Skip to content

House Of Commons Library Misleads MP’s

December 14, 2015

By Paul Homewood 


Bishop Hill has an interesting post tonight, Library Manoeuvres.


The opposition have called a debate on the Cumbria floods tomorrow, and so the House of Commons Library has issued a briefing paper to MPs. There’s lot to amuse. For example, I read with interest that:

…there is a general understanding that climate change is likely to be linked to increased winter rain in the UK.

I think it’s fair to say that this is complete drivel. As Richard Betts has quite rightly noted, predictions of UK climate are incredibly difficult because of our geographical position. Most commentators also agree that GCMs are useless when it comes to rainfall. So predictions about UK rainfall are almost impossible to take seriously. The "increased winter rain" story is of course derived from the UKCP09 climate projections, which are so wrong they put even Lord Deben in the shade. The idea that there is a "general understanding" of anything based on this farce of a computer simulation is preposterous.



Two quick comments:


1) Contrary to popular belief, there has been little trend in winter rainfall in the UK, climate change or not, as the Met Office themselves admit.





2) The study, Explaining Extreme Events of 2014 from a Climate Perspective, carried out by the AMS, in conjunction with Met Office scientists, investigated the record winter rainfall of 2013/14, and found that it was the result of atmospheric circulation patterns, with no anthropogenic influence discernible.




It also found:


Consistent with our findings, a larger ensemble of CMIP5 models shows no significant change in rainfall over the United Kingdom during cold seasons until the second half of the century, when wet winters are projected to increase in frequency (van Oldenborgh et al. 2013).


It is shocking that the House of Commons Library, which is supposed to offer factual and impartial advice, should supply MP’s with such misleading and inaccurate information.

  1. December 15, 2015 12:36 am

    The spike at the end of the rainfall graph is all the politicians and media need: big weather “extremes” are the alleged sign of global warming. The extremes have been rising at an eyeball level since 1940. Natural variability and increased measurements be damned. Put a ruler on the graph since 1940, and there you are.

    Cherry-picking is only a bad thing when the cherries someone picks aren’t the ones you would have. (I think this is a sarc.)

  2. John F. Hultquist permalink
    December 15, 2015 5:10 am

    The first principle of the bureaucrats writing about climate and weather is they are allowed to make stuff up. A corollary to the “1st Principle” is that if the first writing is not scary enough – try again. Use a thesaurus and re-write until your grandchildren cry.

  3. Richard111 permalink
    December 15, 2015 8:24 am

    I read recently that the Gulf Stream had ‘weakened’. Would this effect the path of the Atlantic low pressure systems? Scotland seems to be taking a hammering.

  4. December 15, 2015 12:07 pm

    El Nino this year, not every year is an El Nino year…huevon.

  5. Andrew Duffin permalink
    December 15, 2015 12:59 pm

    You might as well engage the Archbishop of Canterbury (the real one, not the blogger) on the scientific reasons why the virgin birth is impossible.

    It doesn’t matter; they aren’t listening. Their power depends on something completely different from facts, data, hypothesis-experiment-conclusion. The dictums of Feynman have no effect on them. Our magic doesn’t work on them any more than theirs does on us.

    Certain things (declining polar bears, more storms, increased rainfall, submerging islands…) are simply “revealed” and pass directly into the uninformed uncritical minds of the gullible public.

    Damned if I know what we can do about it, but that seems to be how things are.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: