Are Britain’s official weather forecasts biased in favor of warming?

1. Are Britain’s official
weather forecasts biased in favor of warming?

This is the question being asked by a British watchdog group, the Global
Warming Policy Foundation. The foundation is calling for an inquiry into the
British Meteorological Office, known as the Met Office, which is the official
weather prognosticator for the British government. As has
been discussed in previous newsletters, Great Britain is suffering through
its coldest and harshest winter in a century, and that has become a trend for
both Britain and much of Europe. Yet just last summer the Met Office informed
the government that "there was only a small chance of a severe
winter in 2010/11, especially in the midst of a long global warming
trend."

Apparently the British press is also becoming more skeptical of the Met Office.
These are some references published in an
article by the Center for a Responsible Tomorrow:

John Walsh of The Independent wrote recently, "Some
climatologists hint that the Office’s problem is political. Its computer
habitually feeds in government-backed assumptions about climate change that
aren’t borne out by the facts. To the Met Office, the weather’s always warmer
than it really is."

Dominic Lawson of the Sunday Times asserted,
"A period of humility and even silence would be welcome from the Met
Office, which had promised a ‘barbecue summer’ in 2009 [it was wet and cold]
and one of the ‘warmest winters on record’ [for 2010/11 instead of the harsh
cold and blizzards which have occurred]."

2. Telegraph: Met Office kept Brit winter forecast secret

In October the forecaster
privately warned the Government — with whom it has a contract — that Britain
was likely to face an extremely cold winter.

It kept the prediction secret, however, after facing severe criticism over the
accuracy of its long-term forecasts.

This is now being reported
in the London Telegraph.

The Global Warming Policy Foundation, mentioned in the previous section, has
its own take on the lack of openness of the Met Office. In this
article they ask, "Did UK Government Keep Cold Winter Warning Secret
In Run-Up To UN Climate Conference?"

3. Commentary: Progress-Duke merger a model for the progressive
economic agenda

The progressivist vision of how an economy should look and operate is
represented almost perfectly by the merger of Duke Power and
Progress Energy. This merger creates a giant government-protected monopoly
that will, in conjunction with government bureaucrats, control the production,
sale, and distribution of electric power for most of North and South Carolina.

This has always been the economic vision of the progressive movement going back
to the early 20th Century. It is the model that originally gave us the FCC,
which created cartels in the radio and TV industries; the CAB, which cartelized
the airline industry; and the ICC, which brought about the cartelization of the
trucking industry, among other monopoly creating government agencies.

In the progressive economy, all production activities would be dominated by a
few very large industries that work hand-in-glove with the regulatory apparatus
of the state. A few very large companies are easier and less costly to regulate
and pacify than many smaller companies acting in a competitive environment. The
Duke/Progress merger advances this agenda.

While these companies are, on paper, private, they have their market completely
protected from competition by government regulation. All prices are set with
prior approval of the state and, in exchange for this, profits are guaranteed
at certain levels. In addition, the state makes decisions about how and what
sources are used to produce the product in question. In this instance the
product is electricity. In other words, all the important decisions are made by
government while maintaining the veneer of private enterprise.

By the way, this is also the model for transforming the health insurance
industry under Obamacare.

Click here for the Environmental
Update archive.