OT Corrupt BBC at it again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Eternal Optimist]

If I was at all concerned about rising sea levels I'd definitely spend $43,000,000 on a beach side house, me...


https://www.businessinsider.com/bill...h-house-2020-4

[ragingpup]

I've seen it used in the now raging as a reason for escaping hot country's for Europe .

Well, you say that but look at the temperature change in Sudan for example which has risen, progressively, year on year, by a total of 3 degrees since 1961.

I hear all the sceptics on here, EO convinced that every science writer, literally every one of the millions of them worldwide, are corrupt, but how can you argue with temperature measurements? It's that basic. You can't interpret temperature measurements, and they're out there for everyone to see. Sudan's temperature is rising quickly, as are other similar countries and surely it's not hard to see where that's heading in the next century and beyond. It really is very, very basic. No theory needed, just look at the temperature in each country year on year for the last 50 to 100 years. Then think of how that equates to the harshest hot places on earth at the moment (death valley etc) and look at how long it will take currently populated countries to reach that heat of current rising levels are maintained. It's that simple.

[Eternal Optimist]

The goalposts are easily moved...

Concerns have been raised about the methodology used by the UK Met Office in recording temperature data, particularly regarding the use of sensitive electronic thermometers that capture short-term heat spikes.
Critics argue that these instruments, which can detect 60-second heat spikes, may produce readings that do not accurately reflect true atmospheric temperature changes.
For example, a temperature reading of 29.3?C at Kew Gardens on May 1st, 2025, was recorded at 2:59 PM, a value 2.6?C higher than the reading at 2:00 PM and 0.76?C above the reading one minute later.
Such rapid fluctuations are not typical of natural temperature changes, which generally vary by only 0.1?C to 0.3?C per minute.

The World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) recommends averaging temperature readings over five minutes to reduce short-term "noise" and standardise data.
However, the UK Met Office has been criticized for not following this practice, despite its role in WMO deliberations.
The use of electronic thermometers, which are more sensitive than older mercury-based models, is said to amplify these short-term fluctuations.
Mercury thermometers, which expand and contract in response to temperature changes, are less prone to such rapid variations because the movement of the liquid is physically constrained.

Further criticism focuses on the siting and classification of weather stations. Many Met Office stations are located in poor conditions, classified as CIMO Classes 4 and 5, which are considered unreliable with possible errors of up to 2?C and 5?C, respectively.
A study by Dr. Eric Huxter found that stations in lower CIMO classes exhibited greater average hourly temperature changes, suggesting that local environmental factors—such as nearby structures like greenhouses—may contribute to spiky readings.
Heathrow Airport, rated as a Class 3 site, was noted as an outlier with extreme temperature changes, possibly due to its location and surrounding infrastructure.

Additionally, the practice of using instantaneous peak readings—rather than averaged values—has been questioned. The Met Office's reported average temperature is calculated as the mathematical average of the daily maximum and minimum temperatures, but critics argue this method is flawed, especially in areas affected by the urban heat island effect.
The trend in recorded temperatures is said to be dominated by increases in minimum temperatures, which may not reflect genuine climate change but rather measurement artifacts.
Some claim that the use of such data serves to promote alarmist narratives about climate change, particularly in support of the Net Zero agenda.

In response to these concerns, a Freedom of Information request in November 2025 prompted the Met Office to reconsider its temperature reporting explanations, highlighting ongoing scrutiny of its data practices.
While the Met Office maintains its standards, the debate continues over whether current measurement techniques produce scientifically valid and reliable temperature records.

...and...

In fact the one minute plunge is similar to that found on July 19th 2022 when a national record of 40.3?C at RAF Coningsby was set at a time when three typhoon jets were landing. This was later claimed to be a “milestone in UK climate history” by the Met Office.

