69

Was 2023 REALLY the second hottest year since 1884?

Iain Davis

According to the UK Met Office, 2023 was the second hottest year in the UK since 1884.

Quite obviously, this is complete nonsense. Unless they are troglodytes that never venture out in daylight, why would anyone in the UK believe such absurd drivel?

The Met Office states:

2023 is provisionally the second warmest year for the UK according to mean temperature. [. . .] 2023’s provisional mean temperature of 9.97°C puts it just behind 2022’s figure of 10.03°C and ahead of 2014’s 9.88°C.

Right, it’s “provisional” drivel.

The UK summer of 2023—where I live—was a thoroughly miserable affair. We had a few weeks of decent sunshine in the spring and a couple of hot weeks of Indian summer. That was it!

The rest of it was cold, wet and comprehensively devoid of anything we might traditionally call “summer.” The winter preceding and following it wasn’t particularly cold, but nor was it unusually warm.

I’m knocking on a bit and can remember about 50 years of my life. I know, for a fact, that I have lived through many warmer years. Sure, this is anecdotal, but I haven’t completely taken leave of my senses and I still have a functioning memory. No way am I unquestioningly buying the Met Office’s silly claim.

Neither do I believe any of the legacy media reports trying to convince me that the Met Office’s preposterous assertion is evidence of an alleged climate crisis. It simply isn’t true, so it is not “evidence” of anything at all. Although it does suggest deception.

The Met Office—obviously unreliably—tells us “UK mean temperatures have been shifting over the decades as a result of human-induced climate change. [. . .] 2023’s provisional mean temperature of 9.97°C puts it just behind 2022’s figure of 10.03°C.”

For a start, “human induced climate change,” or Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), is a questionable and unproven scientific theory, not scientific fact. This too is just another claim from the Met Office which it wrongly asserts as fact.

The Met Office also tells us that “sunshine was near-average for much of the UK.” If we have got this right, the Met Office is claiming that, with average hours of UK sunshine in 2023—which also seems pretty dubious to me—somehow, since 1884, the only year that has been “hotter” was 2022. Which doesn’t ring true either.

What’s going on?

What does the Met Office mean—pardon the pun—by “mean temperature”? It reports that its 2023 alleged “provisional mean temperature of 9.97°C” had been obtained via the HadUK-Grid data set. The Met Office also cites its 2023 rapid attribution study. It is from this that we can—eventually—glean how the “UK mean temperature” is calculated by the Met Office.

In its rapid attribution study, the Met Office states:

Observed values of the UK annual mean temperature are obtained from the HadUK-Grid dataset v1.2.0.0. The time series spans 1884 – 2023, with the 2023 values being provisional as of 2nd January 2024.

“Observed,” that’s what we want to hear. So what observations are reported in the HadUK-Grid dataset? The Met Office claims:

HadUK-Grid is a collection of gridded climate variables derived from the network of UK land surface observations.

If we look at the HadUK-Grid methodology, the Met Office adds:

The gridded data sets are based on the archive of UK weather observations held at the Met Office.

So far so good. The HadUK-Grid reportedly records real data, such as sunshine hours, rainfall and even temperature. We live in hope. Unfortunately, there is some caveats. The Met Office continues:

The methods used to generate the daily grids are described in more detail in [this] report.

OK. So beyond just recording real-world data, what are the “methods” outlined in said report?

[. . .] the Met Office climate data archive [. . .] contains a simplified version of the raw observations generated according to well-defined rules. [. . .] Mean temperature [. . .] is the average of the maximum and minimum temperatures.

At last we have a definition of the “mean temperature” the Met Office claims to be the second highest since 1884. Apparently, it is “generated according to well-defined rules.”

In Met Office speak “mean temperature” isn’t the actual arithmetic mean of daily temperatures but rather the “average” of minimum and maximum temperatures recorded between 09:00 and 21:00 on any given day. Begging the question how are the minimum and maximum UK temperatures “observed”?

