Jump to content
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?
IGNORED

The ' I NEED TO SCREAM' thread.


Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Nr Appleby in Westmorland
  • Location: Nr Appleby in Westmorland

Oi, oi, oi. Stop it.

Richard, you can't simply go around saying things like

I don't think you would though Devonian even if it was happening
because it's a slur and completely without basis.

It is entirely possible for people to disagree with you without either being wrong, or a liar you know.

Now either address my point or butt out of it.

And any more of that, and you know what's going to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and lots of it or warm and sunny, no mediocre dross
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl

Stratos:

As someone who grew up on an old fashioned farm which had been farmed by the same family for generations, I do indeed have data to the contrary; detailed accounts and crop yields dating back to the early 1800’s. Good years and bad years, all accompanied by details of why the yields had differed; cold wet spring, hot dry summer etc. I also have over twenty years of hands-on experience of horticulture. Hardly empty rhetoric, wouldn’t you say? In fact, continuing the theme of frank exchange of words; I’d say your eagerness to discount what I said, based on your acceptance of third hand experience, is more a classic example of rhetoric.

When it comes to tender plants over-wintering; firstly let’s start with the official side of things. The Royal Horticultural Society has not amended their plant hardiness zones or advice. Across the pond, things are a little different, plant hardiness zones have been amended – southwards. There have been and always will be mild years, spots in gardens more protected than others, places with better drainage etc; that is the nature of gardening. Some years you can plant let’s say for arguments sake, Osteospurnum, it is a tender, summer bedding plant originating from South Africa. Some years it will make it through the winter, some years it won’t; now that could be because the winter is mild or it could be it was planted in a favoured, sheltered spot, if it had been cultivated from seed in this country and grown-on in an unheated greenhouse or cold frame it will be more hardy than one imported from South Africa or grown at speed in a Dutch hothouse. All of those things have an effect on whether or not that plant will survive our winter; none of them are related to climate change. Climate change with its 0.6 degree increase in global temps will make not a jot of difference. And yet, go into a garden centre, listen to those who’s gardens I get the remit to design and you would imagine the face of British gardening has changed irrevocably. It has not. When it comes to plants growing and surviving here which wouldn’t have stood a chance even twenty years ago; wrong again. Good years and bad ones; nothing more.

When it comes to persisting to doubt something which I can’t be bothered to find out about; well the first thing which springs to mind is pot and kettle. How much horticultural research did you do before stating I was wrong? Dev claimed there had been no cold months since 1986, presumably that meant deviating from the norm as set by the CET? He’s wrong, there have been. I accept I didn’t go off and scour through the numbers; I also said I didn’t have an encyclopaedic knowledge of them but then you don’t need to have, you just need to read through threads on here, pay attention, to realise that in fact this summers’ temps have been below average and therefore cold.

Please explain how it is possible to misinterpret “only a taste of the troubles that lie ahead.” And “I think we are too complacent about the weather we are going to get in coming decades”? Or indeed “There will be a rise in temperatures of between 2C and 4C in Britain by the end of the century, with my best guess putting the final figure at the higher end of the spectrum. What is happening now will be nothing compared to what occurs then.” In his role as President his words will be taken as authoritative, he is quoted as speaking in absolute terms for something which even the most adamant adherents to the theory of AGW do not claim an absolute for. Short of a crystal ball I fail to see how he can proclaim that by the end of the century temperatures in this country will have increased between 2C and 4C. My desire to scream is stimulated by the utter nonsense which is peddled wholesale on this subject; when it is peddled by someone in authority I succumb to my urge.

Considering extraordinary things (no dictionary needed thank you) are you not surprised by this summer? Would you, or indeed the President of the RMS with his crystal ball have foreseen it? Would you have dared call it if you had? Complacently relying on last years weather or the year before or the one before that, to predict future weather is ludicrous. The Earth and its climate is an inherently chaotic, non-linear system; predicting the weather with the parameters we know about proves interminably impossible; given we know so little but presume we know so much, I don’t expect an advancement any time soon.

Proponents of AGW who flare unadvisedly at what is perfectly fair comment also detract from the worth of their stance. Those who chop and change the parameters of what they see as legitimate data do a great deal to damage their legitimate position overall. If I or any other person, qualified or not had come out and declared this summer as proof that global warming was not happening, had halted or flipped then those comments, quite rightly would have been dismissed. A thirty year old weather record for a small part of a small island does not prove, validate, demonstrate or indeed illustrate AGW. It is a record of weather, no more, no less and whilst we continue to have people on here and in the media throughout the world claiming that each and every weather event is proof of global warming or otherwise, I will continue to succumb to my urge and scream about the fundamental difference between weather and climate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
...Dev claimed there had been no cold months since 1986, presumably that meant deviating from the norm as set by the CET?...

