The Central England Temperature Index: A Useful Reference

It has been suggested at this blog that it is too risky for mainstream politicians, for example the leader of the Coalition, Tony Abbott, to admit to being sceptical of anthropogenic global warming. It has been suggested journalists at the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) would simply poke fun at him.

I disagree.

Indeed using Bob Carter’s new book Taxing Air as a reference, he could start educating ABC journalists on some of the basics. A good starting point is the longest established ground temperature record, termed the Central England Temperature Index (CETI).

Central England Temperature Index

This record starts in 1659, which was soon after the invention of the thermoscope but before the Fahrenheit scale came into use.

It is a 353 year-long data set, archived by the British Meteorological Office, and it shows that the average summer temperature in Central England in the eighteenth century was 15.46ºC while that for the twentieth century was 15.35ºC.


Far from being warmer due to assumed global warming, comparison of actual temperature data shows that UK summers in the twentieth century were cooler than those of two centuries previously.

This is the sort of very useful information that Mr Abbott could share with ABC journalists.

He could then conclude, as Professor Carter does, that our longest available thermometer records, like our shorter and more accurate modern measures of temperature, offer little by way of evidence for the occurrence of dangerous human-caused global warming.


To order your copy of Taxing Air and an extra copy to send to Mr Abbott, visit The book has great charts like the one embedded into this post of the CETI.

Bob Carter is the author of more than 100 peer-reviewed research papers in professional scientific journals. The great majority of these concern interpretations of ancient environments, including paleo-climatic studies. Link to full of list of publications here


129 Responses to The Central England Temperature Index: A Useful Reference

  1. Peter Champness July 17, 2013 at 10:02 pm #

    Dear Jennifer,

    Not sure where you got this from ;
    “It is a 353 year-long data set, archived by the British Meteorological Office, and it shows that the average summer temperature in Central England in the eighteenth century was 15.46ºC while that for the twentieth century was 15.35ºC.”

    Not from the graph, which shows average temperature in the 19th century as 9C and average temperates at the end of th 20th century as 9.5C

  2. Peter Champnees July 17, 2013 at 10:04 pm #

    I meant 9c in the 18 th century, the bit you highlighted.

  3. Mark A July 17, 2013 at 11:23 pm #

    I’m sorry Jenifer but you don’t seem to know ABC journalists and how the ABC operates.
    I thought you having been on Q&A before would have told you how they operate.

    I have full respect for Professor Carter, but the ABC staff does not, they ridicule him every time his name is mentioned.
    How do you think it would help T Abbott to quote him?

    Sorry this whole CC farce has to run its natural course to a lingering death.

    Unfortunately it costs us in the mean time.

  4. Neville July 17, 2013 at 11:28 pm #

    I just wish it was as easy as you think Jennifer. You forget that most journos and especially their ABC hate conservatives and really dislike Tony Abbott.

    Also it’s a bit late in the day for Abbott to try and teach these fools anything. They will not listen to anything that contradicts their green religion. Facts and the truth mean nothing to these types and he may as well talk to a post.

    But as I said above there just isn’t enough time left to sell the message. Also he would risk the support of up to half of the Liberal members, so he wouldn’t get past first base.

    This isn’t defeatism it’s just facing reality. In short he hasn’t the time, hasn’t the support and they wouldn’t listen to him.
    And we could throw in the rest of the MSM because they would react just as badly as their ABC.

  5. John Sayers July 18, 2013 at 12:19 am #

    Jennifer – this is how ABC interviewer Virginia Trioli treated Greg Hunt, coalition minister for the environment on ABC24 breakfast when discussing the carbon tax changes announced by Kevin Rudd.

  6. jennifer July 18, 2013 at 8:21 am #

    They only had me on QnA to be ridiculed. Should I have not agreed to be on the program, or should I have pretended I wasn’t really a sceptic? Was I completely ridiculed, or only a bit? I even managed a defence of Bob Carter while on the panel. Of course they would give Tony Abbott a hard time. And if he survived he would be the better man for it, and the Australian public much th wiser. Abbott has a big advantage at the moment, they have an obligation to keep reporting him.

  7. Neville July 18, 2013 at 8:30 am #

    More lies from Krudd’s Labor about changing from a co2 tax to an ETS.

    It can’t happen now and can’t be voted on by the new senate until after July 2014, so what is this fool talking about?

    Of course if Krudd spends months after a doubtful Labor win trying to bribe the Greens with more wasted billions $ for zero change to temp and climate, then this could really bite us badly in the near future.
    Don’t forget that the mad EU left and our Greens want a much higher price for co2 credits or certificates than the present price of $6.
    In fact the higher the better and $70 is a much hoped for number mentioned by some of these loonies.
    If they can reduce the number of available co2 credits the price will shoot up. Or take away the present available surplus and OZ will be in very deep trouble.

  8. Neville July 18, 2013 at 9:00 am #

    Jennifer I think this is really a matter of judgement and the use of past experience. To give you an idea of the state of mind of these stupid elites just read Spooner’s account in the book of his experience with the intellectual??? and the journalist.

    The journo said she wouldn’t change her mind for 50 years and the intellectual??? referred him to “coal trains of death and boiling oceans” Hansen. pages 7 and 13. You know the same James Hansen who helped Gore with his AIT Sci fi flick and our own Pearman from the CSIRO who acted as an expert consultant as well.

    I have to repeat again— facts mean nothing to these religious fanatics and even AGW believer Lomborg with all his publically available info still has to suffer vilification and abuse at every turn.
    This after many years of research with a huge team backing him (about 4 Nobel winners as well ) and years on the lecture circuit involving many debates.

    Tony Abbott doesn’t have the time or support to change now and he would be mad to try. And he would inevitably lose votes if he did.
    Direct action on emissions by the Coalition is the best we can hope for and that could even be a hard sell.

  9. Neville July 18, 2013 at 9:21 am #

    Jennifer can I just say that I won’t be voting first for the Coalition at the next election in the reps or the senate.
    But I will put them way above the Greens and Labor as a preference. Labor will be second last and Greens will be last on my how to vote card.

    BTW more looney nonsense on the solar energy front. Geezzz about $10,000 to connect every home, what marvelous efficiency. SARC. We’re barking mad or hasn’t anyone noticed lately?

  10. cohenite July 18, 2013 at 10:17 am #

    Sorry guys, sooner or later you have to stand up to bullies; the abc, the AGW scientists, the academics and the other chatterers are flat track bullies. Has anyone stood up to them?

    John refers to the Trioli interview with Hunt; did Hunt get outraged? Did he take on Trioli? Did Abbott take on Gillard’s misogyny crap? No; the softly-softly approach is making them look like wimps

    I mean you would not know where to start with AGW; the idiocy of the ‘theory’ is so manifest that Abbott could spend the next 10 years ridiculing it. Do any of you need examples? Surely not!

    And just think, is Australian politics crying out for a politician taking a left-wing/green ideological position by the scruff of the neck and then wringing it.

  11. Emeritus professor for Common Sense July 18, 2013 at 10:20 am #

    I give up on this country and its moronic masses. As they say in the classics, one will never go broke underestimating the stupidity of the average Aussie, as its quite on the cards that they will elect Krudd v2 back in….well the dopes east of the brindabellas will.

