Following is an email just sent to Bob Baldwin concerning the need for him to urgently establish a public forum to enable dissident views to be heard concerning the bastardization of Australia’s official temperature record by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology.
Noosa, Queensland, 9th March, 2015
Dear Mr Baldwin
Re: Robust assessment of the trusted and respected Bureau of Meteorology obviously requires that the dissident view be heard
There once existed a broad consensus that the Church must be the ultimate judge of scientific truths. That was before the enlightenment. More recently, there was an equally mistaken consensus that the Church could provide a safe environment for little children.
Those who dared suggested otherwise were first ignored, then ridiculed, and only much later able to fight for truth and justice. When their concerns finally registered, there was disbelief that such outrageous abuse was allowed to persist for so long.
In your recent appointed as ‘Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Environment’ with responsibility for the Bureau of Meteorology, you have the opportunity to provide a forum for dissident voices to be heard concerning what is perceived by many to be the bastardization of Australia’s temperature record.
Eventually, simply through the establishment of a forum of experts tasked with hearing the alternative evidence, history might record you as courageous, and as having begun a process that ultimately exposed the deceit and bias that now riddles this once most respected and trusted organization. This, I thought, was indeed a possibility when I read your media release of January 19, 2015, outlining the establishment of a technical advisory forum that would undertake a “robust assessment” of Australia’s official temperature data set.
Then, just today I was provided with the actual terms of reference for this forum comprising eight statisticians and/or mathematicians, and I see that they intend to meet for only one day each year. Furthermore, during the morning of this one day they will be lectured to by Bureau scientists, with the afternoon devoted to discussion.
Indeed the current format is likely to be as useful at getting to the bottom of our issues with the Bureau’s revisionist approach to Australia’s climatic history, as expecting George Pell to voluntarily admit pedophilia during a Sunday sermon.
If indeed you are serious about a robust assessment of the Bureau’s handling of temperature data, then I urge you to immediately modify the format for the forum. I urge you to immediately establish a mechanism for public critical review including testimony from dissidents.
Yours sincerely
Dr Jennifer Marohasy, Independent Scientist
*****
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
I agree there is really no point in going ahead with assessment in its present format. It is a foregone conclusion that the outcome will be to congratulate the BOM on its outstanding work, world’s best practice etc etc, and everyone off to the pub.
What is needed is an opportunity for the public to question the activities of the BOM, and receive answers in an open public forum. Have something like an AGM for shareholders of a public company.
The present format is just a waste of time and taxpayers’ money. As with the child molestation scandals that went on so long in the churches, nothing will change unless there is a genuine opportunity for concerned people to ask questions and have them properly answered in public.
A forum that only meets for one day each year…and in that one day only the afternoon is allocated to open forum ….is not consultation ….and hearing people out.
….that is a bureaucratic white wash ….a con job
It’s disgusting. It just serves to confirm what a bunch of clowns we have running the BOM
This advisory forum is nothing more and nothing less than the creation of yet another platform for warmist scientists to spread their propaganda.
There appears to be no element of methodical analysis, never mind investigation into motives and agendas.
Instead there will be a comfy little chateroo with tea and bikkies and panel members being paid exorbitantly well for their nominal participation.
Recently I saw a meme on the internet (which unfortunately I cannot find again) that showed a bloody-mouthed fox with the caption, “I absolve myself of all wrongdoing.”
If there has been wrongdoing it should be stopped, instead of allowing it to continue.
Naturally if there has been no wrongdoing, those accused should be allowed to prove their innocence.
A golden opportunity missed.
Jennifer, here was “a golden opportunity missed” for you to maintain your usual class, instead of trying to grab attention by a cheap shot at Cardinal Pell. I hope you have the chance to meet him and find out how candid and decent he is. Have you heard his Sunday sermons? Don’t you realize that he is, far from being like the Bureau, actually an example of the kind of openness you probably wish them to emulate? So, where does your own bias come from, that you would belittle someone who from the time he took office worked to remove abusers? And someone furthermore who agrees with you on the very issue you are passionate about.
Reverend Casanova,
I should like to read the Sunday sermon in which Cardinal Pell admitted there was a problem of pedophilia within the clergy and that the culture needed to change. Is it available anywhere, like on the public record?
Jennifer’s bias comes from her atheism. I would say she should also be a feminist, and that would bias her against your church. Then there is her general scepticism of big business including green groups, and also political organisations. She is not like other bloggers who fit a neat tribe. She is truly independent and rational.
We are currently hearing more horrific details of the child abuse that went on for decades at the Knox Grammar School, and the indifference of the former head master, who did little or nothing when these events were made known to him. Similarly George Pell was made aware of the extensive child abuse going on in church schools, and he chose to turn a blind eye to it all. Hundreds, if not thousands of young lives were ruined by all the abuse over many decades. There have been dozens of suicides directly as a result of the ongoing abuse in religious schools. To suggest that those in charge who knowingly permitted the abuses to continue their activities are decent, kind and wonderful people is absurd.
It is very sad that it has taken so long for many of the details of the child abuse to emerge. Lets not pretend that those in positions of responsibility that helped cover it all up for so long are innocent and should be revered for their good works. A good idea would be to no longer permit organizations to run schools at all where child abuse has been uncovered. Put the money saved into the state school system instead and provide a safe educational environment for little children.
Dear Jennifer
Disappointed with yr comment. Another cheap shot at pell in yr analogy. At least u have some Prima facie evidence against the BoM in their temp homogenisation. What is yr evidence against Pell for the implication he is a closet pedophile?
B. Tranter,
I’m not suggesting Pell is a pedophile, but rather there is much evidence indicating that the church he lead was very slow to do anything about the mounting evidence of pedophilia.
