The Ongoing Warmth in the UK

[Cymru]

I'm sure we are higher than you in parts (Calder Valley, we are a measly 200m ASL) but our bluebells have been flowering for well over a week and some of the woodlands are on their way to finishing! Do you live in a deep dark cave there?

I would say that if May ends up cooler and damper than April (similar to last years May) then we may be looking at a new 'summer synoptic' taking over and that would be dire for June ,July and this year August (El-Nino blip last year). So ,for me ,it all hinges on Mays weather (our 2 week 'monsoon come early).

My bluebells have been in flower over two weeks now and are starting to die off. I must say, I've never seen them bloom quite so early. Incredible.

[acbrixton]

I would say that if May ends up cooler and damper than April (similar to last years May) then we may be looking at a new 'summer synoptic' taking over and that would be dire for June ,July and this year August (El-Nino blip last year). So ,for me ,it all hinges on Mays weather (our 2 week 'monsoon come early).

Not sure that is an accurate account of last May which was for most of us a month of 2 very distinct halves: the first half warm, dry sunny and quite glorious and the second half cooler, cloudy and rather wet. Whilst May 2006 may have been wetter than April (I have not checked) it was certainly not cooler than April as measured by the CET: 12.2 as against 8.8. A repetition this May of a similar CET would still comfortably exceed the likely April CET (say 11.3?).

Regards

ACB

[DR Hosking]

"Its certainly hard to imagine a run of 5 cesecutive below average months now. Its hard to imagine 1 below average month, really."

Well my local weather station in Northants recorded five months below average in a row from November 05 - March 06. Thats not exactly ages ago!

[North-Easterly Blast]

Gavin P;

July 1993 wasn't that bad a month was it. It was nowhere near as awful as July 1988. At least July 1993 although cool overall it wasn't excessively wet overall with rainfall overall similar to July 2002 or even a bit less. It featured a warm spell at the start, but it then became much cooler and changeable but there were some fine days at times.

It is something of note that when you look at the CETs of Julys 1978 and 1980, and the rainfall as well and the general weather pattern, these two Julys had much less rain than July 1988, those cool Julys were certainly not as awful as July 1988 as there were some spells of fine, quite sunny but cool weather at times.

CETs do not always tell the tale on how awful a summer month is. Julys 1978 and 1980 may have had similar CETs to July 1988 but July 88 was a far wetter month. Even more so, look at August 2004 rainfall (156mm), this even exceeded the rainfall of July 1988 (139mm), and the coolm summer months of July / August 1978, July 1980, July, August 1993 were all much drier months than the warm August of 2004.

I share the same feelings as you about September, I would love to see a cool wet September like 1993, or even a September like 1995, as I am just sick to death of how warm September has been over the last ten years. There is certainly some truth that a cool wet September, although not guaranteed, does increase the chances of the following winter being cold, as opposed to the sorts of Septembers we have had since the mid 90s.

[Somerset Squall]

I don't want a wet introduction to autumn but would really like to see a nice cool sunny September with north or north easterly winds instead of non-stop southerly plumes.

Tamara

It would definately make a nice change. Last September was very scary, particularly with ex Hurricane Gordon brushing past to the west, I remember being out in the garden in the evening it moved in, it almost felt like Gordon was still tropical, it was so unbearably warm and humid, and this was at 9pm! I think the temperature was at 24C, which is amazing for this time of day. September was a very southerly month and it would be nice to see something cooler this September.

Edited April 26, 2007 by Somerset Squall

[Somerset Squall]

October was even more bizarre - there many of us were, talking about the forthcoming winter cold and yet I was waking to summer style thunderstorms and 19C at 8am! :lol:

Tamara

Indeed, the start of October sticks out in memory for me too, October 1st was the most amazing day for a long time- there were some really active thunderstorms throughout the early hours and some torrential downpours throughout the day. There was more of the same in coming days. Like you said, it felt just like these storms were mid-summer storms, they were so intense and it was still so warm. It was really interesting to see but deeply disturbing at the same time. I really hope this Autumn isn't similar.

[Bottesford]

I like warm, sunny Septembers myself - with warm but not hot days and cool nights. In October it needs to cool fast by way of Atlantic storms moving into cold high pressure by November...

[noggin]

As much as recent events ............

Perspective should be kept as always - and over dissection does indeed fuel over speculation.

Tamara

I'm glad to hear you say this (albeit edited!) Tamara. When I saw your earlier post I really was quite concerned. I thought you were having a bit of a wobble!

[Lettucing Gutted]

So when i end my education im off to live in scotland or failing that Reykjavik!

I hate living in the hot humid south east

Joe

I will be joining you along with many other cold weather fans!

Edited April 26, 2007 by Craig Evans

[Stratos Ferric]

As much as recent events are concerning and have sapped even my optimism re cold weather in this country (as per yesterdays posts) I do agree with this post entirely

In many ways it probably is the best and most realistic post on this thread yet

It reflects my own attitude about not going OTT and reading too much into recent events - as I said yesterday. Also as I said yesterday, I would call the current conditions a freak outlier, irrespective of what may or may not be going on in the background.

Perspective should be kept as always - and over dissection does indeed fuel over speculation.

Tamara

Tamara, I'm sorry, but it is neither the best nor the most realistic: it is simply written from Noggin's standard perspective which is that there's no such thing as climate change, just variation. To what extent his is judgement is, like yours, occasionally clouded by a strong preference for cold I do not know, but there's more than a whiff of groupthink in the constant buoying up of each other without any substantial argument.

Unfortunately the facts are starting to make a compelling case which, for all that some of us might wish a different reality, is very hard to deny. If this carries on for much longer any argument that this is a blip will have been cut off not so much at the knees as at the neck.

Perhaps you or Noggin can provide a rational argument, based on the numbers perferably, as to why we shouldn't read too much into a run of weather that is not just unprecedented, but way beyond the reasonable statistical bounds of being explainable as a blip in a flat climate.

I'm sure it is possible to over dissect, but point me to a fact in this thread that is unreasonable. It is far easier to under process the facts.

[PersianPaladin]

Tamara, I'm sorry, but it is neither the best nor the most realistic: it is simply written from Noggin's standard perspective which is that there's no such thing as climate change, just variation. To what extent his is judgement is, like yours, occasionally clouded by a strong preference for cold I do not know, but there's more than a whiff of groupthink in the constant buoying up of each other without any substantial argument.

Unfortunately the facts are starting to make a compelling case which, for all that some of us might wish a different reality, is very hard to deny. If this carries on for much longer any argument that this is a blip will have been cut off not so much at the knees as at the neck.

Perhaps you or Noggin can provide a rational argument, based on the numbers perferably, as to why we shouldn't read too much into a run of weather that is not just unprecedented, but way beyond the reasonable statistical bounds of being explainable as a blip in a flat climate.

I'm sure it is possible to over dissect, but point me to a fact in this thread that is unreasonable. It is far easier to under process the facts.

We have no evidence that it is not unprecedented. After all, our records only go so far back.

[Derbyshire_snow]

October was even more bizarre - there many of us were, talking about the forthcoming winter cold and yet I was waking to summer style thunderstorms and 19C at 8am!

Tamara

Well i was walking about with shorts on a few days in february like never before aswell

[The PIT]

Well i was walking about with shorts on a few days in february like never before aswell

I think that may have been the 3rd of Feb 13C 55F.

Watching Blades V Watford this weekend????

[gmoran]

We have no evidence that it is not unprecedented. After all, our records only go so far back.

As far as detailed weather observations go, records for the last 2 decades look unprecedented in terms of warmth. It seems to me there is good evidence for a change in the UK's climate; i.e. this isn't normal variability. However this change may not be unprecedented in terms of all climate types, as the little ice age sounds just as dramatic with the Thames regularly freezing over and sea ice off the coast, and I would have thought that would have shown up in the CET record? And certainly the UK and the world climate has a great deal of variability, in the last 1000 years we have had the little ice age and the medieval warming period (comparable to our own present warming and possibly higher). It seems likely that the world was entering a warmer phase after the little ice age, and that AGW is acting on top of that. The interesting thing will be when the natural warming cycle ends, will climate continue to warm but more slowly; stabilise; or cool. The UK may be on a battle front, so Winters like we used to know them could return in future decades.

[noggin]

Perhaps you or Noggin can provide a rational argument, based on the numbers perferably, as to why we shouldn't read too much into a run of weather that is not just unprecedented, but way beyond the reasonable statistical bounds of being explainable as a blip in a flat climate.

Who sets the "reasonable statistical bounds"?

Who says it is unprecedented?

