MET Office ‘adjusts’ the data to bring us the hottest day since 1976

Posted: June 22, 2017 by tallbloke in Analysis, climate, Dataset, MET office, methodology, modelling, Temperature

sizzler

The BBC breathlessly reports a MET-office reported temperature of 34.5C at Heathrow yesterday, but what does the actual data say?

sizzler-data

We await enlightenment from the Met Office.

In other news, the MET-Office says it can now forecast mountain weather better than before.

To be updated….

Comments
  1. A C Osborn says:

    Wow, just WOW, it was as hot as 1976, now that’s what you call globull Warming and it wasn’t even real.
    Take a look at Tony Heller on the current US localised “heatwave”, still can’t match 1936.

    https://realclimatescience.com/2017/06/putting-the-heat-in-perspective/

  2. craigm350 says:

    Reblogged this on WeatherAction News and commented:

  3. tallbloke says:

    .

  4. oldbrew says:

    ‘MET Office ‘adjusts’ the data to bring us the hottest day since 1976’
    – – –
    Hottest June day since ’76 – so there was a hotter June day 41 years ago.

    Next!

  5. ilma630 says:

    Why Heathrow, where we know there are hot jet exhaust plumes all over the place.

  6. Bloke down the pub says:

    Are the temps in the Met Office graphic maximums or hourly averages? I seem to recall that a year or two back, when Heathrow had a ‘record’ maximum (that coincided with three heavies landing in quick succession) it was only for five minutes, and quickly dropped back by about a degree.

  7. oldbrew says:

    Record UK rainfall in winter 2013-14 caused by tropics, stratosphere and climate warming
    June 22, 2017

    Lead author Jeff Knight, from the Met Office, said: “The record rainfall in the UK in winter 2013-14 resulted from persistently very low atmospheric pressure over the North East Atlantic Ocean, which was part of a disrupted pattern in the atmosphere across the Northern Hemisphere.”

    Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2017-06-uk-rainfall-winter-tropics.html

  8. I suspect the higher temperature was set sometime between 3pm and 4pm, as presumably there are readings every minute or 5 mins.

    But this raises the question – in years past we did not have automatic weather stations, so presumably only had hourly readings. Therefore we are not comparing like for like

  9. Tim Hammond says:

    So is there any reason why Heathrow has become the hottest place in the UK?

    I just can’t think why, meteorologicaly speaking, Heathrow should be the warmest spot. It’s a real mystery, but obviously Climate Change is affecting Heathrow more than any other spot.

  10. ren says:

    In the center of the Arctic will be a deep low, which ensures a low temperature over the North Pole.
    https://earth.nullschool.net/#2017/06/26/0600Z/wind/isobaric/700hPa/overlay=mean_sea_level_pressure/orthographic=-339.95,94.84,596

  11. oldbrew says:

    Tim H: ‘So is there any reason why Heathrow has become the hottest place in the UK?’

    Could be the jetstream 😎

  12. ren says:

    The geomagnetic field deflects incoming cosmic ray particles depending on their magnetic rigidity and angle of incidence. The rigidity of a particle is defined as the momentum per unit charge R = pc/Ze, where p is the momentum, Ze is the charge of the particle, and c is the velocity of light.

  13. ren says:

    America should be prepared to increase precipitation.

  14. ren says:

    Stratospheric ozone is one of the most delicate aspects of habitability on the planet. Removal of stratospheric ozone over the polar regions in winter/spring has established the vulnerability of ozone to halogen catalytic cycles. Elevated ClO concentrations engendered, in part, by heterogeneous catalytic conversion of inorganic chlorine to free radical form on ubiquitous sulfate−water aerosols, govern the rate of ozone removal. We report here observations of the frequency and depth of penetration of convectively injected water vapor into the stratosphere, triggered by severe storms that are specific to the central United States in summer, and model their effect on lower stratospheric ozone. This effect implies, with observed temperatures, increased risk of ozone loss over the Great Plains in summer.
    Abstract

