From the good ol’ UEA <—- I suggest you check out link~ctm
Public Release: 6-Feb-2019
Forecast suggests Earth’s warmest period on record
University of East Anglia
Temperature figures table Credit: Met Office
The forecast for the global average surface temperature for the five-year period to 2023 is predicted to be near or above 1.0 °C above pre-industrial levels, says the Met Office. If the observations for the next five years track the forecast that would make the decade from 2014 to 2023 the warmest run of years since records began.
Today’s figures released by the Met Office include data from a number of sources including the latest publication of provisional figures for 2018 and the publication of the latest Met Office decadal forecast to 2023.
Records for annual global average temperature extend back to 1850.
Professor Adam Scaife, Head of Long-Range Prediction at the Met Office said: “2015 was the first year that global annual average surface temperatures reached 1.0 °C above pre-industrial levels and the following three years have all remained close to this level. The global average temperature between now and 2023 is predicted to remain high, potentially making the decade from 2014 the warmest in more than 150 years of records.”
Averaged over the five-year period 2019-2023, forecast patterns suggest enhanced warming is likely over much of the globe, especially over land and at high northern latitudes, particularly the Arctic region.
Dr Doug Smith, Met Office Research Fellow said, “A run of temperatures of 1.0 °C or above would increase the risk of a temporary excursion above the threshold of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. Predictions now suggest around a 10 per cent chance of at least one year between 2019 and 2023 temporarily exceeding 1.5 °C.”
Alongside this forecast, 2018 is today cited to be nominally the fourth warmest year on record globally in data released by the Met Office, at 0.91±0.1°C above the long-term pre-industrial average. It follows 2015, 2016 and 2017, which are the three warmest years in the 169-year record of the HadCRUT4 dataset.
Professor Tim Osborn, director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, which co-produces the HadCRUT4 global temperature figures with the Met Office Hadley Centre, said: “The warmth of 2018 is in line with the long-term warming trend driven by the world’s emissions of greenhouse gases.”
The effects of climate change are not limited to surface temperature. Warming of the climate system is seen across a range of climate indicators that build a picture of global changes occurring across the land, atmosphere, oceans and ice.
The Met Office decadal forecast show that global average surface temperatures may be close to reaching 1.5 °C, but this would be a temporary exceedance rather than the climatological level of warming in the Paris 1.5 °C threshold.
###
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Yawn.
Or put graphically, (-_-) … (-_^) … (-__-) … zzz
I live in a near north suburb of Chicago. Last Tuesday the thermometer in my backyard read 24 degrees Fahrenheit below zero. Same old winter as always.
I just ignore the ivory fishbowl climate sharks at U of E. Anglia.
“the decade from 2014 to 2023 the warmest run of years since records began.”
So effing what?
The planet is 4 BILLION YEARS old and we have a surface record for say 150 years of which only the last 30 or so are from a fit for purpose instrument system.
This is just more marketing schlock from UAE, the people who snickered about Mike’s Nature Trick and helped Hide the Decline.
I mean seriously, do they really expect us to believe they have a serious accurate global temperature in 1850? Who believes this crud?
Quite a few of our trolls do.
They will tell you with utmost conviction that we can calculate the temperature of the earth to a tenth of a degree, from a few dozen thermometers, read twice a day and recorded to the nearest degree and concentrated almost entirely in central Europe and the east coast of the US and Canada.
Lets see; the period includes a multi-year Super El Nino. What could possibly affect the rankings?
That 2014 to 2023 warming would be based on 2014-2018 homoginized surface temperature data combined with 2019-2023 climate model runs. Would you beleive that prediction? I’ve got a bridge for sale . . . .
Forecast? So far the Old Farmer’s Almanac has been spot on. And my cat has a Ouija board . . .
“Hide the feline.”
Brilliant!
Misleading as usual since the warming TREND is well within past natural variations, and well below the IPCC’s per decade warming rate prediction/projection they first brought up over 25 years ago.
Yup. They have no shame.
No shame – but a lot of grant money! The madness will not stop until the money dries up.
They do not believe much in extrapolation, but they believe in forecasts longer that 6 days, which they have not been good at so far, apart from the Russian model. So, is it anything other than a political forecast?
The met office can’t even predict the temperature one day in advance let alone 4 years.
A forecast from the UK Met office? I now fully expect the actual temperature to be 1C BELOW “pre-industrial” levels.
Oz to Dorothy “Pay no attention to that 1.5C behind the curtain.”
ObiWan to the Emperical Storm Troopers “This is not the 1.5C you’re looking for.”
1-1.5 °C warmer than pre-industrial wouldn’t be Earth’s warmest period of the Holocene Epoch, the Quaternary Period, Cenozoic Era or any other pre-industrial “period on record.”
It doesn’t even reach the levels seen during the Medieval Warm Period, when Vikings farmed Greenland.
I guess it’s not that hard to fish through what flows out of East Anglia and “catch a big one”. 😉
I just would not recommend eating what you catch.
Is it warmer now than it was during the dirty thirties/dust bowl?
