From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
FEBRUARY 2, 2022
By Paul Homewood
Although 2022 is still only really getting going, January has been a month of chart-busting weather in the UK. Some will remember it for record-breaking temperatures, sunshine levels and a noticeable lack of rain, but for others it was almost the opposite, with endless cloudy days and ending with a duo of severe storms.
The year began with the UK having the warmest New Year’s Day on record as St James’s Park in central London reached 16.3C. The previous New Year’s Day record was set in 1916, when it reached 15.6C in Bude, Cornwall.
Warm air from the Azores had brought unusually mild weather.
The Met Office has also confirmed it was the sunniest January on record for England with a total of 80.7 hours, beating the previous record of 77.5 in 1959. It is also the third sunniest January on record for the UK, with 1959 remaining in the top spot with 69.7 hours.
Rainfall has also been in short supply in some locations. Both East Anglia and the area covering the east and north-east of England ended up with their fifth driest January on record with 16.4mm and 23.8mm respectively.
The rainfall total for England and Wales up to 29 January reached 34mm, which is less than 40% of the average. Though it doesn’t even make the top 20 record-wise, with a long way to go to beat the 1766 low of 4.4mm.
With recent rain in Scotland, that figure is now more than 50% but not by very much.
Destructive storms Malik and Corrie brought gusts in excess of 90mph and a very sobering end to the month. Two people died in Staffordshire and Aberdeen and thousands of homes in Scotland and England were left without power.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/features/60216565
To most normal people, extreme weather in January would mean freezing cold, six feet of snow, storms and floods. But not the charlatans at the BBC, who reckon that a bit of sunshine is somehow newsworthy.
They start by talking about record breaking temperatures, which is grossly misleading.
Yes, it is true that it was the warmest New Year’s Day on record at 16.3C, (61.3F) but that is meaningless, given that it is only one day out of 31.
The UK record temperature in January is 18.3C, much higher than this year’s “record”, and was set in three separate years, 1958, 1971 and 2003. There will of course have been many other years with higher temperatures than this year. January 1916 was actually the warmest on record, 1.6C warmer than this year, and temperatures reached 63F on the 6th:
In those days, though, the Met Office was not trying to sell its global warming scam, so there was none of the hyperbole we get nowadays about “record breaking and extreme weather”. Instead their reporting was just matter of fact, as with the sunniest January on record in 1959:
Neither was rainfall as abnormally low as implied by the BBC. Across the UK, it was just the 13th driest January, with rainfall more than double that of January 1997.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/pub/data/weather/uk/climate/datasets/Rainfall/date/UK.txt
No doubt all of this will be blamed on climate change, when the Met Office publishes its annual “Britain’s Wild Weather” nonsense at the end of the year.
Even though they have been consistently claiming that Britain’s winters are getting wetter because of climate change!
BBC = disingenuous narrative
BBC = Baghdad Bob Corporation
BBC = Boy Buggering Communists
Don’t forget BBC’s little brother, CBC.
And ABC (Australia)
Yes, cbc more blatant about it I think, I’m having trouble watching it just to be aware of what the enemies of all Canadians are saying
But I force myself.
BBC=CNN+Steroids+Extorted public money.
You just don’t like reality, which is what the BBC shows you, because it contradicts your political opinions.
Correct, I don’t like the BBC because it’s given over to left wing bias (which is an admitted fact by the new DG) and as comes naturally to the left, everyone within it lies.
One only has to look to its favourite Son, Attenborough, for evidence of that.
The BBC show reality? Ha! That’ll be the day.
Griff,
Please enlighten us as to how the SUVs of today caused the January 1916 record.
Griff, just remember, the BBC Knows Nothing about science. The only “science” they know is what they believe someone, who is presumably a scientist who may be right, told them.
You appear to remember a lot of misinformation that occurs either accidentally or on purpose in any scientific reports or other publications.
Whatever the weather, it’s bad, and it’s our fault!
Unprecedented, more extreme and worse than predicted!
Somehow climate change made the eastern US snowier than usual, but the UK drier.
It was colder than usual at my house this morning (-12F) and to top it off, I had to park further away from my office than I normally would. I’ve been inside for over an hour and my especially are still cold.
I know it gets cold here in Colorado, it’s just a little atypical.
So glad I don’t live down south; we only hit – 6…LOL.
You should really try heating pads for your especially.
… and twice worser than expected?
Saw that also, but thoughts of putting 20% to 25% of your electrical supply based on this 10.8% might be risky and not the best investment.
In Ohio they get suicidal as they have the least sunny days in the continental USA
I spent a November in pittsburgh and saw the sun twice.
Awful
But 10%?
Yikes
No wonder they’re crazy there
You have to remember, the Brits didn’t plan to put their island there. It just happened when they could have moved south to the Azores or someplace,
Brilliant winter so far in the UK. Nice and mild, no snow to talk of, lots of sunny days. Doubtless Excess Winter Deaths from hypothermia are way down, just as one would expect from a warmer planet.
Problem is, it won’t last.
Yes, it did… that’s climate change in reality as opposed to ‘everything just gets evenly warmer by a few degrees’, the skeptic version
But it’s not overly “warmer” is it griff? Dr. Roy informs us the earth’s temperature now is cooler than it was in the 1980’s.
Explain to all of us how that happens, when you continually harp on about the planet warming up, like a carnival barker.
It’s worser than the worsest worst worse! Global warming is even forcing new additions of descriptive words to the dictionary.
Yes! The BBC are shameless in their ridiculous coverage of such random and perfectly normal events. The UK Met office is deeply soaked in climate catastrophism so it’s no surprise that they would be the source of the nonsensical hype.
A bastion of snivelling, left wing, urban catastrophists.
Most of them would get agoraphobia if they set foot outside London.
About half their staff are in Manchester, aren’t they?
The same urban mentality. Isn’t that obvious to you griff?
Many are in Exeter as thats where my neice works
so Griff can say the low rain fall was a once in a 13 year event! Nah he’ll just go with his normal 1 in a thousand year event
He’ll be along shortly to inform us that in spite of being 40% down, rain is 6% wetter these days. Or something.
He said it was 6% wetter on November 12 thereby proving AGW
If January was drier then that is January not November 12 and therefor proves AGW
Rejoice.
The UK is now 6% wetter on average… but there are drier areas than before… the extra is falling in exceptional rain events, not evenly distributed. See map:
Climate change continues to be evident across UK – Met Office
You cite the frequently incorrect MET office only when it suits you griff.
And 6% is meaningless when “the average” is a subjective matter.
But he said rainfall was up 3% a clear sign of global warming 🙂
I can say there were 3 events in second half of 2021 where there was 1 in 1,000 year rainfall…
Meteorological bodies have referred to the rainstorm in China – which saw a year’s worth of rainfall in three days – as a one-in-1,000-year weather event. The rainfall broke hourly and daily records of the 70 years of collected data.
The heavy rainfall in the south of North Rhine-Westphalia and north of Rhineland-Palatinate in Germany produced accumulations which averaged 100 to 150 mm (3.9 to 5.9 in) in 24 hours, equivalent to more than a month’s worth of rain. In Reifferscheid, 207 mm (8.1 in) fell within a nine-hour period while Cologne observed 154 mm (6.1 in) in 24 hours. Some of the affected regions may not have seen rainfall of this magnitude in the last 1,000 years.
And ‘According to Environment Canada, 20 areas across the province broke daily records for precipitation. Cumulative totals also revealed how much rain areas in BC received between Saturday, November 13 at 11 am to Monday, November 15 at 11 am.’
The heatwaves and temp records would take another page of data, so I’ll leave them for now.
And you can check climate change effects in the UK here:
Climate change continues to be evident across UK – Met Office
Are you sure you and Simon are not related 🤔
Oh and arctic sea ice has hit the once in a thousand year level! actual once in 18 year but 1 in a thousand sounds better.
I’ve been wondering. How do places where weather records only go back 100 to 200 years, know what a once in a thousand year event would look like?
Dear Mark
Computer modelling. It is the new societal future telling method, that is so robust that it can tell what occured in the past in great detail. That is why they are altering the historical temperature data sets, those foolish humans read the thermometer wrong, or wrote it down incorrectly.
Just look at the modelling of Covid outcomes, infections and deaths, spot on down to the last person.
I have looked at the modelling for you, and it says your going to have a nice. Enjoy.
here’s a photo of a climate scientist determining both past and future of the climate
How do they know a 1000 year event?
Three ways…
Lies
Damn Lies
And Sataistics
Satanistics
Apparently, a one in one thousand year event doesn’t mean an event happening one in one thousand years. It seems it just happens when it want’s to, but shouldn’t, or something like that.
No, I don’t get it either.
When Griff says its one its one.
A 1 in 1000 year event means that it you take 1000 locations around the planet, the event will happen on average once every year in one of those locations:)
Ah! That makes sense………
Well look it up!
Extent is up compared to recent years… thickness, volume and age are down… compared to 20 or 30 years ago, extent is still well down
Compared to several million years ago when there was no ice at the poles, the extent is 100% up.
One again you pick a subjective ‘average’.
Amazing stuff here:
https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/14573/2021/
Cirrus cloud cover has decreased in March 2020 (lock downs!) over previous six years. Categorized in 4 cloud strengths, the reduction was..
>0.1km -23%
>0.3km -25%
>1.0km -34%
>2.0km -45%
This is THE TOTAL DISTRUCTION of climate science. Why? There is no doubt climate is extremely sensitive to cirrus cloud cover.
Minnis et al (2004)
However the consensus position on contrails is this: yes they contribute to global warming, but their share in total cirrus cloud cover is tiny. In AR6 the IPCC a total cirrus cloud forcing of 5W/m2, and a contrail contribution of 0.06W/m2 in 2019. That is about 1%. They need to be that “conservative” to protect the CO2 narrative.
Travis et al (2002) showed that daily temperature range (DTR) was about 1.8K larger post 9/11 then in the days before and after, suggesting a massive share of contrails in cirrus cloud cover. The above paper just confirms this.
With these data we know causes the warming since the 1970s, and it is not CO2.
You’re only looking at your favourite tree in the forest – you also have to look at the drop in pollutants going into the air from the huge reduction in transportation at the start of the lockdowns. Those pollutants help seed clouds. In fact, there’s a good case to be made that much of the warming in the last couple of decades of the 20th century was due to the air getting cleaner after emission controls took effect.
Cirrus cloud cover is hardly related to polution (those car/industry aerosols tend to stay close to the surface). Instead it IS related to contrails. Then if these aerosols did increase cirrus cloud cover, which you seem to suggest, they would be warming, and their reduction would cause cooling. Your argument makes no sense..
It’s called “Cherry Picking”
“The year began with the UK having the warmest New Year’s Day on record as St James’s Park in central London reached 16.3C. The previous New Year’s Day record was set in 1916, when it reached 15.6C in Bude, Cornwall.”
So, let’s go along with the cherry picking of the two-data-point nitwits (and criminals):
15.6 in 1916
16.3 in 2022
0.7 degrees in a hundred years. Doesn’t rise above the baseline. Congratulations two-data-point nitwits, you just proved that carbon dioxide at current levels has zero effect.
So go and wash your underwear. Your excitement was a bit premature.
I am amazed that in 1916 they had a thermometer that could read .6 degrees.
The climate scare theme will continue to grow like a bacterial infection until it encounters a lack of nutrients (money) or a source of resistance (intelligence). It is still in the growth phase with money sources and a distracted and duped public where even erosion of science quality and institutions are ignored.
And the long term side effects will be diminished progress in real science. Sort of how the dark ages began.
