Guest essay by Viv Forbes
No doubt we will hear how the current heatwaves in Australia are “unprecedented” and evidence of dangerous man-made global warming.
They are neither “global” nor “unprecedented”.
In the great heatwave of 1896, with nearly 200 deaths, the temperature at Bourke did not fall below 45.6 degC for six weeks, and the maximum was 53.3 degC. Bushfires raged throughout NSW and 66 people perished in the heat.
In 1897, Perth had an 18 day heatwave with a record of 43.3 degC. Other heatwaves were reported at Winton, 1891, Melbourne 1892, Boulia 1901, Sydney 1903, Perth 1906 and so on.
Why don’t we hear of these severe heatwaves from the past? Simple – the government Bureau of Meteorology conveniently ignores all temperature records before 1910.
However, that does not excuse our media for neglecting the written records such as these preserved in newspapers of the past.
Could it be that both the BOM and some of the media are still trying to preserve the ailing global warming scare?
Drumphil – If you’re still about.
‘So, given that the uncorrected records are available, can someone run the numbers, and demonstrate how the BoM has deceptively lowered the past temperature record?’
So I’ll do a bit of the work for you.
Raw data for Bourke – check daily temps for Jan 1939 (17 days straight over 40C).
http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/av?p_display_type=dailyDataFile&p_nccObsCode=122&p_stn_num=048013&p_c=-461043825&p_startYear=1939
Now run the same dates for Bourke using the new ACORN system.
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/acorn/sat/data/acorn.sat.maxT.048245.daily.txt
Note the downwards ‘adjustments’?
This is one small example of what we are taking about – Kenskingdom, JoNova, etc have plenty of examples.
And if you can’t be bothered, check my post here.
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/australian-warming-overestimated-by-a-third/#comment-13116
For all those people that think the BOM temperature record is too high due to incorrect adjustments, keep in mind that it’s consistence with our neighbours temperature record https://www.niwa.co.nz/climate/nz-temperature-record
Ian George says: January 21, 2014 at 2:32 pm
“So I’ll do a bit of the work for you.
Raw data for Bourke – check daily temps for Jan 1939 (17 days straight over 40C).
Now run the same dates for Bourke using the new ACORN system.
Note the downwards ‘adjustments’?”
That’s what is wrong with this talk of adjustment. You find somewhere, anywhere, where someone has for some reason adjusted data, and say BoM data is corrupted. And quote BoM data to prove it!
Yes, the Acorn set has been adjusted for a specific reason – to aid the preparation o0f climate indices. They explain at length how and why they do it. But in discussion of record heat and extremes, the adjusted data is not used. Apart from anything else, there are only 110 stations in Acorn. Homogenizing is hard work.
Data is adjusted to get a temperature which is believed to be representative of a region. It’s not an assertion about station history.
“No. It is the usual method of pouring contempt on people who post unsubstantiated assertions and ignore information which refutes the assertions.”
What were the unsubstantiated assertions I made?
“If you want to be taken seriously here then you need to engage in genuine discussion. Provide information (preferably with a link) as evidence for what you say, and address information put to you in rebuttal of what you say. Assertion and logical fallacies (e.g. Appeal to Authority) do not cut it here.
I hope that helps so you can now engage in genuine discussion.”
ORLY? So far I have just asked some questions.. And got this as a reply:
“I think drumphil is working in BOM. LOL. Never mind, the funding will soon dry up for Climastrology.”
But I guess that is OK, because I’m not cheerleading for the cause in a suitable confirmatory way.
Nick Stokes:
I write to ask a question.
At January 21, 2014 at 3:07 pm you say
Assuming what you say is true, please explain why estimates of “a temperature which is believed to be representative of a region” decades ago need to be “adjusted” on the basis of temperature data obtained from measurements obtained now.
Richard
drumphil:
I take exception to your post at January 21, 2014 at 3:11 pm .
I took the trouble to explain why you had been reviled and told you how to avoid such responses. Instead of thanks to me you have provided misrepresentation; e.g. you did NOT “only ask some questions” but had made assertions (e.g. BOM is “highly respected” so its data should be accepted) which were refuted by evidence and links from others.
I assumed you were a ‘newbie’ who would benefit from friendly advice. Frankly, your subsequent behaviour suggests I was wrong and you are merely a troll.
Richard
richardscourtney says: January 21, 2014 at 3:14 pm
“Assuming what you say is true, please explain why estimates of “a temperature which is believed to be representative of a region” decades ago need to be “adjusted” on the basis of temperature data obtained from measurements obtained now.”
It’s not adjusted on the basis of new temperatures. The reason for changing adjustments is usually that a better algorithm has been developed. Or in the case of Acorn, basically because BoM management was persuaded that the effort should be made.
Homogeneity adjustment says that a mix of the station reading with some nearby stations would be more representative of a region than the station alone. In the index, the effect is to down-weight the station relative to neighboours.
“BOM is “highly respected” so its data should be accepted”
This is what I actually said:
“Have you got a source and evidence for this? Even our conservative government who are scaling back action on mitigating warming make no such claim. The BOM is a well respected institution within Australia.”
Having been involved in off shore fishing, and having relatives who are farmers, I am aware of how many people rely on the BoM, and that it is well respected. Consequently, I will ask for people to explain themselves if they think there are problems at the BoM.
Where do I assert that their data should be accepted without question?
I need some help, It seems here in NA there is a strong movement from the greens to remove dams (water storage for towns, cities and foremost agriculture) to protect certain fish stocks and they are succeeding much as they did with the Spotted Owl and the forest industry (which I thought was well understood and handled by all parties involved but still killed 1000’s of jobs and industries). Currently there is a severe drought problem in N California and it is very hard on the Agriculture and so farmers and eventually you and me. So is there anything happening in Australia? Personally I would be WAY more concerned with that than AGW or what ever the new name is (BTW @Prof Turney congrats on the reward where are you going to put the $$ a new expedition? I would not be surprised what a absolute joke!). Thanks for any leads.
Penny Wong said the heatwave was proof of climate change, you remember she was in the Minister of environment during Rudd’s first reign. Well I can remember in the year 1966, I lived in Woolooware a suburb of Cronulla near the ocean. I was 8 months pregnant and the temps were over 100 F for days, I nearly melted. Then a storm came, the temps dropped to 65 F in hours.
Thanks to the southerly buster. In around 1975, I was stewarding at a dog show near Penrith.
The temps there were 43 C. Dogs suffered heat exhaustion and two died, people and dogs were throwing themselves in the nearby river. I returned at lpm to my judges ring, to await her as she was feeling the heat too, she stopped dogs (gundogs) from racing around the ring to a gentle lope. Not even an umbrella for shade or drinks brought around the hydrate us. So I took out my lipstick to refresh my makeup, and it had melted and dripped down my chin and onto my blouse. But on our way home, to Cronulla, we saw heaps of cars with their bonnets up from over heating. But nearer the sea we had a refreshing sea breeze. And to top that I was stewarding with a really bad hangover! Nowadays all dog shows are stopped when the temps go over 38 C. The dogs that died were whippets, my breed when I showed in the early 2000s, and very sensitive to heat and cold. They have little insulation because they can run very fast and faster than a greyhound over 100 yards.
Talk about temps in Oz. Ivanhoe inland is one of the hottest places, and 40 C is not abnormal.
I think they all think Aussies are wimps. But they are laid back possibly to a fault, but the natural environment has brought about very resilient people and bush folk are tough. They have to be to survive. But city slickers well, they are used to the plenty of water and services, that are not available to many inland towns mainly the mining and agriculturally placed towns. Like Tamworth where our international Music festival is about to start. It is much hotter down there than 115 kms up onto the Tablelands where I live. Mind you it is colder here of course, and they were complaining about 31 C the other day. Obviously academics from UNE or the media trying to make news.
Older people have longer memories, we are used to hot or cold extremes, I remember in the late sixties, I was living in Sydney, and it snowed in November. All up the Eastern coast to Qld. I cut out the article and sent it to my sister in law in England. “See we are having snow earlier than you”.
Otter (ClimateOtter on Twitter) says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:05 am
Mr Forbes! Permission to repost?
Yes of course as long as Anthony agrees
Nick Stokes says:
January 21, 2014 at 3:42 pm
richardscourtney says: January 21, 2014 at 3:14 pm
“Assuming what you say is true, please explain why estimates of “a temperature which is believed to be representative of a region” decades ago need to be “adjusted” on the basis of temperature data obtained from measurements obtained now.”
It’s not adjusted on the basis of new temperatures. The reason for changing adjustments is usually that a better algorithm has been developed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That doesn’t explain the need to adjust observed temperatures. An algorithm can explain past temperatures?
Nick
The explanation you give (or BOM) doesn’t make sense. They now compare all recent temps against ACORN’s adjusted data. That’s why we’ve had the hottest day, month, year, blah blah. Only 110 stations with only 75 or so going back to 1910.
For instance, the difference between the Dec max mean temp for NSW using all 95 stations (i.e. those allocated an anomaly status) was 0.3C lower than the official 1.64C anomaly when compared to ACORN. If this happened in all states, the latest temp record is reading too high.
And if what you say is true, why did they adjust Bourke for all 30C+ downwards and the two below 30C upward, reducing the monthly mean by +0.3C. That meant that Cobar, which normally has a cooler Jan mean than Bourke, was now hotter than Bourke for that month. Really representative of the area.
O/T Richard Courtney, I do think we have privately contacted each other before, but I need to contact you on a historical matter about SW England. It’s for a historical novel I am writing, nothing to do with climate nonsense. I’m interested in geo thermal attempts in Cornwall and if they have any connection to ley lines.
“SideShowBob says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:41 pm”
The BoM is involved in the adjustments of NIWA data from NZ.
“Peter says:
January 21, 2014 at 7:43 am
But 2013 was a year of record temperatures and certainly is something new – and well outside the normal climate variability.”
There has been NOTHING unusual about this summer in Australia. You will also note many of these, so called record highs, were recorded at airports.
Newspaper reports of the Black Thursday fires across Victoria in Australia in 1851 that burnt 5 million ha (about 1/4 of Victoria) note that the fires began on 6th Feb 1851 after about 5 weeks of hot northerly winds.
The newspapers reported that on that day the temperature in Melbourne reached 117F (47C) at 11am, at 1pm had fallen to 109F and had risen again to 113F (45C) at 4 pm.
These high temperatures were later disputed by a BOM study (http://www.amos.org.au/documents/item/382) which applied a formula derived from temperature readings taken over the period 1979-2008, to the official government recorded readings taken on Black Thursday 96F at 8:30am, 108F at 2:30pm, 106F at 7pm,and 88F at 9pm and concluded that the maximum temperature on that day in Melbourne was likely 43.9C.
I feel the study based on a formula derived from average conditions may not be appropriate for the unusual conditions present during the day of the fires and the official readings taken at the decreed times may not have captured the the extreme reported at an intermediate time.
I doubt that there was a problem with the siting of the weather station from which the high temperature was recorded as it reported 109F at 1pm whilst the official record reported 108F at 2:30pm.
I tend to think that the temperature as reported in the newspapers did actually occur.
The whole matter of those fires, and the droughts in the period are either forgotten or downplayed when more recent such events are examined, yet there is enough anecdotal evidence to support the idea that what was reported at that time was not exaggerated and was a quite accurate record. Many unofficial records were being kept by the early settlers and many properties have records covering several generations which do provide a deeper insight into have things have or have not changed over time and have not been influenced by urban growth.
Ah the Nick Stokes of old, ignore the obvious.
Nick what was the population of Melbourne in 1913?
What is the population 2014?
Melbourne was the headquarters of the present BOM, like the CET, hard to tamper with that record, but.!
Have you ever driven from the North of the state into the outskirts of Melbourne with a temperature measuring device, I have, and the present UHI temperature rise on the outskirts of Melbourne rises between three and four degrees, and that can even be seen on those modern air conditioned cars that read the outside temperature – I would encourage anyone to try this observational experiment.
Logic would suggest that any temperature achieved in the years leading up to 1913 would be very unlikely to be subject to any significant UHI due to mankind whereas todays fantastic hyped temperatures should be much higher by at least 3 degrees celcius plus the trending temperature over the last 100 years added. That they are not at that level makes these much media hyped temperatures – very ordinary indeed, and I suggest exposes the whole warming meme to some serious errors of logic. The C02 meme is already lost!
You also know the reasoning behind the discontinuance of many past temperature recording sites that were much cooler, in favour of warmer locations – this is convenient when the present BOM uses averaging to introduce desert heat (yes the deserts get hot in the barren interior of Australia) and when smeared by clever people like yourself, there are no longer the rural cool temperature sites to give balance to the reading, Just a lot of much hotter UHI sites like airports and those which have defective siting of modern equipment.
I agree with Gail we should not have to repeat the excellent work published here on the temperature siting issues that amplifies the problems with siting and adjustments ad nauseum on Watts Up With That. Take that up on the links supplied as their are plenty of retired meteorologists on those sites who resent what has been done to Australia’s historical temperature record.
If you can’t do that take you spin elsewhere! You are part of the problem in continuing to sing/spin from the alarmist song sheet!.
Perhaps you are only practicing the spin that is being developed for doing the same smearing exercise in the lead up to the US elections – take for instance that nice new higher temperature natural heat trap in death valley USA will that be smeared by averaging also, I guess so, but will it work? People around the world are looking and checking, becoming aware of the tricks and adjustments, and the spin you guys use.
Trickery might fool some, but not all I suggest.
Ian George says: January 21, 2014 at 7:43 pm
“They now compare all recent temps against ACORN’s adjusted data.”
If you would give evidence, links, something, it would be easier to sort out, I don’t believe that statement is true. They do likely use Acorn for regional averages – Australia’s hottest year etc. They would be expressed in anomalies. But for any statement expressed in absolute deg, such as Melbourne’s hottest temperature, adjusted temperatures should not be used, and I’m sure they aren’t.
Adjustments should only be used with anomalies. The reason is that they are generally made relative to present, which is kept fixed. For anomalies, the base does not matter, because a mean is then subtracted.
If you look at BoM climate data for Bourke, you’ll find an overall max for Bourke PO (49.7°C, 4 Jan 1903), and one for Bourke Airport (48.3 on 12 Jan 2013). Both correspond to unadjusted values, although for the airport the ACORN value is the same, since it is so recent.
Bourke is complicated because its Acorn record is a composite. If you look at the climate data for Cape Otway, say, BoM tells you that the hottest temp ever recorded is 43.3°C on 24 Jan 1982. That’s the value on the unadjusted record. If you look up the Acorn record, it tells you that 24 Jan was 42.9°&C. Adjusted. But BoM cites the unadjusted value.
I would have less of a problem with the BOM’s efforts to propagandize this year’s temperatures – and insult and demean the incoming Australian leader at the same time as they attempt to justify their own jobs and greed (er, creed) of CAGW dogma !
…. IF – and only IF – the bureaucrats promoting today’s “smear-maximum-daily temperatures-across-Australia” used those exact same equations for the specific local temperatures recorded 10, 50, 70, 90, and 150 years ago at the same places under the same conditions as today of UHI and airports and lakes and cities …
KenB says:
January 21, 2014 at 8:57 pm
Have you ever driven from the North of the state into the outskirts of Melbourne with a temperature measuring device, I have, and the present UHI temperature rise on the outskirts of Melbourne rises between three and four degrees, and that can even be seen on those modern air conditioned cars that read the outside temperature – I would encourage anyone to try this observational experiment.
=============================================================================
Hi Ken,
When I left work last Thursday, in a rural area about 100km SE of Melbourne, my modern air conditioned car which can read the outside temperature showed a temperature of 46C, and didn’t drop below 44C all the way home. I believe Melbourne peaked at 43.9C.
And readings in excess of Melbourne’s temperature have happened on numerous occasions.
Cheers!
Jimbo says:
January 21, 2014 at 7:25 am
Thanks Jimbo, That is an excellent history book and the chapters are an excellent source for the very real political battles for control of climate reporting, the constant battle between the C.S.I.R.O. the computer short cut guys and the more meticulous meteorologists who did the hard work to on the spot investigate anomaly records – cross check them and validate the equipment and siting to ensure we had the very best records as that was so important to modern meteorology. There are also clues to be found in the Bibliography of reports dealing with those issues.
The excellent summary of the variability of the Australian climate is the year by year climate graphics in red blue and white depicting the statistical averages and located within the front and back covers. In some years when it is predominantly wet and flooding, you will always find a location that is the opposite and almost in drought compared to the rest of Australia, and of course the opposite in other long years of drought recorded over most but not all of the vast Australian continent.
So if you cherry pick locations, you can always raise doubt/spin due to variability, and the other good source is the Trove Newspaper reports, a little harder to search extremes of weather now – perhaps they were an embarrassment to the Flannery’s, in those clown science years. Most will note that many overseas extreme weather reports have been able to be located because of the interest that Australians had in reading news of world weather events. Weather ruled our lives!
Once you get the report and overseas newspaper reference – great to precisely locate an original report via your local library or historical association and greatly reduces search costs.
Another good source is some of the stock, grain and other food growing journals that go into interesting detail into growing conditions, advice to and from farmers on the effect of temperatures wind and natural variable weather and no hint of anthropological influences!! By studying those type of journals you can almost pick the period when the C.S.I.R.O. followed the money and the political literature/journals became filled with man made climate change memes.
I would hope that at some time there will be a series of Royal Commissions, or Commissions of Inquiry to get to the bottom of the recent wasteful years, and put the science we were all proud of back to the forefront in Australia. Love to see that.
KenB
And so, if the earth is cooling and we are entering a ‘mini’ ice age why is it still so bl**dy hot?