Well, it looks bad. Real bad:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/08/31/outlook-september-could-rank-among-the-hottest-on-record-in-washington/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.533b3b63c090

"We predict temperatures to run above normal for the fifth month in a row, averaging between 74 and 77 degrees, which is warmer than last year’s 72.5 (the 30-year average is 71). We could get very close to or even exceed 1980s all-time warmest September of 77.1 degrees."

I know it's been god damn and freakishly hot here and its only going to get worse. Much worse. Then again, I'm really excited about this - all these F A T Trump supporters will be the first ones to go as the sun boils their F A T and explodes them to pieces. Yay!

excuse Lee, next he will blame the Temperature gauges... even though they r the same ones used in the 80's

Marla wrote on Sep 27^th, 2018 at 2:34am:



No that can't be right
Bobby has assured us that we are in an ice age. He's got lots of winter weather anecdotes to prove it.

"Since  the  introduction  of  AWS  able  to  provide  SAT  measurements,   PRS   were   used   as   the   preferred   sensor   for   AWS.   Prior   to   1990,   the   networks   earlier  automated  systems  were  mainly  the  EG&G and    Micromac.    Post-1990,    the    ALMOS    AWS    dominated  the  land-based  AWS  network. "

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/acorn-sat/documents/ACORN-SAT_Observation_p...

DonDeeHippy wrote on Sep 29^th, 2018 at 6:19am:


They were examples petal. But if you want to be specific, post your proof that Washington recording instruments are the same as at some time in the 1980's.

"Effects of Recent Thermometer Changes in the Cooperative Station Network"

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/1520-0477%281991%29072%3C1718%3AEOR...

Dated 1991.

And at that time they don't use PRS's (also called PRT's. Change Sensor to Thermometer). So that is a later change.



Source: https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/1520-0426(2004)021<1025:SAEEIA>2.0...

Now have a look at the error range of these PRT's.




Ah well; Never mind.


You do know how they "average" temperature? They add the minimum and the maximum and divide by 2. Of course these days they monitor weather every couple of minutes. So the temperature could be low for 15 hours and high for 9 hours. The mathematically correct way would be to sum the total number of readings and divide by the number of readings But that would mean a change of methodology.

DonDeeHippy wrote on Sep 30^th, 2018 at 6:42am:


It's like when lee tries to discredit the BOM by talking about smearing. He is just trying to obfuscate and create strawman arguments. lee is a fraud who clearly knows that the garbage that he posts is dishonest, misleading and discredited, yet he continues to post it. I don't know what he is trying to prove. It's not as if the tiny readership of this forum is going to change the world.

The_Barnacle wrote on Sep 30^th, 2018 at 11:37am:



So what would you call it trying to infer temperatures for places thousands of km's from a weather station?

The_Barnacle wrote on Sep 30^th, 2018 at 11:37am:



So articles of science that don't agree with you are "dishonest, misleading and discredited"

"Effects of Recent Thermometer Changes in the Cooperative Station Network"

Was co-authored by one Thomas Karl. A climate alarmist. Known for his work on SST's.

"Sensor and Electronic Biases/Errors in Air Temperature Measurements in Common Weather Station Networks*"

Is likewise a peer-reviewed paper.

From the Abstract -

"The biases of four commonly used air temperature sensors are examined and detailed. Each temperature transducer consists of three components: temperature sensing elements, signal conditioning circuitry, and corresponding analog-to-digital conversion devices or dataloggers. An error analysis of these components was performed to determine the major sources of error in common climate networks. It was found that, regardless of microclimate effects, sensor and electronic errors in air temperature measurements can be larger than those given in the sensor manufacturer's specifications. The root-sum-of-squares (RSS) error for the HMP35C sensor with CR10X datalogger was above 0.2°C, and rapidly increases for both lower (<−20°C) and higher temperatures (>30°C). Likewise, the largest errors for the maximum–minimum temperature system (MMTS) were at low temperatures (<−40°C). The temperature linearization error in the HO-1088 hygrothermometer produced the largest errors when the temperature was lower than −20°C. For the temperature sensor in the U.S. Climate Reference Networks (USCRN), the error was found to be 0.2° to 0.33°C over the range −25° to 50°C. The results presented here are applicable when data from these sensors are applied to climate studies and should be considered in determining air temperature data continuity and climate data adjustment models.

Corresponding author address: Dr. K. G. Hubbard, University of Nebraska, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, High Plains Climate Center, 236 L. W. Chase Hall, Lincoln, NE 68583-0728"

That's an error of over 0.1C in the temperature gauge. Instrument error. You can't average out instrument error. And yet NOAA finds global warming accuracy to 2 decimal places, an order of magnitude smaller than the instrumental error.

I know you have belief, what you need is healthy scepticism.

However if you have further queries I suggest you contact the corresponding author.

DonDeeHippy wrote on Sep 30^th, 2018 at 5:31pm:


That's why Princess Gobby uses lube.

lee wrote on Sep 30^th, 2018 at 5:40pm:

So your saying a thermometer from the 80’s wasn’t as accurate?

ohh yess Lee todays mercury is much smarter and accurate than the mercury of the 80's 

lee wrote on Oct 1^st, 2018 at 11:26am:

Poor Lee doesn't even know what OMG is, or he would of realized thats what I would say when I read what he wrote 
SO as long as the max temperature is more than 1 degree higher than a 80's reading , which takes into account the max error amount, it has to be hotter and even up to 2 degree's hotter than the old temp if the error was the other way....?
Got it thanks for the clarification Lee... we can all sleep now.... well done 

"T-5. September 7, 1881 - 104 degrees"

https://washington-dc.knoji.com/10-hottest-days-in-washington-dc-history/