Skip to content

CET Baselines

January 3, 2017

By Paul Homewood 





The CET is always based on anomalies from a 1961-90 baseline. This goes against normal WMO procedures, which say the latest 30 yr period should be used, ie 1981-2010.

We can speculate why!


But Neil Catto coincidentally prepared this graph for me earlier, which shows the difference if 1981-2010 had been used.


UKMO CET Anomalies[321]


Put simply. the 1981-2010 period averaged 0.49C warmer than 1961-90. So when the Met Office says that 2016 was 0.83C warmer than average, they really mean that it was 0.34C warmer than 1981-2010.


The current 30-year average is 10.14C. Against that, last year was only 0.2C warmer.

  1. David Richardson permalink
    January 3, 2017 6:18 pm

    Smoke and Mirrors comes to mind. Lies, damned lies and …………….

  2. January 3, 2017 6:28 pm

    The period 61-90 was a particularly cold one for CET.
    I suspect that 51-80 or 41-70 would be warmer.

  3. January 3, 2017 6:38 pm

    The Met Office definition is conveniently whatever the Met Office says it is.

  4. January 3, 2017 6:58 pm

    As ever GreenBubbleworld output PR over truth

  5. 1saveenergy permalink
    January 3, 2017 7:59 pm

    Xmetman’s site has a lot on CET + loads more…. well worth subscribing to.

  6. tom0mason permalink
    January 3, 2017 8:03 pm

    Yes the cold of that era helps to dramatize the tiny warming that has been seen since. Thank to Paul and Neil Catto for having yet another reason to sell off the Met Office!

    By the way the winter of 1879 was extremely cold, as seen on the chart, and ushered in most of a year of below average temperatures. For anyone that is interested GavsWeatherVids has a full analysis of that period at, he also has a few very helpful links for historic weather. Also his weekly, monthly, and seasonal forecast highlight how often the models get the weather pattern completely wrong when looking beyond a few days.

    • January 4, 2017 9:29 am

      1879 was also the year the original Tay Bridge blew down.

      ‘On the evening of 28 December 1879, a violent storm (10 to 11 on the Beaufort scale) was blowing virtually at right angles to the bridge. Witnesses said the storm was as bad as any they had seen in the 20–30 years they had lived in the area; one called it a ‘hurricane’, as bad as a typhoon he had seen in the China Sea.’

  7. January 3, 2017 8:45 pm

    Pop over to Prof Judith Curry’s site to read about her early retirement from the uni *

    and there is a very interesting spiel about renewable tech
    .. That you read forward whereas they normally give in to you backwards.
    It’s quite funny.

    * Summary
    “I have no plans to join the Trump administration (ha ha).

    Technically, my resignation is a retirement event”

    “I’m ‘cashing out’ with 186 published journal articles and two books.”

    “The reward system that is in place for university faculty members is becoming increasingly counterproductive to actually educating students to be able to think and cope in the real world”

    “How young scientists are to navigate all this is beyond me, and it often becomes a battle of scientific integrity versus career suicide.”
    (“I can think of several who made it to the top”, commented Schrodinger’s Cat)

    “I no longer know what to say to students and postdocs regarding how to navigate the CRAZINESS in the field of climate science. ”

    “We’ll see how all this plays out, but I figured I’ve earned the right to explore and do what I want.”

  8. xmetman permalink
    January 4, 2017 6:12 pm

    You can use graphs and statistics to prove just about anything with the CET series as Dave Richardson says. Here’s a bit of a tongue-in-cheek article that illustrates exactly what I mean, and I guarantee that I have included graphs in it to please everyone, be they skeptic, believer or agnostic like me.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: