Is Scotland’s climate really in the midst of breakdown?
By Paul Homewood
Euan has another letter in his local paper, the Press & Journal:
.
Is Scotland’s climate really in the midst of breakdown?
Sir, The James Hutton Institute (JHI) published an editorial in the P&J on December 19th that made many extraordinary claims about Scotland’s climate changing faster than expected.
“We are now in the midst of a climate breakdown – our ecosystems that regulate the climate and enable food production are degrading and are at risk of collapse”.
In truth, global food production is at an all-time high based largely on ammonium nitrate fertilizer (made from natural gas) and the CO2 fertilisation effect. Higher atmospheric CO2 promotes more plant growth. In the past, atmospheric CO2 has been much higher, for example about 2000 ppm during the Jurassic (5 times higher than today), and the planet and dinosaurs flourished.
“Researchers also warned of an increase in water scarcity in the near future stating it could threaten agriculture, forestry and animal habitats…”
And
“We are making Scotland more resilient to flooding…”
I have no problem with investment in flood defences, but are Lochs Tay, Rannoch, Ness, Lomond and Morar really on the verge of drying up? Scotland is one of the wettest countries in Europe.
“Researchers say that in certain parts of Scotland temperatures have risen by 2.5oC in February – with the average of 16.9oC in the period from 1960-89 increasing to 19.4oC during the three decades from 1990-2019.”
Mean February temperatures in Scotland are of the order 2 to 4oC and have barely changed since 1885. Mean July temperatures in Scotland are of the order 12 to 15oC. JHI need to explain where their data come from since official Met Office data do not support their claims.
I have studied numerous Met Office graphs of climate data for Scotland – mean seasonal and annual temperatures 1885 to 2023 and rainfall 1835 to 2023. The graphs show a large amount of variation from one year to the next. There are gradual trends of increasing annual temperature and rainfall that began mid 19th century, as the UK emerged from the Little Ice Age and continue to this day. The upward trends begin well before the surge in fossil fuel emissions, that occurred post WWII. I see no evidence from these graphs to support any of claims made by JHI.
The JHI research was funded by the Scottish Government. What chance was there that JHI would conclude that there was nothing to worry about? Instead, we get a new dose of groundless scaremongering.
Dr Euan Mearns, Aberdeen
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
The other issue in Scotland is the merest whiff of a weather warning and Scotrail issue a Do Not Travel warning and suspend train services days before and when the said warning doesn’t materialise as bad as expected they don’t reinstate the train services. They also use this sort of propaganda to justify their actions.
The weather must have been bad the trains were cancelled.
Rather than it was a bit wet and breezy, just as you’d expect in winter
Environment and Climate Change Canada (used to be called Environment Canada – no propaganda there…) issues hysterical weather warnings a few times a month all year long. Even the climate fanatics are starting to question this. I can remember my childhood (1970’s) winter snowstorms of 30 cm and most things still open. Now “climate changed” snowfall of 15 cm and schools are being shut. The media states that it’s a major weather event – storm of the year etc.
It’s all those windmills taking energy out of the air and upsetting traditional air-currents. (Not too sure that a /sarc is needed but I often wonder….)
yes, ….
“Impacts of wind farms on surface air temperatures”
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1000493107
“Large-scale US wind power would cause warming that would take roughly a century to offset”
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/10/181004112553.htm
Well done again Euan.
It would appear that the JHI is yet another NGO (a charity) that depends for its funding on supporting the climate change scam. It cannot be trusted to do evidence-based science.
Excellent letter Euan. Well done. Also well done for P & J for publishing it. I wonder what pressure they are coming under to censor their reporting of the truth? Who ultimately owns them?
The P&J used to be locally owned by Aberdeen Journals. But has since been bought by Dundee based DC Thomson that is a larger publisher. I don’t think they are likely to interfere with editorial decisions at the P&J and it is local alarm at the country side being covered in turbines, pylons and switching stations that is driving this. They do present the other side of the argument “we must have carbon free turbines to save the planet” but there is an overwhelming majority of correspondence from highlanders concerned about the destruction of the environment.
I am working on writing something on policy driven research and appointments. Politicians can perhaps be forgiven for assuming that all those experts who agree with each other must be right. I think the P&J published this because I sent them the simple evidence that what JHI wrote was a load of rubbish. It was the editor who came up with the title and I think he wants an explanation from JHI.
I’m sure we all look forward to hearing JHI’s explanation!
