Media headlines are already looking ahead to the kind of weather we can expect as we head towards summer in the UK.
Some articles refer to our 3-month outlook for contingency planners to bolster the idea that we could be in for some fine sunny weather, but this is not what our outlook says. Indeed our 3 month outlook doesn’t give any guidance on sunshine hours, and neither does it forecast warm weather of the type reported.
While it does say that above average temperatures are favoured for the UK for Apr-May-Jun, this is only in regards to the UK’s mean temperature – which takes into account both day and night for the whole three months for the whole country. For reference, the top category of above average temperatures in the outlook is about 11C to 13C. So there’s nothing in there about the exact weather we’ll see for those three months.
Similarly, there were no strong rainfall signals for wet or dry in this particular outlook.
Our contingency planner outlooks are experimental and form a part of our research and development. They are complex products based on the likelihood of five different scenarios related to both temperature and rainfall. This can help contingency planners make long-term strategic decisions based on risk exposure, but operational decisions on how to respond to any disruptive weather are based on our five day forecasts and warnings.
Our detailed short range forecasts will always provide the best possible guidance to the public on any periods of cold weather, heavy rain or spells of hot weather, giving detailed local information across the UK.
So those looking for any signs of good weather ahead should keep up to date with our forecasts, which go out to 30-days ahead, for our most detailed and up-to-date view of the UK’s weather.
Official blog of the Met Office news team 
old farmers almanac that predicted last winter right is saying usa will be hotter and wetter than normal in summer from june onwards and autumn will be be warmer
http://www.almanac.com/weather/longrange
good year for the warmists to forget all the caveats about needing 30years for a trend they have been saying when temps were low or stalled and after a couple of months of warm to say ‘AGW back on track’ 🙂
the warmists will of course decontextualise any warming from the term inter glacial WARMING period and say it must be man made co2/methane/etc
as the glaciers retreat forests and human activity is being found which means its all happened before. Science is meant to dispel fears and superstitions not create them.
notice the ice at kilamanjaro has been improved by planting trees so nothing to do with warming.
i have been keeping records of meto 5 day forecasts and i would say 2 days at max and sometimes not even then while others using normal meteorological reasoning [no co2 laced £30m supercomputer] get it right for longer. Must be a reason why people laugh when someone mentions Met O?
The 30 year trend is warming. So will the next 30 years. The world continues to warm. It’s not natural – the sun is in a sharp decline and the PDO has gone cold. Naturally there should be cooling now not warming. The ongoing warming is due to human activity. Earth hasn’t had so much CO2 in the atmosphere for millions of years.
CET is showing the year so far is over 2C warmer than the 1961-1990 average.
Mabe data is not your strongpoint, but the data does show a slight cooling from around 2001. How inconvenient for you.
data doesn’t show cooling since 2001. The data shows the earth continues to heat up. Your surface trend is both cherrypicked and not statistically significant. The ocean data however show resoundingly that the earth continues to gain heat.
My goodness Bob Smith, you accuse me of cherry picking a period of 13 years but fail to notice you have cherry picked a period of three months (Jan – March 2014) to compare against the 1961 – 1990 average. Not only that, but you limit your area to the UK, a miniscule percentage of global area. If you are going to play silly games why not look at the US which is a much larger area where the temperature in your favoured three month period was running considerably more than 2C colder.
That’s the problem with having blinkers on, you have completely failed to see the bigger picture.
There’s a very good reason to laugh when someone mentions the Met Office when Julia Slingo appears on the BBC Life Scientific programme spouting more nonsense about increased weather extremes from AGW. I’m still waiting for Peter Stott to justify similar claims he made during the heavy rainfall in January but he has refused to supply any data to back his spurious claims.
On the CET data i put some trendlines and extended them to make prediction lines which is what the warmists are doing. For fun i added ice age ones to show you could make a case for that too.
Black= on road to boiling
Blue =ice age
pretty easy to be a headless chicken several times with that chart if you decontextualise the data. Science is there to dispel fear and superstitions not create them. So why are people creating them? Love of money? Love of honours? Its not love of truth.
http://jauntycyclist.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/decontextualised-trendlines-and-prediction-lines/
Reblogged this on CraigM350.
Now i understand why the MetO are blinkered.
The most revealing point for me is John T. Houghton. Houghton is currently Honorary Scientist of the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research at the Meteorological Office
He is called a ‘green christian’ and believes in reducing co2 and thinks ‘ There is a Christian imperative for this’: and views “This lack of will is a spiritual problem ” and “that not to care for the earth is a SIN” http://www.christian-ecology.org.uk/houghton.htm
He says his belief “has been a great source of strength to me in my work with the IPCC. I felt this particularly strongly as a few of us met for prayer during the very demanding IPCC Plenary in Shanghai.” and ” If human communities are to be fulfilled and creative, they not only need goals related to economic performance but also moral and spiritual goals. Care for the overall health of the planet is such a goal. ” http://www.jri.org.uk/resource/climatechangeoverview.htm
‘Caring for the planet’ is an ego inflated patrician mindset. A science mindset cares for the truth not indulging in private fantasy.
This for me explains everything. Climate science and the Met Office has been hijacked and under the dominion of religious crusaders. Of course there is ‘no debate’.
Given the climate reports are heavy on the ‘predictions’ from unvalidated models is it not a sin to ‘bear false witness’ too?
Climate alarmism and religion have become so intertwined it’s impossible to tell them apart. I can’t say I’m surprised by any of this.