Has there ever been a "flat" climate?

B)

[osmposm]

Please read all of my posts and not pick selected parts that lead you to erroneous conclusions. I have expressed my concerns clearly I would have thought?, but that does not however mean that I must automatically apply the same intensity of belief on this subject as you do. Furthermore I believe I am entitled to agree (including application of suitable emoticons if I wish) to whoever I want without your permission?

Tamara, of course you're entitled to agree with whoever you want - and equally, if you do so publicly, then Stratos is entitled to say that he thinks that agreement is wrong, and explain why. What I think frustrates him is that he tends to give (or has previously given or referenced) reams of hard, statistical facts to back his perspective (the archetypical 'male' approach, if you like); whereas you, while saying you accept the facts, just "feel", like Noggin, that this is just a freak outlier and things will reverse pretty soon (a traditionally more "female" type of argument). I'm all for more a more intuitive "female" way of thinking in many, many areas of life, but I'm not sure that analysis of weather statistics is one of them!

The facts show that what is occurring is way beyond any accepted statistical level of significance: that is to say that mathematically-speaking what is happening, to all intents and purposes, cannot just be variations in a basically stable system. To carry on hoping that it will vary back again is, to a hard, objective mind like Stratos's, well....um....deeply annoying! So he will always take you to ask if you go there, and your attack on him for doing so seems misplaced - especially where you have shown strong support for Noggin, who does not, as far as I can tell, accept that anything unusual climatically is happening at all. And why is Stratos "seeking to impose his views on others" any more than you? He is merely doing what you do, expressing his opinions and his reasons for them. You may find his "style" irritating, but then he is clearly irritated by yours. It doesn't mean he is Torquemada forcing you to recant at the end of a red-hot poker.

As to "cherry-picking" your posts, well of course he does. It is the "male" way of discussion to concentrate on arguing against the things you disagree with, rather than wasting time expressing your agreement with those you do. Though there is, perhaps, a lesson there for us men: if you do "waste" a bit of time doing just that, you may find a more receptive ear for your your disagreements..........

Vive la difference!

[jethro]

I don't normally enter into the fray on the current weather patterns on this forum, don't know anywhere near enough to comment but I do feel I have to add my twopennoth worth for once. I too share the opinion of Noggin and Tamara on this one, maybe it is a gender thing but, and correct me if I'm wrong; what happened to the Medieval warm period? As far as I know we have no way of checking what the actual weather was like then, but we do know that it was warmer than today, I think the consensus was it warmed quickly. So today's weather patterns/ high temps/warm winters are unprecedented? I don't think so. Maybe, just maybe it's cyclical?

[Stratos Ferric]

We have no evidence that it is not unprecedented. After all, our records only go so far back.

Alright, it's unprecedented in the measured record, but running basic inferential stats suggests a return period that is so long that it is practically infinite for the purposes of every day discussion of whether this is a blip or something more fundamental.

[Thundery wintry showers]

Not sure about the gender stuff here; gender stereotyping and the whole "vive la difference" attitude is something I am not especially fond of (and that's probably an understatement). Some people have actually told me that women tend to be more analytical than men, so it does depend on one's perception of 'gender roles'. In addition some men share Tamara's and Noggin's views.

However, that doesn't undermine the meteorological arguments that Osmposm has used.

Some subject areas are a matter of opinion, but in others, there is a right and a wrong; for instance I wouldn't get very far if I said "I think 2+2=5 and I should be entitled to my opinion. I also think that it's disgraceful that some people want to force their view that 2+2=4 on me!".

That's where the use of supporting evidence comes in; an opinion carries weight when backed up by evidence, but when there is no evidence to back it up, it serves as little more than blind faith. There is a possibility that what we are experiencing is just natural variation, but the longer this goes on for, the more excessively unlikely this possibility seems to become...

[Stratos Ferric]

Who sets the "reasonable statistical bounds"?

Who says it is unprecedented?

Has there ever been a "flat" climate?

B)

The reasonable statistical bounds are set by standard mathematical tests like "t" tests: precisely the same tests that are used to test, say, the safety of drugs prior to certification (have you ever noticed how few people die from routine use of pharmaceuticals, and the huge overall net benefit), whether or not your mobile phone really does cause cancer, whether certain locations are more prone to radiation related illnesses and what might be causing those...in fact a whole load of things in everyday life.

