From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
As noted previously, February 1779 was actually warmer than last month in Central England. It is also worth noting that there is no identifiable trend or pattern in the distribution of warm Februarys:
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/data/meantemp_monthly_totals.txt
What is interesting is that, according to Weatherweb, February 1779 was extremely dry, in contrast to this year. Indeed the whole January to March period was particularly dry and mild.
Ironically though, the following winter was extremely cold.
FJB remembers it well, when weather was perfect.
Story Tip
Scissor,
Did you know that President [Let’s Go] Brandon considers we climate alarm skeptics/realists to be Neanderthals?
Biden On Wildfire: ‘I Love Some Of My Neanderthal Friends Who Still Think There’s No Climate Change’ (youtube.com)
Interesting.
He’s an old master of fallacious reasoning, an old one. He lies for lying’s sake.
Has anyone ever said there’s no such thing as climate change?
Joe Biden tells lies when the truth would suffice. He can’t help it. That’s what spending your life on the public dole will do to you. It’s either that or graduating at the top of your class with three degrees.
Apart from a slight beneficial warming in the last 150 or so years..
… and things like localized urban warming etc
In what way has the “climate” changed in those 150 years.?
Has anyone ever said there’s no such thing as climate change?
yes.
and what they MEAN is this.
theres no such thing as human caused climate change.
news flash IPCC stands for intergovernmental panel on climate change
but EVERYONE knows they mean AGW
there are no AGW skeptics. there are AGW deniers
clue dont take a text literally if it leads to a nonsense meaning
He Big Mad.
Y’all can’t even prove your stupid “theory.”
Apart from localised urban and land effects,
DO you have any evidence that humans have caused the Earth to warm.
Apart from the slight and highly beneficial warming in the last 150 or so years, in what way has the global climate changed ??
You have NOTHING except mouthy meaningless platitudes, as always, Moosh
“there are AGW deniers”
Tell us what we “deny” that you have actual real scientific proof for.
It is as meaningless as saying we deny the existence of the Big Bad Wolf.
“they mean AGW”
IPCC say AGW is to do with human CO2 causing warming.
Do you have any actual scientific evidence to back up that conjecture ??
When did you TOTALLY FAIL at English, Moosh !!
I thought that was the only thing you were meant to be good at !
Sure isn’t science. !
Ah. It helps when you create the meme. 😉
“clue dont take a text literally if it leads to a nonsense meaning”
Steven you have, unwittily, identified the reason why there is an effective sceptical counterforce. The whole text is nonsense (the whole IPCC library is nonsense). 35 years ago, yeah, there was a possibility there could be a problem of dangerous warming because of rising CO2. There was no reason to dismiss it out of hand at the time.
However, falsification of the hypothesis was brutal with forecast warming turning out to be 300% too high measured against independent observations. And the 300% was for the average of all models. Half the models ranged from 300 to 600% too high! Gavin Schmidt was pole-axed: “Models are running a way too hot and we don’t know why.”
So, what happened next was abandonment of science altogether! Goal posts for charting the warming were shifted back 100 years to 1850 to bankroll the 0.6C previously thought to be natural recovery from the LIA and recently there has been talk of moving posts back to 1750. At least the talk about 6 or 7°C by 2100 in the heydays of climate exuberance got chopped (you guessed it) to a third. 2 -3° or so once thought to be sort of okay are now hyped to wipe out the planet.
If this wasn’t bad enough, this all took place in the middle of the Dreaded Pause which lasted as long as the piddling warming that created the frenzy in the first place and only a few years after climategate opened a window on the malfeasance of all the main scientists in this sordid affair. AR6 showed an unrepentant IPCC doubling down on disaster. Don’t believe you missed out on all this stuff? Oh, and meanwhile, The Great Global Greening and bumper harvest switched the cost of “carbon” around to hugely beneficial, Including rendering plants more drought proof! Does that shift your thinking a few millimetres.
Steven,
“news flash IPCC stands for intergovernmental panel on climate change
but EVERYONE knows they mean AGW”
Thanks for confirming how biased the IPCC is.
I would think virtually all mainstream sceptics (including myself) would agree that CO2 has caused some amount of warming. The question is, how much? And are the effects of this overall good or bad?
Clearly, much of the warming is natural, as the planet emerged from the chilling effects of the Little Ice Age. According to one peer reviewed concensus paper, the LIA represented a global cooling of one degree. So what would inevitably happen after the end of the LIA? Obviously, one degree of global warming. You seriously think that’s bad?
If you want to refer to human caused warming, by all means refer to AGW or human caused warming. But, irrespective of the biased IPCC, “climate change” occurs when the climate changes. It’s very simple, really.
“there are no AGW skeptics. there are AGW deniers”
Anyone who uses this offensive word (clearly designed to sound like “holocaust denier”) should be ashamed. It’s not science, it’s vicious propaganda. Please don’t use that word again.
And to answer the second question. It’s blindingly obvious that the mild warming over the last century has been an immense benefit for humanity and the planet. If there had been no warming we would still be in the depths of the LIA. That really would be a catastrophe.
According to the famous NASA study a few years ago, the planet is dramatically greening. The causes are primarily increased atmospheric CO2 and (oh, the irony) global warming.
It’s ironic that green climate cultists demonise CO2, the very thing that makes the planet green!
Chris
Sorry to disappoint you, Mr Mosher, but it is the weather that changes.
Whether that effects our longer term records depends upon how you handle history and/or take appropriate to carefully record stuff in the present. Ask your Mr Mann of Ice Hockey Stick propaganda how he seems to manipulate stuff every time he opens his mouth or puts pen to paper. I am sure he’ll tell you that the change in scientific integrity is justified.
As for UK weather then we seldom have anything like really settled stuff and generally regard weather as changeable like most temperate islands do. .
Weren’t the Neanderthals around during very cold periods in Europe when H.Sapiens scuttled back to Africa? That when H.Sapiens returned and bred with Neanderthals it was quite warm?
Hot weather on the Continent has long been known to affect the mating behaviour of English women.
It used to be called “Spanish Waiter Syndrome”.
The Ministry of Truth provides answers as appropriately needed by the people. The only measurement of any value occurred within the living memory of the Minister, all else is speculation.
Wow. It’s been warmer and cooler in the past.
Yeah but if you remove that oldest data point (it must be an anomaly, so we can ignore it!) then there’s a clear uptick at the end, just as all the best scientists tell us.
Or something like that… 🙂
So, we saved a few quid on the heating.
That’s a benefit.
I thought the hockey stick showed that temperature was perfectly flat up until 1950 or so. This can’t be…
Story tip – BBC Verified /sarc
“…the BBC Verify report was “a profound journalistic failure for the BBC…”
https://www.gbnews.com/news/bbc-outrage-anti-israel-journalist-iran-news-agency
Really sloppy
As sloppy as using reports from the ‘white helmets’ in Syria, even after they’d been identified as ISIS terrorists.
The BBC also had an article today saying “High temperatures causing trees to blossom weeks early.” https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/68447182#comments
The article itself was fairly milquetoast by BBC standards, but I wanted to post a comment saying that they aren’t blossoming early where I currently live in central England.
But the BBC wouldn’t let me post, claiming that I was too old to comment.
So it was written for children, but I don’t much like the idea that the BBC thinks it has a right to say what it wants to children in public without adults being allowed to say anything either.
I liked this gem from the BBC spokesperson:
“The fact that someone has expressed an opinion on social media doesn’t automatically disqualify them from giving eye-witness testimony.”
When that “opinion” is actually an expression of hatred…
In this part of the world, the winter temperature depends more on wind direction than anything else. If you get sustained winds more from the south than the north, it will be warmer. If the reverse, colder. Where the wind is from west or east, it will depend on where the air mass came from. If it came from the pole, it’s cold. If it came from the Sahara, it’s warm.
Now let the alarmists try to explain why there were more winds and air masses from the south in February in 1779 and 2024, but not in other years.
