This is just too funny. Hard-nosed sceptical Scots, who have been used to extreme weather for hundreds of years, react with undisguised cynicism to suggestions by ‘experts’ that Storm Babet is the harbinger of future climate change doom and that Scots should ‘get used’ to weather conditions which they have been accustomed to for millennia!
Paul Homewood has comprehensively debunked the absurd claim by Sky News that Storm Babet was caused by “climate change”, which nowadays is taken to man-made climate change (or just climate change!). He ends with “Quite how Sky News can get away with publishing lies like this without being censured by OFCOM is a mystery”: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2023/10/22/sky-blame-babet-floods-on-climate-change/.
These climate liars have actually got their propaganda the wrong way round as history shows that weather conditions during the Little Ice Age were far worse than today (or would be in their dreaded warmer future). That is exactly as would be expected scientifically due to the strengthened thermal gradients which then prevailed across the then colder UK latitudes.
Sky and others get away with it because Ofcom is peopled by woke leftists who are fully signed up to the climate change/Great reset/UN 2030 sustainability agenda. So they will come down heavily on Covid or climate change 'misinformation' which rejects the government approved/WEF narrative, but turn a blind eye to actual misinformation, lies and propaganda spread by the mainstream media which reinforces that approved narrative.
The worst part of the "climate" fraud isn't what it forces us to do. The worst part is that the fraud PREVENTS us from adapting to bad weather patterns.
FDR faced a bad weather pattern, droughts in some places and floods in others. 1938 was a year of EXTREME floods and hurricanes.
His administration masterfully dealt with the drought by building windbreaks and training farmers. The New Deal adapted to the floods by building hydroelectric dams, controlling the rivers and advancing industry all at once.
Now we create floods to allegedly control tiny parts per million of "pollution", and we tear down dams to make everyone more vulnerable and eliminate electric power.
In very simplistic meteorological terms. A breakaway cold pool from the meridional jet stream plus high pressure over Norway were the main drivers. These lows are very slow moving with a remnant portion of jet wrapped around the southern edge. The left exit from this jet is an area of high cyclogenesis. From here deepening lows and associated troughs form. Unfortunately a blocking high over Scandinavia holds back the movement of the weather fronts. When they become parallel to the gradient wind, they stall. Result: All available precipitation is dumped in situ. The next trough swings in, stalling nearby. Result : Flooding.
Thank you for the more technical explanation. The climate crisis fanatics will argue endlessly that more moisture was picked up and subsequently more fell as heavy rain because Clausius-Clapeyron=climate change. They will pointedly ignore all meteorological dynamics and concentrate solely on one feature of simple thermodynamics in order to prosecute their case. Dumb.
Well, it's 'new' in the sense that the Met Office only started naming them in 2015 to 'raise public awareness of extreme weather'. So yes, it was a blatant climate change propaganda exercise. There was no scientific reason for giving names to every deep cyclonic depression which made its way across the UK.
Here is an enlightening compilation of contemporary accounts of weather events for the period 1700-1849: floods, droughts,heatwaves and freezing winters.
Long before anyone thought of Net Zero and the British weather revealing its changeable and unpredictable trends.
But,lots and lots of money and vested interests behind Net Zero.
Paul Homewood has comprehensively debunked the absurd claim by Sky News that Storm Babet was caused by “climate change”, which nowadays is taken to man-made climate change (or just climate change!). He ends with “Quite how Sky News can get away with publishing lies like this without being censured by OFCOM is a mystery”: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2023/10/22/sky-blame-babet-floods-on-climate-change/.
These climate liars have actually got their propaganda the wrong way round as history shows that weather conditions during the Little Ice Age were far worse than today (or would be in their dreaded warmer future). That is exactly as would be expected scientifically due to the strengthened thermal gradients which then prevailed across the then colder UK latitudes.
Paul has posted extensively on the work of meteorologist HH Lamb who studied and recorded the adverse weather of the past, see https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/11/16/hh-lamb-the-great-storms-of-the-little-ice-age/. A search of his website for “little ice age” brings up a trove of further posts on the fierce storms and extreme weather of that time.
Sky and others get away with it because Ofcom is peopled by woke leftists who are fully signed up to the climate change/Great reset/UN 2030 sustainability agenda. So they will come down heavily on Covid or climate change 'misinformation' which rejects the government approved/WEF narrative, but turn a blind eye to actual misinformation, lies and propaganda spread by the mainstream media which reinforces that approved narrative.
The worst part of the "climate" fraud isn't what it forces us to do. The worst part is that the fraud PREVENTS us from adapting to bad weather patterns.
FDR faced a bad weather pattern, droughts in some places and floods in others. 1938 was a year of EXTREME floods and hurricanes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio_River_flood_of_1937
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_flood_of_1938
https://www.weather.gov/okx/1938HurricaneHome
His administration masterfully dealt with the drought by building windbreaks and training farmers. The New Deal adapted to the floods by building hydroelectric dams, controlling the rivers and advancing industry all at once.
http://polistrasmill.com/2022/03/07/wpa-5-5-summary/
Now we create floods to allegedly control tiny parts per million of "pollution", and we tear down dams to make everyone more vulnerable and eliminate electric power.
http://polistrasmill.blogspot.com/2016/03/pix-of-pits.html
Well said Jamie...
In very simplistic meteorological terms. A breakaway cold pool from the meridional jet stream plus high pressure over Norway were the main drivers. These lows are very slow moving with a remnant portion of jet wrapped around the southern edge. The left exit from this jet is an area of high cyclogenesis. From here deepening lows and associated troughs form. Unfortunately a blocking high over Scandinavia holds back the movement of the weather fronts. When they become parallel to the gradient wind, they stall. Result: All available precipitation is dumped in situ. The next trough swings in, stalling nearby. Result : Flooding.
It’s weather. It’s not Climate Change.
Thank you for the more technical explanation. The climate crisis fanatics will argue endlessly that more moisture was picked up and subsequently more fell as heavy rain because Clausius-Clapeyron=climate change. They will pointedly ignore all meteorological dynamics and concentrate solely on one feature of simple thermodynamics in order to prosecute their case. Dumb.
Is this official naming of storms new, a rhetorical trick to make them loom larger in people's mind, like all the weather warnings?
Well, it's 'new' in the sense that the Met Office only started naming them in 2015 to 'raise public awareness of extreme weather'. So yes, it was a blatant climate change propaganda exercise. There was no scientific reason for giving names to every deep cyclonic depression which made its way across the UK.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/features/44481058
https://www.pascalbonenfant.com/18c/geography/weather.html
Here is an enlightening compilation of contemporary accounts of weather events for the period 1700-1849: floods, droughts,heatwaves and freezing winters.
Long before anyone thought of Net Zero and the British weather revealing its changeable and unpredictable trends.
But,lots and lots of money and vested interests behind Net Zero.