Erm, excuse me, but I said "We haven't had a seriously cold month since 1986...". My emphasis - and Feb 86 was seriously cold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and lots of it or warm and sunny, no mediocre dross
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl
Erm, excuse me, but I said "We haven't had a seriously cold month since 1986...". My emphasis - and Feb 86 was seriously cold.

My apologies. Please define seriously. And the point is? It's like saying we haven't had a seriously snowy winter since 1963, either we are talking about averages as defined by the CET, or we are not. Extreme events are just that, extreme; not really an appropriate measuring stick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
My apologies. Please define seriously. And the point is? It's like saying we haven't had a seriously snowy winter since 1963, either we are talking about averages as defined by the CET, or we are not. Extreme events are just that, extreme; not really an appropriate measuring stick.

Well, I meant, in that case, what all weather fans know as seriously cold - a month below 0C mean temp. But I also had in the back of my mind that Feb 86 was the last month with a large -ve anomaly. But, I may be wrong about that - so someone can allude to me being untruthful rather than wrong...

Look, why don't you read things properly first instead of pitching in without stopping to think, especially when it wasn't even addressed to you?

I have posted facts up about this summer against the 10 year rolling average which is Stratos Ferric's own proudly proclaimed preferred measuring stick - which is why I've now put it back to him. If you care to look you'll see exactly what I mean. Now either address my point or butt out of it. By the way, it is pretty scandalous really that that Met O link is still comparing to the 1961-1990 average . I can see why people get very hot under the collar. 1990 is 17 years ago now, and there's no real excuse for them to be using that anymore.

Here's the relevant paragraph again, sigh:

'By the way, just to play with some local data and taking your favoured 10-year rolling average. Summer is a three-month season, and therefore a reasonably long timespan. We have just witnessed the coolest summer for fifteen years in the UK (though equal with 1998). At 15.2C the summer was 'well below average' compared to the 16.3C rolling 10 year average. I haven't checked but I'm guessing it's the coldest season relative to the average for more than a decade. Does this indicate the end of global warming... ? Presumably not, but might give pause for thought?'

Ok, point taken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion
By the way, it is pretty scandalous really that that Met O link is still comparing to the 1961-1990 average . I can see why people get very hot under the collar.

I know, fancy following international convention. Next thing they'll be giving out temperatures in celcius or using UTC ....... :(

btw ever occur to anyone that, were it nor for recent anthropogenic climate change, the summer just gone could well have been even colder? :(

And what if the predicted forthcoming Gleissberg Minimum does indeed lead to a decadal cooling trend ..... but fail to see temps drop much below the 61-90 average (as I predict will be the case)? :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and lots of it or warm and sunny, no mediocre dross
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl
Well, I meant, in that case, what all weather fans know as seriously cold - a month below 0C mean temp. But I also had in the back of my mind that Feb 86 was the last month with a large -ve anomaly. But, I may be wrong about that - so someone can allude to me being untruthful rather than wrong...

Ok, point taken.

Ok. But I'd rather say a fact is wrong than declare someone a liar, the first is a mistake, the latter a deliberate ploy to deceive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erm, excuse me, but I said "We haven't had a seriously cold month since 1986...". My emphasis - and Feb 86 was seriously cold.

But we have had a 'well below average' season against Stratos Ferric's 10 year rolling average. Fact, and a much more serious one than a below average month - a whole season is much more 'interesting'.

Essan ... 1961-1990 is old old old hat. At the very least they could update to 1971-2000. In fact most of the Met Office do use the latter so there's no excuse for some sections still using the very old mean. This is just the sort of thing that gets the science of climate change a very bad name, and if you're serious about science I hope you'd agree. It looks as if it's deliberate ...

OON/Devonian - apologies, I think my comment was either clumsy or misconstrued ... or both. I merely wondered if Devonian would accept if there were, say, a 'well below average' season set against the mean of, say, the rolling average of the last 10 years. But it was infelicitously expressed for which apologies.

By the way Devonian 'seriously cold' isn't really a Met O designation. I keep forgetting what terms they do use but I know that 'well below average' is one for a month or season exceeding 1 degree below.

