LONDON (Reuters) – Next year is set to be one of the top-five warmest on record, British climate scientists said on Tuesday.
The average global temperature for 2009 is expected to be more than 0.4 degrees celsius above the long-term average, despite the continued cooling of huge areas of the Pacific Ocean, a phenomenon known as La Nina.
That would make it the warmest year since 2005, according to researchers at the Met Office, who say there is also a growing probability of record temperatures after next year.
Currently the warmest year on record is 1998, which saw average temperatures of 14.52 degrees celsius – well above the 1961-1990 long-term average of 14 degrees celsius.
Warm weather that year was strongly influenced by El Nino, an abnormal warming of surface ocean waters in the eastern tropical Pacific.
Theories abound as to what triggers the mechanisms that cause an El Nino or La Nina event but scientists agree that they are playing an increasingly important role in global weather patterns.
The strength of the prevailing trade winds that blow from east to west across the equatorial Pacific is thought to be an important factor.
“Further warming to record levels is likely once a moderate El Nino develops,” said Professor Chris Folland at the Met Office Hadley Center. “Phenomena such as El Nino and La Nina have a significant influence on global surface temperature.”
Professor Phil Jones, director of the climate research unit at the University of East Anglia, said global warming had not gone away despite the fact that 2009, like the year just gone, would not break records.
“What matters is the underlying rate of warming,” he said.
He noted the average temperature over 2001-2007 was 14.44 degrees celsius, 0.21 degrees celsius warmer than corresponding values for 1991-2000.
(Reporting by Christina Fincher; Editing by Christian Wiessner)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well at least they gave a date and number.
This paragraph is the give away: “Theories abound as to what triggers the mechanisms that cause an El Nino or La Nina event but scientists agree that they are playing an increasingly important role in global weather patterns”.
They are backing away from AGW.
And parse their writing carefully- is the Met office actually claiming that climatologists are just now discovering that the Pacific Ocean warming and cooling events influence world weather patterns? Or are they saying that in the past the Pacific Ocean events did not influence weather so much?
Either way, they are idiots.
“Currently the warmest year on record is 1998, which saw average temperatures of 14.52 degrees celsius – well above the 1961-1990 long-term average of 14 degrees celsius.”
How is 1961-1990 a long term average? Hell, I am way older than that. And what happened to the infamous 1979-2000 base period? Why isn’t that being used? GIGO, cherry picking and algorean science methods. Give me a break.
These people are a disgrace to their profession and in time they will discover this
FTA: “…Currently the warmest year on record is 1998…”
I thought 1934 was the warmist year on record? At least we now know how the warmist will respond to continued cooling. It will be described as a unimportant bump on the long term road to an ever hotter world.
Brutal cold forming in Alaska, and you know where it is headed just as soon as it finishes the job of getting cyrogenic.
If this is warmest on record, it’s a cruel joke.
We’re in the middle of an unexpected Deep Solar Minimum, the sunspots are mere specks, the 10.7 cm flux is the equivalent of a flatlined patient on the operating table, the ionosphere has shrunk 30% , the cosmic rays have increased and form inversion layers in the lower atmosphere bouncing out the warming….and yet…. warmest on record?
Not to worry, though, people are starting to ask questions.
How come it’s so cold this winter?
Next year is set to be one of the top-five warmest on record, British climate scientists said on Tuesday.
Yeah, and the Lions will win the Super Bowl next year. And I’ve got a computer model that proves it.
They just want to enable the new vision of a global government in charge of all activity.
And any human activity is bad.
Sad to see so many humans desiring our own demise.
The same problem as why is a beaver dam, built by beavers for beavers’ purposes good, but a human built dam, built by humans for human purposes, is bad.
sigh.
Phil Jones…. LOL…. Steve McIntyre reamed him for not archiving his data and not submitting data for verification… Jones responded by saying he wasn’t going to provide any data so his work can be disproved. Jones is about as competent as Hansen and Mann… Not
There’s also the cool phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. Anything else in the Pacific which they didn’ t mention?
