Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,054,732 times
Reputation: 11862
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pteranodon
Yes, I did not take in count this factor. Almost 700 m is high for a city of the "new world". I guess they had reasons to settle here.
In fact, due to the altitude, Edmonton has colder mornings in summer than Moscow, while the afternoons are almost the same. We can see it in the minima of july : 14° in Moscow, 12° in Edmonton. Maxima : Edmonton and Moscow 23°.
When I read that I thought that's ironic because I associate high altitude cities with the New World in particular, more so South and Central America (and Mexico, although that's really more North America isn't it?). That's been the case from the Inca/Maya/Aztec era to today.
When I read that I thought that's ironic because I associate high altitude cities with the New World in particular, more so South and Central America (and Mexico, although that's really more North America isn't it?). That's been the case from the Inca/Maya/Aztec era to today.
The cities that you are talking are not really cities of the "new-world" since they are old and founded by pre-columbian cultures. Nothing to do with "brand-new" foundations like Chicago, New-York, Montreal, Saint-Louis or Memphis...Those last, if I don't mistake, are almost all at low altitude.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,054,732 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pteranodon
The cities that you are talking are not really cities of the "new-world" since they are old and founded by pre-columbian cultures. Nothing to do with "brand-new" foundations like Chicago, New-York, Montreal, Saint-Louis or Memphis...Those last, if I don't mistake, are almost all at low altitude.
Not all of them were, even after the Spaniards came they often built high up, like even Brasilia is over 1,000 feet above sea-level, and many South American capitals are over 3,000 feet. When you say 'New World cities' people usually think of cities in the Americas. And American cities are particularly lacking in high altitude cities in comparison to other regions anyway: Denver, Salt Lake, Flagstaff, Reno etc are all pretty high altitude cities.
Location: Kowaniec, Nowy Targ, Podhale. 666 m n.p.m.
355 posts, read 977,244 times
Reputation: 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trimac20
And American cities are particularly lacking in high altitude cities in comparison to other regions anyway
America lacking in high-latitude cities?
Madrid, Sofia and Sarajevo are the highest elevation captial cities in Europe, all three around 600 metres. (Andorra la Vella, Ankara and Yerevan are higher, but Andorra is a tiny historical anomaly and Ankara is located in Anatolia, and Yerevan in Armenia which both are politically considered Europe, but geographically not.)
The highest cities with populations over 1 million are Sofia, Madrid and Munich. (Again, excluding Asia Minor) The highest city with a population of over 50,000 is Avila, in Spain, at around 1200 metres. Throughout the whole of Europe, it seems like 1000 metres has been more or less the limit of where cities developed, with the exception of Spain, where it goes a few hundred metres higher. Villages exist higher than that, mostly in the Alps, but outside of the Alps, and Spain, as mentioned before, there are also hardly any villages above 1000 metres. The funny thing is though, one would expect human settlement at far higher elevations in the south (Mediterranean) and far lower in the north (Scandinavian), but the difference between the highest regional capital in the far south, Enna (Sicily, Enna province) and the far north, Kiruna (Norrbotten, Kiruna kommun) is a mere 400 metres. And Enna (930 metres) is at around 37 degrees latitude, while Kiruna (530 metres) is at 68 degrees latitude in the Swedish Arctic. And in terms of population, Enna and Kiruna are also quite similar, Enna being around 30000 and Kiruna being around 20000. (Of course, in terms of population density, the region around Enna is far more populous than the region around Kiruna, within 300 kilometres around Kiruna there are only four cities over 50,000 inhabitants, Tromso, Bodo, Lulea and Rovaniemi, and maybe a dozen places with more than 20,000 inhabitants, and within 100 kilometres of Kiruna there is nothing over 2000 inhabitants, while around Enna within a 300-kilometre radius there are approximately eight million people, and 60% of this is sea)
Common sense would dictate that if people tend to build towns and cities up to just below the tree line (which around Kiruna is at roughly 700 metres), there should be cities in the Mediterranean and Balkans at elevations around 2000 metres, which there aren't.
I read somewhere Redding is the hottest place in the world north of 40°N. I assume that's by average annual temperature. I couldn't find a warmer place, so perhaps that's right. Anyone think of a counterexample?
Many oceanic climates are thought to be a lot wetter than they really are. Cities such as Hobart, Christchurch, London, Paris, and many other European cities only average around 600-700mm of rainfall, which is similar to the annual total where I live. But if I were to tell any locals here that we get about the same amount of rainfall as these cities, they would probably think I was crazy.
People over exaggerate the cold in Minneapolis. Yeah, we have some days when the high is below 0 F (-18C) and the low reaches below -15F (-26C) without windchill, but it's not everyday or even close to that usually. The high is usually around 20F (-7C) and the low is usually around 7F (-14C) in January which is the coldest.
People over exaggerate the cold in Minneapolis. Yeah, we have some days when the high is below 0 F (-18C) and the low reaches below -15F (-26C) without windchill, but it's not everyday or even close to that usually. The high is usually around 20F (-7C) and the low is usually around 7F (-14C) in January which is the coldest.
Hehe, for most people in the world, having 20 (-7) / 7 (-14) would in no way be an overexaggeration. It would be considered utterly and brutally cold.
Montreal and Ottawa are known for their ghastly winters. However, I live in the small Prairie city of Saskatoon. I can tell you that those two cities are warmer than Saskatoon in every month of the year, and a cold winter day there would be a mild early spring day here
I agree about many places in Australia being thought of as hotter than they really are. Most are not aware that high elevations in Victoria and NSW get cool in the middle of summer, even experiencing frost and snow in December and January sometimes, which is the equivalent of June and July here.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hehe, for most people in the world, having 20 (-7) / 7 (-14) would in no way be an overexaggeration. It would be considered utterly and brutally cold.
