Met Office Reluctantly Admits the UK is Cooling

Electroverse

The last decade in the UK went down as the ‘second’ hottest of the past 100 years, at least according to the Met Office’s temperature dataset AND this recent article from the BBC.

But taking the Met’s politicized, warm-mongering, UHI-ignoring data as read, for arguments sake, the simple fact remains: the 2010’s have come out cooler than the 2000’s — the agency may be in control of the spin, but it hasn’t been able to fudge the findings.

Dr Mark McCarthy, from the Met Office in Exeter, said it was “a consequence of our warming climate”.

That’s right, Mark — despite this most recent decade coming out cooler than the previous one, the AGW juggernaut must keep-on rolling, your funding depends on it, doesn’t it? And even in the face of such evidence to the contrary, you can’t bring yourself to stop and ask… why, or how… the 2010’s were cooler than the 2000’s?

I was told average temperatures would rise “linearly” –always up and up and up on an endless march to catastrophe if no action was taken– as depicted by Michael Mann’s now infamous Hockey Stick. 

Now, I can buy a year or two falling out of line — local weather patterns and natural ocean current-fluctuations etc. can explain why 2018 was cooler than 2017 and 2016, for example.

But an entire decade dropping by the wayside? (It would make for a funny looking hockey stick).

No, this appears to be evidence that the sun has had its say, that its Grand Solar MAXIMUM has run its course and that its activity is now waning, likely ushering in the onset of earth’s next cooling cycle — perhaps even the next Grand Solar MINIMUM:

Furthermore, the BBC is also trying to paint 2019 as a disastrously hot year.

But the reality, again according to the Met Office’s own warm-mongering data, is that 2019 was merely the 11th warmest on record — hardly signs of an impending fiery doom.

And serving as a further indication of how hard it is for the Met to tell it’s arse from it’s elbow, I’ll leave you with this recent quote from Dr Mark McCarthy: “We are expecting to see an increase in winter rainfall, so wetter winters and drier summers — but we could still experience dry winters and wet summers.”

Bases covered — the AGW juggernaut is safe to roll-on for at least another decade. Or is it…

…natural climate cycles can scupper even the best-laid frauds.

And as the lower-latitudes continue to refreeze, as depicted by the below Total Snow Mass for the Northern Hemisphere chart, a period of GSM-induced global cooling is likely that natural climate cycle.

Prepare according — relocate if need be, and grow your own.

Solar Activity just reached a new Space Age Low

Greenland just set a new all-time Record-Low Temperature

Lies My Scientist Told Me & Shocking Interview with Dr Nils-Axel Morner

Dr Nils-Axel Morner, as the authority on sea-levels for IPCC, was ignored in favour of much lesser 'experts' because Morner completely disagreed with the reports that sea-levels are rising rapidly and will rise more rapidly, beyond that which is physically possible.

Morner also states that 80-90% of physicists, and 80% of

geologists and astrophysicists disagree with the premise of

anthropologically generated global warming.

Dr Morner's interview is a few minutes in but is well worth the wait.

German Professor: NASA Has Fiddled Climate Data On ‘Unbelievable’ Scale

Global warming invented by tampering 

with the raw temperature data records?

Does the conspiracy go that far?

James Hanson, CARL DE SOUZA/AFP/Getty Images

by JAMES DELINGPOLE

A German professor has confirmed what skeptics from Britain to the US have long suspected: that NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies has largely invented “global warming” by tampering with the raw temperature data records.

Professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert is a retired geologist and data computation expert. He has painstakingly examined and tabulated all NASA GISS’s temperature data series, taken from 1153 stations and going back to 1881. His conclusion: that if you look at the raw data, as opposed to NASA’s revisions, you’ll find that since 1940 the planet has been cooling, not warming.

According to Günter Ederer, the German journalist who has reported on Ewert’s findings:

From the publicly available data, Ewert made an unbelievable discovery: Between the years 2010 and 2012 the data measured since 1881 were altered so that they showed a significant warming, especially after 1950. […] A comparison of the data from 2010 with the data of 2012 shows that NASA-GISS had altered its own datasets so that especially after WWII a clear warming appears – although it never existed.

Apart from Australia, the planet has in fact been on a cooling trend:

Using the NASA data from 2010 the surface temperature globally from 1940 until today has fallen by 1.110°C, and since 2000 it has fallen 0.4223°C […]. The cooling has hit every continent except for Australia, which warmed by 0.6339°C since 2000. The figures for Europe: From 1940 to 2010, using the data from 2010, there was a cooling of 0.5465°C and a cooling of 0.3739°C since 2000.

But the activist scientists at NASA GISS – initially led by James Hansen (pictured above), later by Gavin Schmidt – wanted the records they are in charge of maintaining to show warming not cooling, so they began systematically adjusting the data for various spurious reasons using ten different methods.

The most commonly used ones were:

• Reducing the annual mean in the early phase.
• Reducing the high values in the first warming phase.
• Increasing individual values during the second warming phase.
• Suppression of the second cooling phase starting in 1995.
• Shortening the early decades of the datasets.
• With the long-term datasets, even the first century was shortened.

It just happens that for 13 years I was responsible for quality controlling climate data for British Columbia and the Yukon. That stopped abruptly in 2008. They no longer wanted QC done by experienced professionals. It is all done by computers now.

Ewert’s findings echo that of US meteorologists Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony Watts who examined 6,000 NASA weather stations and found a host of irregularities both with the way they were sited and how the raw data had been adjusted to reflect such influences as the Urban Heat Island effect.

Curious. The heat island effect results in raising temperatures in cities. Adjusting for it would mean lowering the temperatures which is counter to what they are accusing NASA of doing. Of course, there is some wiggle room in how much those adjustments are.

As you can probably tell, I am convinced of the conspiracy to blame global warming on anthropogenic sources, but I'm not convinced that the scheme goes this far. Common sense dictates that the planet is warming if only by observing the dramatic increase in intensities of various storms. Hurricanes seem to be more intense; even local thunderstorms are at times far more intense than in the past. I have documented that fact myself in British Columbia. Both intensity increases almost certainly have to do with warming temperatures.

Britain’s Paul Homewood is also on NASA GISS’s case. Here he shows the shocking extent of the adjustments they have made to a temperature record in Brazil which has been altered so that a cooling trend becomes a warming trend.

Unadjusted temperature record: shows cooling trend.

Adjusted temperature record: shows warming trend.

For still more evidence of NASA’s adjustments, check out Alterations to Climate Data at Tony Heller’s Real Climate Science.