Over at Tallbloke’s Talkshop, moderator Tim Channon wondered about this regularly hot station reported in the news:
An often appearing name in the BBC news as the hottest place in the country is Gravesend but the true location of the Met Office thermometer is a mystery. By chance I followed up today and discovered a new snippet of information.
From the BBC – 2003: Britain swelters in record heat
Britain has recorded its hottest day ever as the temperature soared to 38.1C (100.6F) in Gravesend, Kent.
The record has actually been broken twice today. The first place to beat the previous record of 37.1C (98.8F), set in Cheltenham in 1990, was Heathrow Airport where the temperature earlier today registered 37.9C (100.2F).
Then an even higher temperature was recorded in Kent, making today the hottest day since records began about 130 years ago in 1875.
Here’s another example: Gravesend sizzles in late September sun
It’s definitely time to get that sun screen out as Gravesend is officially one of the hottest places in the UK today.Temperatures reached 28.6C this afternoon, making it Kent’s warmest September 30 ever!
Clearly, it is a leading hot spot.
So what does the Met office say about how official weather stations should be sited? They have it right here:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/learning/science/first-steps/observations/weather-stations
And what does the officially hottest station in the UK at Gravesend look like?
The process of discovery of this station was a long one, aided by a global discussion at Tallbloke’s Talkshop. This Bing Maps aerial view I found and posted at TB’s confirmed to me that there was in fact a Stevenson Screen there:
Source: http://binged.it/RqV8Cv
And that lead commenter “Caz” to make the discovery of the photo:
Caz says:
The Bing Link cracked it for me. It was obvious looking at the shadows that the weather station, transmitter and radar tower were sat on a level depression protected on three sides by banking ie they had their own micro climate.
I then selected Ordnance survey mapping and confirmed that this was indeed a place with a micro climate as the banks are clearly marked on the OS map. But it gave one other vital piece information, the location is Broadness Salt Marsh.
Just a few steps later and a Google of Broadness Salt Marsh and I had the picture and all the information required to see that this weather station is a dud. Note the banking, brick power building with ventilation equipment and the weather station.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Broadness_Radar_-_geograph.org.uk_-_48941.jpg
The Met Office should hang their heads in shame and also the BBC for reporting the temperatures recorded by this station. Well done chaps I hope you can get the message out to the wider world. If anyone lives in that area the site looks easily accessible.
Getting the message out to the wider world is what we do here at WUWT, happy to help.
Now here’s the interesting thing about this station, it has a trifecta of siting issues, and not just from the air conditioner and brick building. Look at the location located by Tim Channon:
That spit of land juts into the Thames. What is nearby? Channon writes:
This is east of London, is the tidal lower Thames close to the estuary. It is going to be permanently humid, including any effect from the elevation of the temperature of the Thames, heat from London.
Industrial activity is obvious as is close dense residential.
Go towards London (left) and within 5 km is the non-motorway section of the M25 London orbital “motorway”, blue on the map. This is 8 lanes all told with queues a lot of the time, is a toll road. Queen Elizabeth bridge southbound and the Dartford tunnel northbound. Both expel heat into the air, a bridge and ventilated tunnel. South side to the left of that see the bright circles? Heavy oil storage tanks, river pontoon for fuel delivery tankers. Next across is the RWE Littlebrook power station. Being oil is probably not run continuously, about 1.4GW output and has additional gas turbine generator sets. This will eject circa 2GW of waste heat, up prevailing wind. RWE web page on station, head photo is looking east toward bridge and weather station.
Next to the left is a wee and poo plant, also tends to be warm stuff. I expect the sludge is tankered into the outer estuary for disposal. (used to be the case)
Little Reach Sewage Treatment plant, run by Thames Water. Photo looking west, can see the edge of the power station.
Is that all?
Figure 3Just off the right of the previous image, north side of the river is… another power station. Top of image here is the electricity output site.
RWE Tilbury Power station, coal fired, hence the pontoon for delivery and black stuff but the RWE web page says the site is being converted. Looks like another 2 to 3GW of waste heat, east winter winds or blocking highs have this one upwind. I notice the RWE photo doesn’t want to show much.
Converting to biomass? I bet the conversion efficiency is lower than conventional fuels, therefore even more waste heat.
There are other power stations a little further away, at least two major ones to the east. (there because of the river, coal delivery)
All this sparkery, I’ve not reached the end yet.
Figure 4
So what is that? Met site is top right. Four piles at the base, is a large power grid pylon, can look bizarre from an aircraft (these are aerial photos, not satellite).
Electricity transmission is not 100% efficient, the lines get hot, are a compromise. Actual lines are aluminium with a steel core. The alignment, this is a river crossing.
Other side are several sites
I pointed out that:
It may be that the station is affected by heated water discharge from the power plant and the sewage plant into the river. Being on that spit of land it has water on three sides.
Only some water temperature measurements will tell for sure.
But another commenter pointed out:
Scute says:
Following up on Anthony’s comments, I have been digging a little, using Tim’s links. The Littlebrook power station just to the west of the QE Bridge does discharge warm water from its condenser into the Thames. The intake and outflow are the two circles in the Thames, visible in the Bing ariel view if you scroll left. The PDF document on the site that Tim linked says:
“The condensate is pumped back to the boiler for reuse and the cooling water [i.e. now warm water] is returned to the river.”
This must be several hundred megawatts at least, given the fact that it is cooling something approaching 800kg of condensate per second at full operating capacity. This would be in addition to the heat lost up the chimney during oil combustion which may or may not drift over the station in question. What is certain is that a large portion of the condenser outflow ends up bathing the station on three sides. Even if there is some convective/turbulent mixing, the mixed water will retain this heat energy quite well at or near the surface albeit as lower grade heat. Since water has a specific heat capacity four times that of air and the mass of air directly above the Thames is much less than the now-mixed surface layer, it means that the water surface can heat the air above it to the same temperature without dropping in temperature itself, or at least by a negligible amount. This amounts to a very reliable, permanently elevated heating source, one which is likely to be elevated further when the power station cranks up in the evening….I noticed that Thursdays temperature graph for Gravesend showed an anomalous rise at 6PM. I was waiting for today’s 6PM update to see if it happened again but as of starting this comment it hadn’t come through. It might warrant monitoring over the next few weeks or months- though tides will dull or enhance the effect I should think.
Speaking of tides:
tchannon says:
Scute,
Hundreds of MW, probably upper, however, oil is an unusual fuel so I suspect this is peak times only. They mention gas plant but seem to casually throw this in without detail. Presumably a similar power and the thermal efficiency is a little better.
More subtly, I mentioned this is lower reaches, the Thames is a small river with low flow: it is tidal.
For this reason any cooling outfall from the station nominally downstream will flow back upstream… and cooling upstream will stagnate in a pool of water.
Goodness knows the effect, for all I know, none.
So, I decided to have a look at that tidal issue. Again Bing aerial view is our friend:
Source: http://binged.it/NblzVn
Note the exposed dark mudflats. What sort of natural surface has the lowest albedo, and thus absorbs the greatest amount of solar radiation?
Dark and wet…like a mudflat on two sides of the station as seen in the Bing aerial view.
The new “hottest ever” record set in the UK was on August 1o, 2003.
I downloaded the tide data for the outlet of the Thames, Sheerness for that day from the UK National Oceanography center. Times are local to the station, +1 GMT.
21217) 2003/08/10 00:00:00 4.356 0.081
21218) 2003/08/10 00:15:00 4.101 0.063
21219) 2003/08/10 00:30:00 3.840 0.048
21220) 2003/08/10 00:45:00 3.581 0.038
21221) 2003/08/10 01:00:00 3.325 0.032
21222) 2003/08/10 01:15:00 3.065 0.018
21223) 2003/08/10 01:30:00 2.825 0.018
21224) 2003/08/10 01:45:00 2.592 0.015
21225) 2003/08/10 02:00:00 2.372 0.013
21226) 2003/08/10 02:15:00 2.168 0.013
21227) 2003/08/10 02:30:00 1.983 0.014
21228) 2003/08/10 02:45:00 1.824 0.022
21229) 2003/08/10 03:00:00 1.690 0.035
21230) 2003/08/10 03:15:00 1.567 0.040
21231) 2003/08/10 03:30:00 1.469 0.051
21232) 2003/08/10 03:45:00 1.385 0.057
21233) 2003/08/10 04:00:00 1.308 0.053
21234) 2003/08/10 04:15:00 1.245 0.044
21235) 2003/08/10 04:30:00 1.196 0.029
21236) 2003/08/10 04:45:00 1.173 0.016
21237) 2003/08/10 05:00:00 1.186 0.011
21238) 2003/08/10 05:15:00 1.235 0.010
21239) 2003/08/10 05:30:00 1.325 0.015
21240) 2003/08/10 05:45:00 1.458 0.028
21241) 2003/08/10 06:00:00 1.610 0.025
21242) 2003/08/10 06:15:00 1.805 0.037
21243) 2003/08/10 06:30:00 2.011 0.038
21244) 2003/08/10 06:45:00 2.228 0.037
21245) 2003/08/10 07:00:00 2.461 0.046
21246) 2003/08/10 07:15:00 2.686 0.046
21247) 2003/08/10 07:30:00 2.909 0.047
21248) 2003/08/10 07:45:00 3.134 0.053
21249) 2003/08/10 08:00:00 3.350 0.054
21250) 2003/08/10 08:15:00 3.577 0.067
21251) 2003/08/10 08:30:00 3.791 0.068
21252) 2003/08/10 08:45:00 4.011 0.075
21253) 2003/08/10 09:00:00 4.226 0.079
21254) 2003/08/10 09:15:00 4.436 0.082
21255) 2003/08/10 09:30:00 4.645 0.095
21256) 2003/08/10 09:45:00 4.842 0.110
21257) 2003/08/10 10:00:00 5.019 0.127
21258) 2003/08/10 10:15:00 5.171 0.149
21259) 2003/08/10 10:30:00 5.290 0.173
21260) 2003/08/10 10:45:00 5.365 0.196
21261) 2003/08/10 11:00:00 5.387 0.212
21262) 2003/08/10 11:15:00 5.358 0.226
21263) 2003/08/10 11:30:00 5.272 0.230
21264) 2003/08/10 11:45:00 5.125 0.218
21265) 2003/08/10 12:00:00 4.942 0.207
21266) 2003/08/10 12:15:00 4.718 0.187
21267) 2003/08/10 12:30:00 4.475 0.171
21268) 2003/08/10 12:45:00 4.213 0.153
21269) 2003/08/10 13:00:00 3.937 0.133
21270) 2003/08/10 13:15:00 3.670 0.128
21271) 2003/08/10 13:30:00 3.404 0.127
21272) 2003/08/10 13:45:00 3.140 0.126
21273) 2003/08/10 14:00:00 2.882 0.126
21274) 2003/08/10 14:15:00 2.630 0.122
21275) 2003/08/10 14:30:00 2.394 0.121
21276) 2003/08/10 14:45:00 2.172 0.116
21277) 2003/08/10 15:00:00 1.969 0.110
21278) 2003/08/10 15:15:00 1.791 0.107
21279) 2003/08/10 15:30:00 1.628 0.097
21280) 2003/08/10 15:45:00 1.508 0.109
21281) 2003/08/10 16:00:00 1.397 0.112
21282) 2003/08/10 16:15:00 1.302 0.114
21283) 2003/08/10 16:30:00 1.223 0.116
21284) 2003/08/10 16:45:00 1.156 0.113
21285) 2003/08/10 17:00:00 1.110 0.112
21286) 2003/08/10 17:15:00 1.084 0.108
21287) 2003/08/10 17:30:00 1.094 0.111
21288) 2003/08/10 17:45:00 1.141 0.116
21289) 2003/08/10 18:00:00 1.231 0.126
21290) 2003/08/10 18:15:00 1.360 0.135
21291) 2003/08/10 18:30:00 1.528 0.147
21292) 2003/08/10 18:45:00 1.720 0.151
21293) 2003/08/10 19:00:00 1.946 0.164
21294) 2003/08/10 19:15:00 2.187 0.177
21295) 2003/08/10 19:30:00 2.436 0.189
21296) 2003/08/10 19:45:00 2.684 0.197
21297) 2003/08/10 20:00:00 2.928 0.201
21298) 2003/08/10 20:15:00 3.180 0.213
21299) 2003/08/10 20:30:00 3.433 0.225
21300) 2003/08/10 20:45:00 3.685 0.235
21301) 2003/08/10 21:00:00 3.930 0.236
21302) 2003/08/10 21:15:00 4.178 0.237
21303) 2003/08/10 21:30:00 4.425 0.237
21304) 2003/08/10 21:45:00 4.670 0.238
21305) 2003/08/10 22:00:00 4.902 0.236
21306) 2003/08/10 22:15:00 5.133 0.250
21307) 2003/08/10 22:30:00 5.337 0.261
21308) 2003/08/10 22:45:00 5.507 0.273
21309) 2003/08/10 23:00:00 5.637 0.287
21310) 2003/08/10 23:15:00 5.715 0.299
21311) 2003/08/10 23:30:00 5.741 0.313
21312) 2003/08/10 23:45:00 5.695 0.310
As you can see from the data, the low tide was about 1.08 meter at 5:15PM local time.
I looked for historical data for Gravesend, which has a tide gauge according to the London Port authority, but I couldn’t find any actual data. So I had to rely on a tide prediction program. Given that Gravesend is well upstream from Sheerness. one would expect the tide to be lower, since it has an higher elevation difference, which is why the Thames flows east. I downloaded the wxtide32 program since it had a location for Tilbury dock, not too far away from Gravesend.
The tide prediction for Tilbury Dock for 8/10/2003:
Tilbury Dock, Thames Rvr
Sheerness, England - READ flaterco.com/pol.html
+ Corrections: High(+0:20 +1.50) Low(+0:20 -1.00)
Units are meters, initial timezone is CUT
August 2003 low is 0.2m, high is 6.2m, range is 6.0m.
Predicted historical low is -2.1m, high is 8.4m, range is 10.6m.
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
07-27 07-28 New 07-29 07-30 07-31 08-01 08-02
L0523 1.0 H0001 5.7 H0043 5.9 H0123 6.0 H0203 6.1 H0245 6.2 H0327 6.2
H1140 5.6 L0606 0.9 L0646 0.8 L0726 0.7 L0808 0.7 L0852 0.6 L0934 0.7
L1753 0.9 H1220 5.8 H1258 5.9 H1335 6.0 H1413 6.1 H1453 6.2 H1533 6.2
L1837 0.7 L1918 0.5 L2000 0.4 L2043 0.3 L2126 0.3 L2207 0.3
08-03 08-04 FQtr 08-05 08-06 08-07 08-08 08-09
H0409 6.1 H0452 6.0 H0537 5.8 L0014 0.7 L0111 0.8 L0221 1.0 L0344 1.0
L1014 0.8 L1054 0.9 L1136 1.0 H0629 5.6 H0735 5.4 H0856 5.4 H1010 5.6
H1614 6.1 H1656 6.0 H1743 5.9 L1228 1.1 L1333 1.2 L1452 1.2 L1622 1.0
L2248 0.4 L2328 0.5 H1840 5.7 H1959 5.5 H2129 5.6 H2241 5.8
08-10 08-11 Full 08-12 08-13 08-14 08-15 08-16
L0500 0.9 L0600 0.8 H0034 6.2 H0121 6.2 H0204 6.2 H0244 6.1 H0321 6.0
H1112 5.8 H1206 6.0 L0648 0.7 L0730 0.7 L0809 0.8 L0844 0.8 L0918 0.8
L1734 0.7 L1830 0.4 H1253 6.1 H1336 6.1 H1415 6.1 H1451 6.1 H1524 6.0
H2341 6.0 L1918 0.3 L2001 0.2 L2041 0.2 L2119 0.3 L2153 0.4
The plot for Sunday 8-10-2003:
The low tide of 0.7m was reached late in the afternoon, about 5:34PM.
