THERE is one aspect of this country’s history that has so far not generated protests and talk of reparations: the Central England Temperature Series (CET). The monthly data runs from 1659 and is the longest temperature record in the world by far. It is so named because the earliest recordings came from vicars, squires and miscellaneous landed gentry who lived roughly within the triangle formed by Manchester, Bristol and London.
The CET is of global importance for climate studies, they tell us, and the warming trend visible since 1930 is used by the Met Office to show how we careless humans are changing the climate.
Currently three observing stations are used: Stonyhurst (Lancashire), Pershore (Worcestershire) and Rothamsted (Hertforshire). Temperatures recorded at these stations, they claim, are underpinned by a rigorous quality management system. You can’t buy a thermometer from the garden centre and think the Met Office would welcome your readings. Because even slight movements in temperature are important, the measuring devices and their location are absolutely critical.
The World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) looks after this kind of thing and is very fussy about having meaningful data, so in 2014 it produced a comprehensive specification for observing sites split into five Classes according to their precise location and surroundings. Class 1 is good, Class 5 can be out by 5 deg C. Cities are warmer than fields. This ‘urban heat island’ effect is another way of saying built-up areas, towns, villages and airfields are warmer than the open countryside.
Well, here’s the first surprise. Pershore and Rothamsted are both Class 4. They are considered to be too close to areas of tarmac, buildings, trees etc and the estimated uncertainty is 2 deg C. The Met Office are using two out of three reporting stations for this critical record which are generating unsafe data. In fact they go as far as saying that ‘most (stations) in the UK are class 3 (uncertainty 1 deg) or 4 for temperature . . . but continue to produce valid high-quality data.’ Valid? High-quality?
Oh dear. Not proper science, surely. But there’s more. That same Met Office like to thrill us with their ‘Another Record Broken!’ messages. The real reason, of course, is to reinforce their climate calamity story. For instance: ‘New analysis of observations shows that extremes of temperature in the UK are most affected by human-induced climate change.’ Keep that in mind.
On July 19 2022 we were told that the UK record had been broken first at Charlwood in Surrey (39.1 deg C). Charlwood is less than a mile from Gatwick. That record didn’t last long, broken again the same day (40 deg C) at . . . Heathrow! Nearly five square miles of tarmac, buildings and constant taking off and landing of huge jet aircraft.
In April this year they kept at it in the unusual spell of good weather. High temperatures were quoted from Wisley (Surrey), Aboyne (Aberdeen), Gogerddan (Ceredigion) and Castelderg (N Ireland). They are all four Class 4, uncertainty up to 2 deg C.
Castlederg features in a Met Office list of highest-ever daily maximum temperature records at 31.1 deg c, along with Coningsby (40.3) for England, Hawarden (37.1) Wales, and Charterhall (34.8) Scotland. Coningsby is a very active jet fighter airfield and the other three are all Class 4, with 2 deg uncertainty.
There’s another thing: most UK temperature data comes from automated sensors which are sampling the temperature constantly. These can show odd very short heat spikes which may be totally unrepresentative of the actual level.
The Met Office is one of the highest regarded weather and climate organisations in the world. Yet we can’t really believe in its temperature data because nearly 30 per cent of its recording stations are in Class 5 (error up to 5 deg C), and another 49 per cent are Class 4 (error up to 2 deg C).
If these results come from a meteorological world leader, what about other countries? The US, for instance? The US Climate Reference Network has been set up by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) specifically to eliminate questionable sites such as those in Classes 3, 4 and 5 that have been swamped by urban development or located on airfields. The WMO’s classification system was produced because the world has seen rapid and widespread urban development which has surrounded many of the observing sites. Rather curiously, the US results are not widely broadcast. I wonder why?
Now we’ve seen that both the UK and the US have the same problem, where does that leave the rest of the world? You can, if you like, argue that they may not be affected in the same way, but just think about it. Are the temperatures measured in places such as Siberia, Patagonia, Uzbekistan, Angola, Nicaragua and Madagascar more carefully quality-controlled than here in the UK?
Temperatures are rising so our climate must be changing. That’s one of the foundations of the global warming argument. Is it possible that much of our world-wide temperature measurement is junk data?
Please forgive me now for quoting some ridiculously accurate figures but this is what they tell us. Global mean temperature in 2010 was 1.04 deg C above the 1850-1900 global average. In 2024 it was 1.53 above.
Increase over 15 years: 0.49 deg C.
That half degree is well within errors contained in however many of the world’s 11,000 surface weather stations are Class 3, 4 or 5. Going on UK and US experience, there must be quite a lot.
Forget the current talk of heat domes and claims of historic highs. Is the world really warming up, I wonder?
