I have noticed that the “National Night-time Hotspot” is still writ large in BoM But in the interval medications such as generic sildenafil uk e hugely effective. Those who want to live fully and choose a drug safe, reliable and cheap it can increase sexual potency; Kamagra levitra free samples is a finest way for people who want to improve their vision. It is estimated that in 2012, 16 million adults were regencygrandenursing.com/long-term-care/dementia-alzheimers-care viagra prescription affected by major depression. One day after getting friendly with a guy summoning the courage to approach a girl. viagra uk regencygrandenursing.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&layout=item&id=36&Itemid=285 data minimum temperature data for the 12 months ended 30 Nov 11.
They never learn.
Category Archives: Surface Record
Perth has a hot year – BoM totally lacking in perspective
The Murdoch press website PerthNow reports the Perth BoM pointing out that Perth has had another hot year. I also note how the BoM beats this up, “It’s an indication that Perth is warming and that is consistent with the whole of the South-West of WA and consistent with global temperatures as well,”.
Is the BoM so lacking in perspective that they can not bring themselves to mention the fact that ~70% of Australia looks to be having a cooler than average year using the BoM map data from 1 Dec 2010 to 30 Nov 2011. And I have not even started on about the Perth UHI – not to mention the history of the changing Perth instruments site.
It is nice to see a healthy scepticism in the comments to the PerthNow article.
US Dept of Energy – should come under more scrutiny
I see that Fox News has latched on to the Climategate2 email(s) revealing Phil Jones saying the DoE were happy with him not releasing station data. They also quote from the DoE email to me in 2005 where after asking for station data I was told – that the DoE had no data and that Phil Jones was not obligated under the terms of his DoE funding to supply them with data.
This follows on from the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) late November FOI action in the US to get the DoE to reveal their correspondence with Phil Jones from 2007. We await with interest the result of the CEI efforts. It has puzzled me over several years that no US org has filed an FOI application with their DoE. A Phil Jones email revealed in Climategate2 has him saying that the DoE which was funding him (since 1979 Phil) wanted the data, “..to be well hidden.” Phil goes on to say – “I’ve discussed this with the main funder (US Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.”
It is important to know that this was not always the case. Following the publishing of the Jones et al 1986 hemispheric papers which “birthed” global warming – the DoE CDIAC division published two books – TR022 (Northern Hemisphere) and TR027 Southern – which set out in fair detail the Jones et al methods. These books were distributed free with data diskettes to anybody who asked for them – and I bet can still be found in many US public libraries. There was an updated combined volumes published in 1991 which I still have but that was the last edition I know of – I have posted pdf files of the 1991 book downloadable here.
When Phil Jones published his 1994 “Hemispheric surface air temperature variations: a reanalysis and an update to 1993.” J Clim 7:1794-1802 – no supporting documentation books were published – and that is the case to this day. So sometime in the mid 1990’s somebody in the DoE decided to cease publishing the books which revealed much about the Jones data and methods.
Did Richard Muller really make this elementary error in his BEST project ?
I have just noticed an article by Jeff Id at “WattsUpWithThat” that says the BEST project analysing global temperature records – does this – “They detect steps in the data, chop the series at the steps and reassemble them.”
Jeff had a link to Climate Audit – and sure enough Steve has a “saw-tooth” diagram, Posted Oct 31, 2011 at 3:24 PM
As Steve says, “in terms of estimating “natural” temperature, the unsliced series would be a better index than concatenating the sliced segments.” Dead right.
As far as I can tell, this diagram expresses exactly what the two GISS diagrams did in 2001 – see from Hansen, J.E., R. Ruedy, Mki. Sato, M. Imhoff, W. Lawrence, D. Easterling, T. Peterson, and T. Karl 2001. A closer look at United States and global surface temperature change. J. Geophys. Res. 106, 23947-23963, doi:10.1029/2001JD000354. and a pdf can be downloaded.
I have a page here explaining the thing –
Also a blog post.
Somali pirates could be causing BoM seasonal Outlooks to be inaccurate
Just saw this news at ABC online. “Pirates disrupting climate change research”
Note at the end – “….so right now half the tropical Indian Ocean is out of bounds for us so it’s a big problem, both for weather forecasting but also for that longer term climate seasonal forecasting.”
Continue reading Somali pirates could be causing BoM seasonal Outlooks to be inaccurate
Non-climatic anomalies in BoM temperature anomaly maps
While compiling the Autumn Temperature Outlooks piece – I noticed what looked like an aberration in the contouring of the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) Autumn minimum temperature anomaly maps here – features that were repeated in the monthly minimum anomaly maps for March – April – May 2011.
