What does the Australian Academy of science think their role should be? To inform or to frighten? To elucidate public policy issues from a scientific viewpoint? Or to indulge themselves in scaremongering so unsupported by facts that it borders on irresponsible? Their latest climate-alarm pamphlet contains appalling rubbish, including claims that the world will warm […]
There are a dozen or so rural Victorian weather stations, of the 255 listed as reporting maximum temperature data to the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, that have records stretching back to years before 1900. I have found them by skimming through the listings on this page at the BOM website. It has a helpful graphic that dynamically displays the record length.
I thought it might be interesting to see the trend of maximum temperatures in these rural locations. The graphic (click the thumbnail) shows that in eight of these twelve sites, including one NSW site—Deniliquin, almost on the Victorian border—the temperature trend is negative or flat. The trend estimate is a simple, linear least-squares trend over the longest period available in each record with 1-sigma bands as indicated. The idea for this experiment came from a post at the Carbon-Sense Coalition website.
June 2009 was not as warm as June 2008, but still 0.8° C above the average for 1961–1990, according to the Australian Bureau of Meteorology. There have been ten hotter Junes since 1950.
Temperatures in May 2009 were 0.52° C above the historical average.
Dr Gavin Schmidt, a climate modeler at NASA and a principal author of the Real Climate weblog, has emailed me to point out an error (mine) in my review of Ian Plimer’s Heaven + Earth.
I said that I had learned from Ian Plimer that NASA had reversed it’s claim that the ten years following 1995 were the hottest ten years of the century when Steven McIntyre showed that the record belonged to 1934. But, as Dr Schmidt points out, 1934 was the hottest year in the GISS records only for the United States, not in the global GISS records. He goes on to accuse Prof. Plimer of ‘lying’ to his readers about this, and other, matters.
I am grateful to Dr Schmidt for pointing out this error, which I have corrected. But I still share Ian Plimer’s amply-documented conclusion that there is no reason for alarm about the slight warming that undoubtedly took place over a fifty year period from the 1940s.
News reports everywhere are picking up the theme of ‘alarm’ over the extent of ice cover at the poles.
“‘What we’re seeing is very dramatic,’ said Andrew Fleming, remote sensing manager at the British Antarctic Survey. ‘It’s very worrying.’ Scientists believed the effects were linked to the ‘very strong warming’ at the poles, he said. The Antarctic peninsula has warmed by more than 3ºC in the past 50 years. ‘That’s a staggering rate of warming, and it’s still going up,’ said Mr Fleming.” Extract from a report in today’s Financial Times
But, as is often the case, the story looks much less alarming when you look at the data for yourself.
p>A strong message with <a href=“http://climatesci.org/2009/03/31/open-letter-by-the-cato-institute-on-climate-science/” title=“Climate Science: Roger Pielke Sr. Research Group News