met office switch to farenheit to make “warming” amount appear twice as large?
The Standard International (SI) unit for temperature is Kelvin, but one Kelvin Unit is equal to one Centigrade unit, however 1 farenheit is approximately 0.5 centigrade.
So the met office claim warmest year since records began by 0.6 farenheit which is about 0.3 centigrade. Where digital thermometers are not even accurate to that level of reading, even though they might kick out a value of .2dp for a temperature such as 21.35, any two units of the same chip could be out of calibration by 0.5-2 centigrade either way, and the same sort of tolerance level is given for any two readings on the same device, which may vary in tolerance as it goes up and down the temperature range. And sure the readings in 1880 did not attempt to go beyond 0.5c or 0.5f, so I reckon 0.6f is statistically insignificant. And the whole thing is very dubious as the number of sites feeding into these readings must be 1000 times the number of sites there were in say 1880. And the amount of city/urban area and population and road tarmac is several orders of magnitude more than in 1880. All these things affect local temperature, and I bet most of the current temp reading sites are in urban areas, or taxi/warmup areas for fucking jumbo jets at airports eh!