    We present observations defining (i) the frequency and depth of convective penetration of water into the stratosphere over the United States in summer using the Next-Generation Radar system; (ii) the altitude-dependent distribution of inorganic chlorine established in the same coordinate system as the radar observations; (iii) the high resolution temperature structure in the stratosphere over the United States in summer that resolves spatial and structural variability, including the impact of gravity waves; and (iv) the resulting amplification in the catalytic loss rates of ozone for the dominant halogen, hydrogen, and nitrogen catalytic cycles. The weather radar observations of ∼2,000 storms, on average, each summer that reach the altitude of rapidly increasing available inorganic chlorine, coupled with observed temperatures, portend a risk of initiating rapid heterogeneous catalytic conversion of inorganic chlorine to free radical form on ubiquitous sulfate−water aerosols; this, in turn, engages the element of risk associated with ozone loss in the stratosphere over the central United States in summer based upon the same reaction network that reduces stratospheric ozone over the Arctic. The summertime development of the upper-level anticyclonic flow over the United States, driven by the North American Monsoon, provides a means of retaining convectively injected water, thereby extending the time for catalytic ozone loss over the Great Plains. Trusted decadal forecasts of UV dosage over the United States in summer require understanding the response of this dynamical and photochemical system to increased forcing of the climate by increasing levels of CO2 and CH4.
    http://m.pnas.org/content/114/25/E4905.abstract

  15. oldbrew says:

    ‘increased forcing of the climate by increasing levels of CO2 and CH4’

    What have ‘increasing levels’ of these trace gases (trace = very small percentage relative to the whole atmosphere) done in the last 20 years?

    Nothing much of any note.

  16. ren says:

    Oldbrew, significant is the decline in ozone due to the weak magnetic field over North America. This is the effect of increased GCR>

  17. mwhite says:

    Last year, the 4oth anniversary of 1976 I caught some of a BBC news radio interview on the endochronology of that year. It would appear that tree ring growth was very poor. Given the use of tree ring data to reconstruct past temperatures it must have been a very cold year(not what I remember. Or it could have been the droubt

  18. Sparks says:

    Getting that 70’s vibe too, what comes after all the warming hype of summertime 2017 will be some brutal winters and an Ice age a cometh… Note to Leif, watch and learn dude.

  19. gallopingcamel says:

    Here in the good old USA it is quite hot in some states but nowhere even close to 1896 when Arrhenius put forward this hypothesis:

    “The selective absorption of the atmosphere is……………..not exerted by the chief mass of the air, but in a high degree by aqueous vapor and carbonic acid, which are present in the air in small quantities.”

    Here is a link to the paper. This false hypothesis is the basis of all the IPCC climate models (e.g. CMIP) that can’t even predict the past.
    http://www.globalwarmingart.com/images/1/18/Arrhenius.pdf
    [mod note] see next comment

    Tony Heller provides context that “Climate Scientists” can’t comprehend:
    https://realclimatescience.com/2017/06/new-video-government-scientists-hiding-the-heat-of-1896/

  20. gallopingcamel says:

    Ooops!

    That link to the Arrhenius paper does not seem to be working so here are links that address the highlights:
    https://diggingintheclay.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/arrhenius-revisited/
    https://diggingintheclay.wordpress.com/2014/03/23/challenging-arrhenius-again/

    Thanks to Ned Nikolov, Karl Zeller, Scott Denning, Tyler Robinson, David Catling and others we now know that the GHE is much larger than the 33 K claimed by consensus “Scientists”.

    “Climate Science” is not science in the generally accepted sense of the word for the reasons set out in the video that follows. “Climate Science” is more about politics than truth:

  21. gymnosperm says:

    Since 1976…about the last time there were hot summers in England and California. Not that any RECORDS were actually broken. The modern superstition is that any time it is uncomfortable, it’s our fault.

  22. ren says:

    Abstract
    The Maunder Minimum (A.D. 1645–1715) is a useful period to investigate possible sun–climate linkages as sunspots became exceedingly rare and the characteristics of solar cycles were different from those of today. Here, we report annual variations in the oxygen isotopic composition (δ18O) of tree-ring cellulose in central Japan during the Maunder Minimum. We were able to explore possible sun–climate connections through high-temporal resolution solar activity (radiocarbon contents; Δ14C) and climate (δ18O) isotope records derived from annual tree rings. The tree-ring δ18O record in Japan shows distinct negative δ18O spikes (wetter rainy seasons) coinciding with rapid cooling in Greenland and with decreases in Northern Hemisphere mean temperature at around minima of decadal solar cycles. We have determined that the climate signals in all three records strongly correlate with changes in the polarity of solar dipole magnetic field, suggesting a causal link to galactic cosmic rays (GCRs). These findings are further supported by a comparison between the interannual patterns of tree-ring δ18O record and the GCR flux reconstructed by an ice-core 10Be record. Therefore, the variation of GCR flux associated with the multidecadal cycles of solar magnetic field seem to be causally related to the significant and widespread climate changes at least during the Maunder Minimum.
    http://www.pnas.org/content/107/48/20697.long

  23. oldbrew says:

    ren – GCRs are a proxy for solar wind strength.