I disagree with that. Covid has woken an awful lot of people up, and it will awaken many more as ‘scientists’ back down from their incredible claims that didn’t materialise and adopt the “you misunderstood me” defence.
Just read the comments section of any popular media when climate change is the subject matter and you’ll find barely a supporter of the climate narrative commenting. The tone is universal condemnation. Even only two years ago it was very different.
In the UK at least, the cost of NetZero is becoming mainstream and the recent energy catastrophe has people asking just what happened to all that cheap, renewable electricity.
Agreed, a lot of people have looked at the complete failure of Covid modelling especially on Omicron and now looking at the Climate modelling with a different perspective.
There is this saying: “Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it.” It was meant, I think, as a joke. However, no more. People talk about the weather as if somebody could do something about it.
Put on a hat, boots, or gloves, open an umbrella,…people have been doing things about the weather for quite a long time.
Moving is something we do because of weather.
I know many who move to arizona every winter due to weather
Here’s another one, from yesterday that is such garbage that you really are left dumbstruck:
Headline:Climate change: UK plants now flowering a month earlier
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-60220661
Yeah, when I was growing up (allegedly) in Yorkshire in the 60s, my Dad was a very good gardener and had planted crocuses, daffodils and hyacinths all over the place, Plus or minus a month, no big deal – unless you’re a BBC bedwetter, still in short pants.
PS Talking to myself but why do we need proxies for temperature? has the BBC not figured out that we have thermometers and satellite temperature censors?
Any predictions on how much more juvenile these nitwits can get ??
…. and that would be sensors, bloody spellchecker
The BBC staff have no idea what a proxy is.
To them it’s a reliable mercury thermometer primitive man had a million years ago.
No proxy on the planet can get within 1ºC, if that, without considerable growing error the further back in time it goes.
But here we are, assured by the scientifically moribund that we can calculate temperatures in the past (even the recorded past) to within one, never mind two, decimal places.
The Cutty Sark was still sailing commercially into the 1960’s. Sea Surface Temperatures were being taken throughout its history with a canvas bucket thrown over the side, to no particular depth, by a deckhand, weather permitting.
Argo buoys today ‘park’ at 1,000 ft. depth before diving to 2,000 ft. every 10 days before surfacing to transmit their data, taking a temperature reading before parking again.
Those ten days sub surface are unknown relative to SST’s.
and that’s a fact. Why are you pretending this isn’t actually happening?
Speaking of doing something about the weather, here is this. A long time ago I created a username on DailyKos, which is a fever swamp of Democratic activism. I get daily emails. Here is a snip of today’s blurb.
Exactly what weather is Congress supposed to stop? Tornadoes, fires, floods, hurricanes, polar vortexes, pestilence, droughts, etc.?
They will pass a resolution saying they are very cross with extreme weather and its ill effects.
…and place extreme weather on double secret probation!
Tax solves everything……..
and do it before midnight- or it’ll be too late to save the planet! (oh, I think I’m going to have painful ribbs when my laughing fit stops)
I am surprised they didn’t include an emaciated polar bear?
Surely the report will concentrate on 2021. You seem to be concentrating on 2022.
“Warm air from the Azores had brought unusually mild weather.”
God forbid!
“Destructive storms Malik and Corrie brought gusts in excess of 90mph and a very sobering end to the month. Two people died in Staffordshire and Aberdeen and thousands of homes in Scotland and England were left without power.”
Get used to being without power once you get closer to net zero. As for “sobering”- with severe storms, probably not many sober people in those areas.
St James’s Park? How much due to UHI?
There’s a 2009 paper The Urban Heat Island in Central London and urban-related warming trends in Central London since 1900
That says:
WIS (Wisley) with no overall change in mean tem-peratures. Wilby (2003) found similar results to Lee (1992) and correlated counts of daily extreme UHI values (St James’s Park warmer than WIS by more than 4 degC)
The Wisley Weather Station is outside the M25 (the motorway around London). whereas St James’s Park is in central London not far from Buckingham Palace
Too much sunshine in the UK: yes, that must be depressing. I’m certain Pfizer can prescribe something for it, and likely get Boris to mandate it.