Like the Catholic church, the BOM will not freely admit any wrong doing. We will only get to the truth if the governments puts in place the appropriate mechanism to enable proper inquiry.
I had been lead to believe such a process was being established. Only to discover yesterday the extent of the sham.
Jen’s analogy is apt.
George Pell is probably a really nice bloke.
This is about inappropriate defensiveness by dysfunctional institional organisations.
The revelations about paedophilia and the way it was handled is topical and therefore a good way to help people understand the behaviour that Jen is highlighting.
BoM, along with so many other similar organisations have been ‘setting and then marking their own homework’.
Jen, your letter prompted me to do a post at my blog: https://c21stleft.wordpress.com/2015/03/09/climate-change-opening-up-to-dissenting-views-of-scientists-letting-a-hundred-flowers-bloom/ And BTW, the problem with the Catholic Church hierarchy regarding sexual abuse of children relates also to the attempts at covering it up. Good luck.
I am surprised that some people had a problem with Jens analogy involving Pell. I didnt read it as a swipe at Pell at all.
In fact if I remember correctly Pell in the past has been outspoken in his scepticism regarding GW….and as far as I am concerned had not done or said anything untoward re paedophilia. Take a Bex fellas.
I think we can say that this enquiry into BOM will be a complete waste of time and money. If there is no proper scrutiny from sceptics they will be exonerated and come out smelling like roses.
Jen, The idiot announced today, that his lot will do as promised, (cap the water buy back), “when Labour agrees”. Liars and fools and they WILL give us back the other lot, through stupidity. I honestly am aghast at how inept they are.
I don’t think airing dissident views is the way to go. This ought to be like what happens when people buy submarines or other very expensive systems. Nobody asks to see the wiring diagram, or the complete set of manufacturing methods, they ask the producer to demonstrate that everything works correctly.
Producers often try to avoid full demonstrations by showing wiring diagrams, and specs for the manufacturing methods, and it looks like the BoM is getting away with this strategy.
The BoM should be asked for the evidence that it should already have (as a reputable scientific organisation) that ALL its temperature adjustments are valid. If the review panel fails to ask for this then the review panel has failed.
I would suggest a simple question to the review panel members: Have you asked to see ALL the justifications, not the specs of the manufacturing methods, the evidence that the RESULTS are correct (or not)?
Mikky
We (myself, Ken Stewart, David Stockwell, and others) have repeatedly shown that many of the adjustments made to individual temperature series in the construction of ACORN-SAT are absolute nonsense.
Graham Lloyd detailed some of the absurdity of what they are doing in a series of article in The Australian last year. This evidence needs to be heard, it currently represents the dissident perspective. If an appropriate process was put in place it would involve simply bringing this evidence to the attention of people like yourself. And if you paid attention to the detail, I suggest that you would be disgusted.
The problem is that the BOM cannot be trusted to review itself. This is complete nonsense. We already know that Australia cannot competently manufacture modern submarines or even cars. Why do you live with these delusions?
I have mentioned this subject(alterations to temp. data) withe numerous people- even our local station officer and not one is aware of any problems surrounding this issue.Ignorance! No-one cares or is listening.Typical.
Yes Ian Thomson.
Almost IMMEDIATELY after the joint media release with Hunt and Joyce, Baldwin did start to change the tone and said that it was somehow up to Labor.
It hasn’t seemed to stop the Libs from pushing much more unpopular stuff through the senate that did not have a pre election promise attached to it?
Mr Koala is right.
BoM can’t be trusted to review themselves along with the MDBA, OEH and a plethora of other so called ‘independent authorities and/or departments’.
They are setting their own rules, writing their own contracts and then marking their own homework…and expecting all of us to be grateful for that ..and to pay for them to NOT supply a trustworthy, transparent or particularly useful public service.
As Mikky points out…they can provide heaps and heaps and heaps of information that looks similar to specs… but it is NOT what Jen and others are asking for…nor is it particularly transparent.
Mikky- Some very expensive stuff has been bought partially on the basis of these statistics. Including some expensive model and computers and all the dumbass research. More expensive than a submarine.
Jennifer, take no notice of the ‘knockers’.
The B.O.M. and their manipulation of Australia’s temperature record to suit their own ends, deserves to be given public attention. Keep up the good work.
Geoff Williams – Sydney
I do hope the secretary will see that allowing the climate obsessed to control the forums which discuss problems with cliamte science is a bit of a zero-sum game not to mention circular. The brief time permitted review and discussion seems designed by the climate obsessed to completely limit the agenda and control the results.
Your talk and writing of last year regarding the need for a new paradigm made this article:
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2015/03/10/the-albedo-of-earth/comment-page-1/#comment-98717
Especially interesting
The analogy was a wee bit inflammatory. Something I was told once is that an analogy or illustration should not distract from the point of being made. .
It is interesting that the promoters and beneficiaries of climate fear resist critical reviews of their work so hard. When coupled with their inability to face critics or dissidents a patter emerges. While a Bishop is highly unlikely to stand at a pulpit and confess to something, Bishops will at least meet with victims and send representatives or personally attend conferences to review problems outsiders point out.
Someone recently wrote that cliamte science is in its infancy. I would suggest its behavior is more infantile than youthful.
It should not be this hard to get a government official to recognize the advantages of having a vigorous open discussion on something like the credibility of temperature data.
Hello Jen’..and all the usual suspects!…Good to see you all back and in good spirits…May I say ; the rest has done you good!…But isn’t all this finger-pointing at the BOM. just a tad like Nero ‘fiddling while Rome burns’ ?..after all, you could quote NASA. figures or some other reputable agency’s temp’ records to back up any claim that the climate isn’t heating up because of Anthropogenic interference….and to point to ANY article in The Australian as a source of authentic justification for ANYTHING is like putting an add for fresh “pork pies” up in Sweeny Todd’s store window and expecting a rush on your product!
