knocker

Right in the pocket

Met Office rainfall records – how far do they go back and what can they tell us? http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2014/02/14/met-office-rainfall-records-how-far-do-they-go-back-and-what-can-they-tell-us/

Interesting Temp Anomaly at the moment

Precisely Dev Any way my even money bet romped in. The Mail article duly arrived on WUWT. If anyone wants to bother you can link to it via HotWhopper as she has duly dispatched it as well. Not the main point though as she found another amusing tweet from Anthony. Dear oh dear. Forgot the link. http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2014/02/oh-he-of-little-brainpumping-floodwaters.html

http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/76448-scepticism-of-man-made-climate-change/page-54#entry2934059 Perhaps an oxymoron thread?

http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/76448-scepticism-of-man-made-climate-change/page-54#entry2933937 Not worth spending much time on this. Matt Collins doesn't work for the Meto. No climate scientist has said that it did including Julia Slingo. She said climate change has a role to play in the storms. And of course she is correct it should be climate change and not global warming. Classic case of bulverism. So since when did 'cause' equate to 'has a role to play' except in the deniers book "let's twist the truth to confuse the average punter". Evens that this will appear in Anthony's blog today although at the moment he has wandering Bob Tisdale twittering on about ENSO again. EDIT Matt Collins tweets 47m ago "I said that the models don't tell us much about how the jet stream is affected by climate change. I don't disagree with Julia" https://twitter.com/mat_collins

14 February 2014 The intensely cyclonic conditions of late-December continued into January, resulting in an exceptionally wet and windy (but notably mild) start to 2014. A succession of vigorous low pressure systems brought gale force winds, exceptionally strong swells (causing extensive coastal damage and tidal flooding) and persistent frontal rainfall. With heavy rain falling on already saturated ground, flood alerts were widespread and sustained through January. Average flows during the month were exceptional in many rivers, but peak river flows were generally not exceptional; rather, January was notable for the persistence and spatial extent of floodplain inundation, particularly from large, slowly responding rivers and in low-lying areas such as the Somerset Levels. Average river flows in the UK during January 2014. Black circles indicate exceptionally high flow. Dark blue indicate notably high flow . More details in key. http://www.ceh.ac.uk/news/news_archive/january-2014-uk-hydrological-summary_2014_08.html

Debating the Causes of Extremes http://climatecrocks.com/2014/02/15/debating-the-causes-of-extremes/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

At Newlyn very few have been out much since the beginning of December. They are certainly feeling the pinch.

Nice photos VM but the adverts have just put me off my saffron bun.

Last evening whilst sitting listening to wind howling I was reminded of a similar awful night 32 years ago when the Solomon Browne lifeboat was lost with all hands at Tater Du rock. They don't come any braver than the men and women who man the lifeboats that's for sure. Believe me I spent quite a few years in seas like that and you sure wouldn't want to be there. How they managed in the old days is beyond me.

Not a problem Paul I was just curious.

Many of the mines outside of the urban areas have gone back to nature. A couple of shots of Wheal Busy, Old Sump at Killefreth that took me about an hour to find and the engine house at Basset and Grylls.

I always credit sources and am familiar with © regs. I realise some sites do it automatically and I don't have any issues with that but I just wondered why the paste was invisible until posted.

I remain to be convinced of this considering the energy change seems so little. And does the temp trend fit that irradiance graph? Do Variations in the Solar Cycle Affect Our Climate System?http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/rind_03/

I'm afraid I don't get around Zennor very much as I don't have a car which limits one somewhat. I have a friend who has moved down to Penwith and we share the same interests so perhaps this summer. Moving nearer home, yours not mine, I was just reading about Mt Lyell copper mine. Seems a bit dodgy working there. What did they eventually decide? Mt Lyell mine to reveal future for workforce during safety shutdown after mine deaths http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-11/some-mt-lyell-mine-contractors-on-half-pay-as-shutdown-continues/5253292

This is no doubt a daft question but why, when I copy and paste something from a website that automatically attaches a link to the site it pastes okay but is invisible until I actually post it?

My Fab Four Up-To-Date Climate Change Observations, by Andreas Schmittner - See more at: http://climatechangenationalforum.org/my-fab-four-up-to-date-climate-change-observations/#sthash.EzY5i7zb.dpuf

Just a suggestion regarding trends. You can fiddle around and do your own and see, whichever side of the divide you are on, by cherry picking certain short term trends you can falsely emphasise your point. http://www.ysbl.york.ac.uk/~cowtan/applets/trend/trend.html

I did say relatively and given the past week next week looks reasonable. The jet isn't howling across us and hopefully the rain won't amount to too much. So I'm not sure I'd go along with dreadful. But hey, what do I know.

I'm afraid your memory doesn't serve you correctly. Climate change was used years before global warming, Of course never trust the media on this. The Internet is full of references to global warming. The Union of Concerned Scientists website on climate change is titled "Global Warming," just one of many examples. But we don't use global warming much on this website. We use the less appealing "climate change." Why? To a scientist, global warming describes the average global surface temperature increase from human emissions of greenhouse gases. Its first use was in a 1975 Science article by geochemist Wallace Broecker of Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory: "Climatic Change: Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?"1 Broecker's term was a break with tradition. Earlier studies of human impact on climate had called it "inadvertent climate modification."2 This was because while many scientists accepted that human activities could cause climate change, they did not know what the direction of change might be. Industrial emissions of tiny airborne particles called aerosols might cause cooling, while greenhouse gas emissions would cause warming. Which effect would dominate? For most of the 1970s, nobody knew. So "inadvertent climate modification," while clunky and dull, was an accurate reflection of the state of knowledge. The first decisive National Academy of Science study of carbon dioxide's impact on climate, published in 1979, abandoned "inadvertent climate modification." Often called the Charney Report for its chairman, Jule Charney of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, declared: "if carbon dioxide continues to increase, [we find] no reason to doubt that climate changes will result and no reason to believe that these changes will be negligible." In place of inadvertent climate modification, Charney adopted Broecker's usage. When referring to surface temperature change, Charney used "global warming." When discussing the many other changes that would be induced by increasing carbon dioxide, Charney used "climate change." Within scientific journals, this is still how the two terms are used. Global warming refers to surface temperature increases, while climate change includes global warming and everything else that increasing greenhouse gas amounts will affect. http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/climate_by_any_other_name.html For more references. http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-global-warming.htm

Sorry, didn't realise you had asked me a question. If it's the question I think it is Giss use a of base period 1951-80. Thirty years being the min. for climate purposes. I've absolutely no idea what you mean by it's 2014 unless you have a magic ball that can deduce trends without going back.

No it doesn't. It looks as if we may be in for some relatively calm weather at last.

Quiet this morning. 5/8 Ci and a couple of eights of Cu. Temp. 7.2C Wind SW 23 mph gusting 35 Pressure 988mb rising

Quiet this morning. 5/8 Ci and a couple of eights of Cu. Temp. 7.2C Wind SW 23 mph gusting 35 Pressure 988mb rising