No question, CO2 😀
Story tip: Yesterday (Monday, March 4, 2024) SpaceX launched a satellite with enhanced methane, and other greenhouse gas, detectors to catch “climate Offenders”. You know who you are. Stop it.
No
PS, the satellite has a Death Ray on it.
I’ll risk it
“As noted previously, February 1779 was actually warmer than last month in Central England.“
Indeed. By a whole 0.1°C. I would suggest they are statistically tied.
“It is also worth noting that there is no identifiable trend or pattern in the distribution of warm Februarys“
Might depend on your definition of “warm”. Here I looked at how many over 6.7°C there were by decade. That’s the upper 5% quartile for all Februaries. Note that the most recent decade only has 5 years so far.
Sorry for the bizarre spelling of Februaries in the graph.
Well it’s an unusual spelling, I’ll grant you!
It’s been mild. Calm down it’s far from a crisis, it’s great
Sunshine, dopey !!
Always the Sun.
Wot, not El Niños?
I’m not sure how increased sunshine caused this very mild February. We’ve hardly seen any sun this month. You can see how dull it’s been in your graph.
I suspect it’s more likely that cloud cover contributes to the milder nights during winter. Here’s a graph showing the correlation between the two for Southern England. This month is highlighted in red.
Story tip…
Another model based study about CO2 emissions melting Arctic sea ice.
– – – – – – – – –
Ice-free summers in Arctic possible within next decade, scientists say
Home of polar bears, seals and walruses could be mostly water for months as early as 2035 due to fossil fuel emissions
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/05/ice-free-summers-in-arctic-possible-within-next-decade-scientists-say
Projections of an ice-free Arctic Ocean
Observed Arctic sea ice losses are a sentinel of anthropogenic climate change. These reductions are projected to continue with ongoing warming, ultimately leading to an ice-free Arctic (sea ice area <1 million km2).
https://www.nature.com/articles/s43017-023-00515-9
Another model based study about CO2 emissions melting Arctic sea ice.
Study based on a model ? No idey how to name that, but study seems to be overblown. Guesswork ?
Why Arctic sea-ice increased since 2012 in a so dramatically warming world ?
Oh, look!
Only 10 years away!
Again
Oh not again, have they learned nothing from their past failures?
Alarm runs in decadal cycles….
Good lord, how many times are they going to try that scam again? Didn’t Al Gore copyright that?
Well, there is, but you can minimize it by starting your data in 1770, instead of its actual start date in 1659.
Even so, there is still a warming trend in Feb average temps in CET from 1770.
CET only publish monthly Max and Min charts from 1878. The monthly Max chart for February is shown below. Again, a clear warming trend, as with the monthly average data.
So it’s another Homewood nonsense to claim that “...there is no identifiable pattern in the distribution of warm Februarys [in CET].”
The noticeable pattern in no trend until 1960, then cooling until 1986, then a big step.
Totally in line with the number of Sunshine hours.
If your tiny mind thinks there is any human causation.. provide evidence.. !
That’s not February-only data; and the claim being made is that “there is no identifiable trend or pattern in the distribution of warm Februarys” in CET over time.
There clearly is an identifiable trend in the distribution of warm Februarys over time – they are warming.
So, whatever it is that’s warming them, the claim Homewood makes is, once again, demonstrably wrong.
Here are the average February CET data per decade (latest decade 2021-2024).
Note the decade that includes 1779 (1780 on the chart).
Do I need to add a trendline?
Do you need a chart of increased sunshine again.. ????
If your tiny mind thinks there is any human causation.. provide evidence.. !
One with Feb only data (since that is the month in question) and for the CET region in particular would be more useful than the last stuff you posted.
YAWN.
it is whole year data.. so what.
Do you really think Sunshine takes a break just during February !
You really are a monumental goose, aren’t you.
If your tiny mind thinks there is any human causation.. provide evidence.. !
The subject is specifically February. That’s ‘so what’.
ROFLMAO
The year graph contains February,
How much more ignorance are you going to show, moronic twerp.
Here’s February sunshine, just because you are so idiotically incompetent.
