Wind Speeds Dropping, Rainfall Similar to a Century Ago – the Climate News You Won’t Hear in the Mainstream

From THE DAILY SCEPTIC

by Chris Morrison

Back to Biblical times and beyond, great floods and storms were the promised punishments for those who sinned against the fashionable orthodoxies and beliefs. It is of course a natural go-to for modern day prophets of climate doom. Needless to say, inconvenient scientific facts are unwelcome in the Latter Day Church of Net Zero, so alarmists are cautioned to stop reading here. The rest of us can digest recent research by Paul Homewood on the British climate in 2023 and published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation. This notes that sea level rises are showing no acceleration over multi-decadal scales and rainfall is not becoming more extreme, while storms have become less powerful over recent years.

It has become slightly warmer than it used to be, notes Homewood, “but the U.K. climate has changed very little in recent years”. Long-term trends are dwarfed by the natural variability of British weather, he continues, and there is no evidence that weather is becoming more extreme. “Nothing in the data indicates that climate will become more extreme in future,” he concludes.

Homewood observes that sea levels have been rising at between 1.3mm and 2mm a year around the U.K. after taking into account vertical land movement, and there has been no acceleration in the rate of rise on multi-decadal scales. But sea level rises are an easy hit for climate alarmists promoting the Net Zero political fantasy. Residents of Gloucester were alarmed in 2022 by local newspaper reports that their Cathedral, set at 19 metres above sea level, would be flooded by 2050. In the same year, the Mirror added to the gaiety of the nation with a story stating that large parts of the Midlands would be under water. Coastal towns in Hampshire, Essex, Sussex and Kent were at serious risk, it was claimed. Belgium, Germany, Northern France and half of the Netherlands “are expected to be under water by 2100”.

All of this is the work of Climate Central, a Green Blob-funded operation that specialises in ready-to-publish stories for particularly dozy journalists. In its own words, it “provides authoritative information to help the public and policymakers make sound decisions about climate and energy”. Apart from flooding laughs, it seems we have Climate Central to thank for the establishment in the U.K. of World Weather Attribution. It claims to have “initiated conversations with leading researchers and key journalists about bringing attribution science into the news cycle”. Rarely can Green Blob money have been better spent. The pseudoscience of attributing individual weather events to human-caused climate change is well established with “key journalists” ready to peddle all the unprovable claims under the covering banner of ‘scientists say’.

Meanwhile back in the real world it is not apparent that rising sea levels in the U.K. and elsewhere – relatively tiny compared to those just 4,000 years ago – present much danger in the near future. Many Pacific island are growing in size due to natural accretion, while a recently published science paper has published the startling news that low-lying Bangladesh has grown in size over the last 34 years by 3,274 km2 to reach 137,656 km2. Bangladesh and its position on the Bay of Bengal has long been a poster alarm for coastal flooding and population displacement. However, the vast majority of the recent land expansion is shown to have been the consequence of receding relative sea levels along the coasts and synchronous seaward coastal land growth.

Earlier this year a senior meteorologist at the Met Office told the BBC that storms in the U.K. were becoming “more intense” due to climate change. In fact the opposite is true, with Paul Homewood noting that this is confirmed by the Met Office, which has made it clear that the Burns Storm in 1990, the Boxing Day Storm in 1998 and the Great Storm of 1987 were very much more severe than any storm in the last decade.

The above illustration shows clearly the decline in wind speeds going back over 50 years. One annual analysis of top wind gusts at Bingley is said to confirm this trend and suggests that wind speeds have been falling.

The British Isles are rainy places and plenty of climate mischief can be made from all the natural variations to be expected given its northern location near the top of the Atlantic Ocean. “Why is it raining so much,” asked Ben Rich of the BBC last April. Hardly headline stuff one might think since similar sentiments have probably occurred to everyone who has ever lived in these sodden lands. According to Rich, the Met Office predicts that by 2070, winters in the U.K. will be up to 30% wetter than they were in 1990, while rainfall will be up to 25% more intense.

