JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Marble Bar’s hottest day? Today might reach 49.1C again like it did 110 years ago

Will it be a hottest record at one of the hottest towns in the world today? The forecast for Marble Bar, Western Australia, is 49C. The record for Marble Bar stands at 49.2C or 120.5F recorded in 1905 and 1922. I guess if we give up our cars and airconditioners the temperatures in Marble Bar will go back to these ideal conditions?

Thermometer-spotting: the temperature has varied up and down.| The BOM page for Marble Bar: 48.3C at 2.54pm but the highest was 48.9C at 2:46 (8 minutes earlier?). | At 3:30pm the current temp is 48.4C but the highest as listed as 49C at 3:12pm. |  Now at 3:50pm the temperature has fallen to 47.9C and it looks like the peak was reached just short of the old record.

Overexcited journalists get 50C into headlines already

Marble Bar record heat 1905

Sat Jan 14, 1905

At least one journalist is so excited he predicted it’s “highly likely” one of the towns in the area will hit the magic 49.5C which can be rounded up to 50C! (Seriously, Anthony Sharwood says that. Marvel at the power of odd versus even numbers and rounding conventions. It is not as though our modern media can report to one decimal place in a headline after all.) And who needs rounding, or even a measurement? That same headline today already assumes the BOM are wrong and it will hit 50C. “It’ll reach 50 degrees in parts of Western Australia today”. Hey, it might turn out to be right.(It didn’t). This article also gets the record maximum wrong saying it was 48.6C in 2008. It’s on the news.com site, but frustratingly it’s not clear which newspapers it was printed in or how many people saw it. Andrew Burrell from The Australian also gets 50C into the headline:“Pilbara miners brace for 50C scorcher “ and “Weather records set to tumble with temperatures in WA tipped to hit 50C “. How many people in Australia will already think 50C happened, even if it doesn’t.

UPDATE: 6pm — the BOM observations page shows no towns making 50C in WA. Marble Bar was the hottest.

At least, the BOM, WA Today, The Australian and the ABC have printed the old record correctly as 49.2C.

Historic hot days in Marble Bar

Here are historic newspaper stories of the day the 120F records were set:

___________________________________________________

Sat Jan 14 1905

HEAT AT MARBLE BAR

TERRIFIC WEATHER IN THE NORTH

Marble Bar, January 10.

Great heat was experienced here yesterday and to-day. Yesterday the shade reading of the thermometer was 115.5 degrees and to-day it was 17 degrees. Between 11 a.m. and noon today the mercury rose 15 points. A hot wind, like a blast from a furnace, prevailed.

Marble Bar Jan 12

Terrific weather still prevails. Hot eastern winds sent the thermometer up to 120 degrees by 12.45p.m., but it only rose half a degree higher, the top reading in the true shade being 120.5 which is a record.

The other record day in 1922

 ___________________________________________________

5 Jan 1922 Kalgoorlie Miner

HEAT AT MARBLE BAR

120.5 IN  THE  SHADE

Perth. Jan. 4. At Marble Bar yesterday the shade reading, showed a maximum of 120.5 degrees, and a minimum for the 21 hours of  81(?) degrees. Roebourne came a good second with 117 degrees.

___________________________________________________

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.7/10 (65 votes cast)
Marble Bar's hottest day? Today might reach 49.1C again like it did 110 years ago, 8.7 out of 10 based on 65 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/ou73rzp

90 comments to Marble Bar’s hottest day? Today might reach 49.1C again like it did 110 years ago

  • #
    Richard111

    “A hot wind, like a blast from a furnace, prevailed.”

    Shades of anabatic and katabatic winds! Doesn’t have to be seasonal. A strong steady wind can cause a temperature increase. Depends on the lye of the land.

    80

  • #
    Ross

    I have not been there for 40 years but as I recall it was in a valley
    somewhat sheltered from wind with a lot of rock to retain heat from
    the previous day . So in the right circumstances a perfect little camp oven .

    .

    100

  • #
    Timboss

    Global warming is about the trend, globally. That’s going up.

    445

    • #
      Gbees

      No it’s not and even if it was its not about the temperature going up. It’s about whether or not human CO2 emissions are causing runaway catastrophic global warming. There is absolutely no empirical evidence supporting that hypothesis.

      422

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        Nor any theoretical construct or identifiable mechanism which supports the idea that Human Origin CO2 can be involved in Global Warming.

        KK

        301

      • #
        Timboss

        http://www.climate4you.com/GlobalTemperatures.htm#AllInOne TempDiagram
        http://www.climate4you.com/SeaTemperatures.htm#Ocean 0-2000m depth temperature summary

        There are numerous sources of information all showing an upward trend.

        If you doubt it is humans to blame as the IPCC suggests, can you please cite the science that identifies the culprit?

        320

        • #
          John F. Hultquist

          Timboss,

          … culprit …

          Defending a hypothesis is the responsibility of the proposer(s). The arguments, equations, data, and so on need to be shown, and shown to be valid. If anything substantial is shown to be wrong by “anyone”, then the hypothesis proposer must counter the material that “anyone” has put forward. If this is not done then the hypothesis can be considered false or wrong. The hypothesis or something similar my be resurrected later, or not.
          The “anyone” that falsified the hypothesis by showing or presenting its incorrectness is not expected, NOT expected, to propose a new hypothesis to explain whatever the other one was supposed to, and failed, to explain.

          The IPCC defines “climate change” as change caused by humans. The word “defines” is the key to that statement. The IPCC does not “suggest” or “prove” what is defined. This is the same as defining the initials of the United Nations as “UN.” There is no need to prove this, it is a statement of fact.
          Catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW) is defined by the UN – it is not to be questioned any more than the meaning of the initials UN.

          I live within viewing distance of where there once was an ice sheet just a few thousand years ago (~20,000). The ice is gone. The climate changed. It is warmer. Evidence of warming is not evidence that humans caused it.

          Now it is warmer and CO2 has gone up. CO2 continues to go up (and will). Temperature of the atmosphere does change but is remarkably steady at the moment. The hypothesis of CAGW does not explain this. Something is wrong with the hypothesis.
          It is not my responsibility to propose a new hypothesis.
          Besides, the UN, Al Gore, . . ., and Pharrell Williams are not interested.
          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

          In case you have missed it: Joanne has a small booklet (now online) called the Skeptic’s Handbook; find the link at the top left of this site. It is several years old but still worth reading.

          201

        • #
          Richard C (NZ)

          Timboss #3.1.2

          Just pointing to the climate4you temperature page is not evidence of anthropogenic warming. The IPCC anthro attribution period is only 1951 – 2010. Addressed above, see #3 on this.

          >”TempDiagram [0-2000m SeaTemperatures]

          Again, not evidence of anthropogenic warming. And the IPCC has no mechanism for anthropogenic ocean warming. After 25 years and 5 assessment reports they still only speculate on “air-sea fluxes” in Chapter 11 Detection and Attribution but have no science to cite. In Chapter 3 Observations: Ocean they were not able to detect the speculated flux. An impossible mechanism anyway – DLR only penetrates water 10 microns effectively (Hale & Querry 1973).

          >There are numerous sources of information all showing an upward trend.”

          We know that – so what?

          >”If you doubt it is humans to blame as the IPCC suggests, can you please cite the science that identifies the culprit?”

          Well we wont be able to defer to the IPCC for that will we? They don’t have a mandate to investigate any other potential culprits than CO2, CH4 etc. That is why they don’t have a solar chapter in AR5. Conversely the NIPCC does have a solar chapter:

          Solar Forcing of Climate – NIPCC
          http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/ccr2a/pdf/Chapter-3-Solar-Forcing.pdf

          This century, climate science has been caught with their pants down. Only now are they conceding natural variability factors are the explanation for the flatlining temperature.

          Except the oscillatory component in global temperature (oceanic oscillations) can be filtered out by signal analysis leaving the secular trend. Problem is the secular trend is now decelerating while CO2 is accelerating therefore CO2 cannot be the driver of the secular trend. See:

          Macias D, Stips A, Garcia-Gorriz E (2014) Application of the Singular Spectrum Analysis Technique to Study the Recent Hiatus on the Global Surface Temperature Record. PLoS ONE 9(9): e107222. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0107222

          http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0107222#pone-0107222-g005

          Apart from the relatively short-term multi-decadal oceanic cycles and cloudiness changes (dimming/brightening) the only potential long-term driver of the secular trend over millennial timescales is the sun.

          There has just been a solar Grand Maximum from around 1958 – 2005 but the sun is now going into recession. Even the IPCC’s solar specialist,Mike Lockwood, states a 0.38 W.m-2 drop in activity from the end of SC 23 relative to SC’s 22, 21, and 19. And just as there is no certainty as to how much solar output increased from Maunder Minimum to Modern Maximum, there is no certainly as to how much it will decrease over the next few decades. Already 0.4 W.m-2, could be up to 6 W.m-2 given Shapiro et al (2011):

          Shapiro et al. – a New Solar Reconstruction
          http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1102/1102.4763v1.pdf

          In IPCC AR5 Chapter 8 Radiative forcing, the authors cite Jones, Lockwood, and Stott (2012) as their case against the solar driver. Except that paper dismissed Shapiro et al in preference for least-case scenarios. I have Mike Lockwood on email record as stating he didn’t understand Shapiro’s methodology.

          Apparently, according to Jones. Lockwood, and Stott, if energy input to a system is reduced the energy output can still increase. They create a model-based thermodynamically impossible perpetuum mobile – but that’s another story.

