It is official, last year was the hottest on record in Australia. The following graph from the Bureau of Meterology shows 2005 was exceptionally warm and more than a degree warmer than the 1961-1990 average which is the standard reference period for calculating temperature anomalies.
Many of Australia's warmest years, including 1988, 1998 and 2002, had temperatures boosted by significant El Nino events. However, 2005 was not an El Nino year, making the high temperatures even more remarkable.
According to the Bureau:
1. Australian temperatures have increased by approximately 0.9C since 1910, consistent with global warming trends.
2. Both daytime and night-time temperatures were high in 2005. The annual mean maximum temperature was 1.21C above average (equal highest), while the mean minimum temperature was 0.97C above average (2nd highest).
3.Temperature anomalies varied throughout the year but autumn 2005 was particularly warm. April had the largest Australian mean monthly temperature anomaly ever recorded, with a monthly anomaly of +2.58C breaking the previous record of +2.32C set in June 1996.
The Bureau noted in its assessment that:
Australian mean temperatures are calculated from a country-wide network of about 100 high-quality, mostly rural, observing stations. The Bureau of Meteorology Research Centre and National Climate Centre have undertaken extensive quality checking to ensure that the temperature records from these sites have not been compromised by changes in site location, exposure or instrumentation over time.
If 2005 was a degree warmer than the 1961-1990 average then we have already experienced the likely consequences of global warming, haven't we? Isn't the IPCC estimate that average temps will increase by one degree?
I was there all through the 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's and frankly, the difference meant absolute jack shit to me. I just wanted good surf, cold beer and get laid. And the reasons I am currently in deficit in all these elements has nothing to do with average temperatures.
Quoting Ender above:
"Yes but the discipline is entirely different. What you saying is the same as implying that an atmospheric physicist is an authority on cosmology they both use mathematics. Yes a paleoclimatologist would use the mechanics of geology to obtain his/her data however this is not the focus of the research and if asked a question or quoted on the subject of geology would not be an authority".
Huh ?
Weeelll - that's "a" definition that some use. Climate is the weather you ought be getting.
"I'd be amazed if we could have a weather summary for 105,421 years ago on March 21. But anyway nit-picking"
Picking a few Nits, climate is defined as weather over a 30 year period.
sigh .. .. so we agree on nothing then. That's OK - but silly IMHO non-expert opinion. There's fairly large sample of stations and there seems to be some spatial coherence in the pattern.
I would have honestly thought a more rational view would be that there is a wide range of evidence that the Earth is in general globally warming. Australia is too.
You could then provide alternative reasons why this is so. Or argue that the cost of adapting is cheaper than mitigating.
But no go on the warming eh - bloody nora !
*So now that we agree Australia is terrestrially warming* - wrong again, we agree there are official records that indicate....
....official records that we admit to containing a degree of error.
rog - "A paleoclimatoligist uses fossiles, rock layers, air trapped in polar ice caps, etc to gain an insight on the weather eons ago.
By definition it must include geology"
Yes but the discipline is entirely different. What you saying is the same as implying that an atmospheric physicist is an authority on cosmology they both use mathematics. Yes a paleoclimatologist would use the mechanics of geology to obtain his/her data however this is not the focus of the research and if asked a question or quoted on the subject of geology would not be an authority.
Anyway why are we still jousting - Rog you have accepted BoM's analysis on face value. So now that we agree Australia is terrestrially warming - why ? is the next question.