No doubt computer models are behind this crystal ball gazing but the actual evidence of recent trends suggests something more modest. Homewood notes that annual rainfall in England and Wales has been increasing since 1980 but the 10-year average is at a similar level to earlier periods such as the 1870s and 1920s. There was a significant rise in rainfall in Scotland during the 1980s, he observed, but there has been little change in trend since. Meanwhile, rainfall trends in Northern Ireland have barely changed since 1931. As to rainfall becoming “more intense”, Homewood notes that in England and Wales only seven days have exceeded 30mm since records began in 1931, but none of these have occurred since 2000.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.

4.8 19 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

56 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 23, 2024 2:13 am

No one is interested in the truth anymore. Its all about credible induction of mild panic.
In the war of words, the truth is no longer an effective weapon.

Reply to  Leo Smith
November 23, 2024 9:23 am

Powerpoint is causing global warming! Chart proves it

Reply to  Leo Smith
November 24, 2024 4:17 am

The author should listen to you. His use of UK-only anecdotes is meaningless, since it’s a global issue.

Someone
Reply to  Leo Smith
November 25, 2024 7:39 am

Most people are generally interested in gaining advantage rather than the truth. When being on the side of truth also helps to gain advantage, they end up situationally leaning on truth as a tool. Being on the side of truth makes one’s operations more efficient, increases productivity of labor, profits and ROI, and leads to better life quality for all. This actually works long-term, humanity has advanced from prehistoric stone age to modern days by picking the side of truth.

However, a lot of people perceive the world as a zero sum game, in which exploiting lies leads to quick or permanent advantage at the expense of others. Lying to mislead other people to give up their possessions has always been very profitable. Think of all religions, but not only.

People who are interested in Truth per se are a rare breed. Scientists are supposed to be truth seekers by definition, but too many are just pretending to be, impersonating.

Politicians are almost never truth seekers. The ones like Ron Paul are exceptions that hardly excite the public. Public en masse follows politicians promising advantage.

strativarius
November 23, 2024 2:43 am

The British Isles are…

Screwed.

Look at the farmers’ protest, and then ask yourself: how will we ever make tax fairer amid such grumbling? https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/22/farmers-protest-tax-labour-reform

Grumbling? Detached or what?

STARMER IS REDUCED TO RELYING ON TWO BLOKES AT BBC VERIFY
https://order-order.com/quote/cla-chief-starmer-is-reduced-to-relying-on-two-blokes-at-bbc-verify/

Reply to  strativarius
November 23, 2024 5:42 am

Talking about GB
Strong low pressure system over the isles, increasing temps in Germany
https://x.com/i/status/1860231705988120652

strativarius
Reply to  Krishna Gans
November 23, 2024 5:52 am

It isn’t increasing them here much. I dread to think how much the heating has cost lately. On Thursday last we ignited the old fireplace to beef things up.

Net zero happiness is the only true net zero they will achieve.

Reply to  strativarius
November 23, 2024 5:54 am

The higher temps are estimated fo tomorrow, they talk about 15-20°C.

strativarius
Reply to  Krishna Gans
November 23, 2024 6:09 am

15 – 20C

The thing about these people is they talk and they talk and they talk.

I doubt it will get to more than 12C or so round these parts. But I’ll be happy to take some of the pressure off of the gas bill that is oh so artificially inflated.

Reply to  strativarius
November 24, 2024 12:52 am

From yesterday evening 6pm to today morning 8am temp increased by 4°C from 5 to 9°C over night.

Reply to  strativarius
November 24, 2024 3:38 am

https://t.co/4DNdi1brZ2
Warm air is coming from W, SW
Tomorrow some degrees warmer

Reply to  Krishna Gans
November 24, 2024 4:51 am

My NE outdoor thermometer Shows 14.3°C

Reply to  Krishna Gans
November 23, 2024 7:17 am

15 Sounds warm. Try where I live…Courtesy WN. Fortunately we have prolific natural gas wells. Western Canada. Area shown = France plus Spain times 3…

IMG_0858
Editor
November 23, 2024 4:10 am

One of my long time favorite weather graphs is the average wind speed at the Blue Hill Weather Observatory just south of Boston MA. Their records go back to 1885 and they still use some of the now antique instruments in their long (for the US) continuous record. Starting around 1980, both the start of the satellite data and the end of a period of extreme weather in the northeastern US, wind speed at Blue Hill has been declining, falling from about 6.7 to 5.1 meters/sec, only about 76% of what it was and the kinetic energy is down to 58% over the period.

No one has come up with a satisfactory explanation, a suggestion that vegetation changes was dropped in their 2022 State of the Climate report, noting:

One of the most dramatic changes in any climate parameter measured at Blue Hill is the steady drop in the annual mean wind speed in recent decades as shown in Figure 10 (above). A slow decline in the 10-year mean annual wind speed (blue) that began in the 1940’s became a sharper, steady drop after 1980, falling nearly 20 percent from 6.7 m/s (15.0 mph) in that year to 5.4m/s (12.1mph) recently, and a new record low annual wind speed of 11.5 mph was set in 2021. The cause of the decline remains under investigation, though it may be related to the shifting of mid-latitude storm tracks and their higher winds to higher latitudes, or to the poleward expansion of the lower wind speeds associated with the tropics. This so-called global stilling is consistent with wind speed changes at other locations across North America and Europe in recent decades, though is nowhere seen more dramatically than in the Blue Hill annual wind speed record.

Separately, a long running review of the Massachusetts Bay has found changes in wind direction that are likely part of explanation (or part of the mystery).

annwind
rtj1211
November 23, 2024 4:36 am

Brainwashing children is terribly easy – they have zero experience of UK climate before 2006, after all and in cognitive terms, probably little before 2012.

It takes annoying old codgers who’ve been around for more than half a century to recall their own personal experiences, be they:

  1. A decade of almost no snow in NW London in the 1970s.
  2. Just under a decade of several hard, cold snowy winters from 1979 to 1987.
  3. Two hot, dry summers leading to drought (1975+1976).
  4. HIgh Pressures sitting from Moscow to Madrid for 8 weeks and more (winters 1988 – 1990).
  5. Etc etc.

Despite all that, apple trees that lived throughout all that weather have yielded good crops of fruit whenever a human being has been sensible enough to prune them regularly (the primary reason of lack of productivity not being climate, it being trees insufficiently stressed to produce fruit to safeguard the genetic lineage).

Reply to  rtj1211
November 24, 2024 4:18 am

You’re citing local data, not global.

strativarius
November 23, 2024 5:30 am

comment image?imwidth=1280&imdensity=2

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  strativarius
November 23, 2024 12:44 pm

Fell off my chair laughing (fomcl)

November 23, 2024 5:46 am

Oops

November 23, 2024 5:49 am

Homewood notes that annual rainfall in England and Wales has been increasing since 1980 but the 10-year average is at a similar level to earlier periods such as the 1870s and 1920s.

Why a ten year average?

Here’s the England and Wales 10 year average. There were big spikes in the 1870s and 1920s, but it seems clear that the increase since then has been more steady. You can;t compare it with a short term spike.

20241123wuwt1
Reply to  Bellman
November 23, 2024 5:50 am

Here’s the same data using a 30 year average.

20241123wuwt2
Reply to  Bellman
November 23, 2024 5:59 am

There was a significant rise in rainfall in Scotland during the 1980s, he observed, but there has been little change in trend since. Meanwhile, rainfall trends in Northern Ireland have barely changed since 1931.

Yet when you combine them, here’s what the UK 10-year average looks like.

20241123wuwt3
Reply to  Bellman
November 23, 2024 6:32 am

There was a significant rise in rainfall in Scotland during the 1980s, he observed, but there has been little change in trend since”



20241123wuwt5
Reply to  Bellman
November 23, 2024 6:33 am

Meanwhile, rainfall trends in Northern Ireland have barely changed since 1931.”



20241123wuwt6
Reply to  Bellman
November 24, 2024 9:35 am

.

Northern-Ireland-rainfall-annual
Reply to  Alpha
November 24, 2024 6:49 pm

I’m not sure what method the MO use for the trend on those graphs.

Here’s what a loess smoothing, which is similar to their graph.

20241123wuwt6
Reply to  Bellman
November 24, 2024 5:36 am

In answer to some of the helpful suggestions below – the y-scale is in annual mm of rain. I should have stated that on the graph, but it makes no difference to the question of whether there has been a rise in UK rainfall.

I didn’t start the graph at 0, because that’s irrelevant to the question of how rain has changed over the centuries. Starting at zero is only relevant if you are interested in the percentage change, which is not really an issue with rainfall. Comparing the change to the range of observations is much more useful. But to keep everyone happy I’ll add a graph starting at zero – the blue line is the 10 year rolling average. The increase in the 10 year average since the 1830s is about 20%.

20241123wuwt3
strativarius
Reply to  Bellman
November 23, 2024 5:53 am

“”Why a ten year average?””

What is or are your alternatives – and why?

Reply to  strativarius
November 23, 2024 9:52 am

What is or are your alternatives – and why?

30-year averages, as correctly chosen by Bellman.

Why? Because this has been the consistent metric recommended for use by the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) to represent ‘climate normals’ for decades.

10-year averages and less are cherry-picks that tend to be used by charlatans, such as Homewood and Lord M.

Reply to  TheFinalNail
November 23, 2024 9:59 am

P.S. Everybody already knows this except you guys here.

Reply to  TheFinalNail
November 23, 2024 5:36 pm

Idiot.

Mr.
Reply to  TheFinalNail
November 23, 2024 11:13 am

Add the Potsdam Institute to your list of “charlatans”?

https://www.pik-potsdam.de/~stefan/6facts/its_real.html

Reply to  TheFinalNail
November 24, 2024 6:33 am

How about using some time series analysis starting by taking 1st difference of the data to make it stationary?

A simple linear regression of time versus some non-related dependent variable is a worthless endeavor in attempting to determine what is actually occurring.

Here is a reference from NIST that will help you in learning about time series analysis.

6.4. Introduction to Time Series Analysis

From one page at this site.

The term “univariate time series” refers to a time series that consists of single (scalar) observations recorded sequentially over equal time increments. Some examples are monthly CO2 concentrations and southern oscillations to predict el nino effects.

Reply to  strativarius
November 23, 2024 12:18 pm

Interestingly there are no units on the Y axis, are they millimetres, centimetres or inches?

Reply to  Bellman
November 23, 2024 12:00 pm

Actual all UK data shows a spike in the 1870.. not much happening from 1900-1997, then a step up around 1998.

Now…. evidence of human causation??

UK-Rainfall-2023
Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Bellman
November 23, 2024 12:48 pm

I not that in none of your charts is the Y-axis achored at 0 and the Y-axis scale varies from chart to chart. Hence useing visual interpretation to get tot he wrong answer.

Until those elementary school errors are corrected, there is no point in reviewing any of this.

Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
November 23, 2024 1:49 pm

All those “averages™” basically rely on the step change around 1998..

… then, as you say, the juvenile propaganda of using non-zero axes to accentuate a small change.

Reply to  Bellman
November 23, 2024 5:56 pm

There were big spikes in the 1870s and 1920s, but it seems clear that the increase since then has been more steady

What a load of utterly made up hogwash. That graph shows no trend for 200 years barring 1875 and today

Reply to  Bellman
November 24, 2024 6:26 am

Here’s the England and Wales 10 year average

From:
Stationarity and differencing of time series data

stationary time series is one whose statistical properties such as mean, variance, autocorrelation, etc. are all constant over time. Most statistical forecasting methods are based on the assumption that the time series can be rendered approximately stationary (i.e., “stationarized”) through the use of mathematical transformations. A stationarized series is relatively easy to predict: you simply predict that its statistical properties will be the same in the future as they have been in the past!

Another reason for trying to stationarize a time series is to be able to obtain meaningful sample statistics such as means, variances, and correlations with other variables. Such statistics are useful as descriptors of future behavior only if the series is stationary. For example, if the series is consistently increasing over time, the sample mean and variance will grow with the size of the sample, and they will always underestimate the mean and variance in future periods. And if the mean and variance of a series are not well-defined, then neither are its correlations with other variables. For this reason you should be cautious about trying to extrapolate regression models fitted to nonstationary data.

You keep “trending” a time series, why don’t you use real time series analysis to see what is happening. There are reams of information about time series analysis on the web. You should avail yourself of the information.

All you are doing is “trending” unrelated data in the hopes something shows up that is useful in discussing CAGW.

Reply to  Jim Gorman
November 24, 2024 6:06 pm

If only you would try to understand the subject rather than just cut and pasting interminable sections from random web-sites.

I’ve really no idea what point you think you are making. I was not trending any time series. I was just showing what a moving average looked like, in order to demonstrate how misleading Homewood’s claims are.

I’m the one suggesting the annual rainfall is not stationary. If it was stationary there would be no increase in rainfall, and Homewood’s cherry-picking would be unnecessary. However, the data looks trend-stationary, and it would be quite strange if it wasn’t. If there was a unit root, you would have to explain how rainfall could remember what happened in previous years.

A Dickey-Fuller test rejects a unit root in the England and Wales annual data.

Dickey-Fuller = -5.4873, Lag order = 6, p-value = 0.01
alternative hypothesis: stationary
UK-Weather Lass
November 23, 2024 6:23 am

Only true leaders know the truth and how to tell it while the rest hide behind their lies.even if that means preventing the truth ever seeing the light of day,

Hell is truth being seen too late (Thomas Hobbes).

strativarius
Reply to  UK-Weather Lass
November 23, 2024 6:57 am

Hell is now until the next election.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  strativarius
November 23, 2024 12:49 pm

Depends on country.

Someone
Reply to  UK-Weather Lass
November 25, 2024 8:03 am

Who are those “true leaders”? In the whole human history I can hardly think of an example of a true leader guided by truth. Marcus Aurelius, perhaps, but he was not an elected leader.

IMO, the so-called “true leaders” are often misled by their conviction in what truth is. What makes them appear “true leaders” is their charisma.

rckkrgrd
November 23, 2024 7:03 am

It is no surprise that wind speeds are dropping with all those wind farms in the way.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  rckkrgrd
November 23, 2024 12:51 pm

A point raised many times in the past. It is valid and worth repeating as often as needed in the future.

Just like those wind towers are their own special UHI as are solar farms.
You want to protect the environment? Don’t install those.
Except, perhaps, in the Gobe desert where no one lives and nothing grows.

Dave Andrews
November 23, 2024 7:22 am

Back on February 17th 2022 Liz Bentley, Chief Exec of the Royal Meteorological Society told BBC Radio 4’s World at One

“If you look back over the last, say, 50 years or so there isn’t a compelling trend that we’ve seen in the amount of storminess we get in the UK”

Later in the interview she said

“we’re not seeing any significant changes or trends within the number of storms or maximum wind gusts over the last five decades”

Reply to  Dave Andrews
November 24, 2024 4:19 am

The UK is not the world.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Warren Beeton
November 25, 2024 8:06 am

And your level of comprehension is non existent. This thread was about the UK!

November 23, 2024 8:03 am

When you warm the higher latitudes more than lower latitudes, you decrease the meridional temperature gradient. This also reduces the amount of wind = meteorology 101!
Colder temperatures = higher pressure
Warmer temperatures = lower pressure
Pressure gradients play a key role in determining wind speeds.

Wind speeds determine the amount of electricity that can be generated by wind turbines. In a world with reduced wind because of the fake climate crisis, investing heavily in wind energy is retarded.

Editor
November 23, 2024 8:11 am

For my sins, I watch streaming Brit police shows…they tend to cool my fevered mind heated by researching so much science and climate nonsense.

If these Brit crime shows are any measure of reality — it is almost always raining in the UK! In each episode, it is either just stopped raining (cars and roads are wet), currently raining, or everyone is grabbing trench coats, raincoats and umbrellas in expectation of rain.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Kip Hansen
November 23, 2024 12:54 pm

In Watership Down, a fantasy about rabbits, there was a saying, “One cloud feels lonely,” which is a counterpoint, obviously, to when it rains it pours.

Thanks for triggering that fond memory.

November 23, 2024 9:23 am

Powerpoint is causing global warming! Chart proves it

Mr.
Reply to  Jimmy Walter
November 23, 2024 11:22 am

And that just goes to prove what so many people have concluded after being forced to watch excruciating presentations at all kinds of meetings –

‘Death By PowerPoint’ really is an existential threat to mankind.

Loren Wilson
November 23, 2024 5:25 pm

30 mm in a day is a sprinkle in Texas. We worry when we get more than an inch (25.4 mm) in an hour.

BILLYT
Reply to  Loren Wilson
November 23, 2024 7:36 pm

In fact a lot of Australia is on average wetter than the UK but it dries more also