Skip to content

Met Office’s Amazing Admission

November 24, 2012

By Paul Homewood




Last month, I corresponded with the UK Met Office regarding some of the errors they had made in responding to the Mail on Sunday’s report that global warming had stopped 15 years ago. One issue, that I raised, concerned the end of the last La Nina episode, which they claimed was still influencing temperatures in August 2012, despite the ENSO index showing that La Nina conditions ended in February, and that El Nino conditions had existed since then.


(Full story here)


I made the point that HADCRUT showed a global temperature increase of 0.32C between February and August this year.


They replied

Please also note also that there are many factors which impact global temperature, in addition to the state of the ENSO cycle. The natural climate variability dominates any changes in global temperature values over timescales of a few months or years.”


So, according to them, an increase of 0.32C is due to “natural climate variability “.

HADCRUT figures also show that global temperature anomalies increased from 0.09C in 1980 to 0.40C in 2011, an increase of 0.31C. Presumably this too, then, could be due to “natural climate variability”.

  1. November 25, 2012 12:37 am

    It’s the same as trying to have a logical fact based discussion with a liberal. You mind as well punt instead.

  2. November 25, 2012 10:32 am

    The hiatus in warming this century has also been ascribed to “natural variability” by the MET and others, as you know. If “natural variability” applies year-to-year, and also applies over at least a decade, logic and common sense dictate that it’s always occurring. It must have been in operation over the “global warming” decades at the end of the last century, yet we’re told that the warming was entirely anthropogenic. Earlier slight cooling has been ascribed to the effect of aerosols, which have also been blamed (rather lamely) for the recent cooling. I’m not the first to comment on these inconveniences for the climate fraternity, but there’s something rotten here, and it’s not just “in the state of Denmark” as Shakespeare had it.

  3. Brian H permalink
    November 26, 2012 6:30 am

    Definition: Natural variability is anything that muddies the purity of the Message. Scrub-a-Dub-Dub; Thirty-Three men in a Tub

    The fudgers are hard at work, but it’s not working.

  4. November 26, 2012 9:00 pm

    Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings.

  5. March 27, 2013 2:20 am

    The HadCRUT4 figures are pretty overwhelming. Can you give me a clue as to where I should start looking in the dataset to confirm the 0.31C increase that you refer to? Thanks in advance.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: