Australian March days were hotter in 1938, 1951, 1980, 1986, 1998 and 2005

The ABC acts as the BoM faithfull media lapdog – March temperatures sets record as hottest ever, Bureau of Meteorology says – We can see the duplicity in the way the article fails to be explicit about mentioning daytime temperature but in fact where they say “…reaching 1.7 degrees Celsius above the long-term average.” That is the MEAN they are talking about (max + min/2) and we all know the mean is little talked about. This beaten-up “Hottest March” did NOT have the hottest days, 1986 had way hotter days. Here are the anomaly charts first.
March max history 2016 no record despite ACORN tweaks
March mean history 2016 sneaky ACORN created record that BoM trumpets
March min history 2016 big record helped by ACORN tweaks – BoM silent on meteorological reasons for the min record
SE Australia 1940 March max hottest by a country mile despite ACORN tweaks
SE Australia 2016 March min record helped by ACORN tweaks
SE Australia 2016 March mean record helped by ACORN tweaks but a mystery how the narrow min record goes with the cooler max result to just give the mean a record by a nose
Now the anomaly maps – March max only a pussy of a hot month – 1986 March max – now there are hot days –
March min – oops there is the NNTHS
March mean
No hot March nights at Giles – our only purpose built professionally staffed met station in central Australia – shame about that.

12 thoughts on “Australian March days were hotter in 1938, 1951, 1980, 1986, 1998 and 2005”

  1. Not sure why you would link to the corrupted ACORN-Sat database for your comparisons? So, you show that even with all the adjustments we still don’t have a record hot March. But its just not useful to suggest the charts that you link to have any credibility – they represented homogenized/adjusted data.

  2. March 2016 temperature data shows no net warming in moving average since 1998.

    As I predicted in 2011, the “pause” will continue until at least 2027 and 500 years of cooling lies ahead starting later this century. Dr Spencer’s March 2016 temperature data is now available. Note that the red line (the annual moving average that eliminates seasonal effects) is still not as high as the maximum in 1998 and the El Nino spike is past its maximum. Click the link below to see details.
    www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_March_2016_v6-1.jpg

    Don’t be misled by the data from ground based weather stations. Those that have not warmed get eliminated, whilst those that have not been affected by urban crawl warming have their rate of warming adjusted upwards. It is all FRAUDULENT science. Trust only Dr Spencer’s satellite data.

    Reducing carbon dioxide will not help the environment because it cools rather than warms and it enhances agricultural production and growth of everything from flowers to forests. There is no valid science supporting the radiative forcing greenhouse garbage for the gullible.

    The Second law of thermodynamics says: “In a natural thermodynamic process, the sum of the entropies of the interacting thermodynamic systems increases.”

    Hence, for the natural thermodynamic process that is a one-way pencil of radiation from a cooler system (a region of the atmosphere) to a warmer system (a region of the surface) there can be no decrease in entropy, and hence no heat transfer.

    This Second Law applies to every independent process, so a reduction in entropy cannot be excused by a subsequent larger increase in entropy. For example, water cannot flow up a mountain to a lake at the top (reducing entropy) just because it will subsequently flow down further (increase entropy more) on the other side. Net effects of two or more non-dependent processes do not excuse a violation of the law.

    Hence GH radiative forcing is FALSE.

  3. OK Jen point taken – but I thought I included enough qualifiers like – tweaks – sneaky – record by a nose – Given the time I can spend on my blog the convenient BoM sites are all that I can use. Note the BoM maps do not use ACORN – these notes quote ADAM – whatever –
    We are up against a monster data tweaking org in the BoM and their associated media machine and must all remember the work you did revealing the truth about ACORN and the series of articles in The Australian quoting your findings jennifermarohasy.com/temperatures/

  4. “Not sure why you would link to the corrupted ACORN-Sat database for your comparisons? ”

    Because even using this highly adjusted and suspect official BoM “data set”, it’s possible to show that the claim of “hottest March ever” is at best highly misleading and at worst deliberate deception to advance an agenda.
    In this case, I agree with Warwick’s choice – because it shows that even using their own data of choice, they are picking cherries, big time.
    As Jen’s research shows, that particular data set is biased high anyway, so having to define a new metric to create their headline tells me they will soon run out of ways to make this happen. These are the same people saying we had a “scorcher” summer this year – I can’t say what the rest of Oz was like, but Sydney was in no way a scorcher this year. Quite humid compared to recent summers, but not anything like the late 60s / early 70s for both heat and humidity, IMO.

  5. Alice Springs is in the wrong anomaly zone on the minimum anomaly map above – Checking Alice Springs location –
    www.bom.gov.au/web03/ncc/www/awap/temperature/minanom/month/colour/latest.nt.hres.gif
    it is shown in the pink 3 to 4 degrees anomaly zone. OK.
    Now the March mean min for Alice Springs Airport is 17.5° from –
    www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/av?p_nccObsCode=38&p_display_type=dataFile&p_startYear=&p_c=&p_stn_num=015590
    Alice Springs Airport in March 2016 registered a mean minimum of 20.2 see –
    www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/201603/html/IDCJDW8002.201603.shtml
    Now getting out my trusty calculator – 20.2 minus 17.5 = 2.7 which should be the anomaly – which belongs in the light brown 2 to 3° colour zone. But the BoM put Alice in the 3 to 4° pink zone. How can this be?

  6. This is how the BoM can claim records – by over shading.
    I remember pointing this out with the October 2014 data for NSW and the way BoM had way higher anomaly zone shadings than the actual average temps for that zone (and I thank Warwick for doing the breakdown map).
    For NSW in March this year, if you average the actual max temps for the 160 or so sites the temps are below average – but the BoM claims NSW was 2.5C above average.

  7. Thanks, Warwick.
    I have been mainly looking at the disconnect between the average max mean anomaly using the NSW sites and the anomaly reached by the BoM.
    If my figures are correct, the site anomaly value is lower than the official value given. Shading must be how the final anomaly is derived. However, it appears flawed.
    For instance, the map shades an area in NW NSW as between 3.0 and 4.0 above normal, yet not one site in that immediate area has an anomaly higher than 2.7 (Wanaaring). The closest is Mungindi with 3.0 which is 500 ams away.
    Data is here for NSW anomaly and map at:
    www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/month/aus/summary.shtml
    and here for individual NSW site/anamoly data:
    www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/month/nsw/summary.shtml
    (BTW, the shadings for this month are nowhere near as bad as Oct 2014).

  8. Another shading ‘disconnect’ for Queensland.
    There are two areas showing a 3-4 degree anomaly in W Qld for max mean temps for March.
    Yet only Taroom in the Central Highlands shows 3.0C anomaly and that district’s temp (District 35) averaged over the four towns listed is only 1.6C above average. Then follows Charleville and Isisford, both at 2.9C above average.
    So where does 3-4 shading come from?

    All data here at:
    www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/month/qld/summary.shtml

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *