BoM makes large warming adjustments to minimum temperatures prior 2007 in its own professionally collected Cobar Met Office data but fails to include the 2007 adjustment in their own 2014 published list – Episode 2 Cobar ACORN-SAT

This is the second episode in the Cobar ACORN-SAT series examining BoM adjustments to the CDO temperature data – here I start to look at adjustments to minimum temperatures. The 1st episode looked at maximum temperatures. A list of ACORN adjustments to Cobar data is here and you can see the first min adjustment listed is 1st Jan 1972 meaning the adjustment factor applies to all data earlier than that. You will see it is labelled as “Statistical” meaning there is no evidence for it in station diaries or admin records but it derives from computer driven comparisons sifting data differences from multiple stations as far away as Parkes and Hillston – see map. In this case of the 4th adjustment the following stations data was used.
Making the chart of Cobar annual minimum temperatures compared to ACORN-SAT my eye was caught by the adjustment starting in 2006 and affecting all earlier years which I have marked with a blue 6. That is unlisted in the ACORN-SAT documentation and is substantial at about -0.4 degrees C. The slight mismatch between Cobar Met Office and ACORN from 2007-2013 is due to rounding differences because I have made my ACORN annuals by averaging a year of daily data which I leave as produced by Excel with multiple decimal places.
The next adjustment to look for is at 1971 where I have the blue 4, which is the 4th adjustment in the ACORN list and is listed at -0.49 degrees C. The increased departure of ACORN cooler than Met Office to about -0.9 is obvious on the chart.
Examining this adjustment in greater detail I have made a chart comparing Cobar MO and ACORN version with nearest neighbours Bourke, Wilcannia and Nyngan. The average difference between the 1971 & 1972 readings for these 3 stations is +0.2 at Cobar MO, +0.4 at Bourke PO, +0.4 at Nyngan, and -0.4 at Wilcannia, an average for the 3 Cobar neighbours of +0.13, not very different from the +0.2 that we know happened at Cobar Met Office. But instead of leaving the higher quality Cobar Met Office readings well alone – what does the BoM decide to do with their adjustment #4? They take off 0.49° making the 1971-1972 difference now 0.7 – greater by 0.3 than any of the neighbours. Presumably the BoM justify this by their computer driven comparisons with sites as distant as Parkes.
If the reasons for an adjustment can not be seen in nearest neighbours then it must be an exercise in fantasy to search for a reason in a cherry picked array of more distant stations which are all of poorer quality than Cobar Met Office.
It is interesting to check the differences in annual minimums between Cobar Met Office and Cobar Airport which are only about 7 or 8 km apart. You might expect them to be very similar and in lockstep – not so from the chart.
Note the BoM never refer to Cobar Airport data in ACORN-SAT – but we are free to check it out.
First there is no evidence here of a step or jump around 2006 – 2007.
While there are such wildly varying and apparently random differences between these two very adjacent sites – what on earth can the BoM learn by comparing Cobar with Parkes – or indeed any other station in their adjustments list.
These are the sort of unsafe foundations that pro-IPCC climate science is based on.

How the BoM ACORN SAT project has reconstructed Cobar temperature data commencing with an obviously invalid adjustment – Episode 1 Cobar ACORN-SAT

A reader has asked me to look at how ACORN-SAT has adjusted Cobar temperature data. Cobar is an old site with Post Office data from 1881 – then in 1963 the BoM opened the Cobar Met Office on the north side of town. Map from Google Earth with MO marked by “green X”. Detail of Met Office – note housing adjacent. A Met Office is of course purpose built and staffed by BoM professionals. Then in 1994 an Airport station commenced with an AWS.
ACORN-SAT starts with a positive adjustment to the max of 0.41 prior to 1 Jan 1995. Table of ACORN-SAT adjustments for Cobar. I will start by examining the evidence for that first adjustment 1 Jan 1995. This chart shows Cobar district annual max t data from 1963 – the 3 Cobar station plus Bourke PO and Airport – then Wilcannia and Nyngan. All data from the BoM CDO www site. I have marked the year 1995 with a “green 1″ – and the first adjustment to Cobar Met Office is indicated by the “green 2″.
Here is a map of NSW showing all stations used in the various ACORN-SAT adjustments of Cobar. Here is a list of stations used in the first adjustment (1 Jan 1995) – the only one we will discuss at this time.
An important note – BoM ACORN-SAT does NOT use Cobar Airport data, despite the two stations only being about 7km apart and as the chart shows the Airport and MO annual max data are in near lockstep as you would expect.
I am saying this first adjustment is invalid for the following reasons.
[1] The Airport data for 1994 & 1995 closely agrees with Met Office so this fact must override whatever signals the BoM computes from “data mining” at diverse stations up to a few hundred kms away some in very different climate zones.
[2] The Cobar Met Office is a purpose built facility staffed by professionals so that data must be considered a more reliable baseline compared to amateur run sites not owned by the BoM.
[3] If there was a valid reason to adjust Cobar MO data prior to 1 Jan 1995 it is ludicrous to think there would not be a reason revealed in the Met Office admin records.
That is my case that the ACORN-SAT version of Cobar fails at the first hurdle.
There has been much valid criticism of ACORN-SAT in recent months and the entire project must be scrapped.

1910 Bureau of Meteorology report shows Canberra region temperatures pre-1909 were similar to the ten years 2004-2013

The BoM was asked to calculate the climate of the Canberra district in the process of deciding on a location for the Australian Federal Capital Territory – Chris Gillham alerted me to this report and he has his own comments on the data in a 1Mb pdf report.
Looking at the temperature data in the Table on page 7 & 8 of the pdf report I decided to check on Goulburn, Cooma and Yass getting data from BoM CDO.
In the case of Goulburn the annual mean temperature was 56.1°F for the 46 years prior to 1910 – this equates to 13.4°C and the station was at an altitude of 702m. Now Goulburn Airport is at an altitude of 640m so the 13.4 in town would equate to 14 at the Airport assuming a standard lapse rate. The Airport in the ten years 2004-2013 averaged 13.1 – so even if we take of 0.2 from the Goulburn Town temperature for possible non-Stevenson screen exposure – we still have Goulburn 105 years ago 0.7 degrees warmer than the last ten years.
In the case of Cooma the annual mean temperature was 54°F for the 44 years prior to 1910 – this equates to 12.2°C and the station at Lambie Street was at an altitude of 812m. Now Cooma Airport is at an altitude of 930m so the 12.2 in town would equate to 11.04 at the Airport. The Airport in the ten years 2004-2013 averaged 11.15 – If we take of 0.2 from the historic Cooma temperature for possible non-Stevenson screen exposure – Cooma 105 years ago might have averaged 10.85 or 0.3 degrees cooler than the last ten years.
Yass is complicated by stations closing in the last ten years with only one month overlap. I have done the calculations and allowing for the site change and altitude differences there is near zero difference between the Yass district pre 1910 and in the last ten years.
Upshot is there seems to be no global warming or significant climate change around Canberra since the 19th Century.

Brilliant Agora Energiewende online graphic display of German electricity generation

Look at the pathetic contribution of wind and solar recently – Agora Energiewende

In July solar was better of course but wind was a lot worse – you can check any period.
No wonder many western economies are near moribund after wasting squillions on dud technologies thinking they would produce “low carbon” electricity in a way acceptable to the population. Amazing that people still vote Green or Left. Deluded. I read where members of Merkel’s cabinet have the common sense to see the train-wreck coming. Germany abandons their climate target, as their Chancellor sings to the crowd

Al Gore effect strikes Brisbane G20 weather forecast – Bureau of Meteorology called for 40°C but Brisbane only got to a warm 32

Saturday morning after 9am the ABC news 24 TV presenters crossed to a BoM staffer from Melbourne and they all talked about a possible record breaking day for Brisbane which had a forecast of 40. Oddly none of them including the BoM guy could quote what the record was (takes 20 secs online to find out). Brisbane Regional Office hit 41.2 in November 1913 – that is the record – nineteen thirteen!!! They are forecasting 40 again for Sunday – might be luckier. On Saturday Brisbane topped at 32 near 1pm but NE breezes moderated the afternoon. Amberley and Gatton further west did hit 40 and Amberley got a record 43. It was also interesting to hear TV news people Saturday evening all faithfully mentioning the “hot day” in G20 reports.

Media around the Brisbane G20 hyperventilates about “climate change” but never mentions the plunging oil price

The world oil price has plunged 16% since the start of October – which must be a boost to many near moribund G20 economies. Yet the media mostly ignores this.
Facts are that cheaper oil plus recent changes in the makeup of the US Congress makes it less likely that any hand wringing hopes for deep emissions reductions will be honoured.

Prime Minister Abbott refers to President Putin hankering after “glory days” of the Soviet Union

Somewhat overloaded by the flood of media puff about the G20 – what did it ever achieve? I thought to myself – what glory days of the USSR?
Fair enough chasing the Wehrmacht back to Berlin in 1945 qualifies as glory days but then Allied armies deliberately stopped which left Berlin to the USSR. And hey lets not mention the Allies failing to push north from Italy in late 1943.
OK – back to glory days of the USSR – now here we have this group of technocrats and party apparatchiks in charge of one of the large populations on earth plus about a sixth of the planets landmass and untold resources. The population is so obedient they tolerate mass murder by famine – they tolerate the gulag of forced labour camps home to millions – they tolerate the charming secret police apparatus that can efficiently disappear any dissenter – they tolerate the system that keeps them decades behind western consumer progress – I could go on.
The truly amazing thing is that by the 1960’s or 70’s no leadership group emerged that could even half efficiently administer the place and see that production of goods let their people progress. They could do large rockets and large armies. All they had to add was to copy the production of a range of western consumer items – copy what the west was doing – not so hard you might think. When they wanted a western car – they turned to Fiat.
The USSR has to be the greatest bar none economic failure of the last 8,000 years – IMHO talk of “glory days” is wishful thinking.

Why are we wasting $Billions on “Carbon Farming” when Australia is naturally sequestering all our emissions without any human intervention ?

The ABC Landline had a segment – Carbon Farming – interviews with rent seekers claiming $Million dollar benefits. CSIRO has known for decades that “The present modelled rate of net sequestration is of a similar magnitude to CO2 emissions from continental fossil fuel burning and land clearing combined.” That is from the early 1990’s.
Now CSIRO knows even more
Increased levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) have helped boost green foliage across the world’s arid regions over the past 30 years through a process called CO2 fertilisation, according to CSIRO research.- 3 July 2013

So why are we wasting megabucks paying a tiny minority of landowners to sequester carbon when our entire continent is naturally doing it for free anyway?

Primarily exposing faulty methodologies behind global temperature trend compilations