With impeccable timing (cold weather is never “climate” to the BBC, only hot spells are), Roger Harrabin rushes to tell us about the alarmists’ pronouncement that 2010 is on course to be the hottest year ever, ever, ever, in the known history of the universe or anything. In usual lapdog fashion, he recycles the claptrap of the Met Office. Shame he did not pause for a second to look at this alternative view of the stats , or to register that – like everything else from the East Anglia econuts – their presentations are as reliable as a three-card trick huckster. They are so desperate to scare us that any old tosh will do – as this item on Met Office re-writing of statistics also shows (the point here is that the measurements were fine when they supported warmism; a re-write is going on now to make sure they do so again). Mr Harrabin, I note, does mention that sceptics don’t accept the Met Office spin, but the main thrust of the subbing leaves no doubt that the BBC wants us to believe that this is AGW in all its awfulness. The Met Office predictions were in yesterday’s Guardian, and I was half hoping that – for once – he would refrain from his usual alarmist Pavlovian response. I should have known better. And this is his lament that Copenhagen did not reach new binding targets on CO2 emissions.
HOT HARRABIN
Bookmark the permalink.
I asked the Met Office to provide me with a simple list of the average yearly temps. from 1995 to 2009. so I could track it for myself as it is not on their web site. They were unwilling to give me this info. How can they proclaim 2010 as the hotest year with 6 weeks to go. I am looking at 6 inches of snow this morning in November !!!!
Average temperatures must have been falling over the period otherwise the liars at the Met. Office would publish the figures.
Average world temperatures cannot be measured with any accuracy. Today there are a lot less weather stations than in the 1970s and they do not cover the worlds surface evenly.
The data is held by 2 centres GISS in the US (Micheal Mann) and the University of East Anglia in the UK (Professor Jones). These 2 centres “adjust” the data acording to some unkown formula which is supposed to take into account for the Urban Heat Island effect and the sparse concentrations of weather stations in most parts of the world (the pacific ocean, for example).
In any other scientific discapline these “measurements” would never be accepted as proof of anything.
It is statistically wrong to grasp on a single year – 2010 – and proclaim it as a signal that “climate science” is correct. All their models said that the whole decade would be on a strong rise, their models have already been disproved, and 2010 (whatever the actual result) cannot salvage that.
All we seem to get from the Warmists now is one long whine – “our instruments have changed, we left out this, we left out that”.
And notice – they have backed away from the infamous Hockey Stick. The whole Warmist cult is posited on the claim that we are in a period of UNPRECEDENTED temperature increase. That is simply a lie.
‘Weather patterns were more like those in the late 1970s, experts said, while Met Office figures released on Monday are expected to show that the country is experiencing the coldest winter for up to 25 years’
02 Jan 2010
So Roger that means the summer must have been a killer lets see =
‘Our forecasters predict a mix of rain or showers throughout, although there will be spells of drier, brighter weather with some sunshine, the best of this in the west on Sunday and then some south-eastern areas on Monday’.
1 April 2010
‘Very warm and humid air will raise temperatures through the rest of the week and weekend, with many parts of the UK seeing temperatures reaching the low to mid 20s, despite some cloud at times. Some parts of England could see highs of 28 °C over the weekend — the highest temperatures since September last year’.
20 May 2010
Got to love the last line a real “it’s hotter in summer then winter ” shock lol!.
‘Our forecasts show that it is likely to stay rather mixed on Saturday and Sunday with some bright or sunny spells, but also the chance of some rain, especially in the north and east where there may be a chilly wind.’
26 August 2010
Nope nothing yet !
‘The changeable and very windy weather is expected to continue into next week, with the chance of gales and more heavy rain’.
29 September 2010.
And to finish the year =
‘Forecasters say this winter could be the coldest Europe has seen in the last 1,000 years.’
04 October, 2010
First and last non met office weather sources, all the rest are! so who’s roger been listening to???
On Today this morning Humphrys – not the most sceptical interviewer when it comes to CAGW – asked the Met Office’s Vicky Pope about the sparseness of measuring stations in the Arctic (or maybe Antarctic). She said that because there were fewer inhabitants in those regions there were fewer stations. Humphrys then asked, if so, how does she know that the temperatures there have gone up (“they might have gone down,” he remarked) to which she replied (this is a “scientist” remember – you know those people devoted to truth and fearless enquiry, whereas the sceptics . . . . ) to the effect that more stations would have indicated exactly how much the temperature had increased ie not whether but by how much and, anyway, she has a 90+% confidence in the figures (after all they’ve been provided by NASA – headed by James “never knowingly out-panicked” Hansen and unnamed “British” sources).
