Lies, damned lies and global temperatures

global warming aust

This would not be just a minor fraud but the basis of a tens-of-billions dollar loss to the future growth and wellbeing of Australians. No one would have robbed more people of more of their potential earnings than anyone who might have undertaken this:

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology has been caught red-handed manipulating temperature data to show “global warming” where none actually exists.

As we motor through the weirdly extraterrestrial stand of windmills you see by the highways all over France, but which I had never run across before, what occurs each time is the phenomenal scandal of the entire global warming con. This story must be big news back home – although a quick look has not seen it mentioned on any of the usual sites. But it is part of a worldwide determination on behalf of the most ignorant to demonstrate that they are right about what appears to be completely unproven, and near enough unprovable.

This entry was posted in Global warming and climate change policy. Bookmark the permalink.

56 Responses to Lies, damned lies and global temperatures

  1. Andrew

    Not news, never will be news. This sort of fiddle has been talked about for years, with many, many examples. (although oddly the BoM doesn’t counter with examples where they have “fixed” faulty data in the other direction).

    The fact is, effectively all warming in populated areas is UHI. Canberra was shown to be 7C warmer than the paddocks, and it’s quite leafy. The BoM has absolutely no business “homogenising” data for UHI – it’s a fact, and their job is to record actual temps. If these show city warming and nothing approaching the 1930s in the bush, so be it.

    The news here is that complaints have gone to the Minister (although it’s Hunt, so nothing will ever be done). And also to Jensen, who actually cares.

  2. johno

    Spot on, Andrew.

    The media and this government are largely complicit in the Great Global Warming Con.

  3. Robert O.

    There is a valid statistical method for filling in missing values, but homogenising data to fit in with that from surrounding areas invalidates the original readings. Science is based on observation, experiment and measurement and if you change the latter you are deviating from basic principal.

    The accuracy of measurements has increased with improvements in technology from mercury thermometers to alcohol ones to sensing units, However, the old readings taken with mercury thermometers are still accurate within a certain standard error, and I would bet that if someone set-up a comparative trial of thermometers at any site the mean values would be about the same, the more modern ones with perhaps a smaller standard error.
    The AGW hypothesis is based on measurements from land stations from mainly Western Europe and North America. However, satellite measurements taken all over the globe, that is both land and sea, show little change for the past 17 years or so. Where is the global warming? It appears to a figment of imagination in the eyes of the beholden.

  4. Ant

    Just what I need 1st thing every morning. To be reminded about ‘my’ colossally stupid desalination plant.

    - Siphoning money from working people for 5 years now.

    - 24 more years to go.

    - 0 water delivered.

  5. mark

    Data manipulation is anathema to the real scientist!

    Having said that, it is not unknown to those in the Bureau of Meteorology not to trust their instruments. Nearly a decade ago, I watched a weather system wind up over Gippsland. Rain, in particular, heavy rain wad falling all around the “parched” Thomson Dam. The Mt BawBaw rain gauge recorded in excess of 270mm in one night. The next day, the data was removed from the record. Upon query, the instrument must have malfunctioned causing an over reading… I have been up there when even mild storms have passed through and I can say from experience that can…in the words of our northern brethren…dump down!

    If the BOM are trained to expunge “outlaying” data, what confidence can be placed on any data under the stewardship of such ” scientists”?

  6. manalive

    As we motor through the weirdly extraterrestrial stand of windmills you see by the highways all over France …

    James Delingpole calls them “bird-slicing eco crucifixes” which for France is a particularly apt metaphor since France is overwhelmingly powered by nuclear.
    They serve the same function as those wayside crucifixes around Central Europe which act as “… votive crosses … erected by people in gratitude for being rescued from death, such as war, sickness, infection or other life-threatening danger … [or] to ward off natural disasters or extreme weather” (Wiki).

  7. A Lurker

    As they say, garbage in, garbage out.

    If you want to predict the weather then just look to nature, and remember past cycles and unusual weather events.

    My own prediction – La Niña this Summer, with possible flooding.

  8. Bruce of Newcastle

    James Delingpole calls them “bird-slicing eco crucifixes” which for France is a particularly apt metaphor since France is overwhelmingly powered by nuclear.

    The French socialists in power want to shut them down and replace them with windmills:

    Nuclear power to wind down in France, as renewable energy winds up

    French energy and environment minister Ségolène Royal on Wednesday presented a bill to boost renewable sources in the national energy mix and limit nuclear power production at current levels.

    “We must diversify our energy sources and the share of nuclear will have to drop,” Ms. Royal told a news conference. The new bill would cut nuclear’s share of France’s energy mix to 50% by 2025 from 75% now, while the share of renewables should increase to 40% from around 15% by 2030. The move confirms Mr. Hollande’s pledge during the presidential campaign of 2012.

    Crazy stuff, especially since France presently exports vast amounts of nuclear electricity to neighbouring countries to help them meet their carbon reduction targets. How are they going to do that when the wind is not blowing and the Sun is hidden by cloud?

    I wouldn’t want to be a French bird or bat in 2025.

  9. JohnA

    Bruce, isn’t it kinda cute that in France a Mr Hollande is wanting to take them back to a form of power which the Dutch only use for tourism?

    And I think the Dutch windmills are more picturesque anyway!

  10. Robert O.

    I thought the French were pretty innovative in the late sixties and essentially made the decision to go nuclear since it would insulate against another Arab oil embargo having a good transport system with their railways, the SNCF. What is it with these socialists, they are ahead, and yet they want to shoot themselves in the foot? The heritage of General de Gaulle, Pompidou is slowly being whittled away, or is it like us, we only have self interested politicians left rather than statesmen.

  11. Tel

    Imagine those climate guys had been giving professional investment advice.

  12. entropy

    My own prediction – La Niña this Summer, with possible flooding.

    No, not happening. Mind you, the ‘super El niño’ predicted a couple of months ago won’t be happening either. In fact, I doubt it will be an El Niño vent at all.
    More likely a neutral year IMHO. Whether the wet season will be drought breaking with so e flooding will be interesting, though.

    El Niño overdue on averages, STC causing damage, overdue.

  13. Greigoz

    The ABC grossly biased, the Aust. Bureau of Meteorology doctoring data, the Press Council on a Leftists Jihad, the Human Rights Comm crusading against Conservatives – *sigh* – I’m fatigued, only because it seems Abbott won’t do anything about any of it. If he doesn’t care, why should we?

  14. Andrew

    Imagine those climate guys had been giving professional investment advice.

    Hmmm, yes. There would be a risk of real misallocation if professional advisors were talking up carbon pricing, overestimating EU prices, calling for divestment of coal and secondary boycotts of banks, overestimating the performance of wind, and punishing trustees for running an unconstrained carbon-agnostic portfolios.

  15. Alfonso

    How the Chinese must laugh at the self loathing of the post modern Western elites.
    Alinsky was correct, that’s how it’s going down.
    I better go fishing.

  16. AP

    it is tremendously insulting to the real scientists who are now dead or retired who took all of those scientific temperature measurements. This was part of their legacy during careers dedicated to science. They thought they were leaving behind a weather record to last generations. Effectively, these technocrats in the BOM are dancing on their graves.

  17. A Lurker

    No, not happening. Mind you, the ‘super El niño’ predicted a couple of months ago won’t be happening either. In fact, I doubt it will be an El Niño vent at all. More likely a neutral year IMHO. Whether the wet season will be drought breaking with so e flooding will be interesting, though.

    I’m basing my prediction on a memory from back in 2011 – when in August that year Australia’s east coast had a couple of east coast lows which brought about fairly significant rain. August is normally dry with westerly winds – this year it’s been wet, wetter than most with east coast lows.

    Thing is, the last time I recollect a really wet August was that 2011, which then was followed by a Summer La Niña and the flooding in Brisbane and Toowoomba.

    We’ll see who is right – the BoM or me.

    ;)

  18. Alfonso

    Also ….must be pissing down in the Warragamba catchment, always a sad day for Koraly and the Flan.

  19. cohenite

    After the NIWA litigation in New Zealand any proposal to litigate against BOM on the basis their homogenisation of temperature data creates a warming bias was put on the back-burner. The recent developments involving Jennifer Marohasy and the great team working behind the scenes which clearly show the adjustment regime at BOM does create a warming bias raises the question once again of how to drag this scandal into the open; whether by litigation, media exposure, the gauntlet of getting PR papers in a system controlled by the AGW meme or what?

    But there can be no doubt that the alleged warming in Australia, one of the highest rates in the world according to BOM and NASAGISS, is a product of the adjustments.

    And if the temperature record is crook than all policies to do with AGW and renewables based on that temperature record are crook as well.

  20. A Lurker

    Sorry, that should be 2010 when the east coast had a wet August

  21. john constantine

    If you were mugged in the street, swampies held you at knifepoint, forced you to draw down your mortgage and give them the money–it would suck.

    Then the swampies keep some money themselves, as compensation for the effort of setting up the mugging, then give the rest to crony socialists, to set up a scheme that would rort your bank account forever.

    That is the clean energy fund. Sadly, if the rorting of the national accounts through ‘crony socialist subsidies’ is ever stopped, the people the clean energy fund loaned the money to will stop being profitable, and what chance of getting the capital back then?.

    The fund luvs windmills, wind power subsidies stop, windmills go broke, does the clean energy fund end up owning the projects, and have to fund the decommissioning?. What a landmine.

    could even swampies be so shitty?.

  22. John, that’s the whole idea – wreck the economy so they can panic the populace into giving them political power. Then grab the populace by the neck, accuse some of them of crimes against the state and march them off to the gulags. Keep the people frightened and they do as they are told.
    Simple, really.

  23. Roger

    This story must be big news back home – although a quick look has not seen it mentioned on any of the usual sites.

    A quick search of Google’s Australian news feed suggests only The Australian has covered the story and that was on 22.08.14.

  24. incoherent rambler

    Adjustments? They fiddle the data!

    Taxpayer funder data is adjusted to support an agenda. Criminal.

    Andrew #1429940, posted on August 26, 2014 at 6:17 am, sums it aup very well.

  25. Michael in Sydney

    I’ve just been driving around Germany. I am impressed at the new major late summer crops which have taken over from the traditional ones. They are, (occasionally) electricity generating wind mills, photo-voltaic cells and maize corn – all heavily subsidised to save the planet.

    The country also promotes business and efficiency, by banning the movement of non-essential trucks on Saturday and Sunday. A many kilometre queue of trucks trying to enter Cologne on Monday morning, was very impressive.

  26. Dr Faustus

    David Karoly weighs in to the debate, criticizing “poorly informed amateurs” for criticizing BOM’s handling of the raw data – and unleashing the traditional disasterati’s demand for peer review by properly qualified experts in “modern scientific methods“.

    You should recognise this as The Empire Strikes Back.

  27. incoherent rambler

    CAGW – Covertly Adjusted Global Warming.

  28. Tom

    Alinsky 101 — attack the messenger:

    CONCERNS about the accuracy of the Bureau of Meteorology’s historical data are being raised by “poorly informed amateurs”, one of Australia’s leading climate ­scientists has said.

    David Karoly of Melbourne University’s School of Earth Sciences, said claims BOM had introduced a warming trend by homogenising historical temperature data should be submitted for peer review.

    BOM has confirmed analysis that homogenisation had introduced or dramatically increased a warming trend, but said the process used was common internationally. However, concerns about homogenisation have been raised with climate agencies in the US and Europe.

    “The ACORN-SAT network of high-quality station data for Australia from the Bureau of Meteorology has been published after peer-review by international experts,” Professor Karoly said.

    Jennifer Marohasy, who in The Weekend Australian raised concerns about the quality of the historical BOM data, has been published in the peer-reviewed climate science literature.

    Her paper in Advances in ­Atmospheric Sciences and Atmospheric Research included detail of the methodology used to construct the temperature series for locations in Queensland.

    “I’ve looked in the peer-­reviewed literature for justification for the methodology that the bureau uses and I can’t find it,’’ she said. “Sure, there are lots of technical reports and reports from committee meetings and audits by committees but there are no peer-reviewed publications that outline and justify the methodology currently used.’’

    Dr Marohasy has analysed the raw data from dozens of locations across Australia and matched it against the new data used by BOM showing that temperatures are progressively warming. In many cases, she said, trends had changed from slight cooling to dramatic warming over 100 years.

    Professor Karoly said a recent independent analysis by him of the temperature data for southeast Australia from 1860 to 2010 had been published in the Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Journal after anonymous peer-review.

    He said his paper had shown good agreement with the BOM temperatures, after homogenisation. It confirmed that a 1.1C increase in maximum temperature and 0.9C increase in minimum temperature since 1960 were the largest and most significant trends in southeastern Australian temperatures in the past 152 years.

    It said “detailed homogenisation” was undertaken using metadata collected from station history files and a two-step process that involved individual station adjustments and comparison with neighbouring reference sites.

    “I am aware of some poorly informed amateurs who have made unsupported claims that are not based on modern scientific methods,’’ Professor Karoly said.

    “Those claims do not constitute a debate. Those claims should be submitted for publication in scientific journals and peer-reviewed by experts, to assess the validity of their claims.”

    The cabal controls the journals. Skeptics like Bob Carter and Jen Marohasy are defunded and/or thrown out of the warmist academy (Marohasy is funded by a private trust at UCQ).

    Karoly will not tolerate the whiteanting of his empire by people who are a threat to its funding. Follow the money.

  29. Bruce of Newcastle

    David Karoly weighs in to the debate, criticizing “poorly informed amateurs” for criticizing BOM’s handling of the raw data

    That’s especially funny from David “Hockey Stick II” Karoly whose temperature paper was so bad it had to be withdrawn.

  30. I am the Walrus, Koo Koo K'choo

    “I’ve looked in the peer-­reviewed literature for justification for the methodology that the bureau uses and I can’t find it,’’ she said. “Sure, there are lots of technical reports and reports from committee meetings and audits by committees but there are no peer-reviewed publications that outline and justify the methodology currently used.’’

    Been working with data for 20 years.

    Never once heard of ‘homogenisation’.

    How convenient, that the process they use produces just the results they are looking for!

    Sounds like bullshit.

    No need to sue, etc. just publish the unadjusted data on the Internet for all to see. Shane them with real science.

  31. Tom

    As Walrus points out above, here’s the money quote:

    “I’ve looked in the peer-­reviewed literature for justification for the methodology that the bureau uses and I can’t find it,’’ {Marohasy] said. “Sure, there are lots of technical reports and reports from committee meetings and audits by committees but there are no peer-reviewed publications that outline and justify the methodology currently used.’’

    They wanted data that justified their funding, then set about inventing a plausible-sounding rationale behind which the doctoring of the raw numbers could be concealed.

    What they have done is very simple and quite criminal. They can never confess to what they have done so they must lie and obfuscate.

    It’s near the endgame of what Eisenhower foresaw in 1961.

    In the end, those who have done the crime must do the time or there will be no justice in this swindle.

  32. .

    I maintain Eisenhower, Grant, Jefferson and Cleveland were the Union’s best Presidents. Wise men too.

  33. cohenite

    A brief history of Karoly.

    At least Karoly hasn’t got his mug in this series of vanity shots.

  34. Mantaray

    Andrew (first post), or anyone else. Got a link for that stuff about Canberra being so much hotter than the paddocks around it? Thanks.

  35. Leo G

    Marohasy and others have drawn attention to remodelled average annual minimum temperature series for a number of stations which appears to involve adjustments which vary linearly over a long period- reminiscent of the way satellite sealevel readings are regularly recalibrated to fit a time gradient matching a select set of tide gauge readings.
    It will be interesting to see the justification the BOM gave for each case, what kind of change in measurement conditions was identified that was found to have caused an inhomogeneity which varied linearly with time over such a long period.
    Even an amateur scientist might suspect that the in homogeneity may be merely a failure of the temperature series to match an expected long-term temperature rise.

  36. Arnost

    I have long thought that there is a major step missing in the homogenization process. The infilling of missing station data is done on the basis of temp anomalies at neighboring stations. That will be an issue where the temp range is greater or shows more volatility than the station being infilled.

    The missing step is to get a std deviation metric of both stations and use that as an asjustment (converted to anomaly / actual). That way a spike in temps from an inland station will not distort a seaside station record. I’d also bet that this would also affect the UHI issue.

  37. joeallen

    Are there any honest scientists left, esp. in govt positions?

    The global warming scam. Mercury in vaccines contributing to autism, but being denied by the CDC even though their data confirmed that mercury contributes to autism. CDC labs show a spike in leaks of dangerous organisms into our environment. Then there’s the manmade viruses of AIDS and Ebola, designed to rapidly decrease the number of humans, to appease the agenda 21 mongrels. The lies about speed scameras cutting accident deaths, being supported by “gov’t research”. One day society is going to lash out against scientists for all their lying and scheming, which has increased tremendously since the late 1980s.

  38. A Lurker

    Then there’s the manmade viruses of AIDS and Ebola, designed to rapidly decrease the number of humans, to appease the agenda 21 mongrels.

    Is there actual documented truth to that, or are we in tin-foil hat wearing territory?

  39. Leo G

    Is there actual documented truth to that, or are we in tin-foil hat wearing territory?

    Tin-foil balaclavas are the latest chic.

  40. entropy

    Triple layered tin foil, I suspect.

    Lurker. You don’t need to have a La Niña event to get a major flood. All La Niña does is increase the likelihood.

  41. A Lurker

    Lurker. You don’t need to have a La Niña event to get a major flood. All La Niña does is increase the likelihood.

    Understood!

  42. manalive

    A comparison of the isotherm maps for July and December contained in the Royal Atlas and Gazetteer of Australasia 1890 (The National Library) with the corresponding current maps on the BOM website shows not much has changed and some areas have (on the face of it) cooled.
    In general the isotherms on the 1890 maps (converted to C°) when overlaid are more towards the south compared to the current corresponding July and December BOM mean temperature maps yet most of the continent has allegedly warmed, some areas up to ~2C since 1910.

  43. Aussieute

    Climate researchers says profitable fruit production safe from #climatechange for another 50 years goo.gl/4NTZLE

    More peddling of lies

  44. Yohan

    BOM has confirmed analysis that homogenisation had introduced or dramatically increased a warming trend, but said the process used was common internationally.

    The progressive academics have been manipulating the temp record in NZ, UK and USA with substitutions and homogenization to achieve lowering of temperature pre 1970 and raising of temps after 1980. So BOM is totally correct here by saying it’s a common process used internationally.

    Mark’s anecdotal comment about the data removal of the Mt BawBaw rain gauge is probably common practice as well when it comes to the rainfall data sets.

  45. Yohan

    This is why the only data sets I am willing to ever consider as legit are the ice core records, and the Satellite temperature data.

    But I heard recently something about maybe the earth is slightly shrinking/expanding by a few feet per year, and thus the Satellite data may not be consistent over time. This talk opens the door to our ‘scientists’ to start manipulating the data sets once again.

  46. Alfonso

    CAGWarming hysterics who are / were also “scientists” have admitted that exaggeration is a technique they must use to manipulate the punters.

    “A new peer-reviewed paper published in the American Journal of Agricultural Economics, titled “Information Manipulation and Climate Agreements”, is openly providing a “rationale” for global warming proponents to engage in mendacious claims in order to further their cause.
    The paper appears to support or provide a formula for why lying or “information manipulation” is able to further the cause of man-made global warming and “enhance global welfare.” The authors use a mathematical formula to study information tactics.
    The authors, Assistant Professors of Economics Fuhai Hong and Xiaojian Zhao, note how the media and environmental groups “exaggerate” global warming and then the offer their paper to “provide a rationale for this tendency” to exaggerate for the good of the cause. The paper was published on February 24, 2014.”

