Another Day–Another Warming Scare!
By Paul Homewood
The likelihood of crossing a key global warming threshold has risen significantly, according to a new analysis.
UK Met Office researchers say that there’s now around a fifty-fifty chance that the world will warm by more than 1.5C over the next five years.
Such a rise would be temporary, but researchers are concerned about the overall direction of temperatures.
It’s almost certain that 2022-2026 will see a record warmest year, they say.
The Met Office is the UK’s national meteorological service.
As levels of warming gases in the atmosphere have accrued rapidly over the past three decades, global temperatures have responded by rising in step.
In 2015, the world’s average temperature first went 1C above the pre-industrial levels, which are generally thought of as the temperatures recorded in the middle of the 19th century.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-61383391?at_campaign=KARANGA&at_medium=RSS
For a start, the world won’t “warm by more than 1.5C over the next five years”, as the absurd Matt McGrath writes. If he really believes that, he should get another job.
Secondly, why the obsession with temperatures during the 19thC, when the Little Ice Age was still in full swing? There is nothing we can do to lower temperatures back to that level, and nobody in their right mind would want to.
We are where we are, and what we should be concentrating on is what happens in future. But if we do that, of course, the numbers look much less scary.
According to the satellites, the most reliable source, global temperature anomalies have fluctuated between around –0.4C and 0.7C in the last forty years. The exception was in the years following the eruptions of El Chichon (1982) and Pinatubo (1991), which depressed temperatures.
These fluctuations are driven by mainly by ENSO changes. The record El Nino in 2015/16 led to temperatures about 0.1C higher than in 1998.:
https://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/
For the Met Office projection to come true, we would need another massive, record breaking El Nino, which is extremely unlikely, given that the oceans lost so much heat in 2015/16. But even then it would maybe only be hundredths of a degree warmer than 2016.
The reality, unlike the BBC’s vision of apocalypse, is that any changes to the Earth’s climate are tiny, and would be unnoticeable if the media was not constantly banging on about it.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Any national broadcatser owes it to taxpayers to cover both received opinion AND opposing opinions.
It would be interesting to find one that actually did. The Australian version of the BBC – ABC – is just as biased.
It would be helpful if broadcasters of all types made clear when they were reporting opinions (including forecasts and models) as opposed to facts, which should be their main stock in trade.
“But even then it would maybe only be hundredths of a degree warmer than 2016.” Really? They could measure temperatures across our entire planetary surface area, and come up with an average measurement accurate to within hundredths of a degree? No, I thought not.
And the average isn’t that precise either. Max-min doesn’t give average temperature, it gives the average of max-min. A day with lots of cloud but an hour that’s clear and hot isn’t the same as a day that’s cloudless and reaches the same maximum. They have taken a proxy and turned it into a measurement.
Correct i have been saying this since the first IPCC technical report
This site does take thousands of surface temperatures from all around the world .http://temperature.global/
Does not adjust them , and shows that for the last 6 or 7 years the yearly average temperature has been BELOW AVERAGE .
But it will never be used by the BBC , who only use a gauge on the runway at Heathrow , because when several jets have just taken off it gives them the readings they want to show
The Met Office say “We’ve put our finger in the air, and taken a guess, as that has a more probabilistic outcome than our multi-million pound supercomputer.”.
Also if you look closely at the UAH record, just about all the warming occurs in two narrow steps, each of which corresponds to a super El Nino. So there are basically three flat periods, each a little warmer than its predecessor. An El Niño does put energy into the air so a bit just has to stay to create the step.
The big thing is there is no GHG warming in this two step picture. None. So the warming certainly is not “in step” with the CO2 increase.
There is no meaningful correlation between the ENSO (Nino 3.4) and Mauna Loa CO2. Remember, the ENSO is made up of three parts, a warming El-Nino, a cooling La-Nina and the neutral condition in between. The may be a correlation between the El-Nino or the La-Nina, but not between all three. The ENSO is part of Earth’s unpredictable natural variability. Climate models must make guesses to include them, or pick one that suits their agenda?
True but my point is that all of the warming in the last 40+ years looks to have been caused by two entirely natural super El Ninos. CO2 has nothing to do with it.
