MY friend Craig Kelly – the Federal member for Hughes – attempted to raise the issue of the world’s longest heat wave record in the Australian parliament last Wednesday. He was shut down by Tony Burke, the manager of opposition business.
Specifically, Mr Kelly was attempting to draw attention to how the historical observations have been changed, and how the values as originally recorded at Marble Bar between 31 October 1923 and 7 April 1924 have been adjusted down. This was first brought to our attention by Chris Gilham, and reposted by Joanne Nova.
When the Australian Bureau of Meteorology cools the past – as it does with most of the 112 temperature series used to construct the official statistics – current temperatures appear hotter. The remodelling of Marble Bar has, to quote Mr Kelly, also robbed Australia of the world’s longest heatwave record. This now goes to Death Valley in California.
The Bureau has made many more changes to the Marble Bar record, than just dropping down the temperatures back in 1923 and 1924. With the first iteration of ACORN-SAT back in 2011, maximum temperatures as recorded at Marble Bar from 1967 back to 1910 were cooled on average by -0.41 °C, and from 1944 back to 1910 by an additional -0.52°C.
The Bureau claimed these changes were necessary because the weather station at Marble Bar has been moved, the moves created discontinuities in the temperature series, and these discontinuities can only be ‘corrected’ with reference to neighbouring sites.
In fact, the weather station at Marble Bar has always been just to the southeast of the town centre, on vacant public land on the edge of the Great Sandy Desert, which covers an area of about 284,993 km². There is no documentation for any move in 1944. In 1967 the weather station was apparently moved some metres. The distance is recorded as ‘small’ in the relevant catalogue.
The Bureau nevertheless identified weather stations at Mundiwindi (about 300 kms south), Wiluna (about 700 km south) and Roebourne (about 300 km east) as neighbouring stations suitable for comparison, specifically for fixing the perceived ‘discontinuity’ in 1944 created by the apparent station move.
The annual average maximum temperatures from the comparison sites move up and down in unison with the Marble Bar data including for the period from 1930 to 1940, as shown in Figure 1. This suggests that there is nothing wrong with the historical temperature observations for Marble Bar. And that feeding these stations together into the percentile matching algorithm would result in only minimal changes.
Figure 1. Maximum Temperatures Recorded at Marble Bar and Comparison Stations
Yet, the cumulative changes made to the original observations from Marble Bar in the creation of the new ACORN-SAT series (using the ‘nearby’ stations) make the new ACORN-SAT series less like the data from the nearby comparison stations.
The consequence of the changes to the maximum temperature series is that what was a cooling trend for Marble Bar of -0.6 °C per century from 1910 to 2005 in the original historical observations, becomes a warming trend of +0.396 °C per century from 1910 to 1918 in ACORN-SAT version 1, as shown in Figure 2. When ACORN-SAT version 1 was updated late 2018 to ACORN-SAT version 2, an even more significant +0.7 °C warming trend was generated for Marble Bar. ACORN-SAT version 2 is now the official temperature data base for Australia.
Figure 2. Historical Observations (blue) and Remodelled (red and orange)
CHANGES TO INDIVIDUAL DAYS VERSUS CUMULATIVE
While the cumulative consequence of all the changes is a warming trend +0.7 °C Celsius per century in ACORN-SAT version 2, the changes are actually made to the daily values, as shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Temperatures for Six Days in November 1923
So while the actual temperature recorded at Marble Bar on 18th November 1923 was 44.7 °C, this has been changed to 43.7 in ACORN-SAT version 2. This is a difference of one whole degree, as shown in Table 1.
The difference is only 0.2 degrees on 21st November. This lack of consistency in the fiddling is because the Bureau applies what is called a percentile matching algorithm to generate the new temperature series. To quote from the relevant peer-reviewed paper as published by the Royal Meterological Society (International Journal of Climatology, Volume 33):
For the purposes of merging station series and correcting inhomogeneities, the data set has been developed using a technique, the percentile-matching (PM) algorithm, which applies differing adjustments to daily data depending on their position in the frequency distribution. This method is intended to produce data sets that are homogeneous for higher-order statistical properties, such as variance and the frequency of extremes, as well as for mean values. The PM algorithm is evaluated and found to have clear advantages over adjustments based on monthly means, particularly in the homogenization of temperature extremes.
TWO TEMPERATURE DATA BASES
Not many people are aware that the Bureau actually holds two very different temperature databases. Mostly, it uses what is called ACORN-SAT version 2 (Australian Climate Observations Reference Network – Surface Air Temperature) for generating trends and announcing record hot years. This database also contains all the values that are sent to the United Nation’s International Panel for Climate Change (IPCC).
The other database includes the historical values more or less as originally recorded. This is called the Australian Data Archive for Meteorology (ADAM), also known as the Climate Data Online (CDO). This database has a reasonable amount of integrity and generally reflects values actually recorded across Australia. There are nevertheless some issues with ADAM. The mix of stations is changing, with stations that have recorded colder temperatures closed down. For example, Charlotte Pass on the slopes of Mount Kosciuszko holds the record for the coldest temperature ever recorded on mainland Australia at −23 °C on 19 June 1994. Inexplicably, this station was closed down in March 2015. Also of concern is that there was a period when lower limits were set on how cold temperatures could be recorded, for example the limit that was set at Goulburn of −10 °C between the years 2007 and 2017 and at Thredbo between 2002 and 2017.
Also, some ‘inconvenient’ early hot records have been deleted, for example 51.7 °C recorded at Bourke in western New South Wales on 3 January 1909. This record needs to be reinstated as it is the hottest day ever recorded in Australia using standard equipment, properly calibrated and in a Stevenson Screen. The Bureau’s only excuse for deleting it is that it was recorded on a Sunday, and the weather observer was not meant to come in on that day.
The existence of these two date bases is not denied by the Bureau, but interestingly key Australian Broadcasting Corporation journalists cannot bring themselves to acknowledge this fact. This is perhaps because of all the complications it raises.
LET US GET IT CHANGED BACK
The Bureau has a long history of making nonsense changes to important historical temperature data series. I’ve previously documented the situation at Rutherglen (Victoria), Bourke (New South Wales), Darwin (Northern Territory) and Amberley (Queensland).
I’ve been trying to get something done about this since at least 2014. Ministers within the current cabinet who are across this issue include Greg Hunt and Josh Frydenberg. So far, they have refused to do anything about it, because they apparently do not want the Australian public to lose confidence in the Bureau.
I suggest we begin a campaign, in the first instance to have the correct temperatures for Marble Bar for the period of the heatwave, which was from 31 October 1923 to 7 April 1924, included in the official temperature record. This will require the Bureau to notify the relevant IPCC working group that is currently incorporating the incorrect values into their Sixth Assessment report, which is being used for the first global stocktake under the Paris Agreement.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
I have been pursuing this issue with my local member, off and on, for years, but all she ever does is refer the matter to the responsible minister for their action, which usually ends up with an innocuous letter from a brain-dead bureaucrat telling me how to suck eggs; nothing to do with answering my query, of course.
As one correspondent in Jo’s blog often states, the BoM has become the Ministry of Misinformation; Eric Blair would have concurred with this observation, undoubtedly.
I shall again seek the Minister of InSTEM to take action to correct this abominable misuse of taxpayers’ money chasing truth down that immortal memory hole of ‘1984’.
This great article reinforces my conclusion that many “scientists” do not apply the scientific method without ideological bias but rather seek (in this case fabricate) data to confirm their ideology. Unfortunately the most media and most politicians share this lack of respect for true scientific enquiry which is a disaster for the modern age.
Until legal action and claims for financial losses resulting from the fraudulent activity by BOM are instituted, then I am afraid that the BOM will continue with its programme of deliberate public misinformation. Doubtless there are people behind this scam who are pocketing $millions at the expense of the wider public.
I thought Craig Kelly was good on this in parliament before the despicable Tony Burke shut him down. Kelly said after the BoM took away Marble Bar’s record the new longest temp record became the Death Valley record in 2000; which of course fits in with the alarmist narrative of modern temps being warmer than the old ones.
This is scandal.
The first exposure of this data corruption process that I am aware of was by the late John L Daly on his web site ‘Still Waiting for Greenhouse’. It is still available.
Scroll to the bottom of the home page, click on ‘Temperature Records’.
Not only has nothing been done to rectify this untenable situation, but the problem has progressively become worse.
With the continuing increase in the well observed ‘Urban Heat Island Effect’ impacting many recording stations, it would be reasonable to assume recent recordings impacted by this would need to be adjusted down to allow for it.
This is not what has happened and therefore with all the other ‘manipulations’ such as this example occurring, it calls into question the motives and incentives of those carrying out this work.
Data integrity, particularly in such a vital area as temperature, should be beyond question and it is past time that this matter is addressed in a very transparent, honest and robust manner.
Your work Jennifer and that of Joanne Nova and others are vital in seeing this inequity finally addressed. Keep up the good work. In the end ‘Truth will win out’.
The BoM is like any organisation that employs people.
When the “chiefs” make their agenda publicly and privately known, the workers who depend on the organisation for their pay packets will carry out the “chiefs'” desires without too much contemplation.
In the case of the BoM, the “chiefs” have never been reticent to present their agenda publicly at every opportunity, usually on the (friendly) ABC. Imagine how strident their exhortations are then when pushing their agenda internally.
These BoM chiefs have already shown they are quite adept at “circling the wagons”.
(I know, I know – that’s a very mangled metaphor 🙁 )
But my main point is – this perfidious behaviour by BoM chiefs is purely political. Their interest in scientific advancement is zero.
My experience is to approach/write directly to both the relevant Minister, and Shadow Minister, and let them battle it out.
With respect to Greg Hunt and Josh Frydenberg, like most Liberal (and National) members, either they are ignorant, or unaware that the BoM’s credibility is already severely shot, and the situation will only deteriorate further deteriorate in time.
“With respect to Greg Hunt and Josh Frydenberg, like most Liberal (and National) members, either they are ignorant, or unaware that the BoM’s credibility is already severely shot”
Or agree and are complicit.
@cohenite
>”Or agree and are complicit”
Yes. We are gaslighted every day – people think this doesn’t matter.
If I am faced with the situation (and have been many times) of geological information from a particular drillhole becoming seemingly anomolous, yet there is another redrill 50m away, I do not interpolate one 300km away. Yet the Bureau of Truth does this all the time, protected from accountability by Federal Cabinet.
A perfect example of gaslighting.
Once again Jennifer thanks for your efforts.
It is unimaginable that the relevant Ministers are unwilling or unable to get onto BOM and have these things rectified. It shows a total lack of principle on their behalf and follows that they are basically politically corrupt and simply protecting their positions.
Craig Kelly is as far as I know the only politician in Australia calling out the false narrative of the Australian Government, bureaucracy and media.
I shall write as you suggest.
Once again Jennifer, a great article. thank you.
I was listening this morning when you were on the Alan Jones breakfast program.
I get appalled by this type data manipulation and the outright misleading of the public, the media and the polies who listen to and just BELIEVE, without any thought of the implications that their complacency is having or just for once,,, dare I say it,,, questioning the validity of the reports or the data measured that is published.
If journalists , media personalities, weather reporters, politicians etc etc (excluding the ABC staff of course, they are totally incapable of thinking or challenging or speaking their mind about it) would just for once take the common sense approach would be enough to put doubt in their minds, if they were not so dumbed down to start with, that would be a breath of fresh air. And, what ever happened to the balance approach to journalism.
For once, just ask the other side, just once…no we only let lefties and climate alarmist have air-time, and lots of it !
By saying noting they are by virtue supporting the ridiculous climate emergency movement, every single day there is another record (hottest, wettest, windious, driest, worst drought, worst fires ever,,etc etc etc, its driving me insane) or the other night on the TV weather report I was totally gutted when the weather person said
“This summer was the 4th (with inflection on the 4TH) hottest on record”, or maybe it was the 4th hottest start to Autumn, I really can’t remember.
I am so over this record thing, whenever I hear a story building crescendo to the ultimate statement I get in before them and say to my wife,,,,Guess whats coming…and Yes, there it is, like clockwork, like day changes from light to dark, guaranteed I always get it said before the TV presenters do. “Due to climate change !,,,,etc”
OMG how far do we have to go to get a headline,, the 5th, the 6th,, why not the 50th…on record.
Not to mention the records now mean absolutely nothing because of the adulterated data they are based on.
Well, did someone forget to tell them at school, the climate has been changing since day 1….(or should we say Billions of years, they might not understand “Day 1”), if they can get that concept, which I seriously doubt.
So, how do we support the campaign and get action and media acceptance and exposure on this data manipulation fact ?
I know it, you know it, Jennifer and lots of other people know it.
The BoM and ABC just ignore and dismiss it, as do others, they are not alone….
So, does anyone have some suggestions ? Its a group effort ladies and gentleman.
I would love to see a ground swell of support to get this temperature data rectified, out there in the mainstream media, back to basics with raw data (not homogenised, thats probably not going to happen) and put back into the records.
Love to support this campaign Jennifer,
Good luck and keep getting on the radio, I doubt you will get a TV spot, but miracles do happen, and we really need one now.
kind regards
Ed
..what was a cooling trend for Marble Bar of -0.6 °C per century from 1910 to 2005 in the original historical observations, becomes a warming trend of +0.396 °C per century from 1910 to 1918 — 2018, not 1918
Great work. Don’t give up on this. You, Jo Nova, Peter Ridd and others who have been persistent, consistent and accurate on climate matters are true heroes.
What gets me is, I cannot find anywhere in the constitution that allows the Govt of the day to make laws on climate.
George Orwells “1984”.
Its a slippery slope
It will all go away if we demand a forensic audit of the BOM’s Data set in fact all the data they hold
Go for it Jennifer. This just shows how far the lefties will go to prove their agendas.
This tampering was exposed several years ago when the weather station at Rutherglen, near to where I live was moved so that it would record a warmer trend.
Les Ridd
We are now seeing the maculate process for creating holy scripture. It is not a pretty sight.