    Mind you, he has the advantage that most of the useless climate nongs in academia will vote for him…that’s at least a Mongolian hordes worth plus, of course the resident dipstick and his adoring followers…aides and abetted by a tribe of ignorant pollies.

    Like for instance, one Mark Butler LLb (Hons) Member for Port Adelaide and Minister for Climate Whatever, who has a feature article in his local rag talking about “carbon pollution” etc? Can you possibly believe it? Repeated here in debate with Andrew Bolt.

    Only a dim witted lawyer could fall for the tripe he has also put in writing… obviously advised by the Flannery’s flock of floosies and sundry university Specialist Climate Centres for Screwing Tax Payers.

    Over to you Neville, you have far more stamina handling this crap than I have.

    I’m off to find a good book

  12. hammy July 18, 2013 at 10:41 am #

    Jennifer, you only have to look at the graph to perceive the unrelenting escalation of temperatures that started just before 1900. During the nineteenth century the line dipped below 8 degrees C on many occasions, but none at all since the last one before 1900. This can only point to AGW. Very clear upward trend.

  13. Luke July 18, 2013 at 10:48 am #

    More bunk from Bob – “Between 1723 and the 1760s most observations were taken not from outside measurements but from indoor readings in unheated rooms, and thus are of little or no use.”

    More rot from faux sceptics. Such lack of scepticism.

  14. el gordo July 18, 2013 at 10:57 am #

    Excellent idea Jennifer, we need to get the ear of Jim Spigelman.

  15. Dennis Webb July 18, 2013 at 11:23 am #

    Mr Abbott would reply to Luke/the ABC that every temperature record and reconstruction has its limitations. That this record is the longest we have and is of tremendous historical value.

    Mr Abbott could then begin dialogue about the temperature record for the USA and explain that the official data, unadjusted/uncorrupted, shows that temperatures were hotter in the USA in the 1930s than anything since.

    This blog would be a good place for Mr Abbott’s minders to test their ideas and polish his responses, because Luke thinks just like an ABC journalist. But he doesn’t run away when the going gets tough. Like Kevin Rudd, Luke never gives up. Thanks Luke for the insights over the yeras.

  16. Johnathan Wilkes July 18, 2013 at 11:50 am #

    So Luke you discard 37 years of data, fair enough, do discard an other 100, it is still a heck of a lot more first hand record than what your mates rely on.

    BTW measuring the temperature consistently in the same way is not a bad method Luke.
    Far better than leaving the equipment in a completely changed location, don’t you think?

  17. Neville July 18, 2013 at 1:07 pm #

    Well I suppose we’ll just have to agree to disagree about the Coalition’s strategy for the coming election.
    Just about everyone on this blog knows more than I do about AGW/ CAGW ( belief or disbelief) but I would count myself fairly reasonable when it comes to common sense, judgement and what will and will not work.

    If Abbott started today and stated that CAGW was exaggerated and had Lindzen, Spencer, Christy, Carter, Happer etc to back him up he would be eaten alive by the MSM.

    For every reasonable argument he and his scientists made the MSM would drown him/them by a factor of 20 at least.
    And most of the time after all the abuse and ridicule he wouldn’t be given a proper forum to respond to their criticisms.
    But remember he would have to have the backing of his party to even start and that is most unlikely.
    All this and he only has a few months ( or less) left to prepare and sell this message, so it’s a hopeless quest.
    At least with direct action you just need to stop planting trees and fixing soils if the opportunity arises in the future.

  18. jennifer July 18, 2013 at 1:07 pm #


    I think you raise a very interesting point, how very cold it got during the Little Ice Age in Central England.

    Yes, there was a Little Ice Age and it did get very cold.

    I can’t see that ‘year without a summer’ of 1816 on the chart, that was the year that Mary Shelley wrote the Modern Prometheus. Perhaps it was not so cold that winter?

  19. Neville July 18, 2013 at 1:22 pm #

    Jo Nova has had a go at this issue. She states that the Coalition would be crucified if it even doubted the climate models.

  20. jennifer July 18, 2013 at 1:32 pm #


    We appreciate that, to quote Cohenite, you are essentially a “wimp”.

    But then again you are not running for PM.

    Most Australians are looking for a hero, or at least a leader, when they think about who they might vote for in an election.

    If they can’t see either, they will vote in terms of self interest.

  21. el gordo July 18, 2013 at 1:43 pm #

    ‘If Abbott started today and stated that CAGW was exaggerated and had Lindzen, Spencer, Christy, Carter, Happer etc to back him up he would be eaten alive by the MSM.’

    I disagree, at first the audience would be shocked, then awed, but then they’ll start laughing at the folly of AGW.

    Its the only way he’s going to win this election.

    Abbott’s best bet is to go on Bolter’s sunday show and when Andrew fires his usual hard hitting questions….all Abbott need do is tell the truth according to Carter.

  22. cohenite July 18, 2013 at 1:44 pm #

    This is obviously an issue with a lot of feeling to it.

    I don’t think Neville can be tarred with the ‘wimp’ brush; at least he has informed himself; the coalition, apart from Minchin and Jensen, have not even done that.

    In fact I find it curious that the coalition with the most scientifically literate man in parliament, Jensen, really haven’t taken the ball and ran with it hard; he would be perfect to quell the msm rabble.

    Anyway, heeeere’s hammy!

    ” unrelenting escalation of temperatures that started just before 1900.”

    Too right hammy; bloody sun!

  23. el gordo July 18, 2013 at 1:56 pm #

    Leadership is important, we still have tribal memories, and I agree with Jen that ‘most Australians are looking for a hero’. Someone who will lead them into a better world, but unfortunately most politicians are bureaucratic types and not charismatic.

    It has been said that Kev has charisma, but in fact he is just popular. Which is odd, considering he has the persona of a Queensland dentist.

    Abbott is not popular, but he maybe charismatic … a revolutionary.

    Besides telling the masses that CO2 doesn’t cause global warming, he could offer some suggestions on opening up the north/

  24. John Sayers July 18, 2013 at 2:09 pm #

    The two most outspoken commentators on global warming being a fraud are Alan Jones and Andrew Bolt. Both are detested by the left and the MSM even though Bolt is the most read column in the press today, has his own TV show and is a regular commentator on 2GB. On most sites if you even quote what a guest said on Jones’ program you get vilified. Even though Jones has been the country’s leader in the war against CSG since 2011 the Murwillumbah CSG protest meeting cancelled his speaking appointment because they hate him cos he’s a denier.

    The left has taken over the CSG protest even though it was a supposed right, Jones, that first started it and was interviewing Debbie from Tara about the health problems of CSG, he was interviewing the Queensland health minister about the Tara problem and attacking O’Farrell over coal and CSG licences way before anyone else cared yet last week all the notable musicians and greenies were at a special rock concert in Tara protesting CSG.

    The Byron Bay CSG activists are holding a celebration on the beach because they stopped Santos from CSG mining in their area, the truth is Santos cancelled its lease because their two test drills showed no CSG or any viable proportions. The CSG in northern NSW is in the Clarence and Richmond valleys.

    That’s the state of the left and their antagonism to Jones and Bolt because they are outspoken sceptics in AGW.

    Tony Abbott, and his party, would face a similar fate.

  25. Emeritus [rofessor of Common Sense July 18, 2013 at 2:20 pm #

    “Excellent idea Jennifer, we need to get the ear of Jim Spigelman.Excellent idea Jennifer, we need to get the ear of Jim Spigelman.”

    El gordo, I would’nt bother. I listened to him prattling on in the Margaret Throsby show a couple of weeks ago. His selection of music wasnt bad, but his logic and reasoning was quite scarey stuff.

    For instance, Throsby asked him about the oft repeated claim that the ABC is biased bunch of lefties. (Which it undoubtedley is, so much so that I wont watch Jones/Rioli /Sales crew)….anyway Spiglemans answer had me nearly driving off the road with laughter.

    He said that it, the claims of bias, was something unique to big metropolitan areas, you dont hear it in the country regions….and because of that, it was only small percentage.

    What the dope was doing was counting it by transmission/studio outlets, not the population of the areas covered…and he was a High Court judge… God help us.

    There were other howlers, but I would have to get the transcript to identify to see them.

    One other, was that he rejected the idea that the ABC should be sold, but did say all the public utilities that have been sold have not seen any dimunition in the delivery of services ie the phones still work, the power still comes on, water still flows, everything that has been sold still happens.

    But note… he not once mentioned price.

    One I did agree with was that ABC FM Classic was part of the cultural fabric and wouldnt have a equivalence as a sold commodity. In truth though there are examples in Europe.

  26. Dennis Webb July 18, 2013 at 2:22 pm #

    Bolt and Jones are popularist ratbags.
    Abbott has the potential to be a charismatic intellectual if he had the guts to speak from his heart and took the time to do his homework on global warming.

  27. John Sayers July 18, 2013 at 2:27 pm #

    Dennis Webb – you obviously, like most of his detractors, have never listened to Alan Jones program.

  28. el gordo July 18, 2013 at 2:37 pm #

    Thanks professor, perhaps we should bypass Spigelman.


    ‘Bolt and Jones are popularist ratbags.’

    Dennis they are rabble rousers and I guarantee that when the science is finally settled on this AGW fraud… Bolt will become a national hero.

  29. spangled drongo July 18, 2013 at 2:43 pm #

    eg, it is easy to be charismatic when the MSM only paint you in the best of lights. Abbott OTOH is reviled by them and does not present too well at the best of times so his chances of appearing like the risen saviour are slim. His options are limited and he knows it. What he does have though, that Howard didn’t, is Rudd’s track record.

    As I said before, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and expecting a different result.

    Let’s hope Australians are smart enough to realise that.

    Jen, good post. You’re not the first to notice that there was more “CAGW” in the early 1700s than in the late 1900s, 250 years later, and that was during the LIA!

    But hammy wasn’t jammy enough to pick it.

    If you look at a more detailed CET graph the first thing that impresses you is that average temperatures have had such little variation for a time during which the earth’s population has increased from 0.7 billion to 7.0 billion. A factor of ten.

  30. John Sayers July 18, 2013 at 2:44 pm #

    Alan Jones was the first to interview Bob Carter on his new book and Bob is a regular guest on his show. He was the first to interview Ian Plimer on his book, he’s interviewed Richard Lindzen, Roy Spencer, Tim Ball, Bjorn Lomborg (many times) Christopher Monckton (many times), Donna Laframboise.
    Andrew Bolt has had Bob Carter on his TV show and Ian Plimer, Donna Laframboise. and Bjorn Lomborg.

  31. Max July 18, 2013 at 2:55 pm #

    I agree with you Jennifer. We do need some plain speaking truth introduced into the public discussion.

    Joe Hockey on Radio National yesterday pointed out that although the European carbon price is low at the moment it could remain low in Europe and still significantly impact here with a substantial upward movement of the Euro in the relativities between the Euro and Aust$. To say we (the public) are better off with a movement to an Trading Scheme is just another con.

    To Tony Abbott I say:

    To fight the bull when you aren’t scared is nothing.
    To not fight the bull when you are scared is nothing.
    To fight the bull when you are scared, that is something!

  32. Neville July 18, 2013 at 3:15 pm #

    Oh well even if I get called a wimp every day I guess I’ll still survive. But it’s funny, I wouldn’t have called Jo Nova a wimp and yet she agrees with me. Funny that?

    I think Hammy wants to do a little more research before he lets loose.

  33. Neville July 18, 2013 at 4:12 pm #

    The Bolter is vindicated again and this time by new treasurer Bowen.

    Bolt told us about Gillard and Swan’s lies ages ago and now Bowen backs him up . This was the best terms of trade for OZ in 113 years.

    If you couldn’t run surplus budgets over the last 6 years you’d have to be clueless, incompetent morons.
    But just imagine the sort of fools in the electorate wanting to front up and vote Labor again?

  34. el gordo July 18, 2013 at 4:17 pm #

    ‘….earth’s population has increased from 0.7 billion to 7.0 billion. A factor of ten.’

    Interesting figures, spangles. Is that roughly over the past 500 years?

  35. spangled drongo July 18, 2013 at 4:30 pm #

    eg, they were only estimates in them daze:

  36. spangled drongo July 18, 2013 at 4:34 pm #

    That link seems a dud but this is the list:

    Statistics on Human Population

    Year A.D. Number of People (in billions)
    1650 .50
    1750 .70
    1850 1.0
    1925 2.0
    1956 2.5
    1966 3.3
    1970 3.6
    1974 3.9
    1976 4.0
    1980 4.4
    1991 5.5
    2000 6.0
    2004 6.4

  37. Neville July 18, 2013 at 4:38 pm #

    Steve McIntyre once again has to show the MET office how to use their own data and understand their own graphs.

    What are the pommy taxpayers paying these fools for? Unbelievable incompetence.

  38. el gordo July 18, 2013 at 5:29 pm #

    During the depths of the LIA populations either remained fairly static or fell, but there is a clear population growth in this Modern Climate Optimum…. likewise the MWP.

    Coincidence? I think not.

  39. Ian Thomson July 18, 2013 at 6:10 pm #

    Hi el gordo,
    “Coincidence ? I think not. ”
    Is there a little unmentioned clue in the fact that serious cooling has just dropped the Chinese wheat crop by 20 million tons ? You are right. We need heat.
    And Jen , I think that the ‘year without a summer’ produced the velocipede , because the horses all starved. And there was a writing comp among some people trapped inside by the weather , on what was supposed to be a summer holiday, producing “Frankenstein” and ” Dracula”.
    You probably know that anyway.

  40. John Sayers July 18, 2013 at 6:12 pm #

    Actually the growth rate has been falling since 1965

  41. el gordo July 18, 2013 at 6:21 pm #

    Slightly OT

    If we are about to slide into a mini ice age a charismatic leader would cultivate the idea of a food bowl in northern Australia. Half the population have no faith in it, so whoever can fast track this forward thinking concept should garner many votes.

    The idea is to dazzle the populace with a huge picture, financially viable and with a SF feel…. very, very fast travel.

  42. el gordo July 18, 2013 at 6:28 pm #

    ‘…serious cooling has just dropped the Chinese wheat crop by 20 million tons ?’

    In the old days the Chinese starved in their millions and that’s why they are now diversifying into Africa and Australia, to cover all eventualities. Carter’s Plan B writ large.

  43. Larry Fields July 18, 2013 at 7:41 pm #

    Hi Jennifer,
    I’ve never heard of a thermoscope before. But my understanding is that reasonably accurate thermometers weren’t invented until 1850. And it’s not just about the lack of a Fahrenheit scale before then.

    Since I’m not a retired Kiwi professor, I won’t claim that the idea of an average temperature for central England is utterly meaningless. But does someone have an estimate for the uncertainties of the pre-1850 temperature measurements?

  44. el gordo July 18, 2013 at 7:48 pm #

    ‘Actually the growth rate has been falling since 1965’

    A burgeoning middle class and the invention of the pill has done wonders.

  45. Ian Thomson July 18, 2013 at 7:49 pm #

    el gordo, Who say’s the Chinese Communist Party has to produce cotton on their flash new farm , Cubby Station ? Can grow whatever they like. Layers of Australian governments ‘blessed’ that.
    Starve ? mmm Who actually will ?
    Anyway Xfactor is on and Kev can speak Mandarin . So they say. And he is ditching the ‘great big tax ”
    Dumb and dumber

  46. spangled drongo July 18, 2013 at 7:56 pm #

    “But does someone have an estimate for the uncertainties of the pre-1850 temperature measurements?”

    Larry, ya don’t have to be a retired Kiwi perfesser to know that post-1850 the CET ties in well with world average temps and that pre-1850 the CET ties in with other European records for as far back as they go [which isn’t quite as far as CET].

  47. John Sayers July 18, 2013 at 8:17 pm #

    Here’s the original paper by Gordon Manley in 1973 about the temperature record. Of course since then the Met. has got their grubby little hands on it.

    and of course wiki has been tampered with – claims it was given in Celsius yet here is the temp record from the 1973 paper in Degrees F!

  48. spangled drongo July 18, 2013 at 8:54 pm #

    Good stuff John. Looks like less than 1c for 350 years and like I said in a recent post, for ~ 350 years before that it cooled and ~350 years before that it warmed by about the same amount.


    And the next 350 years could be similar:

  49. Malcolm hill July 18, 2013 at 9:14 pm #

    Just happened to watch 7.30 report and thought Scott Morrison was excellent in both his rapid fire subject matter knowledge and refusing to be talked over the top of by their ABC Chris Uhlmann….who normally isnt too bad…but he tried it on and lost.

    If more non lefty guests did this to these biased nongs that pass for ABC journos, the better.

  50. el gordo July 18, 2013 at 9:18 pm #

    ‘Who say’s the Chinese Communist Party has to produce cotton on their flash new farm , Cubby Station ?’

    Would you prefer US or UK money? The Chinese are neo-capitalists, under a Communist dictatorship, they need to make their investment productive while the going is good. Cotton is OK for now.

    ‘Starve ? mmm Who actually will ?’

    With mono-cultures spread widely, coupled with a fantastic distribution network, there need be no starvation as we develop a greater middle class. Only if war intervenes would we expect mass dislocation and starvation.

    During the cold Dark Ages the mass migration period created friction, this can be avoided in the future by feeding people in their homeland until the temporary emergency is over. This is fortuitous.

    The CET doesn’t tell the story on the ground, wet summers and cool winters during the LIA were a disaster for agriculture and live stock. For many in Britain life was tenuous at best and temps only dropped a couple of degrees.

  51. Luke July 19, 2013 at 7:16 am #

    As usual lots of off-topic graffiti. Why has Bob not done his duty of care to us and informed us of the major paper on the CET series

    Parker, D.E., T.P. Legg, and C.K. Folland. 1992. A new daily Central England Temperature Series, 1772-1991. Int. J. Clim., Vol 12, p317-342, DOI: 10.1002/joc.3370120402

    which says

    ” Daily temperatures in unheated rooms are, however, not reliably convertible to daily outdoor values, because of the slow thermal response of the rooms. For thsi reason, no daily series truly representative of CET can begin before about 1770.”

    And so we now have a major claim based on trends before 1770. No discussion of the 1992 Parker et al paper cited on the Met Office site.

    Why have we not been told? Is this the standard for the sceptics choice on here as the new leader of BoM. Really? Appalling science.

  52. Debbie July 19, 2013 at 7:20 am #

    Luke 🙂
    I’m reminded of pots and kettles again.

  53. Ian Thomson July 19, 2013 at 7:50 am #

    Cubby Station. The bankers and wankers and Land Agents love that foreign investment tag. It makes them money.
    Foreign investment is when someone invests in Australia generating wealth and taking a profit for themselves. If we are lucky and they are really cashed up, that profit is reinvested in further local ventures. I can show several examples of this, including a large landholding company, backed by Chinese investors , who have spent very big amounts on improvements.
    They are sometimes better than so called ‘ local’ corporate investors who would not fix a fence.
    Can give a couple of high profile examples of that too.

    There is no similarity in that to the other “foreign investment ‘, involving a political party buying a property in Oz, specifically for the purpose of removing the produce directly to their country. A country where you and I cannot buy one square inch of land and our major political parties representatives would be jailed for life for trying.

    Good management on their part, good policy for them. For us it is just someone selling out our security. Cubby is not the local cocky farm , it is Australia’s largest irrigation farm.

    China is expected to get through this crop cycle , partly by drawing down on their reserves of wheat.
    But if it is cold next year? It is already expected that China’s requirement of an extra 3 – 5 million tons will price wheat out of Egypt’s ability to pay.

    China’s leaders are balanced on a knife edge , with industrialisation having chewed up farmland.
    Ours are in a fool’s paradise, where various City attacks on food production and now the CSG fiasco, have us a lot closer to the edge than their constituents know.
    If we were to slip into a little ice age. ( It’s happened before, so we should plan for it ), the Murray Valley, on historical precedent, would get very dry. Crop failures in the NH and world grain reserves , not good now, would vanish to the highest bidder.

    Oh well thousands of Egyptians have starved before ( says so in the Bible ).
    Wonder if someone will write up the history of the Sydneysidians, Melbournians and other extinct third world tribes.

  54. spangled drongo July 19, 2013 at 8:12 am #

    ” Daily temperatures in unheated rooms are, however, not reliably convertible to daily outdoor values, because of the slow thermal response of the rooms.”

    Have you ever done a comparison of unheated room thermometers and outdoor sheltered thermometers?

    Over yearly averages? Over decades?

    I do this all the time and would venture to suggest that back in the 16 and 1700s it wouldn’t have as much effect as UHI has today in the opposite direction to that which your little heart desires.

  55. el gordo July 19, 2013 at 8:36 am #

    Ian there is little point in adding more on the subject, being OT and speculative, but I remain optimistic about the northern Australian food bowl.

  56. el gordo July 19, 2013 at 8:46 am #

    ‘Is this the standard for the sceptics choice on here as the new leader of BoM. Really? Appalling science.’

    There is a lot of it around, most importantly the failure of models to predict real world outcomes. It has been a travesty for the klimatariat.

    Carter for Climate Commissioner!

  57. Luke July 19, 2013 at 8:53 am #

    Nope Parker et al goes through UHI.

    It’s just shoddy stuff guys. Don’t try to weasel out it and stay on topic.

    El Gordo – just waffle from you – we’re not at 2030 yet and off-topic diversion. Although I guess our paper-boy Neville is due on his morning rounds with his slew of off-topic denier-porn clippings.

  58. Neville July 19, 2013 at 8:53 am #

    Just a small observation from wimp central to Jennifer and Cohers at naivety mansion. Here’s a clear case of the Faifax media telling lies about what Abbott actually said. This is just one example today.

    So it’s not so simple as Abbott quoting what Bob Carter or other well credentialled scientists actually say, but what the MSM actually presents to the OZ electorate.

    Say an election campaign lasts about 4 to 6 weeks, how could you really think a confused electorate would change their vote over this one issue when you are fighting these master liars and manipulators?
    But don’t forget that Jennifer also respects Rudd for holding a ridiculous opinion that can’t even pass a simple kindy maths test or simple logic and reasoning or simple common sense.

  59. Dennis Webb July 19, 2013 at 9:13 am #

    The CETI is the very best available for that region and that period. Is someone going to suggest one of Briffa’s reconstructions? Luke which temperature data set do you prefer?

  60. Neville July 19, 2013 at 9:27 am #

    Just thought I should throw in the facts about the impact on global temps if OZ reduced co2 emissions by 5% by 2020. Just a reminder, a lot of our reduction will come from buying useless scraps of paper from the EU’s fraudulent co2 market.

    Bolt asked warmist Prof Roger Jones this question a number of times and eventually received an answer.
    It would be a reduction in temp of 0.0038c or about four thousandths of one degree C. Of course this can’t be measured at all and while we’re reducing the planet’s temp by this nonsense India and China’s emissions are continuing to soar through the roof, multiplying this nonsense reduction over and over again every month.

    But don’t worry, Jen still respects Rudd for holding his ridiculous opinion.

  61. spangled drongo July 19, 2013 at 10:06 am #

    DW, isn’t it curious how warmers can embrace a one-tree hokey stick with upside down proxies yet spurn actual measurements.

  62. Robert July 19, 2013 at 10:46 am #

    Firstly, I wonder why climate “science” is focused on the post-1980 period and on subsequent sat observations of the Arctic (though we have to pretend not to see those grisly pics of “record” Antarctic sea ice!). Seems to me that if you can’t discuss climate over millennia you can’t discuss it at all. It’s a bit like starting State of Origin as a golden point contest: Cronk kicks a field goal after two minutes and we all go home. Nope, I can’t see how studying climate can be a short take.

    Secondly, I wonder why Arctic ice, after a big temp plunge in the region during the 1960s, increased dramatically during the 1970s…and this increase is the focus of very little of that climate “science”.

    I wonder if there’s a connection between these two things.

    Actually, I don’t wonder at all.

  63. el gordo July 19, 2013 at 10:51 am #

    We may not be able to use CETI as a way of convincing journalists that global warming is natural.

    The 1740 plunge is clear, but where is the Dalton?

    As DW said, what is your preferred option, Luke?

    We only seek the troof, bruvver.

  64. handjive July 19, 2013 at 11:04 am #

    How is that “Global Warming” in England going?

    “British authorities have issued a heatwave alert after the first prolonged period of high temperatures since 2006 and following the coldest spring for more than 50 years.

    The heatwave follows a washout British summer in 2012, the coolest since 1998, which raised fears for the London Olympics.”

  65. Luke July 19, 2013 at 11:24 am #

    So no answers except off-topic diversions. Obviously sceptics don’t stand for higher standards. Just another tribe.

    Global warming natural? Well the science says part of the 20th century warming was. Science knows about ENSO and warming. Science also knows about GHGs. Science also predicted a wide range of outcomes down to 1.5C for 2x CO2. Models don’t do the decadal stuff well – but in the longer term decadal won’t matter.

    And the temperature rise is an indicator and almost least of the worries. How the climate system reorganizes itself to an energy imbalance long term is the issue. e.g. possible drying of sub-tropics?

  66. Robert July 19, 2013 at 11:45 am #

    Science has achieved all kinds of good things. Duh. The gang-reviewed trash spewed by Publish-or-Perish, exploiting climate as a political fetish or confection, is not science. The kiddie console of “forcings” and “mechanisms” is an insult not just to science but to the commonsense of the average aphid. As for non-Kardashian models…we know they don’t do the “decadal stuff” well. It will be up to later generations to roll around the floor laughing at their long term “stuff”.

  67. spangled drongo July 19, 2013 at 11:56 am #

    “Seems to me that if you can’t discuss climate over millennia you can’t discuss it at all.”

    Yes Robert, that immediately kicks the legs out from under the GHG ideology and the concerned warmers are beaten before they start.

    Whereas 0.9% of the earth’s ice that has always been in a marginal state during the Holocene is much better “evidence”.

    Well, last year anyway:

  68. Luke July 19, 2013 at 12:16 pm #

    Robert – do you think your philosophic gibberish actually means something?

    So you don’t think there are climate forcings or climate mechanisms? yes or no will do….

  69. el gordo July 19, 2013 at 12:20 pm #

    ‘Models don’t do the decadal stuff well – but in the longer term decadal won’t matter.’

    tru dat

  70. Luke July 19, 2013 at 12:20 pm #

    “gang reviewed” and “trash spewed” – I’d be fascinated if you could pick the top 2-3 climate journals and detail their review mechanisms and why most of their papers are deficient? I expect hand waving or the sound of crickets as an answer

  71. Debbie July 19, 2013 at 12:28 pm #

    Which questions aren’t answered Luke?
    Ones like the questions you asked Robert or those rhetorical ones that already contain your preconceived answers?
    A yes or no answer is not possible for the one you just asked BTW. That’s apart from the fact that Robert didn’t say there were no climate forcings and mechanisms.

  72. spangled drongo July 19, 2013 at 12:30 pm #

    Scaffeta”s new paper claims CS of 1.35c but the GCMs couldn’t possibly be that far out could they?

    If 60% of that is Nat Var, then we can all go back to bed.

  73. Neville July 19, 2013 at 1:02 pm #

    Jennifers on a real winner trying to win the next election on opposition to AGW, SARC. Latest Reachtel poll shows Abbott beating Rudd by 51% to 49% but if the AGW believer Turnbull led the Coalition it would be a massive landslide 58% to 42% over Rudd.

    Stick to what you know Jennifer, as I said before you would make a lousy pollie. And in one way that can be taken as a compliment.

  74. John Sayers July 19, 2013 at 1:14 pm #

    Luke – I was aware of the 1992 paper hence my statement “Of course since then the Met. has got their grubby little hands on it.”

    “Science also predicted a wide range of outcomes down to 1.5C for 2x CO2.” Yeah – and up to 6C

    take you pick folks, everyone’s a winner.!

  75. Robert July 19, 2013 at 1:16 pm #

    Here’s the thing: What you do not know, is unknown to you. Because you do not know it. It’s too bad, but there it is.

    We know little about what’s under our feet. (We all know more than Al Gore but that’s not saying much.) We have only visited a fraction of the hydrosphere, let alone what is under it. That’s most of the earth we know little about, except we know it’s mostly hot and active. As for orbits, polarities, solar and other extra-terrestrial influences…we blunder along, just barely.