All just a bit of “window dressing” surely , for the inevitable?
The only thing ” inevitable”, JC are the trillions that will be slaughtered to fix a possible non-problem if the gatekeepers carry on with their current biased methods.
When “science” has good reason through conflict of interest to head in one particular direction when there is an equal argument for not going that way, surely your hip pocket nerve is sensitive enough to require some scrutiny of that “science”?
The complaints are not all coming from the Australian and even you should know that money combined with religion will end up devouring us all:
http://joannenova.com.au/2015/03/fellow-michael-kelly-says-the-royal-society-must-not-hide-uncertainty-of-climate/#more-41516
Keep up the good work, Jen.
Virtue has its own reward [and a favourable judgment doesn’t go astray either]:
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/21611/
” Virtue has its own reward…” said the Bishop to the actress!…seriously, while there may or may not be a case to put about temp’ “adjustments”..surely this is but a side issue to the main event..ie; the fact that temp’s have been steadily rising overall…
Does it ever occur to you that your main event is really only a side issue:
https://suyts.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/image69.png
jaycee,
Temps have not been steadily rising overall, nor has the climte changed enough to have storm frequency, intensity, drought, flood or any other measure of extreme or unusual weather to show any significant change at all.
The big picture is that the climate obsessed are projecting their inner anxieties and sadly often their political prejudice onto the blank canvas of weather/cliamte and declaring a crisis that does not exist.
Hunter..are you seriously trying to tell us that NASA, the BOM, CSIRO, every BOM of every erstwhile nation that records these sorts of things are all involved in some giant conspiracy w/ the UN. to create a “World Govt’ ” or some such thing?…are you seriously going to go down that path?…for in doing so, be warned; there lies madness!
But even on my own local front…I do regular assist in surveys up and down this stretch of the Murray River and over the Mallee Plains…on matters fauna/ flora / pesci. mollusci etc….I write the figures down on a chart that the expert gives to me…I speak to the farmers and the breeders who come to the Water-Mains stand-pipe to purchase potable water for their own consumption or stock which they now have to ‘shandy” with their increasing salinity bore-water…and I can tell you..: the aquifers in an enormous , ENORMOUS stretch of Sth Aust , East of the ranges and Nth of Mannum to the edge of Oona-whoop-whoop are drying out or are salinating up and are not being replenished because of reduced consistent….that’s CONSISTENT rainfall…not your cloudburst that raises the yearly average so it looks respectable, but in reality just flows swiftly across the paddocks and evaporates in a pool where you don’t necessarily want it!….and this has been going on for over sixty years….and here, where once there was a dairy industry, however humble, it was here the ‘Farmers Union” truck would come on it’s rounds, when there was water enough, regular rain enough to sustain one.
Sorry, Hunter…I could go on, but I am sure you have soooo many links from Jo Nova to Andrew Bolt to confirm YOUR prejudices, that my little anecdotes would just bore you….now off you go!
Poor ol’ Jaycee, no evidence, but just feels it in his water that all his weather problems are definitely the result of mankind’s CO2 emissions.
Whether the weather is warming or not.
I wonder what caused these sorts of dry spells?
https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/screenhunter_7943-mar-15-14-32.gif
How does your water feel about the barrages, BTW?
Difference is, ‘Drongo…here where I live, drought is a tactile thing…you can “feel” it, you can certainly see it!…it is reflected in the bush, the livestock, the fauna and in the eyes of the people…So , go ahead,,,mock, link, denial all you like, but it’s a bit like the sinking canoe…sooner or later you gotta think of a different approach or accept the inevitable!
reasonable climatic detioration is here, is now!
Jaycee, try earning your living in Heartbreak Corner where you often can read your tracks 3 years after you made ’em and good rainfall isn’t expected more often than every twenty years. Yet that country produced millionaires from people who understood it.
That’s Australia. If you choose to blame it on man made CO2 you are delusional.
jaycee, sweeping aside your tired stale strawman argument conspiracies, I am concerned for you-
Do you see boogeymen under your bed? Does you mommy have to check your closet at night night?
I stated the obvious:
Temperatures have not been rising steadily or much.
About 1.5o over about 150 years is not much.
About nil over the last ~18 years is not much.
And temps over the last ~150 years have gone up and down along the way. Certainly a big brave climateer knows that. .
Certainly you are not denying the history or the data, are you?
As far as your anecdotes regarding the lovely Murray river, hopefully you are not one of those fools confusing local climate and weather with global climate, are you?
And no Australian is going to sit there and tell anyone with a straight face that Australia has in the last many millenia been a land of consistent rainfall. It rasies the question- are you even in Australia?
And an informed person would not set out confuse over use of aquifers with a change in climate.
You don’t rise to the level of prejudice. Your ignorance takes up too much space.
No, you are just another intellectual light weight pushing sanctimonious climate doom because you are too lazy to think.
Hunter, what you and the Tessellated Drongo are missing..and it was emphasised last Oct’ when Jen’ (I hope you don’t mind me being “familiar” with your name, Jen ?) shut the blog down in disgust, is that she would like to see “scientific argument”, not opportunistic attacking!…Sure, I am the first to admit I am not a scientist, but unlike yourselves, I am closer to the sincerity of the subject that yourselves in that at least I put the case for the “science of realism”..in the evidence “on the ground” where I live and work, as against your “science of rhetoric”..where you only quote second and third-hand sources.
You could do better to ask Debbie HER opinion of “on the ground” evidence…but just make sure you time it when she is not water-ski-ing on the ” ‘Bidgee”…Gosh!..to think of it…she must have a lot of idle time!
JC, you don’t think you might be missing something yourself?
