Sections

Services

Information

UK United Kingdom

2013 was Australia’s hottest year, warm for much of the world

The Bureau of Meteorology has confirmed 2013 as Australia’s hottest year since records began in 1910. Average temperatures over the continent have been 1.2C above the 1961-1990 average, breaking the previous…

Australia’s very hot January was followed by a very warm September and a worldwide record for November. BaboMike/Flickr

The Bureau of Meteorology has confirmed 2013 as Australia’s hottest year since records began in 1910.

Average temperatures over the continent have been 1.2C above the 1961-1990 average, breaking the previous record set in 2005 by 0.17C. It was also the hottest year on record for South Australia, Western Australia and the Northern Territory. The other states - Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania – recorded above-average temperatures that rank in their top four hottest years.

Off to a hot start, and no El Niño

The year got off to an exceptionally hot start with a heatwave that spanned most of the continent during the first three weeks of January. Numerous locations experienced their highest temperatures on record during this period, including Hobart (41.8C on January 4) and Sydney (45.8C on January 18).

Moomba’s 49.6C on January 12 was the highest recorded temperature anywhere in Australia since 1998 and the highest in South Australia since 1960.

Nationally, January 7 was Australia’s hottest day on record. January was the hottest month on record and the summer of 2012-13 was the nation’s hottest summer.

The record year wasn’t simply a result of a hot January. Above average temperatures were unusually persistent throughout 2013, particularly between July and October. The unusual heat peaked in September when national mean temperatures were 2.7C above average, more than a degree above any previous September and further above average than any previous month in Australia’s climate history. Many parts of the central and eastern interior were as warm in September as they would be in an average November.

Sydney set a temperature record on January 18. Stilgherrian/Flickr

Every month of 2013 had national average temperatures at least 0.5°C above normal. Only in the second half of June did a spell of below-average national temperatures last for more than a week. The only below-average monthly temperatures recorded for any state or territory occurred in Tasmania in April, Victoria and Tasmania in November, and the Northern Territory in December.

Annual average temperatures were above normal over the entire continent, but the heat was particularly significant over the central continent, stretching from western Queensland across outback South Australia and the southern Northern Territory, into the Nullarbor in Western Australia.

Over this region, temperatures in 2013 were 1.5C to 2.0C above average, and many records were set across a range of periods. Temperatures were closest to normal along the east coast (including Tasmania) and adjacent ranges, as well as the northern tropics – but even in those locations temperatures were generally 0.5C to 1.0C warmer than average.

Most of the previous notably hot years in Australia have come when there has been El Niño or near-El Niño conditions in the tropical Pacific. Following the breakdown of La Niña in the first half of 2012 (and a period of relatively cooler temperatures traditionally associated with this climatic state) conditions have remained close to neutral all year with neither an El Niño nor La Niña state in the tropical Pacific.

The presence of record temperatures without the climatic influence of an El Niño makes the 2013 Australian temperatures especially significant.

Rainfall was near average, except here and there

It was a mixed bag for Australian rainfall in 2013. On a nationally averaged basis, it was close to normal (8% below average), but there were some big variations.

The contrast was especially striking in Queensland and northern New South Wales. It was a wet year on most of the east coast. This was thanks in part to (ex-)Tropical Cyclone Oswald, which tracked down the coast in January and caused heavy rain and widespread flooding from northern Queensland all the way south to Sydney.

Oswald’s rains had little effect west of the Great Dividing Range, and areas more than 300 kilometres inland in Queensland suffered from drought for most of the year. Mount Isa had its driest year on record with only 86 millimetres.

Queensland had both droughts and flooding rains. Sunriseon7/Flickr

It was a wet year over many northern and interior parts of Western Australia. The effects of tropical cyclones early in the year were followed by regular northwest cloud-band activity between May and mid-July, when waters northwest of the continent were unusually warm as part of a negative phase of the Indian Ocean Dipole. Heavy rains at the end of the year, associated with Tropical Cyclone Christine, were enough to take Port Hedland beyond its previous wettest year.

Over much of southern coastal Australia, rainfall was fairly close to normal. From July to October, unusually strong and persistent westerly winds over southern Australia brought heavy rain to the southern coastal fringe, especially Tasmania, but very dry conditions to New South Wales and Queensland.

2013 - the global picture

Globally, it was another warm year. As of the end of November, global temperatures were 0.49C above average, ranking 2013 as the 6th hottest year on record. Thirteen of the 14 hottest years on record have occurred since 2001.

Other parts of the world to experience their warmest year on record in 2013 included the tropical North Pacific region around and east of the Philippines, along with parts of central Asia.

The exceptionally warm waters in the western North Pacific contributed to a very active tropical cyclone season in the region, especially in October and November. In those months there were seven super typhoons (the equivalent of a category 4 or 5 tropical cyclone in Australia) in as many weeks.

The most significant of these was Typhoon Haiyan, one of the most intense tropical cyclones ever to make landfall. It caused massive destruction and claimed thousands of lives in the Philippines in early November.

Overall, after three fairly quiet years, global tropical cyclone activity was slightly above normal in 2013.

In contrast to the record hot conditions in Australia, 2013 temperatures were near normal in the United States. In 2012 it was the other way around, with the United States having a record warm year.

It was also less warm than some recent years at high latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere. Arctic sea ice melted to a lesser extent than in 2012, although the total sea ice extent was still lower than in any year before 2007.

Warm waters in the western North Pacific contributed to an active typhoon season, with Haiyan one of the most intense ever. NASA Goddard Space Flight Centre

At the other end of the globe, the extent of Antarctic sea ice reached record-high levels in September. Compared to the Arctic, Antarctic sea-ice extent is not as strongly influenced by recent global warming, with year-to-year climate variability still playing a large role in year-to-year changes in Antarctic sea-ice extent.

In northern and central Europe a hot summer followed a cold spring. It was also an exceptionally hot summer in parts of eastern Asia, especially eastern China, the Korean Peninsula and Japan.

Large fluctuations between extreme heat and cold were a feature of South America in late winter and spring; as one example, snow fell around the Argentinian city of Cordoba in mid-September, only days after it had reached 40°C. At the end of the year an exceptionally prolonged heatwave set many records in northern and central Argentina, including for the capital, Buenos Aires.

Extreme rainfall was not as much of a feature of 2013 globally as it has been in some recent years, though monsoon season rainfall was generally above normal both in the Indian subcontinent and the Sahel region of west and central Africa.

In addition to western Queensland, regions to experience significant drought in 2013 included parts of southern Africa, northeast Brazil, and the southwest United States. California had its driest year on record and San Francisco recorded only 86 millimetres of rain for the year, less than 20% of average and less than half the previous record low.

It has been a warm finish to the year, including the world’s warmest November on record. While there have been some large fluctuations in temperature – in regions such as the Middle East and northern Scandinavia, record or near-record warmth and cold for this time of year have happened within days of each other in recent weeks – the overall picture is one of temperatures well above average.

A warming trend

The temperatures of 2013, both in Australia and globally, are consistent with a long-term warming of 0.8 to 0.9°C over the last century, much of it in the last 50 years.

As temperatures continue to warm, we can expect new records to occur more frequently. The potential for a new global record at some point in the next decade is high – most likely the next time there is a significant El Niño event when warmer temperatures have traditionally been recorded.

Join the conversation

330 Comments sorted by

Comments on this article are now closed.

  1. Mike Swinbourne

    logged in via Facebook

    Thank you for the information gentlemen.

    I read somewhere that the meteorological year runs from November to Novermber. Is this true, and if so, how have the conditions in December ranked against the long term trends? Also, what do you think is the likelihood that we will experience an El Nino in the near future?

    report
    1. Blair Trewin

      Climatologist, National Climate Centre at Australian Bureau of Meteorology

      In reply to Mike Swinbourne

      You occasionally see the term 'meteorological year' used with respect to the World Meteorological Organisation's preliminary statement because it comes out in December. Everything in this article is referring to periods starting in January (calendar year for Australia, January-November globally).

      report
    2. Mark McGuire

      climate consensus rebel

      In reply to Blair Trewin

      Mr Trewin. Congratulations on another year of correct predictions. You note drought in Queensland, as predicted, and refer to the year 2012 in USA for comparison, but fail to inform people that Australia was drought free in 2012. Nowhere in your 2012 summary/statement. Not on your website. Not anywhere.
      Is there any reason why this good news is deliberately omitted by the BoM continuously?
      Keep up the good work!

      report
    3. Mark McGuire

      climate consensus rebel

      In reply to Blair Trewin

      A simple link to the BoM page will certainly shut me up after my sincere apology.
      Or you can censor my comment.

      report
    4. Felix MacNeill

      Environmental Manager

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Thank goodness you didn't mention the caves, Peter - you almost gave away the whole conspiracy in a single post!

      report
    5. Gerard Dean

      Managing Director

      In reply to Mike Hansen

      Mike

      The above in up to your usual standards.

      Cool it please.

      Gerard Dean

      report
    6. Henry Verberne

      Once in the fossil fuel industry but now free to speak up

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      In what way is "drought free in 2012" in ANY way relevant to the BOM data that 2013 was the highest on record?

      report
    7. Henry Verberne

      Once in the fossil fuel industry but now free to speak up

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      No one needs to censor you Mark and I personally do not want to. But this is nothing more than emotive stuff- as if you were making some grandiose claim that important information has somehow been suppressed by the BOM.

      Really !!!!

      report
    8. Mike Swinbourne

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      "....A simple link to the BoM page will certainly shut me up after my sincere apology...."

      Given that I provided the link....................

      report
    9. Peter Redshaw

      Retired

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      2012, drought free? I wonder how that was decided and for whom. This link to the BOM website kind of questions that fact. I have a feeling some of the grazers and other landholders in these areas would also question it. After all not only is Queensland a very big state, Australia is a very big diverse continent.

      http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/drought/drought.shtml

      report
    10. Mark McGuire

      climate consensus rebel

      In reply to Peter Redshaw

      Greetings Peter. http://www.theage.com.au/environment/weather/its-official-australia-no-longer-in-drought-20120427-1xpsp.html
      Good luck finding that information anywhere on the BoM site.
      But you can find information on drought. See above!
      As you can see from the response Peter, I have asked this question before, but no-one can post a simple link. You seem to know your way around the BoM site, maybe you can help me.
      Just in case you think this is a 'one off': http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-06/nz-drought-over/4671688 . http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=822846 . 3 droughts over. 400ppm carbon(sic) http://climate.nasa.gov/400ppmquotes/ . I will be called names, sledged (see mike claim I said Andrew Bolt, but the driveway doesn't go all the way up to the house with Mike), But I didn't make up those facts.

      report
    11. Mike Hansen

      Mr.

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      Climate science denier Mark McGuire trolled this article on drought from the BOM's Blair Trewin from a few weeks ago.
      https://theconversation.com/drought-conditions-return-to-australias-eastern-states-21149

      It is possible that he has forgotten the article already since I doubt that he ever reads the science - he certainly does not understand it.

      His is a pathetic attempt at a "look over there a sparrow" distraction from the temperature records that this article discusses.

      report
    12. Mark McGuire

      climate consensus rebel

      In reply to Mike Swinbourne

      Greetings Mike. Season's Greetings to you. Thanks for the link. I looked through it and no where does it mention the official notice that Australia is drought free. Not in the overview, nor in 'Annual review & significant events'. Let me demonstrate how to do it: UN-IPCC Third Assessment Report 2001.Section 14.2.2.2, page 774 - "In climate research and modelling we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that longterm prediction of future climate states is NOT possible." Your link DOES NOT mention the official notice. Why? It is good news. It is as important as any current drought information. Especially as any current drought conditions can't also be attributed to high carbon(sic) levels as 'drought' free happens @400ppm.

      report
    13. Mark McGuire

      climate consensus rebel

      In reply to Mike Hansen

      Quote: " In contrast to the record hot conditions in Australia, 2013 temperatures were near normal in the United States. In 2012 it was the other way around, with the United States having a record warm year." You should read the post before you comment.

      report
    14. Mark McGuire

      climate consensus rebel

      In reply to Peter Redshaw

      I'm trying to reply, but comments are lost ...

      report
    15. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      Yes indeed Mark .. the tentacles of the temperature conspiracy wiggle their way through our very giblets ... even suppressing the real facts uttered by such recognised authorities as yer good self.

      When will we say enough is enough - throw off this Bonapartist bulldust and return to the proven imperial units (British) that bring comfort and reassurance instead of these alarming sciency warnings of doom with their meaningless millimeters and metrified isobars?

      Let's smash the BoM cell - let…

      Read more
    16. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Thank you sir for recognising my innate problem-solving abilities.
      I'm certainly up for Ms Credlin's job: first off: Direct Action. Reversing warming of the oceans. I'm going to have the entire cabinet get the ice-cubes out of their refrigerators and take them to the nearest beach. Next, on the count of three, they all throw the ice-cubes into the sea. I'll be standing by with a big stick to stir it up.
      Another problem solved. Now for the air pollution…

      report
    17. Phil Dolan

      Viticulturist

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Wow, it never occurred to me that daylight savings created more sun, but as you say, it is rather obvious.

      But I have a plan that can save the world so all is well. We can keep daylight savings and in fact it will help.

      Plant more grapes. The extra hour of sunlight will make them grow faster. Make more sparkling wine. Get everyone to buy a bottle a day and, (this is the genius of the plan) never open it.

      Imagine all the CO2 locked up!!!

      Of course, people will run out of storage space…

      Read more
    18. Mark McGuire

      climate consensus rebel

      In reply to Blair Trewin
    19. Andy Cameron

      Care giver

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      "And of course you a dead right - we never had any of this warming nonsense before daylight saving was imposed on us by the scientist cliques and cabals that seek our global destruction."
      But you must admit it does fade the curtains more! :)

      report
    20. Peter Redshaw

      Retired

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      Mark, what evidence do you need? I provided you a link to the BOM that questions those claims you gave. I am not sure what those lowest rainfall on record within those periods of 2012 and since than mean to you, but I know what they mean to me and to those landholders.

      Now we did have 10 years of severe drought that was ended for many landholders for a while because of those two to three recent years of flooding on the East Coast. But none of that means that much for those areas that missed…

      Read more
    21. Peter Redshaw

      Retired

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      Mark did you actually read the article rather than simply the headline. Did you actually think that the government may have been looking for savings at the time and drought subsidies may have been one of those savings. Did you also not think that the headline may be correct in a general sense. But fail to deal with the complexities of drought at the property level, or at the difficulties of properties in the recovery stage from drought.

      All too often the problem is that even with rain the…

      Read more
    22. Mark McGuire

      climate consensus rebel

      In reply to Peter Redshaw

      Peter, you seem to deny what you read. 10 years of drought is over. Rationalize & pigeon-hole it all you like. If you doubt that link contact the age. Or link the BoM, as they have no evidence.

      report
    23. Mark McGuire

      climate consensus rebel

      In reply to Peter Redshaw

      Quote: "Mark, what evidence do you need? I provided you a link to the BOM that questions those claims you gave." I questioned why the BoM has no official notice that a 10+ year drought broke. Surely a meteorological event worthy of a mention by Australia's official chronicaler & keeper of the country's climate events. Other drought ending events are documented. Unless you can quote & name the page, with a link, you join the long list of Conversation commentators and other more distinguished contributors who have failed this simple request.

      report
    24. Mark McGuire

      climate consensus rebel

      In reply to Blair Trewin

      "2013 was Australia’s hottest year, warm for much of the world". This headline is in-correct.
      Central England Temperature Stats For 2013 - Highlights
      Three of the last four years have been the coldest since 1996.
      The 5-Year running average has been falling steadily since 2006, and now stands at 9.78C. It has not been as low as this since 1990.
      CET in 2013 was 9.56C and was only the 55th warmest since 1900.
      Last year was also the 107th warmest on the full CET record, going back to 1659, tying with 1900. http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2014/01/02/central-england-temperature-stats-for-2013/

      report
    25. David Roth

      Postgrad History Student

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      The headline is correct as far as July 2013, according to the US National Climatic Data Centre. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/7
      "The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for July 2013 was the sixth highest on record, at 0.61°C (1.10°F) above the 20th century average of 15.8°C (60.4°F). "

      report
    26. David Rennie

      IT Contractor

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      Mark,
      You claim "[That the authors] fail to inform people that Australia was drought free in 2012"
      Perhaps that's because the BOM never declared Australia drought free in 2012. The Agriculture minister ended drought support in April 2012, however BOM continued to show the SW of WA suffering long term deficiencies.
      http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/drought/archive/20120507.shtml
      Having said that your comment is of course completely irrelevant to this article which is about weather in 2013.

      report
    27. Mike Jubow

      Forestry nurseryman at Nunyara Wholesale , Forestry consultants, seedling suppliers.

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Hey Peter, seeing as there is a renewed push for daylight saving in Qld, I am hoping that it comes in as I have designed and built a bottling plant to store that extra hour of sunlight in. And as you so rightfully point out, the more sun, the more heat. So, with the bottled sunlight you would be able to not only light up your house for an extra hour every night during winter FREE, but you would be able to heat it too.

      What do you reckon? I think I'm on a winner here and at half a million for each bottling plant, it's a snap! Now if I could get Andrew Bolt to buy the first one, I reckon I'll be a made man. Or do you think a half mill is too cheap.

      report
    28. Mike Jubow

      Forestry nurseryman at Nunyara Wholesale , Forestry consultants, seedling suppliers.

      In reply to Phil Dolan

      Sheer brilliance Phil.

      report
    29. Tom Fisher

      Editor and Proofreader

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      Mark, you are correct here, climate is indeed a non-linear chaotic system.

      Seems a few 'commentators' here might shed their troll paranoia finally, unless crossing a lonely bridge in some forest of course, and on foot - or better get Mummy to look under the bed every morning before putting a foot on the floor - and actually stop and think that the long slippery slope toward global disaster that can only be modified through massive funding from Labor governments, Climate Commissioners and endless…

      Read more
    30. Tom Fisher

      Editor and Proofreader

      In reply to Phil Dolan

      But you neglect to mention the curtains, Phil, fading from the extra sunlight.

      Gran won't be happy at all with your plan.

      report
    31. Anthony Muscio

      Systems Analysist and Designer

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      Mark, It is very simple to understand that warming today is the result of emissions yesterday, in fact records clearly show human impact since the beginning of agriculture then subsequently the industrial revolution. To suggest 2.2 years of a less than adequate carbon tax would slow 150 years of excessive emissions is of course not a claim from a considered position, I can thus only assume you simply wish to sow doubt with a misuse of argument or you have some sort of intellectual disability (I am not trying to be rude, just honest)

      report
    32. Mark Pollock

      Analyst

      In reply to Anthony Muscio

      Nah, intectual disabity? You're being rude. And to suggest that emissions were excessive 150 years ago is a fantasy. I suppose you think cavemen shouldn't have invented fire because they inadvertently might have ended the last ice age?

      report
    33. Phil Dolan

      Viticulturist

      In reply to Mark Pollock

      'cavemen shouldn't have invented fire'

      If a fire started before cavemen could see it, was there really heat and smoke?

      But I'm sure that cavemen, being so clever, would have kept accurate records of temperature. So BOM should include those records, or we will know that they are just grant seeking leeches.

      But as there is no government money for climate research now, they will all be seeking grants to prove that it isn't happening. Is that logical?

      We will be reading all about it soon. 97% of scientists say that all is hunky dory and coal is king.

      Old King Coal is a merry old soul
      Thanks to the fiddlers three
      Percent of those that dole
      Out big fat lies for a fee.

      report
    34. Anthony Muscio

      Systems Analysist and Designer

      In reply to Mark Pollock

      If you understood the carbon cycle you would understand how a small but important part introduced buy humans is in excess of what is captured buy natural processess. This is clearly acting to work against what should be a cooling period.

      In retrospect I was rude.

      Why will contrarians like you never tell us where the billions of tonnes of Co2 we emmit from burning fuels laid down in the ancient past is going ?

      Please answer the question I posed how you would expect 2+ years of any measure to hault and even reverse green house warming when no doubt you think 6000 years of agriculture and 150 years of petrolium could not possibly effect the climate.
      The only case you have put is my claim is a fantacy.

      report
    35. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Phil Dolan

      Now Professor Dolan I reckon this notion has legs as we in the direct action game put it .... a delightful combination of sciency stuff with overwhelming commercial self interest. Who would have thought that we could sequester our surplus carbon in champers and sparkling burgundy.

      Indeed the whole concept of using carbonated beverage storage facilities (pubs) as a vehicle for global salvation is a uniquely Orstrayan approach ... the sort of thinking that has made this country great.

      Utterly excellent ... the Woolibuddha Mens Shed Institute for Intuitive Science will be forwarding your proposal to policy supremo Ms Credlin for immediate adoption by the guvvermint... it's just win win win as far as I can see.

      report
    36. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Well, Your Grace, you have been led astray, if not actually hoodwinked and bamboozled by Professor Dolan.
      I happen to know from my study of history that this is actually a very ancient idea plagiarised by Professor Dolan who has merely recylced it after reading one of my scholarly books entitled "Carbon - Trick or Treat?" which outlines details of an event that occurred in the year 1066 AD.
      But the Professor's imagined outcome - of a party for the Iggerant Masses - was circumvented when a rich…

      Read more
    37. David Rennie

      IT Contractor

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      Mark,
      CET measures such a tiny part of the globe it provides little information on global temperature trends. However it does reflect global warming over the past half century.
      CET records for the past 200+ years clearly reflect the recent increases in global temperatures.
      http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/. They also show, as would be expected for such a localised set of figures, that there are significant annual variations.
      The CET is roughly equivalent to measuring Newcastle, Canberra and Wollongong and producing a temperature record from those. It tells us little about the global trends particularly on a year to year basis.

      report
    38. John Doyle

      architect

      In reply to Mike Hansen

      Hey Mark,
      All this flak must be cheering you up no end!
      Who cares about the science? It's all at sea with itself so there's fertile space to stir the pot!
      How about this idea?
      There is global warming but it's countering a cooling trend.
      Seems we are heading for another Maunder minimum sunspot activity phase, and that coincided with the "little ice age' in the 1600's.
      So the hotter we get the better it will be, at least for a while.

      report
    39. Peter Redshaw

      Retired

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      Mark, can you show me anywhere that says the role of the BOM is to say Australia is in or out of drought? I can answer that for you. You won't find that anywhere in the role of the BOM. The role of the BOM is to collect and provide us information on the weather including temperature, rainfall, wind direction and strength according to the data collected from its different collection stations. And using that data it also provides us storm and or cyclone warnings.

      In using that data it provides…

      Read more
    40. Henry Verberne

      Once in the fossil fuel industry but now free to speak up

      In reply to Tom Fisher

      Just try reading some real, peer-reviewed science Tom.

      Skepticalscience.com is a sound source.

      The climate changes due to forcings and those forcings are driven largely by GHg's emitted by us, who have had a major impact on the planet.

      report
    41. Henry Verberne

      Once in the fossil fuel industry but now free to speak up

      In reply to John Doyle

      If you make some outlandish claims you had better be able to back it up with some strong peer-reviewed science.

      report
    42. Peter Redshaw

      Retired

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      Mark seeing temperature is about the comparison of the long-term average although why you seem to think comparing central England with Australia is in anyway a valid comparison I don't know.

      But if you want to use England and the UK I would suggest these two links provide a much more accurate picture, especially the second link which allows you to compare a whole range of temp data across England as well as all of the UK including annual, daily and monthly as well as for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

      http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/graphs/HadCET_graph_ylybars_uptodate.gif

      http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/summaries/actualmonthly

      report
    43. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to Henry Verberne

      "Skepticalscience.com is a sound source."

      Funniest thing I have read for a long time:

      In March of 2012, the climate alarmist website Skeptical Science had their forums "hacked" and the contents posted online. In a forum thread titled, "Introduction to TCP" (2012-01-19) John Cook layed out the game plan for the 97% consensus study, Cook et al. (2013) 'Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature', See: http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/06/cooks-97-consensus-study-game-plan.html

      Read more
    44. Yoron Hamber

      Thinking

      In reply to Jane Middlemist

      How about giving each one a paper-, or maybe plastic-, would be better? Bag? Then everyone collect some air, seal the bag, take it home and fine comb it for CO2? We could do it, like once every Sunday, maybe?

      We may need to bring ladders though, the air stretches up, quite a bit I'm told...

      report
  2. Mark Pollock

    Analyst

    Australian climate records go back much further than 1910. The authors should explain why this starting date was used.

    report
    1. Mike Swinbourne

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Mark Pollock

      Oh oh Mark - looks like the scientists DO know what they are talking about and actually have a rational reason for doing things a certain way.

      Perhaps you could follow the research which is being conducted in this area as pointed out by Blair.

      report
    2. Mark Pollock

      Analyst

      In reply to Mike Swinbourne

      Well, maybe. The article is full of claims of Australian temperature records being broken and it should be emphasized that the the record is somewhat truncated. These claims should all be followed by a qualifier along the lines of "the summer of 2012-13 was the nation’s hottest summer - since 1910, before which we know next to nothing". Or, "Nationally, January 7 was Australia’s hottest day on record - since 1910, before which it may or may not have been hotter". And why refer to Moomba at all if one is trying to be consistent. The record at Moomba is very short.

      Failure to qualify the claims seems slightly hyperbolic. I can understand the usefulness of having a consistent reference set but its limitations should not be ignored.

      report
    3. Henry Verberne

      Once in the fossil fuel industry but now free to speak up

      In reply to Mark Pollock

      I think Blair Trewin has already adequately and convincingly explained why 1910 was chosen.

      report
    4. Mike Swinbourne

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Mark Pollock

      "....Failure to qualify the claims seems slightly hyperbolic. I can understand the usefulness of having a consistent reference set but its limitations should not be ignored...."

      No-one is ignoring anything Mark. Except for deniers that is - they are ignoring the facts and evidence.

      "....Nationally, January 7 was Australia’s hottest day on record - since 1910, before which it may or may not have been hotter...."

      It was most definitely hotter at some time in the past. For example, about 70 million years ago it was hotter than at any time in the last 200 million years. So what?

      report
    5. Peter Evans

      Retired

      In reply to Mark Pollock

      In the first paragraph it states "confirmed 2013 as Australia’s hottest year since records began in 1910". Yes there is no explanation of the use of 1910 but it clearly indicates the period under consideration. A reader can then determine that little is know of the period before 1910 and that there are not comparable records that can be used.

      report
    6. Mark Pollock

      Analyst

      In reply to Peter Evans

      But that's not quite true is it? Climate records didn't just begin in 1910. It would be more correct to say "records that we want to use didn't exist before 1910". One needs to be very crisp when making alarmist claims. Might give some people thidea that there's a problem.

      report
    7. Mike Hansen

      Mr.

      In reply to Mark Pollock

      Climate science denier Mark Pollock labels the factual statement "The Bureau of Meteorology has confirmed 2013 as Australia’s hottest year since records began in 1910." as alarmist!

      Pollock prefers the fairy tales from the climate crank blogs.

      The next few years are going to be perversely entertaining watching the climate science deniers head butting reality with their ideology.

      report
    8. Mark Pollock

      Analyst

      In reply to Mike Hansen

      What, are you making predictions for the next few years? Care to be more specific?

      Here's some of mine.

      At some time and at some place a new temperature record will be set in Australia. This is perfectly consistent with a natural cycle of warming.

      My second prediction is that when record A exceeds record B, even if it's by 0.01 of a degree, someone from the BOM climate propaganda unit will publish a garish PowerPoint screaming "Hottest ever temperature in Whykickamoocow!!!! We' all going to fry".

      report
    9. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Blair Trewin

      And Blair, when you wipe all those pre 1910 records such as Sturt's 53c in 1828, Mitchell's 53c in 1845, Cloncurry's 53.1c in 1889, Bourke's 52.8c in 1877, Walgett's 52.8c in1878 etc, ignore the UHI that has increased exponentially in city infrastructure and airports where most of the thermometers are placed and start afresh in a cool year like 1910, d'you think we could put this foolish claim on hold till the above project is thoroughly investigated.

      Just because some of our hottest areas weren't recorded in the 19th C, you aren't gonna get the true historical picture by putting thermometers there now.

      report
    10. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      Utter nonsense Jim ... you have been befuddled into using centigrades ... a foul distortion of truth and decency ... a misrepresentation of historical fact.

      I can absolutely assure you that the temps you list were not decimalised in any way - but reflected the god given laws of physics and calibration embodied in Fahrenheit. Temperates we could all believe in. Like cubits and leagues.

      In short - don't fall into the trap set by the bolshevik/Bonapartist Bureau des Poids et Mesures (see…

      Read more
    11. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      So it's all a conversion error?

      And never happened?

      Even though it's 5c below other countries' records?

      I don't know where you do your farming Peter, but having lived and worked in these areas and experienced these 50+c temps and not one having been recorded in this "record" year, I have to say I'm extremely sceptical of the "hottest EVAH" claim.

      report
    12. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Libya 1922 58c;

      US 1913 56.7c.

      Australia 2013 49.7c; Hottest EVAH !!!

      The BoM should be honest for a change and acknowledge that what they are quoting are just not comprehensive figures.

      report
    13. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      Tell me Jim, how far from the ground were Sturt , Mitchell's and any of those earlier observations taken, were they in the shade, approximately 2 meters from the ground, or within one meter. How did they reflect the necessary criteria for accuracy and standardised procedure?
      "Unfortunately for modern-day scientists, there was no common standard for observing equipment during the colonial period. Any number of instrument configurations were used, including-perhaps iconically-thermometers housed in beer crates on outback verandahs"
      http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/acorn-sat/documents/ACORN-SAT-Fact-Sheet-WEB.pdf

      report
    14. Henry Verberne

      Once in the fossil fuel industry but now free to speak up

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      Jim,

      AVERAGE temperatures are the highest recorded. Therefore very high temps in the places you quote are irrelevant unless you can demonstrate that averages.

      report
    15. David Arthur

      resistance gnome

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      Hear's the plain truth, entirely impervious to any parsing of reality.

      The sun warms earth with energy between 0.1 and 4 micron wavelength.

      In order to maintain a steady temperature, earth radiates as much energy to space at wavelengths 4 and 40 microns. Greenhouse gases disrupt transmission of the latter, not the former.

      Humans have and are continuing to increase the atmosphere's greenhouse gas content at ever-increasing rate.

      Happy days, Mr Inglis.

      report
    16. Mike Hansen

      Mr.

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      @Jim Inglis

      Your claims are nonsense.

      Temperature measurements are taken in a Stevenson screen so they are not impacted by direct radiation from the sun.

      "The Stevenson screen was first introduced to Australia in the 1880s and was installed everywhere, with a few exceptions, by 1910. Prior to this date, thermometers were located in various types of shelter, as well as under verandas and even in unheated rooms indoors. Because of this lack of standardisation, many pre-1910 temperatures in Australia are not strictly comparable with those measured after that date, and therefore must be used with care in analyses of climate change within Australia."
      http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/0/e4d19a717ba99a65ca256f7200832fd6?OpenDocument

      report
    17. Mark McGuire

      climate consensus rebel

      In reply to Mike Swinbourne

      Quote:"It was most definitely hotter at some time in the past. For example, about 70 million years ago it was hotter than at any time in the last 200 million years. So what?"

      Climate science logic at work right there! Any idea what caused that heat, Mike? Prove it was carbon(sic) and it's game over.

      report
    18. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Henry Verberne

      Aw listen you clever folks, Jim here is doing his best to provide comfort and reassurance - and by implication - to expose the fiendish fraud being foisted upon us by the BoM, Gavin the weather dude, the IPCC, the IBPD and a host of other subversive acronyms.

      These scientist types with their excessively complex facts, lab coats and wild-eyed theories don't grasp the power of common sense and intuition to protect us and keep us all safe and sound.

      We don't trust them... we know they're on the take ... lying to us every night with their alarmist jihad against petrol and our way of life. God gave us a whole planet to pollute and dig up and burn like there's no tomorrow and these weather types just want to spit in the eye of Godly benificence with their sciences.

      Now as for the Stevenson screen referred to previously - the Stevenson in question was the dad of Robert Louis Stevenson and we all know how he just made stuff up for a living. So it's obvious innit Jim lad!

      report
    19. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Alice Kelly

      "Unfortunately for modern-day scientists, there was no common standard for observing equipment during the colonial period."

      That's just convenient hogwash Alice.

      The fact is, it is raw data and far more accurate than any proxy data your beloved "scientists" use to manufacture hockey sticks etc.

      And with inland Australia being one of the hottest parts on earth, these recordings are still considerably lower than that recorded elsewhere on earth.

      Have you ever compared Death Valley in summer with Sturts Stony Desert in summer?

      Well I have and there is not much difference.

      You just need to get out more.

      report
    20. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter, if you were a fair dinkum farmer instead of a Queen St one, you would know that in the far west many verandahs that housed the early thermometers were built on the "Coolgardie Safe" principle which, prior to aircon, was cooler than any Stevenson Screen yet still recorded 50+c temps.

      You lot are just cheer leaders for an organisation that confirms your religious beliefs when you should be demanding they produce more comprehensive data.

      report
    21. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      I am in fact a proper farmer Mr Inglis ... surrounded by surly black angus who know full well the metric mincing that awaits them. I don't have beasts about myself - being more inclined to matters of orchards and fruit than critters.

      I also have three - yes three thermometers - calibrated in trustworthy fahrenheit and I know full well how the numbers stack up. Two are in shade and one sits outside exposed to the excessive hours of sunlight we are forced to endure this time of year.

      More significantly…

      Read more
    22. David Roth

      Postgrad History Student

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Thanks for your very amusing contribution, Peter. But I really think you should give more emphasis to the vital role of Alan Jones and the Daily Telegraph in bringing Australia true enlightenment on climate science.

      report
    23. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter, with a speech like that you should have NO TROUBLE with converting c to f and back while you are generating your normal ration of CO2.

      My thermometers mostly have both scales so I can see and convert-at-a-glance.

      I just may not get my decimal points exact but that is not necessary for the argument.

      Are you saying I should not relate my 122.5f experience in SSD in Celsius?

      Or Sturt's 127f in Celsius?

      How distorted were they?

      That's a load of old shoes. If you haven't learnt the advantages of the metric system even though you may still think in the old system, that's your problem and you're not a very practical bloke for a farmer, but it has nothing to do with this discussion.

      report
    24. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to David Roth

      Yes indeed it is difficult to overestimate the contribution of Sir Alan's deep insights to the global understanding of matters meteorological ... his forecasts alone are worth the money, presumably made without any insincere input from the corrupt BoM and their meteorological minions.

      It is indeed unfortunate that the Nobel Prizes have become the plaything of professional scientists really when you stop and think about it... there really needs to be some sort of international accolade for divinely…

      Read more
    25. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      Yes the arithmetic is simple enough Mr Inglis, but you cannot deny that there was never NEVER a hint of warming prior to the adoption of the Froggy fudging - let alone the daylight saving scam which increases our sunlight significantly. It's not the arithmetic that I question - it is what that deceitful decimalised data is suggesting.

      Haven't you noticed how far the shops are away now that the distance is measured in centimeters? How rotund we've become in millimeters? How the price of milk…

      Read more
    26. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      Death valley has nothing to do with records in Australia.
      1) What precise techniques were used in the 19th. century, which measured these "records". (I can get many different readings on my verandah.)
      2)You have stated this is more accurate and "raw" data. Why is it more accurate?
      In case you find it impossible to understand these two questions..
      1)What precise techniques were used, where, how, how far from the ground etc.
      2)Why are these records more accurate.
      If the answer to 1), is that you don't know, then 2) has to be false.

      report
    27. David Arthur

      resistance gnome

      In reply to Mark McGuire

      Logic? Did anyone mention logic?

      The sun warms earth with energy between 0.1 and 4 micron wavelength, and earth radiates energy to space at wavelengths between 4 and 40 microns.

      Greenhouse gases disrupt transmission in the latter wavelength band, not the former.

      Therefore, it is logical to assume that earth's climate is regulated by it's atmosphere's greenhouse gas content.

      Humans have and are continuing to increase the atmosphere's greenhouse gas content at ever-increasing rate.

      Therefore, it is logical to assume that climate is changing as a consequence of these human activities.

      Mr McGuire, are there any flaws in that chain of logic?

      report
    28. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Alice Kelly

      "Death valley has nothing to do with records in Australia."

      Death Valley is a similar desert of rock and sand in a hot part of a continent but further from the equator than SSD yet it has temps in the high 50s.

      " Why is it more accurate? "

      Read what I said Alice.

      I said: "it is raw data and far more accurate than any proxy data".

      The BoM claims the old raw data was ~ 0.2c warmer than SS temps.

      Only your darling M. Mann could claim that his proxies were closer than 0.2c to a thermometer reading.

      It is absolute hubris to discard these old raw data.

      report
    29. John Nicol

      logged in via email @bigpond.com

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      David Theodore Ruth,
      First, I congratulate you on making a civil response to Mark McQuire, with whose comment you do not agree. It is the makings of an interesting discussion, to find people of different views, willing to engage in discussion without insults or rancor. Too often, on the pages, responses to other’s comments begin with something like

      Jim Inglis,

      Dear Jim,

      I note with great interest your many “ignorant” comments and the very crisp criticisms from the “much more well informed…

      Read more
    30. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to John Nicol

      Yes indeed "professor emeritus" Nichol ... I think ratbags and cranks should be given every opportunity to express their opinions on the science as they understand it - even when they do not - that they be given the freedom to to accuse the BoM of lies and deceit or worse sheer stupid incompetence ... after all is this not the basis of a civil reasoned discussion?

      You betcha.

      Have you made some effort to correct your multiple (but obviously inadvertent) claims to being an emeritus professor at JCU yet?

      report
    31. David Roth

      Postgrad History Student

      In reply to John Nicol

      John, if you go to the trouble of writing my full name, can you please get my name right?

      report
    32. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to John Nicol

      Thanks John. It's good to run into someone on this site with experience in the real world.

      The Richmond area is beautiful vegetated downlands and yet it gets these temperatures [and has being doing so since temperature recording began out there] that the BoM is rejecting.

      There is much hotter country in Australia than Richmond with landscape that lends itself to higher temps and this country has produced these temps. But the BoM has tossed them out.

      Yes, there has been warming but this manipulated science is full of many uncertainties yet they are more advocates than analysts.

      report
    33. Tom Fisher

      Editor and Proofreader

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      Pete doesn't farm, he just bought an old subdivided farm block after living in Newcastle all his life.

      report
    34. Tom Fisher

      Editor and Proofreader

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      I agree with you entirely, Jim, having tracked rainfall and temperature data as part of our own work in colonial social and environmental impacts, equipment in use back then was astonishingly modern and accurate, developed after all by the British Navy, with ex-navy personnel with their navigation skills doing most of the exploring. The same gear has changed little since, except located by satellite these days in place of trig points.

      The army people were merely brought in later to subdue the natives.

      report
    35. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Tom Fisher

      That's what he sounds like, Tom.

      report
    36. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      It is absolute stupidity to ignore the temperature records of the 20th. and 21st. centuries. Climate change is more than arguing about nonsense records from the 18th century. Climate change as recorded in the 20th and 21st involves ocean temperatures at all depths, atmosphere (both the troposphere and stratosphere) , weather patterns impacted by heat in both the atmosphere and ocean, and changes to the cryosphere at both poles. Research and science have changed since past times (so preferred by you…

      Read more
    37. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      Yes of course ... sounds like, feels like... I have this sense of it ... seems that's how it all works doesn't it?

      But sadly with me, with the BoM and the whole basis of the gobal science you'd be wrong. But you'd be more than used to being wrong I suspect. Not that you'd ever be admitting that regularly.

      Just facts getting in the way of common sense and intuition again.

      Cranks and ratbags out in the shed practising shed science.... playing hunches and thinking they just know this sort of stuff ... all about it in fact. There's a madness to it you realise. Of course you do.

      report
    38. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Alice Kelly

      "It is absolute stupidity to ignore the temperature records of the 20th. and 21st. centuries."

      Who's ignoring them? I'm criticizing the BoM for throwing out the earlier records which then confects an entirely different story.

      The fact that you can't [ or won't ] see this proves my point.

      " What of the future, do you imagine that these thousands of scientists contributing to the IPCC and other reputable organisations are all wrong?"

      Well 96.7 % of their models are and that's what they go by.

      report
    39. Mark Pollock

      Analyst

      In reply to Blair Trewin

      I read in the SMH this afternoon that one of their stenographers was claiming, after reading your heavily quoted propaganda piece, that it was the hottest year since records began in 1859. Are you going to ask then to correct this misinformation?

      report
    40. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      "Death Valley is a similar desert of rock and sand in a hot part of a continent but further from the equator than SSD yet it has temps in the high 50s."

      That's right. The BOM are running scam thermometers.

      report
    41. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Chris O'Neill

      Yes they are Chris ... scam thermometers and dodgy forecasts and dodgy records and obviously the whole outfit must be exposed and torn out root and branch ... the omnly thing I'm not sure about is why. I keep asking those who make these accusations why they believe the BoM is making up such fibs and am yet to receive a response... perhaps because they realise this exploration of motives will expose the depth of their psychosis.

      report
    42. George Montgomery

      Industrial Chemist

      In reply to John Nicol

      Ahh! Richmond. The hottest and the coldest town in Australia if my relatives can be believed. They've got thermometers too - some are fancy ones, others are from tourist shops. Like you, they and their neighbours can't understand why the thermometers in the Stephenson screens at the local post office and at the aerodrome (three flights in, three out per week) consistently read less than theirs on a hot day or more than theirs on a cold day.
      In the past, it was easy to point out that taking temperature…

      Read more
    43. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to George Montgomery

      Yes, some live in little hot boxes but usually they are smart enough to plant a few nice shade trees, insulate their homes, paint their roof white and even build a Coolgardie Safe type verandah which is as cool as a Stevenson Screen.

      Most of the people I knew out that way did that.

      But they still got high temperatures.

      http://www.realestate.com.au/property-livestock-qld-richmond-7514135

      report
    44. Anthony Muscio

      Systems Analysist and Designer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      When much of the world appears to be mad it is far more likely the person making the observation is. One way to avoid such a mistake is to refer to peer reviewed and informed organisations for a a reality check. If however you find yourself building conspiracy theories because multiple qualified parties are contradicting you I suggest seaking professional help because you are now looking at another symptom of madness.

      Perhaps it would make a good PHD "using climate denier posts to preemptivly identify preclinical psychological disorders ". I am being serious here.

      report
    45. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to Anthony Muscio

      Anthony, You are right. The condition could be deemed to be sub-clinical. Meaning it may not deteriorate further, and these individuals can function reasonably well, but be an impediment to rational and clear thought. At the basis of it is a control issue, and if diagnosis were explored, better human relations with the wider community could result.
      Currently it probably sits within the term "personality type".

      report
    46. David Arthur

      resistance gnome

      In reply to Ian Rudd

      Facts, facts! Who cares about facts? Certainly I do, so why is Mr Inglis trying to make my life miserable by persistently broadcasting his befuddlement?

      report
    47. Henry Verberne

      Once in the fossil fuel industry but now free to speak up

      In reply to Tom Fisher

      Ad hominem slurs do nothing to lend credibility Tom.

      report
  3. Bruce Wallace

    Registered Nurse

    Maybe the blokes who wrote this article are only saying this to keep their Government grants going.
    Or maybe they are all Socialists, perpetuating a Socialist hoax to take away our liberties.
    Or maybe climate science is their religion.
    Or maybe they want a price on carbon to rip us off.
    Ah well, back to Alan Jones.

    report
    1. alfred venison

      records manager (public sector)

      In reply to Bruce Wallace

      credible response is necessarily (1) international & (2) co-operative. they fear anything the working through of which will serve increasingly to give credibility to ideas at the basis of socialism. they fear co-operative socialism emerging in the minds of millions as a credible alternative to competitive capitalism while credible response is negotiated & implemented. as populations are exposed to prolonged credible climate change response it is feared they will increasingly grow accustomed to (1) internationalism (2) national, five year even, plans (3) co-operation. and thus socialism will begin to become normalised in the eyes of the atomised consumer population base & capitalism will have lost the grand narrative (reports on the death of which are premature). and god forfend you go down in the grand narrative as one of the capitalists who lost to socialism. anyway, that's my two bits. -alfred venison.

      report
  4. Peter Franklin

    Retired

    quote Globally …... Thirteen of the 14 hottest years on record have occurred since 2001.

    That means that according to the Government’s advisor and probably many in the Government they would have us believe that the the people worldwide who keep these weather details have been conspiring to tell a lie for the last 13 years . That is truly a remarkable achievement and must be brilliantly organised and without anyone of them spilling the beans.

    report
    1. Mike Swinbourne

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Peter Franklin

      I hate being a pedant (no I don't), but hasn't there only been 13 years since 2001?

      Therefore (and this is a criticism of the article and not you Peter), shouldn't it be:
      'Twelve of the 13 hottest years on record have occurred since 2001'?

      report
    2. David Arthur

      resistance gnome

      In reply to Mike Swinbourne

      Perhaps the 13 years to which reference is made include 2001?
      2001 ... 1
      2002 ... 2
      2003 ... 3
      2004 ... 4
      2005 ... 5
      2006 ... 6
      2007 ... 7
      2008 ... 8
      2009 ... 9
      2010 ... 10
      2011 ... 11
      2012 ... 12
      2013 ... 13

      Me? Pedantic? Never.

      report
    3. Mike Swinbourne

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to David Arthur

      Yes Daviid - that's exactly what I said - 13 years since 2001.

      Thanks for agreeing with me.

      report
    4. Mike Swinbourne

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Peter Franklin

      Ahhh - don't worry. My mistake. I've worked it out now.

      Must be too early in the year for clear thinking.

      report
  5. David Arthur

    resistance gnome

    Thanks for this information.

    My question relates to rainfall trends over Eastern Australia where TC Oswald delivered much water to heavily-populated east coast city catchments; ex-TC Oswald tracked southwards along the coast rather than eastward into the Coral Sea; in itself, is this not quite unusual?

    report
    1. Felix MacNeill

      Environmental Manager

      In reply to datreus

      I've got a rain guage in my backyard and a decent thermometer by the back door - hell, I should get paid to provide the service - I could do it much cheaper than those evil commie grant-seeking parasite scientists and make it come out just the way the customer ordered!

      report
    2. Sue Ieraci

      Public hospital clinician

      In reply to Felix MacNeill

      Me too! I don't actually have a thermometer or rain gauge, but I've read a lot of blog articles on climate, and I've lived in a climate.

      Why not a bit of Alt Clim or CAC (Complemetary and Alternative Climatology)?

      report
    3. Felix MacNeill

      Environmental Manager

      In reply to Sue Ieraci

      Hell, just lick your thumb and stick it in the air - that should do seeing we already know the correct answer anyway (having read that nice Mr Watts and that nice Mr Bolt).

      That last sentence is interesting, though...I wonder if there is a homeopathic remedy for carbon emissions?

      report
    4. Sue Ieraci

      Public hospital clinician

      In reply to Felix MacNeill

      Seriously, Felix, there is a homeopathic ''remedy'' for EVERYTHING!

      But you need to be very precise with the symptoms.

      For example,C-di-o is just the thing for excess carbon dioxide associated with dry cough, difficulty sleeping in winter and nocturnal enuresis, but, for excess carbon associated with kidney pains and frequent urination, one would definitely need Calc. carb. - succussed and potentised.

      Ref http://www.homeovision.org/for-homeopaths/new-provings/carbon-dioxide.html

      report
    5. Bruce Wallace

      Registered Nurse

      In reply to Sue Ieraci

      Sue it has been done. You are too slow.
      Lord UpHimself Monckton has patented that.

      report
    6. Tony Walters

      Teacher

      In reply to datreus

      Wonderful, datreus and following correspondents. Nothing like a bit of satire to mock the denialists and their peevish irrationalities! It has been a light moment in an otherwise tedious debate.

      Thanks too to Blair and his colleagues.

      report
  6. Alice Kelly
    Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

    sole parent

    Thanks for all your good work Blair, David , Karl, Neil, and Rob.
    I would add, that on the stroke of midnight, a new 15 year running mean starts from a much cooler 1999. Good bye to the 15 year- pause- lie. Oh., and anybody silly enough to continue with it could take a look at this Land-Ocean Temperature Change by latitude, (NASA), and explanation of the lie generally in this piece, "Happy New Warming Year "
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-currier/happy-new-warming-year_b_4528824.html

    report
    1. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to Alice Kelly

      Happy New Warming Year Part 11
      Part 1) When we enter El Nino conditions - "When it swings up we're going to be in big trouble"
      "the infamous warming pause coincides precisely with a veritable explosion of increased surface warming in the Arctic". Arctic amplification has accelerated beyond prediction. Because the so called missing heat- Super Nino 1998 made it's way through the Bering Straight into Arctic waters during the "pause".
      Very large meltwater aquifer within Greenland Ice Sheet discovered a week ago. This one can raise the level of the ocean. There are probably more.
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-currier/happy-new-warming-year-pa_b_4532998.html
      2) Destabilised Northern Hemisphere weather systems are the result.
      Perhaps we should start to understand the earths energy transfer systems better.

      report
  7. Craig Myatt

    Industrial Designer / R&D

    Great images, especially of the typhoon from space. These sorts of images really lend perspective and a sense of reality, to climate. Good article...

    report
  8. Neville Mattick
    Neville Mattick is a Friend of The Conversation.

    Grazier: ALP Member at A 4th Generation Grazing Station

    Thank you to the Authors' for this piece, I heard the summary of it via TripleJ whilst I was doing my early rounds by motorbike and it was depressing listening indeed.

    Why has the World at large swung away from fact in favour of shaman?

    Once; not so many years ago the evidence of work from our Scientists was at the forefront of the public's mind, now it is only perused by those maintaining the passion for FACTS.

    Professor Dawkins is on the money. http://www.richarddawkins.net/

    Our Government that the Australian's voted for will reek of shame for the wrecking ball in their Climate denial ways and deliberate harshness on those "lacking aspiration" in our Country.

    report
    1. Felix MacNeill

      Environmental Manager

      In reply to Neville Mattick

      Hey, Neville, the average shaman actually knew shit from clay - these guys are much more like medieval schoolmen arguing about angels on the point of a spear or cult members preparing for the coming of the space aliens who will rescue us...

      report
    2. Mike Swinbourne

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Neville Mattick

      Neville, you are going to get kicked out of the Grazier's guild.

      ALP member
      Triple J listener
      Richard Dawkins reader

      What's wrong with the Nationals, country music and the Bible?

      report
    3. Neville Mattick
      Neville Mattick is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Grazier: ALP Member at A 4th Generation Grazing Station

      In reply to Mike Swinbourne

      Guys - one of us has "seen the light" - for a very long time too!

      'twas Tony Windsor that said: "Independent NSW MP Tony Windsor says he got rid of "two cancers" when he gave up smoking and left the Nationals in the 1980s."

      The irony is; many here were involved in a large scale Wind Farm until axed five weeks prior to the Federal Poll, yet none has figured out which side has the butter on it when our Climate is being discussed by Labor and the Greens with the dividend it would have brought had the company the confidence in the future Government = must not have been a COALition !

      Professor Dawkins; massive fan here.

      TripleJ - where the World is Going, not where it's been - otherwise RN or Parliament.

      Cheers //

      report
    4. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Neville Mattick

      "Guys - one of us has "seen the light" - for a very long time too!

      'twas Tony Windsor...."

      You mean, when he didn't contest his seat at the last election?

      report
  9. alexander j watt

    logged in via Twitter

    Once el nino picks up we are going to have some horrendous temps, and terrible terrible fires.

    report
  10. Natasha turnbull

    Student

    How come the introduction of carbon tax in 2012 has made 2013 "hottest on record"?

    It doesn't make any sense.

    report
    1. Natasha turnbull

      Student

      In reply to Natasha turnbull

      I wonder if 2014 would be cooler than 2013 if the carbon tax is allowed to be removed by Labor-Greens in the senator?

      I bet that it will. Mark my prediction in this time of next year.

      report
    2. Felix MacNeill

      Environmental Manager

      In reply to Natasha turnbull

      Is Lewis Carrol's ghost chanelling through you you to illustrate all the great logical fallacies, Natasha, or are you just naturally gifted?

      report
    3. Mike Swinbourne

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Natasha turnbull

      "....How come the introduction of carbon tax in 2012 has made 2013 "hottest on record"?...It doesn't make any sense....."

      Looks like Natasha's logic is up to it's usual low standards. Keep up the good work Natasha. I haven't laughed so much for years.

      report
    4. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to Alice Kelly

      "The carbon tax, politicians, and the senate are all off-topic."

      Don't forget to mark such comments as abuse.

      report
    5. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to Chris O'Neill

      I rarely do this Chris, and rarely correct spelling etc. as I miself am an appalling speller. I should proof read more often, but Natasha writes with a style which means I have to read again, and guess. Sentence, paragraph, meaning, conclusion?? Maybe there's a problem...

      report
  11. Jane Middlemist

    citizen

    Is it true that our government, in its infinite wisdom and mercy, plans to disband the BOM this year and replace it with a "market based mechanism"?
    And, if so, why? Oh yes ideology. Science should be banned - it only leads to "ordinary Australians" getting all uppity as they get ideas above their station…

    report
    1. Mark Pollock

      Analyst

      In reply to Jane Middlemist

      if you believe that you'll believe anything.

      report
    2. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Mark Pollock

      A joke, Mark. But nothing this govt says or does or doesn't do, in relation to climate change, would surprise me.

      report
    3. Mike Hansen

      Mr.

      In reply to Mark Pollock

      Not privatise, abolish. So you are right Jane.

      The climate science deniers at the IPA have called for the BOM's climate change functions and research be abolished.

      No doubt many of the climate cranks who Abbott has surrounded himself with would love to do exactly that.

      report
    4. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Mike Hansen

      Yes, sweep up all useful reforms into a big pile and put 'em in the bin, "clean up Labor's mess". Start off all over again with new stuff. Replace all wheels with used cotton reels and so on.
      A difficult job but the gummint is up for it.
      ( BTW in my earlier post about replacing the BOM, I was stealing Detreus's (very funny) joke. I shouldn't have, sorry.
      Loved his punch line.

      report
  12. Peter Redshaw

    Retired

    Thanks BOM and its authors for the information. Good work. Its hot in more than one way I suppose you could say.

    Sadly no doubt we are bound to get those who dispute the information and the data it is built on. It would be nice to see their claims actually supported by some valid research instead of simply outrageous claims. I suppose we can only live in hope for a debate actually based on the science itself and not the politics.

    report
  13. Stephen Ralph

    carer at n/a

    By now I'm sure the majority of us have got the picture.

    We don't need proof, we need to know what the world is going to do about it.
    And how quickly.

    report
    1. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Stephen Ralph

      Well said Stephen but the problem is, I think, that those with the power keep saying we don't have the proof and seem set on doing nothing that would actually work. And, even going a step further to dismantle initiatives that already are working - like the Clean Energy Finance Corporation.

      report
    2. Karl Lusdig

      Private sector

      In reply to Stephen Ralph

      By how much, measured in thousandths of degrees Celsius, will the Earth’s temperature be reduced by a bloodless coup in Australia?

      report
    3. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Stephen Ralph

      "A bloodless coup" One of my favourite daydreams BUT
      For a successful coup, don't we need the army?

      report
    4. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Jane Middlemist

      Maybe this has already been suggested but in case not: why not a TC / Pro-Science party, with candidates in every seat, win the next election by a landslide. If the motoring enthusiasts can win a senate seat, anything is possible…

      report
    5. Stephen Ralph

      carer at n/a

      In reply to Jane Middlemist

      Just a LOT of people..................surround parliament house and demand everyone's resignation.

      I'm sure it will work. Perhaps we could let off a few crackers to let them know we are serious.

      report
    6. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Stephen Ralph

      To SJR: A LOT of people.
      It would definitely work. Crackers always draw a huge crowd.
      I'll get busy on the posters and T-shirts emblazoned with
      "Don't blame us. We didn't vote for them"
      and
      "People for our Planet"

      report
    7. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Stephen Ralph

      Best "direct action" idea so far. You should be proud because it was YOUR idea Stephen. After we sweep into power it will be:
      Something for the history books!

      report
    8. Mark Pollock

      Analyst

      In reply to Stephen Ralph

      Ah yes, another "suspend democracy" type. How is it that climate "science" attracts so many who are so eager to put the lumpen proletariat into their proper place?

      report
    9. Mark Pollock

      Analyst

      In reply to Stephen Ralph

      And there is nothing more important than making the few feel better.

      report
    10. Mark Pollock

      Analyst

      In reply to Jane Middlemist

      Haven't we got the Greens? And they are doing so well too.

      report
    11. Stephen Ralph

      carer at n/a

      In reply to Mark Pollock

      Do we have any lumpen proletariat in Australia.
      I thought we were all equal.

      My effort is to inject some sense of urgency into politicians, and not see them fiddle as Rome burns.

      report
    12. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Mark Pollock

      Mark,

      You said: " another "suspend democracy" type"

      And that is exactly the point.

      Following the collapse of the Marxist socialist states there is no rational economic argument for the level of control over other peoples lives that so many are eager to exert, another justification had to be found.

      So the popularity of climate science. We need to 'save the planet', so central control needs to be exerted, regardless of the economic strife that would cause. In fact, if you listen to some of the green spokesmen the increased poverty which would result is a feature, not a bug.

      Up until recent decades the left were all about improving the lot of the less well of. These days tho, so many have abandoned that and increased poverty, for others, is a burden they are willing to bear.

      Whatever the argument, it is all about control. Whatever the problem, the solution is the same.

      report
  14. Ian Alexander

    Reader

    To the authors, thanks for the article and please keep up the good work.

    Ignore the poisonous trolls like Mark McGuire/Pollock, they can only parrot the denier websites. Their idiocy is evident to anyone with a brain.

    report
  15. John Nicol

    logged in via email @bigpond.com

    There was a page on the BOM site some time ago which showed the percentage accuracy of BOM forecasts. I have tried to find the page again recently but have not been able to do so.

    Could the authors please direct me to data showing the success rates of predictions both short term (one to three days) and longer term (three monlthy) for various districts or major regions in Australia? Thank you.
    John Nicol

    report
  16. Tom Fisher

    Editor and Proofreader

    Here, you're doing it all over again, guys, one can only guess because from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology therefore you're talking about Australia as a whole, when you cite the Western Pacific, Queensland and NSW.

    Where are you situated? In Canberra I suppose. As back in my old Riverina days, however, we used to say NSW does not mean Newcastle, Sydney, Wollongong, so Australia does not mean the Pacific seaboard. Neither does Australia mean Canberra, Sydney and Melbourne.

    Or perhaps is…

    Read more
    1. Henry Verberne

      Once in the fossil fuel industry but now free to speak up

      In reply to Tom Fisher

      Full of unsubstantiated assertions, again. Hot air no substance.

      report
  17. Toby James

    retired physicist

    The data seems to be consistent with the Earth's temperature continuing to come out of the Little Ice Age - which will be pleasing for those in the US and Europe who would like to have a little more warmth.

    report
    1. Alan Wiggs

      School Teacher

      In reply to Toby James

      However, the temperature rise over the last century is far more rapid than that from natural glaciation cycles. Indeed, we should, theoretically be heading towards glaciation and getting cooler (not warmer). What is still most significant is that this record temperature year has occurred not in an El Nino period, but in a neutral cycle. All rather odd. No point arguing about what the data tells us. Some will see this as a blessing - others less so. The sky isn't falling, but the time is fast approaching when the deniers will have to open their eyes and give credence to the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence and environmental indications.

      report
    2. Mark Pollock

      Analyst

      In reply to Alan Wiggs

      The temperature rise seems to have slowed down a bit over the last twenty years or so. Maybe the sky won't fall after all and maybe, in spite of what we are told by the experts, the "science" isn't settled.

      report
    3. Alan Wiggs

      School Teacher

      In reply to Mark Pollock

      Yes - to a degree....but an El Nino bumping up temperatures, and then a long deep La Nina dropping global temperatures down and flattening it all out a little, is no reason to think the whole show is over. And the decadal recession of Arctic Ice cap tends to provide evidence that heat transfer continues to have an impact - http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/Sea_Ice_Extent_L.png

      report
    4. Anthony Muscio

      Systems Analysist and Designer

      In reply to Alan Wiggs

      When temp rises slow they are still rising. Oceans are the largest mass component in the system and are rising so there is no fall, no platteau, no hope for contrarians but miss information.

      Alan you are quite correct but will discover quickly Mark Pollock will not respond fairly to your points and he does not care for the truth yet claims to be a much maligned soothsayer who is destined to uphold what he believes against all critics.

      report
    5. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to Mark Pollock

      "seems to have slowed down"

      The slowdown is statistically insignificant.

      report
    6. Toby James

      retired physicist

      In reply to Chris O'Neill

      I thought that the NASA satellite measurements showed no significant rise for over 17 years in the temperature of the lower atmosphere - over land and sea.

      report
    7. Toby James

      retired physicist

      In reply to Chris O'Neill

      That's what the likes of Tony Abbott say too - "No statistically significant rise . . ." during the last 17 years and 3 months.

      An increasing number of governments around the world agree with our new PM, particularly as the creators of the climate models regard that period of pause as unexplainable by the models.

      The way things are going, all the good work on renewables will probably finish up being a waste of time and money.

      report
    8. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to Toby James

      Yeah, Tony Abbott, the font of all scientific knowledge. You expect him to tell you everything, do you? Boy do you have a lot to learn.

      "the creators of the climate models regard that period of pause as unexplainable by the models"

      They do nothing of the sort.

      Statistically insignificant data means nothing. (Warming, slowdown, whatever.) That's why they call it "insignificant", amazingly enough.

      report
    9. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to Chris O'Neill

      Try 15 or 17 years from 1975 you will get statistically significant warming. But using that model is not the point. The IPCC were the ones who developed the models, set the goals and were the ones pointing to annual temperature movements when it suited. Going back now and acting as if they expected periods of 15 years or more ff stasis in global average temperature is just revisionist rubbish.

      It is typical that while we were told years ago that the science was settled, it is being re-written on a daily basis!

      report
    10. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to James Doogue

      "But using that model is not the point."

      I'm not talking about models, I'm talking about reality. You know the thing that denialists are talking about when they drone on and on about "no statistically significant warming in 17 years" or whatever.

      "they expected periods of 15 years or more ff stasis"

      Of course they expected 15 year periods or more of statistically insignificant warming. If they didn't then they would have known their models were no good many YEARS ago. There was EIGHTEEN years of statistically insignificant warming from 1979 to 1997. Don't you think anyone noticed?

      report
  18. Anthony Muscio

    Systems Analysist and Designer

    Thanks for this important information which also acts as a honey pot to the contrarians.

    It is clear that many contrarians are so due to ideological reasons. A question that has arrisen in my mind is as they make more and more irrational claims against more and more evidence when do we cross the threshold that questions their whole ideological system not just their fears that their ideology is threatened ?

    I know people accross the political spectrum who are concerned about human induced climate change yet there is a clear preponderance on one side of politics to increasingly insane arguments. I wonder how long these outsiders will continue to be the voices for these ideologies and will they be marginalized before they bring such beliefs into disreput?

    I would prefer a plurality of views but is one side on the path to irrelevantcy ?

    report
    1. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Anthony Muscio

      Contrarians: I've noticed one or more on almost every thread and no amount of evidence, logic, persuasion or argument can alter their deep seated "need to oppose" and, in all seriousness it seems very similar to a phase young children go through - automatically opposing whatever is said to them.
      Happily, most soon "grow out of it" but some simply don't. They just get older without seeming to develop mature and flexible thought processes. In short, they grow old without developing "wisdom". A bit short on humour as well.

      report
    2. Greg North

      Retired Engineer

      In reply to Anthony Muscio

      " I would prefer a plurality of views "
      Of course you would Anthony and what will be the relevancy of future cold spells as well as heat wave conditions.
      Do you have a prediction that there will be no end to increased temperatures and no variations in climate?

      report
    3. Henry Verberne

      Once in the fossil fuel industry but now free to speak up

      In reply to Anthony Muscio

      I am sure there are some genuine contrarians and others (trolls) who derive some sort of satisfaction from disrupting discussions by means of "drive by comments"!, provocative, emotion-laden remarks etc.

      But i also think there are others here who are part of an orchestrated and organised group whose paid job it is to spread misinformation, cast doubt where little doubt exists in the mould of the tobacco lobby.

      report
    4. Henry Verberne

      Once in the fossil fuel industry but now free to speak up

      In reply to Jane Middlemist

      We are dealings with trolls who ideally need to be ignored whenever possible.

      report
    5. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to Henry Verberne

      "trolls) who derive some sort of satisfaction from disrupting discussions by means of "drive by comments"!, provocative, emotion-laden remarks etc."

      "an orchestrated and organised group whose paid job it is to spread misinformation, cast doubt where little doubt exists in the mould of the tobacco lobby."

      Of course, "The Conversation" is meant to be an inviting place for such people. They are allowed to break "The Conversation's" so-called "community standards" day-in, day-out with impunity.

      report
    6. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Henry Verberne

      Thanks Henry. I agree that ignoring them is probably the only sensible way to cope and I usually do that - but occasionally I get carried away; and "rise to the bait". Such a contrast here with some other threads full of civil discourse and disagreement without personal abuse.
      Some here seem oblivious to the fact that data can and will be stored for an indeterminate time into the future; and I hope the careless slander, libel, slurs,and sheer recklessness won't come back to bite them in years to come.
      There is a treasure-trove here for the lawyers!

      report
    7. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Chris O'Neill

      In fairness to the moderators I will tell you: I made a donation a few weeks ago thus becoming "a friend of the conversation". As I type this post,the little red heart is next to my name. But, the moment I press "post comment" it disappears. I queried this by email and promptly received a very courteous reply that the software is failing to 'refresh' the image and needs someone who will return soon from holidays to fix it. I think some of the crude comments would have been deleted long ago if the personnel were here - but I'm sure no-one begrudges them a holiday.
      So, in the meantime we'll probably just need to be patient.

      report
  19. Jane Middlemist

    citizen

    And before leaving this thread I'd just like to thank the authors for this interesting and thought-provoking article. The conversation about climate has been stimulating, instructive, entertaining and, sometimes, frustrating.
    I shall continue to rely on the Bureau of Meteorology and its dedicated climate scientists for information and forecasts. It must be a fascinating (and possibly, worrying) field of study. I hope we will start taking the right actions before we (and our descendants - or our species) all pay for current denials and inaction.

    report
  20. James Doogue

    logged in via email @doogue.net

    A lot of people, myself included don't have a lot of confidence in the BOM temperature data. As evidenced by a recent post by Dr Jennifer Marohasy here: http://jennifermarohasy.com/2013/03/cooking-books-for-hot-summers/ Then there was a more detailed look at BOM records in 2011 calling for an independent audit here: http://joannenova.com.au/2011/02/announcing-a-formal-request-for-the-auditor-general-to-audit-the-australian-bom/

    The most recent and latter paper raised some questions that would…

    Read more
    1. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to James Doogue

      Yes indeed ... independent audits are exactly what we need ... preferably conducted by accountants and a panel of suburban tax planners ... the sort of fellas who will bring a degree of common sense and intuition to the table... who won't be swayed by the flimsy technical explanations about comparability and consistent methodology being proffered by these meteorological charlatans at the BoM.

      Yes indeed ... Jo Nova and Jenny Marohasy ... folks who repudiate the politicisation of our weather ... earnest seekers of truth and common sense ... who know that the weathermen are in thrall to foreign acronyms and are slavishly following the diktats of their Geneva paymasters.

      In fact ,,, damn the audit - it's too late - it's bigger than a simple adding up of numbers - we need a Royal Commission with the power to compel evidence, imprison wrongdoers and crush this conspiracy at its source.

      Stop the science!!!

      report
    2. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      I suppose you think that passes for humour? But it avoids valid questions which shouldn't be necessary if science is objective.

      report
    3. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      "I don't think Jo Nova or Jenny Marohasy pass for science Jim..."

      You just don't get it do you Peter.

      They do pass very well for science but that isn't the point.

      When the BoM are preaching to the converted like you, it isn't rocket science to realise they are being advocative rather than objective.

      And to ask the necessary questions, like James mentions above, does not need qualification in climatology.

      Just a sound, enquiring mind.

      Here, BTW, are the latest satellite global temperature…

      Read more
    4. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      When I see Jo or Jenny or John Nichol getting themselves published in a peer reviewed journal then I'll start taking their ideas seriously ... but of course they don't really want to influence the science Jim - they want to play the politics.... so they are paddling about in the swampy pond of cranks and ratbags ... folks who are prone to paranoid delusion and plots, folks who seek reassurance and comfort, who cannot conceive that there might be any adverse consequences to living like there's no…

      Read more
    5. John Nicol

      logged in via email @bigpond.com

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter Ormonde

      I have no experience with the BOM's temperature records, but any adjustments of raw data has to be questionable as to the accuracy of the result which will ALWAYS contain a significant component of subjectivity - they have to use judgement not science to correct. This judgement may well be OK - but on the other hand it may not be.

      I bought a set of rainfall records from them some years ago and was warned by them of incompleteness. Such "incompleteness" as was in them rendered…

      Read more
    6. Greg North

      Retired Engineer

      In reply to James Doogue

      I'd not be too concerned James for Peter does often consider himself to be a funny fellow.

      report
    7. John Nicol

      logged in via email @bigpond.com

      In reply to John Nicol

      Peter Ormonde

      I should add, that the same issues are valid whether or not the warming since the LIA are because of natural variations in the climate or because `of increases in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere causing warming. So heat waves do NOT indicate in themselves, a problem with increased carbon dioxide.
      John Nicol

      report
    8. John Nicol

      logged in via email @bigpond.com

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter Ormonde

      Correction, Jenny Moharacy has several peer reviewed publications. I no longer wish to publish but as with Jo, this does not discredit our scientific understanding of things physical.

      Could you please refer us to `your own publications list - on anything - not necessarily on climate.

      And while you are at it, could you provide us with a reference to any article, which is NOT just quoting the work from un-experimentally verified models (See AR5 IPCC 2013), indicating that…

      Read more
    9. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to John Nicol

      Dear emitus... all very well indeed ... rainfall too they obviously cannot or will not do ... but what about the impact of this southern sophistry of daylight saving? the abandonment of biblical Fahrenheit and the creeping carpet of metric measurement ...

      Sure you can go on and on and on about the incompetence and fraud perpetrated upon us all by the weathermen but you know full well that we can no longer trust in any measure of any dimension or thing when the confounded metric calibrations…

      Read more
    10. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to John Nicol

      John Nichol.

      I am not a scientist - and make no claim to be - I am a simple farmer who has a wide range of interests and has studied throughout my life. I am not by nature given to public denunciation of working scientists.

      I am however absolutely dedicated to exposing fraud and charlatans .... say fellas claiming to be an emeritus professor of JCU when writing personal notes to the UN Secretary General.... or to make the same mistake again when signing the submission to the Garnaut Inquiry…

      Read more
    11. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter,

      You said: "I don't think Jo Nova or Jenny Marohasy pass for science Jim"

      Well, Ms Marohasy is a quite accomplished scientist, with a long career and many published papers, so what you think of her really has no basis. What she does most definitely does pass for science, by any definition I am aware of. That you disagree with her opinions and findings is a different matter.

      As to Jo Nova, I agree, isn't a research scientist, but that doesn't matter. She gave up laboratory research…

      Read more
    12. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      What bothers me most about the sinister switch to metrics is the weights. On our perfectly respectable home scale, calibrated in decent stones and pounds I weigh about eight and a half. Then I go to my doctor for a check up and she puts me on HER newfangled contraption and informs me that I weigh fifty six thingummies.
      Will this metric hooliganism never end?
      Somehow, absent any scientific training at all, ah jest KNOWS it's a Conspirrisy! Ding dang they sigh-'n- tists.

      report
    13. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter,

      You said: "I am however absolutely dedicated to exposing fraud and charlatans .... say fellas claiming to be an emeritus professor of JCU"

      Then I guess you take a pretty dim view of senior climate scientists falsely claiming to be Nobel Laureates then. How much self regard does that take?

      Remember, you used the words 'fraud' and 'charlatans', not me.

      report
    14. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Chris Harper

      Eminent?

      Jennifer Marohasy knows a fair bit about weeds granted. Not sure what Jo Codling Nova knows about at all... but science works by making considered contributions to published peer reviewed literature ... running the gauntlet of informed opinion ... none of these eminent persons has ever seen fit to do so, preferring bloggery directed to right wing ratbags for their scientific bonafides.

      Now as for John Nichol I've made my views on his recent history pretty clear.

      This whole "field…

      Read more
    15. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Jane Middlemist

      Yes indeed Your Highness, you have grasped the issue in a nutshell ... tiny little measures that mean nothing beyond the laboratory ... milk in litres paid for with worthless devalued cents at shops now kilometres distant ... a creeping sort of pseudo sciencyness infecting our very lives with things of all sorts shoehorned into mindless measures of ten when plainly scales of 12s and 16s were perfectly - indeed divinely - adequate through all time.

      But the ultimate cause - or as we put in at the Institute for Intuitive Science - the giblets of the thing - is the sham of daylight saving with its forced additional irradiation, driving up our meaningless celiuses to dizzying heights. When will this metric madness stop? Open your eyes Orstaya you are being sold a pig in a frock.

      report
    16. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to David Roth

      Yes indeed David ... the whole idea is that we should open up all of reality to a market based approach - where we can choose the reality we find most comforting and reassuring from a pond of competitive bidders ... we could choose to have our weather in inches and fahrenheit.... we could have our temperatures discounted for disbelief... we could pick and choose a paradigm that complements our political perspective.

      Deeply unhinged stuff this ... we demand consumer choice and the economic discipline of a free market when it comes to measuring reality ... shop around till you get a reality that fits your lifestyle and personality.

      Now on special - flat earth bargains and divine intervention at a discount. And most importantly - unlimited credit ... nothing to pay ...ever.

      Good to see that the Marohasies and Codlings know even less about economics than they pretend to comprehend of climate ... A for consistency, ladies.

      report
    17. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter,

      Michael ‘hide the decline’ Mann, owner of a broken hockey stick.

      You put yer random data in
      You get yer hockey stick out
      You put yer random data in
      And you shake it all about.

      Straight report on the matter: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50598

      Discussion of the implication of Dr Mann’s misconduct in his upcoming legal case: http://www.steynonline.com/5264/the-fraudulent-nobel-laureate

      Enjoy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMqc7PCJ-nc and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yrd3HYU80Dk

      report
    18. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Chris Harper

      Sorry when I said links I meant actual links you know like newspapers or something legal or anything at all with a bit of credibility about it ... I'm sorry but rancid offering from the denialist swamp don't move me greatly nor do humorous skits on yewchewb.

      Got anything out here in the real world at all?

      report
    19. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      "I respect folks who've put in the hard yards of getting the knowledge and the skill to understand very complex gear like climate."

      No you don't. You're simply a true believer.

      This is what you believe in, you just said so.

      Phil Jones subverting the peer review process:

      “…I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin [Trenberth] and I will keep them out somehow, even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!” - See more at: http://www.masterresource.org/2013/06/revisting-climategate-climatism-falters/#sthash.zyOvoGAe.dpuf

      Peer review, the last refuge of a scoundrel.

      These are the people you are getting your diagnosis from and if you are quite happy to lap it up, that's your problem.

      But don't then have the hubris to criticise anyone with enough common sense to be sceptical.

      You didn't make your money out of farming Peter.

      report
    20. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to John Nicol

      What natural variations have caused world temperature records such as
      1) Australia's hottest mean temperature for the year.
      2) Ocean waters to the south and south east of Australia much of northern North America, the north eastern Pacific ocean north coastal north east atlantic north eastern south south america and the eastern pacific ocean off the coast of Ecuador.
      3) Temperatures well above average across North America, also above average for winter in both the US and Canada.
      4) Alaska had…

      Read more
    21. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      Money? Out of farming? Heck no what sort of idiot would try that? I made my money from economics - which is nearly as silly, together with a fair bit of writing and policy analysis sort of stuff. Now I grow fruit.

      Seriously Jim the fact is that you find it easier to believe in a vast conspiracy of sinister climate scientists working to achieve global... er something than to believe what the overwhelming majority of scientists are saying...what the evidence and data is saying.

      You would…

      Read more
    22. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Ok, so you don't actually object to people making false clams, merely to who is making them.

      Am I to take it that news reports are not news reports when they contain information that you really really don't want to be true?

      I guess that explains a lot.

      report
    23. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Chris Harper

      Chris what is it that you do not understand about news reports ... news reports are found on media that can be worth suing... not some ratbag blog with a notebook and a coffee mug for assets. Find me some link to somewhere legit that has accused this bloke of telling porkies and I'll read it.

      report
    24. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      "Money out of farming ... gawd there's a laugh."

      About what I thought. Call yourself a farmer but you're not a farmer.

      You'd have to be a lot more sceptical and critical in your thinking to make money out of farming.

      What other things do you say that aren't true?

      report
    25. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      Oh no Jim I farm ... I dig holes, throw water and fertiliser about, prune trees and I make a pittance... certainly no way to make serious money ... if I wanted to that I'd do what my neighbours do and grow grass for a quid with cattle on it. I wouldn't get out of bed without a call to the tax planners and everything I touched would be owned by the family trust.

      But I'm in that happy situation where I can get by on organic produce, make a bit of cash and lead a simple uncomplicated life. Part…

      Read more
    26. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to Chris Harper

      The Nobel Peace prize was jointly awarded to the IPCC and Al Gore. "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counter such change"
      The IPCC awarded lead authors with certificates, and acknowledgement "for contributing to the award of the Nobel Peace Prize".
      The current court case is as much about accusations of scientific fraud, and accusations of child molestation, as well as MM
      misrepresenting himself . These accusations were made by Rand Simberg on OpenMarket.com, and Mark Stein on National Review online. etc.
      Here's a copy of the case which is pending. And I don't think RS, and MS will do so well.
      http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/michael-mann-complaint.pdf
      Thanks Chris, I'll follow this case and have a laugh at the end.

      report
    27. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      Don't forget to report the above comment as defamatory or spam, folks.

      report
    28. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to Chris Harper

      I wonder why a jury trial was demanded by the defendants National Review inc, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Rand Simburg and Mark Steyne? Maybe they'll try to get some religious fundamentalist types onto the jury.
      Still, Libel, damages to reputation, false statements, and a big damage claim being sought by Michael Mann are serious issues to be determined by the court. I'm sure it should be a relatively easy case for MM to win. The Exhibits are very well documented in the case, A, B C &D.

      report
    29. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Alice Kelly

      Oooh dear Ms Alice I suspect our denialist bloggers are about to lose their shirts - perhaps worse. Thanks for the link which I've now managed to read.

      And in true Blot style they didn't go to the object of their allegations for a comment or clarification. In Australian/English libel law that is a big no no - implying malice of intention... not in fact seeking the truth at all. Don't know how US libel law works in detail but I suspect that the same ethical obligation applies.

      Excellent ... more folks should reach for the silks when dealing with the likes of our resident slanderers when such smears are hurled at their professionalism or competence.

      Any half decent university or employer (say the BoM) should be more than willing to stump up for the initial outlay, or I'm sure I could track down a decent brief willing to do some pro-bono work - even a no win no fee approach at a pinch.

      report
    30. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Alice Kelly

      HI Alice, I read the documents. They make painful reading. If there is any justice at all, he must win. How wicked to try and destroy a person's professional reputation for venal reasons.
      Not a rare practice, unfortunately. Even here.

      report
    31. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to Jane Middlemist

      Jane and (senior writer) Peter, As I've found there is a court system, and then there's justice, where-ever. Thankfully in my second case I achieved a rare and profound win, due to rat-cunning, lots of home-work and justice. Anyway this case needs to win because the blogsphere needs to be given a shake-up. Not just for him, but pernicious pervasive scientific fraud, abuse of process to (it), and defamation in general which passes as commentary by bloggers. Those like Jim, Chris, and Mark are simply fodder who could use a bit of rattling too.

      report
    32. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter please give me the courtesy of using the name I log in with. If you had taken the trouble to read one of the papers I referenced, you would see I am a co-author, so yes of course I have read the very generic explanations by BOM for the recalculations.

      If you read the paper, which I am not going to re-type here, you will see what we find implausible. You should be asking why does BOM have a problem releasing the detail which would explain exactly how and why they carried out each adjustment and dropped and added each temperature station to the data set.

      I have asked the questions of BOM, you clearly have no knowledge in this area, why do you feel the need to respond when you cannot address the questions?

      report
    33. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to James Doogue

      Heck and strewth Doctor Doogue I had absolutely no idea I was talking to an actual expert in the field. Could you give me a quick run down of your training and expertise in the field?

      Nothing personal but I've invariably found that folks with a bit of expertise and something to say publish in reputable peer reviewed journals rather than sleazy political web sites.

      I'm sorry I won't be reading or looking at your paper ... I don't read anything on Ms Nova's scandal site ... this is the price of addressing a dumb audience I'm afraid - you only get dumb readers - now if you put your notions somewhere reputable serious folks might give your thoughts a second glance.

      Hope that explains things to your satisfaction.

      report
    34. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter you pretend to put science first, but clearly you didn't even read the papers I referenced which raised questions about the BOM methodology and accuracy. You have simply accepted they are correct because they are 'on your team', without making any enquiries.

      Now you have further embarrassed yourself by making assumptions that Jo Nova and Dr Jennifer Marohasy are unpublished and unscientific. Jo Nova (Nova, being a pseudonym (which you would know because you know so much about her), is an…

      Read more
    35. David Roth

      Postgrad History Student

      In reply to James Doogue

      Isn't Dr Marohasy an entomologist/biologist? i.e. not a physicist, mathematician or climate scientist. Does she have peer-reviewed publications in climate science or related fields? Just asking.

      report
    36. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter,

      So, does this mean that next time you send me a link of some sort I will be justified in rejecting it just because it says something I don't want to know?

      Well, I guess you had to invent some reason for rejecting the Canada Free Press site. You know on that basis The Guardian Australia, and The Conversation would equally be unacceptable as well? Did you mean to say this? Or was that an oversight as you thrashed around trying to invent some reason to reject the links I provided?

      You…

      Read more
    37. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to James Doogue

      I think we're back to Jim...

      So a walk in the park is it for these giants of climate science? So immense of intellect that they feel no need to study it or publish in the respected professional literature?

      No they are not on "my team" - nor do they have any credibility with anyone remotely interested in science - real science, real process, real reviews by folks with expertise. Science is not a team sport Jim ... it is a sober analytical reviewable process in which after debate and discussion…

      Read more
    38. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to James Doogue

      "clearly you didn't even read the papers"

      Yeah you're right there, James. It does become clear when he says something like:

      "I don't read anything on Ms Nova's scandal site", aka sleazy political web sites.

      report
    39. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Chris Harper

      No Chris what I am saying is that I wanted facts not more allegations and smear from the defendants in a libel case. Alice provided same - namely the full statement of claim and supporting documentation lodged with the court together with a couple of reports of subsequent judgments drawn from court records.

      That is the difference between fact and smear - between say Grattan and Blot. It is a subtle distinction but worth trying to grapple with.

      I am not interested in reading partisan trash and scandal from folks with an axe to grind having been hauled into court. I don't have the time and can rarely find any facts or evidence on which to base an opinion.

      If you believe that the Guardian or the Conversation for that matter are tainted by lies and falsehoods then by all means stick to finding stuff that you feel comfortable with - I suspect you do that already.

      report
    40. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter,

      When I were a mere child I was taught that the source of information is not a factor. What truly matters is the validity of the information itself, regardless of where it comes from. I would get smacked around the ear hole every time I tried to claim that you can't believe anything X has to say, because X is a (socialist/Marxist/Liberal/warmist hysteric/Greenpeace spokes(wo)man/climate denier). It was pounded into me that this was a fallacy which diminished my own position. I guess you missed that class.

      That you don't like the messenger really is of no bearing, what matters is the information itself. Try it. You might lose fewer arguments.

      report
    41. Henry Verberne

      Once in the fossil fuel industry but now free to speak up

      In reply to James Doogue

      I agree with Peter that the allegations you make against the BOM are so extraordinary that you have to back them up with extraordinary evidence. As it stands your allegations are so ludicrous and outlandish that the only logical response is humour.

      report
    42. Henry Verberne

      Once in the fossil fuel industry but now free to speak up

      In reply to John Nicol

      Anecdotal evidence is very poor evidence indeed, John.

      Got any real facts ?

      report
    43. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Chris Harper

      So let's get this right exactly Chris... you reckon on the basis of that report you cited that Mann has no right to claim the award of a Nobel Peace Prize - that right? Certainly there is nothing in the "article" to suggest otherwise.

      Now the fact that Mann was one of the team awarded the prize by the Nobel Committee might give you pause for thought. Anything shifting at all?

      Or do you still prefer to get your "facts" predigested by dodgy journals?

      I won't waste my valuable time reading such tripe ... you can choose to read whatever you like - but don't believe too much of it - tends to make one appear ill-informed and ignorant. It's like taking Andrew Blot as a source of facts, or Alan Jones or Lord Vice Prince Regent Monckton.

      report
    44. Henry Verberne

      Once in the fossil fuel industry but now free to speak up

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Chris Harper Will not follow through Peter, because he cannot provide evidence that will stand up to scrutiny. Thinks that if he throws a couple of aspersions around he will somehow have some credibility.

      report
    45. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Henry Verberne

      It's par for the course Henry ... when in doubt say something unpleasant and shoot the messenger - demand a judicial inquiry into the BoM, sack the scientists who bring unpleasant news or unpalatable facts. There's a whole industry based on it.

      But down deep they crave to be taken seriously, to have a "debate", to be treated with the respect they refuse to afford those they smear. And I won't give them any at all ... not till they can get their ratbag ideas and paranoid allegations through a peer-review process where folks who understand the niceties of the science can give us a critical evaluation. But they don't, they can't. They have nothing serious to say. They are a joke - the lot of them.

      report
    46. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to Chris Harper

      The source of information is important when lies are being told. The Court case you mentioned,
      "Straight report on the matter". No you provided a statement by one of the defendants.
      "Discussion of the implications of Dr. Mann's misconduct in his upcoming legal case." He is the plaintiff, no misconduct has been found, against him. The other organisations and persons are the ones who have to prove their innocence.
      Misleading with intent, I believe.

      report
    47. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to Alice Kelly

      Alice it is very easy to select a record here or there to try to make a point. It seems that wherever you have dragged those quotes from has done just that. I could retort that North America had 2,000 new 'coldest' records this winter, but so what? The so called experts have been telling us for years that the climate is extremely sensitive to CO2. They created models which predicted that global average temperature would rise at an increasing pace. None of over 100 climate models predicted that the…

      Read more
    48. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      "I'm just a battling dirt farmer"

      You just said you don't make your living from farming so that isn't right.

      I'm not interested whether you are rich or poor, just whether you are credible.

      And you've shown that you are not.

      report
    49. David Rennie

      IT Contractor

      In reply to Chris Harper

      Chris,
      I guess your one of those people who when faced with overwhelming evidence that you are ill informed continues blindly claiming to be right.
      The hockey stick graph has been identified in every paper examining global temperatures and is accepted as a reasonable description of the global temperatures over the past 600 years. Note that the original paper didn't even cover the MWP which ended about 300 years before the graph presented by Mann.
      Mann has been repeatedly cleared of the dishonest…

      Read more
    50. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter,

      Again, your fascination for credentialism shows. As I have told you in the past, I only care if someone can argue for and and justify their position, as anyone can become at least a lay expert in any topic with a few weeks or months of reading. So long as the papers James Doogue has published hold water in their own right that is sufficient for me, and it should be sufficient for anyone else.

      You keep claiming that you no little about science, so let me enlighten you. Science is about what you do, not what qualifications you hold.

      Freeman Dyson, just turned 90, holds a BA. That's it. One of the Great Geniuses of the twentieth century just plain doesn't meet your standards.

      report
    51. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to James Doogue

      Good luck with the next LIA then, and in the meantime perhaps you could do a little research into changes to the polar vortex, or even the antarctic vortex. Changes which result in both heat waves and drought to Europe and nth. America, and intense cold. and in the southern hemisphere, loss of rain to southern Australia. Then you could look at the temperature of the arctic, during the so called pause to see that there was no such thing. The oceans are slower to move than atmosphere, that's all. You…

      Read more
    52. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter,

      In the statement of claim, paragraphs 5 and 17, as well as para 2.

      When doe we go throw stones together, as you promised?

      You said: "If you believe that the Guardian or the Conversation for that matter are tainted by lies and falsehoods"

      Nope, I was merely pointing out the implication of your statements. Still true by the way.

      report
    53. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      So the Nobel Committee confirming he had not been awarded the Prize cuts no mustard with you then?

      Ok.

      His rewriting of his court submission to remove the claim? His removal of the claim from his web site? From RealClimate?

      No? Nothing? Doesn't strike chord?

      report
    54. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Alice Kelly

      "Jim what did you do?"

      What's that got to do with anything, Alice?

      I don't claim to be anything other than retired [although I have given a lengthy resume in other threads] but Peter claims to be a farmer and being a farmer myself for part of my life, I have never heard a genuine farmer talk like him.

      But as I suspected and he admits, he isn't a farmer, he's a poseur.

      So now Alice, while we are in this stickybeak and confessional frame of mind, what do you do?

      report
    55. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to David Roth

      It is funny that no one rushes to ask the same question of Al Gore or Tim Flannery or Ian Chubb or a host of others who race to present their views that humans are causing dangerous climate change.

      However Dr Marohasy is a scientist foremost and is published in a wide range of areas including hydrology, atmospheric research, insect taxonomy, biology, ecology and plant taxonomy. This breadth of knowledge and understanding makes her better positioned and qualified than most to understand issues of long term climate change.

      Her most recent peer reviewed publication was on rainfall forecasting.

      She has also written extensively on the Murray Darling System, The Great barrier Reef, Agriculture and nature conservation among other topics.

      report
    56. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to David Rennie

      David,

      I am unaware of any allegations of fraud against Michael Mann over the Hockey Stick. I would be interested to know of any.

      The original hockey stick was dropped when it became clear that, because of the way the algorithms were biased, giving greater weight to later data, any data fed into his programs, even random data, always produced a hockey stick. The only way to avoid this was to bias the original data so it wouldn't.

      As I said, I am unaware that this was deliberate intent, or fraudulent, just sloppy thinking.

      Keith Briffa's work, which originally seemed to support Manns hockey stick, was also dropped as a result of a recognised bias in data selection.

      I am unaware of any widespread and significant uses of the hockey stick these days. I would appreciate being enlightened.

      report
    57. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      Sure Jim, two things horticulturalist and sculptor. Aside from that I'm finally away from the big smoke for some 16 years and being rurally born and inclined living in a remote part of the country. I'm growing the best garden now, with aqis approved seed and rare plants from obscure nurseries.
      Poseur is a big claim Jim. As you are aware farmers are 40% women for a start, and some are even homosexual. I'm sure the demographic changes depending on where you look.

      report
    58. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Now you are just being more rude and derogatory. The paper I referenced speaks for itself. I was a co-author and I have appropriate undergraduate and post graduate qualifications as do the other contributors.

      Contrary to what you have written, the bulk of global progress happens in the world without it going through peer reviewed publications. The peer review journals are largely for academia and to tell the rest of the world what has happened already. Have you ever checked how many peer reviewed…

      Read more
    59. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Alice Kelly

      "Poseur is a big claim Jim."

      No it's not, he admits it.

      You can't call yourself "a battling dirt farmer" if it is not your mode of income.

      You are just having yourself on. Like most of the lefties on this site.

      They just kid themselves.

      "farmers are 40% women" and I've yet to meet one genuine women farmer who wasn't the salt of the earth.

      But there are also a few like Peter who own a farm, are of independent means with either a tenant or share farmer doing the work, never getting…

      Read more
    60. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter,

      You said: “Not sure what Jo Codling Nova knows about at all”

      So you acknowledge that you don’t know Ms Nova’s level of expertise in anything. You acknowledge that you don’t read what is posted at her site, yet you regard it appropriate, on the basis of this admitted complete ignorance, to judge the quality of her contribution to the debate.

      You said: “This whole "field" of scientific repudiation is the playground to a pack of charlatans and frauds”

      And this on the basis of an…

      Read more
    61. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      Jim Inglis,

      A bit of advice. Don't tell these people what you have done. Don't try to back up your position with a discussion of expertise. You will garner no respect from these people, you will just invite sarcasm and derision.

      These days I make my argument, treating the rational as rational, the idiots as idiots, and the rabid as rabid.

      report
    62. David Roth

      Postgrad History Student

      In reply to James Doogue

      I looked in Google Scholar and couldn't find peer-reviewed articles on 'atmospheric research' or Murray Darling system' by Marohasy. Correct me if I'm wrong. It's not a criticism of biological science, but I would expect scientists in more 'numerate' fields i.e. maths, physics, statisticians etc to be 'better positioned and qualified than most to understand issues of long term climate change.'
      In other words, you need maths types to check complex statistics.

      report
    63. Ian Rudd
      Ian Rudd is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Retired accountant & unapologetic dissident

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      When you are scientists who have, as the people at the BoM do, a firm grasp of the science and the looming crisis confronting us, then you would, after decades of denialism and inaction by governments, be failing in your moral duty not to advocate for the truth and to counter the lies being spread about the issue.

      report
    64. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter,

      You said: “making the absurd and outrageous allegations made by the likes of Codling and Marohasy”

      But Peter, you have already made it clear that you never, under any circumstances, read the writings of these people. So on what basis do you smear their writings? Fantasy? Guess work? Straight belief shorn of any underlying knowledge?

      Sheer hatred of those who don’t share your self admitted uninformed opinion on the matter?

      Enquiring minds would sincerely like to know.

      report
    65. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to Chris Harper

      "You will garner no respect from these people, you will just invite sarcasm and derision."

      Imagine, a denialist complaining about these things.

      The irony.

      report
    66. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Chris Harper

      Not really credentialism so much as serious study and understanding Mr Harper ... perhps if the denial attackers of science has a few Freeman Dysons in their camp I'd pay them more attention - but then Freeman Dyson published widely in the professional literature, was awarded a host of professional honours and memberships anf fellowships of scientific organisations the world over. He was seeking to improve the state of science rather than inventing conspiracies and alleging fabricated conspiracies and corruption . Sadly the folks who comprise the denialist camp are rather thick and ignorant and have no interest whatsoever in refining or improving the science - only in discrediting and overcoming it.

      So it's not a matter of credentials but credibility... and Chris, I'm afraid Alan Jones is no Freeman Dyson. Nor are any of you.

      report
    67. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Chris O'Neill

      Chris,

      You sent me to the 2007 report? Seriously? You show me a copy of the very hockey stick which has since been discredited as an example of how it hasn't been?

      report
    68. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Ian Rudd

      "failing in your moral duty not to advocate"

      You mean like Steven Schneider's "double ethical bind":

      "To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."

      report
    69. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to James Doogue

      "None of over 100 climate models predicted that the global average temperature would remain statistically stable from 1998"

      Of course not. Those models are not statistical models. They produce instances. Your point is a strawman. There usually hasn't been statistically significant warming over periods of only 15 years, even since the beginning of the modern rapid global warming period 40 years ago.

      report
    70. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Chris Harper

      Nope not when he's been part of a team effort -like pretty much all decent science. In fact the whole idea of rewarding indoviduals for the efforts of large numbers of scientists is all a bit of a furphy actually... a bit mythical.

      So no - if you haven't got some factual credible reportage that criticises or condemns Mann's conduct or behaviour then no the rantings of ratbags on the receiving end of serioius libel actions cuts very little mustard with me. I'm very fussy what I choose to read and accept as factual. So I won't be reaching for my bucket of rocks on this occasion not without some half decent evidence.

      report
    71. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      You said: " I'm afraid Alan Jones is no Freeman Dyson. Nor are any of you."

      For someone so self professedly ignorant of science as you claim to be, I am impressed you have heard of him, or was that a quick trip to wikipedia?

      Regardless, not comparing anyone to him, merely pointing out that under your long term and well observed attention to credentials when judging the value of someones contribution, this man would barely have met the least of your expectations.

      As to the rest, still pulling opinions of others out of thin air I see. Keep it up, pure chance would suggest that one day you might even get it right.

      report
    72. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to David Roth

      I'm not sure your enquiries are genuine David, but as you are a History (i.e. non science) student, I'll assume the benefit of the doubt. You see no one here in the dozens of antagonistic comments against myself, Marohasy or Nova has actually addressed any of the content of the points raised about the BOM records. It has all been about personal attacks and questioning qualifications and ability. Surely the easiest thing in the world if any of us were talking rubbish would be to simply refute our…

      Read more
    73. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Well, if the word of the Nobel Committee isn't good enough for you, I guess there ain't nuttin which will shake your opinion of the saintly and hard done by Dr Mann.

      Kinda like your expressed attitude to Climate Science I guess. Faith, faith, and more faith. Evidence just ain't important, is it?

      Not terrible scientific, but there you go.

      Tell me, you are aware of just who Mark Steyn is, aren't you?

      Is that the sound of little feet scurrying to wikipedia?

      report
    74. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Chris Harper

      I wouldn't mind if you lot did ask questions of the authors but that's not what you do ... you denounce, decry, label and allege ... and claim to be interested in the science... but it is a political position you adopt Chris - and you know that full well.

      I know enough about Jo Codling to know her real name and have tracked her "work" but I would never ever accept any of it as reasoned, truthful or honest. You are apparently less fussy... fine.

      But you have utterly failed to tackle the elephant in the room - the undeniable link between global warming and metrification and the perfidious role played by daylight saving. The calibre of cranks and ratbags in this discussion is deeply disappointing.

      report
    75. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Chris Harper

      No Chris I haven't professed an ignorance of science - I just don't read ratbag blogs and crank websites. .. in fact the last ticket I picked up was in environmental science ... genetics, botany and a sideline in microbiology. But I am not a professional scientist - I just have some respect for those who are... and I think scientific inquiry and process is not characterised by smears, paranoid delusions and allegations of corruption.

      If you have something scientific to contribute then put it in peer reviewed scientific literature... if you want to do the bidding of vested interests and run a political campaign - post gossip, allegations and smears on blogs... simple really.

      report
    76. David Roth

      Postgrad History Student

      In reply to James Doogue

      Actually I do have 2 (very old) science degrees. But my inquiry was genuine. I don't claim to understand the maths in the abstract you quoted, so I have no way of judging its quality. I would still prefer a comment or second objective opinion by a professional statistician. My difficulty (speaking as a historian) is that Marohasy is by her own confession a partisan player (by no means the only one on either side of the debate), so I would prefer objective opinions by people who aren't in the midst of battle (so to speak).
      As for dishing out insults and personal attacks, I think there's been plenty of mud thrown by all and sundry.

      report
    77. Jim Inglis

      retired

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      While you're in denial-of-the-facts mode, Peter, it might be the best time to check out some official global sea ice sites to refresh your memory in this record hot year of the largest recorded level of that white stuff that knocks ships about.

      That way it won't be too much of a shock.

      I could give you the links but it would be a bit like casting pearls among swine so I'll let you find your own.

      report
    78. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Jim Inglis

      I keep asking and no keeps answering ... these facts that are being kept hidden, these lies and distortions being spread by boffins all over the globe - why? What do you think is driving the plot - is it socialist scheming? greenery gone mad ? third worlders seeking to nobble our growth and way of life? or are all these scientists just incompetent fools easily discredited by any old fogies with an interweb connection and a shed?

      If you denialist folks are going to have a serious conspiracy then you have to have a secret mission or a perfidious purpose at the heart of it... come on Jim ... come clean ... who is the enemy and what do they want?

      Or are you too embarrassed to say - afraid that the lunacy might be all too obvious?

      report
    79. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Peter:

      You said: "and I think scientific inquiry and process is not characterised by smears, paranoid delusions and allegations of corruption."

      Absolutely, I couldn't agree more.

      Does this mean you will henceforth cease the hatred, smear and abuse you have been spitting at those who disagree with your declared faith based position? At those who question the orthodoxy? You know, those who advocate science?

      report
    80. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to Chris O'Neill

      "There usually hasn't been statistically significant warming over periods of only 15 years,"

      I'm not sure what you are talking about here. I think you are confusing 'no statistically significant warming' with 'identifiable statistically significant warming above natural climate variability'. There has most certainly been periods of statistically significant warming since since the mid 1970's.

      However if you are referring to no statistically significant warming above natural variability then…

      Read more
    81. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Once again Milud, you are too impatient. Your question will no doubt be addressed at the next weekly briefing - although I read somewhere that Count Morrison is mulling discarding them altogether, so even should you be blessed with a briefing do not expect the General to discuss "on science matters".
      Sorry to disappoint you but we must all learn to work within the new system mustn't we? Don't forget the old adage: "they grow old and are replaced but the institution of "theyness" goes on…

      report
    82. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Chris Harper

      Chris, you seem to be labouring under some delusion that a bunch of old geezers out in the shed with an interweb connection and a thermometer are "doing science" - that their opinions have some weight and merit ... that their refusal to accept or understand the science is some sort of debate.

      Sadly it aint... it's just a bunch of ratbags and cranks who don't like the message - so they invent all sorts of crackpot theories to explain why the BoM is a cabal of liars and incompetents, how they…

      Read more
    83. David Rennie

      IT Contractor

      In reply to Chris Harper

      Chris,
      The hockey stick graph which has been verified in more than 20 different studies is accepted by climate scientists as an accurate description of temperature records over the past 1000 years. There have been no studies that refute it. The statistical objections made by McIntyre and Wegman have been dismissed as having no impact on the shape of the graph. Indeed the Wegman report repeatedly confirmed the reality of warming.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_graph.
      The only reason that the graph may have been 'dropped' is because the science has moved on and the hockey stick description is seen as a confimed model. Claiming it has been dropped is a bit like claiming that one and one does not make two because we don't repeat the proof every time we go shopping.
      I would be interested if you could provide any scientific reference that contradicts the hockey stick model as a representation of global temperatures over the past 1000 years.

      report
    84. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to James Doogue

      "I'm not adept enough (totally inept) with excel to do this now"

      I should hope they don't do their analysis with excel.

      report
    85. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Sneers and smears Peter. sneers and smears. You really can't resist, can you?

      You are capable of rational discussion, I have observed it, but you just can't resist descending into abuse when you have no other argument.

      Tell me, what other branch of science has an orthodox position? In what other branch of science are those who point out failures in the hypothesis abused?

      A year ago there was an issue at CERN where it looked as if a buncha neutrinos might have broken the speed of light? Believe…

      Read more
    86. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to James Doogue

      "I'm not sure what you are talking about here."

      Simple. Pick any 15 year period in the modern global warming period (1974 to the present) and calculate whether its warming trend is statistically significant. A calculator is here: http://www.skepticalscience.com/trend.php

      You will find that for most choices of 15 year period since 1974 that the warming trend is statistically insignificant.

      "They found that tropospheric temperature records must be AT LEAST 17 years long"

      Amazing how that AT LEAST often gets forgotten.

      "I think I will switch off notifications from this site."

      So you've finished your trolling for the day?

      report
    87. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Chris Harper

      Who engages in smears Mr Harper? ... I have simply pointed out that you repudiators of reason have no credible sources - nothing at all in the published iterature - and must rely on an echo chamber of blogs and a pack of fraudsters to stoke your furnaces.

      I don't argue with ratbags Mr Harper ... I don't think they merit argument ... they merit mockery and derision ... they are a parody of scientific inquiry. They are not serious... they can't be.

      Neutrinos what nonsense is this? - some metric…

      Read more
    88. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to Chris Harper

      "everyone got all excited at the idea that (Einstein's) theories might actually be wrong"

      And the denialists should calm down and realize that climate science, like Einstein's theories, are not about to be overturned. Not even close.

      report
    89. Jane Middlemist

      citizen

      In reply to Peter Ormonde

      Oh no please: not a name change for the Woolibuddha CERN. It has long been held in awe in our humble household and my husband who regards the institution as the repository ( is that the right word or is it supp - no, not sure I'll leave it - as I was saying my dour Scottish husband, not easily impressed, regards the shed as the repository of all wisdom and lives in hopes of one day visiting for a quick worship. I share his opinion: it is the cornerstone of our faith. Quite frankly, just knowing it is somewhere out there is all that keeps us going in difficult times. So, I beg of you, don't do anything rash! Regards and keep the candle burning for the DOTS (Devotees Of The Shed).

      report
    90. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to Jane Middlemist

      Your deeply shocked response to the proposal has been duly recorded Ms M and you shall be accorded a full vote (being made an honorary bloke for the purposes of democracy) along with the other half who being a Scot is automatically entitled to full membership without the mandatory probationary period and character checks.

      report
    91. John Nicol

      logged in via email @bigpond.com

      In reply to David Roth

      David Theodor Roth

      Most statistics is now carried out using standard algorithms which have been developed by mathematical statisticians and provided for the use of scientists working a whole range of fields. One does not need to be a mathematician at all to use these intelligently, and Jennifer Mahorasy has a long background in the scientific application of statistics. She is also working with a team in which there are people who also have mathematical backgrounds.

      You may be interested to…

      Read more
    92. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to John Nicol

      Oooh yes indeed ... those raisin d'etres will bring any pudding undone! Lordy you're a hoot and a half emeritus professor Nichol ... your fruity lectures must have had them falling about in the isles.

      Now regarding Ms Nova ... my dogs are both working cattle dogs ... I guess this makes me a bit of an authority on cattle despite having no knowledge of them whatsoever.

      I've done a few sums in my time about weeds and the like and a few more nebulous matters and I guess this gives me carte blanche…

      Read more
    93. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to James Doogue

      There are dozens of comments in response to my original questions of BOM attacking either myself, Marohasy or Nova. But none have actually addressed the issues I raised and those which were raised in the papers cited.

      Many correspondents have questioned whether I or Marohasy or Nova have published peer reviewed papers on climate science. I have answered those questions but I hardly see that is relevant if the points I raised are valid. If they are not, they should be easy to address without needing…

      Read more
    94. Peter Ormonde
      Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Farmer

      In reply to James Doogue

      Excellent Jim ... here we find you late in the night replying to yourself .... now what should that tell us?

      That basically no one here really takes any notice of your absurd accusatory questions designed to impugn the integrity of the BoM.

      You have an agenda Jim ... and science has nothing whatsoever to do with it. This is about your political beliefs, your fears and your suspicions, You have no interest in the science - but you do have an interest in the policy issues arising from it ,,, and you don't like the implications of a warming world at all... you don't believe it, you do not understand it, you have no expertise in it, and you want those who are doing the science investigated and stopped ... it is as simple as that Jim.

      So you stay here chatting with yourself and leave the witch hunts to the professionals mate.

      report
  21. Greg North

    Retired Engineer

    All this talk of averages with variations not only confirms for me what an average is but also of that average Melbourne four seasons in one day and if not liking the weather, just wait five minutes.

    report
  22. Daniel Roberts

    Tech

    "Average temperatures over the continent have been 1.2C above the 1961-1990 average, breaking the previous record set in 2005 by 0.17C."

    Could someone please explain how such "accuracy" can be claimed (to 2 decimal places even!) when the measuring devices have an uncertainity of 0.5 degrees with a field accuracy of +/- 0.8 degrees?

    Que?

    report
  23. Steve Hindle

    logged in via email @bigpond.com

    So how do the hotter temps in Australia stack up against world trends?
    This short video from NASA gives a fairly simple view of what is happening on a bigger scale. http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012-temps.html
    It makes some of the comments here questioning BOMs revisions of past temperature data look to be a bit of a side show, even if many of those criticisms are valid.

    report
    1. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Steve Hindle

      Steve,

      The latest UAH 2013 analysis has just been released, 2013 was the fourth warmest year in the last ten (or thirty, choose your own base line), so again another year of no significant warming. That makes 17+ years of observation diverging from the AGW hypothesis forecasts. Reading the comments here I guess hypothesis continues to trump observation.

      report
    2. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to Chris Harper

      "That makes 17+ years of observation diverging from the AGW hypothesis forecasts."

      No, that is not statistically significant divergence from the long term (40+ year) warming trend.

      17 years is not enough data to show a statistically significant difference from either zero or the long term trend. 17 years is not unusually long for no statistical significance in either direction.

      Reading the comments here, it's obvious that ignorance trumps knowledge.

      report
    3. Chris Harper

      Engineer

      In reply to Chris O'Neill

      Chris,

      You said:"17 years is not enough data to show a statistically significant difference from either zero or the long term trend."

      Yes, I know. Four years ago we were told it would need fifteen years for the divergence to become significant, then it went up. Every year it goes up that bit more. I guess a significant period will always be just a couple of years in the future. A bit like a carrot dangling on a stick in front of a donkey. It doesn't matter how we move forward, the period of…

      Read more
    4. Steve Hindle

      logged in via email @bigpond.com

      In reply to Alice Kelly

      " The early explorers temperature measurements were bogus.."
      Bogus as in some sort of conspiracy? I could understand early temperature records as lacking the accuracy of modern equipment, but to suggest early records were faked is really getting into strange territory.

      report
    5. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to Chris Harper

      "Four years ago we were told it would need fifteen years"

      at least

      "for the divergence to become significant"

      You are a master of quotation out of context.

      But getting back to your FALSE assertion:

      "That makes 17+ years of observation diverging from the AGW hypothesis forecasts."

      As I said before, no, that is not a statistically significant divergence from the long term (40+ year) warming trend.

      Thanks for not denying that you made a FALSE assertion. It tells us everything we need to know about you intellectual honesty. i.e. you don't have any.

      By the way, 18 years without statistically significant warming is very old news. There was no statistically significant warming from 1979 to 1997. Nothing to see here folks, move along.

      report
    6. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to Chris O'Neill

      You shouldn't believe everything you read on the ironically named SkepticalScience blog site - in fact you should rarely believe anything. But you should stop repeating what they claim that 17 years isn't sufficient to show a statistically significant warming trend (not that it would prove it was man made). Go the the model you keep pointing everyone to and use 1975 as the start year and only 12 month rolling averages.

      report
    7. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to James Doogue

      "You shouldn't believe everything you read on the ironically named SkepticalScience blog site"

      Oh puhlease spare me the ad hom arguments. (You seem to have a problem with them elsewhere. Perhaps you don't think you have to follow the rules that you make for other people.) Skeptical Science's confidence interval calculator is just an implementation of a mathematical algorithm that accounts for correlation in global temperature.

      "they claim that 17 years isn't sufficient to show a statistically significant warming trend"

      Your claim doesn't make any mathematical sense. You can always choose a trend small enough to be statistically insignificant. That doesn't mean there is no warming.

      "only 12 month rolling averages"

      And what, pray tell, does this have to do with statistical significance? Or is it just another one of your non-sequiturs?

      report
    8. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to Chris O'Neill

      "an implementation of a mathematical algorithm that accounts for correlation in global temperature."

      Should be autocorrelation.

      report
  24. Comment removed by moderator.

    1. Alice Kelly
      Alice Kelly is a Friend of The Conversation.

      sole parent

      In reply to James Doogue

      Keep up the good work, defamation slander and libel are only a matter of time
      Why would the moderators want to tidy up your post and give it a bit of an edit?
      I would prefer the authors grade your post, which includes personal emails you've just posted by David Jones and Will Steffen

      report
    2. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to James Doogue

      "providing any complainer with every single station observation when they question our data (this usually snows them) and the Australian data is in pretty good order anyway."

      Amazing. Denialists either complain they don't get enough data or they get to much. You just can't win.

      report
    3. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to Alice Kelly

      All on public record Alice! There is no libel in what I have written.

      report
    4. James Doogue

      logged in via email @doogue.net

      In reply to Chris O'Neill

      So you think if someone asks for data from selected stations it is appropriated to dump all station data? That is what you expect of your tax payer funded public servants?

      As it happens there was no 'complaint' offered as evidence from any alleged 'denier' BTW. But it is interesting that you would condone such unprofessional behaviour.

      Why would they need to act in such a manner if there was nothing to hide?

      Interestingly, most data is now publicly accessible, however, not the way it is adjusted. And many of the last few months of 2013 is still missing from the BOM station data publicly available even though they have published their 'Hottest year ever' press release. Why is that data not there? Why isn't it instantly available when digitally processed? It is being second handled before being made available for public consumption. Why?

      Are these not reasonable questions?

      report
    5. Chris O'Neill

      Retired Way Before 70

      In reply to James Doogue

      "That is what you expect of your tax payer funded public servants?"

      So you expect taxpayer funded public servants to trawl through their data for just what someone asks for?

      "As it happens there was no 'complaint' offered"

      So you've never heard of denialists complaining that they can't get the data they want? You learn something every day James.

      "But it is interesting that you would condone such unprofessional behaviour."

      Your opinion of what is unprofessional behaviour is interesting.

      "Why would they need to act in such a manner if there was nothing to hide?"

      What are they hiding?

      "It is being second handled before being made available for public consumption. Why?"

      A conspiracy I guess.

      report
  25. James Doogue

    logged in via email @doogue.net

    Apologies for the mess I posted. I was clearly drafting and cutting and pasting and clicked to post without realising I still had my draft material on the page. A 'Preview' key would be handy to avoid such errors before final 'post'. It should be clear which bit to edit if the moderators want to tidy it up. Thanks

    report
  26. Stephen Ralph

    carer at n/a

    Not having any sort of degree, I have to sit back and read the 300+ comments on this article.....well I get to about 30 and then delete.

    The "conversation" invariably descends into irrelevant argy bargy about evidence and qualifications........."I have a masters in stargazing - what do YOU have?."
    I'll show you mine, if you show me yours.

    No wonder nothing gets taught in schools if the constant nitpicking and small minded arguments in TC are an indication of the state of academia.

    report