December C.E.T

[Nick H]

Manley CET for December finished on 4.9C

Another below average month, 0.2C below the 1971-2000 mean, and 0.35C below the 10 year rolling mean.

If a month turns out 0.2 "below average", I believe it is classified as an "average month".

[North-Easterly Blast]

Well, the December CET has come in at 4.9, or 4.93*C. I personally would classify any month that comes in below the 71-00 average but above the 61-90 average as an average month.

[Snowly does it]

Well, the December CET has come in at 4.9, or 4.93*C. I personally would classify any month that comes in below the 71-00 average but above the 61-90 average as an average month.

Is that the Hadley figure NEB? I know we use Manley for the comp but I am interested in the final Hadley figure very much.

[Stratos Ferric]

If a month turns out 0.2 "below average", I believe it is classified as an "average month".

Is intersting how the definition seems to be varied at times to suit individual arguments; so, it seems, does the choice of period of rolling average.

[Weather-history]

And still no December with a CET of 5.9 in the listings........

[noggin]

4.9, eh? Go me!!!

[Frosty.]

Well, the December CET has come in at 4.9, or 4.93*C. I personally would classify any month that comes in below the 71-00 average but above the 61-90 average as an average month.

Agreed, December was a strange month really, a very mild first week then 2 cold weeks followed by another mildish week, made a pleasant change from the usual mild zonal dross all the time.

[Stu_London]

LOL. And sir what were some your earlier punts like. Certainly closer than you old chap and just off by 0.1C.

Mathematically I'm correct since if it's rounded up it's 5C

Why on earth would you round up 4.93C to 5.0C and how would that be mathematically correct?

[West is Best]

Hadley have now also confirmed the December CET as 4.9C. Note (The Pit particularly) that they work to 1/10ths so there's no question of any rounding there.

That means the annual CET is sub-10.5C (10.48C for the annual figure which is to 1/100ths of course). Given the remarkably warm start, that's an equally remarkable turnaround.

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/cetml1659on.dat

Why on earth would you round up 4.93C to 5.0C and how would that be mathematically correct?

You wouldn't. It's complete tosh not very true.

Edited January 1, 2008 by La Nina

[Stratos Ferric]

Why on earth would you round up 4.93C to 5.0C and how would that be mathematically correct?

Where did the 4.93 come from Stu? I assume that's a mis-type is it? I can see an argument for rounding 4.95, but as has been discussed on here many times, the conventions are many and varied.

[Mammatus]

If a month turns out 0.2 "below average", I believe it is classified as an "average month".

Still below average which is a fantastic achievement considering how mild the start was

Below it is

[Stu_London]

Well, the December CET has come in at 4.9, or 4.93*C. I personally would classify any month that comes in below the 71-00 average but above the 61-90 average as an average month.

There*

[snowsure]

There*

Replying to your tag of "Mild Ramper..." Stu, I would suggest that SF is over cautious in his assessments. Basic psychology would no doubt expose the reason behind this behaviour.

Perhaps he wished too much as a child and got disappointed often?

Final CET of 4.9C? Yet again I was 0.1 C out on the CET competition; this time I went for 4.8 C Am I a cold ramper or what!

[Stratos Ferric]

There*

Not sure where he got that from. I'm assuming PIT was referencing the rounding of 4.95C though, not NEB's 4.93. I think you and I both know PIT well enough to know that he's brighter than that.

[The PIT]

Why on earth would you round up 4.93C to 5.0C and how would that be mathematically correct?

Err wheres 4.93 come from????? The figures 4.95C

http://www.climate-uk.com/graphs/0712.htm

[Stu_London]

Err wheres 4.93 come from????? The figures 4.95C

http://www.climate-uk.com/graphs/0712.htm

But if Philip has rounded it to 4.9 then it must be 4.93 or 4.94 or all points up to 4.95

If he rounded to 5.0 then it would be 4.95something 4.96 or 4.97

[Stratos Ferric]

Replying to your tag of "Mild Ramper..." Stu, I would suggest that SF is over cautious in his assessments. Basic psychology would no doubt expose the reason behind this behaviour.

Perhaps he wished too much as a child and got disappointed often?

Final CET of 4.9C? Yet again I was 0.1 C out on the CET competition; this time I went for 4.8 C Am I a cold ramper or what!

Snowsure, do you know ANYTHING about psychology, other than what can be divined from quizzes in "the Sun"? Just checking...

[Stu_London]

Am I a cold ramper or what!

Not if that was your original guess and that is what you stuck to throughout the month

If you consistently projected 4.8C (or any point lower) and despite mounting evidence towards the month end that this figure was perhaps on the low side, stuck to your guns, then there may be grounds to call you a cold ramper

Snowsure, do you know ANYTHING about psychology, other than what can be divined from quizzes in "the Sun"? Just checking...

Do you know of other sources then SF?

[Stratos Ferric]

But if Philip has rounded it to 4.9 then it must be 4.93 or 4.94 or all points up to 4.95

If he rounded to 5.0 then it would be 4.95something 4.96 or 4.97

aah, but what if it were 4.95 exactly, which is all we have at present? Perhaps we would need Philip to enlighten us on the detail of his rounding.

[Stu_London]

aah, but what if it were 4.95 exactly, which is all we have at present? Perhaps we would need Philip to enlighten us on the detail of his rounding.

I will send him an email.

It will hopefully avoid situations in future where his front page says 4.6C whereas someone then directly misquotes his website and says the CET is 4.7C (rounded up from 4.65C)

[reef]

There*

Also replying to your signature, which I feel is completely unnecessary and could count as a personal snipe.

Back on subject. Interesting that December has finished at 4.9C. Other strong La Nina Decembers had very similar CETs:

1955: 5.4C

1973: 4.9C

1975: 5.3C

The following January's were a mixed bag though.

[Stu_London]

Probably the most disappointing aspect of the CET is the length of the thread at a paltry 33 pages (so far)

When you consider that November (53 pages) October (47) and September (42) had arguably less exciting temperature patterns, I am at a bit of a loss to explain

[snowsure]

Also replying to your signature, which I feel is completely unnecessary and could count as a personal snipe.

Back on subject. Interesting that December has finished at 4.9C. Other strong La Nina Decembers had very similar CETs:

1955: 5.4C

1973: 4.9C

1975: 5.3C

The following January's were a mixed bag though.

The signature appears to contain facts as seen by Stu; something that could easily be compiled by any member of this forum. It appears no different to the constant references by SF to WiB regarding his position. If one of them is sniping then aren't they both guilty?

SF

I have never read the Sun in my life so I do not know the type of quizzes that you refer to. You must happy to be better read than me!

I prefer the Independent, FT or Sunday Times.

[❄️❄️❄️❄️❄️❄️❄️❄️❄️]

Probably the most disappointing aspect of the CET is the length of the thread at a paltry 33 pages (so far)

When you consider that November (53 pages) October (47) and September (42) had arguably less exciting temperature patterns, I am at a bit of a loss to explain

In the Novemeber thread there was a massive slanging match between Sf and WiB, so that may account for it. If the Admins hadnt stepeed in this thread could be a 60-pager.

[Stu_London]

Also replying to your signature, which I feel is completely unnecessary and could count as a personal snipe.

My signature contains accurately researched statistics (as does yours)

If SF wants me to change it, he only has to ask