What I suggest you are missing is that your assumption that your “on the ground” “sincerity of the subject” [what hubris] doesn’t apply to others who disagree with you.
Those “second and third-hand sources” are what’s known as evidence from a reliable source however many hands they have passed through and are always superior to a “not a scientist”‘s feelings about the current weather patterns.
Please show us with some real evidence that you make any case for the “science of realism” other than what you feel where you live and work “on the ground”.
While you are at it you might also tell us what you actually do that gives you this “science of realism”.
Yawn, I suppose we’ll just have to remind JC that his neck of the woods ( southern OZ) has been drying out for at least 5,000 years.
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1848641.htm But JC thinks he can stop this rather long trend by reducing our co2 levels by 5% by 2020.
You have no idea how sincere I am, and your snark indicates you are miles and miles away from reality. Now that you are shown to be wrong about rain, drought, Australian cliamte, aquifers, etc. you go fall back on the sincerity of your argument as a winning proposition.
Good luck with that.
It looks like the barking mad Vic Labor govt thinks it can change the climate all by itself. Stay tuned for more wasted billions dollars on a super corrupt PONZI scheme that won’t change the temp, co2 levels or climate by a jot.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/victorias_labor_government_will_save_the_planet_from_global_warming_never_m/#commentsmore
The new Vance et al study has shown that droughts today over eastern OZ are not unusual at all.
There have been far worse droughts over the last 1,000 years.
http://summitcountyvoice.com/2015/02/08/climate-new-ice-core-data-help-show-long-term-rainfall-record-for-parts-of-australia/
” There have been far worse droughts over the last 1,000 years”…A “in-situ” bio-forest w / understory / fauna that has evolved over many, many millennia, so that it has developed “mechanisms to tolerate drought / flood / fire will not only survive, along with the indigenous inhabitants, but will, in truth , thrive with taking the opportunity to distribute seed or propagation at such times….It is only our “civilised / tech’ society” that will be broken with such natural disasters…we who have come to these shores wit all our goods and chattels in the last 200 yrs…..so forget about those “far worse droughts” over a thousand years ago and ponder more on what will happen to you now…or to use a metaphor of opposite to drought, as Bill Cosby famously said for Noah..: “How long can you tread water?”
jaycee,
Thanks for demonstrating a fundamental failure to understand the issue or deal with reality.
Your last post tacitly admits there is nothing unusual going on, but you have made the leap of faith that CO2 is a magic control knob which if we lower will change the weather in Australia.
I leave your underlying guilt trip about Australians with European roots as a silent monument to yourself.
As usual we are wasting our efforts on faith believers like JC who can feel it all in his water and doesn’t need no stinkin’ evidence.
He doesn’t even realise that his “in-situ bio forest” etc was endlessly burned into the landscape by aborigines to help with the killing of the real natives by spear and boomerang. That was the best they could do.
You’re just a hypocrite, JC.
Radio-carbon dating of continuous use of a food site by the indigenous peoples..
” Results indicate that occupation of these sites was confined to the late Holocene period, post-2500 cal. BP. With the exception of one midden, which appears not to have been used after 500–300 cal. BP, all other sites suggest continued use until the recent past. This pattern fits with a proposed period of population expansion and intensification of resource use in the Coorong, along with more general changes known to have occurred in parts of coastal Australia during the mid- to late Holocene.”
” aborigines to help with the killing of the real natives by spear and boomerang…”…Now..just as an exercise in logic..could you tell us all how a tribal / nomadic society survives by destroying it’s source of food?…and even more logic ; if one IS a “on-foot” hunter, and he scares the game away to another mile or two, how hungry would you have to be to hike that extra mile for another chance at a shot with your sprear or whatever….?
Spangled…I do believe YOU would have swiftly starved to death!
But then, this was supposed to be a discussion about the “fudged figures” of the BOM…so you tell us Hunter…(I’ve got twenty seconds to spare) , tell us EVERYTHING you know about how the BOM does it calculations!
You still don’t get it JC. Fire management of forests was done for hunting purposes and to eradicate parasites on the human body.
And I seem to remember someone changing the subject to the “main event”….
jaycee,
Jennifer has produced the facts and fuigures I rely on that show the BOM adjustments have been done at best poorly.
Her work has not been fatucally contradicted. And in fact makes more sense than the consensus view on temps, in my opinion.
I take it from your desire to return to the issue of deceptive temp records that you conced that droughts, aquifer over use, or the history of drought/flooding rain cycles in Australia are not caused by CO2,
I also take it that you now understand that temperatures worldwide have not actually risen much over the ~150 years of current interest.
I am pleased to see we are off the “feels like climate change” meander.
Nice to see some progress.
Just to look at the data from the BOM for rainfall over the last 115 years. South OZ shows an increasing trend since 1950 and since 1900.
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/timeseries.cgi?graph=rain&area=sa&season=0112&ave_yr=T
And here’s Southern OZ over the same period. Once again an increasing trend. Not bad since we have a 5,000 year reducing trend overall.
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/timeseries.cgi?graph=rain&area=saus&season=0112&ave_yr=T
Also Fort Denison NSW now shows a SLR of just 0.65mm a year or about 65mm in 100 years or about 2.6 inches. Very hard to see a CAGW impact after 1950. Sorry to include all these pesky facts instead of JC’s feel good BS.
Now..I do apologise , Jen..(I trust you do not mind me being ‘familiar’ with your name?)..as you can see by my first post this thread, I was addressing the subject raised…but unfortunately, certain “elements” on the blog have taken it upon themselves to become “spokesmen” for a subject away from , but not necessarily that distant from the above…I am challenged, I must exercise my right of reply…so, please..bear with me while I..much like yourself..attempt to educate the intellectually impoverished!
An Advanced Society.