Dr Doug Smith, Met Office Research Fellow said, “A run of temperatures of 1.0 °C or above would increase the risk of a temporary excursion above the threshold of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. Predictions now suggest around a 10 per cent chance of at least one year between 2019 and 2023 temporarily exceeding 1.5 °C.”
Hear, hear !
I’m looking forward to more than the 10 per cent chance and more than just one year.
Warm is good, cold is bad.
Just as long as they send some of that warmth my way. I hate the cold.
A day of good Sunshine has saved me the trouble of chiseling my ride out of the driveway, no thanks to the last ice storm.
“The warmth of 2018 is in line with the long-term warming trend driven by the world’s emissions of greenhouse gases.”
CO2 is mainly a consequence of ocean warming/cooling per Henry’s Law. CO2 lags by 10-12 months, so it doesn’t drive ocean temperature change at all. Human emissions are a pittance by comparison.
No it’s not.
The monthly variations are due to surface water temp and vegetation experiencing summer and winter. The decadal variations are because vegetation and the ocean sink only half the emissions. The other half (China, if you will) is not sinking immediately.
To win the debate with the general public skeptics must starting using the average Earth’s temperature not just the amount the average has or will increased or decreased. Telling folks we are going to increase from 58.3 degrees F (14.6 C) to 59 degrees is far better at presenting the story than saying a 1 degree increase. The AGW crowd really want the uninformed to believe that the climate will become so hot that the world will end if we don’t do something, and do something immediately.
The Green New Deal is an opportunity to demonstrate just how out of touch the entire movement is with reality.
Many of the colder parts of the world will welcome a two or three degree Celsius increase in averages. This will favour better harvests, less spent on heating and more pleasant outdoor conditions. Strange I never hear these benefits listed by alarmists. Having lived in six different climatic zones, including one where many days in the summer were above 40°C, a two, three and even four degree increase in temperature is no big deal. With proper irrigation we lived comfortably and coped with the hottest days.
The global temperature increases are caused by the warm polar winters, which are caused by warm ocean cycles. This accounts for most of the high anomalies on a daily basis. Keep in mind that 20 deg C warmer than “normal” (?) at polar latitudes is still well below freezing, but the anomalies are real so they count towards the global anomaly and outweigh the 5 deg below normal temps where we live. North of the Antarctic circle to the Arctic circle the temperatures haven’t raised considerably, with the nighttime lows being the only considerable upward trend.
How an increase from 3 molecules of CO2 in every 10K molecules of atmosphere to 4 in 10K can warm the oceans so quickly when they contain 99.9% of the planetary heat and the atmosphere only .1% is the question warmists can’t answer. The oceans have to be warming from another cause, or simply releasing heat that has been stored there previously. We aren’t controlling the world’s air temperatures, no need for changing the world order.
Most people I explain this to thank me.
Thank You
Thank You
Is this the same MET office that is infamous for “getting it wrong” on their seasonal forecasts? and we are to believe they can get it “right” for anything longer term? seriously?
“Records for annual global average temperature extend back to 1850.”
****************
What…..a…….crock.
“The warmth of 2018 is in line with the long-term warming trend driven by the world’s emissions of greenhouse gases.”
Uh, the Holocene shows a cooling trend. It will take a lot (or alot) of CO2 to push us above the Holocene Climate Optimum.
everybody make sure to Save this forecast so you can claim your money back
Corrected
Warmest period since the LIA
……and
Be afraid; be very afraid!!
I wonder if it is too late to jump on the GND bandwagon!!
With China’s and India’s CO2 emissions accelerating (an acceleration that makes anything the US or Europe can do on emissions completely meaningless), the climate scientists are rightly scared that the global temps will not cooperate with the model projections.
The End of the Climate Hustle is nigh.
They didn’t get the memo. The planet is no longer warming.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/02/06/the-planet-is-no-longer-warming/
Those forecasts will fail.
But like newspaper “apologies” and “corrections” it isn’t what they say then that the punters hear and believe but what they say now. And if you continue to forecast doom that us what people will believe.
Edwin (above) is right. We need to talk in real temperatures and we need to start nagging the scientists into being specific. What is this “pre-industrial average” they keep bleatimg about? Put a number on it, Professor Osborn. And how does that compare with the peak of the MWP or the depths of the LIA?
They are talking in figures too small for living beings to bother with, temperature differences which animals and plants cannot experience. When I can vary a local temperature reading by 0.5°C by moving the sensor two feet or when the temperature variation in my garden can be from 28° in the shade behind the big fir tree and 45° in the sun trap beside the garage, their two places of decimals anomalies make precious little sense in the real world.
And they know it. But as long as we let them get away with it …
“2015 was the first year that global annual average surface temperatures reached 1.0 °C above pre-industrial levels….”. Pre- industrial levels are actually the same as The Little Ice Age levels is it not?
No. Pre-industrial average is 1850-1900. That is post-LIA.
But 1850 is the end of the Little Ice Age is it not?
So what we have to too is to compare todays temperatures with the Pre-Little- Ice Age, The Warm Middle Age, temperatures?
