Since I said it's a rough estimate the 1.8C off is ok for me, if it's not for you so what, the point was that Sibiria is a very hot place in summer, far hotter than most people think and to say so it does really not matter wether it's 41, 44 or 46C, even 38C would do to support the point.
<snippage>
Even though i know that there are many nitpickers here i refuse to spend more time than necessary to find proof for something that is in a healty range of the truth as well as common knowledge.
<more snippage>
igs - I'm sorry if you feel singled out.
I think the thing people may have been reacting to more than anything else is lack of context.
You put up a number without context. You have since provided some - a single value posted in Wikipedia - to justify your claim of near 45C temperatures. But even then it still lacks context, as far and away more of Siberia lies away from the Arctic than near it. We have no reference for the location of that number, and it's relative importance to local climate.
The point we are making, and which seemed to be missed, is that the *context* of the current very high temperature anomalies in Siberia, in the Arctic, are really without precedent, either in scale or duration. That was the reason why I specified 65N and higher latitude as a qualifier.
Siberia gets hot, I completely agree. But getting as hot at it is along the Arctic coast is unusual - *highly* unusual, and that is particularly dangerous for the ice.
(Edit: It is in fact dangerous for the tundra and entire Arctic biome, but that is a discussion for another thread)