Edinburgh Will Be As Hot As Paris In 2050
By Paul Homewood
.
And they wonder why climate science is such a laughing stock!
This is from the Scottish Herald, but has also been widely reported elsewhere:
.
EDINBURGH’s climate will be more like Paris’ by 2050, according to an analysis which illustrates the impacts of global warming on major cities.
An evaluation of the world’s 520 major cities by the Crowther Lab, a scientific facility in Zurich, indicated more than three-quarters will experience a striking change in climate conditions by 2050 compared with today.
It found more than a fifth (22 per cent), including Kuala Lumpur and Singapore, will experience unprecedented conditions that major conurbations have not seen before.
London’s climate in 2050 will be more similar to Barcelona’s current conditions, while Edinburgh’s will be more like Paris is now. Glasgow’s future climate was compared to Cardiff.
The researchers said pairing up cities in this way can help people visualise the impact of climate change in their own lives.
For example, London could face the kind of extreme drought conditions that hit Barcelona in 2008, with severe implications for the Spanish city’s population and major economic costs from importing £20 million of drinking water.
The predictions are based on an “optimistic” scenario where action is taken to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
Jean-Francois Bastin, lead author of the research paper, said: “History has repeatedly shown us that data and facts alone do not inspire humans to change their beliefs or act.
“The intangible nature of reporting on climate change fails to adequately convey the urgency of the issue – for example, it is hard to envision how 2C of warming, or changes in average temperature by 2100 might impact daily life.
“With this analysis from Crowther Lab scientists, we want to help people visualise the impact of climate change in their own city, within their lifetime.”
The study, published in the journal PLOS One, suggests summers and winters in Europe will get warmer, with average increases of 3.5C and 4.7C respectively – equivalent to a city shifting 1,000km (620 miles) further south.
Meanwhile back in the real world:
Summer temperatures in Scotland have barely increased since the 1940s, and significantly have not risen at all in the last decade:
.
:
And winter temperatures have hardly changed at all in the last century:
.
And the suggestion that England will run out of water is patently absurd:
.
There is not the slightest chance that these projections will come true. How this junk science gets through peer review is not only a mystery, but also a shameful stain on the reputation of genuine scientists in other fields.
Meanwhile a complicit media fails to do its job of exposing the scam.
Shame on the lot of them.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Reblogged this on Climate Collections.
Maybe publishing real data before the government shuts it down or at least print it off to have proof. The data I found in Canada for my area shows no increase in average temperature
What with Theresa May steaming full ahead with zero CO2 emission agenda:
https://m.uk.investing.com/news/economy-news/britain-to-order-ships-with-zero-emission-technology-from-2025-1914536
we have very credible evidence that mankind contributes 0.01 deg Celsius per 100 years:
https://notrickszone.com/2019/07/11/physicists-clouds-practically-control-climate-whereas-human-warming-amounts-to-0-01c-per-100-years
and that there are many other papers at odds with this Settled Science, just on 2019:
https://notrickszone.com/2019/06/17/consensus-200-new-2019-papers-support-a-skeptical-position-on-climate-alarmism
And there are many from earlier years!
The quicker she goes the better.
And we are not even allowed to discuss this on the BBC.
I’d be more likely to believe a headline which says “Giant Pigs Will Be Flying From Heathrow by 2050”.
The real world data, like snow cover extent, shows nothing much is happening. Sorry Scots, you will still need long johns under your kilts.
Meanwhile, back in the real world, my tartan mankini is still gathering dust in the wardrobe waiting for an airing during the avalanche of barbecue summers that we’re supposed to be enjoying in God’s own country. With a solar minimum and the AMO turning negative I would expect Paris to feel more like Edinburgh come 2050. As for we poor Jocks, we’ll be shivering in our sporrans.
‘EDINBURGH’s climate will be more like Paris’ by 2050, according to an analysis which illustrates the impacts of global warming on major cities.’
And this will be really, really bad. Wait . . . why would this be bad? Why wouldn’t this be really, really good ???
It is really good. Famous Scotch Whiskey will be supplemented by excellent Scotch Wine. Avoid French counterfeits!
Edinburgh and Glasgow are separated by a mere 50 miles yet, by 2050, one will have the climate of Paris and the other Cardiff….. Looks like climate change is going to cause some massive and rapid tectonic shifts after all! Its even worse than we thought. (I had better write “sarc off” since I am a new poster).
This genuinely creased me up. When I read that Edinburgh will have a climate like Paris, and Glasgow like Cardiff I laughed so hard there were tears in my eyes.
Do these people have any idea how ridiculous that comparison is?
The cities are 50 miles apart, on virtually the same latitude. There is no meaningful difference between the weather now, so even with the most extreme climate change, why would there be any in the future?
Arguably, and very arguably, Edinburgh is slightly more sheltered from the Atlantic westerlies than Glasgow, but 50 miles isn’t going to make the difference between a wet and cool Cardiff climate, which is sheltered by Ireland’s East coast roughly 300 miles away, whilst both Glasgow and Edinburgh bear the full brunt of the Atlantic with only 50 miles between them.
These people really need to have their heads examined.
And in answer to Paul’s question of how these papers make it through peer review, it’s simple:
The Lancet informs us that 50% of peer reviewed studies are not replicable, Bayer puts that number at 75%. When I have presented that to sceptics they scoff, saying it’s only appropriate to medical studies. But if there is any area in science that needs to be scrupulous about it’s science, it’s medical science, and if that’s the best they can do, climate science is most certainly a whole lot worse.
And the only reason it’s maintained? Because journals historically established to do no more than broadcast scientific breakthroughs have become money making machines. They are no more credible than publishing science in the Beano.
Far better to publish scientific papers on an open blog, to have them scrutinised by scientists/engineers etc. who submit their credentials to be verified before their views on the subject are published.
The problem is, of course, funding. If it’s operated by commercial organisations, as it is now, then there is the corruptible influence of journalistic and political bias.
If it’s government funded, there is the question of political manipulation and coercion.
If it’s funded by the scientific institutions themselves, that might be an answer as, say, £1,000 per publication might dissuade universities from swamping journals with barrages of papers, but then it might be too much for lone scientists to shoulder.
Any ideas?
HotScot…….HotScot WordPress, Are you listening!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes why would very expensive medical studies that are usually well designed and professional be any worse that climate science in terms of reproducibility?
But all science suffers from fraud, error, poor methodologies, wrong conclusions – except Climate Science. Lots of people now accep that at least 50% of published papers are wrong – but never a single one in Climate Science. The only science that has no fraud or error!
“There is no meaningful difference between the weather now”: not so. Rainfall: Glasgow is wetter.
Mind you, I too guffawed at the Cardiff comparison. People can be so cruel about Glasgow. And Cardiff.
How much wetter, and is it meaningful?
A bit more than 60% wetter. That would be meaningful to me.
Edinburgh’s rainfall is (or was) measured on Blackford Hill, which I’d think must be one of the wetter spots in the city. I’d expect Goldenacre, for example, to be measurably drier.
Where Glasgow’s is measured I don’t know.
One of my schoolteachers claimed that “Glasgow” came from the Gaelic for wet, green hollow. I suspect that he’d added the “wet” himself: he was from Aberdeen.
we heard all this nonsense in 2003 that the english south would be the new riviera by 2020. why does no-one remember the bullshit of 2003 that didnt come to pass? everyone was told to plant olive trees and similiar in England in early 2000s. And all those trees died in the cold winters from 2007 to 2010. My how short memories are that cant remember Englands coldest summer for 100yrs thaT HAPPENED IN 2012.
We are getting a raft of these types of pseudo reports these days. All somewhat scraping the barrel to keep the hysteria boiling away and the grants rolling.
A recent one courtesy of WUWT re: Projected Zimbabwe crop declines due to Climate Change from the Uni. of Minnesota apparently comparing what they call COUNTERFACTUAL data with ACTUAL data in order to reach their conclusions.
I have not come across “Counterfactual” as a scientific term before; so could someone enlighten me with a definition?
BS
Brilliant response Mr Scot
Writing Sci-fi is now government funded.
How does Edinburgh end up like Paris but Glasgow like Cardiff? Aren’t they really very close together?
As for London running get out of water, have they sorted out whether we are getting more rain or less rain yet?
The trouble is, this stuff which is nothing more than whimsical musings, is treated as if it is “science”.
It’s a puzzle, Phoenix. These so-called ‘scientists’ seem to be ignoring sunshine and latitude. It has been well known for years that when you go a little way north of London, there is a distinct line across the UK and those above receive less sunlight per year than those below. This is evidenced in tendencies to vitamin deficiency.
Perhaps it’s a subconscious move on the part of these so-called ‘scientists’ to try to remove that awkward little, unpredictable thing – our sun – from our planet’s supposed global warming. They will have to work a lot harder to remove the geophysical aspects of Glasgow’s and Edinburgh’s climates.
Londons water problem is simply a lack of infrastructure. There’s no link to get water from the lake district to manchester, or Wales to most of england, or Severn river over to the Thames river and London. There are viable plans to restore the bristol canal that would link Severn to Thames and thus supply Welsh water to London (cost £1billion max – peanuts by HS2. crossrail and heathrow 3 standards), but Thames water refuse to build it as it would threaten their monopoly. Govt does nothing as usual.
Bobn there is a link from the Lake District to Manchester. Thirlmere supplies water to Manchester
Jean-Francois Bastin et al.:
“This ineffective communication of climate change facts …”.
“History has repeatedly shown us that data and facts alone do not inspire humans …”.
“Increased scientific literacy has no correlation with the acceptance of climate change facts …”.
The entire so-called study is based on the IPCC’s RCP scenarios, science is supposed to be empirically-based, ‘facts’ cannot be inferred from computer predictions.
This tosh from Jemima Lewis in today’s Telegraph commenting on this very report:
We never properly appreciated the British climate when we had it. Damp, capricious but essentially mild, it gave us green hills, blowsy gardens, soft skin and a constant source of conversation. The very fact that summer was unpredictable made it more precious: when the clouds parted over a Cornish beach, it felt like a celestial intervention.
But, alas, we were always so greedy for sunshine. As soon as the charter flight was invented, half a century ago, British holidaymakers began migrating to Spain every summer in search of fierce, bone-warming, melanoma-triggering heat. Now – thanks in part to the carbon emissions from all those cheap flights – we needn’t bother. Spain is coming to us. It would be almost poetic, if it wasn’t so punishing.
Reblogged this on Climate- Science.
“When I read that Edinburgh will have a climate like Paris, and Glasgow like Cardiff I laughed so hard there were tears in my eyes. ………………..The cities are 50 miles apart, on virtually the same latitude. There is no meaningful difference between the weather now”
Actually there is. Looking at annual rainfall, Edinburgh, 45 miles east of Glasgow is much drier. Glasgow 1079mm, Edinburgh, 668mm. Though spare a thought for Greenock. 20 miles west of Glasgow it gets 1494mm per year.
https://www.scottish-places.info/towns/townclimate338.html
https://www.scottish-places.info/towns/townclimate340.html
https://www.climatedata.eu/climate.php?loc=ukxx0052&lang=en
But sadly, I agree there is no chance Glaswegians will be enjoying sweltering Paris summers in a few years from now.
Quite correct, Ted. Edinburgh is not known as Auld Reekie for nothing.
Further north from Glasgow, in latitude even a little north of Inverness, is a little place known as Inverewe. When so-called scientists and environmental campaigners start to witter on about Climate Change instead of Global Warming, it’s worth asking them about what constitutes ‘climate’ and what sort of ‘climate’ has Inverewe enjoyed for centuries, perhaps millennia.
Didn’t one idiot plant a vineyard in Scotland five or 6 years ago in the expectation that our climate was going to be like the north of France.
I think he went bust after a year or two.
My home is surrounded by hectares of vineyards but even where I live the viticulture is often dodgy. I live 32 miles from France…….. in Kent – there is no chance of a successful vineyard in Scotland.
paul, I think that very much depends on the variety of grape. Certainly the climate is warm enough at Inverewe but it’s not just warmth. Cold and sunshine hours and soil qualities are, I’m told, important when growing grapes for vines. In addition, a hillside may be essential. Plenty of those in Scotland. IIRC, some grapes require a consistent hard frost just to enable them to be picked – that’s a white variety from Germany. That would not grow at Inverewe.
I think we need falsification tests that operate much sooner than 2050. If the climate is not changing within the error cone of the projection it is disproved. London like Barcelona implies average Maxima rising by 6C in July and August, and average minima by 8C. Surely we can guess statistically that this will not happen without waiting until 2050.
Looking at Paul’s chart of Scotland summer temperatures it seems that variability is within about plus/minus 1.5C from trend. An increase of 6C in 30 years is 0.2C per year. Taking the current lower bound as 12.5-1.5 = 11C and assuming a linear trend means that the conjecture becomes question able if the summer average is below 12C from five years hence onward, or 13C a decade hence and so forth.
In the late 90’s when this drivel was first publicised and I didn’t know any better, I was concerned about reports that the Costa del Sol was going to be a desert within 20 years. The EU gave funds to build a desalination plant. The desalination plant has never been used and the sprinklers are still watering public areas. On a separate note, the BBC are ramping up the propaganda with that idiot Harrabin featuring on the radio on an almost daily basis spreading doom and gloom. Fortunately, I am older and wiser which is more than can be said about BBC presenters!
Have they tried looking out of the window instead of at a computer screen? No temperature trend – of the type they imagine – actually exists in the real world.
Sound and fury signifying nothing is what we expect from climate alarmists…
Climate hysteria hots up while temperatures refuse to budge
By Andrew Montford – July 12, 2019
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/climate-hysteria-hots-up-while-temperatures-refuse-to-budge/
Old Brew…That’s the point of all this. Ramp up climate hysteria. Gather more “urgency”. Should be easy to remove and bury a few gigatonnes of CO2 by 2050. All we need is more funding to keep temperatures from rising unacceptably? What’s a few thousand million tonnes of a trace gas when a catastrophe can be seen from the Earth’s curvature.
Prince Charlie is at it again – we’ve only got 18 months now to fix the climate. miracles will never cease!
Prince Charles warned in July 2009 that humanity had only 96 months to save the world from irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it.
Deadline passed – along with all the other spurious deadlines he has uttered over the years! Tell it to the plants.
I think what he means is that there are only 18 months left to get the economy destroying laws in place before the whole scam starts to collapse under the weight of cold spreading around the globe. New record lows being set in N & Central Europe and more snow falls.
Perhaps the Prince means there are only 18 month’s left to stop Trump from starting on his second term, what with Trump being the biggest single obstacle to chalking up the sort of international agreements Charles wants to see implemented.
When HRH talks to his plants, I trust they are telling him how much they appreciate the elevated levels of CO2 they are currently enjoying.
Excellent Tim!
Britain ‘did’ the Med in 1976, then we went back to ‘feels like’ Norway.
and we’re having another barmy summer without enough rain, sort of.
Footnote, another tale of bonkers correlation done on diane abbot inspired upside down tables, this report btw is guff only children could dream up.
‘feels like’ Norway or Patagonia to go with the ‘theme’.
Tim A Wells has just put a photo of a Sheffield weather station
I am sure he will not mind if the experts from here add a comment or two
https://timawells.wordpress.com/2019/07/12/weston-park-weather-station/
Cheers Stew. Wondered where all the traffic was coming from. Somebody put me right that its 400 parts per million of Co2 in the atmosphere. But we only contribute 3% of the 400 parts per million. Regards Tim
That’s nothing! Have you tried to find the Eastbourne instruments?
Met Off says it’s at 59.762N and 0.285E. Last time I checked it out, it was in a sunken garden in the middle of a city-centre roundabout and sandwiched between two electricity transformer houses. You can see it here . . .
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.7624266,0.2838242,3a,15y,166.26h,84.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8Sv_fHTllHuHmnJf8J_Uvw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
But last time the Google cameras were around there, it was a construction site.
But Met Office continue to report it as a serious climate station. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/pub/data/weather/uk/climate/stationdata/eastbournedata.txt
‘Edinburgh ‘will be like Paris by 2050’ due to ongoing climate crisis’
Is it just me, or does 30 years seem like too long a time for a ‘crisis’ to exist?
The media is now part of the entertainment industry and makes no effort to investigate anything much anymore. Look at the time they waste on the Tory leadership contest as if it makes any difference to us except for the 160,000 party members. And it is all about personality not plans. And the ITV debate looked like a game show not a serious political debate, which is wasn’t anyway. If Julie Etchingham wasn’t a half-brained idiot she might have questioned Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum about some of their lies about the Irish border.
Looks like the big liar about the border has been Varadkar, who is now building the kind of systems away from the border that he previously declared were impossible.
Edinburgh’s climate will still be more like Oslo in 2050 when the wind is coming off the North Sea.
Very old Edinburgh riddle. How can you tell a man comes from Edinburgh? He’s the one who holds onto his hat on every street corner.
Being very familiar with the East coast and from Edinburgh to Thanet island, when that wind blows in, a nor’ easter, brass monkey’s put on their overcoats.
and you need to tie your hats dahn.
Athelstan, I regret having to report that we’re having rather too many northerlies, nor-nor-easters, east-nor-easters and easterlies down in the south-east of England this summer. Parts of June and, now, July have been rather chilly even when the sun has been shining.
The near repeat of summer 2018 that Roger Horror-been was promising us in September/October last is yet to appear. It has been very dry but also very dull at times. Living in shorts and tee-shirts for weeks on end hasn’t been possible so far. Snuffy doesn’t like a chill breeze with shorts.
No al bad news in the media though.
“Hundreds of Extinction Rebellion activists are set to face trial in the coming weeks, following April’s ‘uprising’ against the climate crisis.
Extinction Rebellion (XR) say more than 30 people have been summoned to City of London Magistrates Court this Friday, with over 50 set to be called each Friday through August, charged with breaching the Public Order Act”
https://leftfootforward.org/2019/07/extinction-rebellion-launch-crowd-justice-drive-after-hundreds-of-climate-activists-charged/
Fridays? I assume that they instructed the City of London magistrates that they could not attend on any other weekday because they were going to be too busy disrupting the traffic , commerce and people’s lives in Glasgow, Leeds, Cardiff etc. Must get our priorities right in these Climate Emergency times.
By reflecting away 30% of the incoming solar energy the atmosphere/albedo makes the earth cooler than it would be without the atmosphere much like that reflective panel behind a car’s windshield.
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6503085690262216704
Greenhouse theory has it wrong.
The non-radiative processes of a contiguous participating media, i.e. atmospheric molecules, render ideal black body LWIR from the surface impossible. The 396 W/m^2 upwelling from the surface is a “what if” theoretical calculation without physical reality. (And, no, it is not measured!) (TFK_bams09)
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6507990128915464192
https://principia-scientific.org/debunking-the-greenhouse-gas-theory-with-a-boiling-water-pot/
Greenhouse theory has it wrong.
Without the 396 W/m^2 upwelling there is no 333 W/m^2 GHG energy up/down/”back” loop to “warm” the earth. (TFK_bams09)
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6457980707988922368
Greenhouse theory has it wrong.
These three points are what matter, all the rest is irrelevant noise.
No greenhouse effect, no CO2 global warming and climate change neither caused nor cured by man.
Since the earth is actually hotter without an atmosphere, radiative greenhouse effect goes straight onto the historical trash bin of failed theories and all the handwavium, pseudo-science, thermodynamic nonsense pretending to explain it follows close behind.
Nick Schroeder, BSME CU ’78, CO PE 22774
What happened to “it doesn’t warm evenly everywhere”? That was what was said everytime someplace would get colder or more snow. The “hot and dry” is only local—that was the claim. Now we’re back to universal warming (even if the cities are only 50 miles apart). Can’t they make up their minds?
Edinburgh Will Be As Hot As Paris In 2050 say FAULTY climate models.
There is no chance of reality following these climate modeled nonsense.
Clouds utterly destroy climate models …
“Cloud error is 114 times larger than the variable they are trying to detect”
Hi can someone on here correct me please if I am wrong in my assumptions and point me in the right direction. As I understand it, mean daily temperature is compiled from hourly readings per day divided by the 24 hours in a day…….Correct?
There are literally hundreds (possibly thousands) of weather stations in the UK capable of making such recordings as per this map source from the MET office
http://wow.metoffice.gov.uk/home ………….correct?
So i would have assumed that there were many hundreds/thousands of stations contributing to the mean daily temperature data set………incorrect?
Because this government source map suggests otherwise.
Click to access Temperature_Stations.pdf
This seems to indicate that only 17 stations are used and quite bizarrely the data from 4 of them is used “twice” Correct or not?
I am genuinely confused on this one – I actually hope I am wrong in thinking only 17 points (all of which are aviation related and only 2 in Scotland) are used in compiling UK daily mean temperatures. Can any experts in this field clarify the situation for me…….thanks.
Paul – Hurricane Barry is linked to climate change according to Matt McGrath
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48973819
Nevermind that those who know the weather patterns can predict them whilst climate models essentially arm wave.
https://twitter.com/BigJoeBastardi/status/1149887155059286017?s=19
🙄
I wonder if McGrath would like to supply his workings claiming that sea level change makes flooding much more likely during hurricanes. Over what period of rise is he claiming? An extra 3mm of sea level looks puny against storm surges of say 12 ft. Call it 3.603m vs 3.600m
Much more likely? I suspect undetectable, and swamped by other effects such as coastal management.
Paris is roughly 5 degrees C warmer than Edinburgh. So to warm that much by 2050 would require roughly 1.7 degrees C per decade, when the fastest warming observed on the summer plot is about 0.3 degrees C per decade in 1920-1940. So starting today, the rate of warming has to increase from the current zero to at least 5-6 times the maximum observed for this prediction to be validated. It’s so absurd that this could be published.