I am talking about the area near the SW corner of the Northern Territory (NT)- a remote region with sparse data where two stations in particular seem to be at the centre of aberrant contouring over many months – and I have checked back as far as 2002 where the feature shows very obviously month after month.
The two stations concerned are; Walungurru – Number:15664 Opened: 2001 – and Giles Meteorological Office Number:13017 Opened: 1956. Of course the two stations are very different – Walungurru at a remote community – only has a few years of data, and of course averages over the 1961-1990 period would have to be estimated from neighbours and this site suggests no neighbours are close.
I have not found a photo of the instruments site or found exactly where BoM Station Walungurru Number:15664 is located other than Lat: 23.27° S, Lon: 129.38° E, Elevation: 454 m. – and when I clicked on a map icon for details I read – “The information for this station 015664 is not available now, but it may be available in the future”.
This image from GoogleEarth shows the layout at Walungurru / Kintore – the Lat-Lon plots just under the red “T”. It is a possible location seeing that public servants would attend the sewage/water works. I would expect to see a fenced enclosure.
Giles on the other hand is a purpose built – I expect state of the art – worlds best practice meteorological station.
This map of the Minimum Temperature Anomaly for Autumn 2011 has the approximate locations of Walungurru and Giles marked, the two places are ~220 km apart. We see in this map how the Walungurru data forms an anomalously warm pimple in the contouring while Giles is the opposite, forming a cool pit.
This pattern is too common to be natural see my 2002-2007 animation of annual minimum anomalies where Walungurru is always prominent.
You get the point. So often anomalous – I think it stands out that the BoM map construction has incorporated a problem.
This could be caused if the BoM estimated Walungurru anomalies for the 1961-1990 standard reference period assuming too great a warming in the minimum temperature. That could explain why the Walungurru site so often produces a “warm pimple” in the contouring which because of the mathematics of the contouring produces a dipole effect “cool pit” in neighbouring Giles, in effect preventing the more reliable Giles data having its proper influence.
And I have only picked one small area of the map.
Canberra Airport scores a 54 year record for cold May mornings
Today the 29th of May – Canberra Airport minimum temperature went under 0 degrees for the nineteenth day this month.
This exceeds the 18 days under zero which were recorded in May of 1959 and 1961. The record standing now is from 1957 which had 27 days with minimums under zero. Data at Canberra Airport station # 70014 starts in 1939.
I understand this is weather not climate but we all know how the BoM trumpets any warm record it can in the main stream media – so we will be interested to see what the BoM says after the month ends. And we must remember this cold record was set despite the ever increasing Canberra urban heat island.
No, I am not making this up
I saw where Chris Gilham over at the Anthony Watts site is talking about the record heat in Perth last summer and start to 2011.
Had to drive home the disastrous BoM Maximum Temperature Outlook for Jan-Feb-Mar. Could anything be so wrong ?
Note in the Yahoo news item how the BoM – completely without shame talk up their next Outlook !
I was curious if this record heat is as marked in rural areas around Perth – and looking at BoM monthly data for Jan to April in 1978 and 2011 – you can see the answer is – probably not.
From north to south, Pearce RAAF base was 0.05 degrees warmer in 2011 compared 1978, Northam was 0.125 warmer (round how you like), York was exactly unchanged and Karnet was 0.65 cooler in 2011.
I suggest people take 5 or 10min to investigate the data for regions they know.
What a shambles. No wonder Phil Jones mostly stuck to cities. Continue reading No, I am not making this up
Australian FOI law keeps secret the construction of New Zealand seven station temperature series
In 2010 the New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd (NIWA) with the assistance of four months help from the Australian BoM revised their seven station NZ temperature series to arrive at a national temperature trend from 1910. This is a much shorter period than the previous seven station series which was from before 1860.
The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition (NZCSC) started with an Official Information Act request on 21 December 2009 – attempting to obtain from NIWA details of the adjustments and construction of the seven station series from the many component data. These efforts did not succeed and I think in August 2010 they started court action against NIWA – which I understand is not over.
At the end of August 2010 NIWA sought the assistance of the Australian BoM to check their seven station series and in late December 2010 the revised NIWA seven station trend was published.
The NZ blog Climate Conversation Group has an article on 28th April “NIWA — show us the peer review!” – where they discuss the unsatisfactory state of affairs due to NIWA secretly adjusting raw station data to make their high warming seven station trend a trend that is unverifiable until NIWA releases details.
In February 2011 I lodged an FOI request with the BoM to release to me all documents and data connected with their work on the seven station series for NIWA. After a couple of extensions of time – on 6th May they emailed me the following pdf files which in a nutshell – tell me that all relevant documents and data are “fully exempt” from the FOI Act – and are thus still secret.
First the BoM reasons for refusal.
- Some relevant sections of the FOI Act
- Schedule of Documents – a very interesting list of 159 exempt documents comprising over 1600 pages plus 642 files – there may be some duplication.
Many men are born impotent viagra brand online which is called Kamagra. Learn more about the causes of ED and its bought here order levitra online different treatment methods via kamagra100.com If you’ve been having problems in the bedroom lately, you might want to see a urologic oncologist; or if you have erectile dysfunction, you will find it cheap and best for the sexual condition. cheap viagra Cardiac breakdown or coronary artery disease causing unbalanced angina. These side effects can be utter discomforts to any individual; and because of this, more and more hair is falling off your head, viagra best djpaulkom.tv then I guess you are pretty much worried.
This schedule shows the “peer review” process started at the end of August 2010 and the list ends on Christmas Eve – pretty much four months.
I am hoping that people smarter than I might see ways to carry on the battle to get these papers and files released.
What can be so secret about the things publicly funded scientists and bureaucrats do to adjust common garden old weather records into a form that suits them? We are not talking about nuclear weapons secrets here.
There were two other pdf files
- References to papers on homogenising climate data;
- The BoM covering letter to NIWA 14 Dec 2010 already public.
Added 7.30pm 7 May: Please note the anti-spam function is catching many good comments now and holding them for approval. So please be patient if your comment does not appear quickly.
A few comments on Chapter 1 of the latest CSIRO paper "Climate change : science and solutions for Australia"
Climate change : science and solutions for Australia
(p 2, top)
"A network of standard thermometers and standard thermometer shelters was progressively introduced throughout Australia between 1890 and 1910."
This is the first time I have ever seen 1890 quoted in this context. The BoM position is stated on page 4 of their 8 Feb 2011 "SPECIAL CLIMATE STATEMENT 27"
“An exceptional summer heatwave in greater Sydney and the Hunter Valley”
where they say
"Maximum temperatures prior to 1910 have not been considered for inclusion unless they are known to have been measured in a standard Stevenson screen or similar."
I have never seen the BoM mention a date before 1907 or 1908 and I am not aware the BoM produces a trend starting prior to 1910.
My own research suggests that the Stevenson screen was progressively introduced from about 1882 – obviously spreading out from high order stations.
There is much information from searchable newspaper archives and archived photographs coming online in recent years which provide evidence for the use of the Stevenson screen from the 1890’s which undermines the BoM position. A few examples are given here.
It is amazing that in the 14 pages – with several superfluous propaganda photos – the CSIRO paper shows no graphic of the Australian long term temperature trend as defined by the BoM – which we note originates in 1910 – and be aware these BoM data have been stroked and tweaked to show more warming than the raw data.
My graphic "Average of 25 Regional and Remote Stations" shows that Australian temperatures in the late 19th Century were similar to those in recent decades which are quoted by global warming alarmists as evidence for anthropogenic warming.
No wonder the BoM, other public service scientists and global warming alarmists do not chart Australian temperature trends prior to 1910 – yet note how the BoM trend is warped cooler from 1910-1940’s. There is a lot of propaganda out there.
The CSIRO include the page 3 Fig 1.1 which I am sure is not peer reviewed and only runs from 1960. Why do they talk trends from 1910-2009 on one page then can only find data from 1960 ?
RAINFALL
We must remember that the Eastern Australian big wet of second half 2010 and early 2011 caught the CSIRO by surprise. See my blog article from October 2010, Australian wheat crop history does not shout “worst drought ever”
Bottom of page 5 –
"It is notable that, despite heavy rainfall in Victoria during the second half of the year, Melbourne recorded its 14th consecutive year of below average inflows to water storages during 2010."
Wrong CSIRO – there was nothing notable about that – simply that in the swings and roundabouts of rainfall – the Thomson dam catchment got less rain than vast areas of Victoria to the north and west.
To wrap up – can I just point out two sections on Australian rainfall that seem to me to be contradictory.
First – bottom page 4 –
"Similarly, vast movements of oceanic heat and atmospheric circulation over the Pacific Ocean, known as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, are associated with periodic droughts (El Niño) and, alternatively, heavy rainfall (La Niña) across the eastern and southern parts of the continent.
Sea surface temperatures in the Indian and Southern oceans, as well as atmospheric circulation around the Southern Hemisphere as a whole, also make strong contributions to Australian rainfall variability."
Then on the bottom of page 7-
"There is no unequivocal evidence that long-term changes in the Indian and Pacific oceans, such as changes to the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, have had a major influence on rainfall trends over Australia, despite studies that have identified possible changes over the 20th century in these large features of climate variability."
Page 7 – that’s enough wading through CSIRO-speak for me.