Which is worse: Warm or cold for latitude

Well if it’s 45++ then I want warm for the latitude and if it’s less than 35 then I want cold for the latitude.

So this question depends on the latitude obviously so I can’t answer it.

Places in Southern Europe are warm for there latitude which sucks but places in Northern Europe that are warm for their lattitufe are good.

Most people on here like climates at mid latitudes so they’d find places warm for their lattitufr at low latitudes bad and places warm for their lattitifr at high latitudes good.

^ I don't agree, I think sun angle can make quite a difference if the temperatures are similar. Not to mention that a climate at lower latitude but similar winter temps compared to a climate at high latitude has much more warmth potential during winter.


To answer the OP, I'd say warm for the latitude is worse, as that tends to yield boring climates. But to be honest, it's more of a question for me of how continental/oceanic a climate is for their latitude.

0-3C and cloudy in Seattle is nothing. It's doesn't really feel that cold for the temperature. I assure you that 0-3C in my former hometown of Qingdao is freezing cold due to the wind even though on sunny winter days the UV index is 2-3. And if you look at Qingdao's climate, it does not have much warmth potential during winter.

Warmth potential is due to the instability of multiple systems. If one system dominates (e.g. Oceanic fronts or Siberian high pressure), temperatures are relatively stable.

I'd say this is the order of the elements of the weather on determining how cold it feels, from most to least important:

Temperature (by far)
Precipitation
Wind
Sunshine/Sun angle
Humidity (barely perceivable, can possibly even be removed from the list)

The lowland climates I prefer tend to be "warm"  for their latitude... like Northern France... but  I would think, say, Southern China is quite decent ("cold") for it latitude though, as Shanghai or Wuhan get a longer season of pleasant cool-mild-warm/temperate weather, then say Lahore or Cairo...Otoh, Northern Chinese cities like Shenyang and Harbin have excessively cold winters for the latitude, and are not so decent compared to say, Portland..... But their summers could stand to be a bit "colder" for their latitude... Somewhere like Santa Cruz has pleasantly mild summers because it is "cold" for its latitude, while Korea may be too nippy during the winter since it is also "cold" for its latitude.   


When somewhere like Bergen is "warm" for its latitude, that increases the period of temperate weather the climate has... I would overall favor anomalies relative to latitude that result in more pleasant (by my standards, cool-temperate) weather dominating... that would mean anomalously cool summers (and for low enough latitudes, cold winters to "drive down" the transitions seasons) for low-latitude  places (<38N) and anomalously warm winters (and for high enough latitudes, warm summers to "pull up" the transition seasons) for high latitude places (>45N)

I think, however, I prefer a latitude in the upper 30's/lower 40's for my dream climate... this provides some seasonality in daylight variation that the subtropics and tropics lack, and a stronger sun angle (which warrants milder summer temps), without the sun "disappearing" during winter... San Francisco (38N)  with 9.5 hrs of sun during the winter and 14.5 during the summer, looks quite reasonable... yet the climates in this range that have better annual means (like Kaesong, North Korea) and are "cold for their latitude" are not "cold" in the correct way for my taste... with harsh winters rather than mild summers!

So this is a rather difficult question!

I'd imagine your Cfa preferences would make you prefer Wuhan to Basra as well...

Lol I just looked at Basra. A poor D- climate. Yeah, I dislike desert climates with ridiculous temperatures and I'd prefer Chongqing to Basra, let alone Wuhan.

Warm vs. cold for the latitude is somewhat like west vs. east but just comparing winters. I usually prefer west for subarctic and temperate climates. I usually prefer east for subtropical climates. I think the emphasis is on temperate climates here, and warm for latitude is better in that case.

If it was a comparison that sets winter temperatures equal, I would prefer a lower latitude more often than not although it is highly dependent on the specific winter conditions themselves. However, the OP's post said that "cold for latitude" actually means colder temperatures in compensation for more sun, so I assumed that latitudes should be set equal.

I set it at 39N, the same as Washington, D.C. It's supposed to be on the east coast of a continent that is smaller than North America and Eurasia but larger than South America and Australia.

To be honest, I don't really care all that much and I didn't really think about latitude. It's in an acceptable range for sure although I think ~37N could be a better fit for the climate and geography.

Having spent quite some time at high, polar latitudes meself, I must say that sleeping is absurdly difficult! Not to mention that I want it to dusken at the times I expect during midsummer; i.e. straddling 7:50 to 8:50 PM—no later. 

It also doesn't look particularly jovial without the black and starry skies—that is what nightfall means to me.

"Sunshine" at such polar latitudes feels rather non-existant; petty, in terms of potency. I want to feel it burn!

Cold for the latitude is far worse.

Average mean temp at 50N is about 4c, while in London it is 11-12c. If London was average for the latitude it would be unliveable. If it was below average for the latitude I doubt there would be more than a small village there.