50.89866 -1.40925 No CIMO Assessment Installed 1/1/1969 Closed 31/3/2000 {Image from 1999}
Southampton Mayflower Park holds the all time June highest temperature from way back in 1976. That notable summer was the hottest throughout the entire CET record. The only possible debate about many of the temperatures recorded back then is that they were probably under recorded relative to modern instrumentation and some dubious recent screen siting. But that is not the story here.
I started an investigation into the New Forest area at the request of a morally supportive reader and fellow climate realist. I was initially surprised at the dearth of information for the area despite it being such a high profile tourist attraction and National park. This initial research has now become part of a longer ongoing research project to verify the accuracy of readings to site specific areas. For general background I opted to use both Southampton and Bournemouth as stations on which to base comparisons of the area in between.
In publishing the review of Bournemouth:Kings Park site I came across a Local Authority so disenchanted with the Met Office that they established their own independent weather forecasting and broadcast service. In the case of Southampton I have discovered a woven web of extremely dubious meteorological practises that I feel reflect disinformation.
For context I ask older readers to imagine for a while they are 18 years old and just starting tertiary education. Born in 2006, the amazing summer of 1976 was thirty years before you were born, possibly even before your parents were. As Paul Homewood highlighted on NALOPKT you will have completed several years of “Climate Emergency” education. Your University Vice Principal will no doubt be insisting on further climate instruction regardless of the course you are on. Context is always important.
Discussing the summer of 1976 you opt to ask Google and Artificial Intelligence about the highest temperature…….
So you now “know” that Southampton Mayflower Park is a current operational Met Office weather station because AI says so and even gives an approximation of its location with coordinates you may or may not understand but look impressive. How long it has been operational is relevant to its credibility and if showing increasing temperatures over time it will be a clear indicator of Anthropgenic Global Warming. The Met Office is obviously the “go-to” source – https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/historic-station-data {Note the directed heading above – “Historic station data” is there to prove a point not just be an information source.}
Some example data looks like this. Nothing suspicious here is there (?)
WOW! This station has been operating for 169 years continuously, obviously a good reliable candidate to study data from. What does the “DATA” says about average temperatures and “climate change”? The Met Office has the answer for that as well. Gosh this research is easy eh? {Note of course the subtle changes and renaming of this website as highlighted in my review of Braemar}
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/location-specific-long-term-averages
Compare the period for 1961 to 1990……..
…….to the period 1991 to 2020
Clearly this is all too obvious. All those old codger “climate deniers” must live in some conspiracy theory land etc etc. People like me (or my supportive reader) are now fighting an uphill battle with one hand tied behind our backs and easily dismissed as a “swivel eyed loons”. The politicians at every level declare a “Climate Emergency” and what can we actually do?
So to study the realities.
To quote one of the BBC’s Verify reporters, Marco Silva, did you check the source? Well yes Marco I do every time unlike you and other BBC reporters.
Here is the header note to those impressive 169 years worth of data.
This very small print that few would ever notice shows one location’s readings from 1855 to 1969 have been “seamlessly” bonded onto those of a different location. Here is the location of the original site the small matter of 1.35 kilometres away and 17 metres higher up inland. No reputable science source can ever acceptably merge together such different data sets. Without forensic precision very people would even notice this first “Trick” the Met Office has pulled.
The old site was in East Park in front of the original Southampton Ordnance Survey Offices. Always worth checking the source https://digital.nmla.metoffice.gov.uk/SO_1316a1cf-f432-4520-b37c-52b4e39c13cb/
The footnote to the historic data for the station that had opened in 1970 i.e. the one that was only installed then in Mayflower Park clearly states.
So all real data stopped at the end of March 2000 – also well before our young student was even born.
Returning to those “Climate Averages” figures that so categorically prove rising temperatures, where did the data come from for 2000 onwards to compile the averages? The Met Office, when pressed under Freedom of Information request review procedure, were completely unable to Verify which stations were used to formulate averages for the Folkestone and Dover non existing sites. I seriously doubt the Met Office could give a credible explanation for Southampton Mayflower because there simply are not any CIMO assessed climate reporting stations realistically close enough to be used. The last Southampton station producing archived readings closed in 2001.
No doubt the Met Office will again claim some “Peer Reviewed” mathematical computer modelled conjuring trick to create these figures which could never be described as authentic data. But of course “Peer Review” is just a process of gaining acceptance from other “Club members”. To put it another way, from Richard Charles Horton OBE FRCPH FRCPCH FMedSci editor in chief of The Lancet who has published more peer reviewed material than probably anyone else ever –
“Peer review to the public is portrayed as a quasisacred process that helps to make science our most objective truth teller, but we know that the system of peer review is biased, unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong”.
To which he later added:
“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness”
In conclusion, an official Met Office weather Station recorded the UK’s highest ever June temperature in the summer of 1976 when temperature readings were unaffected by an obsessive desire to bend data to prove a political standpoint. The site’s readings have subsequently been illegitimately bonded to a completely climatologically different site. Despite closure a long time ago, artificially created climate averages have been superimposed by means which even the perpetrators cannot adequately explain. Ultimately this corrupted concoction is designed to “prove” ….”Climate Change”.
But if you tell that to the kids today…!
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
December 17, 2024 at 05:08AM
Iowa Climate Science Education 