June CET

[Dawlish]

Who's to say that the Manley CET for June 2003 also wasn't higher then the Hadley CET??

June 2003 could have had a CET of 16.3C or something like that on the Manley scale, i'm notsure but I'm sure Philip Eden would be able to confirm.

Also worth noting that the CET area actually was in the zone of the highest CEt anomaly, most area were between 1-1.5C above average.

June 2003 Manley CET = 15.97, 0.23C below the Manley CET for June 2006.

The Manley series is here. Thanks to Philip Eden for the figures from his site.

http://www.climate-uk.com/provisional.htm

Paul

Edited July 6, 2006 by Dawlish

[kold weather]

Just looked at this, extremely intresting indeed so on the Manley scale 2006 WAS warmer then 2003 for June. Still In term sof offical note from the Met-office and Hadley center, June 2006 was cooler then 2003 and the Met-office calls the shots.

I actually feel though that the Manley CEt should be used instead of the Hadley center simply because of the much longer back-log it has.

[West is Best]

June 2003 Manley CET = 15.97, 0.23C below the Manley CET for June 2006.

The Manley series is here. Thanks to Philip Eden for the figures from his site.

http://www.climate-uk.com/provisional.htm

Paul

First time I've seen that link with all the data back to 1974. That's fantastic to have. As far as I'm concerned, that's the one I'll use from now on!

[Dawlish]

Just looked at this, extremely intresting indeed so on the Manley scale 2006 WAS warmer then 2003 for June. Still In term sof offical note from the Met-office and Hadley center, June 2006 was cooler then 2003 and the Met-office calls the shots.

I actually feel though that the Manley CEt should be used instead of the Hadley center simply because of the much longer back-log it has.

That's the way I feel as well kold. We are just very lucky to be weather enthusiasts in the UK, which has the longest temperature record of anywhere in the world. The CET gives us endless reasons to discuss present monthly weather and compare it to weather and climate past. :lol: It is also terrific to be able discuss such minutiae with people who feel these discussions are as important as I do. How sad is that!!

Paul

Edited July 6, 2006 by Dawlish

[Thundery wintry showers]

According to my local weather records for Cleadon, it was the warmest June only since 2003 there. The mean maximum, in particular, was more than 0.5C lower, though this may have been because the location had more coastal influence than in the southerly and SW'ly dominated month of June 2003.

June 2006 was another month of two halves, in my view, but it's interesting how the second half still managed to be rather warm. The first half probably seemed warmer because there was more sunshine, except in N Scotland.

I'm also a bit more inclined to favour the Manley series, partly because it offers something that is probably a lot closer to a homogeneous continuation, and also because values tend not to be altered by a few tenths of a degree several months afterwards. However, the Hadley series tends to be used as the official series.

Edited July 6, 2006 by Thundery wintry showers

[Guest Mike W]

According to Philip Eden's site the CET for the 1st - 5th July is 21.6 which is 5.8 above average, Global Warming in a big way.

[Methuselah]

According to Philip Eden's site the CET for the 1st - 5th July is 21.6 which is 5.8 above average, Global Warming in a big way.

Yes. But it is only FIVE DAYS Mike??

[Dawlish]

According to Philip Eden's site the CET for the 1st - 5th July is 21.6 which is 5.8 above average, Global Warming in a big way.

I hope you posted this tongue-in-cheek, Mike, because the link between the first 5 days in July and Global Warming is so tenuous as to be non-existent! :lol:

Paul

Edited July 6, 2006 by Dawlish

[Optimus Prime]

July can still end up well below average.....

[Dawlish]

July can still end up well below average.....

Hmmm, I'll give you 3/1 against July ending up below the Manley CET mean, OP.

Paul

[Optimus Prime]

Hmmm, I'll give you 3/1 against July ending up below the Manley CET mean, OP.

Paul

No....because I know it won't

[Dawlish]

No....because I know it won't

?????? Nope, you've lost me there OP! I thhought you were saying it could end up below average. I think it could as well; but only 1 time in 3 from this set-up, with the odds I'm offering. Now you say you know it won't! I'm lost and confused!

Paul