From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
Meanwhile, while we in the UK have a blocking high, Greenland gets the other side of the coin, depressions and wet weather. Even in summer, that generally means snow.
https://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions
The summer melt has no even begun yet and is already a month overdue.
See? Climate change!
Lots of unusual activity near the Arctic this year. The “cold blob” and now Greenland. Could be a sign that naturally driven Arctic sea ice changes have started. I’ve pointed out this could the driver of the 60-70 year cycle, aka the AMO. If the Arctic sea ice minimum increases this year it would support this view.
The sea ice may make a recovery if the current trend continues.
https://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/thk.uk.php
No matter which weather we have, it will be blamed on climate change.
and worse than expected and twice as fast than in the rest of the world.
Especially when nothing or the opposite happens.
No matter which weather we have, it will result in climate change.
(30 year running average or weather.)
Must be because the gulf stream is weakening, you know the one that origins from the Gulf of Mexico 😉.
Well enough of my sarcasm for today, I’m gonna enjoy the pool unless those alamotards figure out that clouds and the sun shape our weather (what these idiots call climate) and therefore come up with the brilliant idea of forbidding private pools. You know: more water surface, more evaporation more clouds and so CLIMATEALARMAGETON…wait for it.
There has still never been a hurricane in the Gulf of America.
Just think how many lives could be saved if Trump just gave the Atlantic Ocean a spiffy new name!:)
Mar-A-Sargasso
Mar-a-Sargasso, perhaps?
I only wish they’d try that in the greater Phoenix Metro area! Imagine the gnashing of teeth!
”You can have my pool when you pry it from my wet, cool, wrinkly fingers!”
But a slowing Gulf Stream is supposed to cause Europe to cool. But they are seeing allegedly record warmth.
Keeping up with global warming makes my head hurt.
You left the Sahara in your head spinning.
A wavy jet stream can cause all that we are observing…..
Greenland Summer Melt Is a Month Late
You most certainly would not know that in the UK. But then why would you when they are busy making as much hay as possible out of what could well be related to El Niño? Cloud coverage is certainly down. That is, it’s nice and Sunny.
Guardian Weather…
Pets can suffer heatstroke even when resting, UK vets warn
England has just had its hottest June on record, Met Office data shows [er yeah, right.]
European heatwave is worst ever and impossible without climate crisis, scientists say
BBC Weather
‘Extreme’ marine heatwave expected for parts of UK
UK heatwave spreads north and west as further heat health alerts issued
We only get reporting from one side… of the jet stream. How very BBC etc
Warmest June and even all-time warmest temperature records fall in countries all across Europe like skittles; global ocean heat content hits record highs; atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations are at their highest levels in at least 800,000 years and a huge El Nino is just getting started in the Pacific.
But surface ice melt in Greenland is off to a sluggish start this year – so much for global warming!
Look! Squirrel!
With a bunch of climate nuts !
😉
Yeah, he is trying to deflect us away from the news of a weak summer in Greenland to a region of the world that an OMEGA block created heat wave that has absolutely nothing to do with their bogeyman CO2 is getting excited as part of their delusional fits they get every summer.
Great to see how much he is embracing El Nino as a major cause of warming. 🙂
Not a very smart one at that.
All time on record. Which is geologically extremely short.
Would record cold every year be better?
Warmest evah 😉
I can only imagine how much he suffers whenever a new former heatwave now heatdome is announced.
The only thing that hits him harder is when someone is using wrong pronouns.
And in both cases he didn’t even know about the pain until they told him.
Are you absolutely certain he is not a she?
The question is, is he/she certain?
Or either !!
Move forward 6 months and a blocking high in the same place could result in headlines like “coldest start to winter since 1963” here in the U.K. with very little if any cloud cover.
Even assuming all that is true, and it may very well be, what is the result of the rising temperatures and GHGs? Rising grain yields, increased arable areas, rising standards of living world wide and fewer cold deaths, to name just a few. Even the potential downsides, like increased deaths from heat, could be greatly reduced by abandoning the unreasonable hatred of air conditioning in much of Europe.
You gotta remember, for the climate alarmists there is only one side of the coin.
Or a 2-headed coin. Either works in your metaphor.
Or a coin like any other, except every flip ends with, ‘Heads I win, tails you lose.’
Actually.. a blank coin…. so they can invent whatever they want…whichever way it lands.
I think that a two-tailed coin is a better analogy.
Here’s the problem. You could be correct in every single one of your assertions (you’re not, but that’s beside the point). The question is, so what? Your points are meaningless. Nothing is happening and no one (at least no one sane) gives a sh.. er, a rat’s a$$. You’re absolutely terrified of something you can’t explain and you can’t fathom why no one else is as terrified as you.
Well, I gotta say, with all the responses to this inane comment you sure earned your money today.
As climate alarmists are so fond of responding whenever a “Coldest EVAH !” record is set :
What is the difference between “weather” and “climate” ?
.
PS : Yes, the same criticism does apply to the “tone” of the ATL article’s title.
Just because “we” make a mistake doesn’t mean that “you” (plural) can make the exact same mistake (in the other direction).
Do you talk about summer 1976 ?
2026 not so extraordinary.
https://uk-historic-weather.co.uk/features/summer-of-1976-heatwave-uk-memories
Not only England was hot, I remember well the fires in Southern France this summer.
But it is the global temperature average that matters.
And CO2 is well mixed.
And and and
And when that heat wave ends, and it will, the temps will drop 20 C, perhaps more and people will have something new to complain about.
Global ocean heat content hits record highs? Do tell.
CO2 concentrations highest in at least 800K years? Do tell.
I really cannot grok why you post here.
You fail time and time again.
Ocean heat content in perspective…
OK:
More hypocricy …
So Mr bnice is quite prepared to accept that Ocean heat content numbers from over 500 years ago, but apparently SSTs from the first part of last century are suspect …. well even from before 2005!
This is just one FI:
Replying to TFN who posted a graph of HADSST4
His emminence posted thus ….
“RUBBISH….
Show us where SSTs were measured before even 2005 with ARGO…
… let alone going back to 1850 !
Can someone point to where some sea surface temperatures that were actually measured for MOST of the ocean before 2005 ??
Even Phil Jones admitted that most of the SH SSTs were ” just made up”.”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/05/07/sea-surface-temperatures-west-versus-east-coast/#comment-3906743
Considering the ‘handle’ that he chose, I think it would be fair to say that he thinks highly of himself. I would venture that he thinks he’s doing some kind of noble social service and expects to be rewarded on a higher plane.
There is/was a WEATHER event in UK /Europe.. other places are having cold waves.
UAH atmospheric temperature dropped last month.
Absorbed solar energy has increased because of changes to clouds.
CO2 has nothing to do with El Nino…… So you whole comment is meaningless !
We’ve only had halfway decent temperature records for the entire globe since 1878 when we started using satellites, and even then the later records are more accurate as satellite instruments improve and coverage gets more complete.
Beyond that, due to the lower instrument quality (each station only recorded to the estimated nearest degree.) and the woefully inadequate global coverage, the idea that we know the temperature of the land surface to within 5 degrees is laughable. The oceans themselves were even worse when it came to quality and coverage.
As to ocean heat content, with only a couple hundred probes, measuring only the top 1000 meters or so of the ocean, the claim that we know the heat content to within 0,01 is as laughable as most climate alarmist claims. Beyond that, when you translate those laughable heat content claims to temperature, it comes out to only a few thousandths of a degree, and that using instruments that were only accurate to a tenth of a degree or so, and that was when it was fresh out of the lab. Many of the probes have been floating in the wild for a decade or more.
PS: There’s a reason why instruments in a laboratory are recalibrated every year.
Since CO2 has proven to be a very minor player in climate, so what if it has had a small increase over the last 100 years. In the past, CO2 levels have been as high as 5000 to 7000 ppm, and life not only survived, it thrived.
Makes people panicking over 400 ppm look pretty silly.
1978?
“global ocean heat content hits record highs” over the last 25 years
Too bad there were no Argo buoys to measure ocean temperatures in the 1930’s. Or during the Medieval Warm Period or the Roman Warm Period. Apparently the last 25 years are the only time that ever existed in history.
“The summer melt has no even begun yet and is already a month overdue.”
It’s only “overdue” in our tiny little myopic view of Earth.
Not even true. It’s melting pretty much as usual, it’s just that the high level of precipitation (i.e snowfall in the high Arctic at elevation) is causing mass gain that is temporarily offsetting the mass loss.
June UAH Arctic anomaly was +1.01
It’s anonymously warm overall. Close to a record for the day on climate reanalyzer again.
(No doubt some clueless soul will now post the DMI graph again.)
My point was that we really don’t know much, and all this hullaballoo about little blips in either direction is just stupid.
I’d much rather it be “anomalously” warm than cold.
“Anonymously warm”?!
Greenland gaining mass – global warming. Greenland losing mass – also global warming.
