CET 2020
By Paul Homewood
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/index.html
The annual data for 2020 has now been published for the CET, with the mean temperature ending up at 10.76C.
No doubt we will get the usual hysteria from the Met Office about the “third warmest year on record”, “nine of the ten warmest years since 1990”, blah, blah!
However this will be no more than an attempt to cover up the highly inconvenient truth, which is that warming stopped in 2006. The 10-year running average shows this clearly.
We can get a clearer picture of this by zooming in on the period since 1991. The 10-year average rose slowly during the 1990s and early 2000s. But since then they have gradually declined, having reached the peak for the 1997 to 2006 period:
Which all leads us around to the question of what is the “normal” climate for England?
The Met Office would say this is the 30-year average, but this is only an artificial construct for convenience. Currently the 10-year average on CET is 10.40C, which is barely above the 1991-2020 average of 10.25C. The difference is well within any margin of natural variation.
After all, annual temperatures rose from 8.86C in 2010, to 10.72C the following year, purely because of variations in “weather”.
The chart below, which plots the highest and lowest monthly mean temperatures for each month since 1991, shows just how variable English weather can be:
If the “hottest” months all occurred in the same year, the annual mean would be 12.8C. And if the same applied to the “coldest” months, the annual mean would be 7.3C.
The next chart shows this range, when overlaid on the actual annual temperatures:
Although such an eventuality may be exceedingly unlikely statistically, I see no reason meteorologically why it should not be possible.
To sum up, the idea that there is a “normal” annual temperature, or for that matter climate, in England is unscientific. Indeed, it is no more scientific than a claim that there is “normal” weather here.
What still dominates English “climate” is the variability of its weather, on a day-to-day, month-to-month, and even year-to-year basis. Any underlying climatic trends are drowned out in the noise.
According to the CET, annual temperatures rose by about 0.7C between the 1940s and 2000s. But how much of this was related to the underlying climatic conditions, and how much was due to weather?
Perhaps the best clue we have is to compare the warmest years. Whilst 2014 was the hottest at 10.95C, the year of 1949 was not far behind with 10.65C. Go back further, and we see years such as 1733, 1779 and 1834, all above 10.4C.
This suggests that most of the warming seen in the last three decades is related to weather, rather than climate change.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/mly_cet_mean_sort.txt
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
I understand that the Little Ice Age ended around 1870 which is about the time the temperature record that has since become the HadCrut series started. We have been warming up since then, so it is not surprising that more recent years are warmer than earlier years and “the hottest since records began.” It is also not surprising that if there is a pause in the temperature than the years involved have a good chance of being the hottest equal.
The Met Office and BBC take care never to mention the LIA which is not surprising since their aim is to deceive people into thinking that we have abnormal warming.
The HadCrut series starts in 1855 supposedly because the Industrial Revolution started effecting the climate then. Bear in mind that the 1855 figures are based on ONE thermometer in the whole Southern Hemisphere. Apparently that lone thermometer in Indonesia could tell what the temperature was in half the world.
The Northern Hemisphere had ‘better’ coverage with over 100 thermometers, mostly in the USA and Germany. There was even a couple in north Africa.
Peter,
According to the temp data such as Hadcrut4 suggests warming commenced around 1900 – 1910 and this is the way the climate model “forcings” are constructed – no net warming until around 1905 to agree with the temp data.
However both glacier retreat and sea level data suggest the onset of modern warming was earlier even than 1870. Given sea level lags glacier melt and glacier melt lags temp, both sea level and glacier retreat data suggest onset of the modern warming was no later than 1840 – 1850.
Globally it seems La Nina is now having an effect. Drop in UAH for December.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/
ENSO certainly seems to be the main dictator of what globally averaged temperatures appear to be.
Sorry, better link.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2021/01/uah-global-temperature-update-for-december-2020-0-27-deg-c/
And yet for all the ‘settled science’, billions spent on super computers and ‘research’, nobody has shown any reliable ability to predict ENSO.
Probably preaching a bit here, but Hovmoller diagrams – inc atmospheric and ocean depth temp evolution profiles – help illustrate ENSO
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hovm%C3%B6ller_diagram#:~:text=A%20Hovm%C3%B6ller%20diagram%20is%20a%20common%20way%20of,or%20ocean%2C%20such%20as%20depth%2C%20height%2C%20or%20pressure.
‘The annual data for 2020 has now been published for the CET, with the mean temperature ending up at 10.76C.’
I hate to be the one to tell you, but 10.76 is awful. 16C would be better.
And going from 282.45K to 283.9K in a hundred years isn’t scary.
off topic.. but anyone else noticed the sudden surge in adverts for vegetarian food. Tesco running one (with a little girl telling daddy she doesnt want to eat animals) and the Aldi brochure featuring new veggie range. is this just capitalising on new year resolutions (mine is to treat the BBC with even more disdain than last year) or part of the new order (livestock causes climate change!).
Also C4 doing their “2020 britains wildest weather” wettest this.. hottest that … wonder if it will outscare the BBC reviews last week
It’s Veganuary time again.
I have noticed ITV has jumped well and truly onto the climate change bandwagon with all sorts of program and inter-program propaganda bursting out.
The 30 seconds I saw of On Thin Ice (which I previously carelessly accused the BBC of perpetrating) was pushing the long debunked Arctic methane monster/bomb nonsense.