ENSO is a chaotic oscillation hence it is intrinsically unpredictable.
Long term average is up half a degree in just over 40 years. Whoop de do. Century rate just over 1C. That’s not a crisis of anything.
This racket involves amplifying otherwise irrelevant temperature movements and egregiously exaggerating ‘predicted’ future increases – based on nothing but computer models, to scare the public witless.
How this hasn’t been declared an outright fraud by now is beyond me.
Hey, but like Exstinkshun Rebellion you Google “Celsius to Fahrenheit” and put in “1.0” and you get “33.8” – so it’s going to be nearly 34 Fahrenheit hotter? That’d be an average temperature of about 94F wouldn’t it? We’ll fry!
What annoyed me about this particular article, coming off the back of the recent MSM exposure of the BBC’s customary climate bullshit, was McGrath doubling down on yet more of the same.
His claims that last year’s ‘wildfires in North America’ were ‘unprecedented’ is palpably untrue. Ditto his inferences that ‘heatwaves in India and Pakistan’ are evidence of man made climate change and not a regular occurrence since time immemorial long before man could ever have had an impact on the climate. Add to that the usual references from ‘some scientists who say’ that human emissions are causing glaciers to retreat and sea levels to rise etc. Notwithstanding the fact that glaciers have been advancing and retreating long before Adam and Eve were a wink in God’s eye, but sea levels have been rising at a slow and steady rate since well before the Industrial Revolution, Antarctica hasn’t melted at all and anthropogenic glacial impact has been so catastrophic over the past 30 years that Arctic sea ice extent is, by date, just about where it was in 1989. The End is Nigh!
At last a BBC climate post that allows comments. Get commenting folks.
Yes, I did. I mentioned the earlier story about the complaints being upheld with regards to the BBC programme on 4th November. They allowed it, which surprised me.
I left two messages on the complaints story and both got taken down and I was warned off making offensive comments. Not sure how calling JR a liar is offensive.
Now why would the absurd Matt McGrath get another job when he gets paid a lot of money for producing rubbish, with no thinking or effort involved?
And, Phillip, who knows what other ‘consultancy’ fees he ‘earns’ because of his contacts and the propaganda that he spreads for them.
50/50 chance eh?
It’s OK, I just tossed a coin and won. Climate change is cancelled.
Crossing the 1.5C threshold is indeed very scary for the Green Industrial Complex … because nobody will notice, and people will continue to get sudden 10C increases on their summer holidays.
The earth has been warming naturally since about 1870 and that is just over 1 deg K according to best estimates. Surely no logical person wants to return to the LIA climate / temperatures. 2 /3 or even 4 degrees above a very low value is not a disaster scenario, so far as I know no one has ever proved that there is some sort of tipping point: like the warming theory is is a form of virtual reality far removed from observations.
Crossing the threshold might be a problem for the alarmists. If the global temperature change exceeds 1.5 C and nothing bad happens… what then? A lot of harrumphing and cherry-picking weather disasters as if they never happened before? A rewriting of history and a silent goalpost move back to 2 C?
The damage from climate change is not measured in an arbitrary number on a scale Nature does not work to. It is real, physical, measurable damage. Let them have 1.5 C, or 6 if they like. The metric they have to point to to make their apocalyptic case stick is altogether different.
The BBC’s Matt McGrath is being misled by Russian disinformation designed to lower the morale of the free world.
John Kerry says robust NATO intelligence has identified that Russia has weaponised the use of fake climate news to demoralise us all.
We must celebrate being led by such defenders of freedom and remember NATO is a defensive organisation and the invasions and destruction of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya never happened.
