Exactly 200 years ago this month,i.e December 1806,Luke Howard ( the father
of meteorology IMHO) wrote in his amazing journal 'The Climate of
London',and I quote:-

'The southwest wind which had so long reigned, yielded, just at the close of
the year, to the north and west. Some frost ensued,which however had not the
characters of permanence,being neither ushered in by driven snows nor
accompanied with a dry and serene atmosphere.Mean temperature 42.53F , rain
1.40 ".'
'The effects of the late high winter temperature on vegetation must have
been obvious to everyone who has seen the country.To the very close of the
year grass continued to grow,the daisies to enamel the turf,and many of the
inmates of our gardens(native and exotic) to thrive and blossom. Even
hyacinth bulbs ,left in the openbeds shot up and flowered.Ten years ago
winter came on six weeks earlier,and with considerable severity.'
Fascinating eh ?

RonB

Absolutely nothing. It's just that we're all being conned into thinking
that everything's drastically changing, and it's all our fault, and we've
got to 'save the planet'.
Oh, and while we're at it, pay a lot of extra pennies into the coffers of
those nice, sleazy, greedy political parties.

CK
"Ron Button" wrote in message
...
Exactly 200 years ago this month,i.e December 1806,Luke Howard ( the
father of meteorology IMHO) wrote in his amazing journal 'The Climate of
London',and I quote:-

'The southwest wind which had so long reigned, yielded, just at the close
of the year, to the north and west. Some frost ensued,which however had
not the characters of permanence,being neither ushered in by driven snows
nor accompanied with a dry and serene atmosphere.Mean temperature 42.53F ,
rain 1.40 ".'
'The effects of the late high winter temperature on vegetation must have
been obvious to everyone who has seen the country.To the very close of the
year grass continued to grow,the daisies to enamel the turf,and many of
the inmates of our gardens(native and exotic) to thrive and blossom. Even
hyacinth bulbs ,left in the openbeds shot up and flowered.Ten years ago
winter came on six weeks earlier,and with considerable severity.'
Fascinating eh ?

RonB

CK wrote:

Absolutely nothing. It's just that we're all being conned into thinking
that everything's drastically changing, and it's all our fault, and we've
got to 'save the planet'.
Oh, and while we're at it, pay a lot of extra pennies into the coffers of
those nice, sleazy, greedy political parties.

Scientists were warning that the increasing amounts of carbon dioxide would
probably result in global warming before there were any signs it was
happening.


--
Graham Davis
Bracknell

Graham P Davis wrote:
CK wrote:


Absolutely nothing. It's just that we're all being conned into thinking
that everything's drastically changing, and it's all our fault, and we've
got to 'save the planet'.
Oh, and while we're at it, pay a lot of extra pennies into the coffers of
those nice, sleazy, greedy political parties.


Scientists were warning that the increasing amounts of carbon dioxide would
probably result in global warming before there were any signs it was
happening.



Something is changing because, I don't recall in the last century
begonias, bizzie lizzies, and pelargoniums all still in flower and lawn
still growing in December. At this rate, tender plants, will be growing
all year round!

Joe
Wolverhampton
175m asl

Ron Button wrote:
Exactly 200 years ago this month,i.e December 1806,Luke Howard ( the
father of meteorology IMHO) wrote in his amazing journal 'The Climate
of London',and I quote:-

'The southwest wind which had so long reigned, yielded, just at the
close of the year, to the north and west. Some frost ensued,which
however had not the characters of permanence,being neither ushered in
by driven snows nor accompanied with a dry and serene atmosphere.Mean
temperature 42.53F , rain 1.40 ".'
'The effects of the late high winter temperature on vegetation must
have been obvious to everyone who has seen the country.To the very
close of the year grass continued to grow,the daisies to enamel the
turf,and many of the inmates of our gardens(native and exotic) to
thrive and blossom. Even hyacinth bulbs ,left in the openbeds shot up
and flowered.Ten years ago winter came on six weeks earlier,and with
considerable severity.' Fascinating eh ?

RonB

The mean temperature here in St Albans was 6degC in Decemeber 2002 which is
the same value when converted to degF.

I don't think one month's values tell you anything except that it was a very
mild month which is not surprising given that the wind direction was
predominately from the SW.

Alan

Joe Egginton wrote:
Graham P Davis wrote:

Scientists were warning that the increasing amounts of carbon dioxide would
probably result in global warming before there were any signs it was
happening.

Something is changing because, I don't recall in the last century
begonias, bizzie lizzies, and pelargoniums all still in flower and lawn
still growing in December. At this rate, tender plants, will be growing
all year round!

Rate? As in vectors and physics such as next year's temperatures...
that kind of thing? Or every 200 years as in history repeating itself?

