date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 16:20:30 +0100 from: André Berger subject: Re: Fwd: Re: 2007 to be 'warmest on record' to: Phil Jones Phil, Many thanks for your paper and congratulations for reviving the global warming. Wait to see you March 5 in Paris. Cheers André Le 12:16 5/01/2007, vous avez écrit: Andre, Happy New Year ! Hope to see you in Paris on March 5. Here is what I sent back to Timo. I am realizing that there were many more blind cc's on his email, which my reply hasn't gone to! I will email Timo and ask him to send these around. I'm attaching just for you the detailed press release for the 2006 temperatures and also Chris Folland's prediction for 2007. Mine is similar but much simpler. Don't send Chris' forecast onto anyone else, but you can send the detailed 2006 press release on to anybody. As usual Timo is wrong ! These forecasts have been done for a number of years. Only two seemed to be archived online. I can't seem to persuade either the HC nor UEA to archive these for longer, nor add the more detailed pdfs. Cheers Phil Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 10:27:24 +0000 To: Timo Hämeranta , "Chris K. Folland" From: Phil Jones Subject: Re: 2007 to be 'warmest on record' Cc: "'Alan J. Thorpe'" , , "'Al Pekarek'" , 'André Bijkerk' , "'Anthony R. Lupo'" , "'Benny Peiser'" , "'Bob Foster'" , "'Douglas V. Hoyt'" , "'Jack Barrett'" , "'Jarl R. Ahlbeck'" , "'Michael C. MacCracken'" , "'Patrick J. Michaels'" , "'Peter Stilbs'" , "'Piers Corbyn'" , "'Richard S. Lindzen'" , "'S. Fred Singer'" , "'Sallie Baliunas'" , "'Stephen McIntyre'" , "'Tom V. Segalstad'" , 'Wibjörn Karlén' , "'Willie Soon'" , "'Vincent Gray'" , "'Boris Winterhalter'" Timo, You recall incorrectly. This isn't the first time. In fact Chris and the Hadley Centre have been doing this for a number of years. The forecasts have generally been with the earlier press release in mid-Dec for, if I recall correctly, since about 1999 or 2000. The press release archive at the Met Office has that for 2006 issued on 15th Dec 2005. You'll need to download the pdf with that press release. They don't seem to have archived earlier years online (and neither does UEA it seems). This said 1. The forecast for 2006 made then (15/12/05) was 0.45+/- 0.12. The final number for 2006 was 0.42 2. The same pdf gave the forecast from 2004 for 2005. The forecast was for 0.51 and it was 0.48. Chris will have a list of the earlier forecasts. The switch over from HadCRUT2(v) to HadCRUT3(v) has changed levels slightly, so the earlier ones are no longer compatible. The techniques that have gone into the forecast have also been refined. There is a background document to the 2007 forecast, which again Chris may be able to send. The 2007 forecast is for 0.54 +/- 0.16 (95% confidence level), which is only marginally above the 1998 value (hence the 60% chance that it will be broken). With the latest method (i.e. that used in 2007), the forecast for 2006 was 0.37 (real value 0.42), so slightly cold but well within the 95% range. Chris has told me he is writing up the latest approaches for a paper. I can only presume that this time there has been more press coverage, as the forecast is for a record. The earlier ones were made, however, but as they were always for a value below that in 1998, they seemed to get ignored by the press. I recall saying with some of the earlier press releases, that it would take an El Nino event to break the 1998 record. Although this one is only in the moderate category compared to 1997/98, the base level is now nearly 0.2 deg C higher than it was in 1997. 2005 got close, even without an El Nino event. I don't want to get into a big debate about this. There will be an IPCC report due out this year, and there will be much to debate there as to why the underlying temperatures now are running higher than they were in 1997/98. As an aside, you can download the global temperature series (HadCRUT3(v)) from either our (CRU/UEA) or the Met Office (HC) web sites. I recall several statements made to the media over the last year or two about trends in global temperature since 1998. Before you make these again, work out the linear trend from 1998. If you take 1998-2005, or 1998-2006 (I've only worked these two out) the trend coefficient is positive. It isn't significant statistically, but I wouldn't expect any trend coefficient in any observational climate series to be significant when just using 8 or 9 years. Best Regards Phil At 09:08 05/01/2007, Timo Hämeranta wrote: Philip D. Jones Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia Chris K. Folland Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research Dear Phil and Chris, I notice how you predict that this year 2007 will be the warmest on record (The Independent Jan 1, and BBC News Jan 4). If I recall correctly, this is the first time you have made a prediction for one year. Until now you have presented computerized projections only, for decades or a century. I suppose you are now confident that HadCam3 parameterizations are now all-inclusive and truly reliable for presenting past climates and for predictions. Yet, Im a bit suspicious. Until now, as far as I have seen, all the scientists who argue that human CO2 emissions are to blame for current warming have explained: We dont know any other cause I have always wondered how ignorance confirms certainty. Actually, to fill certain scientists ignorance we have other scientists who have alternative explanations. For example, when we take a look for longer periods than recent decades or thermometer readings we see how the Earth has been warming almost 400 years now, with cooling intervals. One alternative explanation is Singer, S. Fred, and Dennis T. Avery, 2006 Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years. 276 pp., Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., December 2006 Book Description Singer and Avery present in popular language supported by in-depth scientific evidence the compelling concept that global temperatures have been rising mostly or entirely because of a natural cycle. Unstoppable Global Warming explains why we're warming, why it's not very dangerous, and why we can't stop it anyway. Personally, I dont know how climate evolves in near or far future. We may be heading e.g. for a new Maunder Minimum or for a long natural warm era. But, as far as I can see, scientifically you, dear scientists, dont know for sure, either. All the best to yr future attempts to enlarge our knowledge and understanding. Timo xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Timo Hämeranta, LL.M. Martinlaaksontie 42 B 9 01620 Vantaa Finland, European Union Email: timo.hameranta@pp.inet.fi Home page: [1]http://personal.inet.fi/koti/hameranta/climate.htm "If the facts change, I'll change my opinion. What do you do, Sir" (John Maynard Keynes) "To dwell only on horror scenarios of the future shows only a lack of imagination".(Kari Enqvist) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Prof. Phil Jones Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 University of East Anglia Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk NR4 7TJ UK ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof. Phil Jones Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 University of East Anglia Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk NR4 7TJ UK ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof. A. BERGER Université catholique de Louvain Institut d'Astronomie et de Géophysique G. Lemaître 2 Chemin du Cyclotron B-1348 LOUVAIN-LA-NEUVE BELGIUM Tel. +32-10-47 33 03 Fax +32-10-47 47 22 E_mail: berger@astr.ucl.ac.be [2]http://www.astr.ucl.ac.be/u/berger -----------------------------------------------------------------------------