It is unprecedented in the measured record, against which the use of inferential stats tells us that the return period is so long, and the likelihood of this being a blip (rather than driven by fundamental change) so small, that this really cannot be considered a blip.

No, there has never been a flat climate, but variation tends to be within given limits. In the same way that human beings (it varies though by ethnicity) grow to different heights, but the very vast majority of the population grows to between about 4'10" and 6'4". The population as a whole, however, is slowly growing taller and taller: this latter is evolution, the former is variation about the dynamic mean. That is perfectly natural behaviour. It becomes interesting when the rate of change in the dynamic mean suddenly lurches. Precisely where, very measurably, we are right now.

[The PIT]

There is a possibility that what we are experiencing is just natural variation, but the longer this goes on for, the more excessively unlikely this possibility seems to become...

Of course this time period could be thousands of years and not just a decade for example.

[osmposm]

what happened to the Medieval warm period? As far as I know we have no way of checking what the actual weather was like then, but we do know that it was warmer than today, I think the consensus was it warmed quickly.

No, we certainly don't know that it was warmer than today. In Britain it seems likely (though we can't be sure) that summer heat was comparable, but winter cold was greater then. It is known, for example, that the Thames froze hard very occasionally throughout the period: even allowing for changes in the river's form/flow and urban effects, that suggests that winter temperatures in Britain were sometimes substantially colder, and for long periods, than during the last 40 years at any rate. I'm also not aware that it is suggested that the warming took place especially quickly either, but I may be wrong.

[gmoran]

No, there has never been a flat climate, but variation tends to be within given limits. In the same way that human beings (it varies though by ethnicity) grow to different heights, but the very vast majority of the population grows to between about 4'10" and 6'4". The population as a whole, however, is slowly growing taller and taller: this latter is evolution, the former is variation about the dynamic mean. That is perfectly natural behaviour. It becomes interesting when the rate of change in the dynamic mean suddenly lurches. Precisely where, very measurably, we are right now.

SF

What I don't understand is how this squares against what is the established view of the last thousand years, that does include the Medieval Warming Period and the Little Ice-Age. What we currently see in the UK is a dramatic change in the norm compared to our detailed record; probably because our basic synoptics have changed due to GW. But this doesn't look unprecedented in written history, in fact there is a pattern of warming and cooling. What makes this current pattern unprecedented?

I don't think your analogy with human height holds water at all. There is a viewpoint on NW, that the shift in UK climate is due to a shift in the position of the PJS, which in turn is a result of GW, effectively causing our climate to be far more continental in flavour. If this is the case, or some similar factor, it allows normal climatic variablity to have some very dramatic effects on regional climates.

[Stratos Ferric]

I don't understand why you keep replying to my posts with the same thing when I have said many many times that the current weather, and on the back of the trends since 1988 are very significant indeed B) . This is getting extremely repetitive B)

...Additionally, at no point have I said that anyone else's view is unreasonable. Differently though, I don't seek to impose my own view on others...

Noggin, a lady with common sense, is applying the suggestion of climate variability in the same way as I am.

You may be right or not with your own conclusions - but this is a voluntary forum, with differing views and philosophies and none of us are paid to substantiate our views on the basis that the future vindicates them. The problem also, is that the duration of our average lives is a dot in the ocean in climatalogical patterns and we may never know the real answers in our net-weather lifetimes. Speculation can continue of course, but we should be able to take a 'wait and see' approach if we wish - as an alternative to the equally valid option of pronouncing GW Lurch Part IV , or whatever .

In this sense your own posts which 'whiff of a self-think' of alleged cold-mongering vs the rest of the world introduces a devisive element which is best if erased.Suggestions of continuing ostrich mentality is both derogatory and unnecessary - just because you belive such people who have a more restrained view than you appear foolish and live in melting igloos surrounded by rising seas.

Tamara

Tamara,

I agree and disagree in equal measure with much of the above. There is not, nor have I ever suggested there to be, more weight in one person's right to make a case than there is in another person's. That is not to say that having posted here any view should be protected from challenge. If I challenge robustly then so be it: answer the challenge, and do so equally robustly. My whole point is that "wait and see" is quite demonstrably teetering on the edge of being a provable and invalid position to take. You are well within your rights to stay there, just as you would be entitled to stay in your house on the slopes of an active and rumbling volcano starting to throw ash and smoke out, but that does not exclude from me a right to say that I think you're wrong, if only because there may be other dwellers on that slope waiting to make their minds up about what to do.

