Jeez, SM blow your own trumpet much?

You are certainly NOT the only one on this site with any science background, and from what I have read of your material, yours must be pretty thin.

I have read that has been claimed by the BOM that they have documentary evidence that the Rutherglen site was not in the place where it is now and that they detected a jump/break in the data series around the 1970s that would explain this.
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/acorn-sat/rutherglen/rutherglen-station.shtml

Marohasy says that there are no documented site moves.

Hmm, who to believe?

Also, the raw data is freely accessible, otherwise Marohasy wouldn't have been able to access it right? So the integrity of the raw data is not in question,but the actual analysis of temperature trends, which of course require that homogenisation be done to get an accurate signal from noise.

Your little puns betray that you are not neutral on this matter, and that the integrity of the data is actually not your primary concern.

Shadow,
Just this one point: "stealth denialist" coined by the Royal Society for the Arts (RSA).
So, people along way from the realms of science understand the societal problems in getting society to move quickly.

Let me get this straight, the earlier Rutherglen minimum temperatures were adjusted down which gives a warming trend yet the earlier maximum temperatures were adjusted up which produces a cooling trend, but the focus is on the first because this produces the best fodder for those who think there is a conspiracy occurring.
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/acorn-sat/documents/station-adjustment-summary-Rutherglen.pdf

In fact nowhere in Jennifer's article or her blog does she mention the maximum temperature adjustment. Doesn't fit the narrative?

In Olbost they did the opposite;
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/acorn-sat/documents/station-adjustment-summary-Orbost.pdf

Why not a song and dance over it?

Cherry picking delight.

Steele, putting it another way in relation to climate, we are told by climate scientists that warmer atmosphere and oceans increases evaporation.

Here is a quote from a Meteorologist working for a Insurance company:

"Meteorologist Steve Bowen told USA Today that the fact that the flooding in South Carolina was the sixth “1-in-1,000 year” rain event since 2010 was unprecedented. That term means that the event had a 0.1 percent likelihood of occurring in any given year."

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/10/07/3709459/south-carolina-flooding-impacts/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=cptop3&elq=8e0dc11c6b5540dcb4b434679c95ea45&elqCampaignId=4032&elqaid=27502&elqat=1&elqTrackId=9a13355fb64348128760e67267df4e3a

It's a big jump to not take into consideration extra warming of oceans and atmosphere when such statistics are presented.

Every graph I have seen where temperature has been processed shows the processed temperature to be ever so slightly below the measured temperature. But, the trend line shows a continuing upward movement.
The Pacific, North Atlantic and Indian Oceans are showing that the hiatus has been a nonsense; they have been belching up lots of warmth. In relative terms the Southern Ocean is also showing warm signs through undermining of the Totem Ice Sheet.

https://youtu.be/qQEXRF3Y52g