http://housesandholes.blogspot.com/
The flurry of news from The Met Office is confusing. In order to make it clear, I have summarized it below.
We originally thought that the past decade would warm quickly, but then natural variability caused by man-made pollution resulted in lower temperatures (as the models predicted.) But we have recently discovered that the natural man-made slow down in temperature is not as great as we originally didn’t predict.
Meanwhile, expect heavy snow and bitter cold again this week caused by Chinese power plants which pump out too much CO2. 2010 didn’t used to be, but is now the hottest year ever.
This is the Met Office at their best, like their classical weather forecasts eg “our supermegacomputer says it will rain or snow, otherwise it will be overcast or sunny” and “it will be cold unless it will be warm”.
Our NWS gives us the same type of forecasts. Totally reliable and useless!
It will be interesting to see Hansen, Romm and the rest of the choir scramble to re-adjust their song sheets—that 2010 is NOT the hottest evah (close, but no cigar) and that the Earth will start to cool because of pollution and CO2—now that the choirmaster of AGW has changed the tune. Every day they’re sounding more like Spike Jones than Mozart.
Mozart? When did they sound like Mozart?
I think they always sounded like Spike Jones playing Philip Glass.
lol, yes, I think that summation is just about right. It’s a form of ventriloquism where they can actually throw their voice from a lower orifice but it appears to be coming from their mouth. But, just so we’re clear, HadCrut has us cooling, not slightly warming in the last decade. http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2000.9/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2000.9/trend
Or does the Met get their information from Hansen?
suyts – it is cooling less than it would have been without warming, iow it is warming.
Why didn’t Ireland use the same solid logic to avoid the bailout, I will never understand.
lol, yes that could have been a win!
Cooling… until they’ve finished cooking the books. They aren’t announcng yet how much adjustment they will have to apply to 1998. I suspect they’ll nudge it down until 2005 is the record in line with GISS. That way it will only be 5 years since the last record temperature instead of 12.
In 2000, GISS bumped 1998 up to make it higher than 1934 in the US. Now the Met Office needs to push 1998 down to make it less than 2005.
Musical chairs to make people believe they are not freezing. In industry, this is known as “accounting fraud.”
I hope it might be a bad move for them to do this. Even climate muggles will suspect that they’re being taken for a ride if the MetOffice pull a record temperature out of the bag this year. I’m wondering if the Met knows that this isn’t going to beat 2005 so they hope to push 1998 into third place without too many people noticing?
Well you would not expect the Met Office to use their own data supplied to CRU. After all they know theirs is wrong.
I should also point out, as we go through the new years, that decadal trend will become more pronounced.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2001/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2001/trend
They keep calling the last decade the hottest ever. I wonder what they will do from 2011?
Second hottest? Hottest century? Hottest since 2008?
They’ll call it the hottest decade on record after natural variations are accounted for.
maybe the fake press release is supposed to be funny but generally people today would read right through it and see nothing wrong.