Monday, 11 January 2010

More Snow Coming Soon, Worst Winter Since 1963


met office
bbc weather

The Met Office said the forecast snow could be the biggest single fall since the notorious winter of 1962-63. A blizzard left drifts six metres deep which blocked roads and rail routes, left villages cut off and brought down power lines. Thanks to further falls and almost continual near-freezing temperatures, snow was still deep on the ground across much of the country three months later!
PhotobucketCyclist David Joel travels on the frozen River Thames at Windsor while traffic is at a standstill on the bridge behind

January was the month when even the sea froze (out to half a mile from the shore at Herne Bay), the Thames froze right across in places, and ice floes appeared on the river at Tower Bridge. Everywhere birds literally dropped off their perches - killed by the cold and lack of natural food. That was probably the coldest winter since 1795.
PhotobucketDigging out a stranded train near Grantown-on-Spey (near Inverness).

Despite temperatures in December which were half the average for that month in the UK, the country experienced another warm year which was 0.6C above the long term average. So there is 'No conflict' between Big Freeze and climate change.

Britain is facing its worst harvest for at least 40 years as 30 per cent of the country’s grain lies in waterlogged or sodden ground. Farmers will have to salvage what is left of their crops by using heavy machinery on wet fields. European Union rules ban farmers from using combine harvesters on wet land to protect soil quality. Those who flout the ban can be prosecuted.

The harvest has been most badly affected in the North East, especially Northumberland, North Yorkshire and Co Durham, where the heavy rainfall and flooding have meant that on many farms less than 50 per cent of the wheat has been harvested.

Tom Neill’s in Northumberland, near the Scottish Border, said: “I am 64 and this is the worst harvest I’ve experienced in my 50 years of farming. I am not certain even if we get permission to use our machinery on wet fields whether I will be able to salvage half of my crop. Unless we get a dry spell it will be too late. It’s very depressing and I could lose as much as £20,000 or £30,000.”

Guy Gagen from the National Farmers’ Union said: “This is the most difficult harvest for at least 40 years. Farmers say it compares to 1968, which was very similar, with heavy rain throughout the summer. We just need a break in the weather. If we get that for five to seven days farmers can recover.”


howard thomas said...

How does that fit with the peak of temperatures in 1998 and the gradual decline since then................figures,Adrian,can be used to paint the picture that you are looking to see!

Adrian Windisch said...

As has been written about many times, the peak in '98 was due to El Nino.

Where are your figures Howard?

howard thomas said...

Adrian.. we all know that the temperatures peaked in 1998....and have fallen slightly since. What does that do for the theory that we are on the edge of a diaster, when CO2 levels are rising , but not temperatures...............odd isn't it!
The figures ,if you care to look , are everywhere!

Adrian Windisch said...

Howard, see my previous answer.

Please read and understand the links already given before commenting on this again.

howard thomas said...

Ah yes, the University of East Anglia, where they discuss ways to make the figures tell the story that they wish to present.
And then there is the infamous 'hockey stick ' graph that completely levels out the 'middle ages warm period', like it simply didn't exist,and makes it look like we are about to roast.
Science should be about finding the truth,the whole truth and nothing but the truth...........not cooking the books to justify the future employment of those who write up the reports!

Adrian Windisch said...

What are you talking about Howard? This is nothing to do with the UAE, which was blown out of all proportion by the way.

Denialists tried to attack 'the hockey stick' but it still stands.

I could easily prove all this, but if you wont read anything I have said so far on this thread is there any point?

I am surprised that some people choose to believe scientists are involved in a conspiracy theory about all this, along with most politicians, NASA, the UN etc. Instead they believe everything that the oil industry says, who do actually have a financial interest.

howard thomas said...

"scientists are involved in a conspiracy theory" could also come under the guise of 'don't bite the hand that feeds' (or pays ) you.
This is much like the research conducted into whether mobile phones present a risk to health......carried out at the expense of the mobile phone companies.......what else would you expect the answer to be?
Moving on , how do you account for the decrease in the temperature of the earth between 1940 and 1975 at a time of increasing CO2 emissions. It doesn't seem to add up to me. Does it make sense to you?

Adrian Windisch said...

Are you going to ask every question from the CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL: 100 REASONS WHY as featured in the daily express?

Just see

howard thomas said...

I wouldn't know ,Adrian, I don't read the Express!