Been looking forward to doing Kerang as I knew it was another dud series from ACORN-SAT. The report is here:
The first thing to notice in plotting up the time series data for the raw CDO and ACORN-SAT is that while the ACORN-SAT data goes back to 1910 the CDO data is truncated at 1962.
The monthly data, however, goes back almost to 1900. This is inexplicable as the monthly data is derived from the daily data! Here is proof that, contrary to some opinion pieces, all of the data to check the record is not available at the Bureau of Meteorology website, Climate Data Online.
The residual trends of ACORN-SAT are at benchmark and greatly exceeding benchmark, for maximum and minimum respectively.
While on the subject of opinion pieces, the statement from No, the Bureau of Meteorology is not fiddling its weather data:
Anyone who thinks they have found fault with the Bureau’s methods should document them thoroughly and reproducibly in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. This allows others to test, evaluate, find errors or produce new methods.
So you think skeptics haven’t tried? A couple of peer-review papers of mine on quality control problems in Bureau of Meterology use of models have not had a response from the Bureau in over 2 years. The sound of crickets chirping is all. Talk is cheap in climate science, I guess. Here they are: