Met Office Science Chief Attacked For Climate Claim
Britain’s winters are getting colder because of melting Arctic ice, the Government’s forecaster said yesterday. Met Office chief scientist Julia Slingo said climate change was “loading the dice” towards freezing, drier weather. –Ben Jackson, The Sun, 11 April 2013
Bungling weather bosses predicted a drier than usual winter, it has emerged. The Met Office’s staggeringly inaccurate forecast was made at the end of November last year – just a month before the record-breaking deluge began. –Tom Newton Dunn, The Sun, 11 February 2014
The chief scientist of the Met Office has been criticised for claiming that “all the evidence” indicated climate change had played a role in the recent storms and flooding. Some scientists are said to be concerned that the remark has been interpreted as drawing a strong connection between climate change and the exceptional winter weather when the evidence is incomplete. Her speech came after the Prime Minister said he “very much suspected” that there was a link. “What Dame Julia says goes, at least by implication, beyond what most climate scientists are willing to say,” one academic said. “I find it very hard to look inside her mind as to what made her think that was a sensible thing to say.” –Oliver Moody, The Times, 18 February 2014
Instead of defending Julia Slingo’s statement on the floods the Met Office have defended the original report. This is very interesting: it seems that the Met Office is unable to come up with any defence of its chief scientist’s public statements. Yesterday I suggested that Slingo’s statement had misled the public. This clarification doesn’t seemed to have changed anything at all. It looks bad. Very bad. –Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, 17 February 2014
A study by the Met Office and Centre for Ecology and Hydrology concluded that “it is not possible, yet, to give a definitive answer on whether climate change has been a contributor or not.” At the launch of the report, the Met Office chief scientist, Dame Julia Slingo, seemed to go a bit beyond what appeared in print. She said: “All the evidence suggests there is a link to climate change.” Not some of the evidence, but all of it. The Met Office scrambled to produce a statement to assert that there was no disagreement. It also confirmed the “uncertainty” about the storm track in the North Atlantic but did not address whether the chief scientist had gone beyond the conclusions of their own report. Does this leave us any wiser? No. In my experience scientists always disagree – that’s how research advances. –David Shukman¸BBC News, 18 February 2014
In the row over whether climate change is causing the current floods and storms, the sceptics are the ones who are sticking to the consensus, as set out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — you know, the body that the alarm-mongers are always telling us to obey. And it is the sceptics who have been arguing for years for resilience and adaptation, rather than decarbonisation. While the green lobby has prioritised decarbonisation, sceptics have persistently advocated government spending on adaptation, so as to grab the benefits of climate change but avoid the harm, and be ready for cooling as well if the sun goes into a funk. –Matt Ridley, The Times, 17 February 2014
Most of the climate sceptics operate on self-employed shoestrings and cost you nothing: Andrew Montford, David Holland, Nic Lewis, Doug Keenan, Paul Homewood, Fay Kelly-Tuncay. There is only one professional sceptic in the entire country — Benny Peiser — and he is not paid by the taxpayer. –Matt Ridley, The Times, 17 February 2014
Extreme weather events being taken as signs for the coming end unless sinful ways are repented is as old as civilization. Today’s climate panic is merely just the latest relapse to a very old mental disorder that has afflicted mankind for thousands of years. The only antidote is reason and knowledge. –Pierre Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, 17 February 2014
This Newsbytes is from The GWPF and Dr. Benny Peiser
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
You just have to Believe!
Julia Slingo, the ‘Mystic Meg’ of Met Office chief scientists.
…..On second thoughts, ‘Mystic Meg’ would probably be more accurate and scientific.
For anyone not familiar with ‘Mystic Meg’ here she is with her ‘sister’ predicting the weather (and other things).
Meanwhile, on this side of the pond, Newt Gingrich thinks Kerry should resign: “Newt Gingrich is amplifying his call for Secretary of State John Kerry to resign over his comments that climate change represents the biggest challenge “of our generation.”
I was very pleasantly surprised by what CNN allowed Gingrich to say here:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/18/newt-gingrich-to-john-kerry-resign/?hpt=hp_t3
All the evidence suggests that Met Office chief scientist Julia Slingo received her degree from a box of crackerjack.
I find this very interesting (Bishop Hill quote of the Met Office press release), and another example of the Alarmists’ disconnect from reality:
” ‘With respect to changes in storminess, the good news is that recent advances in climate science are starting to pay dividends. Improved spatial resolution in models – that means that they can model weather and climate in more spatial detail – is allowing the models to represent some of the key factors that drive regional weather patterns. As the Met Office report states ‘With a credible modelling system in place it should now be possible to perform scientifically robust assessments of changes in storminess, the degree to which they are related to natural variability and the degree to which there is a contribution from human-induced climate change.’ ”
Oh, so there is good news, eh? I fail to see what it might be, unless it’s that the models can now disagree with actual thermometers geometrically.
Because the truth is they cannot, and have never, modeled reality with any kind of accuracy which would justify pauperizing civilization. My Fitzroy Storm glass from Weems and Plath is more accurate. There is NOTHING “scientifically robust” about making assessments on the results of a model that you program to say it’s getting hotter, and shouting, “Eureka!” when, no surprise, the model says it’s getting hotter. Damn the thermometers, full speed ahead with the destruction of the Scientific Method and civilization with it.
This 15 year hiatus in warming might be a great opportunity to learn about climate mechanisms: steady-states reveal little clues about how things work. Dynamic systems reveal clues that can lead to more knowledge…but you see, “The debate is over.” So why look for answers, right?
Someone once told me that people who know everything are the ones who never learn anything. I invite your attention to the group for whom the debate is over; QED. And they tie up grants and resources countering “skeptical” claims from people who are actually interested in finding answers—as opposed to Alarmists looking for anything to bolster their political stance on the issues—using public finds to protect their egotistical claims.
To all the Alarmist politicians and advocates who claim to be scientists, as I said before: one day, hopefully not too long from now, people will wake up to the fact that you’ve been peddling nonsense in order to prolong your fifteen minutes. After that, only the most egregious of you will even earn a footnote—of the kind to which no one aspires—and the rest of you, we will forget you, and history will not record you. Not because you were wrong. But because you are venal, and in your hubris you put your ego ahead of the science.
(No, history won’t record me at all, either. But then, I don’t want it to.)
I find it interesting that a record low hurricane summer in the Atlantic has been followed by a winter of intense storms for the UK. Is the stored energy that wasn’t released as usual in the summer now coming back to bite us in the winter? and is this behavior part of the AMO oscillation? i.e. goin into the negative phase.
wbrozek says:
February 18, 2014 at 6:10 pm
Ah, wait. This Newt Gingrich wants someone to resign over saying stupid crap about weather? Or do I have the wrong fat-faced, cheating liar?
In all fairness, I’d be happy to toss ol’ Ketchup Prince over the White House fence, to protest something or other, but I don’t think Newty should be talking.
Stark Dickflüssig says:
February 18, 2014 at 7:43 pm
We all make mistakes and he has seen the error of his ad.
Gingrich on global warming ad with Pelosi: ‘The dumbest single thing I’ve done in years’
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/08/gingrich-on-global-warming-ad-with-pelosi-the-dumbest-single-thing-ive-done-in-years/#ixzz2tjuvWfei
The Nobel Prize has been possibly irredeemably degraded by its presentation to the likes of Al Gore
Don’t let it bother you. It was only the Nobel Beauty prize.
“”Extreme weather events being taken as signs for the coming end unless sinful ways are repented is as old as civilization.””
————————————————
That is a tough one. On the face of it we can see some extreme events, while at the same time it certainly looks like the world is going to hell in the proverbial handbasket. There may be a link in there somewhere. hehehehe
R. de Haan says: @ur momisugly February 18, 2014 at 1:33 pm
Newsbytes: Why The Met Office Has Hung Its Chief Scientist Out To Dry
Hung out to dry, outdoors, In the UK in this weather? Fat chance.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Newsbytes: Why The Met Office Has Hung Its Chief Scientist Out To
DrydrownThere, fixed it for you.
“Why am I in a handbasket? And where are you taking me?”
Jimbo says: @ur momisugly February 18, 2014 at 2:43 pm
You need to start your list with this to get the full impact:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Independent – 20 March 2000
According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”.
“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.
______________________
Sean says:
February 18, 2014 at 6:39 pm
All the evidence suggests that Met Office chief scientist Julia Slingo received her degree from a box of crackerjack.
—————————–
I shall have to run out and buy some, if that is the case!!!
We have ascertained that whatever the weather does, it can be blamed on climate change. The Met Office are so far up their collective backsides in thinking that the public are stupid and they are right, that they can continue to publish totally inaccurate weather forecasts based on their totally inaccurate computer models. Eventually the public will realise that the Met Office are not fit for purpose and have morphed into a pressure group where their secondary function (climate change) has replaced their primary function (accurate weather forecasting).
What is needed is continual publicity of their inaccurate forecasts, they have relied for too long on telling us in October to expect a cold snowy winter, the public forgetting this and then telling us in February that the floods we have experienced are due to climate change.
I believe there has been a typo “since records began in 1854″… It is not UK Met Office, it’s “Meth Office”
NOAA for their part predicted in December the United States Midwest would have an average temperature / average perception winter. In that the winter has become one for the record books it demonstrates the particularly low level of the state of the art of mid term forecasting. Long term forecasting is utter voodoo at this phase of understanding.
“There is only one professional sceptic in the entire country — Benny Peiser — and he is not paid by the taxpayer. –Matt Ridley, The Times, 17 February 2014”
If Nic Lewis counts as a sceptic I’d reckon Paul Dennis is also. Paul gets paid, probably in part by the UK taxpayer, to do research at UEA where he runs an isotope geochem lab. We wouldn’t get far in paleoclimatology without isotope geochem to enable us to use ice cores and forams as temperature proxies. I get the impression that Paul has little time for the paleoclimatological garbage that comes out of the neighbouring CRU lab.
If Slingo had any professional pride in what she does she would have resigned by now. As far as I am aware she hasn’t!
Sean says:
February 18, 2014 at 6:39 pm
All the evidence suggests that Met Office chief scientist Julia Slingo received her degree from a box of crackerjack
Sorry you are completely wrong. Itwas gained through hard, enduringly difficult work at the local supermarket searching all the cornflake packets.
The dame came from bum sniffing.
Paraphrasing–Children just aren’t going to know what science is. They will come to know it as a form of multi-level marketing.
‘End our sinful ways’ Some loony tune anti EU anti-homosexual blamed the floods on the govts law on homosexual marriage.
Two days ago it snowed. Today a lot of that snow melted. That’s a change.
Am I a “Climate Scientist” now?
whether you adapt or decarbonise you are wrong on both counts. the Japanese climate satellite IBUKU evidence is conclusive. the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is coming from high vegetation equatorial areas of the earth with no net carbon dioxide from northern europe and the US. the debate is over the satellite evidence is irrefutable. they have deliberately altered ground based temperature data to suit the global warming disciples but they cannot alter the satellite evidence!