          140

          • #
            Richard C (NZ)

            >”the only potential long-term driver of the secular trend over millennial timescales is the sun.”

            There is a thermal lag in the sun => ocean(+land) => atmosphere(+space) system (i.e. the response is NOT instantaneous). Much conjecture as to what timeframe the lag spans (e.g. Trenberth “6, 10 – 100 years”, Abdussamatov “14 +/- 6 years”) but using a recent study for example:

            ‘Correlation between solar activity and the local temperature of Antarctica during the past 11,000 years’

            X.H. Zhao and X.S. Feng (2014)

            • The millennial variation of SSN led that of T by 30–40 years.

            http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.nz/2014/11/new-paper-finds-strong-evidence-sun-has.html

            The Modern solar Grand Maximum peaked at 1986 (non-contentious). Neglecting the oscillatory component in temperature, if you add 35 years lag to 1986 you get 2021 as the central date around which to expect the secular trend in global temperature to peak.

            Given that scenario, the next 5 years or so are an acid test for the conjecture that CO2 is the primary climate driver. The CO2-forced models are already failing so the embarrassment for CO2-centric climate science looks likely to become more acute as time goes by.

            90

          • #
          • #
            Timboss

            Shapiro seems to think aerosols and volcanic eruptions have no impact on the temperatures which is at odds with most climate scientists.

            14

            • #
              Richard C (NZ)

              Timboss

              >”Shapiro seems to think aerosols and volcanic eruptions have no impact on the temperatures which is at odds with most climate scientists.”

              Huh? They don’t say that – where’s your quote of the passage? Neither aerosols nor volcanic eruptions are covered in the paper AT ALL because the paper is a RECONSTRUCTION OF SOLAR IRRADIANCE from 1610 and for the Holocene. The clue is in the title of the paper. No other similar papers cover aerosols or volcanism either, the purpose of such papers is simply to establish solar change.

              Aerosols and volcanic eruptions are totally irrelevant. They don’t mention cloudiness and dimming/brightening either, both of which are stronger forcings over multi-decadal timescales than TSI, aerosols, or volcanic eruptions.

              The point is, and you either missed it completely or intentionally avoid it, that this reconstruction represents significant solar change that the IPCC has not addressed because it upsets their meme.

              20

        • #
          Richard C (NZ)

          Timboss #3.1.2

          >”TempDiagram..SeaTemperatures.
          Ocean 0-2000m”

          Ocean ‘Global Warming’ is not actually ‘global’ at all

          http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/01/22/ocean-global-warming-is-not-actually-global-at-all/

          30

          • #
            Timboss

            If Bob used Kelvin he could make the incline look even less. So what? There is nothing surprising that if you average the energy over the volume of water that larger deeper bodies will show less incline. That’s pretty basic math.

            The energy is still coming in, the planet is still warming and we’re to blame.

            http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch9s9-7.html

            14

            • #
              Richard C (NZ)

              Timboss

              >”The energy is still coming in”

              Yes, solar energy.

              >”the planet is still warming”

              Err, no. No atmospheric warming this century. The ocean is irrelevant given the lack of anthro mechanism.

              >”and we’re to blame.”

              For what? If the atmosphere ain’t warming there’s nothing to blame us for.

              30

            • #
              Richard C (NZ)

              Timboss

              >”There is nothing surprising that if you average the energy over the volume of water that larger deeper bodies will show less incline. That’s pretty basic math.”

              Huh? The measured depth’s are EXACTLY the same in each basin – 2000m.And how different are the North and South Atlantic? North is warming the same as the Indian but South isn’t. Why, if the basins are similar and (supposedly) the forcing is the same.

              You’re neglecting the fact that the sun heats the ocean in the tropical zone and that heat is transported away by currents. GHGs are irrelevant.

              Even if your woolly logic had any sense (it doesn’t), the diverse rates mean well-mixed greenhouse gasses can’t be the culprit and there’s no observed flux anyway (IPCC above).

              10

            • #
              Richard C (NZ)

              >”The energy is still coming in”

              And the energy is still going out:

              http://climate4you.com/images/OLR%20Global%20NOAA.gif

              No problem.

              10

        • #
          the Griss

          “can you please cite the science that identifies the culprit”

          A bit of reading for you, Timbo !

          100 papers showing that the SUN drives climate

          The latter part of last century has been classes a period of SOLAR MAXIMUM by many solar scientists.

          That solar maximum is now over. The current SC24 is far lower than the previous several, and the solar magnetic cycle dropped down right at the end of the 2000′s.

          The current cycle, SC24, is just over its second peak, and SC25 may be even shallower.

          Many solar scientists are predicting a cooling as the heat from the solar maximum period slowly leaves the system.

          40

          • #
            Timboss

            You might want to check your list. Some of those papers are simply saying that the sun has influence past climate; that’s not something climate scientists disagree with.

            04

            • #
              the Griss

              roflmao..