Here is what an aerial view of the station and the point looks like at low tide of similar magnitude:
As you can see (if you click image for the closeup) the boatyard to the SW is completely dry. Mudflats are around the station every direction except SE.
So, depending on wind direction that day, combined with the low tide, the station may have picked up some heated air from the mud flats. Unfortunately the station does not record wind data. Given the nearby stations (such as London City) show a shift of wind direction to northerly after about 5PM local time on that date, it is quite possible though:
All news reports I read said the high temperature in Gravesend occurred in late afternoon on Sunday August 10th. The historical data available from the Met Office is rather slim. So if somebody knows where to find the exact time the high temperature was recorded, that would help solve this mystery.
One final thing, this IR map shows that area of Kent near Gravesend to be one of the warmer places around London, warmer even than the cityscape of London itself:
So to summarize the surroundings of this station:
- City UHI nearby
- Industrial area surrounding it
- River with heated water from power plant and sewage plant dumped into it nearby
- Surrounded by water on three sides
- Surrounded by low albedo (high solar absorbing) mudflats nearby with low tide near time of Tmax
- Sited at a radar station with waste heat exhaust systems clearly visible
- Sited directly next to a sidewalk
No wonder it is consistently a high temperature record breaker! On that day August 10 2003, it was warmer than Heathrow Airport where the temperature earlier registered 37.9C (100.2F).
UK residents: Feel free to add any information you can find that will help. Still looking for the high temperature time on 8-10-2003 at Gravesend.
UPDATE: I’ve located this photo also. What looked to be a sidewalk turned out to be a big chunk of concrete. Heat sink anyone?
This photo is from a Royal Meteorological Society publication, they apparently didn’t want the world to see the other nearby issues related to the radar station.
More on that publication, and how I’ve caught the Met Office in a lie, coming soon.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thank you! British friends are unconvinced when I point out the variable quality of data on which so much hinges, citing your project, but this is their backyard, they’ve driven the toll road many times…a thing of beauty this post! I shall have to forward it over and over.
Meh. This is just more of that impartial (“ho-ho!”) reporting from the BBC. So what else is new?
Have you ever felt how much heat those towers can give off on a hot day?
and how darn cold they get on a cold day !!!
Well, the site actually obeys the guidelines as written and punctuated.
“No trees; buildings, or steep ground nearby that might influence the measurement.”
In other words, there should be no trees, but there should be buildings or steep ground.
Trees nearby? Nope. Buildings nearby? Check! Just right.
A bit off topic, but here is a calculation I’ve been looking at.. to do with average temp calculations.
Calculation of rural/urban average temperatures
Suppose in a region of size 20000 sq miles there are 3 urban areas of size 250, 500, and 250 sq miles. In this region there are 5 weather stations , one in each of the urban areas and 2 rural stations.
Now, over the past 30 years these stations have seen the following trends:
Uurban1 = 2.1°C, Urban 2 = 2.0°C, Urban3 = 1.5°C, Rural1 = 0.1°C, Rural2 = -0.3°C
If we want to calculate the Average temperature change, and we just apply equal areas to each station, and we get an average rise of 1.08°C.
If, however, we apply the urban stations ONLY to their respective urban areas, and split the rural area equally, we get an average temperature rise of .. ZERO !!!!
