More From Deniliquin

Deniliquin has not only cooled since the 19th century, but the frequency of very hot days has also dropped dramatically.

ScreenHunter_7164 Feb. 15 07.52

BOM ignores all pre-1910 temperatures, because they don’t fit the global warming narrative.

ScreenHunter_7135 Feb. 14 07.45

ScreenHunter_7136 Feb. 14 07.48

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to More From Deniliquin

  1. NielsZoo says:

    Looking at that siting I wonder how much lower the trend for that record would be without the obvious UHI?

  2. Andy Oz says:

    After the droughts of the 1850’s (possibly influenced by deforestation and draining swamps and lakes) and then the Federation Drought of the 1890’s, the NSW government built the Mulwala pronounced Mulwaylah) Canal which irrigated much of the southern Riverina, and then the built the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area canals which irrigated the northern Riverina.

    I caught redfin perch and yellowbelly in both as a kid. Those two engineering marvels did a lot to drought-proof large tracts of southern NSW.

    Engineers, not climate scientists, did something about droughts for farmers caused by the heat in late 19th Century NSW (ENSO related or not). And engineers know that most climate scientists are full of crap.

    • Andy Oz says:

      Got the order wrong – MIA built first in 1912 and Mulwala (biggest irrigation canal in southern hemisphere) second in 1939.

      • AndyG55 says:

        The federation drought dried up the Edwards River “anabranch” of the Murray River that flows through Deniliquin. This would certainly have meant much higher temps in “Deni”
        during that period.

        As Andy Oz says, human intervention then made sure that this could not happen again.. (you could also mention the Snowy Mountains Scheme, 1950’s)

        There is very good reason that those high temperatures could actually be correct, and will never be repeated.

        Water, the great coolant !

  3. gator69 says:

    The 1880’s saw many high temperature records, in the US too. It had been a bad couple of decades…

  4. rick says:

    First graph, left side : should be “percent”

  5. rah says:

    Yea, because before that the civil war has made it one hell of a lot hotter than any weather/climate ever did.

    I have studied the Battle at Gettysburg (July 1-3 1863) extensively. Visited the field five times and will go back again because I’m still learning. Descriptions of the weather from participants and on both sides and some of the residents make it clear the weather was miserably hot and humid at the time. Now imagine being a Union soldier dressed in woolen shoddy uniforms fighting that battle.

    In fact that weather had a significant impact on the battle in some places. On the 2nd day, the most terrible of the three days of hard battle, the determination of the outcome may have been significantly effected by the weather. Col William Oates who led the 15th Alabama against the extreme right (southern flank) of the Army of the Potomac defended by the 20th Maine commanded by LTC Joshua Chamberlain
    most certainly understood this.

    Oates Regiment had marched all night to reach the field and had little respite before pushing off for the offensive. During that brief respite Oates sent a detail to get water to fill his men’s empty canteens. The detail never made it back and Oates men went into battle on very hot day with virtually no rest and empty canteens. They were in battle for hours before finally retreating having been repelled by the hardcore defense by the 20th Maine. No matter how determined, conditioned, and experienced a person is, there comes a point where motivation, mental, and physical toughness can no longer stand before the realities of physiology.

  6. rah says:

    Err that should have been – left flank

  7. Mikky says:

    “BOM ignores all pre-1910 temperatures, because they don’t fit the global warming narrative.”

    That is why sceptics needs to correct data from Oz before 1910, so that BoM can no longer hide behind the excuse of non-standard exposures. Temperatures have to come down a lot, but what remains shows that today’s maxima are no higher than those in 1908 and the Federation Drought years.

    I’m on the case, but Oz is a very large place with a mountain of data.

  8. Andy DC says:

    Climate experts of today are FAR better reading thermometers than the unwashed primatives of the 1880’s. (sarc)

    • rah says:

      Yes they can read them to a 10th of a degree and then come back with a computer years later and change them by 8/10ths or more.

  9. AndyG55 says:

    Notice that there is a step down at the end of the Federation drought,

    then another in the 1940-1950’s.. Malwala diversion and Snowy Mountain Scheme ?

    A pic of he Edwards river, how cool and refreshing does that look !

  10. AndyG55 says:

    I think that the main point here is that BOM needs to do EVERYTHING they can to include the Federation Drought period into the climate record… WITHOUT TOO MUCH ADJUSTMENT.

    This is a period in Australian history that shows just what the Australian climate can throw at us, NATURALLY !!

    To ignore it because its in the “too hard” or “too hot” basket, smacks of non-scientifc BIAS !

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s