A few comments on Chapter 1 of the latest CSIRO paper "Climate change : science and solutions for Australia"April 26th, 2011 by Warwick Hughes
"A network of standard thermometers and standard thermometer shelters was progressively introduced throughout Australia between 1890 and 1910."
This is the first time I have ever seen 1890 quoted in this context. The BoM position is stated on page 4 of their 8 Feb 2011 "SPECIAL CLIMATE STATEMENT 27"
“An exceptional summer heatwave in greater Sydney and the Hunter Valley”
where they say
"Maximum temperatures prior to 1910 have not been considered for inclusion unless they are known to have been measured in a standard Stevenson screen or similar."
I have never seen the BoM mention a date before 1907 or 1908 and I am not aware the BoM produces a trend starting prior to 1910.
My own research suggests that the Stevenson screen was progressively introduced from about 1882 – obviously spreading out from high order stations.
There is much information from searchable newspaper archives and archived photographs coming online in recent years which provide evidence for the use of the Stevenson screen from the 1890′s which undermines the BoM position. A few examples are given here.
It is amazing that in the 14 pages – with several superfluous propaganda photos – the CSIRO paper shows no graphic of the Australian long term temperature trend as defined by the BoM – which we note originates in 1910 – and be aware these BoM data have been stroked and tweaked to show more warming than the raw data.
My graphic "Average of 25 Regional and Remote Stations" shows that Australian temperatures in the late 19th Century were similar to those in recent decades which are quoted by global warming alarmists as evidence for anthropogenic warming.
No wonder the BoM, other public service scientists and global warming alarmists do not chart Australian temperature trends prior to 1910 – yet note how the BoM trend is warped cooler from 1910-1940′s. There is a lot of propaganda out there.
The CSIRO include the page 3 Fig 1.1 which I am sure is not peer reviewed and only runs from 1960. Why do they talk trends from 1910-2009 on one page then can only find data from 1960 ?
We must remember that the Eastern Australian big wet of second half 2010 and early 2011 caught the CSIRO by surprise. See my blog article from October 2010, Australian wheat crop history does not shout “worst drought ever”
Bottom of page 5 –
"It is notable that, despite heavy rainfall in Victoria during the second half of the year, Melbourne recorded its 14th consecutive year of below average inflows to water storages during 2010."
Wrong CSIRO – there was nothing notable about that – simply that in the swings and roundabouts of rainfall – the Thomson dam catchment got less rain than vast areas of Victoria to the north and west.
To wrap up – can I just point out two sections on Australian rainfall that seem to me to be contradictory.
First – bottom page 4 –
"Similarly, vast movements of oceanic heat and atmospheric circulation over the Pacific Ocean, known as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, are associated with periodic droughts (El Niño) and, alternatively, heavy rainfall (La Niña) across the eastern and southern parts of the continent.
Sea surface temperatures in the Indian and Southern oceans, as well as atmospheric circulation around the Southern Hemisphere as a whole, also make strong contributions to Australian rainfall variability."
Then on the bottom of page 7-
"There is no unequivocal evidence that long-term changes in the Indian and Pacific oceans, such as changes to the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, have had a major influence on rainfall trends over Australia, despite studies that have identified possible changes over the 20th century in these large features of climate variability."
Page 7 – that’s enough wading through CSIRO-speak for me.