September CET!

[Anti-Mild]

I think that average is just out of reach but September will end up at 13.8c which is a huge turnaround from the last few Septembers and a decent foundation for a second consecutive below average season.

That said, I reckon a below average Autumn will rely on a cold November as I think October will be quite mild.

[Stratos Ferric]

VP if you can't add anything to a serious debate except accusing someone asking honest questions of stirring then don't bother posting.

SF - ignore the imbecile him. Those are real questions. In terms of the CET what would you think would be the markers that the warm up was slowing down, if you allow yourself hypothetically that possibility? What in terms of the CET would make you catch your breath slightly?

WiB...be patient, all of that is coming, but it's a frantic time of year for me at work in an environment where the baseline is mad.

Re this month, haven't seen any of this morning's posts, but yesterday landed warmer than I 'feared'. 13.9 is now the floor unless there's some rounding up going on today, and I suspect the 2 d.p. point is between 13.9-14. Altogether, since I've been producing the thrice-monthly extrapolations, I think this month is perhaps the one that GFS has nailed best from furthest out.

[The PIT]

Well we're certain to get an above average month for our region temperatures shooting up now as the sun comes out. Gone up 1.7C in the last hour. At present it would be our coolest September since 2003 finishing off a rather boring month.

I guess it all depends on a whether there are clear skies or not over the CET region tonight. Cloud with a decent Max may even nudge it up a bit. 14.1C would sound nice dunno why.

Edited September 29, 2007 by The PIT

[West is Best]

14.1C would sound nice dunno why.

It won't go up. Mins of 11C and maxes averaging 16C makes for 13.5C - a drop not a rise. And tonight will be very chilly.

The final Manley figure will be 13.8C or 13.9C. I think the latter, but it all depends how low those single figure mins fall tonight.

This will mean that by Manley the official figure will be average (within 0.2C). As for Hadley, we need to wait and see the official verdict. Recently they have marked down the Hadobs figures each month (last month by 0.3C)

Edited September 29, 2007 by West is Best

[West is Best]

By the way, it is now certain to be the coldest 4 months June to September for fifteen years (since 1993). It will be below the 1971-2000 average, and matching the ancient cold benchmark 1961-1990 average. Furthermore, July to September is substantially below the 1961-1990 average.

Edited September 29, 2007 by West is Best

[The PIT]

Dunno there's a few sixteen and seventeen's around cloud comes over min of 13C and you get 14.5C to 15C. All depends. Like I said I like 14.1C very much.

[West is Best]

Dunno there's a few sixteen and seventeen's around cloud comes over min of 13C and you get 14.5C to 15C. All depends. Like I said I like 14.1C very much.

Yes but the mins weren't 13C and 14C The Pit - they were around 11C last night. If you're talking about tonight then there is no way the CET mins will be that high - in lots of places they will be well down in single figures.

[The PIT]

Yes but the mins weren't 13C and 14C The Pit - they were around 11C last night. If you're talking about tonight then there is no way the CET mins will be that high - in lots of places they will be well down in single figures.

I'm talking about tonight laddie I guess you're still waiting for todays update.

[Nick H]

June-Sept 07 is the coldest since 1993, well below average. Jul-Sept is substantially below the old cold 1961-1990 benchmark. How much evidence does it take to make people sit up ...?

Absurd.

No reputable scientist has ever said that AGW precludes colder than average months or even colder than average seasons. I will sit up when , and I think TM's guidance on this is pretty reasonable, we have two or three years where there are several below average months. I couldn't suppress a smile when you described the "old 1961-1990 benchmark" as "cold". "Cold" - says who? Oh, you! Eastern Europe has seen temperatures well above average in the past 3 months, incidentally.

From your obsession with the WiB High to your new found love for cold weather; from your crocodile tears about how little WIB will never see any snow in their lifetime, to your premature assertion that AGW is dead; from your unswerving support from the Tories under a social conservative at the last election, to your love of the public sector which would make Stalin proud and your distancing from the Tories under a public school educated toff (of which I know you yourself are one): Richard, no one takes you seriously anymore.

Edited September 29, 2007 by Nick H

[Weather-history]

. Furthermore, July to September is substantially below the 1961-1990 average.

Substantially?

1961-90 CET averages

July: 16.1

August: 15.8

September: 13.6

A 1961-90 CET average of 15.2 for that period

Currently its about 14.9

0.3C below is not exactly substantial

July-September 1993 was 1.1C below the 1961-90 average. Now thats a bit more substantial.

[West is Best]

I'm talking about tonight laddie I guess you're still waiting for todays update.

Looks cold though tonight mate - at least in the CET zone.

Nick - the important thing is to move with changing facts, rather than back old monoliths. This is how humanity has advanced: when intelligent people can learn to adapt. Politically the vitriol of your message just reinforces my belief that the nasty party are still out of touch with ordinary people. On the weather, I'm just questionning. It's the second substantive below average season. You mention eastern Europe, but they had a bone chilling winter the one before last. My point is simply that if we get much more of this it will cause more and more intelligent people who are ready and able to change if the facts do, to at least sit up and question. TEMPORA MUTANTUR, NOS ET MUTAMUR IN ILLIS

As for 1961-1990 - of course it's a cold mean doh It's colder than either the 1971-2000 mean AND the 100 year rolling average. Would you like me to paste in the figures? Oh what the heck, I will anyway: First column is 1961-1990, second is 1971-2000 and the third is the rolling 100 year average.

January 3.8 4.2 3.9

February 3.8 4.2 4.1

March 5.7 6.3 5.9

April 7.9 8.1 8.1

May 11.2 11.3 11.4

June 14.1 14.1 14.2

July 16.1 16.5 16.1

August 15.8 16.2 15.9

Sept 13.6 13.7 13.6

Oct 10.6 10.4 10.2

Nov 6.5 6.9 6.6

Dec 4.6 5.1 4.7

The annual CET from the 3 means is as follows:

1961-1990: 9.5

1971-2000: 9.75

1906-2005: 9.6

So the 1961-1990 CET mean is colder than the 100 years in which it sits. How much more proof, then, of the fact that it's a cold mean would you like me to supply?

Edited September 29, 2007 by West is Best

[PersianPaladin]

Absurd.

No reputable scientist has ever said that AGW precludes colder than average months or even colder than average seasons. I will sit up when , and I think TM's guidance on this is pretty reasonable, we have two or three years where there are several below average months. I couldn't suppress a smile when you described the "old 1961-1990 benchmark" as "cold". "Cold" - says who? Oh, you! Eastern Europe has seen temperatures well above average in the past 3 months, incidentally.

From your obsession with the WiB High to your new found love for cold weather; from your crocodile tears about how little WIB will never see any snow in their lifetime, to your premature assertion that AGW is dead; from your unswerving support from the Tories under a social conservative at the last election, to your love of the public sector which would make Stalin proud and your distancing from the Tories under a public school educated toff (of which I know you yourself are one): Richard, no one takes you seriously anymore.

I think accusing WIB of being like Stalin is out of line there dude.

Edited September 29, 2007 by PersianPaladin

[West is Best]

I think accusing WIB of being like Stalin is out of line there dude.

Thanks. I think the whole post was a bit out of line, but I'm not going to complain. I'd rather leave it up there - it doesn't refect very well on someone who is supposed to be senior on this forum.

[PersianPaladin]

So the 1961-1990 CET mean is colder than the 100 years in which it sits. How much more proof, then, of the fact that it's a cold mean would you like me to supply?

I think its more a question of semantics here mate. You did say 'substantial'. Although that really depends on what ones opinion of 'substantial' really indicates.

[West is Best]

I think its more a question of semantics here mate. You did say 'substantial'. Although that really depends on what ones opinion of 'substantial' really indicates.

Hi - I think that's a different issue. Nick was asking how I dared to call the 1961-1990 mean a cold one, which as I've demonstrated it manifestly is. It's important to remember that 0.1C over an annual period is a lot more substantial than over one month.

As for the 3 months Kevin raised, cumulatively the 1961-1990 average totals 45.5C and this year willbe about a degree lower at 44.5C (if Sept is 13.9C). That's quite substantial over a whole season, certainly by the measure of these days. Against the 1971-2000 mean it's 2 degrees lower: that's quite a lot.

[PersianPaladin]

Hi - I think that's a different issue. Nick was asking how I dared to call the 1961-1990 mean a cold one, which as I've demonstrated it manifestly is. It's important to remember that 0.1C over an annual period is a lot more substantial than over one month.

As for the 3 months Kevin raised, cumulatively the 1961-1990 average totals 45.5C and this year willbe about a degree lower at 44.5C (if Sept is 13.9C). That's quite substantial over a whole season, certainly by the measure of these days. Against the 1971-2000 mean it's 2 degrees lower: that's quite a lot.

I understand that the 1961-1990 avg temp benchmark is substantially cooler than the CET temps measured from the mid nineties to the present day. However, you are only talking about a period of recent below average temps from May to September. That isn't an entire year and isnt really a sign imo..that trends are switching back to the previous baseline mean temps. Remember last summer, autumn and winter and the constant consecutive above-average months lasting until this April? I feel that our spring, summer and autumn has been a means of balancing out the previous large anamolies...although the balancing has not exactly switched the pendulum firmly in the opposite direction. This month for example...may end up below average; but only just. If that.

Edited September 29, 2007 by PersianPaladin

[Weather-history]

.

As for the 3 months Kevin raised, cumulatively the 1961-1990 average totals 45.5C and this year willbe about a degree lower at 44.5C (if Sept is 13.9C). That's quite substantial over a whole season, certainly by the measure of these days. Against the 1971-2000 mean it's 2 degrees lower: that's quite a lot.

Thats a cop out.

We don't measure seasonal temperatures cumulatively, we average them.

Edited September 29, 2007 by Mr_Data

[PersianPaladin]

Thats a cop out.

We don't measure seasonal temperatures cumulatively, we average them.

Well..as the old addage goes. There are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics.

Edited September 29, 2007 by PersianPaladin

[West is Best]

We don't measure seasonal temperatures cumulatively, we average them.

Yes and that's fine too. 0.3C below the 1961-1990 average over a 3 month period is substantial relative to recent performance would you not agree Kevin?

Edited September 29, 2007 by West is Best

[Snowyowl9]

I guess it all depends on a whether there are clear skies or not over the CET region tonight. Cloud with a decent Max may even nudge it up a bit. 14.1C would sound nice dunno why.

13.9c sounds even nicer

Tonight does look colder in more central/eastern parts later under HP.

As for here milder and duller which won`t count.

http://85.214.49.20/pics/Rtavn1817.png

[Stratos Ferric]

I think accusing WIB of being like Stalin is out of line there dude.

I think you're correct in what I assume is your assertion that Stalin had little interest in the weather; though it was a big help in Stalingrad.

[West is Best]

I think you're correct in what I assume is your assertion that Stalin had little interest in the weather; though it was a big help in Stalingrad.

It was indeed. Have you read the marvellous Antony Beevor account of it? The demise of the Sixth Army is one of the most remarkable events of the C20th and undoubtedly a turning point in the war. And the weather played a major part. As indeed it did when Napoleon thought it would be a good idea to march on Moscow in 1812. Remarkable that both attacks got bogged down in autumn, and then reached their annihilation in cold winters. I say remarkable because you would have thought Hitler might have learned from history.

I think I've been called many things in my life, but Stalinist is a first I must say

Edited September 29, 2007 by West is Best

[Stratos Ferric]

...It's the second substantive below average season. ...

Is it? Since when?

WiB, just to put this in some sort of context, the twelve month rolling CET is still around 10.9C: irrespective of whether we have had a few cold months (none of them exceptionally cold) the fact remains, over any period of time bar the immediate short-term, we are still in historic terms unprecedentedly warm.

In general terms, I will sit up and take note when the 10 year mean CET gets back down below 10. Even at ten it's off the previous scale, but it might give some credence to any argument that the modern climate is blip.

[West is Best]

That's fair enough SF - stringent indeed. But to be fair I wasn't asking for you to test whether the modern climate was a blip. That would be to deny the evidence of the last 50+ years. I'm certainly not going down that route, nor am I denying GW has been happening. What I was asking you was what it would take to make you begin to question whether the accelerated warming shows signs of slowing or even is beginning to go the other way i.e. reached its peak ? I've put that in bold not to shout, but to highlight the different issue.

p.s. The other below was that run from late 2005 to spring 2006.

Edited September 29, 2007 by West is Best

[Gavin P]

A sub 14c September, after whats gone before, is going to be pretty darn amazing. The coldest September since 2001, and as it'll be within a couple of tenths of average, it'll be classed as an "average" September!

Another indication that since May, we seem to have entered a rather differant temperature set-up (for now)