Notice the large increase starting around 1995.
If your tiny mind thinks there is any human causation.. provide evidence.. !
Right, but it also contains every other month of the year.
This latest chart you have copied and pasted, and not made yourself (because you can’t) shows only sunshine duration in February. And it shows UK data, not England and not CET.
Overlooking that, the latest data point, Feb 2024, is far below the 1991-2020 average. The 2nd warmest February on record was far below normal in sunshine terms.
Did you even notice that? You didn’t, did you?
Otherwise, why would you have posted a chart that flatly contradicts your own contention?
Sooner or later, b-nasty, you must come to terms with the fact that you are an idiot. It will be good for you in many ways.
Come out, man!
I will support you.
Noted.. you are still totally incapable of providing any evidence at all of any human causation.
You are just an empty-minded yapper. !
“Right, but it also contains every other month of the year.”
Yes, thus explaining why England (which , btw, is part of the UK) has been warmer since 1990.
Or are you trying to imply that extra sunshine doesn’t cause warming
That would be incredibly DUMB , even for you.
Do try to keep up with basic logic and science, if you can.
Try not to exhibit too much more ignorance.. it is hilarious already.
Now.. that evidence for human causation..
Or are you still slithering and sliming away from presenting any. 🙂
I’m getting the impression that you aren’t capable of making your own charts from available data. Is that right?
I totally sure you are totally incapable of understanding any chart of data put in front of you.
If anyone here is the idiot.. it is YOU. !!
You are obviously among the dumbest of the dumb.
IGNORANCE of sunshine causing warming.. is really right at the bottom of the IQ scale.
A step -up in 1990, concurrent with increased sunshine hours.
Up until that, from basically dead level for 100 years.
No sign of much happening at all.
Certainly, absolutely NO sign of any human causation..
…. unless you can “invent” some moronic make-believe excuse for the 1990 step change.
CET data shows 1779 as 7.9C as the highest in the whole CET data
Even with all the population growth effects coming in (as shown in the comparison of Valentia and CET)…
2023 is still cooler at 7.8C
Stop DENYING DATA.. it makes you look very very stupid.
Right, but in terms of the other Februarys around it, it was an absolute outlier.
A one-off. People must have been amazed.
Now, look at the decadal data.
Compared to recent times, Feb 2024 was by no means exceptional.
This is climate change versus one-off outliers.
No, it is a mindless twit having manic conniptions about FSA !!
People are amazed at your idiocy !.
No-one thought it possible.
OLS is different from the pattern of distribution of warm Februaries.
Is this the problem you want to solve?
It has already been answered.
A make-believe NON-problem..
… that certainly can’t be determined from unfit-for-purpose surface sites that have been over-run by urban expansion and densification.
Yet the oceans, and the air over the oceans, warm at a very similar rate to the global land/ocean data.
Are we to believe that UHI is warming the air above the mid-Pacific ocean?
So you now admit that Solar warming is the cause.!
Well done…
Or do you have some total science-fiction of humans cause the warming of the oceans.
In UAH, the air over land is actually warming about 1.58 x the rate of the air over the oceans.
And the oceans are only warming when there is an El Nino event.
Absolutely no human causation… as you continue to show.
Well, it would do, wouldn’t it?
That has something to do with the ratio of oceanic to continental area.
They were most certainly under the effects of anomalous Stratospheric radiative processes, just as they are now. But they didn’t know it then. Very similar today in both aspects.
“It is also worth noting that there is no identifiable trend or pattern in the distribution of warm Februarys.”
It isn’t obvious with the 7C threshold as so few years qualify, but this is manifestly untrue. Indeed the 21st century is already so over-represented among the warmest Februarys (and entire winters), that even if the warming trend merely stops, by the end of the 21st century, all 30 warmest Februarys and winters will likely be in the 21st century
Februarys since 2000 are about FOUR times more likely to be in the top 30 warmest mean temperatures in the CET than the 20th century as a whole. No identifiable trend?
The cause/significance is debatable, the fact of the obvious warming trend isn’t.