolações agora.

So what do we have here: I am using all available data from a valley with the follwing height difference 40-230-600 and 700 m. You say: those are the wrong stations and I chose them.....

Apenas lhe pedi para fazer interpolações a partir de Córdoba para Puente Gentil.
Já lhe dei as coordenadas ( pode ir ao Google Earth ver) e a altitude.

You say Moncorvo is better....
It turns out you haven't got a clue what you are talking about as you have no data on that one, yet you critisize me for using available data????
Wat kind of argument is that? You need no data to prove your point, I can never have enough data to prove mine. Is that it?..

Tenha calma. Eu só utilizei os dados que possuía sobre Moncorvo, que eram os de verão e de inverno ( neste caso usei os de verão). Eu só disse que Moncorvo tinha sensivelmente a mesma média geral dos 2 meses mais quentes que Beja.

Some data to support that? Some stations that you know of, have data of so I can test my calculation for it? If not: how do you know?

Dados para suportar que há variações espaciais?
Então você acredita que todos os locais têm um comportamento idêntico a nível de temperatura?
Isso é algo perigoso é só o que lhe posso dizer.

You disqualify every station, even within the Douro valley if the data don't suit you yet you have not given me any data on any station that does. I guess the station that suits you needs to be invented yet. But you said Moncorvo. So I am awaiting that data (+source).

http://www.meteopt.com/forum/climatologia/diversidade-climatica-na-europa-4708-22.html

Série 1930-1960. Obrigado Dan.

If you want to talk about precipitation, please do so. Any data from those places with less than 300 mm BTW? Sounds interesting. But it is not about temperatures. So not for this discussion

Esse assunto já foi abordado várias vezes.
Ribeira de Massueime e Foz do Côa. E existem outros tantos que andam abaixo de 400 mm. Se quiser pesquise, usando estes nomes. Se não encontrar diga alguma coisa.
Então e acha que a precipitação também não influencia as temperaturas?

Now it is Montoro...I already did the calculation, there is no station at Montoro I am aware of. ..

Existe sim.

http://www.globalbioclimatics.org/station/es-monto.htm

Adamuz is at 140 m just 6 km SE of Montoro with only the river valley between them. What do you expect?? Puente GEnil: 185 m high instead of 100 m of Ecija. It is 31 km to the SE with only the valley in between them: what do you expect. Why on Earth should Puente Genil be warmer dan Andujar, Ecija, Hornachuelos. I already looked at the available data of this month, I know the anomaly. I know how to subtract. I know that none of these places have average maximumtemperatures of 37 C or higher in Juli. .

Errado.

http://www.globalbioclimatics.org/station/es-puen1.htm

One month of data itself, you are correct, says nothing in itself. But if you have the anomaly (whihc IS based on 30 year averages) than that month is all you need. Is it really so difficult to understand? Do you see anywhere a much smaller anomaly in the region? Now suppose it is 1-2 C. The 2 C is touching Hornachuelos. So it is 38,42-2= 36,42 C. Is it really so difficult to see that. Is it difficult to understand that those place would be special only if just there, there would be 0 C anomaly? But there is no such place, not anywhere in Spain. It is 2-3 C warmer than normal. 2-3 in the whole region. And the warmest in the whole region was 38,43 C. Agrostations, mind you, are warmerin general because WMO standards for those stations are much lower.
Anyway: 38,42 -2 is 36,43 at most. Not so difficult. And not anywhere in Spain we see some odd locations that had 0 C anomalies. SO nowhere in Spainthere is any place warmer than that place and who knows, Merida. I don't think so, bu t I have no data..
You do not need rocketscience to do these simple calculations.

