TV news and weather presenters are gloating lately as they report Australia’s “hottest winter ever”. I was traveling by car on the 27th August and Dr David Jones of the Bureau of Meteorology National Climate Centre was being interviewed by the ABC 666 just after 9am. I suppose “interview” is not quite correct, a mutual gush session might be more accurate. Dr Jones was talking up the notion of our “hottest winter” despite there being a few more days yet to run.
Anyway, the BoM now have a new media release which is slightly less trumpeting. They say we just missed the “hottest winter” label except for New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia.
To get a handle on our winter warmth you can make contour maps of maximum temperature anomalies and minimum temperature anomalies at this useful BoM webpage.
Maximum temperature anomalies
and at night time
The home remedies for vertigo are order cheap viagra capable in treating the condition effectually and quickly. This constituent performs the reaction regencygrandenursing.com viagra 50 mg to form the cell membrane. In this condition the erect male organ are forced downwards and impotency becomes apparent. online levitra india Negative feelings may also cause problems in your sexual life, regencygrandenursing.com shop viagra but also improve you relationship. Minimum temperature anomalies
Remember from the above BoM media release that the state of Victoria is mentioned as actually experiencing its “warmest winter on record”.
Now check the state of Victoria on both maps I say Victoria has been too near average this winter to have a “snowball chance in hell” of having its “warmest winter on record”.
So I say to the BoM – if your maps are right or near right – then your claim that Victoria has just experienced its “warmest winter on record” has to be wrong.
Category Archives: BoM Australia
Weather Bureau for Australia
2009 SOI so far refuses tango with El Nino
The large climate groups including NOAA in the USA, are predicting an El Nino event in 2009.
The Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) said on 8 July “Leading climate models indicate that warming of the Pacific will continue for the next few seasons, with very little chance of the current development stalling or reversing.”
It is is noteworthy that the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) which should be trending towards negative monthly values for an El Nino – still shows a positive 30 day average value of 8.38 as of the 18th July 09. SOI information.
The BoM discuss effects of the “classical” or “canonical” ENSO events since 1900 and I have plotted the month by month SOI numbers showing development of those El Nino events – adding in 2002 and 2006. We can compare 2009 with the series of strong El Nino’s and it is clear that the SOI in 2009 is too positive for us to be expecting a “canonical” El Nino.
When you reduce assurance then you can begin to have issues and they can begin generic india viagra to manage even when there is nothing wrong. This causes blood flow to increase and cause hard erection. dig this cheapest levitra Consult Psychologist for Stress: Treatment of stress can be the cause and needs to be considered when looking at global development, other parts of the world will have different objectives which will not only challenge how the two can cooperate together but also in viagra pills from india terms of implementing this as part of the actual process too. Many also continue into the discipline of performing. I have put in a nominal 0 value for July but note that as I write the 30 day average at 18th July is 8.56.
So it looks unlikely we will see a “canonical” El Nino start in 2009. But hey !!, we might see a weaker event.
Interesting too that the TAO SST map for the El Nino regions for the 17th July seems to show the anomaly weaker than the BoM inset shows re the 8th.
The BoM say their next comment is on 22nd July – it will be interesting to examine the nuances in what they say – in the light of hard data.
ACT (Canberra) Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment chides BoM re urbanization near Canberra Airport observations site
Dr Maxine Cooper the ACT (Australian Capital Territory) Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment has a page discussing ACT weather and if you scroll down about half way you see this headline. “Has development around Canberra International Airport adversely affected its use as a climate reference station?”
BoM Climate Ref Stations map
and list
Dr Cooper sees the encroaching of carparks and hangars only from 2005 but I would suggest to her that the increasing size of Canberra and associated increased urban warming over the last half century has been warping the Canberra AP data warmer for decades. Last February, air masses warmed by the SE Australian heatwaves travelled ~2500 km across the Tasman Sea to give Auckland its hottest day (32.4 on 12 Feb) since 1872. I think it is obvious that Canberra air warmed a few degrees by urban effects could at times limp its way the 10 km to the airport and affect readings there.
Anyway, the good Doctor asks the question, “How much do these developments affect the Bureau’s ability to keep using this site as a long-term reference station?”
Heavens above, if Dr Cooper is getting concerned about the Canberra AP site then the list of global sites that that Dr P. D. Jones and the Hadley Centre use to generate “global warming” trends for the IPCC should really give her cause to be alarmed.
And note, Canberra is on the Hadley Centre / Jones list.