Great news for Scotland. They should have a much better chance of catching the Loch Ness Monster this year:
http://www.pinedaleonline.com/archive/2002/jan/scr-andyicefishing.jpg
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2007/pr20070104.html
2007 – forecast to be the warmest year yet- climate change experts 🙂
The Met Office shares the same conflict as GISS. They control both the forecasts and the temperature data.
It is analogous being the coach, referee, scorekeeper and cheerleader – all for the same team.
A couple years ago you may recall that Gloucestershire (in the West of the UK) was totally flooded in the wettest and coolest summer and year for many decades. It was actually a national emergency with the army called out desperately defending power generating stations. The Met Office predicted in the spring that this would be a rather dry warm summer, with rain mainly in the North.
There is no reason to think anyone can forecast UK weather one year ahead. If you look at where the UK is located in terms of the flow of weather, this is in no way surprising. The surprising thing is, people keep forecasting, and people keep reporting their forecasts.
The Met Office has a heater strategically placed next to the thermometer just in case.
Never fear. Not everyone is buying it… including environment ministers.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/environment/environment-minister-sammy-wilson-i-still-think-manmade-climate-change-is-a-con-14123972.html
Cognitive Dissonance. Just once, it would be nice if the MSM would nail their feet to the floorboards for putting out these kinds of absurd predictions.
Fred, 1934 was the warmest in the US not globally!
This can become very, very funny.
According to the latest NOAA ENSO status report we’re back into a La Nina, which, according to NCEP ensemble forecasts, is expected to last through at least the first half of 2009. And once an El Nino or La Nina is established, it can be predicted months ahead with quite good skill. La Nina automatically means cooler temperatures, hence it seems unlikely that 2009 will be very warm …
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/lanina/enso_evolution-status-fcsts-web.pdf
Hat tip to Lubos Motl.
The Met Office only seems to have been doing these annual forecasts for three years. (The quote below for 2007 says they have been doing it for seven years, but I couldn’t find any in the 2005 and 2006 archives, and they don’t go back earlier than that):
2007 is likely to be the warmest year on record globally, beating the current record set in 1998, say climate-change experts at the Met Office.
Each January the Met Office, in conjunction with the University of East Anglia, issues a forecast of the global surface temperature for the coming year. The forecast takes into account known contributing factors, such as solar effects, El Niño, greenhouse gases concentrations and other multi-decadal influences. Over the previous seven years, the Met Office forecast of annual global temperature has proved remarkably accurate, with a mean forecast error size of just 0.06 °C.
Met Office global forecast for 2007
* Global temperature for 2007 is expected to be 0.54 °C above the long-term (1961-1990) average of 14.0 °C;
* There is a 60% probability that 2007 will be as warm or warmer than the current warmest year (1998 was +0.52 °C above the long-term 1961-1990 average).
The potential for a record 2007 arises partly from a moderate-strength El Niño already established in the Pacific, which is expected to persist through the first few months of 2007. The lag between El Niño and the full global surface temperature response means that the warming effect of El Niño is extended and therefore has a greater influence the global temperatures during the year.
Katie Hopkins from Met Office Consulting said: “This new information represents another warning that climate change is happening around the world. Our work in the climate change consultancy team applies Met Office research to help businesses mitigate against risk and adapt at a strategic level for success in the new environment.”
2008 is set to be cooler globally than recent years say Met Office and University of East Anglia climate scientists, but is still forecast to be one of the top-ten warmest years.
Each January the Met Office, in conjunction with the University of East Anglia, issues a forecast of the global surface temperature for the coming year. The forecast takes into account known contributing factors, such as El Niño and La Niña, increasing greenhouse gas concentrations, the cooling influences of industrial aerosol particles, solar effects and natural variations of the oceans.
Met Office forecast for global temperature for 2008
Global temperature for 2008 is expected to be 0.37 °C above the long-term (1961-1990) average of 14.0 °C, the coolest year since 2000, when the value was 0.24 °C.
For 2008, the development of a strong La Niña in the tropical Pacific Ocean will limit the warming trend of the global climate. During La Niña, cold waters upwell to cool large areas of the ocean and land surface temperatures. The forecast includes for the first time a new decadal forecast using a climate model. This indicates that the current La Niña event will weaken only slowly through 2008, disappearing by the end of the year.
