It looks like you went back and added to your post after I already replied. I've noticed you do that a lot. Why?
Looks like another misrepresentation.You argued averages and low temps hardly matter.
The "new elecrtonic gizmos" is clearly a joke. Everyone knows there will be differences in instruments - the article acknowledges such - "The 60 long-term stations then, are more useful because they’re the originals, even though many of them have shifted down the road from post offices to airports and got new electronic gizmos. None of them are ideal, but at least they are in the same locality."- No, I understand the need to have a level playing field when comparing temperatures. When your article says stupid things "new electronic gizmos" conspiracy theorists are trying to imply that instrument calibration is a conspiracy. The point is that if you ignore things like "new electronic gizmos," your answer will be wrong. Do you you really think there are 25 or 60 mercury thermometer stations that have been in continuous operation for a 130-150 years?
I've posted analysis after analysis of why these adjustments don't add up and you just cop out with the conspiracy theory deflection. The BOM could easily put this to bed if they would just be transparent about their adjustments, instead they put it in a black box.
http://joannenova.com.au/2015/06/if-it-cant-be-replicated-it-isnt-science-bom-admits-temperature-adjustments-are-secret/
"The BOM Technical Advisory Forum report is out. Finally there is the black and white admission that the BOM “adjusted” dataset cannot be replicated independently, has not been replicated by any other group, and even more so, that the BOM will not provide enough information for anyone who wants to try.
As we have said all along, the all new ACORN wonder-data was not created with the scientific method. Adjustments to Australian temperature data were done with a black box mystery technique that only the sacred guild at the BOM are allowed to know. Far from being published and peer reviewed, the methods are secret, and rely on — in their own words — a “supervised process” of “expert judgment” and “operator intervention”. In other words, a BOM employee makes their best guess, ruling in or out the “optimal” choices, making assumptions that are not documented anywhere.
It’s a “trust us” approach. Would we let an ASX company audit their own books? Would you buy shares in such a company, or let it inform national policy on billion dollar schemes?"
Bookmarks