The Hon Greg Hunt MP,
Minister for the Environment.
Dear Minister Hunt,
I wrote to you on 4th March 2014 with concerns that the claims made by the Bureau of Meteorology that 2013 was Australia’s hottest year on record, are somewhat deceptive. In that letter I explained that the official temperature record has been truncated to begin in 1910 (thereby excluding the hot years of the Federation drought) and that the method used to calculate the annual average temperature for Australia is not transparent.
I’ve since come to understand that the annual average temperature for 2013, which the Bureau claimed was a record, is in fact a wholly contrived valued based on modeling of temperatures, rather than the averaging of actual recorded values. That is, careful scrutiny of the Bureau’s methodology shows that recorded temperatures at locations across Australia are submitted to a two-step homogenization process that can have the effect of changing the entire temperature trend at specific locations. A weighted mean of these ‘homogenized’ values is then used in the calculation of the Australian annual mean temperature. In turn, the ‘homogenized’ values are used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which gives advice back to the Australian government on global and Australian temperature trends.
A problem with this approach is that it can deliver an impression of climate change which accords wholly with expectations. But, it is reality that Australians should be planning for, so it would be better if the Bureau used real data, rather than modeled output when reporting temperature trends. Indeed to quote Aldous Huxley, ‘Facts don’t cease to exist because they are ignored.’
At the invitation of the Sydney Institute, I will be giving a talk on 25th June 2014, that shows the detail of how this methodology is applied, using the locations of Bourke in western NSW and Amberley in Queensland as case studies. I encourage attendance from the Bureau to scrutinize my presentation for accuracy. Indeed, all Australians should have a clear understanding of the nature of the data used in the calculation of important and highly publicized temperature statistics. All Australians should also have access to a realistic assessment of current temperature trends.
Very recently it was brought to my attention that Graham Williamson wrote to Rob Vertessy, Director of Meteorology at the Bureau, also querying the claimed increase in temperatures. Mr Williamson, in his letter of 27th May 2014, specifically asked why the Bureau of Meteorology did not acknowledge the 15-year hiatus in global warming as detailed in the recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, Chapter 10, AR5). In reply to Mr Williamson, Neil Plummer from the Bureau has suggested that the IPCC is simply referring to a slow down in the rate of global warming, rather than a pause as such. Given the IPCC reports are based on temperature trends derived from ‘homogenized’ data, rather than real observational records, I am concerned that they may also not be giving a true picture of recent climate change. To reiterate, even the IPCC is using modeled output rather than real data.
As part of ongoing research into natural rainfall patterns in Queensland, Professor John Abbot and I have been studying the temperature record for northeastern Australia, as temperature is a key input variable in our neural network models (e.g. Abbot and Marohasy 2014). Considering the data from the late 1800s until 1960, a cooling trend is evident, followed by warming between 1960 and 2001. In contrast, the last 12 years show quite dramatic cooling, Table 1. All three periods have occurred while greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, have been increasing in concentration in the atmosphere.
Our analysis of the maximum temperature trend for the years 2002 to 2013 is based, not on the modeled temperature values used to generate official temperature statistics, but on the unadjusted observed temperatures also available from the Bureau of Meteorology website. The thirty-one sites across Queensland were chosen on the basis that there is a continual temperature record for the period 2002 to 2013 at each of the locations. We choose 2002 as the start date, as the data suggests a change in trend at about this year from warming to cooling. This is consistent with published studies by astrophysicists and physicists (e.g. Nicola Scafetta 2010, Abdussamatov 2012, and Lu 2013) and closely follows the timing of the last solar maximum (eg. NASA update 02/05/2014, http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/predict.shtml). While Table 1 is limited to Queensland, preliminary assessment of data from NSW, Victoria and the Northern Territory also suggests the onset of a cooling trend.
This information is in stark contrast to the information in the State of the Climate Report 2014 recently published by the Bureau and also CSIRO. The report states that “warming over Australia has been consistent” and temperatures are “projected to continue to increase, with more hot days and fewer extremely cool days.”
In order to reconcile the information in Table 1, with the claims in the State of the Climate Report 2014, it is important to realize that, like the calculation of the annual mean temperature for Australia, data present in the report is based wholly on modeled output. That is observed temperature values have been first passed through a two-step homogenization process involving the application of complex mathematical algorithms.
It is important to make a distinction between output from a computer model and real data. In his book Science and Public Policy: The virtuous corruption of virtual environmental science Aynsley Kellow, Professor and Head of the School of Government at the University of Tasmania, shows through many examples, including from climate science, how a reliance on computer models over the last 30 years as well as the infusion of values, has produced a preference for virtual over observational data. But the Australian public and Australian industry deserve much better from the Bureau.
As an Australian scientist with a keen interest in public policy and temperature records, I ask you as the Minister ultimately responsible for the activities of the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, to consider how you might reconcile increasing atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide with a falling temperature trend, and what needs to be done if we are to adequately prepare as a nation for the possible onset of a period of sustained cooling.
Yours sincerely
Dr Jennifer Marohasy
Adjunct Research Fellow
Central Queensland University
Links/References
Letter from Jennifer Marohasy to Minister Greg Hunt, 4th March 2014
http://jennifermarohasy.com/questions-for-the-australian-bureau-of-meteorology/
John Abbot and Jennifer Marohasy, 2014. Input Selection and optimization for monthly rainfall forecasting in Queensland, Australia, using artificial neural networks, Atmospheric Research, Volume 138, Pages 166-178.
Nicola Scafetta, 2010. Empirical evidence for a celestial origin of the climate oscillations and its implications, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, Volume 72, Pages 951-970.
Habibullo I. Abdussamatov, 2012. Bicentennial decrease of the total solar irradiance leads to unbalanced thermal budget of the Earth and the Little Ice Age, Applied Physics Research, Volume 4. DOI: 10.5539/apr.v4n1p178
Qing-Bu Lu, 2013. Cosmic-ray driven reaction and greenhouse effect of halogenated molecules: culprits for atmospheric ozone depletion and global climate change, International Journal of Modern Physics B, Volume 27, DOI: 10.1142/S0217979213500732
Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO 2014, State of the Climate 2014 http://www.bom.gov.au/state-of-the-climate/documents/state-of-the-climate-2014_low-res.pdf?ref=button
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
“as well as the infusion of values”
Now there’s a delicate turn of phrase. In plain English, ‘the ascendancy of virtuous liars.‘ It’s for The Cause, don’t you know.
Jen
FYI
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/10/why-automatic-temperature-adjustments-dont-work/#more-111188
Broad idea. Big broad icebergs floating on Lake Superior in June . Apparently a sign that because there was so much ice there last year , the water will stay cooler this Northern summer and then will freeze more next winter.
Only the locals and the fishermen think that though, so someone better consult a computer model to see whether the icebergs are real.
On a serious note I was near Bourke last week and some of the locals were a bit shocked that their temps had been fiddled. When you get out in the North West , the time it takes to bump your way there on some of the roads , gives you a clue how far it is to some of the other places. Places used to ‘correct’ temp anomalies, that is.
Congrats on being invited to talk at the Sydney Institute Jen.
I’ve just deleted a lot of off-topic comments and comment that would potentially take us off topic. We have a new post about ‘temperature adjusting’ and cooling temperature trends. If we pass 50 comments on this topic… then you can post whatever you want.
Another Ian, Thanks for the link to WUWT that details why and how the algorithms find breakpoints and how this produces a warming trend.
The BOM appears to use a similar algorithm but it doesn’t always generate warming. Chart 3 in my second Bourke post showed a step down in 1911-13 and then a step up in 1951… http://jennifermarohasy.com/2014/04/rewriting-the-history-of-bourke-part-2-adjusting-maximum-temperatures-both-down-and-up-and-then-changing-them-altogether/
Re: Comment from: Ian Thomson June 11th, 2014 at 7:48 am-
‘icebergs floating on Lake Superior in June’
From Al Gore’s (the Goracle) climate journal:
Great Lakes are “Canary in the Coal Mine” July 26, 2010 : 1:22 PM
According to Cameron Davis the senior adviser to the U.S. EPA on the Great Lakes, “The Great Lakes in a lot of ways have always been a canary in the coal mine”
http://blog.algore.com/2010/07/great_lakes_are_canary_in_the.html
~ ~ ~
New permafrost is forming around shrinking Arctic lakes, but will it last?
New permafrost is forming around Twelvemile Lake in Alaska, but researchers have concluded that this permafrost will have disappeared by the end of the century due to continued climate change. Credit: Martin Briggs, US Geological Survey
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-06-permafrost-arctic-lakes.html#jCp
or
http://phys.org/news/2014-06-permafrost-arctic-lakes.html
“the end of the century”?
~ ~ ~
THE Australian grains industry is set to embark on a concerted research effort to help growers – including those in the southern cropping region – in their ongoing battle against frost.
http://www.sunraysiadaily.com.au/story/2339751/frost-battle-heating-up/?cs=1511
What the UN-IPCC says 2007 fwiw:
ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg2/ar4-wg2-chapter11.pdf (Aust. & NZ, pge 509, para5)
“The climate of the 21st century is virtually certain to be warmer, with changes in extreme events.
Heatwaves and fires are virtually certain to increase in intensity and frequency (high confidence). Floods, landslides, droughts and storm surges are very likely to become more frequent and intense, and snow and frost are very likely to become less frequent (high confidence).”
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg2/ar4-wg2-chapter11.pdf
Challenging letter, Jennifer. Looking forward to the Minister’s response.
I am in his electorate and will write to him too.
Jennifer if we’re supposed to be discussing temp trends in the BOM data base then what could be more relevant than recent SL studies and world glacier studies?
Thermal expansion of the oceans plus glacier melt rates and thus SLR is supposed to increase with more co2 induced warming but this doesn’t seem to be the case.
Where is the impact from increased co2 on higher temps since the IPCC approved date of 1950.
You can make people believe anything ,if you repeat it often enough.
Joseph Goebels
Yes Robert LP , the science is settled , the science is settled, the science is settled, the science is settled.
What science ? Oh all the reputable science , you know.
Big oil is sponsoring all the skeptics , big oil is sponsoring all the skeptics, etc, etc, etc,-
Remember to keep your ears blocked while you say it.
Yes, Robert LP. I know people who believe that global sea level rise is responsible for coastal flooding in single towns on the US eastern seaboard. Juneau Alaska and Stockholm Sweden, by the same logic, must be faced with dropping sea levels. These people believe first, then they reason.
Guys, here’s my reason for being skeptical of numbers, even unadjusted, when it comes to temps (and most other things). A cloudy day with a low max can be hotter (depending on definition of word “hotter”, of course) than a clear day with a higher max. With minima it’s even more confused. With winter minima – just forget it. Also, how long did it stay hot or cold for? (Sydney’s 2013 record max was genuine, but blink and you’d miss it. 1939 however…) I find numbers interesting, useful, but pretty lame on their own. Obviously, when numbers start to mount it’s worth noting. The high monthly and annual maxima in my region between 1910 and 1919 are hard to ignore but what conclusions am I supposed to draw? Whatever caused that trend, it ended.
As for our Great Australian National Temperature and Rainfall…a joke. How would Kidman have made his money without looking at drastic differences from place to place, season to season? Averaging out utterly different climate zones because they happen to form part of a single political entity is pretty dodgy, even without those “adjustments”. Hey, if WA or, better still, the south of WA gets independence we’ll be able to claim lots more rainfall for Oz post 1950, since that’s the only big bit that’s been getting significantly drier. It would be silly, but is it any smarter to average out Southern WA now with Cape York just because they both happen to be parts of Oz in 2014? What’s the point? A Rudd or Gillard takes WA’s mining royalties to take to the pub and WA gets credit for rain that fell in Brissie?
Alan Border and Javed Miandad were great not because of how many runs they scored but the circumstances in which they scored and the teams they scored them against. Numbers. Good in their cramped way…but not terrific.
Don’t mind me too much. I’m a compulsive skeptic.
I must say that something that always bothers me with the temp records and trends is the argument that a computed result using a variety of adjustments is a factual account. I realise I know nothing of statistics and modelling, but it’s a man-made construct.
I’ve often wondered what the unadjusted data from a high quality temperature sensing network would show. A recent post on WUWT suggests that such a network exists in the US, and that since it began about a decade ago, it shows northern US temps to be stable or falling.
If this is true, that the network in question is high quality and requires no ‘adjustments’, what is Australia’s equivalent?
It can only be via a high quality recording regime that requires NO adjustment that we can claim a high level of validation for a result. A computed result must always be suspect, surely.
What would such a record show for Australia since 2000? And if we haven’t such a network with which to validly track temperatures and trends, why not? That should have been a primary requirement as soon as AGW really took off as a hypothesis.
Yes.
The Australian public and Australian Industry does deserve much better from the Bureau.
As Robert explains very well above, the focus on producing National averages in such a highly variable climate & then trying to “tease out’ a significant statistical trend from those averages is interesting but not serving a useful purpose.
Sometimes an average of an average can be useful, but an average of an average of an average is generally not very useful.
Would you invest in the stockmarket on advice based on an average of an average of an average? I mean, really risk your own money on that sort of “statistical” analysis?
Alamist collectivists understand they are not investing their own REAL money when they insist upon “action now” – they know they are spending other peoples money, which is much easier and less risky.
yep good point sp
Spending OPM on something interesting might be enjoyable but definitely is not serving a useful purpose in and of itself.
I would not invest in an average of an average of an average .
In Table 1, 8 of 31 locations are shown to have trends that would make their Tmax very much lower (10 Celsius degrees or more). That ought to be quite noticeable. If I lived near any of the extreme spots (say, the minus 15 sort) I would consider renting rather than buying a place to live or work. But these are not really predictions.
From the data you have, can you investigate what the change was from long ago until now? For example, calculate an average high temperature for the last week of December for a 5 year period [1900 – 1905] and compare that to a similar average for 100 years later [2000-2005]?
In the table, Jimna Forestry is the extreme: -17.46. Has something like this ever happened? More likely these trends will bottom-out and then start to rebound – more like a wave than a straight line.
–————–
It would be good if you could hide a microphone in the place where the Bureau representatives will meet after your talk for the Sydney Institute.
I have often commented on the disparity between the CDO (raw temp) and ACORN data. ACORN is now being used to provide the basis for all Australian and state means. In fact the annual means since 1910 have been adjusted based on ACORN data.
Since ACORN was launched in 2012 (spring-boarding from the B0M’s High Quality data series), we have had records being continually broken – hottest day, month, season, year – and all in the past two years.
Is the system of using only 112 stations – all being adjusted, homogenised, weighted/shaded – leading to some dubious conclusions?
I think the minister should be aware of the problems inherent in the temperature record and form an independent body to check the ACORN data series. Just a thought.