Oh, I think the presence nearby of a large and moving body of water is bound to be a cooling influence. …
REPLY: One can always count on Phil Clarke to come to the opposite conclusion while discarding all other evidence. It is his mission here. – Anthony
Good work Scute pointing out the nearby Littlebrook power station. As a “responsible adult” (hah!), accompanying school trips around a power station not far from my home (UK Midlands), I was mildly surprised to learn that every day this one station puts about 20,000 gallons less warm water back into the river than the cold water they take from it. Anywhere near a power station you have (literally) industrial quantities of energy flowing around, not necessarily predictably. Not the place to put a thermometer!
Given the size and population density of the UK about the only weather stations unaffected by UHI effect are likely to be in Scotland.
Is there any information about weather stations in the former Soviet Union – did the collapse of the Soviet Union result in a lot of weather stations no longer reporting ? Just a thought that could have a major impact – remove a significant number of the coolest weather stations from the record suddenly in 1991 and that is bound to create a hockey stick some 9 years later.
I find it inconceivable that weather records continued to be available in the chaos following the split – hell, they had trouble tracking nukes !
Compared to many airport sites, this is not a bad siting. Being surrounded by water on three sides and experiencing the shadow of the tower falling on the instrument shelter at some point during the day would be negative feedback as fas as extreme heat is concerned. Compare this site to many airport sites where the instrument shelter is surrounded by runways and access roads in close proximity and you will see that the airport sites, which make up a good chunk of the longer period climate reporting sites, are even more likely to be contaminated by artificially high temperatures.
REPLY: The tower is to the NW of the shelter, so little if any shadow chances. – Anthony
I’m no expert, but being so close to a radar source must heat the platinum thermometer the UK Met Office uses.
There is another possible source of local heating. The microwave emission from the radar antenna could directly heat up the water molecules in the air in its immediate vicinity. The amount of heating would depend on the power and frequency of the radar, but I suspect it could be substantial in the immediate vicinity of the antenna. Depending on the directional characteristics of the radar antenna, it could also cause heating of metals nearby. Think of a really high power microwave oven…
REPLY:I thought of that, having worked on radar system in the past. Your premise is theoretically possible, but any radar operating in that spectrum wouldn’t have much range due to atmospheric attenuation. Most marine radars are x-band or s-band which don’t get attenuated by significant water molecule absorptions. Microwave ovens operate at a frequency of about 915 MHz—wavelength 328 millimetres. S-band is 2-4Ghz (2000-4000 MHz) and X band is 8-12 GHz (8000 – 12,000 MHz) – Anthony
It’s a few decades ago now but I grew up in that area, in a town called Dartford which is a few miles upstream from Gravesend. As kids we used to get around a lot on our (push)bikes. And naturally, mudflats and water in general were a major attraction. Tim’s analysis fits what I remember.
Latitude: 51° 27’ 51.70”
Longitude: 0° 18’ 40.86”
I will leave others to discuss the surrounding terrain and local UHI.
The two vertical blue boxes on the side of the radar equipment building are probably Liebert process coolers rated for 5-tons(17 kW) cooling / air economizer each. At full load, the heat rejection to the outside would be about 85,000 BTU/H or 25 kW each. Both coolers might be near full load because an additional 1-ton(3.4 kW) condensing unit is also visible on the outside wall. If this is a 24/7 radar installation, the process coolers switch to air economizer/exhaust during cooler seasons. Local prevailing winds could blow this plume of heat toward the temperature sensor. I’ve spec’d many of these units for remote cell/radio transmitters.
BTW, these ‘How not to Measure Temperature’ features are what introduced me to WUWT about 4.5 years ago.
Not sure if this info applies but it is common for large wastewater plants to have anaerobic sludge digesters. These generate methane gas which is often burnt off to the atmosphere. Something to look into for this site.
A couple quickies:
(1) Which bands were used for the false color image? I assume 5,4,1 but I truly have no idea otherwise. Without such knowledge it is impossible to understand just what the satellite image is showing.
(2) While the macroscopic issues of geography, tides, and industry are all roughly understandable I’m more interested in the heat pump on the brick building at the site, and the brick building itself. What is the order of influence that we should expect from these items, at distance to the station, while ignoring all other factors? A rough notion of the error would be highly informative to include in the text.
Actually most concerned about the 5-10 foot berm.
Does that go all the way around? I looks like it is two sides at a minimum. Any thoughts on the other two sides?
A shallow depression of that sort tends to (IMNSHO) have -amazingly- stagnant air.
@Steve C says:
Usually they have cooling ponds somewhere.. which leak warm water into the ground.
That’s ok, won’t make any diff to the temp. 😉
In the UK we have our fair share of badly sited stations. I live near one in a frost hollow, which regularly give the lowest winter night temperatures in the whole region.
The depth and temperature of ground water under that site would also be very interesting.
lol.. Just wondering what sort of reading that set-up would give in say Melbourne or Adelaide in the Australia summer !!! What does the thermometer go up to ???
There’s only one reason that Gardeners go to the trouble and expense of creating a walled garden and that is to protect and warm up their crops within the walls.
What we have here is a walled garden and the Stevenson screen is right in the middle of it, protected from direct solar radiation by its white paint but influenced by local climatic heat build up due to the bunding on three sides and a brick building on the fourth.
Mud flats and salt flats are extremely warm places anyway when subjected to direct sun and zero wind.
Alan S. Blue says:
” have -amazingly- stagnant air.”
And Humid , off the mud flats too.. I can smell it from here !!!
YUCK !!
The UK Met Office have the hottest ever recorded temperature as recorded at “Brogdale” near Faversham Kent, which I think is a bit more rural. http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/q/r/Temperature_Record_-_10_August_2003.pdf
You know, when you see such a “thing of beauty” as LJHills says, then reflect on ALL the surface stations facts that Anthony et al have painstakingly brought to the world’s attention, and then consider the impenetrability of so many minds to the absurdity of it all (think Chris Mooney et al), it just makes you sad. Sad that this is far as we’ve made it as a species, that so many of us could actually be tricked with such nonsense.
I query the Warmista: Drop ~75% of the surface stations since 1990, most of those being high latitude, high altitude and rural stations, leaving us with such as Gravesend. MatheMANNically stitch that up with a very few, very special trees, maybe even process it with upside-down Tiljander ALGOREithms only to end up with model predicted anthropogenic “signals” woefully below any normal climate noise. Virtually inconspicuous in the demonstrated abrupt climate extremes that are so typical at a normal end extreme interglacial. Should I be scared? Really?
But the final act in this Theater Of The Absurd has yet to play out. Strong, much stronger than anything yet predicted, thermal pulses (the minimum maybe 1 at the end of MIS-11) always attend the ends of the extremes. They were from a few years to centuries long. But they always dropped off, over years to centuries, into yet another glacial. In consideration of the vaunted “Precautionary Principle” I find it most humorous that the Warmistas are literally “boxed-in” by their very own arguments. Consider for a moment the argument that CO2 actually is the heathen devil gas it is made out to be. Consider further that you, personally, actually have the CO2 thermostat in your control. You have heard, if you were listening, the complete lack of consensus there is on just how much longer the Holocene has to run.
So, if it was ALL up to you, what would you do? Strip the hated climate security blanket from the possibly late Holocene atmosphere because, somehow, you know that this eccentricity minima extreme interglacial will “go long” like MIS-11 did? MIS-19, the only other post-MPT eccentricity minima interglacial, didn’t “go long”. At best it may have run 10kyrs, or 1,715 years less than the Holocene has so far. So 50/50 odds on that bet. Or would you turn a blind eye while mankind “stacks the ‘climate’ deck” with the blatantly obvious security blanket CO2? You know, just in case you are right…….
Best of luck with that!