June CET

[SP1986]

low night time temperatures over the next few could drive it down too but hopefully not too far

.

[West is Best]

If that's the case, then what exactly does 'exceptional' entail? A CET of 19C? It looks like it could pass 17C today, which is certainly exceptional in my book. A minimum of 21C last night in London seems quite exceptional to me, and some places had reached 29C before midday.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary 'exceptional' means "unusual; not typical; unusually good".

It's too soon to call a month 'exceptional' when it's only 2/5th's through. However, were we to reach the end of the month with a CET of 17C or more it would obviously be appropriate to use the term 'exceptional'. The last June one would describe as 'exceptional' was June 1976.

A way to go but the NW tracker is currently on 17.22C.

All it would take is a cool spell to end June and the CET could quite easily drop by 1.5c-2.0c during the remaining 7 days.

Not easily done at the end of June - much easier in May than end of June to have a truly 'cooler' spell.

[Dawlish]

According to the Oxford English Dictionary 'exceptional' means "unusual; not typical; unusually good".

It's too soon to call a month 'exceptional' when it's only 2/5th's through. However, were we to reach the end of the month with a CET of 17C or more it would obviously be appropriate to use the term 'exceptional'. The last June one would describe as 'exceptional' was June 1976.

A way to go but the NW tracker is currently on 17.22C.

I think I'd go for any month that got into the top 5% as "exceptional", West. Almost all statistical analyses would agree that the 95% confidence interval is significant. If the CET even topped 16C, it would make it the warmest June for 30 years. If we had one winter month with that kind of bottom 5% cold, or the coldest month for 30 years, you can imagine how exceptional everyone would be calling it. A 17C CET, for June, is almost a once in a lifetime, or even a once in a century figure, but one which is much more likely to be achieved, in GW UK, than a winter month with that kind of extreme, in our lifetime. I'd call this an exceptional month so far and, with today's gfs charts, it is quite likely to run out as an exceptional month.

Paul

[Methuselah]

I think I'd agree with that, Paul...1976 was the last (In fact, the only!) such June I can recall...

Please guys? Let's not get ourselves bogged-down in semantics??

Just enjoy the wall-to-wall heat and sunshine, while it lasts? There's planty of time for pear-shapedness to intervene yet... :unsure:

[Optimus Prime]

I would call June 2003 exceptional with a CET average 16.0c (1 degree below 1976)

[Thundery wintry showers]

June 2003 was remarkable not for any outstanding hot spells, but a lack of anything cool. Temperatures were near or rather above average throughout the month, and the average minimum temperature was the second highest of the past 100 years (after 1976), but the mean maximum was beaten by quite a few other Junes.

However, June 2003 did feature a very "summery" pattern over much of England, Wales and eastern Scotland, with a lot of sunny and reasonably warm weather, and occasional showery/thundery outbreaks that were enough to raise rainfall totals above the long-term average in many areas. Thunderstorms in NE England were particularly severe on the 8th, 17th and 22nd. Indeed in some areas it was the sunniest month of that summer, beating the exceptionally dry August.

[Weather-history]

CET: (Jun 1-12): 16.8°C (+3.3 degC)

E&W Rain: (Jun 1-12): 4.5mm ( 16 per cent)

E&W Sun: (Jun 1-12): 138.5hr (182 per cent)

http://www.climate-uk.com/index.html

One record that this June definitely won't be collecting is the title of "driest June on record" at least for England and Wales

June 1925: 4.3mm

The driest June for Scotland in the Areal series? Hold onto your socks and pull: June 1988 29.9mm

[kold weather]

Looking at the models it'll takre a lot to keep the CEt at 17C now, though even when it does coo ldown a little we sghould stil lbe seeing above average temps, just something a little more average prehaps and who knows, anything from 15-17C is still more then possible depends on whether there are any more hot spells.

Also I think there will be some more rainfall but its gonig to take a wet spell like that at thwe end of May to really get us back above average this month.