The Russia angle is a nice deflection from those who are really pushing the agenda, the US billionaire foundations and western national governments. Take Grantham Institute as an example, home of Nick Stern and set up by US hedge fund billionaire Jeremy Grantham in 2008. He funds WWF and Environmental Defense in the US. Note the financier involvement, there are more.
https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/about/about-the-institute/advisory-board/
Grantham Advisory Board includes
Professor Ottmar Edenhofer, Director, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
Mr Fred Krupp, President, US Environmental Defense Fund
Dr Gerard Lyons, Chief Economic Strategist, Newwealth
Ms Joan MacNaughton, Chair, The Climate Group
Ms Jennifer Morgan, Special Envoy for International Climate Action, German Foreign Ministry, Co-Executive Director, Greenpeace, former advisory board Potsdam
Professor Lord Nicholas Stern, Chair, Grantham Research Institute, London School of Economics
Mr Marc Stuart, Private Equity Investor, Allotrope Ventures
Mr Nigel Topping, High Level Climate Action Champion for the 2020 UN Climate Summit (COP26), former CEO of We Mean Business
Dr Joeri Rogelj, Director of Research at the Grantham Institute and Reader in Climate Science & Policy at the Centre for Environmental Policy, formerly Potsdam Institute
Potsdam Institute, formerly headed by John Schellnhuber, is one of the main protagonists in the AGW propaganda campaign. Jennifer Morgan is a long time player, having been previously WWF director on climate change, E3G, World Resources Institute, with Al Gore, former adviser to Tony Blair, mentor and minder for Greta at Davos. For many years Grantham had members on the Climate Change Committee, prescribing government policy.
Not to mention Soros, Rockefeller, Packard and a whole host of others pushing money into the climate scam.
Check out the Climate Action Network, 1823 organisations, https://climatenetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Membership-List-Website-Version.pdf Greenpeace and WWF helped set it up and have been major players, Morgan influential again.
The EU funds lots of groups to lobby them on environmental matters, including Climate Action Network, FoE and more:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7127182.stm
“The European Commission is giving millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to environmental campaigners to run lobbying operations in Brussels, the BBC has learned.”
https://life.lifevideos.eu/environment/life/funding/ngos/list_ngos.htm
But hey let’s blame Putin, he’s good for it. We can forget all the billions spent on renewables which has resulted in the current energy crisis.
‘UK Met Office researchers say that there’s now around a fifty-fifty chance that the world will warm by more than 1.5C over the next five years.’
And every golf hole I play, there is a fifty-fifty chance I’ll make a hole in one. Either I make it, or I don’t.
Note that we made 1.2C already. What he’s talking about is an 0.3C increase.
OH NOES !!!
Quite! My Daughter’s FiL has a holiday home in Florida so I guess he’d best be advised not to use it as the rise in temp in that climate might risk shortening his already 77 years!
Note: when I typed ‘rise’, above, spellcheck offered ‘ruse’ – pretty prescient in my opinion.
Gamecock
That’s another perfect example of how they lie.
That isn’t an error, a ‘way of counting’ or anything other than a deliberate attempt to mislead a gullible audience that isn’t right across every detail of the story. The inference being that temps are going to increase 1.5C in the next 5 years, despite them knowing full well that’s not the case.
It’s real DISinformation.
I don’t know if I would feel a 0.3℃ rise. The previous 2 days the outside temperature at dawn was just above 2℃ but this morning it was 12℃. It might have had something to do with cold air up from the Southern Ocean and clears nights previously and today being overcast and the wind direction different, but Climatologists don’t believe in clouds affecting anything.
Third rate prats, and I am being polite.
30°F swing here today and yesterday. Lots of jackets left at school.
The rise might not happen where you are! Temperatures could be below average where you are in the next 3-5 years. That’s how evil climate change is…
This seems apt:
1.5 C in 5 years. Really?
Even the IPCC says 1.5C per 100 years!
Did the Met office really say ‘5 years’ or was this mis-reported?
They don’t really understand anything about it, this is just another mantra to throw around without any context. We are supposed to have had 1.2 C already since “pre-industrial” so only 0.3 C to disaster. Pre-industrial has been a movable feast, as it originally started as 1750, changed to 1850 and then a UN committee decided to make 1880 the starting point, which makes a bit of difference to the rate of warming.
Indeed. I can go 20 miles south of here and see 0.3°C rise.
This is a seriously false claim. 50% of their model runs might show this, but that’s not probability. The same for any spurious “record”. And I’m confident that natural variability from this position could produce a record anyway.
These people are carried away with their self-importance, as happened with Covid. They are addicted to having every claim reported breathlessly by the BBC and on Twitter. Its not science, its self-indulgence and vanity.
… +O.3 C …”
The long term trend is + 0.14 per DECADE in the satellite series.
