lee wrote on Jan 5^th, 2014 at 5:47pm:

This is acorn-sat....

The methods used to create ACORN-SAT are wrong.

· Maintenance of ACORN-SAT as a production database is not practicable and not reproducible – Not by the BoM, and not by its author. It is one person’s view of Australian temperature history.

· The original Raw temperature data used to create the ACORN-SAT dataset has been corrupted by data merging and homogenising, and in particular by the Percentile Matching method employed.

· At least 60% of the entire ACORN-SAT dataset could be corrupted, and is of questionable value.

· BoM’s use of ACORN-SAT as their principal temporal temperature database is unsound. It should not be a regular BoM data product.

· ACORN-SAT in its present form cannot become the output of a “production” BoM system.

..............................

I reported in July 2012 that BoM data merging and homogenisation methods were introducing errors in temperature series that were not apparent in their “raw” data. I said that I had found 954 such errors, but that this was low estimate of the magnitude of the problem. These adjustments were made to large blocks of data, spanning many years. Thus if some were clearly wrong, then whole blocks of data must be suspect. I said in that report that ACORN-SAT should be withdrawn until these errors were corrected.

The second release of ACORN-SAT was in January 2013, to Y/E Dec 31, 2012. My data was downloaded Jan 21, 2013. I performed a detailed comparison between Releases 1 and 2.

This time I reported on April 28, 2013 that

1. All the Release 1 errors to Y/E Dec 2011 are repeated in Release 2.

more
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/07/04/the-australian-bureau-of-meteorology-gets-...

Acorn-sat vs satellite

Satellite says no record, not even close

http://joannenova.com.au/2013/06/australias-angry-hot-summer-was-hot-angry-hype-...

progs (cods), like most deniers doesnt stop to think about things. He just reposts others thoughts.

Others smarter* than him.

* - Sometimes no qualification is smarter than him.

Innocent bystander wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 12:48pm:

Dont worry. The idiot comes from skeptical science, the cooke who cooks the books and is still saying what he is saying. Nothing but a pathetic AGW loon

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 12:50pm:




Are you saying we shouldn't take Dikran Marsupial and the rest of the kooky global warming activists at unsceptical science seriously?   




Dikran Marsupial

Innocent bystander wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 12:48pm:
Precisely! They're no more qualified to interpret complex climate science than you or I.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 2:55pm:



Would you like to be a little bit more specific, I haven't got time to wade through some global warming lunatics ranting nonsense, can you narrow it down a little.