I tried searching the P&J website for any reference to the claims and the JHI. It seems they have decided that they cannot allow such false propaganda to be found at their site. Probably a wise decision.
Ah but!!
Euan has sent me a photo of it!!
More power to this editor’s elbow
Keep it up, Euan! The message will get through one of these days.
What is becoming increasingly bizarre is that the Met Office is confident that it can get away with telling lies. And apparently it can. Where exactly are these numbers coming from that imply or suggest or simply state right out that Scotland is warmer than the Med? And why are they being taken at face value by gullible media? What has happened to journalism?
I think the editorial staff at the P&J will simply have taken an editorial from JHI on trust – it is an esteemed institute full of experts. But even my wife (who is a psychologist) understood that predicting flood and drought catastrophes was a bit of a contradiction. Having looked at a fair numbers of charts (thanks to Paul for sending me the link to the Met web side) I realised there is huge inter-annual variation with up to 50% variance from one year to the next. So one year drought the next year deluge and this becomes “exactly what we predicted” and they conveniently over look that this patter goes back to the mid 19th Century.
Variability is far and away the dominating feature of climate time series. So much so that if you do a simple year-on-year comparison at almost every station in the
Met Office online historical archive and ask was this month warmer or cooler than the same month last year, coolers outnumber warmers. Not only a statistical feature, variability is also what determines the way society has lived with and evolved to deal with its vagaries – the clothes we wear, the food we grow and eat, the houses we build, and so on. The middle value of all this variation has a certain market appeal and drives many to seek out warmth in retirement – Scots to Bournemouth, New Yorkers to Miami etc etc.
The problem . . . a problem . . . is that they mash up ‘climate.’ As you say, “Variability is far and away the dominating feature of climate time series.”
That’s not climate. It’s weather. Weather is variable. Climate isn’t. It’s what makes climate useful. It is the generalized weather for an area or region.
Climate answers the question, “What’s the weather like there?”
Hence, “climate change” is just stupid. UK has had the same climate for centuries, and it’s not changing. Parts of the Sahel may be experiencing climate change – greening, in fact – but it is the only place on earth. I repeat, climate change is stupid. It’s not happening.
Again, well done Euan.
“There are gradual trends of increasing annual temperature and rainfall that began mid 19th century, as the UK emerged from the Little Ice Age and continue to this day. The upward trends begin well before the surge in fossil fuel emissions, that occurred post WWII. I see no evidence from these graphs to support any of claims made by JHI.”
On Scotland’s rising temperatures, nearly a decade ago even the BBC pointed out ….
As a boy, I recall a very large snow field on the N facing slopes of Ben Nevis. The locals said it had always been there => relic of LIA. It has since gone. But I note the quote from Stephen Harrison bottom right.
On one of the “…….watch” programs, Chris Packham was clucking about that patch of snow, noting that it had been in existence since at least 17-something or other & had finally melted completely during one summer. For some reason, he failed to mention the “Little Ice Age”.
“We are now in the midst of a climate breakdown – our ecosystems that regulate the climate and enable food production are degrading and are at risk of collapse”.
“Researchers also warned of an increase in water scarcity in the near future stating it could threaten agriculture, forestry and animal habitats…”
Gamecock can translate: “You must give control to the government to save you from these catastrophes!”
It’s not about weather or climate. It’s about getting you to surrender your freedom.
Our freedom enabled our prosperity. Prosperity means personal freedom. Freedom haters will do anything to kill prosperity.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.”
― H.L. Mencken, In Defense of Women
There really should be a concerted pushback against the endless ‘climate breakdown’ narrative.
***Where is this ‘climate breakdown’ (or ‘collapse’, or ‘crisis’ or ’emergency’ or whatever else it is this week) manifesting itself and specifically how is it materially impacting humanity? ***
I don’t just mean critical comments, I mean demanding they set their case out very specifically. We can go down a huge list of pro-human benefits that have transformed life for billions across the world, and legitimately ask if these measured and observed benefits are happening, and they are, then how exactly is ‘climate’ negatively impacting humanity?
All the observed evidence strongly suggests humans are adapting and innovating to deliver much better lives across the world, regardless of the threats we face.
The single primary driver of these improved outcomes is cheap, reliable and abundant energy, which has come mostly from oil, coal and gas. It’s insane to throw that advantage away on a perceived-threat basis which isn’t supported by any observed evidence whatsoever.
Some examples:
If infant and child mortality rates are significantly reduced from much higher previous rates….how does that amount to a ‘climate crisis’?