Although the data ha[s] undergone some quality checking, the extent and effectiveness of this has changed through time since the 1960’s. [. . .] NCIC climate data analysis software was again used to create the gridded data. [. . .] The station data were normalised with respect to the monthly 1km x 1km gridded 1961-1990 climate normals described by Perry and Hollis (2005a).

So the minimum and maximum allegedly “observed” 2023 “mean UK temperature” wasn’t actually observed at all. It was calculated from normalised data using computers running software based upon the “climate normals” defined in Perry and Hollis (2005).

The related paper considered how to calculate long term averages (LTAs) and suggested a methodology by which “mean” temperatures could be calculated:

For air temperature, 1490 stations reported at some point between 1961 and 2000 but only an average of 560 of these were open at any one time. This gives an array which is 38% complete. [. . .] [T]he solution is to fill in the gaps using an appropriate estimation technique. [. . .] Once the gaps in the array have been filled, long term averages for the periods 1961-1990, 1971-2000 and 1991-2000 can be calculated for each station from the complete array. [. . .] The regression model parameters provide an estimation of [. . .] the UK climate, explaining between 29% and 94% of the variance in the data depending on the climate variable.

Potentially, up to 62% of the data forming the Met Office’s “Mean UK temperature” is “generated” by “fill[ing] in the gaps.” This is based upon an “estimation technique” which supposedly explains between “29% and 94% of the variance in the data depending on the climate variable.” This doesn’t mean that the estimated fill-ins are inaccurate but they cannot be called “observations” either.

We seem to be moving further away from empirical science. Surely the Met Office isn’t claiming that it knows what the average UK “provisional” mean temperature was in 2023 based upon such limited observations? With regard to how it interprets the HadUK-Grid dataset the Met Office states:

The HadUK-Grid dataset is produced on a 1km x 1km grid resolution on the Ordnance Survey’s National Grid. To facilitate comparison of the observational dataset with the UKCP18 climate projections [. . .]. All the gridded datasets use the same grid projection. The re-gridding is conducted through averaging of all 1km grid points that fall within each of the coarser resolution grid cells.

Whoa there! We already know that the “observational dataset” is created by “fill[ing] in the gaps”—around a 60% gap apparently—with computer modelled estimates. Now we are told some sort of “re-gridding” is necessary to “facilitate comparison” with UKCP18 climate projections. Why is that necessary?

The UK Met Office adds:

Area averages are also produced based on averaging the 1km grid [data] across a set of geographical regions to provide spatial statistics for country, administrative regions and river basins. The details of these areas can be found in the UKCP18 guidance notes.

Now we’ve got “spacial statistics,” instead of empirical measurements, based upon “area averages” that facilitate, for some unknown reason, comparison with “UKCP18 climate projections.” OK, so how are the “area averages” constructed in accordance with the UKCP18 guidance notes:

Before using [UKCP18 guidance notes], it is important to understand the assumptions made, the caveats and limitations and the appropriate use of the results.

Assumptions made, caveats and limitations! What bloody assumptions, caveats and limitations? Just measure the temperature and calculate some sort of meaningful average for crying out loud!

Let’s look at the caveats and limitations:

Our understanding and ability to simulate the climate is advancing all the time but our climate models are not able to represent all of the features seen in the present day real climate and there are still limitations in our ability to project 21st century weather and climate.

Why are the Met Office “generating” temperature datasets to “facilitate comparison” with climate models if those models “are not able to represent all of the features seen in the present day real climate.” Surely the models should be based upon the empirically observed and measured features of the “real climate,” as opposed to creating “area averages”containing “spacial statistics” to fit in with the models?

Almost unbelievably, this is evidently what the UK Met Office is doing:

The relative probabilities indicate how strongly the evidence from models and observations, taken together in our methodology, support alternative future climate outcomes. [. . .] The probabilities are conditioned on methodological choices and expert judgement. The results may change if a different methodology is used.

In essence, the Met Office uses a tortuous and unnecessarily convoluted methodology to make up the bulk of its UK “temperature” data. While the Met Office claims that the provisional UK mean temperature was for 2023 was 9.97°C it also states that its results might change “if a different methodology” was used.

