From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
At the end of spring the Met Office put out a press release, which claimed that “this spring shows some of the changes we’re seeing in our weather patterns, with more extreme conditions, including prolonged dry, sunny weather, becoming more frequent.”
As there is no evidence at all that dry springs are becoming more common, I asked the Met Office to provide for their claim.
This is their reply:
The UK Climate 2023 report referenced offers this conclusion on the section Page 31 to 36:
In other words, dry seasons if anything are on the decrease.
The section from page 74 merely looks at future projections, which therefore have no relevance at all..
Meanwhile the Christidis study is also irrelevant, as it looks summers in Europe. Similarly the Kendon study is only concerned with projections for summer.
The Met Office have been unable to offer any evidence for Emma Carlisle’s claim. Indeed they cannot, because none exists.
Her incorrect statement should be retracted and a correction published.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This is from the ”don’t confuse me with facts when I am arguing with you” department….
There’s another way to measure this rather than Rainfall Amounts. Solar Panel productivity. If there are more Dry Sunny Days, this should be depicted in the total amount of Daily Solar Generation (adjusted for increased Solar Proliferation)
A slightly complex problem. New solar is continually added to the grid and new domestic installations reduce demand as well.
This year where I am we had a dry but overcast spring which would reduce Solar PV output without the rain.
“A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes”
I am not sure if the Met Office really cares much about the truth in this matter. I belive they have achieved what they set out to do. A miniscule retraction is all we can hope to achieve – read by none.
_____________________________________________________________
The IPCC’s AR4 Chapter Ten Page 750 pdf4 says:
“For a future warmer climate … Globally averaged mean water
vapour, evaporation and precipitation are projected to increase.”
Emma Carlisle needs to study her own bible.
“A liar needs a good memory”.
The Climate cabal can’t even keep their lies straight anymore.
I disagree with the ‘liar’ in case of climate alarm. Yes, a liar needs a good memory to keep track of what lies the liar told to whom.
But a climate alarmist needs a true belief to not investigate the boundaries of that belief. If you have been subject to constant propaganda your thought patterns have been finetuned to steer them into the ‘right’ direction. It is no use argueing w a Yehova witness because if you do they only see the devil’s work. The tragedy lies w those working f state institutions w half a brain who should know better yet only use corrupted ‘trusted’sources wich they have been trained to follow.
The Met Office is just another propaganda outlet – data can be instantly imagined and recorded at any one of the 103 non existent stations they operate… And always with the same results: we’re going to fry in double quick time.
Miliband is now clutching at any ideas to promote his net zero dream, and they are getting more unhinged. Ed has run out of places for [fixed] offshore wind…
“Britain is Running Out of Space for Offshore Wind, Warns GB Energy Boss”
The answers?
Bolt on solar panels for balconies – not many have a balcony…
Covering waterways, lakes and reservoirs with solar panels – great for any aquatic species…
And now?
“Miliband now wants Brits to put wind turbines in their gardens”
The government has unveiled its plan to almost double onshore wind across England by 2030.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/2077157/ed-miliband-onshore-wind
Excuse me while I get back on my chair….
I know where Ed Miliband can stick his windmills and it’s not in my garden. They’ll probably get more wind there too!
Can you imagine the noise – especially if heat pumps are in the mix?
It’s desperationville.
“It’s desperationville.”
Yes, it is. Miliband has run out of options.
The windmill and solar roads are deadend roads.
Miliband is now in the position of denying reality.
Miliband needs to sit down with Trump and have a long talk. Maybe that would wake Miliband up. But, I doubt it. It’s very difficult to wake a True Believer up.
Trump needs to give the UK public a good talk about energy Farage should make that happen.
A Musk tweet seems to have an impact over here. I fail to see why the empty suit hasn’t realised yet that the only way out of the economic mess they have created is to ditch Miliband and Net Zero.
But then, it is an empty suit… and paid for. Like the Sinclair ZX81; an input is required before there can be an output for the correct audience.
Us Scots had a king known as Toom Tabard. He was put in place as a vassal for Longshanks and the net result was the Auld Alliance which was the opposite of what was intended.
History has a habit of repeating itself.
Sinclair? As in the Sinclair “Scientific” calculator of the early 1970’s? RPN? Had one, none of my co-workers could/would use it.