Jen, given your trend analysis and its significant negative bias over the last decade or so, do you think much credence can be placed on the findings?
Most of us would agree the planet has probably warmed up and average city temperatures certainly seem to have climbed. Your data suggests this is either a misconception or I assume because of the UHI..
I also know that we can be wrong in our sense/ perception of what has happened to temperature, but I dont think many people in oz would believe that temperatures have actually been falling?
Yes Robert, but it is standard method for anything from unemployment , to the Post Office, to the climate in Oz politics. Common sense is probably rated too , 1–100.
JFH , if you get the microphone in , share it.
I suspect , however, that the rank ‘n’ file climertolergists won’t be encouraged to attend.
If temps are rising, max temps haven’t been in Casino (NSW).
From 1971-2000 the average yearly max mean was 26.6C.
From 1981-2010 the average yearly max mean dropped to 26.3C.
Sources:
http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/av?p_display_type=dataGraph&p_stn_num=058063&p_nccObsCode=36&p_month=13
Also:
http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/cvg/av?
p_stn_num=058063&p_prim_element_index=0&p_comp_element_index=0&redraw=null&p_display_type=statistics_summary&normals_years=1971-2000&tablesizebutt=normal
(Change ‘period’ box to get other 30-year temp averages).
This is also the case for many north-western NSW, Hunter Valley and some western towns (including Bourke).
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=501947030000&dt=1&ds=1
And that’s from GISS NASA, usually the most adjusted data of all the temp monitors.
It’s simple; if a trend appears in the data after adjustment/homogenisation/infusion of values where there was no trend in the raw data, then prima facie the trend is a product of the process not the climate.
Ian your declines as mentioned are nothing in the vicinity of many of Jen’s where many areas have a trend decline of 10-17c over a century…ie over a degree per decade (for the last decade or so). They are so enormous as to be hard to believe, dont you think?
Cohenite a very poignant point and hard to argue with , a shame our political masters can not come to terms with the concept!…or indeed the ABC and other media outlets so hell bent on their crusade to save the planet from evil human beings.
Toby,
I’m not into adjusting data, or apologising for it. Rather I like to explore it, to see what it says. To let it speak for itself. There are a good number of locations shown in Table 1, with a cooling trend.
As regards your comment that few people in Australia would believe temperatures have actually been falling, of course the experts have been telling us its getting hotter and hotter and most people are inclined to believe the experts. It makes for an easier life.
Interestingly many broad acre farmers in the Murray Darling would tell you the incidence of late season frost is increasing.
Ian George
Table 1 has been worked up from daily values. But I was hoping you might do some quick checks/add to this table working from the yearly averages at the BOM climate data online site… http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data/.
Not sure why you would bother with GISS NASA though.
And while it might be reasonable to start at 1998 or 2000, instead of 2002, I don’t know why you would start in 1981?
Jo Nova is ignoring recent cooling in her latest post. Claims warming over last 100 years. Sceptics not on same page?
“Sceptics not on same page?”
I sure hope not. We don’t do “same page”.
We don’t do “same page”.
Sure we do
http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/meeting-group-little-snowmen-12085646.jpg
Jen,
My point was this cooling was also happening in many places in country eastern Aust. It is confirming your point that there is a problem with the use of ACORN to determine Australia’s temp record.
I started from 1981 to show that even in the past ten years (using 30-year data) Casino is still cooling despite the ‘warmest decade on record’ claim by the BoM. The graph of Casino temps shows the cooling clearly.
http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/av?p_display_type=dataGraph&p_stn_num=058063&p_nccObsCode=36&p_month=13
I used NASA GISS to show that even that agency, the one that adjusts the most, shows a cooling trend for Casino.
All the best with your speech at the SI later this month.
Jen; you can’t be serious about open discussion here after dismissing my opening comments re your methods and lack of scientific support in using raw BoM data as off topic.
As Ian George ably points out BoM and others have developed a mutual recognition for routines in handling discontinuities in old and unconfirmed weather data.
Given Australia via BoM has traditionally controlled a vast area of global weather reporting we can’t dismiss any of it as rubbish with just a wave of the wand.
Disappointed.
Hi handjive,
Just read the Algore link on Superior, it certainly was the end of the world as we know it, wasn’t it?
As someone who is involved with wild rice, I can imagine how that stuff must have terrified the Indians.Temperatures and dormancies are critical to propagation .
This is what is all so evil about the whole AGW beatup. Highly paid ‘researchers ‘ frightening people, from innocent natives, to polar bear loving kids, with opinion science.
Softening everyone up for the big trading scheme, so big oil and Goldman Sachs ( and Tony’s frenemy Mal), can make some serious money.
Of course the alternate story , of cooling, will be hidden from public view and manipulated away, until the seasons rotate again, or we get a hot day.
Problem is, we now have a whole generation educated to accept it all as rock solid fact.
Good luck Jennifer.
Dunno about that Emily Fraser,
I just checked Jonova’s latest post (June 11) & it is also about adjustments and the handling of raw data.
I think Jen & Jonova & others (whom I guess you call sceptics) are all asking the same sort of questions about the treatment of data & the use of statistics & whether any of this is serving a useful purpose for either the natural or human environment.
” As regards your comment that few people in Australia would believe temperatures have actually been falling, of course the experts have been telling us its getting hotter and hotter and most people are inclined to believe the experts. It makes for an easier life.
Interestingly many broad acre farmers in the Murray Darling would tell you the incidence of late season frost is increasing.”
Jennifer..While I have no reason to doubt your research value and the figures and I have to respect your honest intent….I have up till now, declined to comment on the post as it is of such a technical side of the debate that I do not feel qualified TO comment….But as you stated in the above quote about the “belief” of “few people in Australia…” , I would like to shove in my twopence worth, not from a “collegiate” point of analysis, but from the “fellowship” angle..for, whilst I have been reading those erstwhile points made by various parties above, to this amateur, the voluminous use of the anagram makes the discussion look like a “J-Lo cover of a R.E.M. song “…and then descends into the kind of argument between two cooks as to how much tabasco to put in the chili-con-carne!….so for those of us who like our food “plain” perhaps I can make a couple of observations..; “from the field” so to speak.
I live in the Sth. Aust’ Murray Mallee…last summer we had a scorcher…and dry?!…as dry as an Arab’s fart!….the temps’ were for many days over forty deg’..as you know..the earth as bare and as dry as a bubbies just powdered bum and at the bottom of those post-holes it showed there was “nothing in the bank”…as a matter of fact, our mains water-pipe from the source to the house travels about half a kilometer 8″ (200mm.) underground..it got so hot that by the ” cold” tap itself, you could not stand under the shower…Now..it’s winter..we’ve had very good starter rains, the grass and weeds have never looked better..there have been light frosts the last couple of days so the air is quite cold…but I am still picking mushrooms!…not “toadies” nor the tripping kind, but nice fat edibles….I ask this of you Jennifer… as you are a Biologist and I am just a grown up who remembers when he was a kid there being a kind of “mushroom season”, just after the first good rains of Autumn, while the ground was still warm and the earth moist and we would hurry out to pick them, because the “season” usually only lasted a couple of days and then they were gone…..but now, and I remember last year too..I am picking mushies right through the year…it can’t be that the air is warm (1deg. or less) can it be that the fungi has adapted (I do notice a greater variety these days)? or is it that the ground below my feet has retained some of that blistering heat for just that much longer so that it has changed the micro-biology of the soil?
The mushies, by the way are delicious!…I remember my mothe cooking them in a skillet of butter and placing them on a lightly toasted slice of white “tank-loaf”…ahh!..one of the delightfull memories of my youth!
Hmm, this could be one of Jen’s posts which draw extra GetUp-style distractions and stunts, as with the dam releases. That’s always worth noting and monitoring.
Gavin,
You will have to explain yourself better. I deleted two posts that appeared to be a carry-over from the last thread… that you can’t trust any measurement.
Jaycee,
We might be cooling from a warm place, that is the 1998 through to 2002/03 peak in a recent warming cycle. But its nevertheless perhaps worth noting that a cooling trend may have begun… so do enjoy those mushrooms while you can!
Emily,
Sometimes it can take people a while to see that what they have predicted for some time, has actually come true.
Where I am likely to disagree with many sceptics is on the nature of 20th Century warming. You see I’m increasingly of the opinion, that in Australia, there was cooling from the very warm years of the Federation drought until about 1960. Furthermore, even the warming from 1960 through to 2000, doesn’t get us as hot as it was 112 years ago.
Debbie,
More open and transparent treatment of data is what we would all like. And to have friends like you.
Ian George,
Thanks for the clarification, and always appreciate your insights.
Ahh!…Robert, Robert….
…” You were quick to pick on a faulty line
That I strove to put my soul in :
Your eyes were keen for a dash of mine
In the place of a semi-colon….
And blind to the rest. And is it for such
That I must brook restriction?
“I was taught too little?” I learnt too much
To care for a scholar’s diction!”……………………….”To my cultured critics”… Henry Lawson.
Was this a Henry Lawson “stunt”?
I live in the MDB too Jaycee.
I’m in the MIA and I am actually a broad acre irrigator and therefore a producer. on our properties, we grow rice, wheat, canola, corn, oats, barley and hay and we also run a livestock program. Our immediate neighbours grow other commodities such as cotton and soy and beans and just down the road we have other neighbours who grow citrus and grapes. Across this area there is literally a harvest every month because there is also a lot of intensive vegetable growing like pumpkins and melons and tomatoes and garlic and onions and prunes and potatoes and gherkins and lettuce and that list goes on quite extensively.
We have just had the best Autumn break we have seen in about 3 decades and along with delicious mushrooms, our winter cereal crops are looking bloody fantastic.
The Summer harvest has been a bit of a bugger however as the ground has been very wet and cool here and since we took the water off our crops in March, we have had approx. 200mls of rain and we have approx. another 20mls forecast for tomorrow.
Yes we had some hot weather over Summer. . .but that’s supposed to happen isn’t it? I think it would be far more unusual if there was not a run of hot weather out here somewhere in the southern MDB in the Summer months.
Here is my twopence worth. . .
One of things that I have learnt is that there really isn’t such a thing as an ‘average season’ out here in the MDB. Most seasons have their plusses and minuses or pros and cons and some seasons are just a bloody disaster. Sometimes one area of the MDB can be having an absolute corker of a season at the same time as another area in the MDB is experiencing the opposite. Sometimes they can be separated by just a 100km or even less. In some places out here it often happens that one farmer gets a timely spring storm that significantly boosts the crop yield while the neighbour doesn’t get a single drop. Other times one farmer can have their crop wiped out by hail or frost while the next door neighbour doesn’t have a single hail stone or a frost touch their crop.
I have also learnt that while the BoM has improved forecasting skills in some areas such as temp and wind direction and short term storm warnings etc. . .and we use their excellent daily satellite and radar services. . .BoM has NOT demonstrated any improvement in the areas that probably matter the most to producers like me or indeed any business that works in the real climate/weather/environment week in and week out.
Wanna guess what those forecasting skills would be?
Hello Debbie…: “I ‘spose the flats are pretty green up there in Ironbark ?…”
Ahh, yes…” no such thing as average / normal seasons”…I hear this ‘catch-cry” from many in this area…even when we may be standing under a mallee tree or perhaps a black-box / swamp mallee tree…surrounded by rainfall – specific shrubs and understory genetically specialised and used by Goyder in his “line observations” for such an area as ours evolved through thousands of years because of such a special “average” climate condition unique to our MDB. area……How is that?…..: How can there be no such thing as average, yet right there in front of us is the flora and fauna, much of it specific ONLY to the Murray Mallee, evolved ONLY in the Murray Mallee vegetation area, AND totally reliant for it’s evolution to a specific “average climate”?….How is it so?
You can see…I can see…anyone can see that ..say..a Swamp box mallee will not grow even a metre or so outside a specific moisture zone.. and demands a specific amount of climate “average” rainfall TO SURVIVE !…any mallee tree will not grow a metre or so outside a specific moisture zone when it gets TOO WET !…the understory the same …the fauna ; the same, ALL those area specific gene-pool life systems evolved in and from a stable, secure , undisturbed environment over many thousands of years…I believe there are certain insects TOTALLY reliant on ONLY ONE specific flower in the MDB. to feed and survive.. now tell me THAT hasn’t done some intensive evolving !..and now I hear people telling me with the air of absolute authority in their voice that there is and was no such thing as “average or normal” weather….well, Debbie..et all…what do you call what was once the largest unique bio-forest in the world..; the temperate mallee forest….Scotch Mist?
Cultured and uncultured fungi in Brisbane sock drawers are becoming a problem.
Jen, there is a big discrepancy between Sydney and my part of the world as regards long records of temp. We have not been getting hotter overall on the max readings, and the period before 1930 had higher monthly and annual max overall. This is opposite to the Sydney trend. As I browse, I find that max readings tend to be higher more recently in most parts, though the increase is not as radical as for Sydney.
Mind you, there are some very striking records of sustained temp. Yamba Pilot Station, a very old one, recorded its three hottest years all in succession and its eight hottest years between 1884 and 1897. I never read much into these things, just observe them. Who knows what clouds etc were doing?
The trouble with your dismissal of my post, Robert, is that THERE is the evidence..the “smoking gun” that no amount of “linking” can deny…A) there WAS a stable climate situation..b) It WAS in situ for thousands of years.. c) It WAS undisturbed through all the time required for the fauna and flora species to evolve into the area unique specific species they are now….no amount of ducking or weaving or posting of graphs and internet links can change that “logical truth”….in that scent of the eucalyptus oil is the “smell” of certainty….in those shallow tendrills of mallee tree roots, lay the scientific fact that keeps my case “rooted” to the good earth.
Your Honour…I rest my case !
Jen i appreciate you are just trying to present the “facts” as the raw data tells it. Clearly the trend is down in the data you assessed. But showing a 100 year trend makes the numbers extreme and I doubt very much you believe temps will fall to those extremes at all?
So my point is, if you suggested a 1-1.7c trend decline over the last 10 years your point would be more effective, it is contrary to teh adjusted data and might make people stop and listen
suggesting a 17c trend change is likely to see people just shake their heads…much like we do when people like obama open their mouths?
How are we, everybody? Tempted to divert from Jen’s topic? I know I am.
Toby,
It has become common place to refer to a temperature trend over a 100 year period in order to get an idea of the magnitude.
For example, many readers at this blog would know that CSIRO and BOM suggest temperatures in Australia have warmed by 0.8 degree C over the last 100 years. Ken Stewart puts the figure closer to 0.6 degree C over 100 years.
I am simply placing the recent cooling in an equivalent context.
You may refer to the rate of cooling over a 10 year period instead, if you prefer. If this makes you feel more comfortable.
But I have no intensions of ever making anyone feel comfortable, I like to make you think. Robert, included.
JC I’ve tried this before but alas you just refuse to learn anything. Your “case” is resting on zip evidence, but I’ll try again.
Southern OZ has been drying out for at least 5,000 years and we are nearing the end of a 1,000 year dry period.
Please read the transcript and watch the video to see the EXTREME variation in rainfall over the last 5,000 years. The climate across southern OZ has had EXTREME changes over a very long time and we have been lucky to live at the wetter end over the last 100 years.
Even the IPCC thinks co2 impacts start after 1950 so what caused the EXTREME climate change over the previous 4,950 years?
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1848641.htm
Hi Jen. Very happy with the thread and some interesting stuff coming out. My reference was to distractions re mushrooms, mallee tendrils, Henry Lawson etc. I wasn’t having a sock…I mean a sook.
Jen, thx but it doesnt matter what i think sadly. Its getting the idiots in charge to think more critically that matters. I was merely throwing in my two bobs worth in the hope that it may make your point more believable and hence have more chance of changing behaviour.
I was not and do not doubt the integrity behind what you are doing. In my opinion we are now at a place where only the ignorant could still be rusted on to CAGW.
@ average climate and vegetation
it’s a convenient and lazy assumption by the uninformed that vegetation in general develops according to so called “average” climatic conditions.
Think about it. Survival of the fittest and all that… average has nothing to do with it.
Sorry Jaycee,
But this is rubbish:
“any mallee tree will not grow a metre or so outside a specific moisture zone when it gets TOO WET”
http://www.abc.net.au/gardening/stories/s1763882.htm
” Most mallees are slow growing, tough trees which originate from arid and semi arid regions. But they’re found from Tasmania to the Tropics and so are iconic Australian trees well worth a closer look.”
http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/17345e0a-40dc-4cae-97d3-e972c52c4ea7/files/vegfsheet-mvg14.pdf
” Mallee Woodlands and Shrublands are located in
the semi-arid areas of southern Australia in New
South Wales, north-western Victoria, southern
South Australia and southern Western Australia.
• Outliers in the Northern Territory, Queensland
and northern Western Australia refer mostly to
the growth form of pockets of individual trees
in places such as mountain tops, rather than
the typical extensive mallee plains of southern
Australia.
Just getting back to temp readings, my feeling is that rain and cloud have indeed been the big influences on lower max readings post Millennium Drought at eg Emerald Airport. My idea of a hot year is when you get okay cloud and rain across the period but still get very high temps, eg 1914 where I live. A cool year might be clear skies yet still with lower max readings.
How do you classify and quantify such real-world temps to turn them into useful numbers? Really, I don’t know. In our 107 year temp record there are no cooler years which are in the 10th percentile for rain, 1914 is the only markedly hot year with high rainfall (90th percentile for rain and max temp, so must have been awesome). That’s my problem with numbers. The case may be different elsewhere, but by the time you allow for cloud, rain, UHI, duration of max, old miscalculation and modern manipulation…whew.
Just getting back to temp readings. . .
We have been continuously lectured by our betters that the (alarming) trend is a rise in AVERAGE minima.
Jen has documented a trend in a decline in AVERAGE maxima.
Maybe we’re averaging towards AVERAGE?
Debbie
We had this summation
“An average property is the perception of an average economist”
Deb; I’m with JC on Malley zones, they are quite tight.
After growing many eucalypt specimens in odd places, I have to say Malleys arn’t much chop as wind breaks, soil recovery etc even though most including WA types can be grown as a garden specimen over wide areas of the country.
http://www.grdc.com.au/About-Us/~/media/A1DC77444CB44E2D9AAF16779C311EF8.jpg
Common White Mallee has perhaps the largest distribution but it’s arid region only. Plantation info for Mallee trees is hard to find except for some frustrated farmers who planted them for biofuel crops
http://bie.ala.org.au/species/Eucalyptus+dumosa#tab_gallery
Pat Michaels and Chip Knappenberger answers the Bolt question for the USA. The impact on temp rise will be less than 0.02c by 2100 and will have zip impact on climate at all. BIG SURPRISE, NOT.
But it will help to stuff up the USA energy grid and lose jobs and lower their standard of living, so I suppose the extremists will be happy.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/12/epa-leaves-out-the-most-vital-number-in-their-fact-sheet/#more-111352
Ian G; just had a look at your Casino BoM mean max temp graph and decided I can’t see anything worth debating as it gives no explanation for discontinuities or weak data from 1950 to 1990 other than the general statement re quality control etc.
More to the point though, it’s not raw station data to begin with and dare I say it, riddled with problems for beginners.
Jen; don’t miss quote me “you can’t trust any measurement” because I suggest all raw BoM station data pre say 1960 can be improved using post Geo Phys station info to help with all temp research from daily max min to yearly averages. But this is still a long way off for establishing trends.
I’m not about to review any of it in detail though cause my expertise is developed from strictly observing the continuous temp charts of yester year based on my intimate knowledge of all the gear in a control loop. What BoM or any similar organisation did with their old weather gear is most likely to remain an unfathomable mystery for ever.
And, Deb..I’m TELLING you, and bloody well for ONCE take the word of one who is right on top of the subject because he LIVES amongst the bloody stuff!..has measured, marked and meditated over the bloody stuff…; mallee is climate specific, moisture specific and position specific..and that includes the associated flora understory… there are places where you could almost draw a “pencil line” where the various species demark themselves…and the native fauna that has evolved in and with the mallee, from the lichen to the lizards..is area specific…sure, you can grow a selected few in selected conditions, why, there was a bloke once grew a couple of pine-apples over in the Barossa Valley…but hey!…I don’t see no industry from it!….and one or a dozen trees don’t a forest make…but there is always Bonsai..
Tell you what…no offence, but I won’t give you advice on how to grow crops if you won’t give me advice on how to observe mallee trees.
Listen..truly..sooner of later, we all have to seriously ask ourselves..; “Where do we go from here?”…this argy-bargy over temp’ recording and CO2. why and where-fors is but a blind alley…I don’t really know where most of the posters on this site live and work, but you , Deb, have said you are a farmer in the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area (MIA.)….I have heard you wax lyrical about “ski-ing on the river and how bloody good it looks”…sure, that post I put up the other day was an old post but the water-logging and the salinity are ongoing problems in that area…I know it, you know it..many who post here know it..just because we don’t say the actual words doesn’t mean it’s gone away…I know of the salinity problems in my area…I have gone as assistant to the person who does the water testing in special bores along sections of the Murray….I know the farmers problems with stock and salinity all around this area…my family grew up on the banks of the Murray…I speak to people all the time…showing me links to politico / environmental blogs doesn’t change the ppm. readings..it is still there and getting worse in most areas…
I read Jen’s posts on the myth and the Murray…I can see her points and good points too they are..except that to return the lower lakes to sea water status would deprive and destroy the farms and livelihood of thousands of people there…would you agree to a swap?..say…the lower lakes for the Leeton / Griffith irrigation area?…of course not…it is too late to turn back the clock…but by jiggers!…we DO have to start to seriously ask ourselves some questions….seriously!
You know, I find temp readings a real puzzle. Explain how Wedding Cake West on the harbour, while being a cooler location than nearby Observatory Hill, only reached 34.3 C on the notorious 18th of January 2013? It did manage a temp of 39.7 on the other hot day that month, when Observatory Hill reached 42.3. But how does Wedding Cake have a max which is 11.4 C cooler on the 18th? I noticed this oddity a long time ago, and there has been no change to the record. But the record is chock full of oddities as you prowl. Jerry’s Plain, though a long way away, has an old record, one which seems to echo much of what is in our Kempsey record, especially the heat in the second decade of the 20th century. Closer locations don’t at all.
Interesting questions, and I hope they are at least slightly on topic.
“Interesting questions, and I hope they are at least slightly on topic.”
I take your point, Robert…and it must be frustrating to have these posters come along with their little anecdotes that THEY seem to think are relevant to a “big picture” version of the topic, but in reality do and contribute nothing to those who would like to adhere to a more ‘professional’ interpretation of the complexities of the vagaries of temp’ readings between one site and another…
Well, Robert..the reason I don’t completely stay “on topic” is because it is so trite…you wonder why there is such varieties in readings from the same area ?…why the BOM. doesn’t use temp’ readings from before oh, what is it..; 1912 ? …well, to us “out here” …”on the ground”…”in the real world”…we know how and where and by whom those temps’ were taken back in those days…and believe me…they were so erratic they could not honestly be used until a more insulated and reliable siting was constructed…
A (another!) little anecdote from temp’ reading in my own family background..; My uncle out here in the mallee used to compare temps’ with his brother in the town (9kms.) nearby and he would always boast that while the town temp was so much, HIS was always a few degrees hotter…there was doubt that the numbers were being fiddled…so they decided to read at exact times on same days under ideal conditions….sure enough…the temps were still in favour of the uncle….until!…until he noticed (because of the change in reading times) that where he had the thermometer (under the back verandah) was just by chance, where the sun would, at a certain time of day, catch the reflection off his shaving mirror…and would by that chance, warm the thermometer just that little bit more…
Even these days, I have people saying how much hotter it is in THEIR shed..and you see they have their thermometer hanging on the galv’-iron western wall…so what can you say….I trust the BOM…you don’t …every arguement you put up, they put up another….yet..like Deb…I’m still picking mushrooms in the middle of winter…go figure!
Jaycee,
Once again I have no idea what you’re ranting at me about.
Not only is it not unusual to pick mushrooms here in a wet atumn/winter. . .mushrooms are grown commercially in this area.
We have species of Mallee here too. . .In the last 12 years they have survived everything from the millennium drought to an awesome flood in 2012. That’s what arid/semi arid species do. . .by their very nature they are exceptionally hardy.
They have also survived a century of irrigation.
The glass is half full Jaycee. . .no one however is arguing that everything is perfectly OK. . .there is plenty of room for improvement.
Luke, you and your mates should ask Chris Lilley if he’s interested in improving this overbaked “jaycee” character you’ve cooked up. By jiggers.
Deniliquin is another very old BoM site. Two things stand out there for me: the very high heat of the latter 1880s, as seen elsewhere (but not everywhere) and the sheer length of the 1939 January heatwave in Deniliquin. 45C on one day was the least of their worries. Doesn’t seem to be any hotter or cooler lately.
1914 was the driest of their years by far and it seems to be one of those southern places where drought was worse around WW1 and WW2 than in the Fed or Millennium Droughts.
Overall, it’s your typical Oz story of living with heat and drought…and sometimes dying. Hooray for irrigation, which enables those naughty rural people to actually do stuff.
Gavin
I understand where you’re coming from. I admit the data for the Casino AP manual station has many problems and that much data is missing.
My point is that the max temps appear to be cooling, not warming.
However, the AWS has been in operation since 1995. This site shows the following.
The average max mean from 1995 – 2003 is 25.91C.
The average max mean from 2004 – 2012 is 25.68C. (2013 annual average has not been posted as yet on the CDO.)
Therefore one could conclude that the max temps for Casino have cooled.
Very slight cooling by av max for a nine year period. It’s not a big deal, I dare say, but it seems a reasonable conclusion to me, Ian. Seems to be the only conclusion. Maybe a drier decade will change things the other way…but that hasn’t happened yet.
Anyone interested; I just made a reading of 12C by halving max-min sides of my old CSIRO weather U tube out back, Can I leave it to others to check on the 3pm Temp for Canberra airport and Tugeranong for tem uniformity over a wide area?
Temperature trends over the last decade are explained almost entirely by the ENSO pattern plus a dash of AGW. (The warming trend is small relative to the year to year fluctuations in temperature).
In eastern Australia in particular above average rain and below average temperatures are more likely when the SOI is unusual positive eg about +8, usually indicating La NIna. The opposite is true for El Niño. During 2010-11 the SOI was mostly well above +8.
Similarly for much of 2002-3-4 the SOI was below -7.
Over the last decade the trend in the SOI has been about +10. So of course a decreased rate of warming was inevitable.
You should all be ashamed.
Correction: Mistake above from a very hasty reading in the rain. At 3.15 it was 10C @Mcgregor
Gavin
Needs an automatic temperature correction algorithm then?
Cooling related to cloud and + SOI? Well I never! I just thought it just kinda sorta happened, like way back when pixies made the climate.
The shame, it sears.
Bazza, Not a “decreased rate of warming”, but rather cooling mate. Who said you were a statistician?
It has undoubtedly been stated many times in these threads on “trends” that the choice of the start and finish points strongly influences the determined (& often ‘hotly’ discussed) trend. It would be interesting therefore to choose slightly different start & end points to see how robust the trend under discussion actually is. I am also personally wary of trends based on only 10 points, although this pains me no end in the present discussion, as I doubt I will still be around when the more statistically robust 30 points are in hand. In the meantime, I’m content to let my sceptics eye remain focussed on the complete lack of correlation between rising CO2 levels and atmospheric temps. I’ve heard all the excuses but none of them convinces me in my dotage. [I hope this has been sufficiently ‘on topic’!]. Now with your forbearance I would like to make a quick comment on mallee in view of JC & Debbie’s side discussion. Red and white mallee (E. socialis and E. dumosa) are commonly found intermingled in the Mediterranean climates of SE Australia. Still they have some plasticity over the climatic range. But red mallee, for example, is only found in associations where free lime is present in the soil. By & large, if I was looking for a controlling feature determining dryland plant distributions within Australia’s semi arid/arid zones, I would be highlighting soil type before climatic factors.
Sorry about going off topic Jen but the rant by Jaycee needs addressing:
“sure, that post I put up the other day was an old post but the water-logging and the salinity are ongoing problems in that area…I know it, you know it..many who post here know it..just because we don’t say the actual words doesn’t mean it’s gone away…”
I’m perfectly OK with you deleting this and the comments that have caused it Jen, because they are definitely a distraction from the topic of this thread.
This is the post in question:
http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/2123/191/1/P6201-1205%28rajindercar%29.pdf
Titled:
Analysing the Benefits of Growing Crops after Rice
in the Rice Growing Areas in Australia
It is 12 years old and is essentially a CBA about double cropping on moisture which is something nearly every summer cropper (not just rice growers) has taken up since then and which does indeed return benefits and which has also probably contributed (among other improved management techniques since 2002) to a dramatic lessening of:
” threat from rising watertables, soil salinity and other environmental
consequences”
At least go for something a little more specific Jaycee and perhaps a little more modern, like the later CSIRO reports called ‘salt balance reports’ and some recent studies by DPI which have shown a steady decrease of the problem in the Murrumbidgee Valley due partly (but not only) to better management techniques.
Also, I am aware of the salt interception schemes in the Murray system. Are they not achieving any worthwhile results Jaycee?
And hasn’t the Murray recently had some pretty good flushes since the drought broke, both natural and from environmental flows via water held in storages by CEWH?
No improvement?
Its all rather like Harry Potter. Apart from our hero, young Harry, they cannot bring themselves to even say the name of the evil one (Lord Voldemort). They are all too scared of the implications of ever mentioning that word.
So with temperatures, they are afraid to say the C-word. They cower in the shadows and call it the “hiatus”. If they utter the C-word, terrible things will surely happen. Governments will be overthrown and the masses will be liberated enlightened.
Well, I’m just a cool koala, and, like Harry I am not afraid.
COOLING!
After Jaycee on mallee one might ought to go back and scrutenise Jaycee on comodities with a very intense scrute
Yes of course Bill Borrows,
In this part of the MDB, the magic line that separates mallee on one side from species like Boree or swamp box or ironbark on the other is far more related to soil types and old water courses than anything else.
Bloody auto correct! Sorry Bill BURROWS!
Deb…yes, I did read something along the lines of “salt interception”, and good on them…desperate times call for desperate action…and I for one say ; good on them in the MIA. if they can improve the problems..that is what we all aspire to do..and yes, I agree it is a bit off-topic…which is why I have withdrawn from the discussion somewhat….and yes we here at the bottom of the system have other saline problems to contend with..but again..I won’t go into them here anymore….let the show go on!
Ps. ….Another Ian…I wouldn’t go taking on something you can’t handle, if I were you….your “clunky” threats and insinuations reek of the thing Cicero once called…: “…full of tinsel and bombast, thoroughly vulgar and affected…; ‘ Anyone who knows Hegesias, (he continues) knows what silliness is !’….
Go in peace.
@jc
As always, the pretentious would be intellectuals get caught out because they can’t help themselves and go overboard.
If you only had mentioned Cicero and left it at that you’d given us the impression of a learned man.
Quoting Wiki in full rather spoiled the effect.
Pity.
In case someone missed it my point re ACT temp readings between 3-3.30 pm today were the same for 3 sites including mine.
However let me indulge in this off topic tree diversion for a mo. All eucalypts are best seen as soil indicators in their normal habitat. Understanding their root system and its development in competition with like kind and other local trees or scrub at different stages is essential
Another chunky stem specimen worth watching for variation in this part of SE Australia is snow gum or White Sally as it occurs in many poor soil areas. However it often fails in street plantings around the ACT and presumably elsewhere at about the same frequency as NH Silver Birch or Green Spruce during our dry spells. It so happens my 40yo Atlas Cedar will outlive them all with it’s massive root base and deep needle active ground cover.
Perhaps the most important climate signal can be found in the vastly reduced Alpine Ash forests in most of its natural habitat through our high country. Although it’s restricted to snow line altitudes and it depends on big falls to germinate, recent mega fires have done more cause extinction of all such forests than the steady temperature rise. Scientific observation finds other continental high altitude forests in similar peril. This is a flash point now in the study of global weather patterns
You have to ask yourself how the climatariat would yell if the following temps occurred in succession at Sydney Obs: 39.4, 41.1, 42.4, 39.7. At Sydney Airport, also by the water: 39.9, 42.2, 43.0, 41.2. There is no dispute about these measurements.
We talk of the big heats of 1939 and 2013, but these were not nearly as sustained as Sydney’s longest heatwave, in Jan 1960, also the “Oodnadatta” month. Nobody called it an Angry Summer etc. In fact, the Sydney event tends to be forgotten, but not by me. I was cooking eggs on the path and watching the tar liquefy. Fortunately we lived on a hill overlooking Kogarah Bay and had the Carss Park baths. Others did it tougher and some died.
If a similar heatwave occurred again (there’s been nothing really comparable in Sydney before or since), my suspicion is that it would be used as convincing proof of global warming etc. The alarmists would not be able to resist. Think they would be rational and balanced in the event? If the answer is no, then we have an activist problem, not a climate problem, because nobody rational would deliberately overlook such compelling information. They love the heat and the extreme…but they hate the date.
Jonathan….” you silly boy”…only your types go to wiki for knowledge and verification….I use the primary sources…..now go back to sleep, Rip Van Wilkie !
@jc
Funny you should say that jc, life is stranger than fiction, I came across this quote only recently that’s why it caught my attention.
But I agree with you on one thing though, It would never in a million years occur to me to use this quote as a rebuttal to a trivial post. Only a pretentious twit would.
Talk about using a sledge hammer to crack a nut.
Robert; one observation does not give us the trend. See this indipendent review SMH Jan 2013
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/exceptional-heatwave-challenges-records-
20130108-2cdn9.html
Heat waves and mega bushfires are increasingly common from about the 1960’s over wide areas of southern Australia.
Gavin,
We won’t be able to manage bushfires by arguing about poompteenths of degrees in national or state mean temps.
Bushfires are caused by such things as poor management of fuel loads, by arsonists, by infrastructure, by accident and also by abberations in local weather conditions such as lightning strikes or whirlwind.
To appropriate a trend on a mere handful of data points is at best clumsy. The dynamics of climate change can easily be observed by one and all from our visual experience though and the melting of tared roads, frying eggs on the pavement etc are a good start.
Although I claim to be an experienced smoke watcher, it was the devastation observed immediately after the notorious 1967 Hobart fires on a calm sunny but ever so silent morning that had the greatest impact.
Dr Phil Cheney CSIRO fire expert concluded it was embers from the mountains that burnt the suburbs, but I had a different theory and it was the flashy fuel within the urban fringe that accelerated the fire fronts.
I would often refer to another direct observation on this point though, the Lara fire in Victoria flashed across a virtually treeless plain from the You Yangs to the sea in a matter of hours. These essentially ground fires can run at the speed of the wind in continuous dry crops.
The mega fire event has other easily observed characteristics, standing dead tree stems with their heads stripped to their core, entirely flattened forests in some runs, exposed stump and root mass where top soil became fuel in extreme temperatures and an absolute lack of tall seed trees over wide areas.
It’s unusual when overlapping mega wild fire events don’t wipe out the forest regeneration entirely before its seed maturity stage leaving all slopes exposed to rapid soil degradation.
Gav OZ needs at least an extra 20% increase in off season burning. BTW wild fires have not increased in the USA over the last 100 years.
And this is probably the case in OZ as well.
Like many of your posts you seem to invest more in wishful thinking than plain common sense and clear evidence.
On another topic it looks like that donkey Plibersek and her left journo luvvies and supporters couldn’t have been more wrong about Abbott’s highly successful overseas trip.
She and they made their earlier mad forecasts but now have egg streaming down their faces. Once again all the evidence shows that these donkeys are the true embarrassment to OZ not TA.
In fact they couldn’t have been more wrong and the Obama meeting was very successful and friendly.
Silly Bill McKibben at 350 dot org gets it completely wrong AGAIN. Unbelievable.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/13/350-org-cant-connect-consecutive-years-much-less-connect-the-dots/#more-111417
This link shows that there was a decrease of 4+% in cloudiness over the USA in the last 30 years.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2014/06/new-paper-finds-significant-decrease-in.html
Even an decrease of 1 to 2% would easily account for any warming in the USA since 1980 without reference to any additional co2 increases
“They love the heat and the extreme…. but they hate the date.”
Love your work Robert, you are a gem!
You’ll note how gav came back at my last post by informing that the events mentioned did not show “the trend”. There is always this assumption that there is a trend – and guess who knows what it is. Gav then proceeds to cook up his trend, something to do with increasing mega bushfires and heatwaves post 1960. Still in doubt? He helps us find the Sydney Morning Herald…a dreary leftist rag renowned for stunts and manipulation.
We’re called Australia. Our biggest fire (and the world’s biggest known fire) occurred in Vic in 1851. But I wouldn’t look for any down trends there, since we’ve had fire catastrophes in 1939, 1967, 1983 and 2009 – just to name a few of the worst – and we’ve had a lot of regrowth since the big rains of a few years ago. Look out, not for trends but for big fires. 2009 is proof of the simple fact that the worst still happens.
Heatwaves in Australia have been our most lethal natural disasters. The official death tolls from our two worst natural disasters are from the heats of 1896 and 1939. The next highest death toll from a natural disaster was Cyclone Mahina of 1899. But the toll from 2009’s heat is right up there.
There may well have been an upward trend in temps post the 1970s. Wouldn’t surprise me. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s been a pause in that trend. Really, I don’t expect climate to stay the same ever. A short ten thousand years ago you could have walked from Melbourne to Tassie. That should tell you all you need to know about “trends”.
This nation was born in the awful heat and drought of the early 1790s, monsoonal failure on a huge scale which also devastated India. Jen has made a posting which simply tries to point out that there MAY have been a very slight cooling of NE Oz since the Millennium drought and that it is worth examining. So examine. Sure there may be cloud and La Nina involved in cooling. Isn’t that usually the case? Hasn’t there also been drought in Qld and inland NSW during this possible cooling? Where’s the harm in mentioning and examining a bit of a down trend in temps over nine or so years? And WHY the distraction blizzard?
All I can say is that if trends didn’t end we’d all be baking from the trend of the 1790s or drowning from the trend of the 1950s.
But trends end. Duh.
Yes, well said again Robert.
Gavin now seems to be conflating trends, cycles, cause & effect and bouncing between daily local temp readings in the ACT and national averaging for SE Aus and bushfires (with an added personal theory)
Gavin.
Can I suggest you re-read Bill’s post 6:07 June 13 and ponder just a little on the elephant in the room?
Robert….it is not “good form” to call for others here to support your sarcastic remarks to Gavin’s legitimate post…..and I have to back Gavin up on this one , although it is still “off-topic”…but since it is the “conversation” at the moment…
Just because a fire isn’t lethal in lives lost, does not mean it wasn’t part of a rising temp’ trend…last summer, here (Jan 17th) on the eastern Adelaide hills we had a ripper of a grass fire, swept all before it…incl’ dozens of cfs. units and water bombers…for more than thirty klms. …from highway to highway..non stop….we didn’t evacuate but only for a change of wind direction…and I was busy fighting a deliberately lit fire in the mallee nearby….it was an interesting observation of fire behaviour…after more than a week of searing temps hovering and exceeding 40 deg. the ground and litter or grass was tinder – dry and as hot as hades…so when you swatted the fire out, it almost immediately sprung back into life!….it was the ground, you see…it was so bloody hot there was almost spontaneous combustion with the litter…I’m, not saying that fire would combust by itself, but with the wind and sparks and extreme heat..(I have never felt it so hot!) there was little hope of extinguishing the fire….now..if the ripe crops were still on the paddocks ??…
But it was the heat from that record spell of high temp’ that caused most of the damage.
Ole Humlum co authored this 2012 study that finds a correlation between the sun and temp over many cycles.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364682612000417
They think there may be a 1c temp drop in certain locations by 2020.
Another so called Nobel prize that suffered from delusional overkill. But I suppose ya gotta laugh at these pompous twits.
http://joannenova.com.au/2014/06/curtin-university-sacred-mural-vanishes-the-nobel-that-wasnt-is-gone/#more-35933
Luke, if you want to talk to me talk to me. I won’t be talking to your sock.
Gav, reading back, I find I was very sharp with you in my remarks. I apologise. When you mention the deplorable ABC and Fairfax press it tends to set me off, but that’s no excuse for my harshness, since I know you have been unwell. Of course, I’ll continue to return serve very hard around here.
Now this is a bit of a problem on this site…I do believe many “residents” here take “familiar” advantage of Jennifer’s hospitality and patience….there seems to be a presumption (as we witnessed on the last post of Cate Stuart’s ) that as soon as there is a degree of disagreement, the insults must accompany the sarcasm!….it is vulgar and it is rude…not only to the other poster, but also to “mine host”.
I am not “Luke” Robert…Jennifer can confirm that…and what Gavin posted and I concurred to back up with my humble effort, ought to deserve at least some dignity of consideration…if not out of respect to myself, then at least to concede..rightfully..a degree of gravitas to Ms. Marohasy’s site.
Now…if we may continue…?
I have a feeling that Jaycee’s last 2 posts would be a rather good example of what I believe is commonly known as “tone trolling” ??????
🙂 🙂 🙂
No offence Jaycee, but Jen is more than capable of moderating comments at her own blog (as she did indeed do at the beginning of this particular thread) and she is also pretty good at employing sarcasm when she chooses to.
Mr Koala wasn’t bad either.
Luke, I’ll just specify that I won’t be talking to your sock regardless of who in your group is making the entry and from which IP address it comes.
You have to ask why there has been such a blizzard of distraction on this thread. We’re now getting into faux indignation and pathos (remind you of anyone?). What next? We shot Bambi?
Somebody does not want us discussing the slightest possibility of some very slight cooling in NE Oz, or anything about temps which runs counter to the faith. To be fair to bazza, he at least spoke to the point, even if he ended by telling us to be ashamed.
Why so nervous? I don’t even care about warming or pausing or cooling. What’s the big deal? Jen and Abbot find quite a bit of cooling in Qld in the last twelve years? I find that interesting because there has been longish drought as well as plenty of rain and cloud in that period. Why is it so urgent to distract from that?
” I have a feeling that Jaycee’s last 2 posts would be a rather good example of what I believe is commonly known as “tone trolling” ?????? ”
Well !!….Let’s just cross Leeton of the list of “friendly places to visit” next time we take the “Winnebago” out for a run..!
It’s a friendly place Jaycee,
Just as most country towns are.
Still got zip to do with the topic of this thread.
What about that cooling trend in the mean max figs that Jen has put up for discussion?
North Eastern Oz is a big place. I often wonder how so many thermometers were all making the same mistake for eg a year like 1915. It was the hottest in the record here on the midcoast of NSW and it was the second hottest in Longreach Qld (behind 1942). It was the hottest in Hughenden Qld and the second hottest in Jerry’s Plain NSW (behind 1940). That’s a lot of simultaneous error over a wide area, particularly where surrounding years don’t show similar abnormality (though in the case of where I live now 1915 was part of a standout decadal warming). I’m not trying to point at any neat patterns here. Grafton had its long run of hot years between 1928 and 1940, and what a run it was!
Here’s the thing: if trends didn’t end, my area would be an inferno based on temps between 1910 and 1919. All Australia would be rainless based on continental trend of the 1930s. So why should a cooling NOT occur in Qld post Millennium drought? Why so shy of a subject which is just pointing out such a modest set of facts?
Deb’…Robert …quite right, quite right…let’s draw breath for a moments reflection with this song… to gather our thoughts and then ; “once more into the fray my friends…”
Polar bears are probably one of the best known yarns of the CAGW iconography. Dr Susan Crockford now estimates PB numbers could be as high as 27,000 to 32,000, much higher than they were 40 years ago.
http://www.thegwpf.org/why-polar-bears-are-doing-better-than-you-think/ Of course PBs survived the Eemian IG when temps were up to 8c higher in the arctic areas than today. And the early Hol climate optimum had much higher temps than today as well. PBs also had a hard time in the Beaufort sea area 20 years ago because the ice was too thick.
I bet Minister Hunt cant wait to tell Antoine A about the cooling as AA tells him about his new friends in Canada and Texas and his new hat – hope it still fits. The good news is that Direct Action is fully reversible and they have already planned to reward the big emitters. They will now be entitled to more to compensate for that solar maximum. They could fund that by cutting the Carers Allowance for a start. That would show they are caring for the economy instead.
We will have to guess if the trend is the same for minimum temps and we will have to guess about all the missing stations which did not fit the story. Those outliers are best discarded. Then again the preliminary analysis shows cooling is spreading south maybe on the wings of the fruit fly.
This analysis of short term trends ignoring ENSO is a joke.
Nev; I googled your BTW “wild fires have not increased in the USA over the last 100 years” and came up with plenty of recent articles to the contary. Take “not” out then google again folks and look for comments from long tim residents
“And this is probably the case in OZ as well”
Go and watch the recent ABC Catalyst program on mega fires. but I doubt you can absorb any of it, nor can several others here.
Robert: My past includes a fair amount of experience in controlled combustion of various fuels including organic liquid waste at extreme pressures in a process known as wet combustion, but I had the monitoring of many draft controlled furnaces at my fingertips for a greater number of years. If you think your knowledge exceeds mine on the question of routine measurements made in air around ambient conditions then show your cards and sources without calling on mere rhetoric like our Nev here.
You can chew my ear 6254 4408
BTW I gave up on Deb way back
This for the interest of Gavin and Debbie…on mallee tree germination problems (in the natural state).
Below are temperature measurements, taken by identical mercury thermometers, both inserted 25mm. into the soil, 500mm apart. One under loose leaf litter, the other in bare soil.
I did the testing because there was a problem in understanding why mallee trees were not germinating outside the line of mallee trees in the redundant, bare-ground farm soil. I did the test over seven days (on the days I was there working.hence the date gaps) in the middle of winter , 2013.
June 27th…high frost – sunny day…….am. noon.
mulch………9deg 11deg.
bare soil……3deg 15deg.
” 28th….cloudy……………….m……..9. 10.
b-soil…..7 13.
July 2nd..cloudy……………….m……..9. 14
b-soil…..9. 14.
” 4th……sunny……………….m……..8. 15.
b-soil….9 16.
” 6th…..frost-sunny………..m………6 11.
b-soil…..3 16.
” 12th……foggy/cloud………m………9 11.
b-soil…..9 15.
” 13th….sun/cloud………….m………11 13.
b-soil……10 17.
What stands out is the rather large vairable from the min’ to the max’ in the bare soil tests…and also note the comparative stable temp’ in the littered test. It is this variability, I believe, that affects the germination and survival of the mallee seedlings. And if you notice that under the mallee trees in a natural state, there is understory that serves as a coolant for the soil.
So there you are..no links, no “experts”, just the humble thermometer and observation. So those sudden heatwaves and then the frosty nights on that overgrazed, barren soil exacerbates the problem of regrowth…..Go ask a biologist, they’ll tell you of the survival rates of spores and bacteria in greatly varying temps’.
While I agree that soil variation will alter the trunk structure of the mallee, I am of the opinion that climate variation plays a large part in recovery after fire.
Apologies for being off topic Jennifer but these guys have drifted into my patch:
Gavin & Neville
The paper you need is Tilman et al. (2000) Ecology (10) pp 2680-2685 (see Fig 1 p. 2681). Go to:
81http://cedarcreek.umn.edu/biblio/fulltext/t1769.pdf
Yes, similar inferences can be drawn for Australia by looking at signals in the biochemistry of long lived grass tree trunks in SW Western Australia. Modern fire incidence in the north is indicated by comparing the satellite fire record for north west and the more closely settled north east of the continent. As a consequence of this reduction in fire incidence (compared with that under the previous indigenous management) we have favoured the build-up of woody plant populations in areas not subject to clearing. Hence rainforest is actively invading wet sclerophyll forest in Queensland’s wet tropics, tea trees are actively invading grassland in Cape York plains, and brigalow and gidgee (Acacia spp.) actively invaded Mitchell and Queensland bluegrass grasslands in Central Queensland. In southern Queensland we have the disappearing grassy balds of the Bunya Mtns and the convincing evidence that mulga and a large assortment of woody weeds have thickened up in ‘intact’ woodlands in Queensland’s south west – which was the subject of discussion in the recent Cate Stuart thread. I covered evidence for much of this observed thickening in our intact forests and woodlands in a talk given in 2005 (see: http://www.propertyrightsaustralia.org/speeches/bill-burrows-pra-rally-2005). There are of course many learned tomes on this subject as well. See, for example, Bill Gammage,s (2011)”The Biggest Estate on Earth – How Aborigines Made Australia” which was discussed in one of Jennifer’s earlier threads addressing this subject matter.
Gav the evidence shows that the no of wildfires in the USA has dropped since 1960 and markedly since 1982.
And if we reduced fuel by better off season burning we wouldn’t have as many big fires to contend with anyway. So it’s pretty simple, there are not nearly as many fires today in the USA and more fuel reduction burning will help to reduce this even more.
http://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/fireInfo_stats_totalFires.html
How the super rich tackle CAGW. http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/how_dicaprio_fights_global_warming/
These dummies have the carbon footprint of a thousand bigfoots. But Gav , JC and bazza will be suitably impressed.
Apologies for going off on a (thread) tangent again Jennifer.
Jaycee – You have strayed into my patch too. I studied nutrient cycling in a mallee community near Rankins Springs in the early 1970’s. What struck me then was the enormous seedling swarm of mallee plants that appeared during those well above average rainfall years. But equally surprising was the speed with which these seedlings vanished, even when there was no soil moisture deficiency. It turns out that the seedlings (hint the cotyledons look nothing like a eucalypt leaf) were being knocked off by two infectious root rot fungi – Ceuthospora innumera and Piggotia substellata – which are well known to also cause the death of seedlings of Mountain Ash (E. regnans). Smart eucalypts have learnt to normally open their seed capsules with the help of fire, which usually leads to a “sterile” seedbed beneath the canopy as well. Smarter eucalypts have seedlings resistant to root rot fungi. Of course mallee get around the seedling survival problem by possessing an extremely long lived lignotuber, which can regenerate profusely even after the canopy is completely removed by fire or mechanical means.
For Gavin & Neville
Just saw that my hyperlink to the Tillman et al. (2000) reference at 7:27 pm 14th June copied incorrectly. It should be: http://cedarcreek.umn.edu/biblio/fulltext/t1769.pdf
Bill Burrows…that is interesting about those mallee seedlings….I have a small copse of mature mallee trees here on the property that were surrounded by cultivated land….the previous owners (of which I am very familiar) stopped cropping the land back in the 1940’s when the horse era ended…he didn’t think it was worth the cost to “tool – up” to tractors….so the area around that copse hasn’t been touched for over sixty years….yet not one…that’s ..: not one mallee seedling or the remains of one mallee seedling has grown outside that copse to this day.
One thing that may be infuencing that situation just may reflect on your above comment about the “sterile seed bed”…and that is ; “non – wetting soil” that is prevalent under the mallee trees of this area…I found by experiment, that when one uses a watering can and drizzles water out from the bole to the edge of the leaf -canopy there is non – wetting soil…but almost as soon as one goes outside the mallee canopy, the ground absorbs the water….whether that is one method of natural seeding propagation…?
What do you think?
Gavin
Find a worse fire in the USA than this one.
1871
Oct. 8–14, Peshtigo, Wis: over 1,500 lives lost and 3.8 million acres burned in nation’s worst forest fire.
It’s a bit like the way we have forgotten the 1851 fire in Victoria – 5 million hectares (25% of Victoria) was burnt. Only 12 people were recorded died in the outbreak – but there were only 50,000 people at the time.
I would also be interested in what Bill thinks of these comment of yours Jaycee:
“So those sudden heatwaves and then the frosty nights on that overgrazed, barren soil exacerbates the problem of regrowth”
and:
” While I agree that soil variation will alter the trunk structure of the mallee, I am of the opinion that climate variation plays a large part in recovery after fire.”
Rankin Springs is not far from here. . .and mallee still grows there.
Even though it’s not far from here the soils types are quite different. Boree prefers the heavy dark clay soils here. This is an old Mirrool flood plain area so there are also many other species of eucalypts in the lower lying areas and lots of native wattle and native pine on the surrounding hills and ridges, and of course to the south is the ‘bidgee so the river red gums are prolific there.
Over the last 12 years, as mentioned before, the weather/climate has done everything from a millennium drought to an awesome flood in March 2012. Out in the semi arid areas temps range from below freezing to well above 40 degrees in a 12 month period. Often the max or the min temps can differ greatly in just the space of one day. That’s normal for our part of the world.
Why can’t you guys find decent fire v weather info for our blog debates re modern climate trends?
The internet is now rich in solid science so don’t bother me with any self selected single events from distant times when none of us even had grand parents close to the action.
http://www.predictiveservices.nifc.gov/intelligence/2013_Statssumm/annual_report_2013.pdf
BTW Alpine Ash is Eucalyptus delegatensis and its natural habitat is above 3000′. Forest recovery after wild fire or harvesting operations is therefore tricky. I keep in touch with changing outlooks re management via these experienced and published researchers.
http://www.bushfirecrc.com/sites/default/files/managed/resource/38_tina_bell.pdf
It’s fine to say you are not interested in past events and conditions, or that not enough can be known about such things. It’s fine …so long as don’t then proceed to talk of things being “worse”, “hotter”, “more intense” or “more frequent” than those past eras, events and conditions you claim to have no interest in or to know nothing about. To make comparisons without allowing points of comparison is one of the main fiddles of alarmists. It’s a pure stunt. And one more stunt on this thread we do not need.
Black Thursday 1851 is real and enormous and undeniable. So too Chicago/Peshtigo (and the other infernos on that very same mid-autumn day in 1871). Real, enormous and undeniable. We need to talk about them more. Just as we need more not less discussion of the Great Texas Drought of the 1950s and those mega-droughts which afflicted the American West in quite recent centuries but long before anyone burnt coal to turn a turbine. We need much, much more talk of the past and the great climatic events of the past. We are all wasting our time talking about climate without talking about it in the long term. There is no short climate.
The climatariat hate the past and knowledge of the past. Repressing or trivialising or minimising the past is their single most common resort, because they know history is their enemy. It drives ’em wild.
Well, they finally got me off topic…but not as far as they hoped.
Well they finally admit that climate models don’t work, so they now pin all their hopes on SLR. Problem is that numerous recent SL studies show a deceleration or little difference in rates of SLR before and after 1950.
And the recent 2014 world glacier study shows a slowing of glacier retreat after 1950. So everything they’ve been telling us for decades suddenly doesn’t add up? Just a pity about those 100s of billions $ wasted just to feed their delusional fantasy.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/14/stunning-admission-and-a-new-excuse-for-the-pause-lousy-data/#more-111440
Dr David Evans has been working on a new solar climate model and time will tell whether this is breakthrough or not.
http://joannenova.com.au/2014/06/big-news-part-i-historic-development-new-solar-climate-model-coming/#comments
Robert; making comparisons based on physics, engineering, electrical theory, remote sensing, scientific research and investigation of the appropriate literature is my speciality. Your only problem is I could be out of date in my retirement and the next gen of data miners have moved on. Ask me about that off blog.
Nev; my opening comment at the beginning of this thread was
“It won’t fly Jen and that’s a pity.
As a paper Table 1 is unsupported either from within your arguments or outside your arguments and it appears in going for max trends you have incorporated peak markers not temperatures from the old weather records, a fundamental trap in your methodology”
There was more but it was all clipped in haste by our host. Subsequent investigation tells me it’s bogged down but I tried the direct approach first and that’s about who I am, up front in these matters and ever the facilitator.
By swinging round to E. deligatensis or Alpine Ash, I gave you perhaps the most important climate signature species on the continent. However gauging its current forest health by occurrence on maps in three states and the ACT is another trap because it’s been vigorously cut over or completely burnt out over the past decade or two. In fact a recent Tasmanian Government Forestry publication shows they willingly remove all unsound i.e. old growth trees in harvesting operations to enhance total wood production. Given the same consultants work through other states, a rapid decline of the species may go unnoticed however this is where modern remote sensing techniques will uncover the problem of outdated blinkered assessments.
Gavin
This statement covers only US fires but may be of interest as to historical facts.
http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=3d0636c4-7ecd-44be-95aa-84973e50b7dd
I was out yesterday photographing that very stretch of mallee that was thouroughly burnt out almost six months to the day last Jan. …I photo’d it a couple of days after the fire and then three months (after a VERY SOLID rainfall in Feb’.) later and then just yesterday…growth around the base ; yes..but I wouldn’t say “vigorous”…good, healthy but not “vigorous…understory in the mallee tree’d area….nearly negative….outside in an area that was “worked” Many , many years ago…the dodonoea (sp ?)..shrub regrowth have completely recovered, along with small ground cover there…..there are signs of acacia where there was no tree before.
Thanks for that info Ian, his testimony just backs up the GOVT numbers on USA wildfires that I linked to above.
Nearly all the mega fires occurred in the so called cooling period and have an almost negative correlation to increases in co2. To be sure the 19th century and earlier 20th century was a terrible period for USA wildfires.
More reasons to vote for the Coalition govt or AT LEAST preference them well before the clueless Labor and Green parties.
So called renewable energy is a super expensive, unreliable load of BS. Just ask Germany and the EU countries busily building new brown coal fired power stns.
If it was viable they would just keep building even more of the solar and wind garbage to service their needs.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/solar_promise_fried/
Gavin – Sorry to have provided you with sources of fire history data that obviously conflict with your belief system. It seems that the only ‘decent’ knowledge you have pertains to the present. That is a twist for oldtimers like us, who usually remember past events better than today’s! Anyway Robert has done an excellent job in giving you an historical perspective. And do read Ian George’s source as well. It reinforces the Tilman et al. reference I provided upthread. Apart from Bill Gammage’s book, also referred to earlier, also make the effort to read Steven Pyne’s (1991) Burning Bush – A fire history of Australia – if you are going to continue to comment on the ecology of Australia’s vegetation.
Nevertheless, I’m encouraged by your claim that “investigation of the appropriate literature is my specialty”. I’m sure then, that with the insights you will obtain by reading the cited references, you will conclude like me that it is imposed management, rather than weather, that has contributed most to the structure and composition of most present day woodlands and forests.
Finally, when you correct me on matters botanical read the actual text rather than what you want to see. I was not referring to E. delegatensis, but E. regnans as I clearly stated. The latter’s common name is Mountain Ash not Alpine Ash as you misspoke. Another clear reminder of the errors common to those who rely on common names to describe species.
I’ll have to intercede her , gavin, on behalf of us “amateurs” who, while we have minimal “scientific cred”, do have eyes and ears and are observant of the environment around us…I have scribbled on the ” clash of cultures” between the “collegiate and the fellowship ” when posting on climatic and environmental observations in my field of interest…read on if you please !
I have been to several environmental themed workshops this last couple of weeks and I have noticed there is a pattern of procedure at each of them.
It works like this…:
You have the speaker / expert and you have the audience. The speaker comes to talk armed with research notes , topic-cred’ and a kind of bestowed authority. The audience consists largely of a group of lay-amateur environmentalists, strangers to each other who attend out of interest or for social connectivity. Some have collected “on-the-ground” statistics and anecdotal evidence.
So when these two disparate groups meet, there is a kind of “disconnect” rather than a “connect” of interest. The clash between the “collegiate” of professionals who have difficulty accepting any “on ground” evidence without acceptable research backing….and fair enough. On the other hand you have the lay-people who have witnessed with their own eyes, certain events which are in contradiction to some accepted orthodoxy….so a conflict of interpretation exists between the “collegiate” of insiders and the “fellowship” of observers.
Usually, the lay people give ground out of respect to the credentials of the experts….but still retain a degree of suspicion that lays dormant till more convincing evidence is forthcoming….after all, one has to believe what one sees with one’s own eyes! Now this, is the moment where a degree of foresight could best be implemented. Foresight to forestall any doubting and disconnect between the parties, because as much as one or the other resents it, each is wedded to the other by necessity…a) the “volunteers” out of a desire to gain knowledge with little cost but maximum benefit to themselves and b) the collegiate out of the need to access, justify and prove the requirements of important research grants.
There is a problem arising here with a lack of sympathy on both sides of the “fence”..with the “collegiate”, there is a degree of impatience with what could be seen as time wasting listening to and collecting unscientific and unstructured data that is of little or no use in research or field work. With the “fellowship”of amateurs, there is little understanding of the oversight of the direction, policy and funding of the professionals. That there is a strata of management above the collegiate that has performance-based criteria that they are expected to meet and funding reports expected to be written.
So in essence , there are three strata of persons in the “game”…Higher management..The professional and.The lay-person. The professional is a little like the meat in the sandwich, with demands from above and below. A difficult situation indeed! However, at least they have some power to control procedure within the parameters of research and can have some freedom of movement within certain guidelines. The lay-person is at the mercy of their own intellectual and skills base and with something new to their experience like environmental monitoring, it can become a bridge too far! This is why they attend workshops, to glean some more nous in their observations…to try and target more accurately their subjects. In this there is huge respect for the credentials and authority of the “collegiate”. They are seen as a font of knowledge.
Perhaps there could be more socialising BEFORE a workshop to help the shy or the doubtful get to know more of the intentions and interests of others also in attendance, perhaps breaking into small groups of strangers to each other so as to break the ice and introduce each other. After all, one thing is for certain…all are there for the same reason..; to protect and enhance the environment.
Judith Curry looks at Melbourne’s “fat tail” and Gile’s “snub nose” temperature response due the geographic position of both. One coastal and the other desert.
http://judithcurry.com/2014/06/10/how-extreme-can-it-get/#more-15813
Et tu….Bill Burrows..?
So Gavin has thrown in his original comment that
“it won’t fly”
I ask what in particular is the ‘it’ that Gavin claims ‘won’t fly’ ?
Gavin seems to want to say that it’s the methodology that Jen and Abbot have used?
I can’t see any problem with the methodology Gavin. . .it’s clearly outlined what they have done and they have maintained that methodology for the entire outlined timeframe and Jen summarises the conclusion for the purpose of this particular letter to Minister Hunt thus:
” Considering the data from the late 1800s until 1960, a cooling trend is evident, followed by warming between 1960 and 2001. In contrast, the last 12 years show quite dramatic cooling, Table 1. All three periods have occurred while greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, have been increasing in concentration in the atmosphere. ”
and the question to the minister is this:
” I ask you as the Minister ultimately responsible for the activities of the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, to consider how you might reconcile increasing atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide with a falling temperature trend . . .”
So. . .considering what is in the actual letter. . .perhaps the ‘it’ is not the methodology after all but the fact that Jen and Abbot point out that there is not an observable strong causal link between CO2 and statistical trends in Max temperature?
And while we’re being side tracked by trees. . .
Have you ever considered what the majority of trees in the various tree communities around the world would argue for if they had a political voice?
More CO2 or less CO2 in the atmosphere?
“Et tu – Bill Burrows?” Well I don’t know Jaycee. If I have a weakness in blogging it may be in trying to only comment on subjects I know something about. It probably comes from being enrolled in “school” for c. 30 years all up (you could say I was a slow learner!). Then there are 2 gongs I am most proud of – being a recipient of a Cattleman’s Union Research Medal and being told by a group of landholders who kept inviting me back to address them on my grazing industry research that they did so because I spoke “Brahman” (this is northern Australia bush vernacular). The latter reminded me that despite my time in school I had not strayed too far from my “prickle farm” roots – and I am really chuffed that that was the perception of others too. Hope that is enough insight for you Jaycee.
” And while we’re being side tracked by trees. . .”
Well..we’re not really being “sidetracked by trees” Deb…because if you look into the precis’ement of Jen’s letter, she puts in a “aha!” clause..ie ; “…how you might reconcile…etc.”…meaning ; ” so what’s the deal with the discrepancy?”
Well…we can see that Jen and others here quote numbers and links to prove their argument, we “lay- folk” who sit under the trees are scratching our heads and wondering ..; why, if there is a cooling and not a warming, are my plants burning off at the tips rather than the roots when the hot nth’ly winds get blowing?….why am I carting more water to the stock?….why are my bore aquifers drying out?…yet Jen’s data would suggest the opposite!
Consider this moot point….at the end of a military battle, there are less bullets being fired, but those that are may be from snipers and better targeted…ergo ; less bullets../ ..more percentage causalities….If you recall a couple of years ago, a huge storm swept through the sth east of S.A. and through southern Vic. causing almost 25% crop loss…..in the one storm!!….this is the problem with climate change…there is less consistent and predictable weather and more one-off highly damaging storms…Why just yesterday, an intense low pressure system swept across Eyre Peninsula and Cummings got a god awful amount of rain so that it flooded!…yet the BOM (as much as I was watching the weather reports) was caught somewhat napping…but this is now the norm for storms…you see those flashes of dark red suddenly appear on the radar maps like someone turning a blowtorch on and off all over the place in a storm…erratic, but terrible!
Yes good for you Bill!
And Rick Colless NSW MLC and ex DPI with experience not dissimilar to yours has recently commented rather similarly in parliament. . .and used the term ‘the tree police’ if I remember correctly?
It can be found here:
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Prod/Parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LC20131112047?open&refNavID=HA8_1
Jaycee?
Seriously?
” !!….this is the problem with climate change…there is less consistent and predictable weather and more one-off highly damaging storms…”
Even if you could prove that assertion (which I very seriously doubt). . .is it increasing global (or Aussie) human CO2 wotdunnit?
And will reducing human CO2 emissions help to successfully manage the risk of such things as crop damage from random storms or for that matter bushfires, coastal erosion, salinity in the Murray, and several other distractions you have put up?
Bill Burrows…I don’t doubt for a moment your “schooling” and qualifications…and I also congratulate you on the accolades you have received…: “…and I am really chuffed that that was the perception of others too.”
I could also be accused of being a “slow learner”…being now well and truly in my sixties…and having been “schooled” over the years by that “ghastly seamstress” ; Fate…I suspect we could most probably exchange of equal value ; piece for piece, subject for subject, knowledge for knowledge…between not only ourselves, but many of the “great – unwashed” that blog who equally have “been schooled” in that other university…: “Hard Knocks”.
But I will presume to offer one tiny aphorism that I, and I would suspect many reading here have learned the “hard way”….: ” The road between flattery and mockery is VERY short and VERY straight “……watch your back.
Not a distraction, Deb…Jen put up the argument about temp’ and CO2. and several others backed her and others disputed her…the nub of the thread must therefore be in “proving” her proposal…Not all of us (as I have said) go down the road of statistics on temp’ gauging…some of us “lay- folk” use our own methods of assessment and come via a different route to a similar conclusion….Why not?….if not, the thread would be very short and bloody boring!…and THAT is the “death knell” for ANY blog!
So…argue away….the gloves are on…any takers?
Ian G; from your David B. South link although M Morano- Climate Depot approved, I concluded it was an unabashed attempt to justify some of the common anti AGW rhetoric in its death throes. For starters he is the only author and nothing is peer reviewed including the method.
My casual observation from start to finish failed to find the primary association of wild fire loss v available forest at any given time. Fig 6 is the nearest we get to understanding this ratio with the UFSF harvest curve superimposed on the forest loss by area.
May I leave it to you Ian to come up a realistic assessment of timber loss v total timber from within this poor document?
Another point I should make following the debate outlined, 30 year cycles v a longer time frame, this issue is not mentioned in the main topic outline May issue SAF Journal of Forestry which is otherwise rich in Silviculture Rehabilitation articles.
http://www.safnet.org/publications/jof/currentissue.cfm
Jaycee?
” ….Why not?….if not, the thread would be very short and bloody boring!…and THAT is the “death knell” for ANY blog!”
I find from my own ‘layman’ observations that the blogs which actually stay on topic like this one, Jonova’s, Judith Currie’s, WUWT etc are not experiencing any alarming problems with what Gavin describes as ‘death throes’ and you proclaim as a ‘death knell’.
On the other hand, blogs like Deltoid, SKS, Rabbet etc. . .to my non professional ‘layman’s’ eye. . . appear to be experiencing a bit of a ‘cooling trend’ as far as traffic and commenting is concerned. . .whether from ‘laymen’ or from ‘professionals’.
Debbie…there is a difference you know, between going to a blog to participate in a lively discussion and to go to a blog to “get a fix” !
Anyway, Deb’…if it was left to some on here, the site would be little more than some sort of lost-cause cheer squad!…with Jen kicking off the chant, you gate-keeping while giving out the “happy – pills” , Neville handing around the coalition “how -to -vote” cards and Beth Cooper ringing in the Angelus at the end of every topic!
I would suggest you have a few more articles like Cate Stuart’s last one..and, by the way..if any of you heard that talk about Scottsdale in Tassie this morning on ABC. radio you would have been shocked as I was at how widespread is the demise of community throughout Aust’.
Jaycee,
I don’t agree that the discussion here lacks liveliness. . . but of course you are entitled to your own opinion.
I find that people here are generally more interested in discussing apolitical, socially responsible, common sense solutions to challenges in the Aussie environment rather than trying to re interpret the past and/or employ hand waving political rhetoric or arguing the ‘least worse’ line.
And. . .BTW. . . despite the fact that I didn’t catch the talk about Scottsdale this morning. . .I continue to be very concerned about the widespread demise of community throughout rural and regional Australia. . . my community included.
As I mentioned at the previous thread, there is a loss of social capital and services occurring and as Cate mentioned. . .there are too many good people going down for it to be the rural communities at fault.
Quite clearly, Aussie society is becoming increasingly urbanised and quite disconnected from what us country folk understand about community.
Jaycee. . .
If you’re truly interested in a lively discussion about the complexities and frustrations facing rural and regional Australia and the productive industries that are supposed to support us all . . .including the situation that Cate has found herself in. . .have a gander at this one, which discusses some of the issues you have raised:
http://www.farminstitute.org.au/news-and-events/current-newsletter.html
In particular (but not only). . .have a gander at page 10. . .” Australian and International Farm Policy News”.
Cheers
Debbie
The Nullarbor plain is greener now than at any time in the last 30 years. In fact the planet’s semi arid zones are greener and becoming a greater sink for co2.
http://notrickszone.com/2014/05/25/scientists-stunned-globes-semi-arid-zones-underestimated-turning-greener-with-more-vegetation/
Thank you Deb….I did have a read…I take it that you were particularly referring to the “My View” section ?…..
What I find most interesting in some of these “in depth” studies, on a variety of subjects, is not so much what is said, as what is NOT said !…In the case of that article, I could feel he was itching to explain the quandary of the “traditional” family farm dynasty (the corner shop) as against what looms as the threatening inevitable “corporate agri business” ( managed investment scheme farms)….
I can see the rise and rise of the “private agricultural extension agencies” as a kind of “lobby group” for production direction toward MIS schemes as a method of increased agricultural production, never mind the damage and in some cases the destruction of regional community family-farm networks…..am I correct? or are they very accessible and friendly for smaller farming acreages?
The discussion I “don’t hear” when I talk to local farmers here is any differentiation between “them”..the MIS scheme farms and their bulk handling networks(eg. ; Viterra…bulk grain handlers etc.) and “us” those who now have to cart their product many more miles, since the closure of local silos, to further silos or shipping points AND pay the handling…or else, as in some cases I know of..have to give up on bulk selling entirely and market their product locally….much , much more labour intensive with bagging, labelling and individual handling…especially when the main source of labour is the cocky themself !
Be prepared for the onslaught of carpetbaggers promising the world !
Eat my words hey. Enjoying picking this thread to bits –
“You Cannot Craft A Climate Statistic From One Singular Extreme Weather Situation”
By P Gosselin on 13. Juni 2014 – German DWD Weather Service.
JC; another slow learner here, I used to watch Scottsdale science students in their high school lab during my contracted visits for the Tas Ed Dpt. After hearing that program on RN today while still recovering in bed, I reckon nothing much has changed in that rather ordinary rural town over decades. Tasmanian rural communities believed in those big promises handed out by a succession of state governments based on the idea big biz would save the day.
The younger gen could hock the deeds of their parent’s farm in order to drive some big rig. But individual cartage contracts came and went, particularly after Linfox made the scene. One but only one dad kept his boys running out of Yolla near my place by converting dual axel timber jinkers to triple axle with his home welding rig running hot.