    New paper finds another solar amplification mechanism, low solar activity correlated to jet stream blocking [2014]
    http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/new-paper-finds-another-solar.html

  24. ren says:

    Abstract

    In the historical record of solar activity the period from 1645 to 1715 is a singular epoch during which the number of sunspots decreased markedly for a generation. Known as the Maunder Minimum, this solar epoch coincided with the coldest part of the Little Ice Age (circa 1450 to 1850). We estimate the change at this time in the output of solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation at wavelengths from 120 to 300 nm, relative to contemporary observations. Since this portion of the solar UV spectrum determines ozone composition in the stratosphere, our results bear on the historical variability of ozone and its potential climatic effects. Between the Maunder Minimum and 1986 (the present day solar activity minimum between cycles 21 and 22) we estimate reductions of 64% in the irradiance of the Lyman α line of neutral hydrogen (at 121.6 nm), 8% at 200 nm, and 3.5% in the wavelength range from 210 to 250 nm. The reduction in the solar output from the entire spectral band between 120 and 300 nm is estimated to be 0.17 W/m2, which is approximately 6% of the change in the total solar irradiance of 2.7 W/m2 previously estimated by us (Lean et al., 1992a) over the same time span. Because of this diminished UV output due to very low solar activity the Maunder Minimum total ozone concentration may have been 4% below its 1980 level. While the climatic consequences of such a change have yet to be determined, recent work by Haigh (1994) on modulation of radiative climate forcing by stratospheric ozone emphasizes the need to understand the role of UV irradiance variability as one forcing mechanism.
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/95GB00159/abstract;jsessionid=5FDD739E5123956EBB09A78015970C61.f03t03


    The temperature in the stratosphere above the equator shows a clear fall in ozone. It is difficult to predict what the consequences will be, but it will definitely change the circulation in the stratosphere.

  25. oldbrew says:

    Met Office won’t want to read this inconvenient report…

    David Whitehouse: The Global Warming Hiatus Is Real

    Date: 23/06/17 Financial Post
    The global warming ‘hiatus’ is the most talked about and researched topic in climate science

    Some are adamant that the “hiatus” does not and never has existed, and will never change their minds. But the evidence is irrefutable. As a large number of influential climate scientists have just said in the journal Nature Geoscience, since the turn of the century there has been a substantial slowdown in warming that computer climate models did not predict or can explain. In fact, such models predict a warming twice that observed

    http://www.thegwpf.com/scott-pruitt-is-right-the-global-warming-hiatus-is-real/
    – – –
    Significant man-made warming due to CO2 was, is, and always will be a crock.

  26. oldbrew says:

    Recent increase in oceanic carbon uptake driven by weaker upper-ocean overturning [Feb 2017]
    Tim DeVries, Mark Holzer & Francois Primeau

    Abstract

    The ocean is the largest sink for anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2), having absorbed roughly 40 per cent of CO2 emissions since the beginning of the industrial era. Recent data show that oceanic CO2 uptake rates have been growing over the past decade, reversing a trend of stagnant or declining carbon uptake during the 1990s. Here we show that ocean circulation variability is the primary driver of these changes in oceanic CO2 uptake over the past several decades. We use a global inverse model to quantify the mean ocean circulation during the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s, and then estimate the impact of decadal circulation changes on the oceanic CO2 sink using a carbon cycling model. We find that during the 1990s an enhanced upper-ocean overturning circulation drove increased outgassing of natural CO2, thus weakening the global CO2 sink. This trend reversed during the 2000s as the overturning circulation weakened. Continued weakening of the upper-ocean overturning is likely to strengthen the CO2 sink in the near future by trapping natural CO2 in the deep ocean, but ultimately may limit oceanic uptake of anthropogenic CO2. [bold added]
    – – –
    Comment: the general idea of course is that cooling oceans absorb CO2 while warming oceans expel it, as the oceanic part of the carbon cycle. So less outgassing suggests, or indicates, cooler waters.

  27. Sparks says:

    Some “carbon” magic happened. obviously there is no such thing as magic.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s