              Sun has influenced past climate..

              but doesn’t influence now…..

              Very cute hypothesis! :-)

              30

            • #
              Richard C (NZ)

              >”Some of those papers are simply saying that the sun has influence past climate; that’s not something climate scientists disagree with.”

              The Griss didn’t say they disagreed but at least you’ve got the central point Timbo – “the sun has influence past climate”.

              The first question is: by how much?

              By this I mean not just over the term of (supposed) CO2 forcing (since only 1750 but back then only minimally, apparently – doesn’t explain the LIA for example), but also over say the last 1000 years, the last 1000 – 10,000 years?

              Not for nothing is senior IPCC adviser Jay Overpeck on record by Dr David Deming as saying “We need to get rid of the MWP”.

              Why would he say that Timbo?

              The second question: by how much for the rest of this century?

              The IPCC play down a solar change – temperature change connection (primarily by bogus modeling) similar to the way they were ignorant of a natural oscillations – temperature change connection, but the answer to the second question will be unavoidable for CO2-centric climate science.

              The first phase of the IPCC’s failure has been playing out since around 2006 when Bob Carter pointed out that temperatures were flatlining contrary to the CO2 conjecture.

              Look for the second phase of solar and thermodynamically ignorant IPCC failure in the 2020s – about the time of their next Assessment Report.

              20

    • #

      Global warming is about the trend, globally.

      Exactly. Please remind the BOM? They seem obsessed with irrelevant or inaccurate hottest ever type records. I haven’t heard them talk about the global trend lately… which is either up down or flat depending on your start point.

      460

      • #
        Timboss

        There is a whole section devoted to climate, not weather.

        http://www.bom.gov.au/state-of-the-climate/

        29

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          There is a whole section devoted to climate, not weather.

          And still there’s no evidence that shows human activity is responsible for any weather or climate changes, past or present.

          No one disputes that the climate and the weather both change. It’s the blaming finger pointing at human activity as the cause, a finger with no visible means of support that skeptics dispute.

          51

        • #
          the Griss

          Correction required Timbo…

          “There is a whole section devoted to climate ACTIVISM !!”

          61

      • #
        John Of Cloverdale WA

        The 1905 newspaper article says “Terrific weather still prevails”.
        Obviously not a problem for those tough guys and gals back then, without aircon. And my trucker mate in Queensland is complaining about the rain!

        60

        • #
          Spotted Reptile

          The word “terrific” did not have the positive connotations in the early 20th century that it has now. It came from terrible, rather like “horrific” coming from horrible. It actually meant terrifying back then. Sometime in the early 1920s or so it gained a positive meaning. Some say the movie King Kong was the cause. Anyway it’s safe to say that if a newspaper in 1905 referred to something as terrific, it wasn’t complimentary.

          50

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Over the last two hundred years it has been going up, but it is still at a relatively low level considering Earth’s previous much hotter times.

      All depends on the length of the period being assessed.

      Tonight, I’m 95% certain, will be cooler than today’s midday temp!

      Comments like “hottest day ” are NOT about science but about histrionics.

      KK

      190

    • #
      the Griss

      “That’s going up.”

      I might have been for a short while if you consider all the Giss/HadCrut adjustments as temperature “going up”.

      This century.. ie NOW.. nada, nothing, zip !! steady as she goes. !!

      101

    • #
      tom0mason

      Timboss

      I thought ‘Global Warming’ was “out of control” or is said to be heading that way. If so it may have no trend at all if there is no control mechanism.
      .

      And there’s another crap theory all the CAGW alarmist can exercise both brain cells over.

      :)

      80

    • #
      Richard C (NZ)

      Timboss #3

      >”Global warming is about the trend, globally. That’s going up.”

      Yes, been going up since the LIA – naturally. The IPCC’s anthro attribution period is only 1951 – 2010, 60 years, 6 decades.

      On a decadal basis only 2 of those 6 decades, 1980s and 1990s, exhibit any warming (there has been no atmospheric warming this century). See IPCC AR5 SPM Figure 1:

      http://www.easterbrook.ca/steve/wp-content/IPCC-AR5-WG1-Fig-SPM1.png

      80

  • #
    sophocles

    Here are historic newspaper stories of the day the 120C
    records were set:

    Oops. 120C would be a real record!

    Thanks Fixed! – Jo

    60

  • #
    Bob Malloy

    Marble Bar heatwave, 1923-24

    The world record for the longest sequence of days above 100°Fahrenheit (or 37.8° on the Celsius scale) is held by Marble Bar in the inland Pilbara district of Western Australia. The temperature, measured under standard exposure conditions, reached or exceeded the century mark every day from 31 October 1923 to 7 April 1924, a total of 160 days.

    While BoM state 47.5C as the Max during those 160 days, Marble Bar experiences about 154 days above 37.8C (100F) yearly. Heat In Marble Bar in Summer, SHOCKING!!!

    http://www.bom.gov.au/lam/climate/levelthree/c20thc/temp1.htm

    140

    • #
      Bob Malloy

      At least one journalist is so excited he predicted it’s “highly likely” one of the towns in the area will hit the magic 49.5C which can be rounded up to 50C!

      But temperatures in other Western Australian towns have been higher: in a remarkable late-season heat-wave in February 1998, Mardie recorded a maximum of 50.5°C

      80

  • #
    tom0mason

    From Western Mail (Perth, WA : 1885 – 1954) Thursday 4 January 1945
    http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/38558167

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    THE MAN FROM MARBLE BAR.

    We were somewhere in Queensland and a heatwave at its height
    Was sapping our endurance from dawn till, late at night;
    But one there was among us who expressed for us his scorn
    As limply from the swelter we faced each fiery morn;
    The weather here, he reckoned, for him was just the shot
    Back home in Marble Bar they’d never” think this hot,
    And he’d yet to find the place that for heat was on a par
    When the summer season lasted in, earnest at the Bar; .
    There the mercury was given to reaching record peaks,
    Consistently maintaining the same for many weeks;
    There the sunlight fairly blinded with incandescent glow
    Ard you staggered ‘neath the heat as from a mighty blow;
    Then for emphasis he stated that down where Satan gloats
    The victims from the Bar would welcome overcoats!
    .
    PERCEBE.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    120

    • #

      In Marble Bar, they hang the thermometers up higher so that the mercury doesn’t pop the top.

      :-)

      140

    • #
      Another Ian

      Tomom

      A long time ago I had to translate for a friend in US. The quote was along the lines of

      “You can’t scare me with hell fire said a new recruit to the devil. I’m from Marble Bar”

      100

  • #
    Binny

    How many people know that Australia has only official reached 50+ 3 times and 2 of them were more that 1/2 a century ago.
    Oodnadatta 50.7 C (123.3 F) on the 2nd January, 1960
    Mardie 50.5 C (122.9 F) on the 19th February, 1998
    Wilcannia 50.0 C (122.0 F) on the 11th January, 1939

    Compare that to the publicity surrounding the BoM’s 52 / 54 forecast maps.

    100

  • #
    Wayne Job

    About ten years ago I road through there on my motor cycle in january, both the front and rear tyres melted, turned to bubble gum like I had been hooning. I found accom and travelled early the next day to save my tyres. Wonderful place to leave.

    80

  • #
    pat

    Sky Weather Channel does this sort of thing all the time.

    the other day they had 4 WA towns, including Kalgoorlie, with forecast max temps for the next day in the lefthand column and record max temps in the righthand column. none of the forecast temps were higher than the record highs.

    anyway, can’t recall the other towns, but there have been no record temps recorded or reported for Kalgoorlie or WA since, so it was all for nothing, other than furthering the CAGW meme.

    50

  • #
    RoHa

    Does anyone actually live there, and, if so, why?

    60

  • #
    pat

    damned if u do, damned if u don’t:

    22 Jan: Independent: Roger Wicker: Meet the one (and only) US senator who still thinks climate change is a hoax
    by Andrew Buncombe
    What, precisely, does Senator Roger Wicker know about the climate that everyone else has missed?
    Why, when even his Republican colleague James Inhoffe – a man who once dismissed climate climate as a “hoax” – vote that it is real, does Mr Wicker continue to insist it is not…
    Reports say the Democrats had pushed for a vote ahead of the 2016 elections, with polls showing that a majority of Americans believe humans are indeed contributing to climate change…
    While the vote to recognise climate change as real passed 98-1, another motion to acknowledge the role of humans as being part of the cause of such change, failed…
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/meet-the-one-and-only-us-senator-who-still-thinks-climate-change-is-a-hoax-9996116.html#

    all MSM reporting is purposely confusing the vote, making out it was about CAGW, yet admitting it was only about CC. so the CAGW propagandists got their headlines…and that’s all that matters.

    the comments at The Independent show how easily duped the public can be on this issue, tho there are some sceptic voices.

    80

  • #
    BruceC

    Max temp 49.0°C @ 3:12pm. 3:00pm: 48.2°C, 3:30pm: 47.9°C

    Missed it by…that much. Now watch them come out and say hottest January day (48.6°C on 11th Jan 2008).

    50

  • #
    mmxx

    It’s summer time again in Australia.

    When autumn or spring temperatures show a single day’s anomaly beyond standard deviation, alarmists please have a restorative coffee/tea/substance before pressing your apocalyptic CAGW buttons. Certainly, please don’t bother me about a couple of days’ anomalous recordings in summer or winter.

    it seems that the MSM is primed for alarmist reporting of any hot day temperature that short-term memory can’t recall. The MSM reference base is in danger of being reduced to reliance on day-by-day comparisons with memory records loosely scattered on trivial social media sites.

    50

  • #
    el gordo

    So close, but no hamper.

    ‘Western Australia’s north has experienced another sizzling day amid an extreme heatwave, with one location falling 0.2C short of its highest ever recorded temperature.’

    Ebonnie Spriggs / ABC

    50

  • #
    Another Ian

    BruceC

    But! That hasn’t been homogenised yet and otherwise adjusted. So hold your hat.

    50

    • #
      BruceC

      Weatherzone News @ 20:06EDT:

      Earlier in the day Mr Bennett (BoM) said Marble Bar could get close to its hottest ever day on record – 49.2°C, recorded on January 11, 1905, and January 3, 1922.

      But Marble Bar was just 0.2°C shy and hit a maximum of 49°C at 3:12pm, while the next hottest, Shay Gap, reached a maximum 48.3°C at 12:44pm.

      Mr Bennett also said;

      …Mardie Station, which recorded WA’s hottest ever temperature of 50.5°C in February 1998, could also nudge its hottest ever January day of 49°C.

      I bet they’re happy :) ….max 36.6°C @ 10:57am

      50

  • #
    Leigh

    I’m still having trouble getting over the channel 9 breakfast show live cross to marble bar.
    Where the reporter highlighted a melting paddle pop!

    110

    • #
      the Griss

      A melting paddle pop..

      OH NO !! catastrophe !!!!! :-)

      120

    • #
      Peter Carabot

      Well that paddle-pop is symptomatic of the difficulty that Street Ice Cream has in keeping the town re supplied with ice blocks. I am stupefied that they didn’t have an egg frying on the bonnet of the car, it would have been muuuuuch more effective in conveying the argument: car, fossil fuel, anthropogenic thingy, it makes sense! Personally I favour the boiled egg from the chicken rear end stunt… Fresh and clocked, that’s how hot it is here! Now! Give me your money!!

      20

  • #
    ma

    What’s the problem. 45 can be rounded up to 50, 50 can be rounded up to 100. Headline ‘Water boils at Marble Bar’.

    180

  • #
    the Griss

    “Today might reach 49.1C again like it did 110 years ago

    But it DIDN’T

    Sounds like GLOBAL COOLING to me !! ;-)

    After all this warming.. its STILL cooler than 110 years ago. !

    121

  • #
    Dariusz

    Taking about one point on earth, which is one of the hottest almost every day. Do I need to go to Antarctica and talk about lowest temperatures and prove that we are undergoing cooling? This has nothing to do with science again. Looking for distractions and cheap stunts again. BOM,s kilmaradtchiks prove their despair, incompetence and complete contempt.
    Thought that at least the “Australian” will refrain from this, but it looks like they have been infected by the climate plague too. And this is supposed to be a more conservative paper? What a joke.
    Celebrate less free Australia on Monday? Sadly I won,t.

    101

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      And they constantly look backwards and adjust the past.

      Any real science would be looking forward.

      There are many great meteorologists and they are not served well by climate change “scientists”.

      KK

      50

  • #

    It did not make the magic 50C (or even 49.5C)anywhere in WA Today. I’ve just checked and added an update.

    Latest Observations in WA. Marble Bar was the hottest.

    90

  • #
    pat

    btw ABC has no BOM correction online as yet re Queensland drought NOT being the worst in 80 years.

    News Ltd’s Business Spectator’s Tristan Edis with a counter-attack on the PacHydro wind study (check out the homepage to see the relentless CAGW promotion and the About Us page for the ABC/Fairfax connections. u have to laugh when ABC/Fairfax try to claim Murdoch’s News Ltd are CAGW deniers!

    22 Jan: BusinessSpectator: Tristan Edis: Did PacHydro give a free kick to the anti-wind lobby?
    Yesterday wind farm owner and developer Pacific Hydro had the rest of the wind power industry scratching their heads in consternation.
    There on the front page of The Australian newspaper was an article …
    What caused the consternation was a combination of two things that suggested this study would reach a pre-determined conclusion which was always going to provide ammunition to support the claims of the anti-wind farm lobby, even where the evidence was weak…
    ***Members of the academic community have come out panning the study as inadequate and lacking in scientific rigour and saying that its findings would be rejected for publication in any half reasonable academic journal…
    http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2015/1/22/wind-power/did-pachydro-give-free-kick-anti-wind-lobby

    from the comments -
    by Graham:
    Why is it that the proponents of wind farms take such an incredibly selfish view towards those who object to windmills being put in close proximity to their properties ?
    These things are not silent and they do make whining noises.
    Let’s turn this around the other way: rather than criticise the objectors, how about we have a show of hands from the proponents of windmills, volunteering to have these devices located next to their backyards.
    What ? No hands ? Not in/near my back yard! It’s good for others but not for me. What a surprise! QED.

    the CAGW “academics” at The Conversation tell u how to interpret the findings:

