Record breaking weather?
Monthly Outlook
Summary
Some midsummer heat for a time – fresher later on
We’re half way through summer now, and so far for most places, the summer has been fairly underwhelming, with temperatures around average, limited amounts of sunshine, and quite a bit of rain.
However, as we head towards the end of the month, things are starting to feel much more summer-like with a dose of hot, humid weather across much of the country. It does look as through we’ll see a return to fresher, more changeable weather before too long, but still there are some hints of further spells of warm and bright weather at times as we look towards late summer.
We are waiting for harvest, at least two weeks late even with an almost hot spell. On Countryfile and elsewhere the weather forecasters speak of ‘where temperatures SHOULD be. Well where they mean is average and above. What they don’t seem to understand is that an average requires and equal and opposite amount below as above.
No. An average does not require that.
Commented deleted.
Would you mind posting a link to the data, tbaskett?
If you were really interested you could find those data for yourself. Nonetheless here is a link:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20160719/
Thanks for the link Marvin, and for the unnecessary snark. It’s good manners when making a scientific claim to provide supporting evidence, but never mind.
NOAA routinely ‘adjust’ (i.e. fiddle) the figures. They have an agenda just as the BBC does. Goodness knows what the truth is.
I’m sure Mike Hunt is just about to ask StephenL but I’ll save him the trouble. Can you cite a source for your claim?
NOAA’s own website (and GISS as well). See also the books on what the crooks at UEA got up to.
Here we go again.
1/ NASA’s figures are massaged (they call it ‘adjusted’) and as such are worthless.
2/ They differ significantly from UAH’s.
3/ This has been an El Nino year.
4/ Along with NASA’s jiggery pokery with contemporary tenperatures , they actually go back and adjust figures from the distant past, claiming they are ‘correcting’ the data!
Didn’t you read Mike Hunt’s post GCooper? Where are your manners?
A great deal better than yours. Unlike you, I contribute to this regular discussion of BBC bias, I don’t just troll here on behalf of the BBC.
It was bound to happen. The Shill Gambit and some whataboutery. Poor effort.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Shill_gambit
I don’t know what GCooper’s source is, but as you said earlier “if you were really interested you could find those data for yourself. Nonetheless here is a link:”
German Professor: NASA Has Fiddled Climate Data On ‘Unbelievable’ Scale
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/24/german-professor-nasa-fiddled-climate-data-unbelievable-scale/
NASA Exposed In ‘Massive’ New Climate Data Fraud
http://principia-scientific.org/nasa-exposed-in-massive-new-climate-data-fraud/
There are plenty more. Just google “nasa climate data manipulation”.
PS. Calling GCooper’s question a “shill gambit” is not an answer, it’s an evasion.
Your idea of evidence is a link to Breitbart and the conspiracy theory laced ravings of a retired geologist who is on Heartland’s payroll?
So, erm, your argument is that because the professor is retired, he must be wrong?
Oh yeah, that’s right: old people are stupid, aren’t they.
You and Jerrod/Scott/Manon make a right pair.
At least he has at least analysed the data.
But apparently you know better, so you simply shoot him down because he’s retired, or because of the news channel on which it appeared. Charming. And not a very good argument.
Look, Marvin, it’s very simple: name-calling is not a substitute for logical argument.
Can hardly wait for your next sarcastic comment. Yawn.
Oh and by the way, it’s not MY evidence, it’s just what I found by googling. There are loads more if you can be bothered to do any research which doesn’t conform to the preconceptions in your already-made-up mind.
Here’s another link for you http://www.giyf.com
Mike, if Marvin knew the first thing about the AGW debate he would know that NASA doesn’t even deny that it massages the figures, In fact it positively boasts of it. For example:
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=6576
But, of course, that isn’t why Marvin is here. Here’s here to troll with the BBC’s party line. He has nothing worthwhile to say.
Theories are modified when new data are available. You call it fiddling, most people call it doing science.
“Theories are modified when new data are available.”
That’s so funny. If you had actually bothered to read the NASA article which GCooper had linked to, you’d see it was about adding data which are not available – so NASA simply add them in!!
Because it isn’t possible to add more measurements from the past, the researchers instead set up the climate models to mimic the limited coverage in the historical records.
What a hoot.
“most people call it doing science.”
Sorry, remind me again which part of science is about making up observations when you don’t have them?
I simply state as a fact that you are a troll. Now prove me wrong.
You made the claim. You prove it.
“Where are your manners?”
Pot, kettle…
Has anyone else noticed Al Beeb’s very selective use of a comments section after articles they clearly feel should be allowed for public comment. Today it appears that only the Philip Green article is available to comment on which is really fucking interesting, because my facebook is exploding with people commenting on current affairs articles, even more so than usual. But its not Philip Green they’re talking about. Aw Al Beeb – you are just too cute sometimes. Also on that note, anyone noticed the completely rigged facebook trending on the right hand side of the page – the top trending item has been shared just 31 times yet appears in pole position, whereas the two terrorist attacks (one has now been removed entirely) have been shared over 4000 odd times yet according to allround freedom fighter and keeper of world peace as we know it Mr Zuckerburg feels that one should be put in second position. Please guys at least make this difficult for us. And if as I hope the trolls do work for the BBC, have some pride in your work. This is laughable. The hugest irony of all this is that despite you thinking you are making the situation better you are in fact making it worse with every single misreported and spun story you write, the general public are not a happy bunny and you my friends are only speeding up the situation.