No wonder we laugh at you.
Meanwhile from the hot and humid swamp weather capital, East Texas, we have low 80’s for highs forecast next week.
Not necessarily relevant, but UAH shows Greenland as having an exactly average June, with temperatures equal to the 1991-2020 average.
The south was a bit below average, the north a bit above.
At least you got that right. The below average temperatures are below freezing in the south, but the above average temperatures in the north are only below freezing…
Current temperature at the Freya glacier (NE Greenland) is currently 8.8ºC (above 500m).
Nice try. The Freya glacier is a puny, little peripheral glacier along the coast and is no way representative of the overall average temperature or melt of the Greenland icecap.
Phil R makes a claim that temperatures are below average.
You respond by listing the absolute temperature.
I guess it made sense to you.
BTW, 8.8C is still pretty cold. Not much heat to melt the ice.
“BTW, 8.8C is still pretty cold. Not much heat to melt the ice.”
And yet it’s melting quite rapidly!
Regarding the melting of the Greenland icecap an abnormally large area of it is melting.
Meanwhile, off topic, but:
Just took a short shopping trip. Turned on NPT and I hear a conversation about how awesome the democratic socialist party of America is- how it has a great chance of gaining seats in Congress and the cities. Then of course some nasty comments about the evil Republicans, blah, blah, blah. It’s so good that NPR lost its federal funding but they should also lose their name of National Public Radio- which still sounds as if it’s the official radio station of America. More typically, within 20 seconds of turning on NPR I hear some nasty comment about Trump and his administration. All day every day. Maybe some NPR stations in more conservative areas are better, but certainly not in the Northeast. I can pick up 3 of their stations- the worse by far is Albany, NY. I also get one from Amherst, MA and another from the Boston area.
Tune your clock radio to NPR and count the statements of TDS or the logical / economic fallacies. I usually count several within 10 minutes, or so, which is my signal to get up. More reliable than using the snooze alarm.
And little is said about the reasons for Kirk’s murder, wounding of a republican congressman, and two attempts on Trump’s life. If the party of the self-appointed intelligentsia, supporting ‘peace and freedom,’ is going to continuously criticize Trump and religious supporters, they should expect to have some effect. Why else would they engage in the remarks? It is akin to ‘inciting to riot.’
Wait, where is the serial copycat news barrage across platforms?
No matter what happens, it’s caused by climate change and it’s bad.
If you can’t figure out how, you just have to believe harder.
And perhaps clap your hands.
I still don’t get why we vest so much reliance in observed weather conditions comparisons based on our construct of ‘Months’, which natural weather variability has zero connection with.
I mean, our designated ’12 Months in a Year’ construct serves us well to determine what OUR activities might amount to at any given time, but the weather patterns have no such use for what the “coupled, non-linear, chaotic” atmosphere might get up to.
Here. Takes this pill. You are thinking too much and too critically.
Then recite 7 times, “CO2 is evil.”
You will be well on your way to no longer worrying about the truth.
Even worse is mixing Tmax and Tmin into a soup lacking any flavor at all. I would love to know how the assumption that averaging reduces the need for understanding the variance got started in climate science (if not all science).
Story tip / update: The Met Office and RCP8.5 and UKCP18. Comments welcome.
Q: I am writing with regard to the international committee responsible for the official scenarios that feed into climate modelling, and thereby into UKCP18.
You will no doubt be aware that the scenario used has been declared implausible. This is an absolutely huge development in climate science that will have lasting impacts across research and policy. The future is not what it used to be.
Just as RCP8.5 has been ruled as implausible, so have all the Met Office’s climate predictions based upon it. What is the plan to discard the implausible UKCP18 and what will you advise to the Climate Change Committee about RCP8.5s new junk status?
I think we should be told…. Maybe you can get someone on to the BBC to explain it?
Kind regards…
————————————-
R: Met Office Hadley Centre scientists were involved in the scientific paper published by the ScenarioMIP group which has described new scenarios of future climate for use in climate modelling. As part of this, they have ruled that recent real-world developments mean it has become much less likely that emissions will reach the levels in the previous highest emissions pathway, SSP5-8.5. The previous lowest emission scenario, SSP1-1.9, has also been ruled implausible as it is inconsistent with observed trends in the climate.
