In 2 days time I reckon it is worth keeping a check on this February for a
possible new record CET.
For the first 5 days of this month my thermometer has not been below 10C
once even at night. I am sure this has been shared by other correspondents
as I am not in the mildest part of the country.
Fair enough I know we have another 3 weeks to go but with little if any
sign of any much colder weather and according to Darren's runs the south
westerlies will return again soon, after only a brief interruption, it seems
like the mechanism is pretty well in place for an attempt at the record.

For the record, 2 exceptionally mild Februaries were

1990 CET 7.3C

1998 CET 7.3C.

According to my table of CET records the all time February record was way
back in 1779 with 7.9C
It is interesting to note that many of the all time records for mildness
are in fact very long standing records indeed.
I wonder what others have to say on this interesting point.

Regards, Gavin.


--
************************************************** **************************
************************************************** *
Gavin Staples.

website updated regularly
www.gavinstaples.com

For the latest lecture in the Darwin Lecture Series in Cambridge, please
click on my site, and then click on the Darwin Lecture series link.

Statistics are like a bikini: what they reveal is suggestive, but what they
conceal is vital. ~ Anon


All outgoing emails are checked for viruses by Norton Internet Security
Professional 2004.

************************************************** **************************
************************************************** **

Well contrary to popular belief, colder climate regimes are stormier and
have wilder temperature swings, "Little Ice Age" of which 1779 was a
part of. Warmer climates regimes are generally less stormy, mainly because
the temperature differential between the poles and the equator is somewhat
less.

Shaun Pudwell.


"Gavin Staples" wrote in message
...

In 2 days time I reckon it is worth keeping a check on this February for a
possible new record CET.
For the first 5 days of this month my thermometer has not been below
10C
once even at night. I am sure this has been shared by other correspondents
as I am not in the mildest part of the country.
Fair enough I know we have another 3 weeks to go but with little if
any
sign of any much colder weather and according to Darren's runs the south
westerlies will return again soon, after only a brief interruption, it
seems
like the mechanism is pretty well in place for an attempt at the record.

For the record, 2 exceptionally mild Februaries were

1990 CET 7.3C

1998 CET 7.3C.

According to my table of CET records the all time February record was way
back in 1779 with 7.9C
It is interesting to note that many of the all time records for
mildness
are in fact very long standing records indeed.
I wonder what others have to say on this interesting point.

Regards, Gavin.


--

************************************************** **************************
************************************************** *
Gavin Staples.

website updated regularly
www.gavinstaples.com

For the latest lecture in the Darwin Lecture Series in Cambridge, please
click on my site, and then click on the Darwin Lecture series link.

Statistics are like a bikini: what they reveal is suggestive, but what
they
conceal is vital. ~ Anon


All outgoing emails are checked for viruses by Norton Internet Security
Professional 2004.


************************************************** **************************
************************************************** **

Well contrary to popular belief, colder climate regimes are stormier and
have wilder temperature swings, "Little Ice Age" of which 1779 was a
part of. Warmer climates regimes are generally less stormy, mainly because
the temperature differential between the poles and the equator is somewhat
less.

About time this point was made because it has relevance to global warming.
No doubt about the world being a considerably warmer place than it was
(whatever the cause) but why it should lead to greater storminess is not
obvious. But has the year-to-year variability of monthly CET changed? A
statistical test may provide the answer and shouldn't be too difficult to
perform.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

There is a trend, but not really what you would expect. Monthly CET temps
for winter months are generally going up across the board. This has to do
with possible changes in atmospheric circulation ( See Philip Eden's posting
{ February 1951-200 Synoptic Climatology } ).

Some non winter and non summer months are showing a negative trend, while
there is no real change to high summer CET's. Yes the summers have been
warmer recently, but there is a cycle all the way through the CET data,
where there are groups of warmer summers. I don't really understand why
this is or what may cause such a thing to happen. I have also noticed,
looking at a colour gradiated version of the MO's CET data that warmer
winters tend to bunch up in groups too! Again, I don't know why.

Shaun Pudwell.


"TudorHgh" wrote in message
...
Well contrary to popular belief, colder climate regimes are stormier and
have wilder temperature swings, "Little Ice Age" of which 1779 was a
part of. Warmer climates regimes are generally less stormy, mainly
because
the temperature differential between the poles and the equator is
somewhat
less.

About time this point was made because it has relevance to global
warming.
No doubt about the world being a considerably warmer place than it was
(whatever the cause) but why it should lead to greater storminess is not
obvious. But has the year-to-year variability of monthly CET changed? A
statistical test may provide the answer and shouldn't be too difficult to
perform.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

Well contrary to popular belief, colder climate regimes are stormier and
have wilder temperature swings, "Little Ice Age" of which 1779 was a
part of. Warmer climates regimes are generally less stormy, mainly because
the temperature differential between the poles and the equator is somewhat
less.
.........About time this point was made because it has relevance to global warming.
No doubt about the world being a considerably warmer place than it was
(whatever the cause) but why it should lead to greater storminess is not
obvious.
Dunno about the CET but a recent paper on SH trends -
Fyfe, John C., 2003: Extratropical Southern Hemisphere Cyclones: Harbingers of Climate Change?. J.
Climate, 16 (17), 2802-2805.
In concert with a poleward shift in baroclinicity, the synoptic environment south of 40°S appears to
have changed significantly over recent decades. South of 40°S and north of the Antarctic Ocean the
number of cyclones has dramatically decreased, while over the Antarctic Ocean a modest increase has
occurred. A global climate model with anthropogenic forcing produces similar historical changes, and
under a "business-as-usual" emissions scenario predicts that the number of sub-Antarctic Ocean
cyclones will drop by over 30% between now and century's end.

--
regards,
david
(add 17 to waghorne to reply)

It does make you wonder where all this is leading.

When you look at previous warm and cold climate regimes, you can see a
cycle. This cycle, however is not a constant and has progressively
shortened. I did some theoretical research a few years ago, regarding what
the climate may do just before the start of the next Ice Age. My conclusion
was: Climatic temperature trends would start to become unstable. Instead of
flipping from one regime to another at a constant pace, this pace would
start to quicken. Effectively, you would have shorter and shorter warm
periods and shorter and shorter cold periods. At some point in time, the
climate would SNAP ( if you like ) and a new constant would begin, i.e. the
start of an Ice Age. Obviously, if that is the case, then it's safe to
assume that we are not going to have an Ice Age just yet, or are we?. The
only fly in the ointment is CO2 induced global warming. Could this
artificial warming of the Earth, caused by a build-up of CO2 in the
atmosphere, cause a premature SNAP in the climate to a new constant?? That
is the only question I really have and I am not sure anyone has an answer!

Actual Previous Warm and Cold Climatic Periods:

975bc-250bc Subatlantic cold period ( lasted approx 725 years )
250bc-450ad Roman warm period ( lasted approx 700 years )
450ad-950ad Dark ages cold period ( lasted approx 500 years )
950ad-1400ad Medieval warm period ( lasted approx 450 years )
1400ad-1850ad Little Ice Age ( lasted approx 450 years )
1850ad-2003ad Modern warm period ( 153 years and counting... )

Notice how the durations of warm and cold periods are shortening, just as my
earlier theoretical work suggested.

Shaun Pudwell.


"Waghorn" wrote in message
...
Well contrary to popular belief, colder climate regimes are stormier
and
have wilder temperature swings, "Little Ice Age" of which 1779 was a
part of. Warmer climates regimes are generally less stormy, mainly
because
the temperature differential between the poles and the equator is
somewhat
less.
........About time this point was made because it has relevance to global
warming.
No doubt about the world being a considerably warmer place than it was
(whatever the cause) but why it should lead to greater storminess is not
obvious.
Dunno about the CET but a recent paper on SH trends -
Fyfe, John C., 2003: Extratropical Southern Hemisphere Cyclones:
Harbingers of Climate Change?. J.
Climate, 16 (17), 2802-2805.
In concert with a poleward shift in baroclinicity, the synoptic
environment south of 40°S appears to
have changed significantly over recent decades. South of 40°S and north of
the Antarctic Ocean the
number of cyclones has dramatically decreased, while over the Antarctic
Ocean a modest increase has
occurred. A global climate model with anthropogenic forcing produces
similar historical changes, and
under a "business-as-usual" emissions scenario predicts that the number of
sub-Antarctic Ocean
cyclones will drop by over 30% between now and century's end.

--
regards,
david
(add 17 to waghorne to reply)

mmm, but you can hardly claim statistical significance yet: you need
about another 20,000 years of data and another ice age before you can
have confidence that the data matches your model

Shaun Pudwell wrote:
[snip]
Actual Previous Warm and Cold Climatic Periods:

975bc-250bc Subatlantic cold period ( lasted approx 725 years )
250bc-450ad Roman warm period ( lasted approx 700 years )
450ad-950ad Dark ages cold period ( lasted approx 500 years )
950ad-1400ad Medieval warm period ( lasted approx 450 years )
1400ad-1850ad Little Ice Age ( lasted approx 450 years )
1850ad-2003ad Modern warm period ( 153 years and counting... )

Notice how the durations of warm and cold periods are shortening, just as my
earlier theoretical work suggested.

By then I'll be to dead to care less.

Shaun Pudwell.

"Christopher Curtis" wrote in message
...
mmm, but you can hardly claim statistical significance yet: you need
about another 20,000 years of data and another ice age before you can
have confidence that the data matches your model

Shaun Pudwell wrote:
[snip]
Actual Previous Warm and Cold Climatic Periods:

975bc-250bc Subatlantic cold period ( lasted approx 725 years )
250bc-450ad Roman warm period ( lasted approx 700 years )
450ad-950ad Dark ages cold period ( lasted approx 500 years )
950ad-1400ad Medieval warm period ( lasted approx 450 years )
1400ad-1850ad Little Ice Age ( lasted approx 450 years )
1850ad-2003ad Modern warm period ( 153 years and counting... )

Notice how the durations of warm and cold periods are shortening, just
as my
earlier theoretical work suggested.

In article ,
Shaun Pudwell writes:
Actual Previous Warm and Cold Climatic Periods:

975bc-250bc Subatlantic cold period ( lasted approx 725 years )
250bc-450ad Roman warm period ( lasted approx 700 years )
450ad-950ad Dark ages cold period ( lasted approx 500 years )
950ad-1400ad Medieval warm period ( lasted approx 450 years )
1400ad-1850ad Little Ice Age ( lasted approx 450 years )
1850ad-2003ad Modern warm period ( 153 years and counting... )

Notice how the durations of warm and cold periods are shortening, just as my
earlier theoretical work suggested.

I wonder whether it's simply that we are better able to detect changes
in mean temperatures of a few degrees as we get closer to the current
day? In other words, is it possible that, for example, there was an
undetected warm period in the middle of that Sub-altantic Cold Period?
That might change the impression of periods getting shorter as we
approach the present day.
--
John Hall Weep not for little Leonie
Abducted by a French Marquis!
Though loss of honour was a wrench
Just think how it's improved her French. Harry Graham (1874-1936)

I have to say that must be a possibility, but there has been a whole raft of
studies which indicate that the Subatlantic cold period was long and harsh.
I suppose its a bit like the "Little Ice Age", where there were on average
colder winters but there were some warmer spells that we can't even seem to
match today! In general though, I think the figures are correct.
Unfortunately, no one really knows what effect our increased CO2 will
eventually have. Yes there may be some warming going on at the moment, but
I still have this nagging doubt in the back of my mind. If the climate were
left to its own devices, we could well have another couple of hundred years
of relatively warm and stable climate, however, with the dramatic increase
in CO2, that warm stable climate could be pushed beyond its limit and
instead become cold and very unstable. I guess we won't really know the
answer until it actually happens!!

Shaun Pudwell.

"John Hall" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Shaun Pudwell writes:
Actual Previous Warm and Cold Climatic Periods:

975bc-250bc Subatlantic cold period ( lasted approx 725 years )
250bc-450ad Roman warm period ( lasted approx 700 years )
450ad-950ad Dark ages cold period ( lasted approx 500 years )
950ad-1400ad Medieval warm period ( lasted approx 450 years )
1400ad-1850ad Little Ice Age ( lasted approx 450 years )
1850ad-2003ad Modern warm period ( 153 years and counting... )

Notice how the durations of warm and cold periods are shortening, just as
my
earlier theoretical work suggested.

I wonder whether it's simply that we are better able to detect changes
in mean temperatures of a few degrees as we get closer to the current
day? In other words, is it possible that, for example, there was an
undetected warm period in the middle of that Sub-altantic Cold Period?
That might change the impression of periods getting shorter as we
approach the present day.
--
John Hall Weep not for little Leonie
Abducted by a French Marquis!
Though loss of honour was a wrench
Just think how it's improved her French. Harry Graham
(1874-1936)