What’s more, the data it uses is normalised, based upon a wide gamut of climate assumptions, in order to fit in with its own climate models. Again, it admits its so-called observations, of things like mean temperature, are “taken together in [its] methodology” expressly in order to “simulate the climate.”

Most of these modelling shenanigans are utterly superfluous if your objective is to calculate the arithmetic mean annual UK temperature. Of course anomalies, such as heat islands, need to be normalised in the data but the rest of the Met Office’s “methodology,” which doesn’t even attempt to calculate an arithmetic mean temperature anyway, is about as far removed from empirical science as it is possible to venture.

Inevitably, it produces completely meaningless pap. The problem with such allegedly “scientific” rubbish is that, rather than being laughed off, it is then taken seriously by millions—thanks the unquestioning propaganda reports of the legacy media—and used to advance policy agendas, such as Net Zero.

Apart from the fact that it is blatantly obvious, to anyone who has lived in the UK from more that a couple of decades, that 2023 was not a warm year, there are other notable reasons not to automatically trust the Met Office’s makey-uppy “climate science.” Its entire claim is reliant upon the HadUK-Grid dataset which is a project funded by the UK government. As is the Met Office itself.

Apparently, the UK government is irreversibly committed to UN Sustainable Development and the associated UK Net Zero policies. The Met Office’s alleged scientific “observations” suffer from an enormous financial conflict of interest. Providing any evidence that contradicts the notion of “unprecedented global warming” couldn’t be further removed from the Met Office’s and the UK government’s own declared interests.

There is absolutely no reason to believe any of it. As “science” goes, it’s complete junk. I’ve read comics with more credibility that the Met Office’s claim that 2023 was the second warmest year in the UK since 1884.

Pull the the other one, it’s got bells on it.

SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN

If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.

For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.

Categories: climate change, latest, UK
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

69 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
joep
joep
Jun 5, 2024 2:04 PM

Water vapor in the atmosphere is an important determinant of the greenhouse effect. Water vapor is an important greenhouse gas. The global temperature increase allows the atmosphere to absorb more water vapor. This creates a strengthening greenhouse effect, a so-called back (or co-) coupling effect. The eruption of the Hunga Tonga volcano in January 2022 will again have a significant impact. The water vapor (60,000 Olympic swimming pools), which ended up in the stratosphere due to the eruption of the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai volcano in the island state located to the east of Australia, can will have a significant influence on the weather in vast areas of the Earth over the next 5 to 8 years, varying from temperature and precipitation to cloud cover and the course of high and low pressure areas. This is what researchers from Australia’s University of New South Wales and the Australian Bureau of Meteorology… Read more »

Doly
Doly
Jan 21, 2024 12:54 PM

It isn’t troglodytes living in caves that believe the Met office, it’s more like Mithraists worshipping in caves. But I appreciate that interest in ancient religion is rather niche. We have arrived at that time, and we must reach that high ground. Again, I’m not expecting you to be able to make sense of the blindingly obvious, which is: the Met office know their job, which is recording and predicting the weather and the climate. You, on the other hand, have chosen to ignore the facts about climate change. Climate change is more extreme weather both in summer and in winter. It just gets a bit more extreme in summer, which skews the average to hotter. But please do focus on the winter as well, because the cold can bite a lot, especially with broken windows. And yeah, there could be a lot of broken windows when people get frustrated… Read more »

Dave
Dave
Feb 12, 2024 7:18 AM
Reply to  Doly

Rubbish. Mithraists were perfectly aware of the cosmos and highly adapt in understanding and interpreting it. It’s all about looking outside, then taking it inside.

Graeme
Graeme
Jan 21, 2024 7:59 AM

Ha….. prior to around the 1950’s, the smoke and smog of London and other industrialised city would have prevented many Poms ever experiencing a fine sunny day. This had to have had a large bearing on measured temperatures as direct sunlight to the ground would have been rare……like having a volcanic eruption blocking out the sun. Temperature measurements around cities prior to the air cleanup should NOT be compared directly to temperatures measure in clean air. Also….do they take into account the heat sink effect of cities/roads/roofs etc. They are not comparing apples with apples……,but don’t let that get in the way of sensationalism.

Voltaria Voltaire
Voltaria Voltaire
Feb 3, 2024 1:29 AM
Reply to  Graeme

Hi Graeme, I like your reasoning. You have to compare alike things to gage statistics accurately. But yeah, I remember those horrid smoke stacks. What do you suppose they do with them now? Well, after they became illegal they still had to store the crap rather than send it up the smoke stacks. Then when it got TOO much to store they decided to covertly market it to the military in a slimy sleezy way of saying it is going to save us all a little longer from this dasterdly impending situation called climate change. But keep it top secret and don’t tell anyone because they might object to the pollution being sprayed all across their skies, that they already outlawed. They market it as being just as “safe” and “effective” as volcanic ash for cooling down the planet. Problem is, it’s just another poison designed to kill us and… Read more »

Thom 9
Thom 9
Jan 19, 2024 4:44 AM

Global warming is a carbon based tax scam designed to work in conjunction with their great reset plans to rob you of everything ie. your rights, dignity, sanity, property and family.etc. for “their” greater good so “you’ll own nothing and be happy”.
In “their” wildest dreams.
Cue “Us and Them” by Pink Floyd

The Fleecer
The Fleecer
Jan 18, 2024 1:26 AM

Keep up the good work. We must all question the scam and make others do so wherever possible

Paul Cardin
Paul Cardin
Jan 15, 2024 2:59 PM

The iPaper vomited “global boiling” all over its front page, knowing that we don’t need to buy the shite to see the fakery. Must be true, eh, guys?

Freecus
Freecus
Jan 15, 2024 1:51 PM

It’s a case of Geoengineering driven Climate Change.
The public-private patents go back decades and show a clear militarized intent to dominate the Natural world. We do not consent.

Grafter
Grafter
Jan 15, 2024 12:53 PM

The Met Office where ‘weather forecasts’ are turned into ‘weather warnings’.
 😂  😂  😂  😂  😂  😂 

Literally nobody
Literally nobody
Jan 15, 2024 11:43 AM

2nd hottest
1st most expensive… likely

HotScot
HotScot
Jan 15, 2024 10:54 AM

The Stevenson screen was developed in 1864.

It wasn’t adopted by the Met. Office until 1884.

“This design was adopted by the British Meteorological Office and eventually other national services, such as Canada.” (Wikipedia, my emphasis).

In other words, any claims of “Since records began” referring to any meaningful period before the 20th Century are just bollox.

Sea surface temperatures were still being measured from water collected in canvas buckets (wooden buckets float) tossed over the side of ships to no defined depth, restricted almost exclusively to well plied trade routes. With no reason to venture into the Southern Ocean it was, and still is, for the most part, avoided by shipping.

Molybdenum
Molybdenum
Jan 15, 2024 9:47 AM

Polly St George (amazingpolly.net) did a very good 3-part exposé of Jordan Peterson last year. Post comment button wouldn’t work with links so trying just titles to look up (BitChute)

JORDAN PETERSON’S WEF DREAMS

LISTEN BUCKO, PETERSON IS CONTROLLED OP – ANSWER COMMENTS & GOING IN TO MORE DETAIL

SURPRISE! JORDAN PETERSON’S “ARC” WAS BUILT FOR (AND BY) BILLIONAIRES

MattC
MattC
Jan 15, 2024 6:58 AM

Polar air has caused very low temperatures in the USA accompanied by deep snow in many places, while in the U.K. even the Biased Broadcasting Clowns are writing about cold weather payments. But we have been told that the World is now entering the era of global boiling, so if all the polar ice is melting then just where has all that cold air been hiding?

underground poet
underground poet
Jan 15, 2024 2:39 PM
Reply to  MattC

The north and south poles silly, and then when those areas heat up(for some reason), that cold air temporarily plunges to areas outside is natural domain. Climate change is about weather extremes, not about where it has been hiding.

MattC
MattC
Jan 15, 2024 8:28 PM

Like the scam itself – utter B0llocks

Brian Baugh
Brian Baugh
Jan 21, 2024 2:37 PM

If its all about weather extremes than whats the big fuss? According to you our climate remains the same basically with a few really hot or a few really cold days thrown in. Oh shiver me timbers!
The fact of the matter is its all a big lie. Science is not about consensus. It takes someone breaking outside the consensus to make the discoveries and now when someone does that they get deplatformed, canceled and death threats. And the left applauds it!

mgeo
mgeo
Jan 15, 2024 6:30 AM

“climate change.. is a questionable.. scientific theory”
Actually, if you want to keep your job in many places, you cannot question it.

Dave
Dave
Feb 12, 2024 7:20 AM
Reply to  mgeo

Well, you can (internally). Oh, and there is still something like truth. Why keep working for deception? Maybe, in the end, not a good choice.

Sunface Jack
Sunface Jack
Jan 15, 2024 4:24 AM

Absolutely right Iain. Drivel.
The UK is where it started in 2008 and it hasn’t stopped. Climatic Research Unit at the
University of East Anglia.
Andrew Montford’s report exposed the rubbish.

Brian Baugh
Brian Baugh
Jan 21, 2024 2:39 PM
Reply to  Sunface Jack

Hide the decline! I was foolish enough to think when that was exposed, it was over for the chicken little crowd. But no. They are shameless and we have a media that has taken sides.

Penelope
Penelope
Jan 15, 2024 3:58 AM

“The greatest expansion of life on Earth occurred 540 million years ago, when CO2 was at its peak. Atmospheric CO2 levels were more than 15 times higher than they are now. Corals and shellfish evolved during that time. If ocean acidification was a real problem, there would have been no sea life, rather than a massive expansion of life in the oceans..”

https://realclimatescience.com/there-is-no-climate-crisis/#gsc.tab=0

les online
les online
Jan 15, 2024 1:33 AM

“It’s real meat for me, vatgoo & bugs for thee !” (Billionaire’s saying)…

https://www.sott.net/article/487821-zuckerberg-beefs-up-again-billionaire-raising-prime-cows-on-island-retreat

A few more of those (DEW ?) Hawaiian ‘wildfires’ and the billionaires
will have the better parts of the islands for their ‘Retreats”…

ChairmanDrusha
ChairmanDrusha
Jan 15, 2024 12:05 AM

Why was the last UK summer a “thoroughly miserable affair”? Is it like here in NZ (and many other places in the world) where whenever there is a patch of blue sky they fill it with poisonous spray?

Clea
Clea
Jan 15, 2024 7:16 AM
Reply to  ChairmanDrusha

It basically rained from March, overcast constantly, any blue sky immediately covered with those ‘contrails’ from planes we’ve been told we’ve been seeing for years, that merrily criss cross each other in the sky as passenger planes do…

ChairmanDrusha
ChairmanDrusha
Jan 15, 2024 7:44 AM
Reply to  Clea

Yep, that’s exactly how our current summer is playing out.

Clea
Clea
Jan 15, 2024 8:56 AM
Reply to  ChairmanDrusha

We’re in a dry and still cold spell at the moment and can see the actual old fashioned contrails for a change. The new ones don’t seem to take in this sort of weather, which is something I suppose.

NickM
NickM
Jan 15, 2024 10:24 AM
Reply to  Clea

Those “old fashioned contrails” are merely the misty breath of a jet engine. Smoke and steam: as old fashioned as Puffing Billy loco-motive (Latin, place-changer) but breathing faster and higher up..

Voltaria Voltaire
Voltaria Voltaire
Feb 3, 2024 1:49 AM
Reply to  Clea

I think they changed the ingredients consistency in the last couple months. The trails are sometimes different. Maybe they are trying to be more covert due to less people being willing to normalize them. But it seems like when they do a ton of them it’s warmer for few days after. Like being under a blanket when you would prefer fresh air. The sun feels very weird too. Not good like it used to when I was younger and just wanted to soak it up because it felt so good. The plants are sure to be protesting that junk too. Crazy genocidal billionaires. What could be done with all that money if it wasn’t pegged for killing!!!!!

niko
niko
Jan 14, 2024 11:23 PM

comment image

niko
niko
Jan 14, 2024 11:19 PM

comment image

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Jan 15, 2024 2:51 AM
Reply to  niko

Every purchase must be personal.
Its prohibited to buy something to another person which cannot be tracked and it will be punished by the penalty law.
Jamal must wait until she get 4 digits, and Jane must wait until the government unfreeze her account.
Im sorry, but that’s the rules.

By the way, if both Jane and Jamal are so stupid they want to buy lab-grown Pfizer apples, a little waiting time is not unjustified. Go hungry children.

Thom Crewz
Thom Crewz
Jan 18, 2024 1:21 AM
Reply to  Erik Nielsen

By the way, if both Jane and Jamal are so stupid they want to buy lab-grown Pfizer apples..

They won’t have a choice, will they?

Brian Baugh
Brian Baugh
Jan 21, 2024 2:45 PM
Reply to  Erik Nielsen

Pretty sure Jamal is a he. Another layer in the 2030 cake.

niko
niko
Jan 14, 2024 11:19 PM

comment image

niko
niko
Jan 14, 2024 11:05 PM

comment image

niko
niko
Jan 15, 2024 12:08 AM
Reply to  niko

comment image

niko
niko
Jan 14, 2024 10:49 PM

comment image

niko
niko
Jan 14, 2024 10:51 PM
Reply to  niko

comment image

niko
niko
Jan 14, 2024 10:46 PM

comment image

niko
niko
Jan 14, 2024 10:44 PM

comment image

les online
les online
Jan 14, 2024 10:39 PM

Why are They continually going after the unvaxxed ?
Is it because there’s more unvaxxed than claimed ?

Or, are They really going after the unvaxxed ? Could
it be – if there were no unvaxxed They would invent
the unvaxxed…
I mean, every morality play requires A Devil / Evil
(real or imaginary) to reinforce The Message…
(Without Moriarty’s malign influence lurking
in the background would the Sherlock Homes tales
have made much sense ?)…
(And if you claim the unvaxxed are any brainier than
The Other Lot remember, even smugness becomes a
trap of ones own making – even your smugness can be
used to seduce you)…

Veri Tas
Veri Tas
Jan 14, 2024 10:06 PM

CO2-driven climate change is another con!

comment image

The whole article is worth a read, especially since it quotes NASA even confirming the good news.

On the other hand, the regional disturbed weather conditions may very well be driven by the military and BigBiz in cahoots with our governments to further their well-known agenda.

Here are just some Australian companies in on it:
https://tottnews.com/2018/06/25/australian-companies-manipulating-our-weather/

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Jan 14, 2024 10:47 PM
Reply to  Veri Tas

See all that water around on the Atlas?
Our drinking water comes from the Sea via evaporation. Heating up, cooling down, rain.

niko
niko
Jan 14, 2024 10:05 PM

comment image

Johnny
Johnny
Jan 14, 2024 11:09 PM
Reply to  niko

That says it all.

Molybdenum
Molybdenum
Jan 14, 2024 9:26 PM

Hello, I’m still pending and seemingly can’t now comment on previous article so checking in here to see what happens.

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Jan 15, 2024 1:08 AM
Reply to  Molybdenum

You had one comment in spam. It’s out now. A2

Todd Hayen
Todd Hayen
Jan 14, 2024 8:33 PM

But they said, didn’t they? So it must be true. Officials have no reason to lie, right?

underground poet
underground poet
Jan 14, 2024 10:04 PM
Reply to  Todd Hayen

Once you get to the top of the pyramid, you have every reason to lie.

Even when you tell the truth.