If average life expectancy and quality of life are up….how does that amount to a ‘climate crisis’?
If global crop yields and food availability are up to record levels….how does that amount to a ‘climate crisis’?
If sea level is rising so slowly (roughly 6″-12″ per CENTURY) that it can’t materially impact anyone within a typical human lifetime….how does that amount to a ‘climate crisis’?
If Arctic and Antarctic sea ice rates are having no materially deleterious impacts….how does that amount to a ‘climate crisis’?
If Greenland and Antarctic land ice aren’t collapsing wholesale into the sea (and they’re not)….how does that amount to a ‘climate crisis’?
There’s dozens more examples of innovation delivering much-improved outcomes for humanity which prove humans have innovated our way to the best life expectancy, quality of life and medical outcomes in history. Our forefathers couldn’t have dreamed of the things that billions of ordinary people can do today.
‘Climate change’ has not stopped human progress, so it can be reasonably stated that on balance between ‘bad’ and ‘good’ things that humans have caused, ‘climate change’ simply has NOT had net negative impacts.
Which begs the question….how does that amount to a ‘climate crisis’?
The real question should be why we are we being deliberately misled by the global power elites including JHI. For being misled, largely under Agenda 21, we surely are. This is being perpetuated by mainstream media. Russia, India and China are laughing at our gullibility.
“This is being perpetuated by mainstream media.”
That is the core problem. An informed public is necessary for effective democracy. BBC/Guardian exert substantial control over information. Met Office, et al, can lie all they want to, because BBC/Guardian will back them up.
And, the #2 problem is the politicians who are supposed to be the opposition to nuttery – Tories – are too scared of BBC/Guardian to speak up.
#3 Going along to get along. Rush Limbaugh said the Democrats had the best parties in DC. Republicans wanted to go. So they kept quiet. Tories want to be friends with the people who are destroying your country. They seem not to comprehend what’s at stake.
I agree with you. You can’t trust any of the previously reliable sources or institutions. We need a truly benevolent dictator to control the dishonesty and subterfuge
The Guardian is still spouting the lie that the Libyan dam collapse was due to climate change and not badly maintained infrastructure thanks to the chaos caused by the moron Call Me Lord Dave’s military intervention.
We are going to the Glen Nevis/Fort William area in March. I was going to pack jumpers, but by then I won’t need them will I ?
I would just in case the Climate Change you encounter is one its cold turns.
Well its certainly lashing down here in North Wales today and has been for some time. A few months ago the doom mongers were whinging about reservoirs being so low…….
There is a whiff of influence from the likes of Covering Climate Now which instructs all kinds of bodies on how to promote the insidious climate propaganda without any shame in producing climate misinformation – LIES!
Since Bandaid in 1984 the population of Ethiopia has more than trebled.
That does not sound like a Climate Crisis causing climate refugees.
I recall many decades ago, a drought crisis in Ethiopia and an appeal for help on Blue Peter. But the alarmists simply ignore history and facts. It has popped up in P&J letters that I am ignoring the plight of Africans.
Not to mention Pacific and Indian Ocean islands. It should be obvious to all scientists that these carbonate atolls and coral reefs adjust continuously to sea level variance.
The problems for Africans are not being caused by Climate Change. There are many caused by humans but climate isn’t one of them.
Island dwellers too have human caused non-climate problems.
The only ‘climate change’ that’s happening is an imperceptible global temperature increase of 1.4degsC a century. (UAH). That can’t cause much. And doesn’t. But I’ve had an alarming experience recently. Talking to educated middle class friends I ask “what causes climate change?” Too many um and aw and don’t have an answer. It’s as if CC has grown a life of its own divorced from GW and therefore impervious to argument. Anyone else?
A common reaction and equally evident in the mindless way climate change gets reported in the media. I compare it to the miasma theory of disease – an all embracing toxic vapour that wafts in , cause and origin unknown, that visits death, doom and disaster on all in its wake. It eventually gave way to germ theory; one lives in hope that something similar brings people to their senses about weather events.
“Climate change” itself is mindless.
According to Wincopliot/ ChatGPT
The James Hutton Institute is a globally recognized research organization that delivers fundamental and applied science to drive the sustainable use of land and natural resources 1. The institute is named after Scottish geologist James Hutton, one of the leading figures of the Scottish Enlightenment. The institute’s expertise lies in the fields of Cell and Molecular Sciences, Ecological Sciences, Environmental and Biochemical Sciences, Information and Computational Sciences, and Social, Economic and Geographical Sciences 1.
