Met Office Data Confirms Record Drop Of Global Temperatures

by David Rose

New official data issued by the Met Office confirms that world average temperatures have plummeted since the middle of the year at a faster and steeper rate than at any time in the recent past.

rose-met-data-pix1

Cooling: New Met Office world data shows a big fall from heat spike caused by El Nino this year

The huge fall follows a report by this newspaper that temperatures had cooled after a record spike. Our story showed that these record high temperatures were triggered by naturally occurring but freak conditions caused by El Nino – and not, as had been previously suggested, by the cumulative effects of man-made global warming.

The Mail on Sunday’s report was picked up around the world and widely attacked by green propagandists as being ‘cherry-picked’ and based on ‘misinformation’. The report was, in fact, based on Nasa satellite measurements of temperatures in the lower atmosphere over land – which tend to show worldwide changes first, because the sea retains heat for longer.

steepest-drop-global-temperature

It is true that the massive 2015-16 El Nino – probably the strongest ever seen – took place against a steady warming trend, most of which scientists believe has been caused by human CO2 emissions

However, now the drop in temperature is also showing up in the authoritative Met Office ‘Hadcrut4’ surface record, compiled from measurements from more than 3,000 weather stations located around the world on both sea and land.

To the end of October, the last month for which figures have been released, Hadcrut4 had fallen about 0.5C from its peak in the spring.

The reason is the end of El Nino. The natural phenomenon, which takes place every few years and has a huge impact on world weather, occurs when water in a vast area of the Pacific west of Central America gets up to 3C hotter than usual.

It has now been replaced by a weak La Nina, when the water becomes colder than usual. This means temperatures may still have some way to fall.

El Nino is not caused by greenhouse gases and has nothing to do with climate change. It is true that the massive 2015-16 El Nino – probably the strongest ever seen – took place against a steady warming trend, most of which scientists believe has been caused by human emissions.

But when El Nino was triggering new records earlier this year, some downplayed its effects. For example, the Met Office said it contributed ‘only a few hundredths of a degree’ to the record heat. The size of the current fall suggests that this minimised its impact. When February produced a new hot record for that month, at the very peak of El Nino, newspapers in several countries claimed that this amounted to a ‘global climate emergency’, and showed the world was ‘hurtling’ towards the point when global warming would become truly dangerous. Now, apparently, the immediate threat has passed. It would be just as misleading to say lower temperatures caused by La Nina meant the world was into a new long-term cooling.

The Mail on Sunday’s report was picked up around the world and widely attacked by green propagandists as being ‘cherry-picked’ and based on ‘misinformation’

But the big question is: what will happen when both El Nino and La Nina are over and the Pacific water returns to its ‘neutral’, average state?

Professor Judith Curry, of Georgia Tech in Atlanta, who is president of the Climate Forecast Applications Network, said it would take years before it was clear whether the long-term warming trend was slowing down, staying the same or accelerating.

‘The bottom line is that we can’t read too much into the temperatures of a year or two,’ she said. ‘We will need the perspective of another five years to understand what is going on.’


Full story Mail on Sunday, 11 December 2016

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
204 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
James at 48
December 13, 2016 10:14 am

Another bad North American storm system is now spinning up here on the West Coast. Warm front on its way in now, cold front to hit Th. Pretty much a repeat of last week / this weekend albeit the track looks a little more inland and lower latitude. For example, PDX may only get barely clipped by serious ice this time around. Intermountain, central midwest and beyond may get clobbered.

