In an article I wrote for the Daily Sceptic on June 20th 2024 I predicted:
As we all shiver in the autumnal weather during what is meant to be summer and some of us have even turned our central heating back on or continued using our winter duvets, there is one certainty – in a few weeks time, the good folk at Met Office and the BBC will tell us that we’ve just had the “warmest June on record”. After all, the Met Office and the BBC made the same claim about appalling April and miserable May.
In the article I proposed three possible tricks which the Met Office and the BBC could use to justify their claim of June being “the hottest ever”:
- Will they have the gall to say that June in the U.K. was the warmest on record even though everybody else knows it wasn’t?
- Or will the Met Office and the BBC choose somewhere which had a bit of decent weather – perhaps Greece or Spain or India – to justify their climate catastrophism?
- Or will they instead try to fob us off by claiming that, although June in the U.K. was a disaster weatherwise, global temperatures (if such a thing can even be measured) were at record levels?
Well, just as I predicted, we’ve been told that June was the hottest on record: From the Mail: ‘Last month was officially the hottest June on record‘.
To justify this claim, the ‘experts’ used the third trick: “claiming that, although June in the U.K. was a disaster weatherwise, global temperatures (if such a thing can even be measured) were at record levels.”
The key words are “on record”. What the ‘scientists’ used as the start of records this time is the year 1980 – a few years after satellites began to be used to measure the Earth’s temperature. Before the late 1970s, there was no way of measuring the Earth’s temperature as temperatures were not recorded in many places.
But let’s remind ourselves of what happened to the Earth’s climate in the 1960s and 1970s. Temperatures were so low that even the climate-catastrophist Guardian newspaper predicted a new Ice Age:
Crop failures and mass starvation were expected:
The CIA was commissioned to write a report for the U.S. President about the consequences of the coming Ice Age:
And the experts worried that the global cooling would never stop:
Of course, the predicted Ice Age never happened and, quite naturally, the cooling 1960s and 1970s have been followed by a period of warming. The climate catastrophists have never got around to explaining to us how global temperatures could have cooled for around 20 years in the 1960s and 1970s while levels of atmospheric CO2 were increasing. I guess that’s a question we’re not supposed to ask, otherwise we might conclude that the climate king has no clothes.
Moreover, there are strong indications that the scorching hot 1920s and 1930s, the years of the U.S. “Dustbowl” featured in John Steinbeck’s novel The Grapes of Wrath, were much hotter than today’s supposedly “record” temperatures:
It was predicted that sea levels would rise 40 feet and half of England would disappear beneath the waves:
Because the glaciers and ice caps would melt:
Just to conclude, there’s one more of many charts which suggest that the 1920s and 1930s, when atmospheric CO2 levels were the lowest they’ve been in the last 100 or so years, were much hotter than today’s supposedly “record” temperatures. That’s the chart of the acreage of forest fires in the U.S.:
Was June 2024 really the hottest since records began as our rulers claim? I’ll leave that up to you to decide.
David Craig is the author of There is No Climate Crisis, available as an e-book or paperback from Amazon.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
“Record number of new millionaires created by Maldives construction boom funded by green grants”
The more bollocks like this they come out with, the more people will begin to disbelieve the nonsense.
I predict this year will be the year the climate lobby will suddenly start believing the erstwhile “conspiracy theory” and suddenly find a new message “it would have been the warmest x on record except for the localised effect of weather modification prevented it from being so.”
Really freezing on Monday and Tuesday. However, as I keep saying weather is not climate. Anyway on slightly different perspective, but related, something very wrong with the green thing anyway:-
1)Organic food seems to be harder to get, probably due to increased cost- better for me and better for the environment?
2) tree planting is often a con, and has often lead to a loss of valuable habitats. Says so in the Flora of Cornwall.
3) Livestock harms the planet? Who says so. I can understand it somewhere were they chop down rainforests, it maybe true. However, a lot of Nature Reserves in the UK need grazing such as for heathland and grassland. In a lot of places this has decreased and hence courser vegetation has increased, and eventually this will scrub over and become woodland. In lowland UK, it is the grassland, heathland and fenland that has been lost, not woodland (since WW2).
4) More and more agriculture ie ploughing going on, which seems to chop down more hedges and releases co2 from the ground by ploughing.
5) The rest about Co2- go and read Ian Pilmers book. 🙂 Or to put it simple, people are convinced that we are destroying the planet with manmade c02, but they haven’t got the foggiest what the evidence is.
6) Making a country poor does not help the environment.
7) Going around flailing yours arms around saying we are doomed never solved anything!
8) Somebody needs to convince China, India etc to cut co2 emissions surely?
9) Great Thunberg (Al Gore etc etc) need to live in a iron age hut somewhere to prove it will work.
Anyway, that is my rant for the day. 🙂
However, as I keep saying weather is not climate.
If the so-called climate has no tangible effect on the weather, then, what tangible effect is it supposed to have? Depressed stock prices?
I never said anything about cause and effect. It is just that weather is something that happens over short period of time. Climate is something that you look at over decades as an average.
This weather is not climate statement is nonsense. Assuming climate change is real and actually matters, we should see its effects on the weather. If there are none, than, apparently, climate change has no effect. The effect also needs to be persistent, by the way. If such-and-such a bad thing was “caused by climate change”, it must not suddenly go away. After, climate change still happened and hence, how come it could first cause X and then suddenly not cause it anymore?
Strong words. I don’t dispute what you are saying in causality. Unfortunately they are not the same thing- an analogy would be points on a graph- one point is not a graph. A whole series of points (and the fitted line) make a graph. The same as climate- one day or a few weeks one year does not make climate. If (on average) it started getting warmer year on year over say a couple of decades, then you would say that the climate is warming (maybe not boiling). And visa versa if cooling. You have to take into account natural variability etc etc, like a high pressure which tends to fix itself, which is what happened in 2022- I think there was an article on here about that. Sure there are going to be more ways of calculating this ‘average’, including some bad ways. And the factor is that you obviously have to take into account the time of year and also the time of day. I think it was Steven Koonin (for USA) described in his book that in the USA the thing that was changing was not more heatwaves, but that the Winter nights had got warmer. It also obviously depends on where you get your data from- no use using land based records in cities. The most accurate I am aware of is satellite data backed up by weather balloon data, as analysed by John Christy. Oddly enough it seems that this century not much has changed. But why bother? That is not scary enough to be of any use to Al Gore and Greta Thunberg.
All predictable. Every day, every month, every year, is the hottest evah, hottest in 14 billion brazilian darwinian years. So says ‘The Science’.
July has been a miserable wash out thus far.
Undoubtedly the hottest July evah…..
And what does “the hottest June on record” actually mean? According to the Copernicus Climate Change Service (certainly no political bias there) of the EU, an average calculated from world-wide temperature spot measurements in June was 0.14⁰C higher than an average calculcated in this way for June 2023. As usual, no information about the expected variability of this ‘average’ is provided. It’s a safe bet that 0.14⁰C is within this range, though, meaning that the headline should really be “another average June” and not “hottest June on record”.
These climate hoaxers lie to us by omission by keeping schtum about the Hunga Tonga undersea volcanic eruption which was the obvious cause of the currently elevated global temperatures. Just look at the latest graph of UAH satellite global temperature:
. The current spike is much bigger and heavier than any past El Nino in modern measurements. It is scientifically impossible for such a sudden spike to be caused by atmospheric CO2. As with normal El Nino spikes, e.g. 2016 and 1998, the warming is caused by atmospheric water vapour, not man-made CO2 as they would have us believe.
A change less than 1⁰C is not a spike. It just looks this way because of the scale of the y-axis. Using -10 to 10 as y range or even -5 to 5 would make this look essentially flat which is a lot more realistic. I would have produced a graph showing this but unfortunatly, the raw numbers are not available in any format intelligible by humans without reading “Dr Roy Spencer’s” mind.
The climate change hoax is framed around temperature anomalies rather than absolute temperatures so anomaly trends are what we have to address, in the case of UAH against a baseline of the mean from 1991 to 2020.
In the context of the UN’s precious “1.5 degrees” limit, the current anomaly spike of ~1°C is very significant. Strange that climate alarmists are very quiet on global temperatures having been above the 1.5°C limit for over a year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68110310.
Agreed that a graph of full-scale absolute temperature change would be almost indistinguishable from a flat line, which is why climate alarmists never show such a graph.
The climate change hoax is framed around temperature anomalies rather than absolute temperatures so anomaly trends are what we have to address, in the case of UAH against a baseline of the mean from 1991 to 2020.
It’s based on swindling the public with graphs like the one above which suggest increasingly warm temperatures with large temperature spikes when in fact, the difference between the highest and the lowest point of the graph above is a mere 0.5⁰C which is completely irrelevant.
NB: I realize that Dr Spencer doesn’t want to propagate the climate emergency myth but he involuntarily contributes to that by producing graphs like this one (and keeping the raw data in some undocumented text format nobody can really use as-is).
I still don’t understand what “the Earth’s temperature” means. People keep referring to it but I’ve never seen it defined, nor have I seen anyone define the implications of “the Earth’s temperature” rising or falling. Perhaps it’s obvious to everyone except this dimwit but it seems fundamental to understanding this debate and surely if it’s obvious it should be simple to explain.
I think it’s being taken by sticking a huge thermometer into the south pole.
🙂
Yeah though wouldn’t you need to do the North Pole too for balance
As someone long departed from these pages used to say about “Covid statistics” – “This is what is known as utter bollocks”.
Good question. I don’t think it is a simple average of temperatures, but is based on anomalies;-
https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-do-scientists-measure-global-temperature/
seems to provide a bit of an explanation. But essentially it is complicated. Noticed that they were trying to debunk John Christy’s satellite work- although oddly no mention of weather balloon work used to verify it.
Thanks
As I imagined, assumptions and modelling used to fill in the missing data.
Nothing either about what it means in the real world.
This is really very simple: Earth has no ‘temperature’ and the attempt to construct something which can be passed as such is complicated in the hope that people won’t see through baloney,
I agree tof.
As far as I am concerned the idea of an ‘average temperature’ for the planet is beyond nonsensical. The two words do not and cannot belong together.
some things lose their meaning when you average them. Temperature is one of those things, because it isn’t an amount of anything. It is a “condition”.
It might have been the warmest June somewhere on the planet, but definitely not where I live. We have two wood burning stoves and both were lit every evening in June and the first couple of days in July.
I have a weather station and the temperature on that have only recorded temperatures above 20 degrees on two or three occasions this year.
I know people who live in NYC who would certainly concur with this as it has been 30+ for weeks…..But that has always been the case as New Yorkers are traditionally known to leave the city during the Summer because of heat. Remember the “7 Year Itch”?
We had the warmest whatever on record all based on a temperature record that has been fiddled about with more than a Lady of the Nights undergarments. ——Or knickers if you prefer.