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/2014-06-15/5514994
Sorry Deb..I see you mean the Thai rice farmers and the Aussie wool collapse…yes, I read that too…although, Australia WAS THE major wool producer for many years…the poor Thai rice growers were just one country surrounded by several large growers…you can see they were sold a pup!…but then again, I have reservations whether the Thai peasant was as well informed on the international rice market as the wool corp was on world wool sales….both, it seems were doomed to failure…the wool market by administrative indolence, the rice market by straight corruption!
gavin…” One but only one dad kept his boys running out of Yolla near my place by converting dual axel timber jinkers to triple axle with his home welding rig running hot. ”
I remember a mallee farmer out Borrika ways (that’s near Karoonda…just nth. of Tailem Bend) telling me that the only way to stay afloat out there was to work your machinery till it was ground to dust and never buy new stuff unless there was no other way!….bolt it, wire it and by jayses even gum it together…but never , never buy new machinery!
Further on the article I posted on the last thread on “sustainability of smaller farms”…and I might add ; communities….I was less inclined to promote the collective or cooperative community that to push the barrow for decentralisation of shopping from the city to country markets…not just those dicky ‘farmers markets” , but a seriously BIG ; “Central Market or Victoria Market ” capacity….decentralise to attract buyers, both wholesale and retail away from the cities to the source of production…it’s a long shot..but ?
Gavin
I just thought you might be interested in the number of ‘mega fires’ that occurred in the ‘cooler years’ – far more than the ‘warmer years’. If you can prove any of those fires didn’t happen or weren’t as bad as the report says, please provide the evidence.
I would hope that people in 100 years time don’t dismiss any natural tragedies that happen today so that they can claim the ‘unprecedented’ tag.
Ian G; although I was quite interested in the D B South testimony, it was immediately obvious it was based on proving a climate change denial agenda, a hardly pure motive. As I said, it failed to outline the changing forest pre fire condition or the decline in native forest cover over the whole time frame considered.
I suspect a poor response to any fire in those early years caused the wide spread damage by area burnt and human life lost. This must be a consideration in assessing our own early days of settler forest management.
I repeat: May I leave it to you Ian to come up a realistic assessment of timber loss v total timber from within this poor document?
Now the cliamte kooks claim the weather of today is less predictable?
Lolololol.
Thanks and Happy Father’s Day.
I’m not sure what to make of this except for: ‘if one data set doesn’t give us what we expect, let’s change to another data set which will’ department.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/jun/13/pause-global-warming-data-sea-level-rises
At least they admit the temp record and their models are flawed.
I also note that the highly promoted new ESA data sets do not include land temperatures. Why not?
http://www.esa-cci.org
Gavin
South has a section devoted to fuel load levels. He also notes increased rainfall and its effects on fires and looks at how fires are started. But you can’t dismiss the historical records because the person who presented them may, or may not have, an anti-AGW agenda.
I concede your point re poor fire response in earlier times. However, present fire prevention/reduction practices leave a lot to be desired as well – the 2009 Vic fires were a testament to that. I’m sure there was nothing that firefighters could have done to ameliorate that situation – and I have been in the RFS for 25 years so I do have some experience.
Ian you’ll find that Gav doesn’t respond well to proper historical numbers and facts. Ditto JC who just loves to ramble on about diversionary nonsense to try and hide the pea.
You’ve well and truly proved your point but don’t expect Gav or JC to understand. The facts are that wildfires in the USA are well documented over at least the last 150 years and anyone who wants to can find the facts for themselves. You are correct and Gav is wrong, although he’ll never admit it because it comes between him and his CAGW religion.
I’ve asked them for years to tell us how they’d mitigate GAGW, but nearly everyone loses their nerve and refuse to answer. Although silly Luke did try after years of stupid abuse, but his answer of new nukes is easily shown to be nonsensical.
BTW it looks like the clueless Labor party have now painted themselves into a corner over their co2 tax. Big surprise NOT.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/so_why_is_labor_still_forcing_us_to_pay_a_tax_it_cant_defend/
Ian G: Congratulations, you hit the jackpot with that trusty Guardian article. Sea level has always been the only long term measure of global atmospheric temperature as I have stated on this blog many times.
Nev; I feel quite vindicated in ignoring all your garbage cause the above article outlines a steady temp- SL rise right through your cooling distractions.
Ian however has yet to tackle the issue of smaller forests today being impacted differently to earlier destructive events in much larger native forest areas.
Jaycee?
I’m fine with discussing both articles but it may be a good idea to get the facts straight:
eg:
You say:
“Australia WAS THE major wool producer for many years…the poor Thai rice growers were just one country surrounded by several large growers”
Yet the article very clearly states that:
“Thailand went from being the TOP WORLD EXPORTER (!) of rice to third, severely damaging its trade relations on the way”.
Also. . .the article discusses issues re animal welfare legislation and the resultant impact on Australian producers.
The theme of the article is not difficult to understand and it does indeed relate to the situation that Cate has found herself in:
(remember the Live X debacle?)
Here are some hints from the article:
“Politics and markets can be a dangerous mix”
‘Australian consumers have been given the impression that the Australian Industry does not take animal welfare issues seriously….’
“…In contrast the ACT Government has chosen politics and grandstanding over science with no actual impact on animal welfare”.
And just out of interest Jaycee?
(but of course you are only at a blog and there is no compunction to answer)
You claim you are a farmer in the Mallee.
What Agricultural commodities do you actually produce and what is your main market?
Grazing? Cropping? Local Market? Export Market?
You seem to want to claim from some ‘layman’ or ‘hard knocks’ experience that you have deduced that AGW is the major cause of your woes in your area?
In what specific way is AGW interfering with your farming program and/or your market?
Jennifer – presumably you have seen this latest post at WUWT? My initial comment on your ‘trend table’ reflected a concern (not stated in my comments) over the lack of error terms in your trend values (hence the comment that means based on 30 data points would be more robust). If you are going to present these observations to a bunch of infidels, try to include estimates of error wherever you can.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/15/standard-deviation-the-overlooked-but-essential-climate-statistic/
Gav it isn’t “my garbage” but recent peer reviewed studies on SLs that I’ve quoted. Can’t you get anything correct? So you can’t handle PR studies on SLs now?
Don’t forget that at least RECENT tudies show a deceleration in SLR or no change since 1950 and early 20th century studies. The PR Glacier study actually finds a slowing in retreat since 1950, so you are wrong again. BTW even the strongest alarmist groups accept that there has been a pause for at least 14 years.
This was linked from WUWT before you seemed to notice, but I suppose the link to the Guardian prompted your interest?
But this just proves that the models are lousy and the sceptics have been right all along. Bob Tisdale had this to say about the lousy models article.
Bob Tisdale says:
June 14, 2014 at 7:56 am
Eric, thanks for picking up on that article. It’s based on an obvious failed attempt at misdirection by Stephen Briggs.
Sea surface temperatures are still one of the metrics that climate models cannot come close to simulating properly. Not even remotely similar. And it’s not a hiatus problem. Models actually double the warming rate of the global ocean surfaces for the past 32+ years. We discussed and illustrated this in the post “Maybe the IPCC’s Modelers Should Try to Simulate Earth’s Oceans”:
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2014/03/26/maybe-the-ipccs-modelers-should-try-to-simulate-earths-oceans/
And they cannot simulate the warming or cooling over the multidecadal periods before then either. We discussed and illustrated those failings in the post “IPCC Still Delusional about Carbon Dioxide”
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2013/10/07/ipcc-still-delusional-about-carbon-dioxide/
Cheers
“Sea level has always been the only long term measure of global atmospheric temperature as I have stated on this blog many times.”
In spite of Gav’s claims of scientific obs, he just doesn’t get that in spite of his non-observations, SLs in tectonically stable countries have not risen [ and are not rising ] and just because faulty reference frames allow dodgy claims of varying amounts of SLR via satellite, that is not the real world.
You are right, Gav, SLR is the real world indicator and it is not happening.
The highest SLs in Moreton Bay in recorded history were cyclonic sea surges in the 1930s.
BTW, does anyone know how the average HOURLY temperatures as quoted by the ABC from BOM “data” are arrived at.
I have asked the BoM more than once but have not got an answer.
BillB at 10:14 – I reckon a ideology -free hypothesis and even a known mechanism could well come before error terms.
Bazza – fair enough. But Jen notes that she will be presenting this at a public meeting on 25 June and she specifically invites members of the citadel to attend (& presumably question her). In such situations you need to anticipate what might be thrown at you. I was just suggesting one possibility.
Also Jaycee?
“I take it that you were particularly referring to the “My View” section ?…..”
While it’s possible that the online version may look a bit different to the printed version I have, the “my view” section has 2 articles, both primarily about food labelling and both written by women. (Jackie Healing and Dr Sharman Stone)
So your comment here was a bit perplexing:
“In the case of that article, I could feel he was itching to explain the quandary of the “traditional” family farm dynasty (the corner shop) as against what looms as the threatening inevitable “corporate agri business” ( managed investment scheme farms)….”
After checking again I think you possibly meant the Feature article by Mick Keogh pages 1-5 and not the 2 ‘My View’ articles pages 8 & 9?
I don’t agree with your ‘between the lines’ comment that Keogh was itching to explain the quandary between family farms and MIS.
IMHO. . .he is quite clear about his stance on the potential upsides/pitfalls of both those entities.
In this article he is highlighting that recent Government public policy re Agriculture and NRM are not achieving results in terms of increases in productivity via R&D and/or public good and/or environmental goals and/or successfully engaging rural and regional communities.
Oooops. . .pushed send too quickly. . .sorry for taking up so much room Jen.
But Jaycee. . .
You might also perhaps gain some further insight to the frustrations for regional communities if you take a gander at page 11 “The Myth of the Ageing Farmer”.
It does bear a bit of relevance to Jen’s post and the use of data and methodology.
The conclusion from that one is:
“. . . analyses such as the example above create the risk that policy-makers will focus on the wrong issues when it comes to decisions about what policies might best help the Australian farm sector to respond to the opportunities that have emerged . . .”
As Jen has often commented. . .we need to compare apples with apples.
The IPCC accepts there has been a pause in the GMST record, but then makes a mess looking for excuses to explain the cause of the pause.
Judith Curry’s summary at the end states that their explanation is painful. I couldn’t agree more and part of the pause is that co2 isn’t as strong a driver as the alarmists once predicted. But don’t expect the extremists to use simple logic and reason to understand this simple answer.
In short the IPCC is a disgrace and should be wound up ASAP. IOW just stop funding these con merchants.
http://judithcurry.com/2013/09/30/ipccs-pause-logic/
Gavin
You say ‘……the issue of smaller forests today……..’.
Yesteryear
You mean the forests that the Aborigines use to burn to reduce the fire hazard. You mean the forests that are no longer being logged as in the past. You mean the forests that were cleared to make way for farming. You mean the forest that the ‘greenies’ have said that have been devastated by past logging.
Today
You mean the land that once was cleared and now have trees being planted to improve the environment. You mean the forests that are left to grow without any clearing or hazard reduction burns. You mean the forests that the ‘greenies’ – for want of a better word – have ‘locked up’.
You mean those forests?
By the way, don’t SL rises now incorporate glacial isostatic adjustment, some 3mm/pa?
Has anyone just noticed that Bolt, Blair, WUWT, pindanpost, icecap have seemingly been hacked into – or is it just my computer. Let’s you in but won’t allow you to scroll down.
Phew,
False alarm. Just my computer infected – all gone now
@Ian George
re. bolt, it works OK
As to forested areas in OZ, it’s a statistical fact that we have greater areas of forest today than at the time of the first fleet.
I need that like button again for Ian George.
Those questions can be asked right across all NRM policy.
What is the actual time period of that utopian state that Gavin seems to referring to and hence using as a some type of benchmark to claim such things as bushfires are worse and/or unprecedented because of AGW?
I also remember being taught that the USA was the first nation to start having protected National Parks and National forests?
I’m pretty sure Australia was amongst the world leaders as well?
Bill,
We have just 12 data points, with a fair scatter of values, but that doesn’t detract from what appears to be the beginning of a cooling trend across a large number of sites.
Temperatures were tracking up within a defined channel. That upward trends appears to have ended. The IPCC calls it an hiatus. Bazza calls it ENSO. It looks to me like a change in direction.
Given the nature of the data, how would you calculate ‘errors’ and what exactly would they represent?
Deb…The “current newsletter” you posted up was for May…is that the current one?…It sounds like I may have been reading another issue from yours!
I’ve told this blog before..I am / was a tradesman builder / contractor for most of my working life. As for me being a “farmer”…only in the sense that I did some years cropping on a couple hundred acres for hay for our horses on this farm . I personally am not a “farmer”..though I am through family connections of four generations quite well informed and ‘work – skilled’ on farming practices for this area….I also in my wandering youth worked for a spell on a sheep station up near Broken Hill as a general hand…..and boy!..have I built some fences!
BTW…Deb…now you tell me…what are your qualifications to practice as a political commentator?…Have you read “Das Capital”?…any Ayn Rand?…a tad of Machiavelli I could believe!..any classical studies on political systems and / or historical land management systems?…perhaps you are just “learning on the job”?…..OH!…of course…: Fully qualified from the Andy Bolt college of buffoonery!
No offence..but you asked for it!
Anyway, Deb…there are no page numbers on the HTML version of that newsletter…and I am not going to use ub my gig’ allowance just to please you…post the article in question here if you want and then we can all read it…that damn Turnbull and his “dixie – cup and a thread” NBN.
Anyway, Deb…on that Keogh piece…sure, if you really…REALLY want to increase production in agriculture at Tonnes per hectare…then just get rid of those crappy old “family farming communities” and bring in the MIS. (managed investment scheme) big investors and pivot – irrigate the buggery out of the countryside ..all run by employees on the 457 visa scheme to save on wages that they can then send back home and the regional residents can just go bankrupt and be thrown off the land and more big- money MIS. “estate farming” can be set up…is that what you think he was trying to say…or is that just what you’re trying to suggest?
Jaycee.
As far as I know. . .considering it’s early June. . .that’s the current issue.
Not an Andy Bolt fan. . .but sometimes enjoy his sense of humour. . . most recently his jibe at TP. . . for her ‘Nigel no friends’ nonsense.
Have seen no evidence that MIS farming is more productive than family farming. . .have you?
As well as being a family farmer, have 3 university degress, UNSW, CU & ANU. . .one of those degrees helps to sort the BS in NRM policy in partcular. . .but nothing beats that ‘dirt under the fingernails’ & generational experience IMHO.
Am also a wife, a daughter, a very proud mother of 3, a proud MIL of 2, an Aunty a niece and a granddaughter.
Not a grandmother yet but expect that will be my next new role.
So. . .would you now like to have that lively discussion . . .and actually discuss the issues affecting rural & regional Aus or not?
No offence Jaycee. . .but so far it’s just generalisations and obfuscation from you. . .sorry. . .but you did ask for it.
JW; what stats?
Spent my afternoon verifying eucalypt forests of one type or another reached down to the sandy shores both sides of Bass Strait and on all the major islands pre settlement. They aren’t there today with most remnants isolated with many species of dependent wild life threatened.