So , very UNLIKELY – not 50:50.
Either you believe in the straight trend lines you draw on the charts or you do not.
Can’t have it both ways. Well, actually, of course, they can have it both ways because they are liars.
According to the cycle theories of Professor Harald Yndestrad we are ‘topping out’ but unfortunately – from the point of view of wishing to force realistic thinking – not due for an actual downturn just yet.
What’s worse is that they don’t even know the preindustrial temperature.
John McLean (2018) states that the HadCRUT4 dataset starts in 1850 but for just over two years at the start of the record the only land-based data for the entire Southern Hemisphere came from a single observation station in Indonesia. At the end of five years just three stations reported data in that hemisphere.
He concludes that data prior to 1950 (i.e. the first 100 years of the data record) is particularly unsatisfactory for the calculation of global or hemispheric averages.
His opinion is that the data before 1950 has negligible real value and cannot be relied upon to be accurate.
It’s worse than we thought!
Until the satellite era began, we had no method to measure global temperature. Any Global Mean Temperature before 1979 is a SWAG, and it’s not “scientific” if they try to attach value to it, such as by comparing today’s GMT to 1850’s.
We simply don’t know more than “It was cooler,” or “It was warmer.” Applying maths is a false precision fallacy.
Climate Change is a stack of fallacies piled deep.
It would be most interesting to see the 95% confidence intervals for this estimate. My expectation is that they would be very wide indeed.
‘researchers are concerned about the overall direction of temperatures.’
The same would be true if it was thought to be getting cooler. Whatever happens, the future must be made to look scary, otherwise who will take any notice?
‘researchers are concerned’ invalidates their research. Researchers must be dispassionate.
If this is McGrath projecting, he should be fired. If this is Met researchers, they should be fired.
Whichever, this is a public display of BAD SCIENCE.
“For the Met Office projection to come true, we would need another massive, record breaking El Nino”
And which would of course be an entirely natural event and nothing to do with GHG’s
This locale in Northern England has very little Urban Heat Island effect change in recent decades. From a climber-mountaineer perspective in mid-May, the 10 degrees this morning and currently 12-13 degrees approaching midday is much colder than 40 years ago. Photos and clothing worn in the 1980s demonstrates this. We are 10 degrees under “normal”. It is getting colder in general.
12 degrees at midday and in less than six weeks the days get shorter – ouch!!
Thank you Paul for snaring Rowlatt. The wonder is that the mainstream obviously didn’t expect it! You did a public service in the manner of ‘Bellingcat’. What if the BBC even XR and their spin-offs are actually but emissaries of the Government? The hitherto lenient treatment of XR and the lack of influence to calm down Harrabin and his familiars might all be elements of government trickery to keep their obsession in the mainstream. The government could do much to ameliorate the current financial difficulties by removing the eco subsidies, mothballing HS2 and having a pause in its seemingly only forthright policy, nuts as it may be. HS2 is as much a token part of eco flummery as it is a transport system, it’s suspension will not inconvenience the public (constantly carping about ticket prices) and get us out of the hands of the rail union who even now seek a national closure of the system. We will end-up in the grip of the unions in the way that the stevedores throttled us and then the miners by providing the strikers with a foot on the nation’s transport neck. Trains if they allow them. Mandelson is out of the way, now we should set about Gummer. In the vein of BSE he needs to eat his own words.
The Paris two degrees was dreamed up by an economist at the failed Copenhagen COP – am I right? Keeping under three degrees was too easy – while keeping under one degree was too difficult or already passed! So when it looked like we might be keeping under two degrees naturally, it was ridiculously cranked down to one point five by the ridiculous and ridiculed SR1.5 study before failed Katowice. As we don’t know what the temperature was in 1850, the half a degree to go is ridiculous. Why is there this whiff of dishonesty in everything the alarmists say or do?
Another good site to follow is https://electroverse.net which reveals how cold it is becoming in many parts of the world.
Another good site to follow is https://electroverse.net which keeps track of the record cold afflicting many parts of the world.
There is more than a 50:50 chance that I wont believe a word that the BBC says
“For the Met Office projection to come true, we would need another massive, record breaking El Nino”
Which is exactly what I wrote on their facebook post.