This year, Russia experienced its warmest winter since records began, with temperatures in most regions of the country six to eight degrees centigrade higher than average. Reading about this a few days ago made me less anxious about the accuracy of the Koltsovo data. The station in Yekaterinburg recorded running average mean temperatures 7°C above Pre-Industrial throughout March. Each week since then has been cooler than the one before, an experience largely shared by the other four northern hemisphere stations.
Even with the cooling in the last seven or eight weeks, the Northern Five are still over twice as warm as last year. The IPCC has projected a global temperature of 1.065°C above P-I at year-end, (based on an even rise of 0.0217 degrees per annum from 2017). The math is simple and yields a notional warming rate of 92 times greater than the IPCC projection in 2020 to date. Last year’s warming rate was a tenth of that.
How are the Southern Five faring?
I have mentioned before how much cooler the south is this year. There has been a slight rise and levelling over the last four weeks but overall the “warming rate” is negative, expressed in the chart as x 24 “cool rate”. The southern hemisphere last year was warmer than the north (at the 5 stations), though not by much. Unless something remarkable happens, the south will not climb above the IPCC’s 1.065 degrees above P-I by the end of November.
Combining North and South gives the 10 station globe at Week 24 a running average mean temperature of 1.81°C above P-I, a warming rate of x34. Last year ended at 1.35°C, warming 14 times more than the IPCC projection. The noticeable global cooling from Week 16 has become less steep recently but I don’t think we’ll reach my “mini globe’s” 2.2 degrees above P-I peak, experienced in the first week of March.
Flower 16 · Leopard’s Bane
Slowly spreading up the ravine after wildflower seeding following post-flood restoration about 11 years ago. (With red campion, cow parsley and hogweed.)
Back in December, I looked at the three contenders for a lasting place in the affections of John COLLEY.
They were not all called Jane.
I messaged a contributor and can now report that some changes have been made on the Shared Tree. It may help to read Jane Lundy x2 before proceeding.
All of the women discussed in December’s post have been thrown in the dustbin of family history, though Sarah’s ID has been taken by an outsider, one Jane STUTTER.
This screenshot updates December’s Jane & Sarah illustration.
I am questioning Jane Stutter because she dies aged 47 and not 56 as recorded by the gravestone, death registration and burial record. Her five children were born in Filey between 1827 and 1837 but her marriage to John took place in Essex in July 1825. Maldon is a small port on the Blackwater estuary, so it is quite possible that our Master Mariner found his wife there. But I am loathe to give up on the elder Jane LUNDY who figures in Filey Genealogy & Connections, though there are no sources to prove a woman with that name married the sailor.
The marriage of John to Jane Stutter does not seem definitive, lacking information regarding home parishes, father’s names and their occupations. It doesn’t give the age of the bride or groom either. Jane’s age on the Shared Tree accords with the 1841 Census, where she is 38, living with 47-year-old John in Prospect Place, Filey. Enumerators were cavalier with ages at this census and the instruction “to the nearest five years” could give a margin of error up to ten years for adults. Jane is said to be Yorkshire-born – and searching for a fitting Colley family in Essex has yielded nothing so far.
I also sent a plea-for-help message in December regarding the elder Jane Lundy’s great-granddaughter Mary Jane COLLING, who was posing as Mary COLLEY, daughter of William and his wife Jane JENKINSON. See Another Mistaken Mary. I didn’t get a reply and so, five months on, I have packed the errant Mary off to the West Riding, where she belongs.
Tree 37 · Country Park