Australia swelters through heatwave as records tumble

[webfact]

Australia swelters through heatwave as records tumble

By Byron Kaye

 

Volunteer life guards from North Bondi Surf Life Saving Club, keep an eye on swimmers enjoying Christmas day on Bondi Beach, Sydney, Australia, December 25, 2018. REUTERS/Jill Gralow/File Photo

 

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Australia looks set to sweat through one of its hottest Decembers ever, the national weather bureau said on Friday, prompting fire bans, health warnings and big crowds trying to cool off at beaches.

 

As the country's hottest town, Marble Bar in the remote northwest, endured its warmest day ever, forecasters said the heat would spread southeast where the big cities of Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide would endure monthly average temperatures up to 16 degrees Celsius higher than usual.

 

The capital, Canberra, was bracing for its hottest December day on record -- 39C (102F) -- on Saturday.

 

"We're going to see December records tumbling," said Diana Eadie, a meteorologist at the Bureau of Meteorology.

 

"We're definitely not out of it yet, in fact I would say it's going to be peaking over more populated areas this weekend."

 

December is the beginning of the Southern Hemisphere summer. January and February can be even hotter.

 

For the four-fifths of Australia's 25 million people who live on the coast, the summer typically means lazing on the beach, watching cricket or both.

 

But the unusually high temperatures add to a sense of exhaustion for a farm economy already reeling from a year of drought.

"It adds insult to injury," said Laureta Wallace, a spokeswoman for the National Farmers' Federation.

 

"Most farmers would have got some rain prior to Christmas but the benefit of that will have been eroded with this heat wave. Water's an issue."

 

The Bureau of Meteorology put the hot spell down to a combination of hot air being blown from the northwest toward the densely populated southeast, where a "blocking" high off the coast was stopping cooler winds from moving it on.

 

The bureau's "extreme heatwave" warning, its highest category, includes Sydney for the next three days.

 

Sydney's inland suburbs were forecast to swelter in 40C (104F) heat.

 

Almost the entire state of New South Wales had a "high" or "very high" fire danger, according to the rural fire service.

 

A "low-intensity heatwave" in neighboring Victoria state was expected to spread south almost as far as the second city Melbourne.

 

Health authorities have issued warnings for pregnant women, babies, people aged over 65 and people with lung conditions since the heat eroded air quality.

 

The town recognized by Australians as their hottest, Marble Bar, with a population 174, had a reprieve on Friday from its 49.1C (120.4F) record a day earlier, enjoying a relatively comfortable 35.6C (96F) in the morning.

 

(Reporting by Byron Kaye; Editing by Robert Birsel)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-12-28

[marko kok prong]

Been to Marble bar,why anyone would want to live there is beyond me.

[mfd101]

2 hours ago, marko kok prong said:

Been to Marble bar,why anyone would want to live there is beyond me.

You could say the same for much of Australia actually, at least outside the major cities: Geologically fascinating, anthropologically interesting (and I don't mean the Aboriginals) ...

[toofarnorth]

Streuth !  I worked up in the NW working for Australian Arial Mapping in '70 and left when it got to 40c along the railway lines , enough already !

[tandor]

1 hour ago, mfd101 said:

You could say the same for much of Australia actually, at least outside the major cities: Geologically fascinating, anthropologically interesting (and I don't mean the Aboriginals) ...

..you mean the horny/thorny devils ?

[RickBradford]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

... the big cities of Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide would endure monthly average temperatures up to 16 degrees Celsius higher than usual.

You can always rely on the mainstream media to lie in the service of the global warming crusade. The bureau actually said that temperatures in some places over the next few days may hit values which exceed the monthly average by up to 16C.

 

Normally, this could be explained by journalistic incompetence rather than malice, but Reuters does this every time nowadays. And it's unlikely the Australian Bureau of Meteorology will ask for the error to be corrected.

[rickudon]

If temperatures exceeded the monthly average by 16c in Thailand people would be dropping like flies. The reality is that parts of Australia are on their way to be uninhabitable, and you have a PM who will enable it. Never mind, you will need the coal to keep the aircon running!

[ozsamurai]

All BS, sitting in 45 now, its just another Summer for us.  It'll last a few weeks then be done.  BS press.

 

Oz

[Odysseus123]

37 C-nice breeze blowing and it is still cool at nights.

 

We had it far,far worse when we were kids.

 

Large parts of inland OZ have always been marginally uninhabitable for Europeans.

[bristolboy]

27 minutes ago, ozsamurai said:

All BS, sitting in 45 now, its just another Summer for us.  It'll last a few weeks then be done.  BS press.

 

Oz

Damned dishonest Australian Bureau of Meteorology:

http://media.bom.gov.au/releases/591/audio-news-release-victorias-forecast-for-christmas-and-boxing-day/

[RickBradford]

4 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Damned dishonest Australian Bureau of Meteorology:

http://media.bom.gov.au/releases/591/audio-news-release-victorias-forecast-for-christmas-and-boxing-day/

Very dishonest.

 

They've been caught a number of times before trying to fiddle the data to make warming seem more serious.

 

Many sources reported this, but hardly any of the mainstream media.

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/19211/global-warming-hoax-exposed-australia-weather-john-nolte

[simple1]

21 hours ago, RickBradford said:

You can always rely on the mainstream media to lie in the service of the global warming crusade. The bureau actually said that temperatures in some places over the next few days may hit values which exceed the monthly average by up to 16C.

 

Normally, this could be explained by journalistic incompetence rather than malice, but Reuters does this every time nowadays. And it's unlikely the Australian Bureau of Meteorology will ask for the error to be corrected.

You're misrepresenting the article. The intro talks to high temperatures, the context is a forecast for a few days averaging 16C above average daily temperature for the month.

 

BTW for most people contributors to Briabart, e.g. John Nolte, are not considered credible sources, nor is Daily Wire, but as leading contenders for conspiracy nonsense and right of centre..

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, RickBradford said:

Very dishonest.

 

They've been caught a number of times before trying to fiddle the data to make warming seem more serious.

 

Many sources reported this, but hardly any of the mainstream media.

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/19211/global-warming-hoax-exposed-australia-weather-john-nolte

This is just more dishonest nonsense from John Nolte about data homogenization.

If you want the facts, here they are:

"Our data on extreme temperature trends show that the warming trend across the whole of Australia looks bigger when you don’t homogenise the data than when you do. For example, the adjusted data set (the lower image below) shows a cooling trend over parts of northwest Australia, which isn’t seen in the raw data.

Far from being a fudge to make warming look more severe than it is, most of the Bureau’s data manipulation has in fact had the effect of reducing the apparent extreme temperature trends across Australia."

https://theconversation.com/no-the-bureau-of-meteorology-is-not-fiddling-its-weather-data-31009

And here's some more data from the Berkeley Earth project. You know the one that was financed originally by deniers to challenge the warming data and then abandoned when it came up with data that proved the deniers wrong.

http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/regions/australia

http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/auto/Regional/TAVG/Figures/australia-TAVG-Trend.pdf

http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/auto/Regional/TMIN/Figures/australia-TMIN-Trend.pdf

 

[RickBradford]

^^^

If you instinctively dismiss as incorrect or biased every source that disagrees with your preferred narrative, you will not get very far in your understanding of matters.

 

As I purposely took the trouble to point out, BOM's serial data dishonesty was spotted by several scientists and reported by multiple sources; one of those was The Australian newspaper, which you can check yourself if you can spare the time from chucking infantile words like "denier" around.

[RickBradford]

2 hours ago, simple1 said:

You're misrepresenting the article. The intro talks to high temperatures, the context is a forecast for a few days averaging 16C above average daily temperature for the month.

How you can possibly misread the phrase "... the big cities of Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide would endure monthly average temperatures up to 16 degrees Celsius higher than usual.", I really don't know.

 

It seems crystal clear to me, and, I suspect, most others taking the trouble to read this thread.

[simple1]

6 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

How you can possibly misread the phrase "... the big cities of Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide would endure monthly average temperatures up to 16 degrees Celsius higher than usual.", I really don't know.

 

It seems crystal clear to me, and, I suspect, most others taking the trouble to read this thread.

Comprehension of context is required; from the article following on from the above...

 

The capital, Canberra, was bracing for its hottest December day on record -- 39C (102F) -- on Saturday.

 

"We're going to see December records tumbling," said Diana Eadie, a meteorologist at the Bureau of Meteorology.

 

"We're definitely not out of it yet, in fact I would say it's going to be peaking over more populated areas this weekend."

[RickBradford]

8 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Comprehension of context is required;

Nonsense. The statement stands alone and is quite explicit. Impossible to misread, in fact.

 

"... the big cities of Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide would endure monthly average temperatures up to 16 degrees Celsius higher than usual."

 

Tell that to 100 people who learned even a small amount about arithmetic and the English language, and they will all draw the same conclusion I did.

 

It's flat-out nonsense, and my belief is that the journalist knows it is.

[bristolboy]

3 hours ago, RickBradford said:

^^^

If you instinctively dismiss as incorrect or biased every source that disagrees with your preferred narrative, you will not get very far in your understanding of matters.