Prof. Chris Folland from the Met Office Hadley Centre said: “Phenomena such as El Niño and La Niña have a significant influence on global surface temperature and the current strong La Niña will act to limit temperatures in 2008. However, mean temperature is still expected to be significantly warmer than in 2000, when a similar strength La Niña pegged temperatures to 0.24 °C above the 1961-90 average. Sharply renewed warming is likely once La Niña declines.”
These cyclical influences can mask underlying warming trends with Prof. Phil Jones, Director of the Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia, saying: “The fact that 2008 is forecast to be cooler than any of the last seven years (and that 2007 did not break the record warmth set on 1998) does not mean that global warming has gone away. What matters is the underlying rate of warming – the period 2001-2007 with an average of 0.44 °C above the 1961-90 average was 0.21 °C warmer than corresponding values for the period 1991-2000.”
2009 is expected to be one of the top-five warmest years on record, despite continued cooling of huge areas of the tropical Pacific Ocean, a phenomenon known as La Niña.
According to climate scientists at the Met Office and the University of East Anglia the global temperature is forecast to be more than 0.4 °C above the long-term average. This would make 2009 warmer than the year just gone and the warmest since 2005.
During La Niña, cold waters rise to the surface to cool the ocean and land surface temperatures. The 2009 forecast includes an updated decadal forecast using a Met Office climate model. This indicates a rapid return of global temperature to the long-term warming trend, with an increasing probability of record temperatures after 2009.
Professor Chris Folland from the Met Office Hadley Centre said: “Phenomena such as El Niño and La Niña have a significant influence on global surface temperature. Warmer conditions in 2009 are expected because the strong cooling influence of the recent powerful La Niña has given way to a weaker La Niña. Further warming to record levels is likely once a moderate El Niño develops.”
These cyclical influences can mask underlying warming trends as Professor Phil Jones, Director of the Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia, explains: “The fact that 2009, like 2008, will not break records does not mean that global warming has gone away. What matters is the underlying rate of warming – the period 2001-2007, with an average of 14.44 °C, was 0.21 °C warmer than corresponding values for the period 1991-2000.”
There seems to be a very similar pattern to these forecasts and the caveats about masking global warming. You would have thought that each forecast would start off with a review of the previous year’s forecast and how good it was (or wasn’t) and why.
What amuses me is that the Met Office appears to have a split personality.
On the one hand: “temperature increases are likely to result in an increased frequency and severity of weather events such as heatwaves, storms and flooding. Rising levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere could set in motion large-scale changes in Earth’s natural systems. Some of these could be irreversible…”
(In the world of “climate”, warm = bad.)
On the other: “We are all more likely to feel the chill and catch cold or flu in winter, but for certain groups of people, cold weather can lead to more serious health problems such as heart attacks, strokes or pneumonia. Those most at risk of the effects of the cold include older people, families with young children and people with disabilities or long-term health conditions.
Cold weather is serious…”
(In the world of “weather”, cold = bad.)
“underlying rate of warming”
C’mon Phil Jones…
That’s been going on for 18,000 years!
“These people are a disgrace to their profession…”
What these people don’t want to admit is that their profession is politics, and not weather forecasting. They know full well that they are completely incompetent in their activity of weather forecasting.
“The fact that 2009, like 2008, will not break records does not mean that global warming has gone away. What matters is the underlying rate of warming – the period 2001-2007, with an average of 14.44 °C, was 0.21 °C warmer than corresponding values for the period 1991-2000.”
How to get an average figure by comparing a 7 year period to a 10 year period!!
Almost as good as their statement earlier this month that the average for 2008 was 14.3C when the data used was Jan to Oct. As they have since said that the first 2 weeks of December here in the UK were the coldest for 30 years methinks their average has been hammered….either that or they were at the Baileys (whisky cream liqueur for those that have never had it…yuk) again.
We are waiting with bated breath for the ice and snow from Siberia that was due yesterday/today. So far still above freezing, just, with fog (which they forecasted for last week!) If we get the 2 weeks of cold stuff then 2009 is not off to a good start for the warm year 2009 is going to be…LOL
Wonder if we’ll also get snow again in April for Easter just like we had in 2008? First time in who knows when….lots of “first times since xxxx” around at the moment.