From the OP

"'The southwest wind which had so long reigned, yielded, just at the
close of the year, to the north and west. Some frost ensued, which
however had not the characters of permanence, being neither ushered in
by driven snows nor accompanied with a dry and serene atmosphere.

Mean temperature 42.53F, rain 1.40 ".'

'The effects of the late high winter temperature on vegetation must
have been obvious to everyone who has seen the country. To the very
close of the year grass continued to grow, the daisies to enamel the
turf, and many of the inmates of our gardens (native and exotic) to
thrive and blossom. Even hyacinth bulbs, left in the open beds, shot up
and flowered.

Ten years ago winter came on six weeks earlier, and with considerable
severity.' "

200 years ago the average garden was a local supply of sugar as most
who had a garden, tended to tend it with a view to more than a view.

The UK had not been stripped of most of its trees and air pollution was
nothing to what it was to become at the end of that century. The
diarist was at pians to point out that conditions were not so
strikingly obvious in cities where (in London at least) the rivers were
extremely filthy.

Perhaps there were then no notable heat islands? I can't see how not,
even though buildings were not often more than three stories high.

Plus the fact that such exotics as existed then were carefully tended
by a huge gang of skilled cheap labour has to compare to the less well
tended but high tech modern varieties.

It is difficult to generalise with such a lack of "controlled test"
conditions but idle speculation makes it: "Fascinating" yes.

Well, interesting. But then, I am not of the glowballer persuasion.

Some vegetation only require temperature to grow. Some require
variation in day length and some (as was recently reported on
Countryfile?) require intense cold to come out of dormancy. So what
sends them to sleep I wonder?

Weatherlawyer wrote:
Joe Egginton wrote:
Graham P Davis wrote:

Scientists were warning that the increasing amounts of carbon dioxide would
probably result in global warming before there were any signs it was
happening.

Something is changing because, I don't recall in the last century
begonias, bizzie lizzies, and pelargoniums all still in flower and lawn
still growing in December. At this rate, tender plants, will be growing
all year round!

Rate? As in vectors and physics such as next year's temperatures...
that kind of thing? Or every 200 years as in history repeating itself?

From the OP

"'The southwest wind which had so long reigned, yielded, just at the
close of the year, to the north and west. Some frost ensued, which
however had not the characters of permanence, being neither ushered in
by driven snows nor accompanied with a dry and serene atmosphere.

Mean temperature 42.53F, rain 1.40 ".'

'The effects of the late high winter temperature on vegetation must
have been obvious to everyone who has seen the country. To the very
close of the year grass continued to grow, the daisies to enamel the
turf, and many of the inmates of our gardens (native and exotic) to
thrive and blossom. Even hyacinth bulbs, left in the open beds, shot up
and flowered.

Ten years ago winter came on six weeks earlier, and with considerable
severity.' "

200 years ago the average garden was a local supply of sugar as most
who had a garden, tended to tend it with a view to more than a view.

The UK had not been stripped of most of its trees and air pollution was
nothing to what it was to become at the end of that century. The
diarist was at pians to point out that conditions were not so
strikingly obvious in cities where (in London at least) the rivers were
extremely filthy.

Perhaps there were then no notable heat islands? I can't see how not,
even though buildings were not often more than three stories high.

Plus the fact that such exotics as existed then were carefully tended
by a huge gang of skilled cheap labour has to compare to the less well
tended but high tech modern varieties.

It is difficult to generalise with such a lack of "controlled test"
conditions but idle speculation makes it: "Fascinating" yes.

Well, interesting. But then, I am not of the glowballer persuasion.

Some vegetation only require temperature to grow. Some require
variation in day length and some (as was recently reported on
Countryfile?) require intense cold to come out of dormancy. So what
sends them to sleep I wonder?

There have only been 20 Decembers equal to or warmer than December 1806
(6.8 degC) on the CET record, the last one being 1988, but the month
was still 1.3 degC cooler than December 1934 or 1974 (the record
holders). Very mild Decembers have been rare in the last 30 years.

January 1807 had a mean of 2.8 degC, whilst Feb 1807 was 3.7 degC.
March 1807 was the 11th coldest on the CET record, with a comparable
mean to January of that same year.

Dave in Durham
http://nediary.blogspot.com

Weatherlawyer wrote:
Joe Egginton wrote:
Graham P Davis wrote:

Scientists were warning that the increasing amounts of carbon dioxide would
probably result in global warming before there were any signs it was
happening.

Something is changing because, I don't recall in the last century
begonias, bizzie lizzies, and pelargoniums all still in flower and lawn
still growing in December. At this rate, tender plants, will be growing
all year round!

Rate? As in vectors and physics such as next year's temperatures...
that kind of thing? Or every 200 years as in history repeating itself?

From the OP

"'The southwest wind which had so long reigned, yielded, just at the
close of the year, to the north and west. Some frost ensued, which
however had not the characters of permanence, being neither ushered in
by driven snows nor accompanied with a dry and serene atmosphere.

Mean temperature 42.53F, rain 1.40 ".'

'The effects of the late high winter temperature on vegetation must
have been obvious to everyone who has seen the country. To the very
close of the year grass continued to grow, the daisies to enamel the
turf, and many of the inmates of our gardens (native and exotic) to
thrive and blossom. Even hyacinth bulbs, left in the open beds, shot up
and flowered.

Ten years ago winter came on six weeks earlier, and with considerable
severity.' "

200 years ago the average garden was a local supply of sugar as most
who had a garden, tended to tend it with a view to more than a view.

The UK had not been stripped of most of its trees and air pollution was
nothing to what it was to become at the end of that century. The
diarist was at pians to point out that conditions were not so
strikingly obvious in cities where (in London at least) the rivers were
extremely filthy.

Perhaps there were then no notable heat islands? I can't see how not,
even though buildings were not often more than three stories high.

Plus the fact that such exotics as existed then were carefully tended
by a huge gang of skilled cheap labour has to compare to the less well
tended but high tech modern varieties.

It is difficult to generalise with such a lack of "controlled test"
conditions but idle speculation makes it: "Fascinating" yes.

Well, interesting. But then, I am not of the glowballer persuasion.

Some vegetation only require temperature to grow. Some require
variation in day length and some (as was recently reported on
Countryfile?) require intense cold to come out of dormancy. So what
sends them to sleep I wonder?

There have only been 20 Decembers equal to or warmer than December 1806
(6.8 degC) on the CET record, the last one being 1988, but the month
was still 1.3 degC cooler than December 1934 or 1974 (the record
holders). Very mild Decembers have been rare in the last 30 years.

January 1807 had a mean of 2.8 degC, whilst Feb 1807 was 3.7 degC.
March 1807 was the 11th coldest on the CET record, with a comparable
mean to January of that same year.

Dave in Durham
http://nediary.blogspot.com

Weatherlawyer wrote:
Joe Egginton wrote:
Graham P Davis wrote:

Scientists were warning that the increasing amounts of carbon dioxide would
probably result in global warming before there were any signs it was
happening.

Something is changing because, I don't recall in the last century
begonias, bizzie lizzies, and pelargoniums all still in flower and lawn
still growing in December. At this rate, tender plants, will be growing
all year round!

Rate? As in vectors and physics such as next year's temperatures...
that kind of thing? Or every 200 years as in history repeating itself?

From the OP

"'The southwest wind which had so long reigned, yielded, just at the
close of the year, to the north and west. Some frost ensued, which
however had not the characters of permanence, being neither ushered in
by driven snows nor accompanied with a dry and serene atmosphere.

Mean temperature 42.53F, rain 1.40 ".'

'The effects of the late high winter temperature on vegetation must
have been obvious to everyone who has seen the country. To the very
close of the year grass continued to grow, the daisies to enamel the
turf, and many of the inmates of our gardens (native and exotic) to
thrive and blossom. Even hyacinth bulbs, left in the open beds, shot up
and flowered.

Ten years ago winter came on six weeks earlier, and with considerable
severity.' "

200 years ago the average garden was a local supply of sugar as most
who had a garden, tended to tend it with a view to more than a view.

The UK had not been stripped of most of its trees and air pollution was
nothing to what it was to become at the end of that century. The
diarist was at pians to point out that conditions were not so
strikingly obvious in cities where (in London at least) the rivers were
extremely filthy.

Perhaps there were then no notable heat islands? I can't see how not,
even though buildings were not often more than three stories high.

Plus the fact that such exotics as existed then were carefully tended
by a huge gang of skilled cheap labour has to compare to the less well
tended but high tech modern varieties.

It is difficult to generalise with such a lack of "controlled test"
conditions but idle speculation makes it: "Fascinating" yes.

Well, interesting. But then, I am not of the glowballer persuasion.

Some vegetation only require temperature to grow. Some require
variation in day length and some (as was recently reported on
Countryfile?) require intense cold to come out of dormancy. So what
sends them to sleep I wonder?

There have only been 20 Decembers equal to or warmer than December 1806
(6.8 degC) on the CET record, the last one being 1988, but the month
was still 1.3 degC cooler than December 1934 or 1974 (the record
holders). Very mild Decembers have been rare in the last 30 years.

January 1807 had a mean of 2.8 degC, whilst Feb 1807 was 3.7 degC.
March 1807 was the 11th coldest on the CET record, with a comparable
mean to January of that same year.

Dave in Durham
http://nediary.blogspot.com

Sorry about that.

Dave in Durham
http://nediary.blogspot.com