[Mr Sleet]

Looking at the models it'll takre a lot to keep the CEt at 17C now, though even when it does coo ldown a little we sghould stil lbe seeing above average temps, just something a little more average prehaps and who knows, anything from 15-17C is still more then possible depends on whether there are any more hot spells.

Also I think there will be some more rainfall but its gonig to take a wet spell like that at thwe end of May to really get us back above average this month.

Do you know if the CET measurements are corrected to take account of the heat island effect in urban stations? Is not, and one wonders how accurate such correction can be, the CET trends are pretty much useless.

[Dawlish]

Do you know if the CET measurements are corrected to take account of the heat island effect in urban stations? Is not, and one wonders how accurate such correction can be, the CET trends are pretty much useless.

There are always going to be arguments and difficulties about where to site stations, as John Holmes has alluded to with airports, on the other thread. The Met Office tried to make allowances for this in 1974 and the Hadley centre has, again, revised the stations it uses quite recently, but the original Manley sequence appears to be standing the test of urbanisation pretty well. This is Philip Eden's take on it.

http://www.climate-uk.com/page5.html

and

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

To say, blandly; "the CET trends are pretty much useless" is to be dreadfully blind to the longest series of accurate temperature measurements, moderated by some of the most painstaking work (pretty much a lifetime's) by a meteorologist who is widely regarded as one of the best, in the world. I think you are in a very small minority, Mr. Sleet if you think that the CET trends are "pretty much useless".

Comparison of long-term areal trends to the CET is extremely useful - how else would we measure whether one area's temperatures are behaving differently to another's? Manley's CET series provides the norm to which statistical comparisons can be made. Of course you can't use it for your area, unless, perhaps, you live in the area between Oxford and Lancashire (Central England, as defined by Manley) but what you can do is compare your area's long-term trends against that of the CET.

The other great series is the NOAA's series of world temperatures, dating back almost 130 years. Both have stood rigorous peer-analysis against changing urban/rural environments and are the best norms we have.

I would accept both as being statistically reliable and what they show are identifiable changing patterns in our climate, over time, which, with the absence of other, better, records, we must accept as fact. Whether short-term, local, often ad hoc, small sample, observations of change appear to challenge this pattern means little against such a wealth of data.

It is the best, long term, climatic data we have access to in the UK and it shows that our climate is warming. To infer a change from this pattern, identifiable from the CET, using 1/2/3 years data, compared to the warming trend that the CET record shows, over the last 25 years, is just not a long enough period to even begin to make that inference.

I've read a lot over the last few days about people seeing a change in climate over the past few years, by observing in their area. I think it is time to reflect. With the greatest of respect for your own observations (and I do mean that; I am a great believer in making local observations and comparing to the Met Office ones), they are in no way scientific, they are unreliable, not standardised and cannot be accepted as evidence. There are many more people making the same visual observations and coming to a very different, warming, conclusion about the current temperature trends in the UK, Northern Hemisphere and the World. Neither you, nor they, are actually correct, using only their own, or a few other people's, observations - though it is always interesting to see and read.

When one amalgamates many, many, individual observations, over a length of time, they may then become statistically reliable, but a few people agreeing a cooling trend on netweather is nowhere near a reasonable sample, no matter how many times the mantra of "I know what I've seen in my area" is repeated. Impartial observers shouldn't be taken in by that. I'm not impartial, I believe the world is warming and it will most probably continue to do so, but I would never use these kind of observations to back that assertion. I mean, a temperature record was set for June 12th yesterday, the warmest June 12th for hundreds of years - evidence of Global Warming? Absolutely no way! This June/this summer perhaps being exceptionally warm? Not a chance of it being good evidence. However, a 25 year, identifiable trend with a terrific amount of research going on to say it will extend, last year's Global and Northern hemisphere record/exceptional temperatures and only a tiny minority believing the opposite, then yes; there is the evidence.

The great danger in looking for something in science is the temptation to look for things that fit your original premise, so you can use the "results" you have gathered as proof of that premise. That's why true research always stresses the limitations of the project and involves rigorous statistics.

Hope this helps!

Paul

[johnholmes]

re this remark

'the CET trends are pretty much useless.'

this is the kind of remark which does make me wonder about some people on Net weather. We are ALL entitled to our opinion but please can we keep this kind of remark to ourselves. It does not help anyone to understand what may be happening. In truth, not even the most experienced meteorologist or climatologist can say with certainty just what is happening.

All we can say, from all the available reliable evidence, and the above comment about a highly respected meteorologist/climatologist is very sad to see, is that the earth, at the surface and in the higher levels IS warming. What no one can say for certain is WHAT EXACTLY is causing this warming.

Is it part of the natural warming/cooling cycles the earth has been through many times before. Is it entirely or partly caused by human activity, the jury is still out, and may well still be out when most on Net Weather have long since departed this earth.

Its a discussion, really good to read the constructive posts, from whatever side but can we PLEASE stop bickering on this and other threads about what is happening and make constructive and polite posts.

regards

John

Do you know if the CET measurements are corrected to take account of the heat island effect in urban stations? Is not, and one wonders how accurate such correction can be, the CET trends are pretty much useless.

to an extent they are by the Met Office as increasing urbanisation takes effect. You may be better asking Philip Eden for his comments.

One thing, see my post below,

we are all entitled to our opinion but try and keep your comments less inflamatory than the last one about CET records. These are the main repository for England, indeed are taken as a guide for the UK, and they represent a lifetimes work by an emminent meteorologist/climatologist.

regards

John

[PersianPaladin]

I remember briefly studying the central england temperature at university in my climatology module. Interesting stuff.

Although when i look at the latest posts in this thread, i bet Gordon Manley (who btw - taught at Durham Uni) must be turning in his grave.

:lol:

Edited June 13, 2006 by PersianPaladin

[West is Best]

Excellent post by Paul, and John too. An apology is sometimes all that's needed - and if offered should be accepted. Anyway, on the CET ...

... with the Azores high coming in very strongly next week, and very far north I can honestly see the June CET ending up at an astonishing 18C or above. Perhaps that's an exaggeration and it will be nearer 17C if it drops this week (big 'if'), but I can't avoid the serious prospect of a very warm final week of the month bringing the CET up to a crazily high level. I hope I won't regret those words, but that's my opinion having looked at the synoptics.

[summer blizzard]

The CET has fallen slightly to 16.7C.

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

[SP1986]

The CET has fallen slightly to 16.7C.

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

I think with the run of cooler days and nights, it should be down to 16C easily by the weekend

[Mr Sleet]

There are always going to be arguments and difficulties about where to site stations, as John Holmes has alluded to with airports, on the other thread. The Met Office tried to make allowances for this in 1974 and the Hadley centre has, again, revised the stations it uses quite recently, but the original Manley sequence appears to be standing the test of urbanisation pretty well. This is Philip Eden's take on it.

http://www.climate-uk.com/page5.html

and

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

To say, blandly; "the CET trends are pretty much useless" is to be dreadfully blind to the longest series of accurate temperature measurements, moderated by some of the most painstaking work (pretty much a lifetime's) by a meteorologist who is widely regarded as one of the best, in the world. I think you are in a very small minority, Mr. Sleet if you think that the CET trends are "pretty much useless".

Comparison of long-term areal trends to the CET is extremely useful - how else would we measure whether one area's temperatures are behaving differently to another's? Manley's CET series provides the norm to which statistical comparisons can be made. Of course you can't use it for your area, unless, perhaps, you live in the area between Oxford and Lancashire (Central England, as defined by Manley) but what you can do is compare your area's long-term trends against that of the CET.

The other great series is the NOAA's series of world temperatures, dating back almost 130 years. Both have stood rigorous peer-analysis against changing urban/rural environments and are the best norms we have.

I would accept both as being statistically reliable and what they show are identifiable changing patterns in our climate, over time, which, with the absence of other, better, records, we must accept as fact. Whether short-term, local, often ad hoc, small sample, observations of change appear to challenge this pattern means little against such a wealth of data.

It is the best, long term, climatic data we have access to in the UK and it shows that our climate is warming. To infer a change from this pattern, identifiable from the CET, using 1/2/3 years data, compared to the warming trend that the CET record shows, over the last 25 years, is just not a long enough period to even begin to make that inference.

I've read a lot over the last few days about people seeing a change in climate over the past few years, by observing in their area. I think it is time to reflect. With the greatest of respect for your own observations (and I do mean that; I am a great believer in making local observations and comparing to the Met Office ones), they are in no way scientific, they are unreliable, not standardised and cannot be accepted as evidence. There are many more people making the same visual observations and coming to a very different, warming, conclusion about the current temperature trends in the UK, Northern Hemisphere and the World. Neither you, nor they, are actually correct, using only their own, or a few other people's, observations - though it is always interesting to see and read.

When one amalgamates many, many, individual observations, over a length of time, they may then become statistically reliable, but a few people agreeing a cooling trend on netweather is nowhere near a reasonable sample, no matter how many times the mantra of "I know what I've seen in my area" is repeated. Impartial observers shouldn't be taken in by that. I'm not impartial, I believe the world is warming and it will most probably continue to do so, but I would never use these kind of observations to back that assertion. I mean, a temperature record was set for June 12th yesterday, the warmest June 12th for hundreds of years - evidence of Global Warming? Absolutely no way! This June/this summer perhaps being exceptionally warm? Not a chance of it being good evidence. However, a 25 year, identifiable trend with a terrific amount of research going on to say it will extend, last year's Global and Northern hemisphere record/exceptional temperatures and only a tiny minority believing the opposite, then yes; there is the evidence.

The great danger in looking for something in science is the temptation to look for things that fit your original premise, so you can use the "results" you have gathered as proof of that premise. That's why true research always stresses the limitations of the project and involves rigorous statistics.

Hope this helps!

Paul

Thanks Paul. So there is no reliable correction ?

Edited June 14, 2006 by Mr Sleet

[kold weather]

Well temps have certainly is cooler today and it should stay cooler now for a good 3-5 days before temps warm up again as the Azores high may start to ridge back in after the remains of Alberto moves through to our north.

[The PIT]

Dunno what is like today down south if it's like here it'll drop a bit more. I said 14.5C before which is going to be wrong. Now if this month follows the other months there will probably be a cooler period too offset the warm bit. Thats if it follows the last few months.

[Mr Sleet]

Well after a mixed response in some quarters to my question as to whether the CET was adjusted, I decided to ask a professional , and here is his reply

"Hi Mark ... yes it is ... Manley began with very small adjustments starting around 1950 in his original work. The MO used corrections of 0.1 to 0.2 degC in the 1970s increasing to 0.2 to 0.3 degC in more recent years to accommodate the moderately urbanised sites at Ringway (Manchester airport) and Squires Gate (Blackpool airport). The three sites they use now (since 2004) are largely unurbanised (Rothamsted, Pershore and Stonyhurst), but I don't know what the present urbanisation correction is"

That's from Philip Eden

I'm surprised at the amount of chopping and changing, only three sites too :o

[West is Best]

I think with the run of cooler days and nights, it should be down to 16C easily by the weekend

But with highs likely of 22C today, up to 25C by Sunday (officially very hot) any initial cooler nights should be off-set comfortably here on in. By the time we reach the ridging high pressure the NW tracker should be still easily in the 16.7 to 17C range (probably higher), and the Manley figure around 16.5C. As I say, despite some fresher nights we have some very high maxima likely again over the next week.

Edited June 15, 2006 by West is Best

[Polar Continental]

But with highs likely of 22C today, up to 25C by Sunday (officially very hot) any initial cooler nights should be off-set comfortably here on in. By the time we reach the ridging high pressure the NW tracker should be still easily in the 16.7 to 17C range (probably higher), and the Manley figure around 16.5C. As I say, despite some fresher nights we have some very high maxima likely again over the next week.

Morning heat lovers,

Here in burton my current mean for June is standing at an astonishing 17.7c

And as WIB has just mentioned, temperatures will again be on the up over the next 4 to 5 days.