Exacto não é preciso ser um expert para entender que você está de novo errado.
Hornachuelos tem 2 estações : uma fica até a 183 m de altitude e atinge 37,3 ºc de MÉDIA DE MÁXIMA PARA OS 3 MESES MAIS QUENTES do ano. Não é apenas 1 ou nenhum.

http://www.globalbioclimatics.org/station/es-horna.htm

E calha bem que a outra fica a 70 metros e é mais fresca:

http://www.globalbioclimatics.org/station/es-horn1.htm

As suas interpolações basicamente estão erradas.
Esse assunto já foi discutido aqui, eu avisei-o para ler o que tem sido discutido mais atrás, mas você não tomou atenção. É preciso ter em conta as especificidades de zonas com valores anormalmente frios, quentes, secos ou húmidos...
Não entendo a sua insistência neste assunto, quando o IM empregou até professores universitários na execução deste trabalho, é evidente que eles têm em conta as suas interpolações de nível básico e certamente muito mais.
Como já lhe expliquei eles também conjugaram dados tirados do campo ( com abrigos meteorológicos ( e não me venha dizer que estavam em condições deficientes de funcionamento, pois se o próprio IM não sabe montar estas instalações e tirar o devido valor das suas medições, quem saberá...)).
Com os resultados fizeram aproximações, não certezas, que apenas estimularam o interesse nestas regiões mais quentes, quem sabe algumas poderão albergar estações.
A ciência vive é destas acções e não apenas de teorias.
O objectivo central deste tópico é de forma humilde e lúdica identificar as zonas mais quentes para posteriormente tentar fazer registos e não reclamar coisas inexistentes e viver uma utopia.

 

[J.S.]

Re: Looked up july data for several Guadalquivir stations

Exacto, quero ver aonde vão as suas teorias de interpolações agora.


Apenas lhe pedi para fazer interpolações a partir de Córdoba para Puente Gentil.
Já lhe dei as coordenadas ( pode ir ao Google Earth ver) e a altitude.

So? Do it youself. There will be little difference between Ecija and Puente Genil. Simple.

Tenha calma. Eu só utilizei os dados que possuía sobre Moncorvo, que eram os de verão e de inverno ( neste caso usei os de verão). Eu só disse que Moncorvo tinha sensivelmente a mesma média geral dos 2 meses mais quentes que Beja.

But I am not interested in that. I saw the data of Moncorvo and it says 24,2 and 24,4. Now that is 25,8-24,2= 1,6 degrees cooler than Pinhão. And Pinhão is only slightly warmer (0,7 C) than Beja. We have to be carefull however: the period 1931-1960 was somewhat cooler than 1961-1990 and that one againa cooler than 1971-2000 etc.
So Mocorvo will be a bit warmer when we compare to Beja in Tmedia. But the maps we are talking about are maxima.

Dados para suportar que há variações espaciais?
Então você acredita que todos os locais têm um comportamento idêntico a nível de temperatura?
Isso é algo perigoso é só o que lhe posso dizer.

I don't say that. I say my way is crude but does well enough to exclude errors of 5,5 to 8 K. And in general 1 K will be the limit, when it comes to Portugal and western Spain. I believe I already wrote that the Guadalquivir region is somehwat different in that it is open and flat. Now I live in an open and flat country, like I said, and continentallity over here increases much slower (1/5 of the Portugese figures) per km you go inland. The Guadalquivir is not the NW Europe, but it is different from anything found in Portugal everstill. Anyway: my calculations are spot on there also. Little differences.

http://www.meteopt.com/forum/climatologia/diversidade-climatica-na-europa-4708-22.html

Esse assunto já foi abordado várias vezes.
Ribeira de Massueime e Foz do Côa. E existem outros tantos que andam abaixo de 400 mm. Se quiser pesquise, usando estes nomes. Se não encontrar diga alguma coisa.
Então e acha que a precipitação também não influencia as temperaturas?

It doesn't matter too much in a country where rain is practically inexistent in the months we are talking about at the places we are talking about. Fr example: look at Hornachuelos. Now that station to me is in error. It is nothing special BTW. It is well known, like I said before, that there are a number of Spanish stations (and anywhere else in the world) that do not measure correctly at all. Certainly older stations. >Which is why many older data have been dropped. Anyway: the warmer Hornachuelos station you point at gets a lot more rainfall than those supposedly dry areas in the Douro, and that is also the case in the two Hornachuelos stations you point me to: the cooler one receives signifcantly less rain than the abnormal warm one. We wonder why one stopped in 1969 and the other was started in 1968...May be because it was placed within the city limits? Looking at the data (coordinates) this might well be the case..