Noggin may well have common sense, but common sense is not the nub of the argument. Amongst those on here who support, no less stridently than I do, the case for warming there are equally people who have common sense, every bit as much as Noggin. TWS, for instance, exudes it in every response he writes on every forum. Let's not try to infer that the "common sense" position on this, therefore, is "wait and see". Common sense does not correlate consistently with enlightenment.

If I get irritated by the tendency on here of one or two people to be in cahoots with each other then I make no apology. It's the same in winter when the occasional forecast for cold attracts a load of "great forecast Noddy" type comments, when many far more thoughtful forecasts (of whatever persuasion) attract no such critique from the same people. It's a bit like me saying "great fried Sausage my best friend Mr Chippy" as if it were the pinnacle of culinary finesse, when there is Michelin starred restaurant next door that I've never set foot in. The ability to agree with people simply because they say things you want to hear is laudable and supportive, but it's not the same as agreeing with a well constructed argument irrespective of who has formulated it.

[Stratos Ferric]

SF

What I don't understand is how this squares against what is the established view of the last thousand years, that does include the Medieval Warming Period and the Little Ice-Age. What we currently see in the UK is a dramatic change in the norm compared to our detailed record; probably because our basic synoptics have changed due to GW. But this doesn't look unprecedented in written history, in fact there is a pattern of warming and cooling. What makes this current pattern unprecedented?

I don't think your analogy with human height holds water at all. There is a viewpoint on NW, that the shift in UK climate is due to a shift in the position of the PJS, which in turn is a result of GW, effectively causing our climate to be far more continental in flavour. If this is the case, or some similar factor, it allows normal climatic variablity to have some very dramatic effects on regional climates.

Yes, well, as one of the people on here who first put this theory forwards (if not the first - TWS and I were discussing this - and being dismissed by most people - over four years ago and long before NW was up and running) I have to agree, but let's be clear, the PFJ doesn't just meander semi-permanently of its own accord. For the macro circulation to change across the entire hemisphere the net balance of warm and cold air must have changed, meaning the entire PFJ is on average displaced polewards (or in the other direction if we're cooling).

In this regard my analogy is actually bang on the money. Climate changes, but it doesn't mean that any one year has to be warmer than the last. An occasional frustration on N-W is the idiotic posting from somebody, following a cold night say, to the effect of "where now GW"? Weather fluctuates widely around a moving mean, and it varies on any timescale you choose to pick. The point is that at present that mean is upwards. The point of the current fluctuation, and if you read back in this thread you will see I have made the same point more than once myself, is that sometime, in the next year or two or five, things will cool (or at least become less excessively warm), but it is looking like they will not go to the floor levels that they would forty, or twenty, or possibly even just five years ago.

The unknown about the middle ages is the extent to which that was a localised or global change. As I keep saying almost adnauseum, in the measured record there is no comparison to where we are now: this warmth is year round, sustained, and of an absolute level and geographical scale that excludes all previous measured comparison.

As far as detailed weather observations go, records for the last 2 decades look unprecedented in terms of warmth. It seems to me there is good evidence for a change in the UK's climate; i.e. this isn't normal variability. However this change may not be unprecedented in terms of all climate types, as the little ice age sounds just as dramatic with the Thames regularly freezing over and sea ice off the coast, and I would have thought that would have shown up in the CET record? And certainly the UK and the world climate has a great deal of variability, in the last 1000 years we have had the little ice age and the medieval warming period (comparable to our own present warming and possibly higher). It seems likely that the world was entering a warmer phase after the little ice age, and that AGW is acting on top of that. The interesting thing will be when the natural warming cycle ends, will climate continue to warm but more slowly; stabilise; or cool. The UK may be on a battle front, so Winters like we used to know them could return in future decades.

IF this carries on for another 3-6 months, you might want to go look at the plots of CET (I may refresh my own this evening): believe me, there is absolutely NO such dramatic warming ANYWHERE in the record. As I posted earlier in the thread, at this stage this year we are something like 1.5C above where we were last year (and that off an already historically high level) on a 12 month rolling basis. It's one thing to rebound upwards from a cold start, but to explode upwards from the ceiling is quite another altogether.

Let's be clear, it cannot be sustained for much longer, but in saying that what if it is...I wonder what "common sense" will say then?