Paul

[West is Best]

I'm surprised at the amount of chopping and changing, only three sites too

Mark ... there are professional metereologists employed for working on the CET, as well as Philip who is one of the country's most seasoned experts outside the Met Office. Much science goes into this, as well as experience. I think what was probably irksome for some folk was your dismissive comment about the CET - which is, afterall, a lot older than you and I and which will be around long after you and I have died. It's a superb series, and the longest running such series in the world. Whilst no-one wants sycophancy, a little respect, and a little humility wouldn't have gone amiss perhaps?

There have to be changes to the stations. With the spread of urbanisation you obviously have to adjust sites accordingly. At the moment the Met O apply a 0.1 to 0.3C adjustment for the urbanisation effect. You can read more in basic format here: http://www.metoffice.com/research/hadleyce...bsdata/cet.html

However, if you really want the definitive study of this issue, then the Met Office have made it available. You will find it here in pdf format: http://www.metoffice.com/research/hadleyce...CTN/HCTN_50.pdf

This is a 31 page document authored by David Parker and Briony Horton and should give you all the information you will ever need on the topic of CET adjustments unless you want to do a PhD on it.

(NW mods - worth a link somewhere in the NW guide to this excellent study by the Met O?)

Edited June 15, 2006 by West is Best

[Mr Sleet]

Mark ... there are professional metereologists employed for working on the CET, as well as Philip who is one of the country's most seasoned experts outside the Met Office. Much science goes into this, as well as experience. I think what was probably irksome for some folk was your dismissive comment about the CET - which is, afterall, a lot older than you and I and which will be around long after you and I have died. It's a superb series, and the longest running such series in the world. Whilst no-one wants sycophancy, a little respect, and a little humility wouldn't have gone amiss perhaps?

There have to be changes to the stations. With the spread of urbanisation you obviously have to adjust sites accordingly. At the moment the Met O apply a 0.1 to 0.3C adjustment for the urbanisation effect. You can read more in basic format here: http://www.metoffice.com/research/hadleyce...bsdata/cet.html

However, if you really want the definitive study of this issue, then the Met Office have made it available. You will find it here in pdf format: http://www.metoffice.com/research/hadleyce...CTN/HCTN_50.pdf

This is a 31 page document authored by David Parker and Briony Horton and should give you all the information you will ever need on the topic of CET adjustments unless you want to do a PhD on it.

(NW mods - worth a link somewhere in the NW guide to this excellent study by the Met O?)

Yes I agree it was a rather clumsy choice of words but wasn't my intention to diss the series.I do think Mr Holmes response was a tad OTT shall we say. Thanks for the info BTW.

[johnholmes]

wow what a hefty article there mate. I can't pretend I've read it thoroughly but I have skimmed through it. More effort seems to have gone into checking for possible errors on temperatures within the screen than some of the POSSIBLE changes caused by urbanisation which is what many on this forum show concern about.

Yes as I've posted on this and other threads, a measured response rather than 'shooting from the hip' style comments is best. But I do understand why some people get a bit heated about things.

Its an argument/discussion that will carry on long after we are no longer here. It would be marvellous though if the world, including the USA and 'new' players like China and India, could all agree that the world does need to try and do something. It matters not one jot whether its man made or natural. It is happening. It will cause many hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people, around the world to be displaced, if the present rate of warming continues, within the next 50-100 years. This is a mix of areas becoming desert and areas going under water. Surely the world needs to have a plan on how to cope with this huge problem.

John

ps

just seen after I posted the response by Mr Sleet.

No I don' think it 'a tad OTT' as you put. As in the above post all I'm trying to get is for people to make calm and constructive posts and not 'shooting from the hip', or dismissing someones' lifetime work.

j

Edited June 15, 2006 by johnholmes

[West is Best]

wow what a hefty article there mate.

Totally agree with everything you wrote there John.

That is indeed a hefty article It's just helpful to point out that the Hadley CET series isn't put together on the basis of a few thermometres scattered around the country! As you say, it's a lifetime's work for some people.

I must get down to some work ...!

Edited June 15, 2006 by West is Best