Is the Atacama desert the warmest place in Chile or South America? No. Is the driest place in Europe (Almeria) the warmest? Far from. So to deduce any temperature from that, while you have five stations in the Alto Douro region is a bit silly.

Existe sim.

http://www.globalbioclimatics.org/station/es-monto.htm

Errado.

http://www.globalbioclimatics.org/station/es-puen1.htm

Exacto não é preciso ser um expert para entender que você está de novo errado.
Hornachuelos tem 2 estações : uma fica até a 183 m de altitude e atinge 37,3 ºc de MÉDIA DE MÁXIMA PARA OS 3 MESES MAIS QUENTES do ano. Não é apenas 1 ou nenhum.

http://www.globalbioclimatics.org/station/es-horna.htm

E calha bem que a outra fica a 70 metros e é mais fresca:

http://www.globalbioclimatics.org/station/es-horn1.htm


As suas interpolações basicamente estão erradas.

You think so. So you trust these tables blindly, do you. I don't and with good reason. I already knew they existed (forgot about them, so thanks)

How about this one:

This is Badajoz, Talavera la Real. From 1951-1989. Altitude is 185 m. Justlike the other Badajoz La Real we find here:

http://www.ucm.es/info/cif/station/es-tala1.htm

Now it is 1964-1994.
http://www.ucm.es/info/cif/station/es-talav.htm

Oh my god: it is exactly the same place with an overlap of quite some time and yet the temperature all of a sudden jumped from 30,5 to 33,3 C That is a 2,8 C jump. Great. And in august it is 31,2 tot 33,9 C. Almost the same jump. We may expect some differences. But temperatures in that period did not rise by even 0,5 K. So how about that: these maps prove I am wrong?

Well, we have another Badajoz station that measured form 1931-1970 and what does it show:

http://www.ucm.es/info/cif/station/es-bada1.htm

Almost the same values is all others, bar the cool one. The cool on is in error. A big error. It is not difficult to see.

Hornachuelos...So you go DOWN 60 m, down and you go 15 km to the south and remain in virtually the same position. And temperatures just plumet 1,5 C, where they at least should rise. The older Hornachuelos station is simply wrong. It is not so difficult to understand that.

Another one: Sevilla San Pablo. Look here:

http://www.ucm.es/info/cif/station/es-sevil.htm

What? 37,22 and 7 W..It is near the city. And for some reason, over the period 1951-1994 it is about 4 C colder there then elsewhere. Someone left the freezer open all the time or what??

These data are absurd and occur throughout the territory.

I did calcalate the last 9 years for Hornachuelos, of which I know they use plantinum 1000 element in a well ventilated (andsometime artificially ventlated abriga). Now the last ten years hav not been very cool. They are the hottest on record. The average temperature fo all those years, with one day missing s....36,3 C.

Esse assunto já foi discutido aqui, eu avisei-o para ler o que tem sido discutido mais atrás, mas você não tomou atenção. É preciso ter em conta as especificidades de zonas com valores anormalmente frios, quentes, secos ou húmidos...
Não entendo a sua insistência neste assunto, quando o IM empregou até professores universitários na execução deste trabalho, é evidente que eles têm em conta as suas interpolações de nível básico e certamente muito mais.
Como já lhe expliquei eles também conjugaram dados tirados do campo ( com abrigos meteorológicos ( e não me venha dizer que estavam em condições deficientes de funcionamento, pois se o próprio IM não sabe montar estas instalações e tirar o devido valor das suas medições, quem saberá...)).
Com os resultados fizeram aproximações, não certezas, que apenas estimularam o interesse nestas regiões mais quentes, quem sabe algumas poderão albergar estações.
A ciência vive é destas acções e não apenas de teorias.
O objectivo central deste tópico é de forma humilde e lúdica identificar as zonas mais quentes para posteriormente tentar fazer registos e não reclamar coisas inexistentes e viver uma utopia.

There work is wrong in cases that we can show clearly. I have said it one haundred times: the Areaof the Guadiana nearBadajoz is s easy as it is so uniform and theyfucked it up bigtime. Using some stations in the field is a good idea, as long itis calibrated and stands tehre for a couple of years. So you get a clue.

MY interpolacoes worj very well, there are no errors to speak of. The weahterstation list you showed me is ridden with errors...Too bad..