Europe’s climate warming at twice rate of global average, claims WMO
By Paul Homewood
From the Guardian:
Temperatures in Europe have increased at more than twice the global average in the last 30 years, according to a report from the World Meteorological Organization (WMO).
The effects of this warming are already being seen, with droughts, wildfires and ice melts taking place across the continent. The European State of the Climate report, produced with the EU’s Copernicus service, warns that as the warming trend continues, exceptional heat, wildfires, floods and other climate breakdown outcomes will affect society, economies and ecosystems.
From 1991 to 2021, temperatures in Europe have warmed at an average rate of about 0.5C a decade. This has had physical results: Alpine glaciers lost 30 metres in ice thickness between 1997 and 2021, while the Greenland ice sheet has also been melting, contributing to sea level rise. In summer 2021, Greenland had its first ever recorded rainfall at its highest point, Summit station.
The claim comes from a WMO report, featuring this graph:
https://public.wmo.int/en/media/press-release/temperatures-europe-increase-more-twice-global-average
The WMO is of course another UN organisation, so obviously cannot be trusted. Neither can any of its sources of data, such as NOAA, GISS and Berkeley Earth, which are based around homogenised data.
But what do we know about recent climate trends in Europe?
For a start, we know that the official Met Office data for the UK does not support the WMO’s claims. The warming trend since 1991 has only been 0.2C / decade, not the claimed 0.5C.
More significantly, even that warming trend has virtually disappeared in the last two decades.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/uk-and-regional-series
As for Europe, the Our World in Data website has looked at climate trends in great detail on a country-by-country basis. But rather than using the flawed homogenisation method, they only consider weather stations with continuous data since 1950:
Increase of temperatures by continents 1950 to 2021
If you want to observe rising or falling temperatures over a long period of time, you need weather stations that not only existed over the entire period, but also provided continuous data. Looking at the period from 1950 to today, only 176 of the more than 4,000 weather stations worldwide remain.
These provide informative data from large parts of the world and show a general increase in air temperatures. Especially in the last 10 to 20 years, the temperature rose more strongly than in the previous decades. All 176 measuring stations provided continuous data during the entire observation period. Changes in these average values are therefore not due to the fact that individual stations failed for a longer period of time or new ones were added in particularly warm or cold regions. The 10-year average is given in each case.
In the regions of Central and South America, which are not shown, there were no weather stations that consistently provided corresponding values for the period under consideration.
https://www.worlddata.info/global-warming.php
Although they acknowledge warming since 1950, both globally and in Europe, significantly the trends for Europe are similar to the UK’s – no warming this century, and only a small amount of warming since 1990.
Interestingly most of the rest of the world shows a similar pattern, with the exception of Oceania. As in the UK, there was a definite rise in temperatures during the 1980s and 90s, but since then that rise has clearly stopped. This raises very big question marks about the reliability and accuracy of the official global temperature datasets.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Reblogged this on Roald J. Larsen and commented:
Everywhere is warming up twice as fast as everywhere else .. Didn’t we do this comicshow already??
Dr Roy Spencer has a paper on the de-urbanisation of temperature data which shows a reduction in any warming trend of 50% showing that what most of us already know – UHI is behind most of the temperature increases.
I did enjoy the comment some talking-head CC alarmist on the BBC when they were discussing this ‘news’ item, where he claimed (with a straight face, I assume) that things are so bad now that ‘climate is affecting the weather’.
Thank you for the good and long laugh.
We are having a nice warm early November and I am headed out to do more leaf removal on my sizeable lawn and mulch them on my 2 very sizeable fields….too many for the lawn to absorb.
I will try to keep in mind that “climate affects weather”….what a novel concept.
Hereford, Tewkesbury and many other towns on or near the Wye have been routinely flooding for centuries! Nothing new to see here.
Indeed, and in about 1750 Tewkesbury Abbey was flooded to about 3 feet so the abbot was rowed down the aisle in a boat to give his sermon. Which shows a certain amount of style and resilience.
Tewkesbury is on the Severn.
I suspect that the “warmth” of Europe is located on the continent, and consists mainly of the horror of frigid winters being a bit warmer than they were. Here for example are winter nights at Stockholm, showing tolerable temperatures in recent decades:
Great analysis as usual, thanks. I was trying to use the CETs, but you have really done the job.
Here in the UK warming is very pleasant.
And leads to reduced energy consumption.
More pre COP27 alarmist nonsense. Unless someone has managed to wrap an enormous duvet around Europe, its temperature cannot be rising at “twice the rate of the global average”. This a similar to the spurious claims from Pacific islanders that “their” sea level is rising more quickly than the rest of the world.This is all deliberately misleading cr*p meant to scare the scientifically illiterate who, unfortunately, appear to be the majority.
“an enormous duvet” to go with the Boris CO2 tea cosy sitting over the earth. (speech to G7)
“Can we have everything louder than anything else?”
Ian Gillan to mixing desk roadie at Deep Purple gig; have always said they were ahead of their time, little did he know how prophetic he was..
According to NOAA, The 20th century average for the globe is 57°F. The same average for the US 48 states is 52°F. That’s five degrees cooler.
Canadian glaciers have been melting for a century or more according to the families who have always lived there and old photographs.
I think its odd Paul did not bring up the AMO. If the WMO tracked the AMO the way Paul does (or did) a year ago, they would have seen European temperature trends tracking the AMO.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/31/has-bob-ward-heard-of-the-amo/
‘Temperatures in Europe have increased at more than twice the global average in the last 30 years’
What’s 2 times nothing?
This site is quite good for showing the worlds temperature for the last 30 years.
http://temperature.global/
It uses thousands of genuine readings , and shows that the world is not getting warmer and the last few years have been below average temps .
But the ” Hide The Decline” Lot use fake readings ,[ next to jet aircraft ETC ] and adjust them all to try to con everybody the temperature is rising .
This “twice as fast as average” story is a semantic game, as I have explained here: https://andrewromanviews.blog/2019/11/06/every-country-is-warming-twice-as-fast-as-the-average/
It is my considered opinion that the term “Global average temperature” is as meaningful as “the length of a piece of string”.
If that.
True, though Global Mean Temperature is what I usually hear.
People who toss it around seem not to realize it is a CALCULATED value – mathematically derived – and does not really exist. No place on earth actually experiences it.
See also: climate.
The Brouwer Fixed Point Theorem suggests otherwise, though I suspect the locations that experience global average temperature are not fixed, but wander over the surface.
Climate science does not deal with “Global Average Temperature”, which is indeed meaningless. It deals with Global Average Temperature … CHANGE, which does have meaning, being simply the average across a region or the globe of temperature … changes.
Which Education Minister said ‘we need to aim to get everyone above average’.
No wonder we’re screwed!
In education that is done by dumbing down standards. Result! Everyone gets A*.
Can someone explain why human CO2 emissions cause one part of the globe to warm and another part to cool? Or could it be that the changes are natural and CO2 does not cause climate change?
FM. Human CO2 emissions, unlike the vast natural emissions that dwarf human emissions, are MAGIC!
So that’s why! Game little human CO2 is way more destructive than its big brother? My CO2/thesis is better than yours … Fairy stories at least have credibility? If only we could get the politicians to listen and understand
Slightly off topic but relevant – from Dr Meryl Nass – “WHO, heat and health. Lots of generalities.”
https://open.substack.com/pub/merylnass/p/who-heat-and-health-lots-of-generalities?r=2mnu5&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Petroalbion-because CO2 not do what they say it does.Temperature drives CO2 on all timescales.
Petroalbion-the Tallbloke site and also No Tricks Zone have some interesting technical stuff.There are some sites also that believe the CO2 nonsense.
If there was valid proof available for CO2,then there would be no more discussion.
“(Insert continent name here …)’s climate warming at twice rate of global average, …” is true of every continent, country, region or city for the very simple reason that oceans covers more than 70% of the surface of our planet, and are warming less slowly than land.
So, looking at Paul’s data, the true headline should read: UK WARMING AT LESS THAN HALF THE GLOBAL AVERAGE. I bet you won’t see that on any mainstream media.
Just an important point to note for the sake of clarity, though Paul states “As for Europe, the Our World in Data website has looked at climate trends in great detail on a country-by-country basis.”
The linked data is not to the Oxford University based Our World in Data website but rather to a different independent German organisation Worlddata.info.
So, what data should we believe, Ray? The WMO with its “discredited homogenized data” or the Worlddata.info website?
That is not the point I am making, nor am I criticising anyone let alone Paul. The point is for clarity lest anyone make the claim that Our World In Data said ….. when in reality they have not. Quite simple really.