Metomania

It was the 5th warmest since records began in the US. The 106th coldest is a play on words, and not a very clever one at that (as a retired teacher you'd be marked low for trying to be clever, without being!). It is the 106th warmest in 111 winters, or, if you want to use your little word play, it is the 106th least cold. Using coldest will confuse people, and in metereology there is no need for that - especially if it's a deliberate attempt to distort facts.

I decided not to respond on that point ... it's beyond the absurd! (No offence OP, but deary me!)

I think you misread that. It's the 106th warmest in 111 years, not coldest. No in metereological and geophysical terms it is not peanuts, it is the fastest increase in temperature we have seen on this planet. Attitudes like yours are deeply worrying, but fortunately fast becoming the fringe as people take seriously the problems we face.

By the way, just to pick up on one point: not to find anything remarkable in the fact that six of the nine warmest Aprils of the past 40 years have been in the last ten years is itself fairly remarkable. To go 30 years and have 3 of the warmest, and then go 10 years and have 6 of them would be 'noteworthy'.

Going on the graphs, rather than his frontpage which isn't updated since 15th, and up to yesterday? http://www.climate-uk.com/ I'd await his return before we can be sure. Going through some figures based on the 6z run I'd say we should get a figure above 8.8C on the NW tracker - perhaps over 9C is not out of the question. A lot will depend on these maximum temperatures. If the cloud lifts and we see the sort of projected figures then anything up to 9.4 is possible really. I'd reckon between 8.8C and 9.2C looks probably about right from here ... but that's on the NW tracker, which has been very accurate since I joined.

You wouldn't. A little cold-biased I think Nevertheless, the 1940's also had a string of warm Aprils which was equally remarkable. (Though you neatly side-stepped the 6.4C in 1941 I notice!!!!) Personally I'm delighted to be getting back to above average months, although GW worries me greatly.

The CET is lifting briskly now. With it currently at 8.25 something above 8.8C looks likely. If it does attain 8.9C it will be the equal 9th warmest April in the last 40 years. What's amazing about that statistic though is that 6 of them have been in the last 10 years.

Just done the figures, and the six month period from 01st October to 31st March was: 0.3C above the 1961-1990 average 0.1C below the 1971-2000 average and 0.1C above the 100 rolling average 1906-2005. So although there were colder/cooler months, the last six months have been average (the 1961-1990 mean is undoubtedly cold-biased). To have an average 6 months is significant after a large number of months with an upward trend. It will be very interesting to see where things head from here!

The six months from October 1st to March 31st was the coldest since 2000-1. I'm not too sure about the 'astonishing' point really Reef - it all depends on when you pick your reference point. We need to see this in a long-term context. The average (or slightly below) months apart from January will need to be viewed over the following years. If the general trend in the CET remains upward then the 3 months below average 4 if you include February which was average to the 1961-1990 mean) will be an interesting blip. Those who believe in cycles will be hoping the next few winters show the trend to cooler conditions was no one-off, but something more significant. But I do think we need to reserve words like 'astonishing' for now. How did it fare for the 6 months from October 1st to March 31st?

Blast - the 1F increase in the past century, which has shown an acceleration in the last 20 years, is the fastest warm up in the planet's history so far as we can tell. It may not seem much but on a global scale it's a significant increase, and without precedent. The NOAA now report winter 2005/6 as the 5th warmest in the US since 1895 - so that's the 5th warmest in 111 years. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/resear...b/national.html

The Met Office have released both the February CET and the March CET. You can see the Hadley figures on their site, here: http://www.metoffice.com/research/hadleyce.../HadCET_act.txt February is officially 3.7C and March is officially 4.9C.

The Met Office have released both the February CET and the March CET. You can see the Hadley figures on their site, here: http://www.metoffice.com/research/hadleyce.../HadCET_act.txt February is officially 3.7C and March is officially 4.9C. (By the way, I agree that it's not unreasonable for a 20C, or even a 21C, to be reached in April but the best test of the month's temperature remains the average temperature, rather than freak warm or freak cold. Those are never good indicators. This was the very point The Eye was making.) Edit - Blast, what is "WIB"?

Well the 8.1C has finally been reeled in on the NW tracker - it's now at 8.1C. With 9 and a bit days to go it's going to be very interesting to see where this winds up!

The Eye, You can't have it both ways! I took issue with your comment that . I challenged this precisely because an overall average April, or indeed an above average one which we're heading for, can be reached in any number of ways. What matters in terms of the CET is not how that average is attained, but whether, over the entire month, the average is below, on, or above. You can't have it both ways - on the one hand complaining at allegedly low maximums at the same time as admitting that there are many ways to get there, including not having high maxima! Consistency please ...As it happens, I don't agree anyway with your maximum temperature assertions for reasons I pointed out, and which you haven't answered: not least that the maximum temperature has exceeded the average every day since April 12th. We're likely to have a 20C or a 21C before the month is out anyway so I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make. The fact, if indeed at midnight on April 30th this is the case, is that April will be an above average month.

Hi Chris - I'm using 'norm' as synonymous with 'average'. So I totally agree about many ways to reach that norm i.e. average for the month. Got to take issue about facts though. I think there are facts - such as that the CET average for 1971-2000 is 8.1C. That's the sort of fact I don't want to concede or metereologists might as well pack up their bags? Another is that the mean max CET temp since April 12th has been above the norm - see Philip's Eden's link I posted. On the other hand, I agree that there are other statistics which can be manipulated, and there are ways of playing with them.