In his book The Road to Serfdom, Freidrich Hayek asserts that the economic freedom of capitalism is a requisite of political freedom… with continual growth being the mechanism that feeds such “economic freedom”.
So we have to propose the question : What makes an “Advanced Society”?
Could it be that as proposed by Hayek above?..Or is it something more basic…more durable…more sustainable than the capitalist notion of continuous growth / continuous consumption? Can it be presumed that a technological advanced society holds greater ethical dominance and therefore deserved racial dominance over the more stable tribal structures that once were spread throughout the Australian environment for tens of thousands of years?
Consider these examples..
Eucalyptus Largiflorens (Black Box) : Distribution and occurrence: Local community dominant, in grassy woodland on heavy black clay soils in seasonally flooded areas; In this area of Sth. Aust’, primarily restricted to ex / swamp-lands. This tree, like many that have evolved to an environment-specific location can be found near my residence in the Mallee. Like the Mallee trees everywhere, it has evolved in a stable, static environment over many thousands of years..indeed, you can see that a mulititude of trees and understory in the Mallee bio-forest were reliant on such a stable environment for them to spread so wide, so far in such profusion. Any extreme disruption of climate or landscape would have changed the appearance and bio-diversity of the entire forest and it’s denizens..THAT is a “given”. We have to accept ; the very existence of such a bio-forest system proves beyond argument that the geography where they settled, took root and evolved was stable, static and sustainable for a very long period of time.
This is an important point to my thesis..we have to understand and accept that the Mallee bio-forest, from the dry-lands to the swamp-lands, from the canopy to the forest floor is a unique interconnected species specific / environment specific entity that relies upon a stable, static geophysical situation to maintain it’s integrity. Certainly, that integrity has been corrupted over the last two hundred years since settlement to the point where we cannot truthfully claim that pristine Mallee exists anymore at all. It has become a victim of “continual economic growth”.
Likewise, if we look at the indigenous peoples who lived and thrived along The Coorong in Sth. Aust’. I will not even attempt to disassemble the complex tribal structures that existed along the lower Murray River…it would be presumption on my part and liable to insulting error. Enough to point out that settlement is proven for many thousands of years. Indeed, carbon dating of one site of middens (discarded mollusc shells) alone put it back to 2.500cal BP. (2.500 yrs. Old)…so we have evidence that of the many sites scattered along the seaward-side of The Coorong there was regular gathering and consumption of a reliable food source by the indigenous peoples for thousands of years. I have seen these middens many years ago…scattered amongst the site were numerous camp-fire circles, denoting the practice of stopping, gathering, cooking and consumption of the food and presumably the social intercourse that accompanies such moments.
For such feasting to have taken place (these middens are huge!), would prove the reliable, regular supply of the molluscs and the reliable, regular harvesting by a group of peoples familiar with and capable of attending to such a chore on a continual basis for thousands of years. I know the geography of The Coorong well..on the seaward-side we have bountiful harvest of shell-fish, on the landward-side we have bird and mammal life…the evidence of indigenous people’s fish-traps indicate regular harvesting of food there, the abundance of fresh water from the natural Sth. East drainage system then in place, guaranteed the presence of kangaroos, emus and sundry wildlife for food and clothing…in all, one must admit, that along with the temperate climate, not a bad place to reside…indeed, it could be considered almost an idyll..and reside here people did ..undisturbed for many thousands of years…mark that!…food, clothing, shelter of a quantity and quality that remained in-situ for many thousands of years…exploited but not over-exploited..harvested but not depleted..lived with but not dominated..and perhaps it could have gone on for time immemorial..like it already had…if not finally destroyed by the kind of “advanced society” lauded by Mr. Hayek at the start of this article.
So tell me..: What constitutes an advanced society?..is it the one who uses it’s developed technology to invade, subjugate, desecrate and finally, perhaps, annihilate that very environment it relies upon for it’s life…or is it the other who, with astute observation recognizes a “line” between sustainability and destruction, and by managing it’s population ,refuses to be tempted by the possibility of a gluttony of temporary riches and maintains a judicious, salubrious lifestyle and culture for many thousands of years, visiting the same locations for food, clothing, shelter without desecration nor selfish accumulation?
So YOU tell me.: Who has the most “advanced society” ?
Don’t be so deliberately naïve and self deluding, JC. It hasn’t been either/or for centuries.
What all those of the entitlement mentality practice is the equivalent of modern Native Hunting Rights, which is the freedom to do what they want with whatever modern tools and weapons they can get away with.
When they rort the system like this to achieve their greatest “advancement”, their complete lack of discipline destroys us all.
jaycee-
civilization is the process of liberating men from other men.
there is nothing civilized about your tyrannical fantasies of ‘managing a population’.
go ahead and manage anybody you own. ever give a thought to self-ownership?
keep your mitts off other folks’ bodies, minds and property. or find out the ethical response to the existential threat of slavers, looters and tyrants.
We fly all over Earth, sail across and under its oceans, and fly to space.
We communicate our stories in writing, not glyphs. we transmit knowledge by radio, not dream stores.
I think in a reasonable discussion that makes us more advanced.
But is jaycee holding a reasonable discussion?
1-2-3. strange answers to a philosophical question.
1) Hear no “evil”
2) See no “evil”
3) Speak no “evil”
Oh dear, oh dear…I can see your problem, Jennifer….: There’s not much action going on there..”The swimming pool is in but the patio is dry!”
Good luck, you can have them!
Jen, the Cape Flattery AWS will be interesting to watch tonight.
Cape Flattery has just entered the destructive wind area and w/s is 28 knots gusting to 43.
Nathan should be about Cat 20 by the time ABC wakes up on Friday 20 March (if the ABC ever wakes up).
“But is jaycee holding a reasonable discussion?”