[frogmiller]

The earth is constantly going through changes frog but slowly. I haven't look only at the last 20 years, here's what I wrote earlier and is the most important thing I've been trying to get over, the crux of why the current global warming spike is very different to the natural climate change you're talking about:

In very, very simple terms, Earth's temperature only changes very slowly, like really really slowly over 1000s and millions of years. The main periods are the Eocene period, 50 million years ago when we were a greenhouse, the ice caps were tropical and the global temp was about 24 deg centigrade. Over millions of years, and with some dips and ups on the way it fell down to the lowest point, the last Glacial period approx 22000 years ago, and since has been climbing up to the crucial and current holocene period starting around 12000 years ago where the global tem settled at around 13.8 deg and thus settled in the sweet spot that enibled life to flourish and within this temperature, between 13.8 and 14 deg global temp, human life has evolved and developed all of our existing infrastructure with only a very, very little upturn of temp from 13.8 to 14 degrees in this last 12000 years.

But then, just in the last 150 years alone, the global temperature has risen to approx 15.2 degrees!! That's a huge jump and it is demonstrably down to human activity. It's unprecedented in that space of time! No other point of history shows that level of change.

Scientists pretty much agree that we can manage this increase without huge changes in our climate experience up to about 15.5 degrees, the first 'tipping point' at which point you would start to see significant changes in climates with increases in 'wild weather' and some parts of the Earth starting to become uninhabitable due to water loss. At the current rate of change, we will hit this point in around 10 years time.

Beyond this, the next tipping point - 16 degrees, is where there would be very significant changes with melting ice sheets increasing sea levels back into the lower reaches of the Eocene period, and at this point significant parts of the hotter continents wouuld not be habitable through water loss and much of the inhabitable parts including Europe would be lost to raised sea levels.

As I said the main point is that a temperature change from 14 to 16 degrees in the space of 200 years is completely unprecedented in the natural evolution of the Earth (save natural catastrophes,

Not to be too dismissive but that degree of temperature change happens every day where I live. It starts off cool in the morning then warms up until it gets to night time again and then cools down. 😂

You won?t convince me Raging just like I won?t convince you. We will both continue to live to our life?s expectancy and then die. The next generation will do the same and the next after than and so on.
Have a great weekend.

[Shark27]

Just watching Martin Lewis. So gas bills will be coming down and electric going up to cover policy costs of renewables. So if you’re trying to do what you’ve been told and getting rid of your gas boilers then your prices are going up more.

[Townerslovechild]

Just watching Martin Lewis. So gas bills will be coming down and electric going up to cover policy costs of renewables. So if you’re trying to do what you’ve been told and getting rid of your gas boilers then your prices are going up more.

Blame the mad Russian for that.

[Eternal Optimist]

Blame the mad Russian for that.

That's not logical. (Not having a pop TLC - just trying to understand the machinations in play here.)

In 2021 Russia supplied the UK with approx 4.4% of our total gas requirements.

Today Russia supplies the UK with 0% of our gas.

So I fail to see how it could be Putin's fault that we'll be paying less for gas and more for electricity. Unless I've missed summat?

[mygiddypant]

That's not logical. (Not having a pop TLC - just trying to understand the machinations in play here.)

In 2021 Russia supplied the UK with approx 4.4% of our total gas requirements.

Today Russia supplies the UK with 0% of our gas.

So I fail to see how it could be Putin's fault that we'll be paying less for gas and more for electricity. Unless I've missed summat?

If you watched anything other than Reform News you might have learned that the increase in electricity is due to investment in green

energy infrastructure

[Eternal Optimist]

If you watched anything other than Reform News you might have learned that the increase in electricity is due to investment in green

energy infrastructure

I get that, but I'm not sure where Big Bad Vlad (that one's just for raging ) comes into it, that's all - other than being the official 'Bad Guy' we apparently need...

It may be a surprise but I regularly tune in to BBC/Sky/ITV News to keep abreast of their version of events too. No such thing as too much information.

[ragingpup]

I get that, but I'm not sure where Big Bad Vlad (that one's just for raging ) .

😂 Thanks for that!