December 13, 2016 10:26 am

>Greg December 12, 2016 at 1:42 pm
>“I think it is an average temp reconstruction chart.”
>Well the problem is just that Steve: we don’t actually know what that graph is supposed to be, >because there is no reference to the data nor even any indication more specific than “New Met >Office world data”.
>OH, it’s “world data” . May pass with your average Tory housewife Daily Mail reader but won’t >pass muster on an award winning science blog.
>So if WUWT is going to reproduce this tabloid crap, can we at least have a proper reference for >the data. It actually looks like a quite important change that needs to be communicated far and >wide. But I will not be referring to it nor copying a meaningless, non scientific graph to anyone I >know. I’d be embarrassed.
>Maybe our host could ask David Rose what the data shown is and post a proper attribution.
Parrot much Greg? Is this your new toy, dunning everyone for data because you’ve been called out so many times for failing to do so yourself? Since you have such a low opinion of WUWT, why don’t you bugger off and save us having to skip your endlessly stupid comments? Or are you still being paid to troll?

Donald D
December 13, 2016 11:50 am

As an example of how meaningless looking at short term fluctuations are (especially coming out of an El Nino), using UAH v6beta global, land and sea, during the 1998 El Nino, the anomaly peaked at 0.74C in April, and dropped down to 0.12C in November ’98. That’s a difference of 0.62 in 7 months.
Whereas during the 2016 El Nino, the anomaly peaked at 0.83C in February, and had dropped down to 0.45C in November – a drop of 0.38C in 9 months – at about half the downwards rate observed in 1998.
Whereas, if using last month’s values, the 1998 drop would have only been 0.34C and the 2016 drop would have been 0.42. With monthly fluctuations on that order, clearly such comparisons are frivolous; anybody publishing such an analysis shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Bindidon
Reply to  Donald D
December 14, 2016 5:25 am

+ 10 !

December 13, 2016 5:03 pm

To sum up Sirs, is there any treat on climate change as we approach year 2100 as projected and predicted to us by our environmentalists?

ren
December 14, 2016 4:21 am

Current temperature North America (F).
http://files.tinypic.pl/i/00850/wvm3k4z3s5cm.png

Bindidon
December 14, 2016 10:26 am

El Nino is not caused by greenhouse gases and has nothing to do with climate change. It is true that the massive 2015-16 El Nino – probably the strongest ever seen – took place against a steady warming trend, most of which scientists believe has been caused by human emissions.

How often did we read that stuff! Werner Brozek wrote many posts based on that supposition.
Here is a comparison of the relative power of the ENSO events in 1997/98 and 2015/16, using five indices (JMA, Nino3+4, ONI, MEI, SOI):
http://fs5.directupload.net/images/161214/u9mxfln3.jpg
Why relative? Simply because we should never compare absolute values following in time when the recent ones possibly buid on inceases or decreases created inbetween.
But even when we compare the absolute peaks, none of the five ENSO indices show for the 2015/16 event a value above that of 1997/98! At best do Nino3+4 and ONI show the same for both. The other ones show 1997/98 clearly above 2015/16; SOI places even 1982/83 in front of the two.
The same hold for mean values computed over different periods.
It is very likely that this supposition (or inbetween: claim) of the 2015/16 ENSO event being probably the strongest ever seen does not at all originate from any comparison of ENSO events, and rather is bound to the comparison of temperatures, especially those measured in the troposphere by… UAH.
This in turn following the idea that if temperature increases during ENSO phases are solely due to the ENSO events themselves, then these temperatures conversely are a tool to compare the events.
But here as well, the temperature values measured in 2015/16 must be compared relatively to those measured in 1997/98, in order to offset any step up/down between the periods compared:
http://fs5.directupload.net/images/161214/8efqoa8q.jpg
Though the situation here is less clear then in the ENSO corner, we see that the mean temperature‘s plots nevertheless show 1997/98 above 2015/16.

December 23, 2016 10:15 am

The temperature spike in 2015-16 may have been caused by the eruption of Iceland’s Bardarbunga volcano in 2014-2015 (Aug-Feb), the largest since Laki in 1783. Chlorine, released by the eruption as HCl, would have depleted the ozone layer, admitting more UV-B irradiance to Earth, causing warming. More on this at https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/10/10/interesting-climate-sensitivity-analysis-do-variations-in-co2-actually-cause-global-significant-warming/