There has been a “marked cooling trend” across the North Atlantic in recent decades (Ryu and Kang, 2025).
via Watts Up With That?
July 19, 2025 at 08:03AM
Author: Iowa Climate Science Education
In my previous report on Whitesands I posed the question “What are the Met Office’s real motives?” Further information is now available that I feel provides the answers.
When I originally reviewed Whitesands there were no recorded temperature readings for the site nor any up to date Google StreetView images, both of which are now available. These are very enlightening.
Firstly the observations record. This site is yet again an amateur site that has been accepted into the Met Office Climate Reporting Network and is recorded as below:
As an amatur/personal/enthusiast/whatever “other” type site in its first year of observations, it would be expected to have a keenly well kept record – it most certainly does not. Starting from the 12th May 2024 there should have been 233 daily readings for 2024 but, in reality, only 163 attempts were actually made. That is very poor indeed but it then gets worse, of those recorded 163 attempts a further 29 failed to secure adequate readings to form a daily average. So barely over half of the readings required were actually taken – if it starts this bad it is only likely to worsen. This is a typical extract from the file with columns I and J being maximum and minimum temperature readings. Also worth noting the frequent gaps in the date column.
If the effort of taking readings is so “hit and miss” what confidence can be given to the accuracy of those actually taken?
Whilst observational frequency can be improved what about the actual siting now that it can be viewed in detail? Imagine you are a highly trained and qualified meteorologist such as a Met Office employee. You are fully aware of all the siting requirements for a reliable weather station. Even ignoring the WMO requirements, (jointly established with the International Standards Organisation) you will definitely know your own organisation’s requirements.
So how does this work? The screen is on the corner of a roadway where slow moving vehicles (such as motorhomes or SUV’s towing caravans et alia) are moving around the corner and tripping the PRT into a reading spike.
But that is only the part of the story, remember the Met Office directive above? “No trees” is very specific so why plant them right in front of the screen? The image is from November 2024 and those swirly plastic covers known as “tree guards” are to protect the newly planted saplings from animals. Just like Culzean Castle and many others, hedging just centimetres from the screen has been planted. This hedge is to the northern plus eastern and seaward elevation of the screen which will shield it from cooling offshore nighttime breezes but retain daytime warmer onshore breezes to ultimately over record – almost by intent? Was this all invisible to the Met Office inspectors? Did they not know about the requirements?
A new 2024 site installed alongside a fence , where slow moving motorised vehicles will pass within 3.5 metres, in an unrepresentative area and has just had hedging planted under 1.5 metres away is supposed to meet acceptable standards. This appears to be a deliberate attempt to produce artificially elevated readings both now and ever increasingly in the future.
So going back to the motives, why are the Met Office withholding the details of all those
“well correlated” sites they claim are being used to compile “climate averages” data for long closed sites? A disinterested party might suggest from impartial evidence presented to them that…….the Met Office are using data of dubious accuracy from recently installed very low grade sites with known artificially elevated readings to produce evidence on temperature increases over time.
I again challenge any meteorologist to defend the assertion of many that the Met Office’s actions in deploying such poor sites even now (and they will continue to do so) and to prove wrong that these are intended to be used to corrupt the ongoing historic climate record.
This, the reality:
Versus this, the public portrayal:
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
July 19, 2025 at 05:08AM
An irresponsible designation, a gift to ambulance chasers, shows why the U.S. is exiting the WHO.
via CFACT
July 19, 2025 at 05:03AM
By Paul Homewood
h/t AC Osborn
The Daily Mail has an interesting insight into the riches we to wind farms at the expense of billpayers:
The Cabrach and Glenfiddich Estates cover almost 50,000 scenic acres of Morayshire at the north-eastern end of the Grampian Mountains.
Owned by Christopher Moran, a colourful Tory donor who made his fortune in the City of London, they take in grouse moors, a salmon river, a pheasant shoot and some of the finest stalking ground in all of Scotland.
There are also some 18 tenanted farms, endless estate cottages, and a grand 17-bedroom lodge, which once belonged to the Dukes of Richmond and Gordon and boasts a ping-pong room decorated with oil paintings by Thomas Gainsborough.
Moran, who is 77, acquired this pile via two transactions, in 1979 and 1982.
A keen shot, he describes his hobbies in Who’s Who as ‘architecture, opera, art, politics and country pursuits’, and once told an interviewer that Cabrach and Glenfiddich gave him ‘sanity’, saying: ‘In London I can work 24 hours a day. But here, I unwind.’
Lately, the wealthy laird’s perks have been more than just sporting. For recent events have turned his picturesque Highland seat into one of rural Britain’s most prolific cash machines.
Historically, this was one of the finest unspoiled views in Scotland. But today, the skyline is broken by 59 gargantuan steel turbines of the Dorenell Wind Farm.
Each of them stands 126 metres tall and sits on land that has been leased by Moran to the French energy giant EDF.
Read the full story here.
Dorenell is being paid £116.79/MWh this year under its CfD, and this price will go up each year for inflation. Market prices since April have averaged £59/MWh.
https://register.lowcarboncontracts.uk/AAA-DOR-182/
It began operations in 2018, having won a heavily subsidised contract just before David Cameron pulled the plug on subsidies for onshore wind. This ban has, of course, since been lifted by Miliband.
To date, Dorenell has been paid a sum of £49.6 million in subsidies, over and above its income from sales of electricity. As the Mail reports, Dorenell has also received millions more in constraint payments.
So the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. Meanwhile the countryside is ruined.
Welcome to Britain’s “Clean” Energy revolution!
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
July 19, 2025 at 04:32AM
Iowa Climate Science Education 