David McBain
David McBain
Jan 14, 2024 8:23 PM

It seems that the Met Office has been hiring Eskimos.

sandy
sandy
Jan 14, 2024 7:59 PM

After the LOCKDOWN, what was general skepticism of academia has been x-ray’d into a an ideological factory for corporate societal intellectual engineering. What existed pre-1980 from individual instructors bears no resememblance to what i hear of academia in 2024. If i were in college now, knowing what i know, i’d probably be thrown out for questioning every class/authority i felt needs open debate. Among those are Climate and the history of our HOT planet. We are now well below average temps for the last 500 years. This graph shows that. 25,000 years ago there was 128 feet of ice over Manhattan. Planning for the next 1000 years is way more complex than the CC trash being thrown at us by academia, and leveraged by predatory capitalism to lock Humanity down under their Rat Kings empire. The CC-GR hyper-preemptive lockdown is a mirror of the hyper-preemptive vaxx-mask-distancing LOCKDOWN. Everything they do… Read more »

semaj
semaj
Jan 14, 2024 7:54 PM

I wish the warming bollocks was true, how I would love more summers of ’76 before I die.

NickM
NickM
Jan 15, 2024 10:37 AM
Reply to  semaj

’76 in London was too hot for me; and I came from South Africa.

’74 in London was when my Lab Assistant asked my opinion on the predicted New Ice Age.

rubberheid
rubberheid
Jan 15, 2024 4:36 PM
Reply to  semaj

i miss the melting tar on bare feet and the smell of a summer shower on said tar, or even the smell of a good sun-tan.

that was normal as a child, and winters where we made snowmen and ice-slide “pile-ups”.

i don’t recall any metled tar pavements last summer and the snow never lasts long, if it ever falls…

George Mc
George Mc
Jan 14, 2024 7:10 PM

Iain, after that title, all you had to say was:

No.

ariel
ariel
Jan 14, 2024 6:55 PM

WHAT IT REALLY MEANS is ‘They are MAKING IT ALL UP,’ just like ‘covid’ and ‘democracy,’ and a good few other things. I too remember a few actual long hot summers, and understand that they have ‘heat islands’ next to the the runway when Typhoons are taking off on afterburners.

Paul Watson
Paul Watson
Jan 14, 2024 5:59 PM

Another global scam full of estimates and modelling.
I also live in the UK and summer was non existent.
Might have been hot at Heathrow airport where they are always announcing record temperatures but 2nd hottest year since 1884…..total bollocks..

ThinkTwice
ThinkTwice
Jan 14, 2024 6:34 PM
Reply to  Paul Watson

Right, summer was cold.

Gordon Cheyne
Gordon Cheyne
Jan 14, 2024 11:45 PM
Reply to  Paul Watson

So it was hotter in 1884, What’s the problem?

Sean Veeda
Sean Veeda
Jan 14, 2024 5:50 PM

It may be junk, but the mainstream will report it and credit the Met Office as the source, so everyone will believe it.

In addition to the junk above, they didn’t have runways and jet engines blasting hot air on the thermometers back in 1884.

Simon
Simon
Jan 14, 2024 4:24 PM

Guys, your Cloudflare problem is back. Have you changed your security config again?

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Jan 14, 2024 10:41 PM
Reply to  Simon

Just be friend with the Cloud and do what it says. Then everything is fine. AI and IoT likes you.

Johnny
Johnny
Jan 14, 2024 10:53 PM
Reply to  Simon

Outside interference?
Wouldn’t put it past the prick$.

Simon
Simon
Jan 15, 2024 2:42 PM
Reply to  Simon

Seems to be fixed now, thanks.

Thom Crewz
Thom Crewz
Jan 18, 2024 1:29 AM
Reply to  Simon

CF is on the WEF list. Their job has been and will be to impliment a system that will ban you from entering websites unless you drop your privacy guard, after that it will start demanding your real I.D, just so you know.

Kernow gurl
Kernow gurl
Jan 14, 2024 4:22 PM

Thanks Iain, just say “1976” to people of a certain age – ha ha ha.

semaj
semaj
Jan 14, 2024 7:59 PM
Reply to  Kernow gurl

Just posted re 76 but its disappeared just like many of my posts.

DavidF
DavidF
Jan 15, 2024 6:16 AM
Reply to  Kernow gurl

That was a great Summer. I was building a hotrod with my mate in Kent, Frampton was Showing Me The Way and the girls were pretty in their cutdowns. Bring it back !