    Let’s hope it doesn’t infect something important like medicine.

  47. Dr Faustus

    But I heard recently something about maybe the earth is slightly shrinking/expanding by a few feet per year, and thus the Satellite data may not be consistent over time.

    Yohan: The Earth’s crust moves constantly, by about a foot in the vertical plane, due to the tidal forces exerted by the Moon and the Sun. The satellites themselves wobble in their orbits by more than this because of the varying gravitational influence of the planets and the Sun.

    But this all gets lost in the wash, because the satellite temperature readings are measured over bands of 10′s of kilometres of atmosphere.

  48. BilB

    Again Steve Kates, you demonstrate your lack of thoroughness and, in my opinion, a deliberate penchent for, at best, obfuscation, but more likely deception.

    The charge that the Bureau of Meteorology “admit” lying with their Climate data homogenisation is, from the reading of Maharosy’s article, a conclusion drawn by her based on the office’s failure to respond to her analysis via some one called Lloyd. A conclusion that you are only too eager to distort and amplify. This is the basis of the lying allegation, as I read it, is…..

    “I understand that by way of response to Mr Lloyd, the Bureau has not disputed these calculations.

    This is significant. The Bureau now admits that it changes the temperature series and quite dramatically through the process of homogenisation.”

    Here is an explanation of the process and purpose for the homogenisation of temperature data for climate study purposes.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homogenization_(climate)

    Now I don’t know how thorough Maharosy’s analysis is, and she has not offered clarification in support of her accusations, but from the explantion of the homogenisation process I can see any amount of reasoning for the BoM’s caution in responding to a renegade individual with a reasonable degree of potential self interest in promoting her own commercial weather related product.

  49. Leo G

    BilB, your claim Jennifer Marohosy’s article draws a conclusion that the Bureau of Meteorology “admit” lying with their climate data homogenisation “based on the office’s failure to respond to her analysis via some one called Lloyd” does not appear to be supported by the article on her blog site or by the story in the Australian.
    A reference to BOM “fabrications and lies” was made by James Dellingpole on the Breitbart blog site, but Marohasy is not Dellingpole.
    Once a troll, always a troll, eh?

  50. BilB

    Are you feeling alright today, Leo G? Dellingpole quotes Marohasy, Marohasy quotes Marohasy, Skate quotes Marohasy, and I’ve no doubt that Nova quotes Marohasy, possibly eventually Momkton will quote Marohasy. It is all the same highly suspect accusation.

    Once a denialist, always and in every way a denialist, Leo?

  51. Leo G

    BilB, Where is Marohasy quoted to have concluded “that the Bureau of Meteorology “admit” lying with their climate data homogenisation”?
    Nowhere that I have read.
    Your claim appears unfounded, except possibly on the basis of delusion- delusion demonstrated by by your unsupported claim that I am a universal denialist.
    On the other hand, my previous conclusion that your arguments are not based on a reasonable consideration of the available information appears well-founded.

  52. Fred

    There is no reason to discount readings from mercurial (strictly speaking, “liquid-in-glass” because minimum thermometers use alcohol) thermometers, the main reason why meteorological agencies have moved to electronic sensors is simple- they can be read remotely, at unstaffed locations. The issue with “early” thermometer readings is not necessarily accuracy of instrument, but exposure. Prior to around 1910, Australian thermometers were exposed on a Glacer board, which required the observer to keep moving it thoughout the day to keep the thermometers shaded. Stevenson screens became widespread after 1910, but were in use well before that date so there is no reason to discount (or amend) readings taken in such screens. In many cases, older temperatures also be used with some sonsideration to their poor exposure. Temperatures from England are still in use, taken from the mid- 17th century, and they weren’t taken in Stevenson screens.

Comments are closed.