Ant,

The position of the temperature measurement is very important which is why Penrith has consistently shown higher than average temperatures than the rest of Sydney during the Summer. Considering that Penrith only started recording temperature in 1995, that means that the measurement of 49C in 1896 would probably be measured higher today.

Using your argument your claim that "The global temperature measure for 2017 is significant in that it is the highest temperature measured without an el nino influencing it" applies only to the last 10 decades when "reliable" measurements existed.

Penrith is a hot part of Sydney. Penrith is situated in a virtual pocket up against the Great Dividing Range to the west and lowland stretching east to the coast. Penrith is landlocked away from cooling sea breeze including southeries coming off the sea.

Penrith would be a good place to measure hot temperature.

As for Perth, higher temperature occurs on the WA Perth coast in association with warm wind flowing from the ocean onto land. That warm seabreeze from the west is known to split skin on white grapes grown in that region.

It puzzles me why cause/s of warmer AREAS of SST (sea surface temperature) are not known.

Shadow Minister

We will need to agree to disagree with one another.

I gave a reference quoting Meteorologists that were working in the 1890s.

I had talk with a scientist today who had visited about the issue, her comment was "so". She went on to say there are so many matters displaying climate change that the temperature of Sydney in the late 1890s is a furphy.

One such matter is permafrost continuing to thaw which will have a devastating impact on human life, coral reefs, and various habitats should it not be slowed. At the end of film referenced, Max Holmes, a climate scientist, is questioned about the impact on his children; his body language and response says it all ... he is not able to hide his great concern.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GGAp7y0lpU&feature=youtu.be

This is the truth

There has been great research done, such as identifying the Australian east coast Sediment Dispersal System, but impact of municipal sewage nutrient over-load dumped into that system that flows into GBR waters, is politically excluded from GBRMPA science and coastal development EIS procedure.

Why is researched fact purposely being excluded from some other research?

For example, why is transportation of dissolved nutrient into GBR waters not being seen and measured in coral science when presence of nutrient dependent algae covering dead coral is obvious?

The sediment system described at the following link surely cannot function and flow without transporting dissolved nutrient.

http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.2112/08-1120.1