January wasn’t the only warm month in Britain in 1959, which happens to be the year I was born. Many years ago my Mum told me that the good weather held out until I was born in early November, meaning that she didn’t need a maternity winter coat that she couldn’t afford.
UAH global mean has just dropped to 3 percent of one degree C above nothing.
https://www.drroyspencer.com/2022/02/uah-global-temperature-update-for-january-2022-0-03-deg-c/
from the article above. “The Met Office has also confirmed it was the sunniest January on record for England with a total of 80.7 hours, beating the previous record of 77.5 in 1959. It is also the third sunniest January on record for the UK, with 1959 remaining in the top spot with 69.7 hours.
i’m not disputing the numbers but this got me thinking. 80.7 divided by 31 days = 2.6 hours of sun light per day. sooooooooo, how many solar panels and storage batteries would you need to power the countries grid with that 2.6 hours of sun? silly question I know but come on all you
climate jackals,concerned climate folks, please acknowledge you see a problem here.Here in the US, we have our own hypers of extremes. Headline from today:
“Honduras players forced off due to ‘extreme climate conditions’ in World Cup qualifier against US”
The “extreme climate conditions”? It was cold outside in Minneapolis in February.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/03/football/honduras-players-forced-off-world-cup-qualifier-usmnt-spt-intl/index.html
Allianz Field is in Saint Paul, MN not Minneapolis.
Love the meme.
Meme magic is real.
It seems the records broken were in known cold periods. A Canadian Prairies -40C day is guaranteed to be a sunny one
80.7 hours of sunshine in January for all of England !
I’d like to see that contoured.
How many hours in Wigan, how many hours in Newcastle, how many hours in Redruth?
I need to find a link , I read something recently by a native Elder in the BC southern interior.
He said there was oral history of catastrophic rains in the 1700s same or worse than the Pineapple Express event in November
But because there are no written records it didn’t happened and he was dismissed.
Funny how “aboriginal knowledge” is sacred except when it goes against the narrative.
Same as natives who support oil and gas and pipeline development (the majority), totally ignored by our sociopathic federal government.
Wow it took over 100 years of building up London with concrete and asphalt, but finally they were able to beat the record of a little seaside village. Well, that it, the Climate Emergency must be true, with evidence like that.
Normal = bad uneducated reporting
BBC = bad bad corrupt
January in the UK has been dry, dreary with some warm sunny outbreaks – and a couple of exceptional storms. Up to the end of December I only saw frost once… The daffodils are in bloom as are many other flowers, weeks early.
But the weather in the UK generally has been greatly changed by climate change…
It is 6% wetter on average than 30 years ago – that’s a fact based on recorded observations. There are more extreme weather events – storms, floods and flash floods.
The BBC is right and no amount of misleading cherry picking and denial can change the facts – the UK is suffering from climate change.
Looks to me like the BBC is suffering from a case of Peyronie’s disease.
Paul H, there _was_ one record for January which was a “month-wide” one. It is the CET (Central England Temperature) maximum, which was recorded as 14.3 degC on January 1st, which is the warmest of any January day back to the start of that series in 1878.
Not that I think that proves global warming or regional warming. I just like to see statistics treated in a balanced way.
It’s weather, and the weather of the UK is notoriously fickle. Personally, I am glad that it is presently warmer than usual, as it will keep my heating bills down. Most winters, it does snow, and everyone is surprised (and, this winter is not finished, yet). Similarly, most summers, everyone hopes for a summer like 1976, and are invariably disappointed; last year, though it was dry and quite sunny, temperatures rarely got high enough to wish we had air-conditioning installed (about 3 days, iiirc). Naturally, the government is desperate to Be Seen Doing Something About Climate Change, so that, when the cooling can no longer be denied, they can triumphantly shout: “See! Told you it would work!” at their impoverished people.