Edited by West is Best
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
But we have had a 'well below average' season against Stratos Ferric's 10 year rolling average. Fact, and a much more serious one than a below average month - a whole season is much more 'interesting'.

Essan ... 1961-1990 is old old old hat. At the very least they could update to 1971-2000. In fact most of the Met Office do use the latter so there's no excuse for some sections still using the very old mean. This is just the sort of thing that gets the science of climate change a very bad name, and if you're serious about science I hope you'd agree. It looks as if it's deliberate ..

I can see two arguments here. One, that to measure change you need a base. Two that climate means should refer to 'now'.

I suspect if we used 1971-2000 means the changes from mean levels would not seem so large to the untutored eye (since some of the changes would be part of a higher mean) and thus would be, by some no doubt, trumpeted as less significant. Fo that reason I rather dread the day we move to 1971-2000 or indeed 1991-2020... That's why I'd used a older base - to better show change. But, if you want to know how things compare with 'now' you need a 'now' average.

Indeed, I'd go so far say to say I think I begin to sense (no more than that) younger weather observers in places like this one call weather as 'cold' based on their experience of the present - so not cold as in what in the past was cold. But, hey, perhaps I'm just ageing :o

OON/Devonian - apologies, I think my comment was either clumsy or misconstrued ... or both. I merely wondered if Devonian would accept if there were, say, a 'well below average' season set against the mean of, say, the rolling average of the last 10 years. But it was infelicitously expressed for which apologies.

By the way Devonian 'seriously cold' isn't really a Met O designation. I keep forgetting what terms they do use but I know that 'well below average' is one for a month or season exceeding 1 degree below.

Again, fair enough and, as I said, accept the 10 year thing :(

Edited by Devonian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and lots of it or warm and sunny, no mediocre dross
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl
Everyone gets jumped on - it's one of the 'sine qua non's' of internet discussion.

Oh no you don't...

You know who I mean by qualified - climatologists and meteorologists from the Met O, NOAA, IPCC and the rest. They are the qualified ones.

Don't mean to squibble needlessly but I've posted literally dozens and dozens of peer reviewed papers from reputable, qualified scientists, even some of those hallowed IPCC folk who raise questions. The sceptic stance isn't all quack you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see two arguments here. One, that to measure change you need a base. Two that climate means should refer to 'now'.

I suspect if we used 1971-2000 means the changes from mean levels would not seem so large to the untutored eye (since some of the changes would be part of a higher mean) and thus would be, by some no doubt, trumpeted as less significant. Fo that reason I rather dread the day we move to 1971-2000 or indeed 1991-2020... That's why I'd used a older base - to better show change. But, if you want to know how things compare with 'now' you need a 'now' average.

Hiya - I agree on all points. I have to be open about the fact that for a long time I preferred the 1961-1990 base. But, hand on heart, it was because I believed in AGW and wanted to demonstrate the effects more starkly against the older, colder, mean. Stratos Ferric along with Snowmaiden have really pushed the 10 year mean as being a better way to measure the trending of climate. I happen to question whether it really does that, but in the spirit of their mean I thought I should point out to them that it means this summer was 'well below average' :( Snowmaiden won't mind that, but I'm greatly looking forward to Stratos' spin take on it.

This summer was, anyway, below average against all official CET measurements, although admittedly against the 1961-90 one only just.

The summer CET was 15.2C :Hadley official figure http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/hadle.../HadCET_act.txt

That's 0.4C below the 1971-2000 average

0.1C below the 1961-1990 average and

0.2C below the 100 year 1906-2005 average

and

1.1C below the up-to-date 10 year rolling average.

Anyway, back to the screaming topic. I'm not turning against GW. Unfortunately I think it's a reality, although I'd love it to be just cyclical as opposed to anthropogenic and for us to get a correction. What I am against are the ludicrous things being published in the media on the subject in which just about any and everything is getting blamed on climate change. The science behind many of the claims, including and especially extreme weather events, strikes me as virtually non-existent.

Edited by West is Best
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion
Essan ... 1961-1990 is old old old hat. At the very least they could update to 1971-2000. In fact most of the Met Office do use the latter so there's no excuse for some sections still using the very old mean. This is just the sort of thing that gets the science of climate change a very bad name, and if you're serious about science I hope you'd agree. It looks as if it's deliberate ...

Well complain to the WMO then.

It's the standard international convention. Like the use of SI units and UTC. The whole point is to have a fixed reference period, and the for the same period to be used by everyone. Scientists don't change such things on a whim just because a few non-scientists object :(

I personally think the standard convention of measuring weather data on a 24 hrs to 09z basis is daft - but I doubt that'll change any decade soon :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well complain to the WMO then.

It's the standard international convention.

I'm sorry but you are talking out your hat on this. 1971-2000 is the accepted mean in most parts of the Met Office now and there's one reason and only one reason some sections still use the 1961-1990 base: they haven't yet got round to changing it. (Well, that's unless you buy into the conspiracy theory that some on here believe, namely that sections of the Met O deliberately use the colder mean to distort their take on AGW.)

There's no need for me to complain to anyone on it. I doubt you will find more than 5% support on NW for using the oldest mean so I don't feel any need to defend my call for the rest of the Met O to hurry up and get their act together by moving on with the rest of the MetO and use the slightly more up to date mean.

I'm not known as one to criticise them, but by the time they get round to switching all sections to 1971-2000 other parts will be onto 1981-2010 ;) :o

Edited by West is Best
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion
I'm sorry but you are talking out your hat on this. 1971-2000 is the accepted mean in most parts of the Met Office

The current standard WMO climate period is 1961-1990. The next period will be 1991-2020

The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) requires the calculation of averages for consecutive periods of 30 years, with the latest covering the 1961-1990 period. However, many WMO members, including the UK, update their averages at the completion of each decade. Thirty years was chosen as a period long enough to eliminate year-to-year variations.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/index.html

Date for 71-00 is available and may be used. Just as one may measure pressure in mb instead of hPa. However, the WMO standards are for 61-90 and hPa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The current standard WMO climate period is 1961-1990. The next period will be 1991-2020

Er 'However, many WMO members, including the UK, update their averages at the completion of each decade' (Ibid.)

The Met Office have officially updated their averages to 1971-2000. Only not all sections have caught up yet. As we were talking about the Met Office I rest my case!

Edited by West is Best
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Steeton, W Yorks, 270m ASL
  • Location: Steeton, W Yorks, 270m ASL
Stratos:

...I also have over twenty years of hands-on experience of horticulture. Hardly empty rhetoric, wouldn't you say? In fact, continuing the theme of frank exchange of words; I'd say your eagerness to discount what I said, based on your acceptance of third hand experience, is more a classic example of rhetoric.

When it comes to tender plants over-wintering; firstly let's start with the official side of things. The Royal Horticultural Society has not amended their plant hardiness zones or advice. ...

When it comes to persisting to doubt something which I can't be bothered to find out about; well the first thing which springs to mind is pot and kettle. How much horticultural research did you do before stating I was wrong? Dev claimed there had been no cold months since 1986, presumably that meant deviating from the norm as set by the CET? He's wrong, there have been. I accept I didn't go off and scour through the numbers; I also said I didn't have an encyclopaedic knowledge of them but then you don't need to have, you just need to read through threads on here, pay attention, to realise that in fact this summers' temps have been below average and therefore cold.

Please explain how it is possible to misinterpret "only a taste of the troubles that lie ahead." And "I think we are too complacent about the weather we are going to get in coming decades"? Or indeed "There will be a rise in temperatures of between 2C and 4C in Britain by the end of the century, with my best guess putting the final figure at the higher end of the spectrum. What is happening now will be nothing compared to what occurs then." In his role as President his words will be taken as authoritative, he is quoted as speaking in absolute terms for something which even the most adamant adherents to the theory of AGW do not claim an absolute for. Short of a crystal ball I fail to see how he can proclaim that by the end of the century temperatures in this country will have increased between 2C and 4C. My desire to scream is stimulated by the utter nonsense which is peddled wholesale on this subject; when it is peddled by someone in authority I succumb to my urge.

...

A thirty year old weather record for a small part of a small island does not prove, validate, demonstrate or indeed illustrate AGW. It is a record of weather, no more, no less and whilst we continue to have people on here and in the media throughout the world claiming that each and every weather event is proof of global warming or otherwise, I will continue to succumb to my urge and scream about the fundamental difference between weather and climate.

First, to the growing season and whether or not I research. I read a lot, and am well aware that there has been a lot of discussion recently regarding the lengthening growing season in the UK. The phenomenally early start to this year just the latest example.

http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-chl...-trelissick.htm

http://environment.independent.co.uk/clima...icle2780175.ece

Just two articles that took a minute to find. And it's not only plants; animals, fish, pretty much everything is migrating polewards at present.

"Hands on experience" does not necessarily mean detailed record keeping. There is sound reason behind the Met Office insisting on consistent and standard instrumentation in record keeping. You may have detailed records of why crops have varied, but simkple year to year comparison without measurement (e.g. a screened thermometer) is, at best, squidgy information.

As Dev has said, and the point I was objecting to, was your challenge that there had been cold months since 1986. To state, as you do later, that August was below average and therefore cold is total nonsense. 0.5C would be below average, and yet far from cold: the official definition would be "close to average".

The UKMO used to keep official definitions for mean temperatures: John H may be able to correct but the bandings and definitions were something like (summer / winter):

>3C above norm (very hot / very warm)

2-3C above (hot / warm)

0.5-2C above (warm / mild)

+/- 0.5C about average

-0.5 - -2C (cool)

-2 - -3C (cold)

>-3C below par (very cold).

The whole point in having an anchored likert scale like that is that a constant frame of reference is provided. It stops your "hot" and my "cool" actually referencing the same phenomenon.

Either way, the last genuinely extremely cold month was back in 1986, Feb '86 was around 4.6C below par. December 95-Jan 96 just dipped below 2C below par, as did March 06.

You miss the main point of my post though. You criticise the President as if he were saying all of these things were going to happen. If you read carefully the article he says himself that he was being provocative. We seem the same behaviour on here too often: people criticising what they think somebody said, NOT WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DID SAY.

As to whether the past can indicate the future: you're a horitculturalist: will you trees be taller next year than this? How do you know? And by how much exactly?

As I keep pointing out to you - and you keep admitting you don't look at the numbers: maybe you ought to seeing as how the whole argument IS about something that is measurable and measured - any cursory assessment of the temperature pattern, particularly here in the UK, demonstrates that what we have at present is anything but NORMAL deviation about the mean. The fact is the weather is becoming more extreme, and for that reason climate (which is ONLY the average of the weather) is itself changing. No, we can't point to individual seasons or events as if the cause-effect is hard wired, but we can look for persistent patterns. For example, nearly every temperature record we set nowadays is a warm one. If we were oscillating around a flat mean would you not expect records to be set in both directions?

Hiya - I agree on all points. I have to be open about the fact that for a long time I preferred the 1961-1990 base. But, hand on heart, it was because I believed in AGW and wanted to demonstrate the effects more starkly against the older, colder, mean. Stratos Ferric along with Snowmaiden have really pushed the 10 year mean as being a better way to measure the trending of climate. I happen to question whether it really does that, but in the spirit of their mean I thought I should point out to them that it means this summer was 'well below average' :o Snowmaiden won't mind that, but I'm greatly looking forward to Stratos' spin take on it.

...

To be honest, different trends are useful for different things, and when I publish my occasional plots you will see I often use three lines: 10, 30 and 100 year rolling. There are arguments for each. Indeed WiB, the 10 year mean will always make more of an outlier of any event against trend than the thirty year will: that's simple maths and to be expected. Equally, it's meaningless data on its own. The fact is, this summer is an outlier on that basis because most of the others have been far warmer than the thirty year norm. As one or two of us pointed out previously, the time to judge this summer fully is some way downstream. I said the very same thing last autumn when I first picked up on the warm blip then: last September looked remarkable on its own, but was then followed by an unprecedented series of warm months. Less an outlier, more a part of something slightly larger. Now we might dip down, or we might stabilise, or we might climb: we just have to wait and see, though the general trend is clear as evidenced by the longer timeline.

My only issue with the stable 30 year reference is that there comes a time (given the lag in moving the reference forward) when it is already fifteen years out of date. As I've said before, in a flat climate that arguably is less important than in a changing one.

Ultimately, if you're making ABSOLUTE comparisons though, all that matters is that you use a common baseline for all.

But we have had a 'well below average' season against Stratos Ferric's 10 year rolling average. Fact, and a much more serious one than a below average month - a whole season is much more 'interesting'.

...