“generalisations and obfuscations…”….now, Deb…you are just writing things so you can see yourself in print.
You remember I suggested I could see you reading Machiavelli?…..well here’s a tad just to whet your appetite…could it be anyone or anyplace we know?…..from “Discourse on Titus Livius”…Google it sometime..it makes for interesting reading.
(continuing)
A Prince, therefore, wanting to gain over to himself a people who are
hostile to him ((speaking of those Princes who have become Tyrants in their
country)), I say that they ought first to look into that which the people
desire, and he will find they always desire two things: the one, to avenge
themselves against those who are the (perceived) cause of their slavery: the other, to
regain their (perceived lost) liberty. The first desire the Prince is able to satisfy
entirely, the second in part. As to the first, there is an example in point.
When Clearchus, Tyrant of Heraclea, was in exile, a controversy arose
between the people and the Nobles of Heraclea, (and) the Nobles seeing
themselves inferior, turned to favor Clearchus, and conspiring with him they
placed him in opposition to the disposition of the people of Heraclea, and
(thus) took away the liberty from the people. So that Clearchus finding
himself between the insolence of the Nobles, whom he could not in any way
either content or correct, and the rage of the People who could not endure
having lost their liberty, he decided suddenly to free himself from the
nuisance of the Nobles, and to win the people over to himself. And on this,
taking a convenient opportunity, he cut to pieces all the Nobles, to the
extreme satisfaction of the People. And thus, in this way, he satisfied one
of the desires people had, that is, to avenge themselves. But as to the
desire of the people to regain their liberty, the Prince, not being able to
satisfy it, ought to examine what are the reasons that make them desire to
be free, and he will find that a small part of them desire to be free in
order to command, but all the others, who are an infinite number, desire
liberty also as to live in security. For in all Republics in whatever manner
organized, there are never more than forty or fifty Citizens of a rank to
command, and because this number is small, it is an easy matter to assure
oneself of them, either by taking them out of the way, or by giving them a
part of so many honors as, according to their condition, ought in good part
to content them. The others, to whom it is enough to live in security, are
easily satisfied by creating institutions and laws which, together with his
power, gives realization to the general security of the people. And when a
Prince does this, and the people see that no one breaks such laws by
accident, they will begin in a very short time to live in security and
contentment.
A rather nuanced metaphor…would you not agree?….(btw. the above parenthasised “perceives” are mine)
Just more obfuscation Jaycee?
(atm. . . I can clearly see why Robert thinks you might actually be a sock for Luke)
You no longer want to discuss the issues that are raised in those AFI articles and how they might relate to the situation Cate found herself in?. . . nor the issue that Jen raised re the ‘cooling trend’ of max temps?
🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂
You would now prefer to copy/paste quotes from ancient history “Discourse on Titus Livius”… (with added perceptions via parenthesis) and also picture me reading Machiavelli?
Hahahahahahahaha!
Hilarious.
Good luck with that.
I guess it probably counts for extra traffic on this blog if nothing else?
Jennifer (@ 4:55pm) – What I was reflecting on was personal experience in taking on entrenched positions in “science”. [In my case it was challenging the “green” mantra underpinning Queensland’s Vegetation Management Act, which effectively presumed that all woody vegetation not cleared, or regrowth from an acknowledged earlier clearing event, was “remnant” i.e. representative of the vegetation present in the State in 1788]. In these situations one small scientific slip is not forgiven, no matter how strong and rigorous the supporting data and argument may be. So if you have a strong case and objective evidence the aim is to not give the backers of the entrenched position any opportunity to side-track yourself or your audience (in a talk in this case) with questions you cannot convincingly answer.
Jo Nova and David Evans are following this preparatory step on Jo’s blog right now, as they gradually release what they apparently believe will be a game changer in the whole AGW debate. By doing this they are exposing their data and argument to the most stringent criticism by people sympathetic to their cause. Hopefully this preliminary process (cross check) will ensure their arguments are not summarily dismissed when the data and its synthesis are formally presented.
To some extent of course you are also doing this in this present Post. In my initial comments I made a quick remark about “trends”. Certainly if your trend is derived from simple maths and is based on “rise/run” in your data set then the choice of start and finish point (years) will undoubtedly affect the linear trend, determined for each chosen location. That is why I suggested varying your start and finish dates to see how consistent the trend for each location actually is. If you do not do this then don’t be surprised if the knights of the citadel front you with such info at your meeting. Do you have a ready answer to why the 1960+ warming stopped in 2001 and why the cooling started in the same year? What if you had chosen 1999 or 2003 as your start or finish year for ‘warming’/ ‘cooling’? Would the trends for each location be the same, or would they be noticeably (if not significantly) different? Whatever – if this is how you determined your trend then there is only one value for each location x chosen year range and no error term can be calculated.
However, if your maximum temperature trend for each location was based on the slope of a linear regression of the 12 yearly values, then you could also provide the standard error of this slope (regression coefficient) and hence determine its statistical significance. The average of the maximum temperature trends for all 31 locations is given as -8.43 oC /100 years. The sample standard deviation for this = 4.78 oC/100 years. In other words the 2 sigma ‘cooling trend’ confidence range, for the average of all locations, encompasses zero. But also the range of your location maximum temperature trend values vary from +3 to -17.46 oC/100 years. This background variability is an example of what I believe Tim Ball was alluding to in his WUWT Post (q.v.) – which I provided a link to at 10:14 am 16 June.
My statistics memory is rusty Jennifer so I would not be offended if told my perceptions are wrong. And please be assured that I accept the global temperature hiatus as real. I actually prefer it to be called a plateau in anticipation of the direction of the trend you seek to highlight here. But my simple message still remains. You are challenging the establishment. Better to be forearmed and forewarned, as they will delight in pointing out any inconsistencies in your arguments (even if you are in a position to reciprocate). Cheers.
[PS Do you really believe the maximum temperature at Jimna Forestry will drop by an average of 17.5 oC over the next 100 years? Whether it is called a projection or prediction is immaterial to me. Whenever we don’t know or understand all the variables controlling a parameter it is moot to extrapolate outside the range of values over which it was initially determined. Of course alarmists do this all the time, but that is no good reason to join them in this very questionable practice].
Bill & Jen; we have a generally solid reply with Bill’s latest post. The first paragraph particularly and perhaps this bit, “You are challenging the establishment” outlines the case for caution.
My feeling however; Jen still can’t fly without some acknowledgement of her isolated position within the modern climate science community and reasons why her case should continue i.e. deliberately take down at least one consensus. Try SL.
Mark my words; Bill is on a very slippery slope here in handing us anything from Tim Ball given his support base, questionable outlook and productions over time. Don’t scratch through the litter in the chook house looking for fresh tucker.
Watch your rhetoric too.
Hello Deb…now how did I just KNOW you wouldn’t even consider taking that nice bit of historical reading seriously?….ans. : the same way Machiavelli knew how to advise ‘the prince” on how to run a state…..simple… you see, when one wishes to maintain a certain status quo , in our case conservative / oligarchal, one doesn’t pander to the ‘progressive” side of politics…one looks to “managing” those more susceptible to one’s policies…so it’s to those most seeking a certain type of security that one concentrates the most rewarding policies….these people are what are in essence the most dangerous enemies of the status quo….NOT the opposition…THEY can be ruled by absolute law…your “own” people must be ruled by appeals to their most emotive fears…
It’s old hat, Deb…very old hat…I could take you back two thousand years and relate policy after policy directed to address almost EXACTLY the same situation…almost word for word..that Cate and the smaller farming community are facing now!…to dismiss history is to repeat the mistakes…
In a nutshell, Deb…I and us “lefties” are not the most threatening enemies of the oligarchy that currently rules this nation’s politics….we are kept in line by rule of law….it is that other 50% that must be “sold the pup” of financial and agrarian and industrial policy to get them to continue the support….YOU ; Deb..and “yours” are in truth, their biggest enemies…only YOU and yours are capable at the moment of changing your vote….
I suggest you spend a leeetle bit more time with history to inform yourself as to WHY you fear to break the status quo.
Lord Stern has opened his silly trap and now wants to increase the cost of a tonne of co2 through the roof.
Even as high as $260 as tonne. I hope he asks China and India what they think of his job destroying stupidity. It wouldn’t make a scrap of difference to co2 levels or temp or climate for thousands of years and certainly not a whisker of difference by 2100.
But he still wants to waste trillions of dollars down the drain for a guaranteed zero return.
Yet there are still plenty of fools ready to listen to these delusional twits.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/16/260-ton-for-carbon-the-price-of-salvation/#more-111564
Deb…I give you ; Neville….and I rest my case!
JC tell us by how much Stern’s $260 a tonne co2 tax would help to mitigate your CAGW? Of course it won’t happen, even Obama now refuses to introduce a co2 tax and forget about China, India and the non OECD even considering such stupidity.
Obama also agreed that the Abbott govt had a mandate to abolish the Labor and Green stupidity.
Jaycee,
This may or may not surprise you.
I look at BOTH you and Neville. . . and I rest my case.
Unlike you apparently Jaycee. . .I don’t wish to offend either of you…as we are fortunate to live in a country where we are free to voice our opinions.. .and consider how we will vote at elections.
But IMHO. . . arguing who is the ‘least worst’ in politics and turning pseudo intellectual sneering and ad homs into a highly marketable social commodity (and some even think it’s a fine art). . . is just a failing of our mostly excellent political system and is proving to be entirely counterproductive in the NRM space.
Get this straight from me Jaycee.
IMHO. . . .
NEITHER SIDE OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM has achieved long term, sensible results in the NRM space!!!!!
GEDDIT?????
Also. . .whether you can bring yourself to admit it or not. . .people like Cate were sold a pup re using marginal grazing country as carbon farming.
And if you want to get rid of the status quo Jaycee. . .considering for the most part Australia is a very lucky country as far as its political history goes. . I think you would first need to provide an robust example of a system that works better than ours and achieves better results than ours in the areas that are being discussed at this blog.
But of course. . .as we are all only human. . .nothing is perfect and there is always room for improvement.
And . . .just for fun. . . how did I just KNOW that you were lining up to give me a lecture????????
Deb…thank you for your colourfull replies…but I think we best let the subject go for a bit…for I can see you want to take some time to absorb the theory presented..I will leave you too your thoghts for a while….
regards…Jay’
Jaycee,
So ultimately therefore, you’re actually not interested in a lively discussion about the issues raised here?
1) The ‘cooling trend’ that Jen and Abbot have documented?
2) The problems and frustrations facing rural and regional Australian communities?
3) Managing risks like bushfires, random weather and salinity in the Murray?
New webpage Jen?
Looks good.
Bill, this is terrible – those downward trends are cropping up everywhere. Just one example, Qld max temps from 1991 to 2000 – temps have come down on a trend of 8C per century and highly significant too – big RSQ. Two different periods so cant be coincidence. Maybe it is the moon for that one and the sun for the more recent ones. Who knows? I give up.
Geologist and glaciologist Prof Schluchter of Bern uni claims that science today is fundamentally dishonest.
He is the author of 250 papers and is a giant in his field. He states that NH glaciers were much smaller in Roman times and the Rhone glacier was an ice free area 5,800 years out of the last 10,000 years.
He also states there was a rapid retreat of glaciers in 1850 and then advances in the 1880s, 1920s and 1980s.
This is a must read for anyone who thinks that our present temps are unusual or unprecedented. Of course temps today are not unusual at all.
http://notrickszone.com/2014/06/09/giant-of-geologyglaciology-christian-schluechter-refutes-co2-feature-interview-throws-climate-science-into-disarray/
Yes Bazza – I am thinking of switching from burial to cremation for my final resting place. It is going to be too damn cold in a casket below ground in a 100 years’ time. But even worse in 200 years or more, if we extrapolate our trends a little further. Seriously though, it is not looking good for the CO2 drivers of AGW/CC. I went through several research fad switches in my 40 years in the bush. It will be interesting to observe the goal posts moving again and speculating on the new direction. I think the CO2 zealots will still find mileage in “ocean acidification”, unless chemistry majors drop in and spoil the party. I am fortunate to be going on a 2 week sojourn to check the state of GBR edible fish stocks shortly. Perhaps I should take a pH meter to establish baseline acidity levels in reef waters (and of course not forgetting to mark the side of the boat where I take my samples, so I can get a follow up reading next year).
Excuse me folks but Bill has stumbled into one of my pet areas pH, a measurement I did routinely with a variety of industrial clients. In particular, effluents and their neutralization, hardening of cellulose fibre in web processes and metals separation in wet processes.
Several observations; building sensitive electrodes and maintaining a sharp instrument response in continuous measurement is not easy for lab based scientists.
Although large deviations are easy to maintain with the addition of lime or concentrated acid, the “Neutrality” of any solution is difficult to verify by instrument alone.
Recent ocean Ph – SL studies
http://www.coral.noaa.gov/research/climate-change/ocean-acidification.html
http://pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/A+primer+on+pH
http://phys.org/news/2013-06-sea-rose-mmyear.html
http://www.climateemergencyinstitute.com/sea_level_rise.html
Gavin
There seems to be some problems with SL and warming going on here. SL rises have slowed since 2005 (according to the graphs in your link) yet temps are supposed to have plateaued or still rising, depending on which side of the debate one is on.
Sea ice levels have increased in both the Arctic and Antarctic since 2009 – so where is the extra SL rise coming from?
Ian G; “so where is the extra SL rise coming from?”
Given water expands with temperature increase and that’s a relative simple calculation even on a global scale based on the agreed warming of the moment, the other SL rise observed is due entirely to glacial ice loss regardless of sea ice extent in either hemisphere. Independent observation of glacial regions will doubtless confirm changes SL due to the addition of fresh land ice to the oceans.
Cheers.
Bill
LOL!
🙂 🙂
There was a story on channel 10 last night about mixing human ashes into a fireworks display and sending our loved ones off that way.
Another flawed Australian paper on Antarctic sea ice reviewed
at Climate Audit. Abram et al found to be based on data mining
and spurious multivariate methodology.
It all seems more about relevance to when? Is the average temperature hotter than 1788, 1888 or 1988? A global reference time is needed to be the controlled measurements. If the climate is a global issue, and a global influence is effecting our weather? so our data would need comparing to where our weather comes from? again… relevance to what? AND when.
I will be following this thread. I’m just starting my second session and climate is first up!!! this will be helpful in my research.
I find it quite astonishing that these scientists are still relying on climate models that they know have failed them in the past. These Warmegedinists scientists had better get back to basic science.
As someone else suggested, it would be very valuable to have a similar table with the results on the 100 year tend line of daily MINIMUM temperatures.
Would the results also be negative?