The Met Office Explains How Climate Change Will Affect Our Gardens

[J07]

I find this to be a frustrating clip. It's somewhat misleading, and also confusing, by pretty much directly comparing "Apples with Oranges".

During the clip we are shown 4 images, displaying winter and summer weather in the UK.

The first is introduced as: "taking a look at a typical winter night now"

The second as: "what's it looking like by 2050?"

The first: "this is a typical British summer day now"

The second: "by 2050 things have really changed"

The issue though is that for the "current" weather we are shown a "typical" scenario for the UK now. Looking at it, there can be few arguments, it all looks quite standard-fare stuff for those seasons. So no issue there.

But then we are shown what is perhaps (?) supposed to be an "extreme" winter night in 2050, and an "extreme" summer day in 2050. But these are not explicitly stated, they are not labeled any differently, they are not introduced as such. We are just led from the typical to the extreme. That is either poor scientific presentation or poor communication.

It just looks to me like they're going for the "shock factor". After being shown a current summer day with temperatures in the low to mid 20s and then plunged into a 2050 scenario with 35C and 38C plastered around the south.

On first viewing I was a little confused by the 2050 winter slide. Are they really going for typical or extreme? The 2009 temperatures shown are clearly "typical" overnight minima, and the 2050 ones are simply 6C warmer. Most climate change scenarios do not favour a warming quite as extreme as 6C by 2050. But I would have thought a warm night in 2050 would be double figures minima. So is it meant to be typical or extreme or somewhere in between? The problem is that we're not told.

Another comment:

"Quite often we're going to see temperatures getting into the mid to high 30s"

Really? According to this: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pres...pr20090709.html the average temperature for the hottest day in summer is expected to be 32C in Essex and Surrey...which are in the warmest part of the UK in summer. So where does the 38C come from? Where does the "quite often" come from for temperatures hitting the mid to high 30s? Does "quite often" mean "once every 5 years" instead of "once every 10 years"? Why do I need to worry about planning for an event that is still going to be pretty damn rare?

The feeling I have coming out of this clip is that I'm not really sure what I've been shown. Should I expect my current summer days of 23C to be replaced by 36C in 2050? Can I expect a typical winter night in 2050 to fall to only 9C? I think I'll start planning my coconut palm garden.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

This is meto at their warmist worst. To comfort yourself, just look at how well this summer is going

BFTP

[laserguy]

This is meto at their warmist worst. To comfort yourself, just look at how well this summer is going

BFTP

My garden's had it 'cos of the absence of the 'bbq summer' . As for 2050,ignore it. Just more warmist twaddle to keep 'AGW' and it's attendant baggage on the radar. We'll be frozen to death by then.

[johnholmes]

oh dear he we go again

a member makes their comment on what they THINK a clip says and others then make their comment based on that comment.

The actual video clip or the link into the Met O site showing exact data gets lost.

I do urge you go to the link below, read what it says, watch the video clip from the Hampton Court Flower Show by Peter Gibbs, THEN post in here.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pres...pr20090709.html

Having looked at the link and watched the video clip it all seems to be fairly reasonable forecasting for 40 years ahead to me-given the uncertainties at that times interval.

do read and watch though before commenting on another posters comments please?

Edited July 15, 2009 by johnholmes

[Methuselah]

I agree, John. I sometimes wonder if I'm watching the same clips as some of the other members. Why can we not just report things as they are, without all the pro-this or anti-that rhetorical drivel?

On the whole, John, I thought Peter Gibb's piece was quite fair and well presented. Like all of us however, he probably won't be 100% correct... B)

[johnholmes]

tks Peter

[Guest North Sea Snow Convection]

Sorry - but I think we are entitled to be scornful of this as much as we like and quite entitled to disagree with it as freely as we wish frankly. Pete, with respect, how can you say it was 'fair and quite well presented' when it is based on very very arguable and unproven supposition that does indeed look like some kind of scaremongering. Anything is possible indeed in this world - but I think this is sensationalised claptrap. There - said it.

The METO are not above criticism any more than any one else. We don't HAVE to agree with their AGW train of belief - such projections as they provide almost make one believe that it is a given that we will have this med climate in a few decades time. They clearly take the extremist IPCC model predictions as the one's that are likely to happen - thus they believe that all the assumed positive feedbacks under AGW hypothesis exist at the expense of negative one's. The labelling of human causes next to the charts with the 'Sudanese' type summer temps is pretty disengenuous stuff. Exactly how much of this hypothesis is fact.

Shock factor it might be - but as BFTP alludes to, lets get seasonal forecasting as accurate as possible first before suggesting OTT temp rises in thirty/forty years time.

Suffice to say more evidence to suggest our METO have clearly become an extremist AGW movement. The arrogance with which they recently dismissed discussion about natural factors being (paraphrased) 'the typical stuff that does the rounds on the net' was bad enough

Think I'll bite my tongue now before saying anything else B) *she waits for the wrath to descend around her ears*

Edited July 15, 2009 by North Sea Snow Convection

[Solar Cycles]

Didn't the MetO advise us to plant Mediterranean plants a few years ago, due to the Mediterranean type climate we would be experincing!!

Edited July 15, 2009 by Solar Cycles

[J07]

I agree, John. I sometimes wonder if I'm watching the same clips as some of the other members. Why can we not just report things as they are, without all the pro-this or anti-that rhetorical drivel?

On the whole, John, I thought Peter Gibb's piece was quite fair and well presented. Like all of us however, he probably won't be 100% correct... B)

I had problems with the way it was presented, not so much the findings. More so, the video doesn't really seem to match the press release - where did these 35C, 36C, 38C temperatures come from when we are told to expect the hottest summer day to be about 32C in the press release?

Why did you think it was "well presented" when it so poorly explained what the 2050 images were meant to represent?

[valiant]

Millions has already been spent by the British gardener on Mediterranean plants - which have promptly died, mainly through last winter.

For God's sake. Get the weather right first. Don't start pontificating about garden plants and horticulture, particularly if the first part of the chain of logic is anything but proven.

Bring back Peter Sissons.

[Solar Cycles]

Millions has already been spent by the British gardener on Mediterranean plants - which have promptly died, mainly through last winter.

For God's sake. Get the weather right first. Don't start pontificating about garden plants and horticulture, particularly if the first part of the chain of logic is anything but proven.

Bring back Peter Sissons.

I know valiant, luckily I wasn't taken in by the AGW bandwagon, I now have a nice traditional garden. Those warmists with their predictions hey!! B)

Edited July 15, 2009 by Solar Cycles

[Guest North Sea Snow Convection]

Millions has already been spent by the British gardener on Mediterranean plants - which have promptly died, mainly through last winter.

For God's sake. Get the weather right first. Don't start pontificating about garden plants and horticulture, particularly if the first part of the chain of logic is anything but proven.

Bring back Peter Sissons.

I have to say I wholeheartedly agree with all that!! Well said

But one thing - as for palm trees etc - I bought a palm tree back in the 1980s (which went through both the 1986 and 1987 winter spells) so the concept is hardly anything new and has zero to do with climate change B) We have always had a maritime climate and keeping such plants is hardly difficult if they are put in sheltered positions and covered in winter from freezing temps.

Next we will have a presentation with Darren Bett wearing xmas shorts on roasting turkey in the garden for 25 Dec

All just another way to try and beat the AGW drum. Sorry I said I would bite my tongue didn't I?? B)

Edited July 15, 2009 by North Sea Snow Convection

[Methuselah]

Sorry - but I think we are entitled to be scornful of this as much as we like and quite entitled to disagree with it as freely as we wish frankly. Pete, with respect, how can you say it was 'fair and quite well presented' when it is based on very very arguable and unproven supposition that does indeed look like some kind of scaremongering. Anything is possible indeed in this world - but I think this is sensationalised claptrap. There - said it.

The METO are not above criticism any more than any one else. We don't HAVE to agree with their AGW train of belief - such projections as they provide almost make one believe that it is a given that we will have this med climate in a few decades time. They clearly take the extremist IPCC model predictions as the one's that are likely to happen - thus they believe that all the assumed positive feedbacks under AGW hypothesis exist at the expense of negative one's. The labelling of human causes next to the charts with the 'Sudanese' type summer temps is pretty disengenuous stuff. Exactly how much of this hypothesis is fact.

Shock factor it might be - but as BFTP alludes to, lets get seasonal forecasting as accurate as possible first before suggesting OTT temp rises in thirty/forty years time.

Suffice to say more evidence to suggest our METO have clearly become an extremist AGW movement. The arrogance with which they recently dismissed discussion about natural factors being (paraphrased) 'the typical stuff that does the rounds on the net' was bad enough

Think I'll bite my tongue now before saying anything else B) *she waits for the wrath to descend around her ears*

Well, I did hear the expression 'climate change' mentioned, I'll admit that...But an extremist AGW movement? Where's that one come from? Are we just supposed to act as if our climate's not changing, has never changed, and will never change? Or, do we agree to use the best that science has to offer, as a guide?

And yes. I can understand what Peter Gibbs's graphics were saying to me.

[J07]

Millions has already been spent by the British gardener on Mediterranean plants - which have promptly died, mainly through last winter.

For God's sake. Get the weather right first. Don't start pontificating about garden plants and horticulture, particularly if the first part of the chain of logic is anything but proven.

Bring back Peter Sissons.

I do wonder sometimes what kills Mediterranean plants.

The whole idea of a Mediterranean climate is that the summer is dry and the winter is wet. A wet winter will not kill Mediterranean plants, in fact they would expect it. So I wonder about the effect of "waterlogged" soils on such species. I suppose that evaporation is so incredibly low in a British winter that they have to endure conditions they would not in the Med.

Equally, cold weather and frosts in winter are not uncommon in the Mediterranean, even in coastal areas, so would a cold winter kill them?

Who really knows (Stephen would he handy here). But Britain will never attain the strong seasonal rainfall variation that exists in Mediterranean climates, even though climate predictions are tending to push it in that general direction.

[Solar Cycles]

Well, I did hear the expression 'climate change' mentioned, I'll admit that...But an extremist AGW movement? Where's that one come from? Are we just supposed to act as if our climate's not changing, has never changed, and will never change? Or, do we agree to use the best that science has to offer, as a guide?

And yes. I can understand what Peter Gibbs's graphics were saying to me.

Pete temps have been static for 11 years, so what change are you refering too?

[J07]

And yes. I can understand what Peter Gibbs's graphics were saying to me.

Please enlighten me!

PS - aimed at no one in particular - this thread was never supposed to turn into an AGW vs anti-AGW flamefest. Hopefully we can all keep it civil!

[Solar Cycles]

I do wonder sometimes what kills Mediterranean plants.

The whole idea of a Mediterranean climate is that the summer is dry and the winter is wet. A wet winter will not kill Mediterranean plants, in fact they would expect it. So I wonder about the effect of "waterlogged" soils on such species. I suppose that evaporation is so incredibly low in a British winter that they have to endure conditions they would not in the Med.

Equally, cold weather and frosts in winter are not uncommon in the Mediterranean, even in coastal areas, so would a cold winter kill them?

Who really knows (Stephen would he handy here). But Britain will never attain the strong seasonal rainfall variation that exists in Mediterranean climates, even though climate predictions are tending to push it in that general direction.

It did in the MWP, but that didn't happen anyway! B)

Please enlighten me!

PS - aimed at no one in particular - this thread was never supposed to turn into an AGW vs anti-AGW flamefest. Hopefully we can all keep it civil!

B)

[Guest North Sea Snow Convection]

Well, I did hear the expression 'climate change' mentioned, I'll admit that...But an extremist AGW movement? Where's that one come from? Are we just supposed to act as if our climate's not changing, has never changed, and will never change? Or, do we agree to use the best that science has to offer, as a guide?

And yes. I can understand what Peter Gibbs's graphics were saying to me.

Temp projections of that magnitude are extreme. And presenting such scenarios on screen suggests that they support such temp rises - do they not?

Regarding the best science available - we are all free to make our choices, we don't have to pay lip service to the Met Office views on progressive AGW hypothesis based climate change.

[Admiral_Bobski]

My biggest concern about the whole presentation was the graphic which declared: "FACT - Man is causing it."

That titbit of information makes the whole video a logical progression of ideas and, as such, a fairly good presentation.

But...!

It is not actually a "fact". If the word "fact" was replaced with another - "supposition", "belief", "assumption" - then I'd have a great deal more respect for the MetO.

CB

[Guest North Sea Snow Convection]

My biggest concern about the whole presentation was the graphic which declared: "FACT - Man is causing it."

That titbit of information makes the whole video a logical progression of ideas and, as such, a fairly good presentation.

But...!

It is not actually a "fact". If the word "fact" was replaced with another - "supposition", "belief", "assumption" - then I'd have a great deal more respect for the MetO.

