Temperature Records - Are they serious?

msg · Guru

Temperature Records - Are they serious?

Whenarewethere · Guru

Repeat a small number every few years and it adds up.

Ineedabiggerboat · Senior Member

https://ipa.org.au/ipa-today/australias-broken-temperature-record-part-1#:~:text=In%202011%2C%20the%20Bureau%20made,SAT%20Version%202%20for%20Rutherglen.

dorian · Guru

Ineedabiggerboat wrote:
https://ipa.org.au/ipa-today/australias-broken-temperature-record-part-1#:~:text=In%202011%2C%20the%20Bureau%20made,SAT%20Version%202%20for%20Rutherglen.

Dr Jennifer Marohasy is a biologist, not a climate scientist. She wants us to know that she has written a book, and that she is writing another book which "you should be able to order for Christmas". Hmm.

msg · Guru

Whenarewethere wrote:
Repeat a small number every few years and it adds up.

Whenarewethere I think you may have misunderstood my post. I wasn't commenting on the temperature but on Nine's over the top reportng and seemingly (to me) exagerated and dramatic form of narrative.

Ineedabiggerboat · Senior Member

She could be a dressmaker for all I care, she is tabling facts. Unlike that idiot who said the snow will stop and the dams will never fill again. Oh, and the seas will rise and flood half the world. (He went on to buy a waterfront home on the Hawkesbury River.) Re the author: https://jennifermarohasy.com/2022/01/australias-broken-temperature-record-part-1/

dorian · Guru

Ineedabiggerboat wrote:
She could be a dressmaker for all I care, she is tabling facts.

She's tabling her "facts" in a book that she wants us to buy. I'll pass.

Ineedabiggerboat · Senior Member

Unlike some, everything she quotes is supported by evidence. I dont care either way to be honest. News does sensationalise it. E.g. the hottest day since 1878. What that means is that in 1878 it was hotter than today.

rmoor · Guru

I think we have been flooded by propaganda from many sources.
Played a week of golf recently in a tournament.

After one of the rounds with some city based players, I had to sit back and cop the results of some of this propaganda.

Where I live we have been inundated with solar farms and wind turbines.
I am not wholly against all of this but do have a strong belief that they should be built on poor ground near the big transmission lines, not soft easy dig arable ground.
Of course these overseas power builders like to make a quick buck here and choof off.
They don't like the higher costs of 800 mm deep channels to dig on rocky ground. Less profit to b*gger off overseas with.
There is now significant opposition in the region, where locals have woken up to their prime land being taken from the landscape simply for the profit off others.

Where I copped it was, the city based claimed that the shows they saw on Aunty indicated sheep do far better under solar panels than they do elsewhere.

Whatever I said, or could offer was totally rejected, so I simply gave up the ghost and had to take it on the chin.
A bit like some of the discussions on this forum, come hell or high water, you are going to cop it and have to choose to either ignore it or state some facts - and still cop it sometimes.

Since then, I have raised the question with numerous local farmers and sheep farmers with years or generations of experience.
Every single one of them tells me it is bollocks that sheep do better under solar panels for weight, general health and value.
I say to them, aren't they eating the same bl**dy grass??? In fact many solar farms are weed ridden and not a sheep in sight.

So, how can they be doing better than in an open, well maintained grazing paddock, some of which are irrigated.

It is annoying when someone sees something on TV that is obviously agenda pushed propaganda and we have to cop it.

Ineedabiggerboat · Senior Member

Thank god not everyone is drinking the green koolaid

Sarco Harris · Senior Member

Climate records?
What are they really?
In geographic terms our climate records are the equivalent of a blink of an eye. Additionally, the hottest day since a given date. 200 years earlier than that date, was it hotter, colder or pretty much the same?
Further selective reporting is another issue.

dorian · Guru

https://ipa.org.au/read/australias-broken-temperature-record-part-1

Also of concern, since 1996 the Bureau has converted to custom-made electronic probes for temperature recording, and rather than averaging temperatures over one or five minutes as is standard practice around the world from such equipment, the Australian Bureau is recording one second extrema. To be clear a hottest temperature record is now a one second automatic download from a supersensitive electronic probe rather than a reading from a more inert mercury thermometer. This is another way the Bureau gets more global warming for the same weather with its own third generation probes.

Mercury thermometers? Is this idiot aware that it's the 21st century? Has she ever heard of thermal inertia? Are we really expected to believe that the temperature of a mass can change instantly? Well, yes it can, but only if you light a match next to it, and even then only if the mass is tiny. If I put ice cubes in my drink and then take it out into the 40C midday sun, it will take some time for the ice to melt.

I am going to explain all of this in more detail in a book Im sketching out, to write this year.

Wow, sign me up.

Ineedabiggerboat · Senior Member

Whats your problem with books?

dorian · Guru

Ineedabiggerboat wrote:
Whats your problem with books?

None at all, if the author is an authority on the subject. In this case we shouldn't need to wait for a book. A reputable scientist always quotes their references. These are conspicuously absent from her self-promotional rant.

In any case, it's already clear that she has no knowledge of basic thermodynamics. She seems to be saying that the BOM should revert to the old days when humans stuck a thermometer in the air and waited 5 minutes for it to acclimatise. Nowadays we have a technology called "telemetry". The temperature probe is no doubt permanently installed in the measuring environment, so it is always acclimatised. The BOM then reads the data remotely, without human intervention. There is no need to wait for the readings to settle. Furthermore, the temperature won't change if we wait an additional 5 minutes, so the initial reading remains valid.

Whenarewethere · Guru

msg wrote:
Whenarewethere wrote:
Repeat a small number every few years and it adds up.
Whenarewethere I think you may have misunderstood my post. I wasn't commenting on the temperature but on Nine's over the top reportng and seemingly (to me) exagerated and dramatic form of narrative.

It was not necessary to do further investigation on said words as I on good faith took your interpretation as a quality interpretation of this article.

Please enlighten me of my error.