 

As I purposely took the trouble to point out, BOM's serial data dishonesty was spotted by several scientists and reported by multiple sources; one of those was The Australian newspaper, which you can check yourself if you can spare the time from chucking infantile words like "denier" around.

I followed the link you provided. It was garbage. Now you're making another claim but without providing the link. If you make a claim, then it's incumbent upon you to provide the evidence. That's the way it works in science, law, history, etc.

[RickBradford]

^^

If you're incapable of searching for the article on The Australian,  don't complain to me.

 

And you should bear in mind that articles aren't "garbage" just because you think they are. Just because you want something to be true, that doesn't make it so.

 

That's the way it works in science, law, history, etc.

[bristolboy]

12 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

^^

If you're incapable of searching for the article on The Australian,  don't complain to me.

 

And you should bear in mind that articles aren't "garbage" just because you think they are. Just because you want something to be true, that doesn't make it so.

 

That's the way it works in science, law, history, etc.

Once again, it's incumbent upon the person making the claim to provide the evidence. That's what honorable people do. They back up their claims with evidence. They don't simply allege that it exists. Can you imagine a scientist or lawyer or historian refusing to provide footnotes and telling readers it's incumbent upon them to confirm the claims? Maybe you believe that's how it works? 

I provided a link to a serious scientific explanation of temperature homogenization provided by climatologists.

I also provided links to the Berkeley Earth Project which independently found that the average temperature in Australia had indeed risen.

You link to an article by a non-climatologist who makes the following assertion:

"There is simply no question anymore that Global Warming or Climate Change — or whatever these luddites are calling it today — is a massive fraud."

Edited December 29, 2018 by bristolboy

[RickBradford]

 

3 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

You link to an article by a non-climatologist who makes the following assertion:

"There is simply no question anymore that Global Warming or Climate Change — or whatever these luddites are calling it today — is a massive fraud."

Trillions of dollars p**sed away on meaningless make-work climate "activities" and nothing to show for it except shedloads of money for banks, fund managers, lawyers, insurance companies, activists and organised crime.

 

What do you call it? Progress?

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, RickBradford said:

 

Trillions of dollars p**sed away on meaningless make-work climate "activities" and nothing to show for it except shedloads of money for banks, fund managers, lawyers, insurance companies, activists and organised crime.

 

What do you call it? Progress?

Your comment is entirely irrelevant.

He claimed that Global Warming or Climate Change is a fraud.

This is the author of the article you linked to. I provide links to Scientists. You provide one link to an article in a right wing rag authored by a ranter.

And as usual you make ridiculous exaggerations about how much money has been spent.  "Trillions of dollars." Really?

And you also claimed that 

"Normally, this could be explained by journalistic incompetence rather than malice, but Reuters does this every time nowadays." You gonna stick with this obvious piece of dishonesty as well?

[RickBradford]

Just now, bristolboy said:

And as usual you make ridiculous exaggerations about how much money has been spent. "Trillions of dollars." Really?

The Climate Policy Initiative has just boasted that spending on climate activities reached $463 billion for the year of 2018, with broadly similar sums in the 2 previous years. There's a trillion, just in the last 3 years.

 

Why not do some reading before accusing people of making "ridiculous exaggerations"?

 

As I said before, and I meant it in all seriousness, things don't become true just because you want them to be.

 

 

[bristolboy]

21 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

The Climate Policy Initiative has just boasted that spending on climate activities reached $463 billion for the year of 2018, with broadly similar sums in the 2 previous years. There's a trillion, just in the last 3 years.

 

Why not do some reading before accusing people of making "ridiculous exaggerations"?

 

As I said before, and I meant it in all seriousness, things don't become true just because you want them to be.

 

 

 

24 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

The Climate Policy Initiative has just boasted that spending on climate activities reached $463 billion for the year of 2018, with broadly similar sums in the 2 previous years. There's a trillion, just in the last 3 years.

 

Why not do some reading before accusing people of making "ridiculous exaggerations"?

 

As I said before, and I meant it in all seriousness, things don't become true just because you want them to be.

 

 

I thought you were referring to money that was being wasted. But since their figures includes such things as wind power, solar power, water conservation I wouldn't call that make-work or money wasted. Wind power and solar power have already made coal uneconomical, and they are now pushing gas out of competition for on demand power supply. They are way ahead of where the predictions were just a few years ago. Now that economically competitive battery storage is a reality, gas will soon be a fossil fuel in more ways than one.   And that is without considering the costs saved from reduced harm from air and water pollution alone. 

And you still haven't provided evidence to back your claims about the Australian Bureau of Meteorology apart from that of the ranter who claims that global warming and climate change are frauds

Nor backed your ridiculous claim about Reuters.

You just keep on shedding the garbage and move on to the next deflection.