MO Propaganda and messaging: Name that storm…
“The Met Office should name storms after fossil fuel companies, campaigners have said, after the weather forecasting service opened a storm naming competition. Climate campaigners have recommended the Met Office names its storms after various oil and gas corporations to remind the public of the link between burning fossil fuels and extreme weather.
…
“An idea like this makes it much more tangible the connection between, the companies that have helped create this damage, and actually, what the consequences are.”
She said the campaign had “gone crazy”, adding: “I’ve had hundreds of reposts on LinkedIn, and it just keeps on getting picked up everywhere on WhatsApp as well. So I definitely think it will gain some traction. “
…
A Met Office spokesperson said: “We don’t name storms after any private companies.”
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jun/26/met-office-should-name-storms-after-fossil-fuel-companies-say-campaigners
Stormy McStormface…
““The Met Office should name storms after fossil fuel companies, campaigners have said, after the weather forecasting service opened a storm naming competition.”
So, when the storm moves away from the UK and into Europe, does it keep the same name, or does each nation in the path get to give the storm a different name?
Naming thunderstorms is a big joke. Climate Alarmists want us to think every thunderstorm is the equivalent of a hurricane now, because Climate Change. It’s just more Alarmist Climate Change Propaganda. Climate Alarmists are selling a product.
Maybe they could pass the baton, so to speak.
In the UK it could be storm BP and depending on movement then in France storm Total, in Belgium storm Petrofina, in Germany storm(s) Shell, BP or Total, in Italy storm Agip etc etc etc.
The alphabetical order doesn’t survive the process…
Plus, it’s not the companies who cause the problem, it’s the users. If nobody bought their products, they wouldn’t produce them.
Did Paul also see the press release confirming that June 2025 was the warmest June on record for England?
If so, he failed to draw attention to it.
On record means bog all. And they have hoisted themselves on that with their own petard.
Which records? They cherrypick them all the time to suit the narrative. We are not experiencing anything out of the ordinary – ie it’s plain old natural variation. Yahweh has gone from the stage and they all scratch around seeking meaning…
Next we will sing hymn #94. There is a green hill.
Only when it’s the warmest, apparently.
Apparent urban degradation of surface sites, and many sites that don’t actually exist.
The Met Office weather sites have been shown to be totally farcical, with a large proportion being Class 4, 5 at best !!
It means bog all scientifically, to you it appears to mean everything.
The Met office still use readings from Heathrow airport… which mean, bog all.
Also, as confirmed in the headline of the above Met Office article (but ignored in the commentary by Paul Homewood) spring (March, April, May) 2025 was both the warmest and sunniest spring on record for the UK.
Temperature records for the UK begin in 1884; sunshine hour records begin in 1910.
Human civilization began quite close to the zero line on that chart, just before the point at which temperatures and CO2 begin to rise in tandem.
Dinosaurs did very well during long spells in some of the earlier periods..
“Temperature records for the UK begin in…” [add year here]
There is no climate crisis. But then, you know that.
What a load of rubbish.
Most of the last 10,000 years has been significantly warmer than current temperatures.
And the CO2 line at the bottom is barely at plant and planet subsistence level.
Be very thankful for the increase in CO2 and temperature since the mid 1800’s…
It is what enabled, with the use of fossil fuels, the development of modern civilisations.
Even you rely almost totally on the use of those fossil fuels for your very existence.
You could never exist without them.
Sunshine levels have been increasing for decades in many areas of the planet and have caused most of the warming observed globally. The UK version is shown below and shows a significant trend upwards.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/uk-temperature-rainfall-and-sunshine-time-series
‘Did Paul also see the press release confirming that June 2025 was the warmest June on record for England?’
This should be publicised more widely, as I doubt more than 1 person in 100 will believe it. The credibility of the Met Office would be wrecked.
The temperature was 35.6°C, recorded at Mayflower Park in Southampton on 28 June 1976.
2020 – There were serious concerns about overcrowding on Bournemouth beach. On June 25, 2020, a major incident was declared after thousands of people flocked to the beach during a heatwave. Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council said the beach was “stretched to the absolute hilt,” with emergency services overwhelmed by the volume of visitors.
At present, 4 July 2025, it is 20 degrees in England where I am.
On a tangential note, Bangladesh increased coal usage by 115% in 2024. It seems they have never heard of climate change.
June 1976 was a signifcantly warmer month more widespread, than just mainly the SE of England during June 2025.
June
23 32.2 90.0 Maldon (Essex) 1976
24 32.4°C / 90.3°F Gillingham (Kent) 1976
25 33.5 92.3 East Bergholt (Suffolk) 1976
26 35.4 95.7 North Heath (West Sussex) 1976
35.4 95.7 East Dereham (Norfolk) 1976
27 35.5 95.9 Southampton Mayflower Park 1976
28 35.6 96.1 Southampton Mayflower Park 1976
“In June 1976, the UK experienced a significant heatwave with many days exceeding 30°C. Specifically, Heathrow recorded 16 consecutive days above 30°C between June 23 and July 8. Additionally, there were 15 consecutive days where the temperature reached 32°C somewhere in the country. Southampton recorded the hottest June day ever in the UK with 35.6°C on June 28.”
There have been only a few days in June 2025 compared that reached over 30°C.
Northern England only reached over 30°C on one day during 2025. (30th June)
I find the whole alarm about heatwaves ridiculous because A: one can take precautions to protect the vulnerable, B: the amount heatwave days in a year is very small, C: people in the tropics and subtropics are living in these conditions most of the year, D: humans are a tropical species.
I’d be worried if we start seeing increasing year on year crop failures, which we are not. The alarmistas are promising it will happen in…..years ( fill in the dots). And CLIMATE REFUGEES.
Has the Thames run dry yet?
No – jt caught fire.
According to the Metrosexual Office.
From: “A Chronological Listing of Early Weather Events, 7th Edition, by James A. Marusek. Copyright 2010.
I searched on “Thames”, 342 ‘hits’. I checked the first 100 only.
139AD: Thames was dry for two days (72)
1114AD: knee deep water under London Bridge (212)
1157/1158 Thames dried up (72)
1214AD: 4 inches between the tower and the bridges (1)
1281AD: Westminster to Lambeth – cross dry shod (212)
1540AD: so low, salt water above London Bridge (72)
1541AD: even at ebb, salt water above London Bridge (212)
The vast majority of “Thames” mentions were for freezing.
References:
(1) Charles Peirce, A Meteorological Account of the Weather in Philadelphia from January 1, 1790 to January 1 1847, Lindsay & Blakiston, Philadelphia, 1847.
(72) Thomas Short, A General Chronological History of Air, Weather, Seasons, Meteors in Sultry Places and different Times, London, Volumes 1 & 2, 1749.
(212) E.J. Lowe, Natural Phenomena and Chronology of the Seasons, London, 1870.
I remember the Summer of 1976 very well, June that year was very warm London had 17 days with temperatures over 25 C and 10 were over 30 C July had 19 days over 25C 9 of which were over 30 C The temperatures today (50 years later) cannot compare, Urban temperatures according to
the recent data from the European Union are saying temperatures in Towns and Cities are 2 – 4 C higher, and in large cities with very little wind can be 10 C higher.
The CET for June 2025 is 17.0c and for June 1976 it was 17.8c.
Ah, tis Homewood with his latest example of fake information reflective of his paranoia of the UKMO.
“This spring shows some of the changes we’re seeing in our weather patterns, with more extreme conditions, including prolonged dry, sunny weather, becoming more frequent. The data clearly shows that recent decades have been warmer, sunnier, and often drier than the 20th century average, although natural variation will continue to play a role in the UK’s weather.”
Now let’s see…..
warmer: yep
sunnier: yep
“and often drier than the 20th century average”
NB: “often” and “20th century”
Doesn’t say “was”.
Doesn’t say “since 1840” …. which is where that UKMO graph starts (IOW the 1st third of it).
Take those first 60 yrs away and indeed springs are “often drier than the 20th century average“
Can you explain to us why the met office has 103 imaginary weather stations? It is a pertinent question that demands an answer
“Met Office Shock: More Non-Existent UK Weather Stations Discovered Reporting Invented Data
https://dailysceptic.org/2025/04/09/met-office-shock-more-non-existent-uk-weather-stations-discovered-reporting-invented-data/
https://www.climatedepot.com/2024/11/12/science-shock-u-k-met-office-is-inventing-temperature-data-from-100-non-existent-stations/
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/12/09/massive-cover-up-launched-by-u-k-met-office-to-hide-its-103-non-existent-temperature-measuring-stations/comment-page-2/
Ad nauseam.
Nick Stokes explained this to you many times, but you didn’t get it. So ‘no’, is probably the answer.