CB

I have alluded to the same - it is because of that word linking the presentation to 'fact' that has led me to use the term 'extremist' in my description. I have in all honesty been trying hard to suspend belief and stay open minded about the views of the Met Office on climate change, but it is very difficult not to view them as an especially radical global AGW movement

Edited July 15, 2009 by North Sea Snow Convection

[J07]

Here's an incredibly crude classification of the Mediterranean nature of some climates. It's winter rainfall/summer rainfall:

San Francisco: 110 (massively "Med")

Perth: 14

Marseille: 2

Wellington (just for fun as it's where I live): 2

London: 0.9 (exhibiting "negative Med characteristics")

Basically it's saying it rains slightly more in a London summer than in a London winter, which is the opposite of the Mediterranean trend.

[johnholmes]

all I asked was that people read the printed output on the site I linked to; watch the video from start to finish THEN comment-nothing more-I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with what Peter Gibbs said or is printed on the web site.

My own views on GW or AGW should be well enough known by posters on this forum. I remain of the belief that man is influencing events, nomore, no less than that.

The current level of science suggests that in 50 years time the average global surface temperature is going to be higher than it is now, I agree with that.

We then get into the argument-how much-I don't know-the best available evidence seems to suggest anything between 1C and 5C.

[jethro]

Here is the RHS official line: http://www.rhs.org.uk/climate/climate.asp

When it comes to predicting climate way in the future, to be honest I don't think it's a great deal more accurate than pin the tail on the donkey.

When it comes to gardening and how plants will cope, well, there's soooo much hoohaa around, it's getting beyond belief.

Firstly this Mediterranean thing, it's a bit of a misnomer to begin with; Lavender and Rosemary for example, what many would consider archetypal cottage garden plants - they're not native, they're Mediterranean. We've been growing them for years and years, long before climate change became an issue. Sometimes they die, when they do it's invariably due to winter water logging of the soil; it's not how much rain we get, it's whether or not it can drain away, Mediterranean soils are stonier and thus more free draining than our loam or clay based ones.

Tender plants surviving our winters....some like Osteospurnums do over-winter quite successfully, they're classified as tender, not frost hardy. This classification has less to do with fact and more to do with assumption, they were introduced from South Africa and it was assumed they would be tender - when you're advising large commercial nurseries with oodles of money invested in growing the things, you err on the side of caution. It turns out they're not as tender as once thought, is this because we've warmed? No, it's because they were wrongly classified in the first place.

Other tender bedding plants, say Busy Lizzies for example, can we expect them to over-winter? No, not now, not in 2050 either. That's not because I have a crystal ball and can categorically say what the climate will be, it's because due to our position in the world, we cannot guarantee a totally frost free existence. Less frosts, perhaps, warmer winters, perhaps but not frost free. It matters not a jot whether we only get one sharp frost in a winter, they will still turn to mush over night. Put two cucumbers in the freezer, one over night and the other for a fortnight, they'll be equally mushy.

For all those who are concerned about gardens of the future and how their prized plants will cope, I'd offer one thought for consideration. Very, very few of the plants we consider to be English garden plants actually originate from these shores. Tulips -Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan. Roses - Asia, Europe, North America and Northwest Africa. Magnolias - China and Japan Horse Chestnuts, the good old conker tree - Eastern Europe. The list goes on and on, Mr. Tredescant was a very busy man, his passion for importing from around the world was followed by many.

If plants are so susceptible to changes in environment and climate as the recent publicity would have us all believe, then our gardens would bear no resemblance to what we consider a typical English garden should look like.

Sermon over, yours truly, frustrated professional gardener of long standing.

[johnholmes]

tks for that Jethro-you should know what will or will not happen with the plant world.

re the osteospurnum-I've got at least 3 from one small plant of 4 years ago which seems happy enough with our winters. But as you say South Afica is hardly without cold in its higher regions in their winter.

[Optimus Prime]

And yes. I can understand what Peter Gibbs's graphics were saying to me.

That's good cause I most definetely don't. A load of skewed Metoffice rubbish presented by a very respectable weather forecaster.

Wow! Average temps in the late 30Cs by 2050, well I suppose there'll be no more worrying about bad Summers!

That's not what it's saying, it's the 'Extreme'. Whatever that means. Those summer and winter temperatures 'Extreme' don't look deadly to me unless they were a constant average.