    I find the CET informative, but I don’t believe one should be putting decimal points on English summer temps in the 18th century. I’ve translated records relating to English climate and harvest in the late Middle Ages and I’m happy enough with the idea of a general and even perilous cooling around 1400. It would be hard to doubt cooling around 1700, as glaciers swallowed towns in Europe. But decimal points? Sorry, no way. I’m not really impressed by temp records, since they do not account for real situations, eg persistence of heat and cold, cloud cover or absence thereof etc etc. They’re just handy, rough-as-guts stats…like nearly all stats.

    Some time ago I was agreeing with an alarmist that it was ridiculous to conclude anything from a posited pause or slight cooling in global temps over the last seventeen years. Delighted with my attitude, the same guy proceeded to tell me how much you could know from a thirty year record. Really!

    No, I won’t be boning up on the material you’ve been reading, Luke. I know you don’t like the mention of Lysenko, but he used to be required reading too, in a period when his field of “science” was all the rage. When the Old Kingdom of Egypt was perishing under Nile failure and sandstorms, I’m sure there were plenty of priests and scholars offering advice in exchange for offerings.

    Me, I’ll take long, tedious, blundering, head-scratching scholarship over Bristlecone revelation.

  76. Larry Fields July 19, 2013 at 1:17 pm #

    Thus far, Spangled is the only person here who’s been willing to touch my earlier question about measurement uncertainty with a barge pole. Note: All measurements, unlike simple counting, have uncertainties — some large and some small. Moreover uncertainty analysis is crucial for interpreting numerical scientific data. Since then, I did a little digging, and a few salient facts caught my eye.

    1. The early thermoscopes did not have scales of any kind. Thus most temperature ‘readings’ were largely subjective, and ranged from bloody cold to bloody hot. (OK, I’m exaggerating slightly.)

    2. In some of the early thermoscope designs, temperature ‘readings’ were contaminated by barometric pressure.

    3. As another commentator mentioned, during part of the 1700s, temperature ‘readings’ were taken in unheated indoor rooms. These ‘precise’ measurements were somewhere between ground temperature and outside air temperature.

    4. As Jennifer mentioned, the graph did not show the expected big temperature dip from the Volcanic Winter of 1816, when the Thames froze over. Skinny dipping, anyone? 🙂

    Putting things into perspective … Mikey Mann’s Bristlecone Pine tree ring proxies reflected precip in the high arid mountains of the Basin and Range region of the Western USA, more than they reflected temperatures. Although CET is not in the same dodgy category, my crap detector is pinging nevertheless. Until I can analyze the raw data myself — which I’m not really motivated to do — I’m taking CET with a very large grain of salt.

  77. el gordo July 19, 2013 at 1:30 pm #

    All good comments, so can we fall back on paleo evidence?

    Keeping in mind the ABC jounalists Carter needs to convince… that climate is behaving naturally.

  78. Jennifer Marohasy July 19, 2013 at 1:53 pm #

    Thanks for your expert insights Larry and for pointing out the likely limitations of this data series. Also to Robert for suggesting that putting decimal points on English summer temperatures is not realistic.

    But I also agree with Dennis, that this data series is a useful starting point.

    El gordo, if we could get the mainstream media discussing these issues it would be a major breakthrough?

    After Abbott was ridiculed, the question would remain, what were the temperatures back then? How are they measured? How reliable are the other systems of measuring summer? What measurements do the IPCC and Tim Flannery use?

    The average Australian needs to start thinking about these issues and Tony Abbott could lead the discussion.

  79. John Sayers July 19, 2013 at 3:17 pm #

    What’s the average punter to think when we get such disparity in the reports by our leading scientists?

    Here’s Heidi Cullen, PhD
    Chief Climatologist, Climate Central

    Here’s Roy Spencer PhD
    Earth System Science Center

    Here’s Roger Pielke Jr. PhD

    Exactly what view do you expect Tony Abbott to present?

  80. spangled drongo July 19, 2013 at 4:06 pm #

    “Exactly what view do you expect Tony Abbott to present?”

    Yes John, any sceptic view he presented would be totally misrepresented by the MSM.

    Because the issue is so complex and only partially understood, it is only the bleeding hearts that get any cred with the MSM. Particularly if it comes from a female bleeder like Heidi. And she is free to mis[b]lead to her little heart’s content.

    A macho misogynist misfit male like TA has no chance.

    The best he can do is to haemorrhage along with the bleeders.

  81. Johnathan Wilkes July 19, 2013 at 4:20 pm #

    Neville did you see Jo’s blog re. India requires windfarms to predict the next day’s output in advance by 15 minute intervals?

    Should be a cinch, after all if they can predict the effect of CO2 on temperature 50 years in advance to hundredths of a degree C this should be easy?

  82. Luke July 19, 2013 at 4:27 pm #

    “No, I won’t be boning up on the material you’ve been reading, Luke.” says Robert

    meaning I can’t substantiate my prejudiced opinions and I don’t even know what I’m saying really – but sounds good ! Hardly a scientific position on “an evidence based blog” is it?

    “Yes John, any sceptic view he presented would be totally misrepresented by the MSM.” well it wouldn’t want to be Bob’s CET graph would it – not even the most minimal duty of care undertaken. Try-ons are try-ons.

  83. spangled drongo July 19, 2013 at 4:42 pm #

    “not even the most minimal duty of care undertaken.”

    Wadda larf! Double standards anyone?

    So what does that make the mann made hokey stick?

    You know, that icon of the DoCC? [until it got too hot to handle]

  84. Neville July 19, 2013 at 4:53 pm #

    Looks like it could still be the sun stupid.

    New study shows a good correlation between solar activity and Arctic climate, ice etc. Geezzzz who would have guessed?
    JW I read that and yes should be an easy task for them. And I’ll believe it when I see it confirmed.

  85. Neville July 19, 2013 at 5:39 pm #

    IPCC lead author Von Storch says there is a problem with the climate models.

    He says that there has been little warming for the past 15 years and they may have to admit that they were wrong in another five years.

  86. Luke July 19, 2013 at 5:42 pm #

    Irrelevant Spangled – what about the war in Afghanistan – stick to the topic. You can’t assume the moral high round if you’re doing this sort of dodgy representation of CET data.

    Hey Neville – have you actually read the Arctic paper – it’s deeply flawed – surely you just didn’t take someone’s word for it – how naive ! where’s your scepticism?

  87. cohenite July 19, 2013 at 6:46 pm #

    Well luke, let’s talk about your Parker paper on CET; and let’s start with the ‘corrections’ for UHI.

    Parker’s methodology is discussed on section 3.6 and the corrections shown at Tables VI(a) and VI(b). Their methodology is extraordinary. They compare stations designated, by no discernible criteria, to be likely to be affected by UHI. They then compare these stations with other stations likely to be rural, although they concede some of these comparison stations are “not truly rural”.

    They then do a least squares linear regression of the various anomalies [with no base period defined, although I may have missed that] and conclude that most of the UHI stations, apart from Malvern, do not differ temperature-wise from the comparison stations. OLS is not a good method of comparing stations for UHI because it assumes a uniform UHI effect from all UHI factors; this is something I discussed before at paragraph 3 here:

    Anyway, they then wonder off and subtract, on some seasonal basis, 0.1C from the UHI stations up to 1998 and 0.2C thereafter.

    Seriously. And you hide behind:

    ” Daily temperatures in unheated rooms are, however, not reliably convertible to daily outdoor values, because of the slow thermal response of the rooms. For this reason, no daily series truly representative of CET can begin before about 1770.”

    A more accessible analysis of CET is here:

  88. spangled drongo July 19, 2013 at 7:51 pm #

    Try these apples Luke:

  89. el gordo July 19, 2013 at 8:35 pm #

    ‘El gordo, if we could get the mainstream media discussing these issues it would be a major breakthrough?’

    It would and to be fair the Murdocracy has been fair and balanced on this, while Fairfax stayed with the faith.

    There is little likelihood that anything will change in aunty’s newsroom before the election, but hopefully someone will purge the place of watermelon after it. All we ask for is equal time, to explain that the science is flawed.

  90. Johnathan Wilkes July 19, 2013 at 8:46 pm #

    el gordo
    looks like Kevin has pulled it off with his PNG “solution”!
    The man of principles and one that is steadfastly sticking to his vision indeed!

  91. Jennifer Marohasy July 19, 2013 at 9:05 pm #

    John Sayers,

    I suggest Tony Abbott start and end with Bob Carter’s new book.

    And starting with a temperature graph… is a good idea. The important thing is to get some charts that don’t look like hockey sticks into the public domain.

    The CETI is a big improvement on what the average punter things a modern temperature graph looks like.

    About two weeks ago I was in Sydney, on a freezing day, chatting with a woman who said that while it might not feel like the climate was getting any warmer, you only had to see the official temperature charts to understand there was a problem. When I quizzed her what charts, she explained the charts with the spike up at the end… And she mentioned Al Gore.

    Climate science is in its infancy, everything and anything will and should be disputed, the important thing is start putting an alternative ‘official’ perspective out there.

  92. el gordo July 19, 2013 at 9:08 pm #

    ‘looks like Kevin has pulled it off with his PNG “solution”!

    Labor is returning to the centre, where they used to reside.

  93. Jennifer Marohasy July 19, 2013 at 9:12 pm #


    No doubt Kevin Rudd believes in the solution he has just announced… a proposal to send the most vulnerable people to one of our poorest neighbour.

    It certainly shows he has no compassion.

    One measure of civilisation is how well we treat the most vulnerable…

    I like to think it also applies to how well we treat alternative perspectives be they political or scientific.

  94. Johnathan Wilkes July 19, 2013 at 9:24 pm #

    Jennifer I have no time for any politician.

    Most of them have one and one interest only, to get into and stay in office.
    Over the years there were few who actually believed that they can do good, they resigned when they realised they cannot. Such is the system.

    There are a few I remember Tony Staley of the libs comes to mind for one.

  95. Neville July 19, 2013 at 9:38 pm #

    Good grief Jennifer the most vulnerable are the real refugees in the camps not these illegals who fly into Indonesia then throw away their identification and jump on a boat to OZ.

    They must have identification and money to fly into Indonesia and then pay up to $15,000 to smugglers to at least get them to Xmas island.

    What a farce, yet people are so easily conned by the media to some how feel sorry for them. I must adfmit I do feel sympathy for the children, toddlers and babies involved in this scam, but certainly not these selfish que jumping adults.

  96. Johnathan Wilkes July 19, 2013 at 9:38 pm #


    I have prolly as much if not more compassion for refugees as anyone else.
    But I always had this niggling question, how many do you want to admit?

    1 Mil 2, more?
    How will it help if we admit too many and in the process we wont be able to support the numbers?
    Is it any consolation to some that we all become equally poor?
    One benefit would of course be that they wouldn’t want to come here anymore.

  97. Neville July 19, 2013 at 9:50 pm #

    BTW I hope Abbott has the brains to read Bob’s book too and digest it. But he would be mad to go in hard on this issue because there are no votes in it .

    As I said before if this blows up he would cause division within his own party and he would be roasted alive by the MSM.
    Jo Nova said they would crucify him and she is correct. And if he is stupid enough to oppose Rudd’s New Guinea strategy he will really lose votes big time. But I’m sure he’s not that stupid.

  98. Luke July 19, 2013 at 10:06 pm #

    Nice attempt at a diversion Cohenite. It’s a typical try-on – Still waiting for my book I hope like hell Abbott reads Bob’s book and quotes it it liberally. Especially the CET try-on.

    And oh Cohenite have you published something on UHI – no … oh …

    CET is good sceptic fodder – Tamino just shredded Archibald for a whopper CET try-on

    Cohenite despite his bleatings and infantile behaviour will enjoy the pattern match of the GHCN and CET in the more modern period.

    Actually the more I think about it – the more I think it’s a most excellent idea for sceptics to advise Abbott for the election. Brilliant !

  99. Johnathan Wilkes July 19, 2013 at 10:20 pm #


    “for sceptics to advise Abbott for the election. Brilliant !”

    Why Luke, don’t you think he can make his own mistakes?

  100. John Sayers July 19, 2013 at 10:39 pm #

    Unfortunately Jen I can’t order Bob’s book from Dubai as there is no mail delivery unless you have residency status. I wish there was an E-Book available.

    “Climate science is in its infancy, everything and anything will and should be disputed, the important thing is start putting an alternative ‘official’ perspective out there.”

    Then it’s up to the scientists to present proper information to the public not politicians – at the moment we have the Flannery, Steffan and Karoly presenting hockey sticks from the front line. Unless other scientists start to contradict them they will hold the stage.

    Dr Dennis Jensen from WA is the only poli who is a scientist and he had no success trying to push the sceptical line and was howled down immediately.

    With regard Kevin’s boat policy – he’s swung further right than the Howard Government! Refugees are rioting in Nauru.

  101. el gordo July 19, 2013 at 10:40 pm #

    Sceptics Advise Abbott on Climate Change

    Nick Minchin could introduce Carter and Salby to Abbott, it would be a ‘road to Damascus’ moment.

  102. Neville July 19, 2013 at 10:45 pm #

    Luke I’m sure Tony Abbott wouldn’t fall for any advice offered by amateurs. He has picked the right strategy to win an election against a resurgent Labor party.

    His direct action will at least save us from Rudd’s idiotic ETS plus wasting billions $ on overseas con merchants selling fraudulent co2 certificates and in time he may be able to gradually win over the electorate and perhaps guide them to use their common sense about so called CAGW.
    Just to see the stupid fools in the Climate Commission get the boot will be a bonus as well.

  103. Luke July 19, 2013 at 10:49 pm #

    John S – the issue is that most behind the scenes “real scientists” don’t get the opportunity to engage – i.e. not allowed by management structures. And increasingly more so as the need for “accountability” grows. Additionally many of the gun backroom boys and girls shun the media and actually don’t want the attention. But on any day you’re only ever seeing a few % of the research reality.

    Case in point with Australian example – Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Journal

    Do you know any of the names? Do you know what they think? How they vote?

  104. el gordo July 19, 2013 at 10:50 pm #

    Mal Washer maybe another sceptic.

  105. Luke July 19, 2013 at 10:50 pm #

    “Luke I’m sure Tony Abbott wouldn’t fall for any advice offered by amateurs.” but you do ! every single day.

  106. John Sayers July 19, 2013 at 10:51 pm #

    Abbott gets confronted by Alan Jones over this every time he’s interviewed – I’m sure off mike they have discussed it many times and I’m sure Abbott, in private, is fully informed of the actual science.

  107. Neville July 19, 2013 at 10:56 pm #

    EG Nick MInchin is far too wise a person to light a fire under the AGW issue this close to an election.
    I’m sure he wants the Coalition to win the election not waste another 3 years in opposition. You people may mean well but politically you leave a lot to be desired.

    Please get a grip on reality.

  108. cohenite July 19, 2013 at 10:59 pm #

    You are such a nuisance luke; tammy’s CET analysis is not with CET data or the data which your mate Parker used:

    Tammy has all the credibility of, say Flannery.

  109. jennifer July 19, 2013 at 11:09 pm #

    John Sayers,

    I have an electronic copy of Bob’s book. I shall see if I can get permission to send you a copy.

    The book does have a nice introduction, explaining why it is incumbent on each of us to become informed.

    Which is why, I repeat, there is nothing wrong with Tony Abbott beginning discussion with reference to the longest temperature record that exists in the world based on actual measurements.


    I’m interested to know who has actually purchased and received a copy of Bob’s book?


    Have you read the introductory chapter to Bob’s book?

  110. Mark A July 19, 2013 at 11:22 pm #

    If not mistaken, last I looked it was available on Amazon?
    Very reasonable too.

  111. Neville July 19, 2013 at 11:27 pm #

    Yes Jennifer I have read the introductory chapter. Why?

  112. Mark A July 19, 2013 at 11:59 pm #

    Sorry knew I saw it somewhere.

    Kobo eBooks $7.99

  113. John Sayers July 20, 2013 at 12:13 am #

    Thanks Jen – I’ve now purchased a Kindle version that’s on Amazon Cloud so I can read it on my computer.

  114. Luke July 20, 2013 at 1:23 am #

    “Which is why, I repeat, there is nothing wrong with Tony Abbott beginning discussion with reference to the longest temperature record that exists in the world based on actual measurements.”

    That would be actual compromised measurements. So Jen you’re happy to recommend a discontinuous data series with data measured indoors before 1772 !

    Bob’s book on iTunes too

  115. spangled drongo July 20, 2013 at 8:02 am #

    “That would be actual compromised measurements. So Jen you’re happy to recommend a discontinuous data series with data measured indoors before 1772 !”

    That’s not necessarily the case but even so, if you are doing a summer comparison, what do you think would be the results of indoor measurements with thermal lag, warmer or cooler?

    And we are talking about a substantial building designed for a cold climate, not a garden shed.

  116. sp July 20, 2013 at 8:18 am #

    Armagh is another good temp record – indoors and outdoors:

  117. el gordo July 20, 2013 at 8:39 am #

    ‘Please get a grip on reality.’

    You mean political reality, no I’m an idealist and will vote informal unless a charismatic leader turns up.

  118. Neville July 20, 2013 at 9:20 am #

    Well EG thanks for proving my point. Think a moment, if we all held your contempt for democracy and didn’t vote until a charismatic leader??? showed up we could well end up with a dictatorship.
    Brilliant thinking that, NOT. What did Burke say—- “all it takes for evil to flourish is that good men do nothing.”
    You can stick your charismatic leader, give me a good hearted conservative and plain speaking person with a good dose of common sense.

  119. Neville July 20, 2013 at 9:52 am #

    Could the IPCC be starting to wake up?

    And could 50% to 60% of the warming from 1850 be natural? Years ago when arguing with Luke I stated that some of the warming is just a natural recovery from the LIA, some is solar, some is ocean oscillations, some is certainly UHIE and yes some is probably due to humans.

  120. Luke July 20, 2013 at 10:51 am #

    So after all the debate on met station siting – Wattsup – Surface – Spangled now wants to argue that siting of instruments doesn’t matter? Not that’s denial on steroids ! No hypocrisy here folks – move on ,,,,

    “Recovery” is an anthropomorphic concept – recovery ? again more hypocrisy – the old sceptic meme “oh but climate always changes” – so now we’re “recovering” back to “normal” ? Think about what you’re saying….

    Incidentally the IPCC has already argued that some of rise in temperature is “natural”. Just not the 2nd half of the 20th century.

  121. John Sayers July 20, 2013 at 12:50 pm #

    I read John Spooner’s first chapter last night and it’s a good summary of the story from the Al Gore movie to this day and it sets it out plainly for jo punter.
    One factor that he didn’t mention was the reason I first became sceptical. The CO2 effect is Logarithmic. The more CO2 we put into the atmosphere the less effect it has and that is being demonstrated in the current temperature record.

  122. el gordo July 20, 2013 at 3:10 pm #

    ‘Amidst all the agitprop, there is a nugget of science: no 15-year period of global temperature yields a statistically significant trend. But then, to its embarrassment, neither could the Met Office demonstrate a statistically significant trend in global temperature for the last 130 years.

    ‘That doesn’t mean observed temperatures did not rise – they did – or that global warming, whether man-made or not, did not happen. Rather it illustrates the sheer difficulty in demonstrating whether the rise is outside a range of random natural variation and of moving from the physics of the test tube to the immense complexity of the atmosphere.’

    Rupert Darwell / Huffpo

  123. Luke July 20, 2013 at 5:01 pm #

    Gee John logarithmic eh ? We never knew that. Really?

    El Gordo – only if you believe stats bullshit artistes

  124. NikFromNYC July 20, 2013 at 7:12 pm #

    cohenite wrote: “You are such a nuisance luke; tammy’s CET analysis is not with CET data or the data which your mate Parker used….”

    Please disregard that very early version of my Tamino CET debunking since it spotted the deception but it took me about three tries to duplicate it properly, here being the final version:

    Also, early on, when I posted the CET far and wide on blogs and news stories I found it had little effect since it was just viewed as eccentrically local climate by whole armies of online activists, so I found it lots of friends, namely the other multi-century records that exist, the vast majority of which are boringly linear right up to our high CO2 era:

  125. Beth Cooper July 20, 2013 at 8:09 pm #

    Ahem … seems
    ter this serf
    that the A-B-C
    is jest another
    in the style
    ofthe I-P-C-C,
    the B-O-M &
    not so sure
    they’re gonna’
    listen ter
    the oppos-ishun.

    Beth- the- serf

  126. cohenite July 20, 2013 at 8:43 pm #

    Thank you NIK.

  127. Stacey July 29, 2013 at 5:59 am #

    Professor Manley(decd) looked after the CET up until the mid 1970’s plotting temp against time for all seasons.
    Nothing to cause concern but when the boys from CRU got their dirty mitts on the data what did they do use anomalies on a distorted scale and what do we get a hockey stick. Care of the fragrant Professor Phil Jones?

  128. jennifer August 6, 2013 at 10:35 am #

    ‘Taxing Air’ reviewed by Paul Monk here


  1. The Australian Bureau of Meteorology Gets it Wrong | The GOLDEN RULE - July 18, 2013

    […] The Central England Temperature Index: A Useful Reference ( […]

Website by 46digital