This forum is about wrong numbers in science, politics and the media. It respects good science and good English.
One of the most intriguing numbers in regard to AGW is how many years will the global warming pause (or hiatus) have to last before climate scientists accept that there is a problem with their models.
The attitude of the IPCC to the global warming pause issue in their press conference for the release of the AR5 'Summary for Policymakers' in 2013 is described in this GWPF article by David Whitehouse:
At the press conference, the Daily Mail's AGW sceptic journalist David Rose did manage to ask the important question of how the long the pause would have to last, after grabbing the microphone from another journalist, only to receive an evasive reply.
But a few days ago a news story in Breitbart London announced that an answer to the important question has finally been obtained.
The Royal Society sent a delegation to convince a group of UK Conservative MPs to drop their scepticism towards man-made climate change, apparently arguing that the sceptical MPs would be ruining the economy. The group appears to have included Peter Lilley, John Redwood and David TC Davies (the TC is to distinguish him from the other, more well-known David Davies). According to David TC Davies, the Royal Society view was that the pause, or hiatus as AGW proponents seem to prefer to call it, would have to go on for another 50 years before they accepted there was a problem. It was also clarified that the 50 years they were talking about applies from the present date rather than the date identified by David Whitehouse as being when the pause started, the beginning of 1997. So the pause would have to go on until the year 2065 before the Royal Society will admit defeat.
I would guess that the "hottest day" syndrome is back with us again today and this will be parleyed into one swallow does make for AGW. Indeed, i am surprised that the "hottest day" did not obviously trigger a rash of AGW stories in the media - or maybe I have stopped seeing them.
Yes, July 1st 2015 has supposedly been the hottest July day ever recorded in the UK, with a temperature of 36.7 deg C or 98.1 deg F.
I haven't really seen anything in the UK media which attempts to link it to AGW so far. I get the impression that nowadays the media limits itself to associating flooding with AGW and tends to steer clear of temperatures, possibly as a result of the 'snow is a thing of the past' debacle.
I vaguely remembered that the last time, back in 2006, that this 'hottest July day ever' story came up, a sceptical journalist called Ross Clark writing in the Times pointed out that there had been a higher UK temperature in July recorded in Victorian times. The Times is now of course unreferenceable as it has gone behind a pay wall, but I managed to find some blog called "The Daily Duck" where the blogger happened to write a post based on the Clark article and seems to have included most, if not all, of the text of the article:
From the blog post it looks like the Victorian record temperature was 38.1 deg C or 100.6 deg F on 22nd July 1868 at Tonbridge in Kent. This record, which was listed in 1950s textbooks, was apparently thrown out because the thermometer and housing were not considered acceptable by modern standards.