There is no precise date for the end of the LIA (nor for its beginning). I would place its end at 1840. After several volcanic eruptions in the 1830s.
“Industrial Revolution, in modern history, the process of change from an agrarian and handicraft economy to one dominated by industry and machine manufacturing. This process began in Britain in the 18th century and from there spread to other parts of the world. Although used earlier by French writers, the term Industrial Revolution was first popularized by the English economic historian Arnold Toynbee (1852–83) to describe Britain’s economic development from 1760 to 1840. Since Toynbee’s time the term has been more broadly applied.” – Encyclopedia Britannica
But the Industrial Revolution began circa 1760. Other than the CET, what records are there that far back such that anyone can talk about a “pre-Industrial Level”?
“2015 was the first year that global annual average surface temperatures reached 1.0 °C ”
So they are still trying to count the recent El Nino as part of climate.
“Records for annual global average temperature extend back to 1850.”
I call BS. There can’t possibly be any meaningfully accurate records that far back. It’s a guess at best cobbled together from woefully inadequate fragments of data taken from uncontrolled conditions/methods/instruments.
Some locations/areas may go back reasonably reliably that far, but the globe – Pffft.
In 1850 the USA contained 31 states and 4 territories, Stanley didn’t find Livingstone until 1871, the Trans Siberian Railway wasn’t started until 1891, Burke and Wills crossed Australia from 1861. So large tracts of the world were unexplored in 1850 so anyone who claims that a global temperature was known in 1850 is a cheat, liar and charlatan, anyone who believes them is either gullible beyond credibility or a politician.
Yes, as I admit to alarmists when they try to smear me as being a climate denier (whatever the hell THAT is): I admit to the science that says the majority of recent global warming is man-made.
“Oh, that’s GREAT”, they’ll answer, believing they’ve converted me to their religion.
“So, would you like to discuss what I mean by those four words?”, I will reply, with the same enthusiasm my dog shows for a squirrel in the middle of the dogpark?
“Huh?”, they reply.
“Well, lets start with “recent”, then we’ll move to “global”, then “warming”. The “man-made” might take some time…
It is called kriging, and with a few measurements here and there you can get a trusty global average. I hear they are now extending the record to the first Homo sapiens.
Kriging is easy to fudge. Especially when data points are very widely separated.
But is is a very useful technique when used properly, which requires skills and long experience. Geoff.
Yes, it’s easy to fudge, ESPECIALLY when you lack ANY DATA at all from vast areas of the Earth’s surface, over land or water for years at a time.
And it is the height of folly to believe the results of all this interpolation can result in numbers claiming accuracy to the hundredth of a degree.
Did the climate change groundhog see its shadow?
Good! We need some more of that old fashioned global warming. It’s shaping up to be a long, cold boring winter. After the adjustments, I am sure it will wind up being the 2nd or 3rd warmest winter on record.
Oh dear, with temperatures 1.0 °C above pre-industrial levels, how terrible life is. So many more people enjoying life compared to what it was back in 1850. They had no catastrophes back then, but they labored away and died young.
Ah, 1850… when you didn’t have to jiggle the toilet handle. Good times, good times.
This “since pre-industrial levels” is a very clever new gimmick on the part of the alarmists. I’ve seen it for maybe a month now.
WUWT readers will know that temperatures are now referenced to the coldest period in the last thousand years, maybe even the past 14 000 years.
But the general public has no clue. They will be fooled. This gimmick will be very successful.
Not a single word about the 0.3°C lost since February 2016. The most remarkable cooling period in 40 years.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/08/14/the-planet-is-experiencing-an-unexplained-major-cooling-and-scientists-are-ignoring-it/
Isn’t that bias?
“The warmth of 2018 is in line with the long-term warming trend driven by the world’s emissions of greenhouse gases …”.
================================================
That statement is a half-truth: “… a deceptive statement that includes some element of truth …” probably self-deception as well as to deceive the public.
As is well recognised the global greenhouse emissions before 1945 were relatively insignificant …
… and therefore cannot be credited for the global warming ~1910 -> ~1945:
Not to imply that the post-1950 warming was entirely due to GHG emissions as claimed by the IPCC …
… a preposterous claim viz. that Mother Nature suddenly and coincidently decided to hand over the total control of the global climate to humanity.
What NOAA conveniently leaves out is the margin of error is a few tenths of a degree. In other words, it may not even be in the Top 10. Regardless, everything goes in cycles. Have you all heard about the recurring cycle theory. Excellent example of its usefulness here: http://texasstormwatch.com/2019/02/long-range-weather-pattern-after-valentines-day.html
With the AMO heading into negative territory soon, a solar minimum and the distinct possibility of a multi-year La Nina …… these dudes are not going to be happy when the exact opposite of what they are predicting plays out. That is far more likely than their prediction. They would need another super El Nino to have a chance.
If the PDO were to also go negative then the only question will be how low do we go.
Actually they need a super-mega Niño by 2021. That is what they have drawn with the blue area in their graph.
They will get a Niña instead.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/07/05/solar-minimum-and-enso-prediction/