The BBC rushed to tell us……
World on course for warmest year
The UK Met Office says the observed temperatures would be highly unlikely without the influence of greenhouse gases produced by humans.
“There is no standstill in global warming.”
Not sure the ‘Central England Temperature Anomaly’ can be describes as ‘all of the UK’ let alone ‘The World’….but let’s not be too critical…we’ll leave that to Christopher Booker:
Last week’s claims that 2014 is set to be ‘the hottest year ever’ are frankly a load of nonsense, says Christopher Booker.
Led by the BBC, the usual media suspects were quick to trumpet last week’s claims by the Met Office and the World Meteorological Organisation that 2014 is set to be “the hottest year ever”. It’s funny that the rest of us hadn’t noticed; least of all those citizens of North America and Russia whose lives were lately disrupted by record snowfalls. It is true that the temperature records compiled by the avid warmists of the Met Office and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (the one formerly run by climate activist James Hansen) have managed to show this year squeaking just ahead of 2010 as “the hottest year since records began”. But the much more comprehensive and reliable satellite records agree that 2014 is way down the list, with six of the past 16 years ahead of it.
At least there is one real journalist at the BBC who raises a few questions…..
Guys. The met office might have jumped the gun on announcing this year as the warmest ever.
The dec “Cet” temperature needs to be 4.2 oC to make it happen. We are currently at 4.7 oC and falling. The met office have takenfor granted that december will be average or above. So far its not looking that way and there is still a possibility that the bbc_ met office could still have serious egg on their faces.
It makes no difference, by the time that the truth is out the damage is already done.
(1) Unlikely comes from IPCC politics
(2) Greenhouse gases, Nitrogen 80 percent, Oxygen 20 percent, others including those produced by humans are negligible, and therefore would not have any detectable influence. Proven by a formula produced by Ned Nikolov & Karl Zeller in 2011, and works for all known planetary atmospheres including the carbon dioxide atmospheres of Mars and Venus.
(3) I heard that there was a paper by Michaels and Balling that shows correction of errors in temperature measurements are not random as would be expected, but show an extreme bias towards warming, proving wide scale corruption of Global temperature measurements.
(4) This year, the Met Office is cherry picking land based temperature measurements in Britain, a sign that things are worse in Britain than any where else when it comes to the ideological grip of the fraudsters.
Matt Ridley in The Times and partly here (free) on the GWPF destroys the ‘warmest year” con and wonders why the Royal Society in the form of Nurse does not expose scientists who abuse their positions in exchange for activism.
http://www.thegwpf.com/23657/
Worth seeing The Times for the whole thing !
I wonder how long Andrew Neil can survive at the BBC, given that he is not prepared to drink the CAGW Kool-Aid? For those of us also abstaining, he remains a last, best hope for a voice of reason on the BBC against a tsunami of pro-CAGW propaganda.
He’d better watch his back. Knives will be out.
Don’t forget guys that the Central England Temperature is just that for a strip of land in the U.K. contained in the geographical boundary from a point in London to Bristol to a point in Lancashire and back to London. This does not include, Wales, N.Ireland, Scotland, the whole of the Eastern side of England or South of the M4/M25 or the South West of England. Talk about cherry picking data! The Met Office must be really desperate or is it the BBC trying every trick in the book to find any temperature increase ANYWHERE!
I do believe we should all give thanks for the excellent Andrew Neil who is, by far, the best and most knowledgeable interviewer the BBC has got.
He won’t stand for waffle and demands proper answers from politicians of all stripes.
Most importantly, he’s the only one at the BBC I know of who seems to know the meaning of ‘impartiality’.