Apparently not.
Looks like highest wind recorded 167 km/h. TC Nathan a cat 2. Claimed a cat 4
spangled drongo,
A wind speed of 167km/h is about 104.3 mph which is a cat2 per the Saffir-Simpson Scale:
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutsshws.php
CAT 2
96-110 mph
83-95 kt
154-177 km/h
Extremely dangerous winds will cause extensive damage: Well-constructed frame homes could sustain major roof and siding damage. Many shallowly rooted trees will be snapped or uprooted and block numerous roads. Near-total power loss is expected with outages that could last from several days to weeks.
In my experience Cat2 is not so rough if buildings are up to code and power is built to be wind resistant/resilient.
I hope all impacted by this storm are safe and their property secured.
Nathan got down to 967hPa but the Bureau issues wind gusts to 260 kph at a category4. The media is going to love this “monster”storm! What goes?
Those high wind speeds near the centre don’t look too convincing:
http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/500hPa/overlay=temp/orthographic=-206.19,-33.14,874
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclone_Marcia
Never read so much infactual rubbish in all my life. There is so much that is incorrect in this it is way beyond a joke. Can’t wait for who ever writes this crap to bastardize cyclone Nathan with another absolute misrepresentation of the facts!
To take an uninteresting typical storm and fabricate stats on it to make it look like a so-called monster and then claim CO2 is the only explanation for the “monster storm” is a sign of strong faith, committed believers and dishonest science.
A pretty good tell that the climate obsessed are non-rational is their consistent need to manufacture “climate miracles” out of what looks like fairly typical weather events.
By the way, Climate Etc. has a major post up on temperature homgenization in Australia.
OH!
LOL!!!!!
I do so enjoy Jaycee’s little bag of newspeak terminologies.
“reasonable climatic detioration is here, is now!”
What is ‘reasonable climatic deterioration’ ? ( deterioration now spelled correctly BTW)
That looks like a term that an economist would dream up…something like ‘quantitative easing’
That has got to be one of the funniest things I have read for a while Jaycee.
It still means you believe that humans are the evil destroyers of climate (misanthropy)
Another funny case of newspeak was one of the MDBA’s recent changes of terminology.
They changed ‘over the bank flows’ to something like ‘wetland connectedness’.
It still means they’re planning to put water on the back of floods and flushing stored water resources down the proverbial toilet!!!
Deb..so glad you got some jollys from my post..you could have changed “reasonable’ to “seasonable” and still got a laugh at the commas !…You ought to hire yourself out to the “comedy club” as a one-person (one-man?) audience…..so tell us.: How’s the flats out there in Ironbark….pretty green?
TC Nathan, now “strengthened” to a Cat 2, Just passed over Gove Airport where the wind raged at 9 knots but only in the gusts, thankfully.
And JC wonders why we are a little sceptical of the gatekeepers.
Deb..” It still means they’re planning to put water on the back of floods and flushing stored water resources down the proverbial toilet!!!”
It would do you well to check up on why wet-lands need to be dried and flooded on a regular basis…the inflow of sediments and the build-up of toxic algaes and nitrous and associated elements in wetlands demand attention be paid to flush these systems out at regular intervals…you may remember the damaging blooms of blue-green algae back some years ago because of a sudden release into the river system of infected stored- water.
I don’t doubt, yourself, Deb, can add to the information here on the site, using you knowledge of the practices of irrigation in the MIA.
Spangled’…I’m not here to act as a foil to your cynicism…go do your own “doubting Thomas” act….I’m here to throw some light on the darkened corners of the mind…I, like Jen ( I trust you don’t mind me being familiar with your name, Jen?), see myself as a kind of “educator”..here to serve the common good.
You mean you just want to defend stupidity without having it sheeted home to you?
But I suppose that IS embarrassing for an “educator”.
Right! ..Spangled ..that’s it!!…I challenge you to a duel..it’s Catallaxy Files at ten comment spaces!…I’ll see you there in half an hour…If I’m not there then, you go ahead and start without me!
I might just wait for you JC. Don’t feel too bad, the wind has now picked up to 13 knots.
Woo Hoo!!
From: Temperature Adjustments in Australia at Judith Curry’s:
http://www.euanmearns.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/alice_anomalies.png
Agrees with Goddard’s blog from 18 months ago:
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/11/05/rss-shows-no-warming-in-australia/
It looks like climate sensitivity may be a lot lower than the IPCC models predict. Big surprise NOT.
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2015/3/19/climate-sensitivity-takes-another-tumble.html
Hmmmm….it is interesting how misanthropes redefine “cynicism” to justify their “idealism”.
spangled drongo,
The latest paper on climate sensitivity adds to the long and growing list of issues which shows that skeptics are justified in their skepticism and that climate true believers have vastly over stated the reasons for their catastrophism. Not to mention that Jennifer’s main point is correct: temperature adjustments have on balance been improperly used by climate hypesters to support their fervent belief in a climate catastrophe.
Look at the kooky way jaycee has to redefine reality with “reasonable climate deterioration” to sustain his apocalyptic faith, as a local example. Look at nearly any major media report on climate for larger examples.
Yes, hunter, if JC ever studied history, the bit about Hannibal getting his elephants over the snow- free alps didn’t sink in.
He’s a very selective “educator”.
hunter..the statement ; “reasonable climate deterioration” was a softening of language by myself in deference to the sensitivities of the clientele of this site…I see it was wasted, as soon as I wrote that I thought of replacing the “r” with an “s”…”why bother” , I reasoned, after all it was small potatoes in a big subject..and as for Hannibal and his mastodons…: it was a known pass, spangled..like now, it has a tendency to become lighter with snow some seasons and at favourable times…I know, My forebears come from the Dolimities..I have been there in summer…I tell you..you blokes ought to get out a bit more, you know..roll the old Hk. Kingswood out of the garage, get “Mawther” to knock up a few of those egg and pickle sangers and get away from Penrith for a day…go see how the other half live!…or you’ll be in danger of ending up like the white-trash hoovering up their lost humanity over on the Catallaxy site!
