There is a far simpler explanation Hasbeen, and that is you are just a truculent old coot. I only ever really address comments to you when you directly address me. None of your comments ever add anything useful or insightful to any subject and nothing you have ever written has given pause to respect any opinion that you hold. In light of the fact that you find my posts a waste of time, as I do yours, you could do me the courtesy or ignoring them in future, as I generally do yours.

Ken: whatever, take it up with the BOM.

Cohenite: now this is a great example of misinterpretation and misrepresentation of statements, something that is far too common on these blogs and actually typical of your articles. You are guessing that I’m a ‘climate scientist’, but I have made no such claim to that, nor claimed to be the ‘world’s best’. However, I do claim that I have published infinitely more scientific papers than you, only because you only have to publish one to achieve that honour.

The points made here are trivial, as is the article.

And let you & your com man mates a free run,no way Bugsy.

We will bug you & the other con men until we get the truth.

Do enjoy your little bit of cherry pie, it looks as if the planet & the net are about to turn nasty for you.

Continued;

To achieve the BoM’s national and state averages based purely on all station maxima, it’s interesting looking at how many of the highest maxima stations would be needed out of the total in each jurisdiction:
Australia 339 out of 721
NSW 91 out of 172
Northern Territory 27 out of 54
Queensland 54 out of 125
South Australia 45 out of 80
Tasmania 57 out of 57
Victoria 68 out of 94
Western Australia 60 out of 139
In other words, if you chose the hottest 339 weather stations in Australia on 7 January 2013 and ignored the other 382, you’d find an average maximum of 40.3C.

By comparison 1896 a real National heat-wave according to Sir Charles Todd’s records:

http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/davids-disinformation.html

In conclusion the Summer hot but too many questions unanswered to justify hysterical conclusions of “Angry Summer”; fail.

6 How did BOM calculate its National Mean? Ken Stewart offers one suggestion; supported by David Stockwell’s observations:

http://aefweb.info/data/Stockwell%20AEF%20Conference.pdf

See slide 10; basically ACORN hot ‘lumps’ around Alice Springs and Tibooburra responsible for heating of entire continent. Ian Hill has noted a temperature gerrymander with BOM’s spatial homogenisation; Ian says:

“Look at NT, lots of area, not that many stations. When considering the state area ratios used to work out the national figure, Alice Springs is probably more than ten times as “equal” as any station in SA. Of course Alice Springs or other stations close to the SA border need to be used to help work out the SA average. Similarly for the other large (in area) states.”

The reason why this temperature gerrymander exists was looked at by Stockwell and Stewart:

http://landshape.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/06-Stockwell[1].pdf

They looked at the HQ network but the point applies to ACORN:

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/07/boms-new-data-set-acorn-so-bad-it-should-be-withdrawn-954-min-temps-larger-than-the-max/#comment-1090733

Basically there are 2 problems with BOM’s homogenisation process; the data and the extrapolation from particular sites. Let me state this plainly; BOM has problems with both as Della-Marta et.al. (2004) found; these problems have persisted as BOM’s predictive woeful record shows, eg:

http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/?p=931

And they are not transparent. Not good enough, except for the alarmists. Fail.

And the CC; wrong again:

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/how_dare_the_climate_commission_complain_at_being_caught_out/

Anyone else notice how deniers want to splice the Birdsville records without allowing for the recent one being on a different weather station at a different physical location? I guess they don't approve of Watts' surface station efforts.

Or how they think a river can't flood more than one area. (Nor heard of flash floods.)

Still trying to argue what Watts himself denied, that the yellow line is a 'trend' line.

And despite a complete lack of numeracy skills (don't understand how an average works), and incomprehensible lack of understanding of even basic weather and climate, still maintain they know more about weather and climate than the professionals.

Dunning Kruger or a deliberate attempt to disinform? Both I'd say, mixed in with paranoid conspiracy ideation (involving BoM, the Climate Commission, the Australian government and probably all the media outlets including Channel 10 and maybe the opposition as well).

I'd call them knuckleheads except that would be insulting to knuckleheads.

sou - do you have anything to contribute to this discussion or just you just come here to abuse people and promote your blog?

No Janama he/she doesn't; he/she is just a nasty little sou and sou.

There is, unfortunately, no doubt the position of the BOM and the CSIRO has been politicised in respect of AGW. Science and the world economy have been tained and distorted by this with $billions wasted.

The CC is beyond redemption and is a disgrace.

I hope some good does come out of it including a closer examination of Green ideology and its insidious impact.

In the meantime the 'science' of AGW goes from bad to worse. The much vaunted Marcott paper about paleoclimate temperature is just dreadful. Apparently Marcott's thesis dealt with the subject and had NO hockeystick showing the present warmer:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/14/marcotts-hockey-stick-uptick-mystery-it-didnt-used-to-be-there/

Marcott's proxies do not sustain any conclusion about today being warmer:

http://climateaudit.org/2013/03/13/marcott-mystery-1/

In fact Marcott has conceded that the present day warming, or "uptick" in temperature is not "robust".

And when the the confection of the "uptick" is removed what is left is a confirmation that the MWP and Holocene were warmer:

http://suyts.wordpress.com/2013/03/14/hockey-stick-found-in-marcott-data/

Yet this rubbish was published in a prominent peer reviewed journal.