At that point listeners could sense that even Humphrys gave up expecting intelligent, let alone coherent responses. However, this farce hasn’t stopped the BBC News (or Louise Gray in the Telegraph, of course) banging on about this latest catastrophist assertion by the Met Office.
Like you, I sense that John Humphrys is getting fed up with the Warmists, he was sounding very querulous this morning.
But no-one on the Today staff is doing the research to let him pull the whole thing apart.
I think when they cannot use the UK as their sample to prove their hypothesis they go world wide – or a selection of the world which may prove their point.
The Sahara and Gobi deserts have always been hot but maybe they didn’t use them before in their world calculation, so now it appears hotter as these hot places are now included. This is speculation on my part as to how they reach their astonishing figures but I would be surprised if they were calculated honestly.
This is also part of the problem…and that problem is that there are VERY few weather stations in Northern and Central Africa, as there are very few stations in the arctic, so therefore temperature smoothing will occur over much larger distances simply because the big brains that call themselves climate scientists have little to no actual data to work with.
When you look at temperature maps of the world, where does the heating occur? Yes thats right, the greatest heating is occuring in the areas that have the least actual measurement data!
But doesnt it strike you as kinda odd, when the UK, Northern Europe, Mother Russia and the evil capatlists dawgs in America all suffered the worst winter since the creation of man kind, the denialists (you know, those clowns that have attempted to deny that the mid evil warm period ever existed) just ran ahead and told us that 2010 was going to be the hottest year evah…and while they said that, we shivered!
Now, there is another problem here with the temperature record. The evil anti-christ, Steven McIntyre, single handedly destroyed the argument that North America is hotter today than it was 70 years ago…then this year we got confirmation that NIWA in New Zealand had butchered its data to show NZ warming faster than it actually was (actually, it wasnt even warming!!!) and there are also big questions over Australia’s temperature record. But guess who’s name keeps popping up in relation to these issues? Trenbeth, yes, one of the key scientists in AR4 and an actor in climate gate.
And while this is going on so called journalists like Harribin just keep looking the other way.
Mailman
Gosh, this global warming stuff is getting serious, now. Has anyone seen the hordes of refugees from this dreadful man-made climate change disaster? If you see any, let us know…
http://www.ihatethemedia.com/50-million-refugees-fleeing-impact-of-global-warming-whats-that
How stupid do they think we are?
If you were to ask the average man (or woman, brother) in the street whether they thought this years weather had been hotter or colder than average I have no doubt that the majority would say colder, given the bitterly cold start and end to the year. Which just leaves the bit in the middle, which, must have been exceptionally hot for this to be the “hottest year on record” (AGAIN), given that the year was book-ended by such extreme cold snaps – all of which leads me to the conclusion that either I slept through a summer heatwave or somebody is telling lies…..hmmmmmm.
Coldest start to the year in 60 odd years. Mild wet boring summer, and the coldest autumn on living memory and we have the hottest year on record. Bollocks.
America had record cold temps in California in Jan Feb. Today they have unseasonally cold temps right across continental US.
Europe experienced a bumper ski season last winter and this one is turning out quite nice again with very healthy early snow indicating a potential record breaking season on the way.
China had severe cold weather earlier in the year with major transport problems.
May june and July saw record cold temperatures right across south America with Lamas falling off mountains dead.
To balance this Russia had a record hot summer but where was ours. Where was Canadas?
Global warming …..bunch of arse.
The earth is warming caused by man is as real as Gillian McKeith fainting. Pretend fake, con , sham, lie, fairytale, untruth, porky, hoax, falsehood, fabrication, hocus pocus or a tall tale its really a load of bollocks. The beeb and the worlds media have swallowed the longest running april fools joke. I keep on expecting Jeremy Beedle to pop out at one of Al Gores rallies.
Well I am off now to go and shovel snow from my drive so I can enjoy the lovely indian summer we were predicted.
Ask yourself this, how often did you use your expensive barbecue equipment this year? How many days did you have to put the fans on? Where were the ‘scorchio’ headlines in the papers? It was pleasent but hardly sweltering.