“Reasonable climate deterioration” is a term I don’t believe many have seen. Please offer a referenced definition.
Please tell me are you kidding about Hannibal using Mastodons in his war on Rome?
Hunter. you don’t geddit. History was wrong. Hannibal used mastodons to handle the snow.
It’s us that ain’t paying attention. Not the “educators”.
Dolomites Dolimites whatever Good for construction.Where would we be without the Romans and concrete
or dollytities where Jaycee’s antecedents come from
Hunter, our category system for cyclones is lower than yours but I was getting ahead of myself back there.
Gove Air Port is just now in the eye-wall of TC Nathan showing wind speeds of 37 knots with gusts just over 50 knots, putting it into Cat 1 [49 – 67 knots].
This would only be a tropical low under your Saffir-Simpson Scale.
“White trash ” of climate debate.
Spoken like a true mastodon homogeniser.
Jaycee,
LOL!!!!
Again.
” I don’t doubt, yourself, Deb, can add to the information here on the site, using you knowledge of the practices of irrigation in the MIA.”
Of course I could Jaycee and much, much more.
For a start I could explain to you that this comment:
” the inflow of sediments and the build-up of toxic algaes and nitrous and associated elements in wetlands demand attention be paid to flush these systems out at regular intervals…you may remember the damaging blooms of blue-green algae back some years ago because of a sudden release into the river system of infected stored- water.” …..
Is missing the point entirely.
Which specific water storage was infected Jaycee?
What caused that infection?
Who or what suddenly released that infected water back into the river system?
And isn’t sudden releases from the storages into the river systems onto the back of floods exactly what the MDBP is planning to do?
The majority of wetlands are ephemeral Jaycee. Pre European, they all regularly dried up a long way ahead of the rivers.
In many cases, Ramsar listed wetlands are there on a more permanent basis (which all the native flora and fauna just love BTW) because the system is now regulated and… even in the middle of the millennium drought… the Murray River did not run dry.
We have two Ramsar listed wetlands very close to us. They were originally naturally fed by the surrounding hills from the west after rare but very heavy rainfall events….NEVER from the Murrumbidgee River. In Summer, even though those wetlands are watered from the ‘bidgee….the birds and frogs and turtles and numerous other creatures and critters actually prefer to come to our place.
A bit of a microcosm of the silly nonsense that the SA political elite sprout about the Coorong in your neck of the woods.
Most of the water that came into the Coorong pre European settlement was NOT from the Murray River.
Perhaps Spangled and Hunter have hit the nail on the head by questioning your grasp of history?
The wetlands through much of the MDB spent the majority of their time bone dry before the systems were regulated. Many of them were not filled by floods from the rivers, they were filled by heavy local rainfall events.
And The Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area does not release water back into the river system in the manner you imply. Except in exceptional flood circumstances, it is a closed system.
Hope that helps?
jaycee,
I wish you well in your efforts to communicate more effectively.
Debbie..I was inviting you to extrapolate on my “light touch” statements, using, as I remarked, your “on ground knowledge” of the subject…but all we get is derision and mockery, backed up by the usual “stenographers”…I must say, that as someone who claims to have three degrees from high-esteemed universities, Debbie…you dissapoint….one introduces you to the readers as a environmental authority and all you deliver is comedy!….for shame.
Yes…; Mastadon…a joke , joyce! (as if I NEED to explain…but then..: thick!).
That’s funny, I thought I got your sad little joke. But any’ow, here’s a bit more history for you [from both hemispheres] to show how he did it without mastodons:
https://oz4caster.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/climate-reconstructions-2000-years-to-0-ad.gif
Northern Hemisphere gives even more opportunity:
http://www.murdoconline.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/gisp2-ice-core-temperatures.jpg
IOW, JC, d’you think that with all that warmer and wetter weather in the past, our slight recovery from the LIA might possibly be mainly due to what it was due to then?
ie, natural weather and climate variability?
A large, boring part of weather and climate is nat var.
And when you allow for that, which you must, there’s not much left for the ACO2 generated stuff [read minus quantity].
So, plenty of room for more warming without the need to get concerned.
” So, plenty of room for more warming without the need to get concerned.”…why don’t we get a second opinion on that, Spang’s…Let’s ask a biologist…JEN!!?
jaycee,
Offer something that is substantive and serious and you will get the same. So far you offer emotional claptrap and historically ignorant examples, along with demonstrations of guilt projected on entire cultures.
Here is a factual article ( sorry JC) from Lomborg in the WSJ in February.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2015/02/the-alarming-thing-about-climate.html
And here are the facts about deaths from NATURAL disasters in the earlier 20th century and today. That fall of 97% today is remarkable and so are the other points he makes about so called CAGW.
Here is lomborg’s quote———————-
“This is important because if we want to help the poor people who are most threatened by natural disasters, we have to recognize that it is less about cutting carbon emissions than it is about pulling them out of poverty.
The best way to see this is to look at the world’s deaths from natural disasters over time. In the Oxford University database for death rates from floods, extreme temperatures, droughts and storms, the average in the first part of last century was more than 13 dead every year per 100,000 people. Since then the death rates have dropped 97% to a new low in the 2010s of 0.38 per 100,000 people.
The dramatic decline is mostly due to economic development that helps nations withstand catastrophes. If you’re rich like Florida, a major hurricane might cause plenty of damage to expensive buildings, but it kills few people and causes a temporary dent in economic output. If a similar hurricane hits a poorer country like the Philippines or Guatemala, it kills many more and can devastate the economy.”