Sorry WiB, one final point and reference the likert scales I used in replyoing to Jethro. You cannot use a scale that applies to a thirty year series, to a shorter series. You would expect the intervals to be slightly larger for a smaller series because the data is likely to be more volatile. There are caveats to this point of view, however, the main one being whether your scale is intended to define absolute margins, or to contain a forced distribution (e.g. set the tail limits so that only 5% of events would be expected to fall outside them, etc.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact is, this summer is an outlier on that basis because most of the others have been far warmer than the thirty year norm. As one or two of us pointed out previously, the time to judge this summer fully is some way downstream.

Yes, unless of course it were indeed the first signs of a cooldown in the warmup, or even a cooldown full stop. Unlikely though that is, and without any other global references at my fingertips, it is at least possible.

Haven't we actually had a few of these little outliers of late though? Winter 2005-6 was 0.7C below the 10 year average. That doesn't even include March last year which (Devonian take note) was a seriously cold month in any and every sense: 4.9C making it:

0.8C below the 1961-1990 average

1.4C below the 1971-2000 average and, wait for it,

2.1C below the 10 year rolling mean

In fact, haven't there been rather too many of these 'cold outliers' for comfort in the last 2 or 3 years Stratos?

Edited by West is Best
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think a 10 year mean is of much use in making any sort of prediction of where our climate is headed. One or 2 freak years could skew the whole mean in one direction for another. It's interesting to look at what's happening in the short term, but I don't think you can make any judgements about our overall climate from just 10 years of data. A 30 year average is much better, and against that this summer would be defined, using Met Office classifications. as "close to average". Certainly not cold by any stretch of the imagination.

In fact, haven't there been rather too many of these 'cold outliers' for comfort in the last 2 or 3 years Stratos?

How about the warm outliers? We've had just in the last 2 years:

The warmest ever September

The warmest ever July

The warmest ever month

The warmest ever Autumn

The warmest ever April

The warmest ever 12 month period

The 2nd warmest summer ever

The warmest ever day in many parts on July 19

The 3rd (or 4th?) warmest ever winter.

The warmest ever first half to a year (2007)

The warmest ever last half to a year (2006) (if I remember right)

If you want to include 2003, also, the highest daily temperature recorded in the UK. Wasn't August 2003 also the warmest ever August? One of them anyway.

All this compared to one or 2 chilly months. Sorry, but there is absolutely no sign whatsoever of any sort of cooldown based on that. The last few years have been of astonishing warmth.

Edited by Magpie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think a 10 year mean is of much use

Nor do I actually, but I'm just using the scale that Stratos himself does like.

Yes yes we've had some warm things going on. But it's not absolute and there are plenty of reasons to throw back some of the cooler points of reference. In fact there has been nothing remotely warm for four and a half months now. Instead we've had almost the wettest summer on record, and the coldest for over a decade. Certainly against the Met Office average (1971-2000) it was below average: by just under half a degree centigrade.

It's not that I have suddenly ceased to be a believer in GW. I'm just weary of people distorting 'facts' to fit their theory - which is clearly going on - and of the media who are just making up any old thing they like. My problem with this is that it tends to makes me smell a rat, and I'm not referring to the contents of Baldrick's apple crumble.

Erm, excuse me, but I said "We haven't had a seriously cold month since 1986...". My emphasis - and Feb 86 was seriously cold.

Hiya - as I've mentioned above, March 2006 was certainly well below average: the second coldest March of the past 20 years. Still whenever a cold month or season occurs it's just an outlier afterall :o

By the way, it's a bit off to reference to Feb 86. It's the second coldest month of all since 1947, and the coldest February since 1947. It's not really representative.

Edited by West is Best
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not that I have suddenly ceased to be a believer in GW. I'm just weary of people distorting 'facts' to fit their theory - which is clearly going on - and of the media who are just making up any old thing they like.

I am too, but the last 2 years have seen so many warm records broken it's shocking. How many cold records were broken? None that I'm aware of. We have had a cool summer by recent standards, yup, but that is only 3 months, and a 3 month period in regard to climate is insignificant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Coalpit Heath, South Gloucestershire
  • Location: Coalpit Heath, South Gloucestershire
In fact, haven't there been rather too many of these 'cold outliers' for comfort in the last 2 or 3 years Stratos?

Couldn't agree more, WIB. In fact, I have mentioned several times (maybe even ad nauseum, like a lot of what I say!) that I think the past 3 years have been the peaking of warming.

How many cold records were broken? None that I'm aware of.

Yes, but things wouldn't plummet to record-breakingly cold after a couple of decades of warming, would they? That would require unprecedented drops of temperature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion
Hiya - as I've mentioned above, March 2006 was certainly well below average: the second coldest March of the past 20 years. Still whenever a cold month or season occurs it's just an outlier afterall :o

Based on the E&W Temp Series, 15 of the past 20 Marchs have been above the 71-00 average ...... (8 in the past 10 years).

It's quite clear the trend was for colder Marchs in the 70 and 80s, warmer ones on the 90s and 00s, and the odd exception here and there doesn't negate such a trend no matter how much you want to redefine statistical analysis ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
Nor do I actually, but I'm just using the scale that Stratos himself does like.

Yes yes we've had some warm things going on. But it's not absolute and there are plenty of reasons to throw back some of the cooler points of reference. In fact there has been nothing remotely warm for four and a half months now. Instead we've had almost the wettest summer on record, and the coldest for over a decade. Certainly against the Met Office average (1971-2000) it was below average: by just under half a degree centigrade.

It's not that I have suddenly ceased to be a believer in GW. I'm just weary of people distorting 'facts' to fit their theory - which is clearly going on - and of the media who are just making up any old thing they like. My problem with this is that it tends to makes me smell a rat, and I'm not referring to the contents of Baldrick's apple crumble.

Hiya - as I've mentioned above, March 2006 was certainly well below average: the second coldest March of the past 20 years. Still whenever a cold month or season occurs it's just an outlier afterall :o

By the way, it's a bit off to reference to Feb 86. It's the second coldest month of all since 1947, and the coldest February since 1947. It's not really representative.

And the last really cold month (by anomaly or absolute I think)...Indeed the last wintry one of real note (going by means of below zero as a definition - a fair one I think since 0C or below tends to mean the month sees considerable snow cover - of a wintry month).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the last really cold month (by anomaly or absolute I think)...Indeed the last wintry one of real note (going by means of below zero as a definition - a fair one I think since 0C or below tends to mean the month sees considerable snow cover - of a wintry month).

Actually it's not a month I'd call wintry. It certainly wasn't all that snowy by memory, at least until 01st March. Unless my memory fails me it was incredibly cold on a largely bone dry easterly. Which is why it's seldom mentioned on here. But it's such a cold outlier that it's a bit mad imho to use it as a base of reference you know. I mean it was even colder than February 1963. ;)

Based on the E&W Temp Series, 15 of the past 20 Marchs have been above the 71-00 average ...... (8 in the past 10 years).

It's quite clear the trend was for colder Marchs in the 70 and 80s, warmer ones on the 90s and 00s, and the odd exception here and there doesn't negate such a trend no matter how much you want to redefine statistical analysis :o

Well it'll be interesting to see what happens, and whether it and this summer (amongst other recent periods that haven't followed the script) are just blips or the sign of an easing in the upward trend.

Are you execuive manager of ukww by the way? Eeek. I'd have been much more polite!

I have mentioned several times (maybe even ad nauseum, like a lot of what I say!) that I think the past 3 years have been the peaking of warming.

Yes, I certainly think being as objective as possible that there are rather to many flies in the ointment of the upward trend for comfort. The little inconvenient outliers are starting to seem like a trend to me, you, and a number of others.

Edited by West is Best
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion
Are you execuive manager of ukww by the way? Eeek. I'd have been much more polite

Yes, I'm a co-owner of the website. Which means b*gger all in terms what how right I am and you can be as rude to me as you like :drunk:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • UK Storm and Severe Convective Forecast

    UK Severe Convective & Storm Forecast - Issued 2024-03-29 07:13:16 Valid: 29/03/2024 0600 - 30/03/2024 0600 THUNDERSTORM WATCH - FRI 29 MARCH 2024 Click here for the full forecast

    Nick F
    Nick F
    Latest weather updates from Netweather

    Difficult travel conditions as the Easter break begins

    Low Nelson is throwing wind and rain at the UK before it impacts mainland Spain at Easter. Wild condtions in the English Channel, and more rain and lightning here on Thursday. Read the full update here

    Netweather forecasts
    Netweather forecasts
    Latest weather updates from Netweather

    UK Storm and Severe Convective Forecast

    UK Severe Convective & Storm Forecast - Issued 2024-03-28 09:16:06 Valid: 28/03/2024 0800 - 29/03/2024 0600 SEVERE THUNDERSTORM WATCH - THURS 28 MARCH 2024 Click here for the full forecast

    Nick F
    Nick F
    Latest weather updates from Netweather
×
×
  • Create New...