From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

The latest fake news from the BBC:

After weeks of dry, sunny conditions in Scotland, torrential downpours over the bank holiday weekend marked a sudden change in weather.

Barely a drop of rain was recorded over almost the entire month.

March and April were far drier than normal, with May seeing only 4% of the normal rainfall by the middle of the month.

This flip between extremes has introduced a new phrase to our forecasting vocabulary – weather whiplash.

Some scientists believe we will have to get used to the idea that our weather will see wild swings from one extreme to another over short periods of time because of climate change….

Before the weather turned last weekend, Scotland had only recorded 41% of its usual spring rainfall, with just seven days left of the season.

This switch is driven by a warming world speeding up the water cycle and allowing the atmosphere to hold more water. So when it does rain, the rain is heavier, which in turn can lead to flooding.

We know that our weather will continue to become more extreme, because global temperatures are rising due to human-induced climate change.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz63g95nxxno

Obviously the weather has never swung from one extreme to another!

And true to form, the BBC, or their so-called scientists, offer no data at all to back up their assertion.

Indeed, no such evidence exists; on the contrary the data shows nothing has changed over the years.

Here’s some of the evidence:

Although April was drier than average, it was not unusually so, nor is there any trends either way.

Secondly, we can look at the month to month changes during spring.

UK rainfall is inherently variable, sometimes extremely so. For instance, rainfall in May is often considerably greater, and equally often lower. But there is no evidence whatsoever the swings have been widening over time.

Exactly the same can be said for changes from May to June.

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/pub/data/weather/uk/climate/datasets/Rainfall/date/Scotland.txt

The BBC repeat the same old lie that rainfall is heavier because of a warmer atmosphere.

The actual daily data for Scotland quite clearly shows this claim to be baseless.

https://climexp.knmi.nl/getindices.cgi?WMO=UKMOData/HadSP_daily_qc&STATION=Scotland&TYPE=p&id=someone@somewhere&NPERYEAR=366

The most dishonest part of the BBC report is this graph, which claims that “when it rains, it now rains more”

But Ed Hawkins’ graph does not show daily rainfall, but seasonal average rainfall.

Taking spring as an example, although the average has increased since the 19thC, that does not mean individual springs are getting wetter. What has changed is that unusually dry springs are now less common.

---

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/xViw50G

May 28, 2025 at 04:07AM

Look at the chart from the Sky article (red boxes and text added by the Talkshop). Where’s the supposedly rapid – ‘3.5 times the rest of the world’ and ‘12% per decade’ – rate of summer sea ice melting since about 2008?
– – –
The rapidly melting Arctic is opening up an unspoilt region to shipping, military and oil and minerals activity, experts have warned – as Foreign Secretary David Lammy tours the region to assess changing security threats, says Sky News.

The Arctic is warming 3.5 times faster than the global average, scientists have warned, raising new security threats for the UK.

Melting Arctic ice is opening up more routes for shipping and military vessels, and the potential to drill for new reserves of gas, oil and natural minerals in an otherwise virtually unspoilt ecosystem.

The continent has long been warming faster than the rest of the world.

As the sea ice disappears, its white surface that reflects sunlight gives way to darker ocean underneath that absorbs the heat instead. [Talkshop comment – very little heat or there wouldn’t be any sea ice there in the first place].

Full article here.
– – –
Image credit: NSIDC/NASA/Sky News

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop

https://ift.tt/2BwKNpd

May 28, 2025 at 03:16AM

“All in all, and contra to the IPCC reports, there is insufficient evidential basis for the use of carbon dioxide, et cetera, emissions – taken together, the IPCC’s Anthro – as climate policy variables.” − Green and Soon, 2025

A new evidence-based study provides compelling evidence that for decades the IPCC has been engaged “advocacy research,” or the “antiscientific practice of undertaking research designed to support a given hypothesis.”

The IPCC-favored climate model parameters used to support the narrative that climate change is primarily caused by humans burning fossil fuels (referred to as the Anthro models in the study) is so fraught with errors that even a stripped-down benchmark model that merely projects future temperatures will not deviate from the historical average overwhelmingly outperforms the IPCC’s modeling.

“The IPCC’s models of anthropogenic climate change lack predictive validity. The IPCC models’ forecast errors were greater for most estimation samples – often many times greater – than those from a benchmark model that simply predicts that future years’ temperatures will be the same as the historical median.”

The IPCC’s Anthro models that hypothesize CO2 (primarily) will foment dangerous global warming over the coming decades woefully overestimated the warming from 1970-2019 by anywhere from 1.8°C to 2.5°C.

“The errors of forecasts from the anthropogenic models for the era of concern over manmade global warming, starting in 1970, were 1.8°C (AVL), 1.7°C (AVSL), 2.3°C (AVR), and 2.5°C (AVSR) warmer than the measured temperatures.”

Over the 2000 to 2019 period the Anthro models’ forecast errors were a staggering 16 times greater than the simple benchmark model’s errors.

“…forecasts for the years 2000 to 2019 from models estimated with 50 observations of historical data (1850 to 1899) have MdAEs [median absolute errors] of around 17°C or 1600 percent greater than the 1°C MdAE of forecasts from the naïve benchmark model.”

In contrast, the authors found the models that centered on Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) as a climate change factor did indeed have predictive validity, and their error ranges were much smaller.

Considering the magnitude of the error in using CO2 emissions as a basis for climate forecasts, the authors conclude the Anthro models’ unreliability “would appear to void policy relevance.”

 Image Source: Green and Soon, 2025

via NoTricksZone

https://ift.tt/rVzawlo

May 28, 2025 at 02:40AM

The drumbeat of climate litigation has grown louder in recent years, fuelled by activists and dubious science.  A new paper claims to link oil and gas companies’ CO₂ emissions to specific weather events and trillions in economic damages. This whole piece of nonsense is debunked in this excellent article:

 Another ‘scientific’ attack on the oil majors – Clintel

via climate science

https://ift.tt/i9AZHDr

May 28, 2025 at 01:30AM