Neville…There are so many “logic holes” in that Lomburg piece , one would need a LEGION of seamstresses to patch it together!
road toll deaths in Aust’ per 100.000 ….: 2013 1,193 5.16…and that’s just road toll…you tell me there are LESS road deaths even in any other countries…never mind all the other things that can kill one!
Neville..That stupid table of rainfall averages you posted the other day..it is useless…because as ANY farmer/ resident in regional Aust will tell you, any rain in a 24hr period of 5mm or under, unless backed up by MORE rain, is useless…ie; if ti rained 5mm overnight, that moisture will be evaporated with little value by 2pm. that same day!..it just may freshen-up the foliage..
Any rain of 3mm or under is totally useless and may not even be recorded..and I would say the same for any 5mm or under…and seeing as how this sort of erratic rainfall is the main these days out here, your “Average” is WAY, WAY out of kilter..and will demonstrate just why drought still persists in some parts of the country…
I told you…: roll that old HK. kingswood out of the garage and get out of Penrith for the day and see how the other half of the country lives!
GOG!..I hate posting on here some-days..one has to wade through sloughs of thick, dickhead aggression and stupid, dopey illogical bullshite personality projections before one can even get to respond to the stunted, state of denial and stenographed plagiarism from ANY half legitimate fellow-traveller site…just as long as it in even the most infantile, infinite way support the most insipid debate!…
GOD! you are a pack of unimaginative blogging effing bores!!!!!!
Can you not even think outside the square in even your own little environment?
JC I agree that we realists haven’t your imagination or interest in delusional nonsense. So now we know that you think the BOM rainfall record is useless, so what record should we use to cover the last 115 years? Please provide a link.
Dr Goklany’s work backs up Lomborg claims.
And he states at the end of the article that the huge decline in death rates is because of the extended use of fossil fuels.
IOW if you want a more prosperous and safer way of life make sure you use more fossil fuels. And he is an IPCC author as well.
http://www.thegwpf.com/indur-m-goklany-global-death-toll-from-extreme-weather-events-declining/
Wisdom;and wild-eyed JC has none.No flexibility-if it doesn’t agree with his insular mind its rejected out of hand.Bit like the peer-review system that rejects alternative climate science that puts the piss up CO2 as the dominant driver of earths temp.
When you go fact-free JC you’ve got to remember to use big font too.
It’s the only way you can expect to fuel the already billion dollars a day Global Warming Industry.
When you’ve only got half a degree warming in the second half of the 20th c to fall back on, your rants and ad hom make the grade but you just gotta learn to SHOUT LOUDER.
Your knack of ignoring evidence is a good first step but suck lots of lozenges and look after your throat at all times.
Yes Spangled JC loves his fact free nonsense and I have to admit he certainly has a super abundance of fact free imagination.
Here’s a good example of the fact free Greens receiving a well deserved kick up the backside by a young Liberal senator. Amazing that people actually vote for these Green loonies in the first place. This is one of the best speeches I’ve seen in a long time.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/seselja_calls_out_the_greens_on_coal/#commentsmore
Yes, Neville, you, me and Zed might think there is some point to coal but the JCs thinks this beats coal every day:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2581887/The-bonfire-insanity-Woodland-shipped-3-800-miles-burned-Drax-power-station-It-belches-CO2-coal-huge-cost-YOU-pay-cleaner-greener-Britain.html
Poor jaycee. His complaining about the difficulty of all the tough slogging he has to do and yet misses the point that it is his own offal he is slogging through. When one looks up derivative, unimaginanitve, fact-free rants, it is not suprising that jaycee’s posts are prominently offered as examples of the same. He doesn’t know- or even care to know- the basicis of Australian climate, he promotes an infantile guilt against the tech socieity he and the rest of us completely rely on, he has no appreciation of the measurable and tremendous good that our tech socieites have done, and he conflates his personal concerns into rational for believing infantile apocalyptic clap trap.
Another stupid study from the Mann.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/24/michael-mann-and-stefan-rahmstorf-claim-the-gulf-stream-is-slowing-due-to-greenland-ice-melt-except-reality-says-otherwise/
More delusion and even some warmists have had enough. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/24/mann-on-the-run-latest-paper-dead-at-birth-rejected-by-german-warmist-scientists-deletes-inconvenient-facebook-challenge/
Jaycee.
That’s because your statements are so ridiculously out or touch…and Sooooo last century…. that I can’t help laughing.
You are basically arguing that ‘The Environment’ is somehow entirely mutually exclusive from Agriculture and more particularly in your comments to me …irrigated agriculture.
Then you wonder why people like me laugh at you.
The MIA does not release drainage water into the river system. It is a closed system.
Which part of that did you not understand?
Many Ramsar listed wetlands (including most of the Coorong) were not originally naturally fed from the MDB rivers.
Which part of that did you not understand?
Wetland fauna & flora hang out where there is good ecological health….they’re far from stupid. They prefer my place to the local Ramsar sites.
Which part of that did you not understand?
The derision and mockery is a result of your tendency to assume stuff about other people and their occupations with no evidence & your simply delightful little excursions into newspeak style terminology.
It’s amusing.
Greetings Ms. M.
Here is a link to an ABC interview:
Dr Rob Vertessy, Director, Bureau of Meteorology on Sunday Profile
with Richard Aedy on 702 ABC Sydney
Sunday 29th March
Of particular interest might be this question @11.50-
“I want to ask you about a series of attacks on the Bureau in the Australian newspaper. I think there were 14 or so in a few months when the Bureau was accused of fiddling with it’s temperature data …” (It’s not slanderous or anything)
The full interview is 24.29 mins.
http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programitem/peyl3MNdrQ?play=true