And yet now 10:10 and the rest of the kiddy exploding fraternity want us to believe we’re all going to fry. Bollocks bollocks bollock bollocks bollocks.
To be fair to Harrabin he has caught out Vicky in a lie
“There is a question over how many times the Met Office has forecast a record previously. Dr Pope said they had not done so from her recollection. But a Met Office press release shows a forecast that 2007 would probably beat 1998. And a BBC report implies that they made the same prediction for the other El Nino year of 2003.”
Note though Harrabins escape clause in his implication that the Met was not actually wrong since 2003 (and 2007?) were “El Nino years”. In other words those years were record-beaters if you ignore the effects of El Nino. It’s rather like saying Harrabin’s and Black’s journalistic ethics match those of, say, Walter Cronkite except for H&B’s suppression of germane but awkward facts.
Harrabin also threw a few crumbs the sceptics’ way at the end of the article (when most people had nodded off) by quoting John Christy to the effect that the Met’s tarot-reading is crap.
In all, Harrabin’s contribution to the store of human knowledge is just another snow-flake in the pre-Cancun CAGW propaganda avalanche
Now, 1998 needs to go back down to make 2010 warmer.Juggling 1934, 1998, 2005 and 2010 is like keeping four balls in the air at the same time.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2010/11/26/the-met-office-challenge/
It will be interesting to see how they manipulate the 1998 temps to boost 2010 into first place.
The met and all the other warmists need to do something drastic to try and keep the number of “non-belivers” becoming bigger. If they dont act quickly bang goes their power and wealth.
JHT
The problem for the warmists – both the mock-scientists and the mock-journalists as well as the BBC generally – is that once you have lost people’s trust it’s (almost) impossible to retrieve it. The tragedy is that this distrust leaks into the general view of both proper science and responsible and ethical (if there is any) journalism. A sample of 1 I know but I am highly dubious of any announcements in any newspaper concerning “new” discoveries. The “news” is tainted by all the other “news”, not only about climate but about all the other dubious and politicised subjects like smoking, medicine generally, diets etc etc. By politicising everything we (or rather “they” – the political class) have corrupted society as a whole.
What I also find interesting is that Harribin doesnt allow any comments.
Christ, even that loony Jean Gray (or what ever her name is over at the Telegraph) allows comments to be left. Having said that, I doubt Harribin would be mentally prepared for the hammering he would get!
Mailman
Louise Gray allows comments alright but she never responds.
I doubt she has much choice.
The Telegraph has seen merit in having a few bloggers of alternative viewpoints to the pervading readership to drive traffic; grit in the oyster if you will.
Can’t be much fun to be set up to account for what is often poorly constructed or justified opinion.
Or having to see the ‘closed for further comments’ option not applied when utter tripe is filleted.
But at least the medium does offer such diverse views and the opportunity for critiques to stand.
Unlike oth… another.
But silence when nailed is consistent.
Richard Black used to be dumb enough to dig further holes on his blog, but wiser heads now see merit in simply pulling the plug when things veer off script. And then go back and take out anything that doesn’t make for the picture they’d prefer.
http://www.terradaily.com/images/russia-kremlin-regiment-afp-bg.jpg
Mods, we salute you!
“Motes, beams and the University of East Anglia”
(James Delingpole)
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100065446/motes-beams-and-the-university-of-east-anglia/
Would someone please explain what is meant when someone says 1972 was hotter (or colder) than 1982?
As mentioned frequently at any given time temperatures vary at different locations. On any given day temperatures vary at the same location depending on the time of measurement. Throughout the year temperatures vary day by day at the same location but these changes are not consistent depending on where that location is relatively on the earth (latitude) and relative to other natural feature (mountains, seas, etc.).
Are we talking about the average temperature of all locations over every day over a year, the median or what?
Do small differences really matter?
OT
It is now a year since ClimateGate broke.
And we still do not know why Paul Hudson at the BBC , who received the material early (or some of it), failed or was prevented from publishing one of the biggest stories of the year.
His involvement is touched on in this speculation about who actually leaked the CRU stuff :
http://ourmaninsichuan.wordpress.com/2010/11/23/profile-of-the-climategate-whistleblower/
inconvenience for the BBC;
Regards
Mailman