Veganuary is the world’s largest vegan movement, inspiring people to try vegan for January and throughout the rest of the year.
So, yes there is a lot of publicity. You are welcome to look it up.
Or you could pop some corn and have beer.
Tomorrow, try a steak.
I’m sure it’s on your desk to deal with Paul, but the dreadful Skating on Thin Ice C4 documentary is surely one of the most transparent pieces of propaganda from the Climate Change industry to date!
Yes. Even during the Pleistocene Ice Age Alaska was less covered in ice than most of Europe and North America
From PNAS-Life and extinction of megafauna in the ice-age Arctic
Al Gore invested in the meat replacement industry a few years ago.
CET is an artificial construct that conflates climate zones and with contributing stations subject to major urbanization, motorway and airport construction and site changes over the years and as such is of little scientific value other than an historical curiosity
It’s actually far more reliable than the main UK Met Office dataset, which contains rubbish like Heathrow
Paul,
Something to watch out for: “This version of CET will be superseded by CETv2 later in 2021. This will be a fully traceable system, with improved homogenisation and data adjustments to ensure a more consistent data-set through history and up to the present day. Further details to follow in due course.”
Shouldn’t the veganists at least be happy? Warmer temperatures are good for veggie production.
Urban warming can account for 6C of the increase in a city. Comparing apples with apples we need to measure change in temperature in an environment that hasn’t changed like a forest that has never been felled.
If one is concerned with warming its the average daily maximum that should be the metric, and in the warmest months, but only if the temperature in those months is seen to be excessive.
I wouldn’t have thought that the temperature of the winter season in the northern hemisphere would be seen to be uncomfortably warm.
There has been no increase in the average daily maximum in February in the warm summer, cold winter locations in Australia in places like Kalgoorlie, Alice Springs and Bourke. It’s the big cities that show warming and that, it is increasingly realized, is due to the replacement of vegetation with bitumen, concrete and bricks.
Its not science or common sense that driving this concern about warming, its the ideology of the aristocracy and the rich and famous that can eat cake.
Not to deny the CET as representation of how temperatures are varying in the UK, no way is perfect but I offer SST as another representation. Note the 3c temperature just starting near Lincs./ East Anglia.
https://apps.ecmwf.int/webapps/opencharts/products/w_sst?area=North%20West%20Europe&base_time=202101021200&level=sst&valid_time=202101171200
UAH satellite data is mentioned but this over represents the tropics because the NH contains part of the tropics as does the SH so there is no part of this which represents our part of the world.
Good point and just shows the problem with a ‘global temperature’.
My concern with UAH, while being the most honest we have since RSS added heat, is that there have been posts around that have shown there is cooling taking place if the wholesale fiddling is stripped out. UAH doesn’t show this so either it is not true, there could be warming of the oceans that override land cooling so far, or there is a flaw.
Very interesting data. Thank you.
If someone could tell Boris about this we could save countless billions.
Keep up the good work Paul. Without sites like yours I would have gone mad! I notice in the CET record how temperatures before around 1990 are pretty much flat and temperatures after about 1990 are again pretty much flat, but about 0.5°C higher. Its as if there was an immediate step change of about +0.5°C – a bit suspicious to me. I wonder if the temperature recording equipment was changed or there was some “adjustment” made back in 1990?
It seems that the “good quality” local records are a more meaningful representation of the climate than the Algore-ithmically homogenised data that are being used to justify the cause.
Most of the higher quality sites show some, small warming , a few show some cooling: guess that this is real climate!
Attached/linked below is a slide of Modest Experiment 5.0 where once more I demonstrate that radiative heat transfer DOES NOT function separately from the non-radiative heat transfer processes of conduction, convection, advection and latent. They work together and in concert. Increasing non-radiative processes reduces the system’s temperature thereby reducing the amount of radiation. They are chained together like escaped convicts.
The governing equation: Qin,kJ/h = Radout,kJ/h + Non-Radout, kJ/h
The energy leaving the free standing heating panel is 68% radiation, 32% non-radiation.
The energy leaving the fanned panel is 23% radiation and 67% non-radiation.
The energy leaving the wetted panel with latent evaporation is 34% radiation and 66% non-radiation.
The energy leaving the covered panel where convection is effectively stifled is 79% radiation and 21% non-radiation.
All science backed up by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/nicholas-schroeder-55934820_climatechange-greenhouse-co2-activity-6749812735246254080-bc6K
RGHE theory as depicted in the K-T diagram and numerous clones assumes/requires the surface of the earth to radiate “extra” energy independently and as a near black body. Trenberth also specifically states this assumption in TFK_bams09.
As I have demonstrated five times now by classical experiment because of the non-radiative heat transfer processes of the contiguous participating atmospheric molecules – this assumed BB upwelling of “extra” energy for the GHGs to “trap” and “back” radiate – is – not – possible.
The Radiative GreenHouse Effect does not exist!!
I have also demonstrated that IR thermometers can simply be spoofed into displaying energy that does not exist as is required to “measure” the non-existent up/down welling LWIR.
‘Tis the season for the annual Met Office teasing.
Excellent.
The Times’ “Weather Eye”, written by Paul Simons, ran with this today (7 Jan 2021) and did indeed use the all the “third warmest” etc as Paul anticipated. Shame. The Times used to be more objective but not these days.