Ray Sanders has actually looked at the many of the Met sites.
They are, to a large majority, totally unfit of climate, or even local weather purposes.
That is why the Met Office likes to use them.
It suits their rabid leftist agenda that is aimed at destroying the UK.
Can you explain to us why the met office has 103 imaginary weather stations? It is a pertinent question that demands an answer
Stokes has never answered me on this. Why don’t you answer it for us, now?
“The Met Office is operating in an extremely unscientific and even incompetent manner. Analysis of such incomplete and inaccurate, even invented numbers is a futile exercise. That such non-data are being statistically tortured to the Nth degree by alleged peer-review scientific processes is frankly a bad joke and completely unacceptable.”
https://dailysceptic.org/2025/04/09/met-office-shock-more-non-existent-uk-weather-stations-discovered-reporting-invented-data/
And your answer is….
Tumbleweeds…
But it’s a ridiculous assertion.
The UKMO uses data from previously in-use stations and publishes its methods in peer reviewed journals.
You keyboard warriors only ever float this garbage on conspiratorial blogs like this. Never any refutation of the papers.
‘The UKMO uses data from previously in-use stations ….’
So there is no current data from these previously in-use stations?
They are closed down, according to your link.
The data is ‘estimated ‘ , according to your link.
Do you know what ‘data’ is?
You measure data. You don’t estimate data.
You can’t measure data at a place where the measuring equipment has been removed.
Why not save money and put one weather station in John O’Groats and one in Lands End and then estimate the in-between data?
He’s beyond help.
He is correct that there is nothing wrong with estimates.
If I want to estimate the number of piano-tuners in Chicago, I could produce a reasonable estimate.
The number would be very useful, but I can’t call the number that I produced ‘data’
Sounds like a scenario for one of Monty Python’s “Argument” skits.
“I can’t call the number that I produced ‘data’
“No I can’t”
etc
etc
etc
Like The Guardian, his favourite newspaper, ToeFungalNail can be relied upon to get everything wrong, every time. What would we do without him?
Ah, you’re highlighting the PROBITY problem with temps “data”.
This issue warrants a scientific journal all on its own.
(No need for appointed ‘peer reviewers’ though.
The general public will always accept “the bleedin’ obvious”).
Invented data is a MO reality.
Squirm all you like.
How much does estimating data from other weather stations increase the error bars on the Met Office’s temperature ‘measurements’?
1 degree? 1.5 degrees? Copy out the correct answer from these famous peer reviewed journals we hear so much about.
The Met Office have copied ways of the GISS for station and grid data making it worthless and not comparable with decades before.
What year did the Met Office start bastardizing the temperature record?
How long have they been using temperature data that is not fit for purpose?
I’m guessing somewhere around the turn of the century. So just about everything they show is bogus after that period.
Whatever they are doing they are getting about the right answer. There may be a few rogue records claimed and the averages may be tenths out, but the warming we have seen in the UK is real and substantial and way beyond those errors.
Or are you going to tell me my own max/ min thermometer bought from Boots in the early 80s and hung on the same screw in the same unchanged environment ever since has started telling me porkies?
We also have the CET, which again whilst not perfect very much agrees.
We used to get runs of months 1 to 2C above average, this year has jumped to 2 to 3C.
Unless the weather dramatically cools, 2025 will be the hottest in the entire CET both by average daily mean and maximums.
Here is MO June report.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/news-and-media/media-centre/weather-and-climate-news/2025/june-2025-provisional-statistics
Handily it also refutes the recent spurious allegation by ‘Taxed’ that all the MO stations over-read in his area and consequently the MO was claiming his entire area (around Scunthorpe) and the East had had heatwave conditions. Maps show the heatwave conditions were patchy.
“Whatever they are doing they are “
Falsely recording invented data.
“bought from Boots ” The chemist.
Is your glassware class A or class B?
If you bought 103 more thermometers from Boots you could donate them to the MO for those stations they currently record data for, that don’t actually have a thermometer present.
Call it public service.
Since you have drawn my name into this, l will respond.
I have never claimed that MO stations always overstate the temperatures. What l have said is that electronic thermometers housed in Stevenson screens overstate the daytime temperatures during fine sunny weather when compared with a LIG thermometer in open shade, and that it’s only during these weather conditions that this happens.
Of all the local weather stations l track, only 1 of them is a MO weather station. The rest are privately owned weather stations.
The Met Office weather station l followed is the Waddington station.
Since February when l first started my daily temperature record.
The Waddington weather station has consistently recorded higher monthly Mean Maximum temperatures then l have here in Scunthorpe. The data is below.
Feb,
Scunthorpe 7.4C Waddington 7.9C
March,
Scunthorpe 11.7C Waddington 12.8C
April,
Scunthorpe 14.8C Waddington 16.0C
May,
Scunthorpe 17.6C Waddington 18.4C
June,
Scunthorpe 23.0C Waddington 23.4C
I have always said the mean minimum temperatures are higher in Scunthorpe, due to the UHI effect.
“Take those first 60 yrs away”
LOL… So ignore data you don’t like.
The average for the last 30 years is obviously higher than the average of the previous 30 years…
… and certainly much higher than the 30 years before that
The comment being referred to data from the 20th century so in order to verify that you should ignore those first 60 years in the graph
IT’S THE SUN, STUPID | Dr Willie Soon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oV902JVOKKE
Unpacking Climate Science | Dr. Ned Nikolov:
Not so settled science
“critical to advancing humankind’s understanding of the Sun “
https://parkersolarprobe.jhuapl.edu/
It sure is mainly the sun and it does go into this here with declining albedo.
Declining global clouds causing increasing solar energy reaching the ground, warming the oceans and land. In turn warms the atmosphere and decreases global albedo levels. This is what is mainly causing the oceans to warm and many places around the planet are seeing more sunshine hours because of this mechansim.
If it’s “sunnier”, surely it would be expected to be “warmer”?
well, that’s how the weather operates in my neck of the woods anyway . . .
?
Exactly, that is NOT a CO2 mechanism.
So the Met Office is claiming that man made CO2 is changing the UK’s weather patterning.
Just exactly what is the weather patterning that are they claiming is been changed by man made CO2. ?
and where exactly is the evidence to support this claim.?
Few people contest that “GMST has risen by ~1°C since 1975/1980”, so it is hardly surprising that UK temperatures are “above the 20th century average”.
Sunshine was a definite outlier for 2025 (and 2020) … but “climate” is a set of statistics covering at least 30 years (according to the WMO, at least) …
The MET Office graphs for “Rainfall”, however, have “1991-2020” averages (the latest WMO standard 30-year “Reference Period”, the magenta lines on the graphs you copied) instead of a “20th century” one.
Redoing their graphs with a “1900-2000” average to compare against instead gave me the following graph …
You may want to consider the “often” qualifier, at least for England and UK “Rainfall”
The equivalent graph for England.
Rapid cloud loss is contributing to record-breaking temperatures, new study shows | Tallbloke’s Talkshop
Absolutely NOTHING to do with human CO2.
Story tip.
My local news had Miliband visiting our wind farm, boasting about powering millions of homes, whilst it was totally becalmed in the background view. Could he get ANY MORE ludicrous? Starts at about 5min 20sec.
https://youtu.be/D26mL19AtEw
Shouldn’t this be reported under the “misinformation” laws in the UK/EU so the prosecution can commence?
Weather is getting weatherier.
Here is the rainfall record from ukmo Hastings sea front weather station
From Matt Ridley at The Telegraph on the Met using RCP8.5:
The Met Office has deliberately chosen an unrealistic scenario to predict climate doomsday
‘Met Office Cannot Back Up Their Claim That Springs Are Getting Drier’
What amazes me is that they surely must know by now that their pretentious pseudoscientific game has been well and truly rumbled yet they persist in trying to bluff it out with claims that just get more and more preposterous – as if anyone can trust their fickle word at all any more. I almost feel sorry for them when I think of the public humiliation and disgrace that await them for their obdurately blind and remorseless folly.
They have had 50 years to support their alarmist claims and failed too many times to count. In my view the theory failed about 20+ years ago but they are still trying to cling onto it.
I called it a scam back around the early 2000’s when I predicted global temperatures won’t rise until there is a significant/strong El Nino again. The planet then slowly cools until the next significant/strong El Nino. With each strong El Nino there is a step up in global temperatures that remains for years after. Global albedo especially with clouds, has generally been declining since the 1980’s where more solar energy reaching the surface has been responsible for the step ups we see in global temperatures with strong El Nino’s. Ultimately decreasing global cloud albedo causes more solar energy to warm the surface, increasing ocean and land temperatures that warms the atmosphere.