    ***22 Jan: The Conversation: Wind turbine studies: how to sort the good, the bad, and the ugly
    by Jacqui Hoepner, PhD candidate, Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science at Australian National University
    and Will J Grant, Researcher / Lecturer, Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science at Australian National University
    (Disclosure Statement: The authors do not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article. They also have no relevant affiliations.)
    Yesterday, The Australian ran a front-page article about what it called a “groundbreaking” new study on wind turbines and their associated health impacts…
    But this study is an exemplary case of what we consider to be bad science and bad science reporting. Far from “resolving the contentious debate”, it’s much more likely inflame an already fractious and fraught situation.
    Here’s a step-by-step guide to help you read this and similar studies…
    comment by eric oliver:
    Why would anyone buy his papers or be surprised at news limited to ruperts opinion publishing pseudo science on the front page of their flagship gossip rag. It would be interesting to know how much advertising and infotainment revenue comes to them from the fossil fuel industry. The subjects of the study would possibly have a vested interest in their perceived ailments with hopes of a compensation payout. Another gossipy fake news story. Its just the australian way.
    http://theconversation.com/wind-turbine-studies-how-to-sort-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-36548

    Profile: Jacqui(Hoepner) is currently undertaking PhD research with the the supervision of Dr Will Grant.
    Her thesis aims to investigate opposition to wind power in Australia on the basis of health impacts and how these concerns have been communicated or opposed by various groups.

    Profile: Will Grant is a talker, writer, thinker and reader, based primarily at the Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science at ANU. His talking / writing / thinking / reading has focused mostly on the intersection of science, politics and society, and how this is changing in response to new technologies. Co-host of KindaThinky.com
    Education: University of Queensland, PhD (Political Science), 2007

    60

    • #

      Trisdan Edis is a well known climate carpetbagger. He’s just an entertainer peddling bs to those who get off on climate doomsaying.
      Just like Alan Kohler, the finance entertainer, they really are just missing the clown suits.

      61

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    O/T and offered without comment.
    http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/01/23/20/53/queensland-opposition-leader-wants-green-future-for-queensland

    Apparently this is considered vote winning material one week before an election.

    50

  • #
    TdeF

    Does this mean bushfires are more likely at Marble Bar this year? Ask Tim Flannery. Is it Global Warming, an ‘angry summer’, Gaia being annoyed or is it just the climate in the middle of the desert? Put it down with the second catch in an afternoon session by a left handed batsman fielding at silly point on a Sunday in January in an even numbered year. Records are there to be broken. So? Where is this runaway global warming? The warmists’ desperation is showing.

    51

    • #
      Leigh

      “TODAY’S forecast: stinkingly scorchingly unbelievably boiling hot.”
      According to Sharwoods rediculous cringe worthy first line.
      Anything is a possibility with these alarmists..
      Oh and he forgot the children.

      40

  • #
    el gordo

    O/T William Astley in comments at Watts has discovered the mechanisms involved in the approaching mini ice age.

    ‘I will provide a couple of comments to provide a Coles notes summary of the mechanisms, as it appears the start of Dansgaard-Oeschger cooling is imminent. The Dansgaard-Oechger cycle is at 1500 years with beats of 400 years. The Dansgaard-Oeschger cycle occurs at high latitude regions at both poles.

    ‘There has been the recent firing of a senior Nature editor for attempting to publish unequivocal ice core evidence (from the Antarctic peninsula which is outside of the polar vortex and hence reflects south sea temperature rather than Antarctic ice sheet temperature.) that shows there has been 250 warming and cooling cycles in the last 250,000 year in the Southern hemisphere.

    ‘The Antarctic peninsula ice core data is very important as it means the Northern and Southern hemisphere repeatedly warm and cool, exactly in fact as we have just observed. Note Antarctic sea ice is suddenly the highest in recorded history which supports the assertion the cooling has started.’

    60

  • #

    Can anyone shed more light on this.
    “Western Mail Perth, WA Page 18 Thursday 14 August 1941
    “I have in my care the official Stevenson screen with four standard thermometers, maximum, minimum, wet and dry thermometers, which belong to the Australian Commowealth Meteorologist Department, and I send my book every month to the head office, Melbourne. The standard returns are entered every day at 8 a.m. I do not consider a temperature of under 110deg. is very hot in the district, as often we have had 126.5deg. and no comet.”

    http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/37935738.”
    Here is another claim of 126 F from thereabouts.
    http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/59449632?
    This makes it look like he got his Stevenson screen and thermometer a few months later but the data does not look like it backs his claims other than showing the date he began recording the rain correctly.
    http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/av?p_nccObsCode=36&p_display_type=dataFile&p_startYear=&p_c=&p_stn_num=012008

    30

    • #
      toorightmate

      Please – do not let facts (and the truth) get in the way of a good story.

      20

      • #

        toorightmate
        “do not let facts (and the truth) get in the way of a good story.”
        Well it DOES stand up to some scrutiny. The claim of Februrary 13 1933 reaching 126 F (52.2 C) does NOT look to far fetched. After checking the average January and February maximum temperatures for a lot of stations in that area I found numbers ranging from 35 to 37.7 Deg C.
        EG: Click here
        and Click here
        It can bee seen from the BoM map here below that during the 11th, 12th and 13th a big hot zone passed right over that area. It is shown being at least 12 degrees C above average.
        37.7 + 12 = 49.7 but the chart maxes out at 12 and by the look of the lines for 8,10 and 12 a new 14 line may fit in with a 16 line also. So the truth may be higher than his claim. This could happen if his well shaded box did not have good louvers to let the hot air in.
        Check out the map and click the next day etc to see how the centre of the heat went right on top of him.
        http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/awap/temp/archive.jsp?colour=colour&map=maxanom&year=1933&month=2&day=11&period=daily&area=wa

        00

        • #

          These links may work.
          Boolygoo Spring 012008
          Bulga Downs 012239

          This station at Walebing 008151 has daily data for 1933. For February 10 the BoM has Walebing reporting a maximum temperature of 46.2. This is 12.7 degrees higher than the mean there of 33.5. The map shows how this hot zone merged with another near equal hot zone from the South just before getting to the Sandstone area.

          00

  • #
    Mike of NQ

    I must be missing something, according to weather station – ID 004106 located at Marble Bar, the maximum temperature achieved today was 48.3 degrees at 2:30pm. By 3:00pm, the temperature had dropped to 48.2 degrees. By 3:12pm it was less than 48.2 degrees. That said, I did like Anthony Sharwood’s description of the hot day ‘stinkingly scorchingly unbelievably boiling hot’. Is there an undertone of doom and gloom in this description?

    30

  • #
    Mikky

    The old press releases are interesting, when they refer to temperatures “in the shade” it probably means that the thermometers were not screened, and may well not have been 100% in the shade, e.g. if under a tree. If they were shaded by a wall then Urban Heat Island was at play.

    Bottom line is that early temperatures cannot be compared with modern ones without some sort of correction being applied …

    15

    • #
      tom0mason

      And remember that all adjustments are time dependent.

      So 1960s temperature get up to 0.75°C reduction,
      1940s 1.0-1.75°C reduction, anything after that 2-2.5°C reduction,
      All with a +/- 0.001°C error as per best international practice.

      120

    • #
      old44

      And if they were screened, the box would have been whitewashed, you do know the temperature difference between plastic painted Stevenson screens and whitewashed screens tomomason?

      10

  • #
    tom0mason

    While the ice melts then vaporizes at Marble Bar, elsewhere the ice still floats on the surface -
    https://sunshinehours.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/antarctic_sea_ice_extent_zoomed_2015_day_19_1981-2010.png

    20

  • #
    toorightmate

    I lived in the Pilbara for 12 years.
    50 degrees should not alarm too many folk who may have resided at Newman, Paraburdoo and Pannawonica.
    In fact, the recent 45 degree days at Karratha are far worse than 50 degrees at Paraburdoo – for living/working “comfort”.

    “Why do people live there?”
    Because the people are nice, the Aussie bush in the area is beautiful, winters are magnificent and the money and conditions of employment are fantastic.

    110

  • #
    Spotted Reptile

    What’s going to happen in 2015? IF 2014 was the ‘hottest ever’ then it follows that the year after that has to be even hotter, and the next year and so on to continue the AGW myth. Otherwise people might think the warming has stopped. . . .

    10

  • #
    old44

    I the link “no towns making 50C in WA” the BOM readouts contain (and I quote)

    “Rowley Shoals -8.4″

    Does anyone at the BOM ever check the figures.

    Rowley Shoals being in the Indian Ocean.

    20

  • #
    old44

    Sorry, I missed the good one.

    Rowley Shoals Low Temp. and time -49.9 at 5:36am

    Hope none of those LNG tankers run into an iceberg.

    20

  • #
    Mike of NQ

    Warning warning warning – 2014 was the 9,700th hottest year in the last 10,000 years and the 3,867,856,221 hottest year since Earth’s creation. We must spend trillions now to avert this disaster.

    20

    • #
      the Griss

      9,700th hottest year in the last 10,000 years

      I make it 9,689th hottest in the last 10,000….

      … but I’ll accept your rounding off. :-)

      (just wanted to get you quote in big letters) ;-)

      10

  • #
    Brian Hatch

    We are told that Oodnadatta has the highest recorded temp of 50.7. BOM ignores Mildura which also reached 50.7 on 7 January 1906. Pesky old records.

    50

  • #
    Ian George

    50.8C actually – but they reduced it quickly.
    http://www.amos.org.au/documents/item/383

    00