The Met Office Hadley Centre view is that the ScenarioMIP perspective on an SSP5-8.5 level of emissions becoming highly unlikely is based on sound evidence. However, at present there is not enough evidence to rule the next-highest scenario, SSP3-7.0, as implausible. There is still considerable evidence that a global warming relative to pre-industrial levels of 4°C at the end of the 21st century is a plausible, if unlikely, outcome. It is relevant to include as part of a risk assessment as a potential reasonable worst-case scenario.
The UK Climate Projections (UKCP18) includes a range of emission scenarios, with some projection products based on the RCP8.5 scenario (which has a similar 2100 forcing level as the SSP5-8.5 scenario). For UKCP18 products which use scenarios below RCP8.5, results and conclusions can be used as before. Where studies use UKCP18 products based on RCP8.5 but in the context of global warming levels that reach up to 4°C, results and conclusions can also be used as before. Where studies use UKCP18 products based on RCP8.5, users should be aware that the likelihood of temperatures above 4°C being reached by 2100 has been reduced, and that the rate of temperature rise during the 21st century is expected to be somewhat slower. Whilst the importance of these changes for most users is expected to be modest, because of the long lead-times involved, we have advised users to look towards updating their risk assessments when the UK projections are updated in future. We are currently working on more detailed guidance for UKCP18 users.
The upcoming UK Climate Information (UKCI) projections will likely use two scenarios, informed by the new scenarios from ScenarioMIP. One corresponds roughly to greenhouse gas emissions consistent with current global policy; the other is a higher-emission scenario for contingency planning as a reasonable worst-case scenario. This will be above the current policy scenario but below SSP5-8.5.
Whilst SSP5-8.5 is now considered implausible, it is important to note that higher levels of warming still might be reached if some feedbacks in the climate system turn out to be stronger than current estimates, or there are additional feedbacks not included in typical climate model simulations. The plausibility of future scenarios also changes over time. We cannot rule out that scenarios currently considered implausible could become more likely again in the future. For instance, a widespread return to investment in very high fossil fuel use and back-tracking on current climate policies could increase the likelihood of higher emissions.
Rendering the previous highest-emission scenario implausible is positive news for climate action, however the removal of the lowest-emission scenario also highlights that while current climate policies are moving the world away from the most extreme projected outcomes, this is not yet enough to avoid significant impacts.
Hopefully this reply has addressed your concerns.
I’m giving this some thought. What do you think?
Whilst SSP5-8.5 is now considered implausible, it is important to note that higher levels of warming still might be reached if some feedbacks in the climate system turn out to be stronger than current estimates, or there are additional feedbacks not included in typical climate model simulations.
Straws, clutching etc
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2026/07/04/the-physics-of-the-tropospheric-lapse-rate-refutes-the-radiative-greenhouse-effect/
You posted this on a different thread. I reply there.
And so did I.
With the Met-Office sites being most Class 4 and 5, who knows what amount of warming they can conjure up. !
In other words, we have no reason to change anything.
In other words, they are finally admitting that there are “known unknowns” and possibly even “unknown unknowns” in their models, and the overcertainty they used to profess isn’t there any more. They just can’t admit it directly and still have to obfuscate to try to save the climate crisis.
Suddenly the news has gone dark on Greenland in the press, except for TDS.
Overdue?
Maybe we should perform a C-section. (C as in climate) 😉
I’m starting to see a pattern here. Good data like UAH and Greenland melt really stirs up the troll nest.
“The summer melt has no even begun yet and is already a month overdue.”
Check out the Freya glacier
https://www.foto-webcam.eu/webcam/freya1/2026/07/09/1830
Melt is ahead of previous years on this date, last few days sunny and highs above 10ºC.
Further data from the Polar portal doesn’t support the statement in the OP.
Nice cherry pick.
Freya Glacier is and itsy-bitsy glacier somewhere in the orange circle..
… a small area that is actually losing mass.
The data from the whole of Greenland absolutely supports the headline.
Nice. I commented on the puny glacier above, but I like your comment with the graphic better.
Yet you both ignore the data I posted from the same source as the OP that shows that the melt area exceeds the maximum of the range for this date over the last 30 years!
My comment was a direct response to Bellman’s diagram showing June 2026 global averages and how averages, without a baseline or reference, are misleading at best. Your comment was an ignorant distraction.
Yes, you said this: “At least you got that right. The below average temperatures are below freezing in the south, but the above average temperatures in the north are only below freezing…”
8.8ºC is not ‘below freezing’, not an “ignorant distraction” I was just pointing out your error with actual data!
Forget your losses, look at this shiny penny I just found.
The strong melting is continuing in Greenland contrary to the article.
Too complicated for sheep MPs in Westminster….