949260 -353 -1492 578 CANBERRA AIRPORT AUSTRALIA
I have heard a term, “strain at a gnat while swallowing a camel”
Anthony Watts should be pleased that some well heeled Govt. group down-under is on the job, helping him.
BoM declines to give Australian journalist Antarctic temperature data
Read this latest illustration of the famous saying by Sir Walter Scott along lines, “..what a tangled web we weave when we set out to deceive..”
May 2 article in “The Australian”, no compromise over the length of this headline.
You need to read right to the end of the article for the lines,
“Dr Watkins declined to release the temperature data to The Weekend Australian. He said it had still to be fully analysed by the bureau.”
Can I please add – but the data was quite OK to be a base for Dr Watkins to trumpet his version to the media.
Here you can see some graphics of BoM data from Australian Antarctic stations, thanks to Geoff Sherrington and to the stalwart observers who ventured out in thick and thin to record these data over the decades.
Thanks to Romanoz for his mention on another thread.
Below here for the article text, in case it vanishes.
Continue reading BoM declines to give Australian journalist Antarctic temperature data
Why are BoM 3 month forecast models so pathetically WRONG
Just taking a quick look at the latest January to March rainfall and temperature three month Outlooks from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BoM). I have linked to the originals for rainfall and temperature. Note these forecast maps were issued on 17 Dec 08.
I have made the actual rain and temperature anomaly maps at this useful page. You can choose rain or temperature (max or min) for various periods or parameters. I am not saying medium term forecasting is easy but I am puzzled the BoM maps are often so EXACTLY wrong.
| Rain forecast | Actual rain deciles, blue wet, red dry |
 |
 |
| Max temperature forecast | Maximum temperature anomalies |
 |
 |
| Min temperature forecast | Minimum temperature anomalies |
 |
 |
Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) now run by non-meteorologist
Image via Wikipedia
I suppose it is what we could expect with the BoM coming under the wing of Minister Penny Wong, the Minister for Climate Change and Water.
It has been obvious for over a decade that CSIRO has been more gung-ho than the BoM about pushing an agenda underpinned by ridiculous “climate change” modeling.
Now a CSIRO staffer has taken over the BoM. Why not go the whole hog, make the BoM a Division of CSIRO? Tidier.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://i0.wp.com/img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?w=474)
Some early contact with bias and mythology in the Australian Bureau of Meteorology BoM near two decades ago
I first got to know the BoM in 1991 when GW was in its infancy and was surprised at the extent to which PC myths coloured peoples thinking.
I noted very early on that many long term small town sites were as warm in the 1880’s as they were in the 1980’s and when I asked about this – BoM sages wisely told me, “Ah yes, that is due to the introduction of the Stevenson screen thermometer enclosure into Australia in 1907 when the BoM was formed.” It was explained that older more primitive exposures could cause the higher readings. Nobody espoused an alternative view, it was group-think.
Ferreting in their very good library I came across proceedings from a number of Intercolonial Conferences from the 19C which referred to the Stevenson screen. I wrote up a draft paper trying to put the references into perspective and circulated it around including the BoM. A response came back from the BoM pointing out the multiple errors of my ways and I gave up any idea of publishing a paper. The story continues a few years later and I explain how I came to publish my paper as a Comment in The International Journal of Climatology in 1995, the 4 pages are scanned.
Some helpful soul in the BoM gave me a copy of the Jones et al 1986 Southern Hemisphere documentation paper; Jones PD , Raper SCB, Cherry BSG, Goodess CM, Wigley TML, (1986c) TR027 A Grid Point Surface Air Temperature Data Set for the Southern Hemisphere. Office of Energy Research , Carbon Dioxide Research Division, US Department of Energy. Under Contract No. DE-ACO2-79EV10098 referred to here.
The pattern of bias I detected in TR027 started me on the road to perdition which I am still travelling. That lead to my review of the Australian component of the Jones et al 1986 data, scroll down above page to.
[2] Tasman Institute 1991 review of the Australian component of temperature records used in the 1986 Jones et al Southern Hemisphere paper.
Recently I have found some of my original Word docs still readable on old HDD’s and one day will prep these for the www.
Scrolling down about 30% on the above page, you can read about a 1990 BoM study which defined, albeit in a simple way, urban warming at most of Australian capital cities.
The 1990 BoM draft Paper, M.J. Coughlan, R. Tapp and W.R. Kininmonth; 1990, “Trends in Australian Temperature Records” by three senior BoM staff, defined urban heat island (UHI) magnitudes by various comparisons between central city sites in all the Australian state capitals and their respective airports, more than one satellite site in the case of the larger cities.
I suggest you download the zip file of scanned pages of this paper.
After easily finding solid evidence of urban warming in Australian city data the BoM failed to Comment in the relevant Journal(s) on the patently wrong Jones et al methodology. I can only conclude that the BoM noted the irritable tone of the Jones and Wigley reply to Fred Wood’s 1988 critique of the Jones et al 1986 papers, read it all on my page.
Note the discussion re San Juan Puerto Rico in point 5 of my Table, two peer reviewed papers help highlight Jones error and I note, 785260 184 660 3 SAN JUAN INTL A PUERTO RICO, still stands in the CRUT3 station list.
The actual station data used is still top secret.
The BoM decided discretion was the better part of valour and decided not to discuss Australian urban warming with Dr Jones through a Journal. Not a battle they wanted to win anyway, no brownie points taking on Jones et al, better to hide, it might all go away.
It is ironic that in 2008 Chinese climate scientists have dragged Dr P D Jones to an acceptance that urban warming affects the Chinese component of his CRUTem3 global land data.
This Jones et al 2008 paper invalidates the entire CRUTem3 global data, it also puts a torpedo into the Jones et al 1990 Letter to Nature, a crucial IPCC defence still against claims that urban warming still affects IPCC GW trends. BoM staffers developed the Eastern Australian trend used in the 1990 Letter to Nature, much promoted by the BoM in the 1990’s. I had told them it was badly UHI affected and I circulated a little paper, titled I think, “Heat Islands in SE Australian Country Towns”. This was slammed by the BoM reviewers, as they slammed my critique of the Jones Australian component(added Apr 4: to be fair the BoM did agree Jones et al used too many cities and that rural data was under-represented), as they slammed my Stevenson screen draft paper.
The Chinese climate scientists have also torpedoed the Chinese component of the 1990 Letter to Nature, which does no good at all to the Eastern Australian trend quoted as being Rural.
I put actual numbers to their Eastern Australian bias in the paper “Eastern Australia temperature variations 1930-1992”. One of the few attempts to generate a near truly rural trend and way below the IPCC trend for the region.
Thats enough for now, I will try and answer questions where people are genuine, and will try to set down more material later, this sets some foundation to the early development of BoM bias.
South East Australian heatwave in January 2009 is not detectable in “global warming” data
Increasingly, we are hearing in the media that the January-February south east Australian heatwave and disastrous bushfires in Victoria that have killed over 200 people are the result of climate change or global warming.
This map shows the 10 degree grid cell that the temperature data graphs below is collected from.
Here is what the local region component of global temperature data speaks to us about January 2009 vs long term trends for South East Australia. These graphics of monthly temperature anomalies from land stations demonstrate that FROM 1880 THERE IS NO WARMING IN SOUTH EAST AUSTRALIA. February data is not yet in but can be added later.
The first graphic is from the UK Met Office – Hadley Centre, their latest CRUTEM3 global land data which has evolved from the datsets of P.D. Jones et al of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of Norwich. These data show a very slight and statistically insignificant warming of 0.03 degrees from 1880 to Jan 2009.
Note the pre 1880 data is riddled with gaps.
The second graphic is generated by NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) lead by the well known greenhouse warming proponent, Dr. James Hansen.
GISS monthly anomalies shows that SE Australia between 140-150E and 30-40S has a miniscule cooling trend over the 1549 months from Jan 1880 to Jan 2009 which would not be statistically significant from zero.
Both sets of data are made available through the The Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute who have a web site KNMI Climate Explorer, where it is possible to download a huge range of global climate data.
First let us be clear that “global warming” is measured by monthly mean temperature anomalies, so if a signature can not be seen in that context, then the case for a link between heatwaves – bushfires – global warming, is just arm-waving speculation.
Mean temperature = the average of night and day.
Blaming the 2009 Victorian bushfires on climate change or global warming is likely to become one of those “self evident truths” that our Governments and green media love so much.
It is interesting to remember what the “official” data show and that is that although there have been periods of both warming and cooling over south east Australia for 129 years, these cancel out and there is no overall trend.
“Our hot, dry future”?
THESE days, it can be hard to imagine how Melbourne ever earned a reputation as the gloomy, rain-filled capital of the south. But, growing up in the 1970s, my memories are full of muddy ovals, local creeks in flood and catching tadpoles in puddles that lasted for months on end. How things have changed.Since 1996, each successive calendar year has brought the city below-average rainfall. With 299 millimetres recorded so far this year, and with just three months to go, it seems virtually certain that this year will become the 12th in a row that has failed to get to the average of 650 millimetres. September 2008 was the driest on record in Melbourne, and the outlook for the remainder of the year suggests that below-average rainfall will continue.So why has it been so dry? The drought started in late 1996, and the subsequent El Nino years of 1997, 2002 and 2006 have each been particularly dry. Ordinarily, these events would have been interspersed with wetter years, but since 1996 the intervening periods have only approached average at best, with the deepening drought particularly evident in our reservoirs and stream-flows.
My main criticism of the article is that the BoM relies on Melbourne CBD rain data to back up their regional conclusions regarding “climate change” and drought, while the rainfall history is in fact affected by the growing urban heat island.
Melbourne Regional Office 86071 (MRO), a weather station in Melbourne’s CBD is
(a) excluded from their own High Quality (HQ) dataset and
(b) shows a negative trend of 90mm (a stunning 13% of mean annual rain) over the last 153 years when compared to the nearest HQ station, Yan Yean 35 km NNW.
So much of what they say in “Our hot, dry future”, is slanted by this amount, no wonder I am critical of much that the BoM publishes.
Melbourne Regional Office weather station in Melbourne’s CBD which has rain data from 1855, is a site that has undergone enormous changes in its surroundings as the city has been built and expanded over the centuries, resulting in an ever-increasing urban heat island.
The above illustration is from a 1997 BoM paper.
High rise developments have increasingly affected wind and changing pollution levels over the decades could also cause variations in rain formation. Up to post WWII coal burning would have been common leading to much worse pollution than modern times, (note visibility data) and air quality data show improvements over say the last 40 years.
These are just a quick sketch of some reasons why weather data from a large and expanding urban heat island is a most unsuitable source from which to draw conclusions about, climate change, regional changes and long term rain trends.
Finally, the article contains another BoM failed prediction, saying in the second paragraph, “..the outlook for the remainder of the year suggests that below-average rainfall will continue.” Wrong BoM, the 2 month rainfall total for November-December for Melbourne Regional Office was 130.8mm compared to the long term mean of 118.7.
Jennifer Marohasy featured 5 articles on her blog examining the subject during October 2008; the first titled How Melbourne’s Climate Has Changed: A reply to Dr David Jones (Part 1) was posted on 14 October and parts 2 to 5 were later in the month.
How reliable are Coral Sea SST (Sea Surface Temperature) data ?
There is a discussion at the Jennifer Marohasy blog, “Sea-surface Temperatures along the Great Barrier Reef” Posted by John McLean, January 5th, 2009, re recent research from AIM in Townsville that global warming is harming the Great Barrier Reef (GBR). The AIM scientists use the UK Hadley Centre SST data to show global warming is affecting coral.
This got me to take another look at a post of mine on Willis Island in the Coral Sea, a site that refuses to warm.
[Note here how politicians were running with the pro-warming conclusions, long before the published paper by De’ath et al is available.]
At the time I compiled Hadley and Reynolds SST data along with lower troposphere satellite temperature trends for the grid cell 15 to 20 degrees South and 145 to 155 East, which neatly has Willis Is. fairly central and extends west to the GBR coast.
This graphic shows that the Hadley SST data warms by ~0.75 degrees C while Willis Island land data actually cools slightly.
Now a good photo of the Willis Is. weather instruments can be found on the “Australia’s Reference Climate Station Network” web page.
www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/reference.shtml#rcsmap
by clicking on Willis Island on their map.
[Let me know where the actual BoM RCS temperature data can be downloaded from please]
Now take in this idyllic scene and ask yourself, could the sea surface temperatures warm without warming air above them, which must then be reflected by the thermometers inside the Stevenson Screen which looks to be only 100-200 metres away ? That is what the Hadley Centre and the US based NOAA/NCDC are asking us to believe with their over-adjusted SST data. That the sea can warm without affecting air so close over the island. Note both the satellite data and Willis Is. cool slightly 1979-2005 while the Hadley SST’s warm. For the period 1982-2005 both the satellite data and Willis Is. cool slightly while both sets of SST’s warm.
Note: I downloaded the SST and satellite data from the KNMI website www.climexp.knmi.nl/
Continue reading How reliable are Coral Sea SST (Sea Surface Temperature) data ?