The references are taken from the JHI website. So why are they even commenting on Climate Change?
It has however changed its answer to this:
According to the VisitScotland website, Scotland’s climate is moderate but changeable. The average temperature in February ranges from around 2.2°C to 7.4°C, with possible peaks as low as -9°C and high as 16°C as observed in previous years 1234.
I could not find any information on the specific temperature rise you mentioned. However, it is worth noting that the James Hutton Institute conducts research on climate change and its impact on land use and natural resources 1.
when I presented it with the temperature claim. Previously, it quoted the revised version of the BBC article instead. However, it is quite plain that it has memory holed the original version: I asked
You didn’t look very hard. The claim that in certain parts of Scotland temperatures have risen by 2.5oC in February – with the average of 16.9oC in the period from 1960-89 increasing to 19.4oC during the three decades from 1990-2019 was originally made by the John Hutton Institute and widely reported in the press. At least you have shown that the claim is false, which is perhaps not surprising as the JHI doesn’t list climate as one of its areas of expertise. Why do you think that the press were so gullible in accepting the ridiculous claim and publishing it without challenge?
to which it responded
I apologize for the confusion in my previous response. You are correct that the James Hutton Institute has conducted research on climate change and its impact on land use and natural resources 1. I could not find any information on the specific temperature rise you mentioned, but I did find a report by the Met Office that states that the average temperature in Scotland has increased by 1.1°C since the 1960s 2.
I am not sure why the press would publish such a claim without verifying its accuracy. However, it is important to fact-check information before accepting it as true.
After several more exchanges where it attempted to deny the claim I finally got:
Yes, I agree that the links you provided contain the quote you mentioned.
It’s like getting the BBC to admit some of its factual claims are inaccurate.
Following on from a hint elsewhere, I asked it for the last 10 digits of π, which is of course a trick question. It responded with 1415926565, which I pointed out are the 2nd through 11th digits while quoting the first 50 digits, and describing them as such. Asked again for the last 10 digits it responded with digits 41-50. I suggested it need to do some transcendental meditation, and it failed to get the joke or the reference. So I asked it what is a transcendental number? it quoted Wolfram Alpha, but it plainly had not understood the concept, because when I asked again for the last 10 digits of π it was unable to make the connection.
It’s actually quite limited in its real intellectual compass. It did get right that the MMR/autism paper had been retracted and disproved by other research.
I did note that it has started asking for access to my browsing history, which I have denied. Plainly it wants to pick my brain. I shall probably have to cut out all interaction with it, but I hate to think that a Microsoft software licence agreement will include in future somewhere deep in the terms an agreement to do just that. I should probably take urgent steps to switch to Linux.
So why do some many children become autistic immediately after receiving the MMR jab then? I have two friends that have children that have suffered from this? As we are now much wiser about Big Pharma and government collusion this has all the hallmarks of another cover up. ‘Safe and effective’ LOL
Around 90% of all children now get the MMR jab. Diagnosis of autism happens at an age (around 30 months) that follows on from jab timing (by age 24 months), regardless of jab status. If the jab has no effect, you would therefore expect 90% of those diagnosed with autism to be jabbed. The general prevalence of autism is 1% of the population. So if autism is only caused by the jab you would need a very large random sample of the jabbed population with autism and of the unjabbed population all without autism, to be reasonably certain that that is the case. However, we know that autism occurred before the jab was invented, so in fact separating out the vaccine effect (if any) is even harder. But that is what the proper research has done. Having done a course in medical statistics I can confirm that the research is credible in confirming no link.
That is not to say that all vaccines are safe (they aren’t – there is always some balance of risk between the protection offered by a vaccine and the potential harm it might do, although most properly trialled vaccines have very low levels of negative outcomes beyond a relatively mild initial reaction at worst), or that we know all about mRNA vaccines – we don’t: there is still plenty of research needed, and much of it isn’t happening. Of course MMR is not an mRNA vaccine anyway: it has a long history of proper trials.
If fewer than 90% of autism cases are jabbed that would actually suggest the MMR vaccine is providing some protection against autism. Your sample of a “couple of friends” is way below statistical relevance. Autism research is focusing on a combination of genetic factors.
Joe with the BBC in reality you only have one attempt. Your first is always rejected out of hand. You then appeal which is sometimes given a more in depth rejection, but often with the rider we only report aka copy and paste.
For this particular story I got a quicker than normal response with this paragraph:-
We’re sorry for any confusion caused by the error you cite in the original article. As you may since have noted, the paragraph in question was amended and now reads as follows:
“In some parts of Scotland, the average monthly maximum temperatures in February rose 2.5 degrees, while the highest maximum temperatures have risen from 12.6C to 13.4C.”
That really is insufficient though. The BBC should have amended the article to confess that an earlier version had included the false statement and quoted it. All the more so, given how the falsehood propagated across the media.
When the BBC did a nonsense story claiming that ships at anchor off Port Said were giving rise to a sulphur plume during the Evergiven blockage if the canal, I got them to print an acknowledgement of the false story and a statement that it had been retracted at the head of the revised article that actually explained that the plume was from eruptions from Etna. That one really was a case of “We’ll be back with more news later when we have made some up”.
“The references are taken from the JHI website. So why are they even commenting on Climate Change?”
Answer: their use of the word “sustainable” is a declaration of Marxist orthodoxy. They are into “Climate Change” because that is the latest Marxist tool to get people to accept communism. “Climate Change” has served them well, for many years.
“All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing.” — O’Sullivan’s Law
In old money its called ‘weather’
Another brilliant letter Euan. Thank you for your efforts. I hope the P&J keep printing them.
The Government ordered, the James Hutton Institute delivered. Business as usual. Not very scientific, but business does not have to be scientific.
I think Institutes warned and created fear, governments got worried and said “we have to do something”, Institutes said we can help and then deliver a new dose of fear. The irony with JHI is that their editorial was laden with how much they care about the environment and protecting eco systems while their remedy is to totally wreck the environment.
Scottish weather is so variable, even the midges can’t cope…
BBC: Bumper midge hatch alert after warm spell
Published 19 June 2022
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-65939262
BBC: Scotland’s dry weather devastates midge numbers
Published 12 July 2022
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-62121827
Heads I win, tails you lose.
P and J should revert to traditional journalistic ethos. Ask questions. The 6 F’S Fit? Fa’? Fou? Far?, Fitwye? and Fan?
or for the the semi educated masses south of the Highland Boundary Fault What, Who, How, Where, Why and When . Keep up teh hgood work Euan Loon
Alastair, The journalist of the P&J article is called Ryan McDougall, who seems to be some kind of syndicated journalist. He seems to have received some press release form JHI, where there is obvious scope for him to make mistakes. But he also cites directly from Dr Mike Rivington who led the Scottish Climate Change and extremes research and allegedly says “We are now in the midst of climate breakdown”.
FWIW…I have left instructions for my descendants to read so many of the threads on this blog (and my comments, if they find them) so that they might come to the proper conclusion that I – and many of you, my fellow-commenters – will show, in the scam that was climate change, we were right!! And I hope they get to read posts like this!
Happy New Year! And long may PH continue – and soon, may he no longer need to.
And…I was watching a wonderful compilation of the incomparable Parkinson’s interviews just now. He was talking about his favourite interviewee, Jacob Bronowski, who told him, the most important thing he learnt was from Cromwell – who said: “I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think you, that you might be mistaken?”
I often feel that such an injunction should be addressed to our leaders and their advisers. But would they have the humility to question their own beliefs?
It doesn’t add up… December 30, 2023 9:41 pm
“Around 90% of all children now get the MMR jab. Diagnosis of autism happens at an age (around 30 months) ”
I am sure you are aware of the old saying “a little knowledge can be dangerous. From a recent study, the mean age of diagnosis was 9.6 years in 1998 and 14.5 years in 2018. But not normally before 24 months.
In the same period annual diagnosis rates have gone from 3,072 to 65,665, a 787% increase in recorded incidence of autism diagnosis over 20 years.
https://acamh.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcpp.13505
Yes Autism was around before the MMR jab, but was already being linked to those vaccines containing Mercury.
A meta study, reporting on 21 studies:
https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9464417/
Please can someone help me keep up with the new non science originating language of the at best Arts Graduate political “scientists” of the Klymutt party.
Can someone define what “Climate Collapse” is, presenting the physics of how it comes about?
If you can explain that made up term then please can you also help me with “Climate Breakdown”. Perhaps you can say when it happened before in Geological Time and in what circumstances?
The only “collapse” and “breakdowns” around are are in the mental states of those inventing these meaningless terms.
These terms are everywhere and part of project climate fear focussed especially on the most vulnerable in society which are children. That those on the left have no hesitation damaging children mentally “in a good cause” screams a line of wannabe Maos, Stalins and Pol Pots.