Hi Jen,
For some time I’ve been popping in to your blog to relate my region’s monthly weather extremes, based on the Australian Bureau of Meteorology’s own records. The highlight was always the mean monthly maximum, since every month had its hottest max between 1910 and 1919, with the exception of August, which was hottest in 1946. These are the records as they have stood for many years on the the Elders website under Kempsey climatology. http://www.eldersweather.com.au/nsw/mid-north-coast/kempsey
No more!
The hottest months by mean max have all been changed. Every single one. If you look at the fine print, you’ll find the explanation: the temp data is now from 1965 to 2010. No doubt the BOM can adduce good scientific reasons for this…and who reads fine print anyway?
So there you have it: our searing decade around WW1 has not been eliminated from memory by any Orwellian measures.
It’s just been taken off the page.
If a careless reader might think those were cooler times – his own fault!
To add to the perfectly legal distortion, our rainfall records extend from 1882 to 2010, so a careless reader might think the temp records also fall within that period. The only downside of this for the BOM: all our monthly records for drought were set between 1882 and 1957. I wonder when all that will be removed from the page, with a little fine print in explanation.
Thought this might interest.
Appreciate your work mightily.
Rob
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
I’m a little unsure as to what is going on here; in my neck of the woods Nobby’s signal station is the nearest BOM temperature site; for graphs the data goes back to 1910:
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/hqsites/site_data.cgi?variable=meanT&area=nsw&station=061055&dtype=raw&period=annual&ave_yr=T
And the full data is available from 1862:
http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/av?p_nccObsCode=36&p_display_type=dataFile&p_startYear=&p_stn_num=061055
It happens that some sites do “prune” the data they keep on file. Also, the “climatology” is updated at intervals, generally at decade boundaries so what is considered the “normal” temperature for any particular date might be the average over the 30 years ending on the last even decade (we use 30 year average for “normal” temperatures in the US, it could vary elsewhere). Even that is incorrect as it is pretty clear by now that temperatures vary on a 60-ish year cycle. So in order to capture the entire cycle, you would need a 60 year period to set your “climatology”. Since the mid 19th century we see a 30 year period of warming, then a 30 year hiatus where it cools off a little, then 30 years warming, then hiatus, and finally the late 20th century warming which seems to have ended in 2004 and now it appears to be cooling again. If your calculation of “normal” is anything less than 60 years, you aren’t capturing the temperature over a complete cycle. There is also an 800 year cycle but nobody has data going back that far (yet).
They might have changed their source of climate data, too, to a more economical provider that doesn’t keep as much data on file. Hard to tell.
Totally unclear post – who has what data where?
Amazing!
Luke posting Climategate questions!!
Luke,
If you go here:
http://www.eldersweather.com.au/nsw/mid-north-coast/kempsey
Then click:
http://www.eldersweather.com.au/climate.jsp?lt=site&lc=59017
You’ll see “what data where”. You’ll note that there’s a declaration near the bottom of both pages that data is from BOM via Weatherzone. If you hover over the monthly or daily records, you get a little pop-box indicating the year the record was set.
Obviously, I don’t know which party – Elders, Weatherzone or BOM – is responsible for this “revision”, since nobody even said they were going to do it, let alone who wanted to do it, or why. It was just done, within the last weeks.
Totally clear?
So you could ask perhaps? Starting with Elders …
“So you could ask perhaps? Starting with Elders …”
If you’re curious, by all means ask any one of them. You’ll probably get “The dog ate my data” by way of an answer. Or maybe:”We constantly strive to improve the quality of our data”. Good luck with that.
Well that’s not very positive.
It is clear to me.
It says at the bottom of the webpage that BOM is responsible for the data and that the point of reference is from 1965. Why shorten the point of reference? Why not include the very hot years between 1910 and 1919! More adjusting to get rid of hot years.
Pure speculative paranoia ! Is Elders a climate change study reference site? Better check under the bed for reds….. and how long has that van been parked outside ….
One of the interesting things about the old Elders Kempsey monthly weather records – which nobody has ever confused with a climate study change reference site – was the absence of any record extreme monthly weather in recent decades. Nothing for hottest, nothing for wettest, nothing for driest. Only one fairly recent month figured, November 1999. It still figures in the “revised” charts, since, obviously, it’s post 1965. It’s a temp record, by mean max, and I remember that Spring well.
1999 set a record for November COLD.
luke, just start the van, and drive away… stalkers are not needed.
Well what a beat up. Gee a cold record eh? Wow ! Means nothing – the trend in hot and very hot days versus cold and very cold days would be more pertinent.
And even worse – gee “a location” – the ye olde uniformitarian ruse.
And if it’s on Elders site – the first port of call is Elders. It’s their marketing tool. Trying to fit BoM into some conspiracy theory here is simply juvenile without any phones calls/emails requesting more information.
“Trying to fit BoM into some conspiracy theory here is simply juvenile without any phones calls/emails requesting more information.”
Too right luke, and the “phones calls/emails” have been done.
http://kenskingdom.wordpress.com/2011/10/24/the-australian-temperature-record-part-10-bom%e2%80%99s-%e2%80%9cexplanations%e2%80%9d/
I should point out that my region is connected with a larger region known as Australia, and is likely to show trends for that larger region over an entire century and more. Monthly averages are, of course, very interesting in this regard. There may, of course, be a mysterious disconnection of one region from another. After all, when 75% of our coal is combusted offshore, it’s called revenue. When burnt in the Latrobe Valley, our Green Betters insist it’s a toxin to be taxed out of existence. From this I conclude that there is a Chinese atmosphere quite insulated from our Australian atmosphere.
I need to repeat that all the records referred to have come from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology. Elders simply lay out the information in a very convenient format. Perhaps too convenient for some.
For years I’ve been expecting the Kempsey page to be altered – I just didn’t know how. Now I know. If clarity and transparency were a concern to those who”revised”, we would have the reasons without phone calls or emails. As to whether I would embark on such an investigation myself: people who practice spin and little else – GetUp, for example – are always inviting us to go swimming in molasses.
“Pure speculative paranoia !”
Yeah Luke, like BoM deleting all the old max temp records prior to 1910.
1910 conveniently was a generally cooler period and so sets all the graphs at the “right” slope.
Let us know, won’t you, when BoM happen to adjust anything that shows a cooling bias instead.
Contributions for Tallbloke:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/17/tallbloke-to-take-to-torts/#comment-834883
Rob, before you get too perplexed by the historical records on the central north coast, it would be worth checking how your region fares in the Australian spatial context. It is a bit different as you have discovered.
Bazza, I’m in no way perplexed by the local historical records. Nor do I expect them to provide any kind of close representation of the local climatic reality, let alone of any “Australian spatial context”. For example, weather stats don’t tell you how long a condition lasted, how quickly it occurred or subsided; how it was enhanced or mitigated by other factors, such as wind strength, wind direction, revegetation, urbanisation, cloud, rain, humidity, freak events, absence of freak events etc etc. I spend a lot of time in the forest, the paddock and the bamboo grove, so I’m intensely aware of all these variables.
On the other hand, a century of monthly totals and averages for temp and rainfall…that’s worth having to hand. The fact that every month here – except August of 1946 – was at its hottest between 1910 and 1919, the fact that all low rainfall records were set between 1882 and 1957, these things would be of interest to many.
By the way, our worst flood cluster (three years in a row) was in the nineteenth century and our worst flood event was the double whammy of 1949-’50.
I can be trusted with this knowledge. I won’t use it to draw silly conclusions. No Mayan Calendar outcomes or computer models – I promise!
That Kens Kingdom stuff is simply bollocks. More sceptic time wasting nonsense. In fact moving thermometers to airports would have a net cooling effect.
Licence sceptics not guns.
You are kidding Luke!
Robert – 1911 – 1916 and 1918 – 1920 were major droughts.
“In fact moving thermometers to airports would have a net cooling effect.”
Luke, you do get things partly right, occasionally.
Airports ARE cooler than cities.
But warmer than natural vegetation.
Just goes to show how much REAL UHI there really is.
All they do is cause convection which draws in cooler air from the surrounding countryside.
“All they do is cause convection which draws in cooler air from the surrounding countryside.”
And I don’t suppose in the meantime this asphalt-and-jet-engine-caused heat which rises and draws in the cooler air has any effect on the ol’ thermometer, eh?
Specially in Svalbad.
With the thermometer placed beside the airstrip, what do you think might be the difference in temperature between a grass airstrip and an asphalt airstrip?
Or an ice airstrip and an asphalt airstrip?
Well where’s the experiment ? All just sceptic projection.
Well if you can’t see that at least half the time the thermometer will be warmer beside the asphalt than beside grass or ice, then we know who the denier is.
It’s only a matter of to what degree.
“Well where’s the experiment ? All just sceptic projection.”
Well if the ARGC wasnt so narrow minded and funds could be applied to such experiments it would be great ..why should alarmists in shonkademia have all the fun with public funds
Not really SD – I reckon the convective suck from natural surroundings would more than compensate.
Well, I never, luke may be right; looking at several airports around NSW they all show either no warming or cooling!
Richmond:
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/hqsites/site_data.cgi?variable=maxT&area=aus&station=061086&period=annual&dtype=raw&ave_yr=T
Mudgee:
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/hqsites/site_data.cgi?variable=maxT&area=aus&station=062101&period=annual&dtype=raw&ave_yr=T
Orange:
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/hqsites/site_data.cgi?variable=maxT&area=aus&station=063231&period=annual&dtype=raw&ave_yr=T
It’s a reverse UHI effect; relax boys, humans have a cooling effect!
The “convective suck” would work only when it wasn’t being overcome by wind in the opposite direction.
Breeze blowing through almost 180 degrees would carry some asphalt heat to the thermometer plus many hours of night radiation.
You are right that convection would compensate because that’s how our marvellous climate system works but you can’t put a paddock of black asphalt in the wilderness without adding warmth to a thermometer placed right beside it.
It’s called land use change and it’s separate from and additional to UHI.
How much area of black road do we have in this world. Black paddocks etc.
When you add all that to the warming caused by natural variation there isn’t much left of that 0.7c that you can blame on the GHG effect.
GHG may even be negative.
With fast internet and computers plus huge databases available today, I can’t understand why truncate proven records on one hand, but try to go back and wipe out the MWP by manipulating dubious tree ring data from much further back?
no sense at all.
But man, that GHG effect can still be apocalyptic.
Apparently.
http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/stories/could-the-earthquake-in-haiti-have-been-a-man-made-disast
“but try to go back and wipe out the MWP by manipulating dubious tree ring data from much further back?”
Jonathan,
It seemed like a smart idea at the time but it has now bitten them on the bum in no uncertain fashion. Like climategate 1&2, it showed the “hockey team” in their true colours.
Spangles discovers albedo – LOL ! Pullease !
Yep! It’s albedo but it’s still non-GHG man made global warming and it’s all eating away at that 0.7c.
That leg you’re standing on is looking pretty spindly.
Oh come on – do you think science doesn’t know about these issues. Spare me your bulldust.
What has happened Luke? You don’t appear as your old self….must be just this thread.
And what about the Cool Air Outbreak (CAO) on the eastern seaboard? I would like your assessment of the situation.
“Oh come on – do you think science doesn’t know about these issues. Spare me your bulldust.”
True science knows there is a lot of uncertainty and with many factors being responsible for that 0.7c of warming there ain’t much left over for the GHG effect.
What’s your own take on a doubling?
Mine’s +/- 0.5c. Not much lukewarming even.
Yes EG, I think Luke’s away on Chrissy hols and we’re on lukeauto.
Models have extensive land surface schemas … that know about albedo …. it’s already factored in
CAO – “La Nina weather”
Remember previously on CAOs – “cold air outbreaks in a greenhouse world” will happen !
http://ams.confex.com/ams/87ANNUAL/techprogram/paper_117372.htm
AGW is not the end of weather, inter-annual or decadal variability
“In this study we use output from seven state-of-the-art GCMs to analyze the behavior of extreme cold-air outbreaks (CAOs) under recent and future climatic conditions”
EG, I told ya we were on lukeauto.
Yep, luke’s on hols and is sending his work in by carrier pigeon which has pooped on the message so its coming out garbled.
I think he is talking about natural variability which is grudgingly filtering through the AGW hive consciousness; it really has emerged since McLean et al got shafted by Foster et al; speaking of whom his and Rahmstorf’s recent paper on detrending natural variation is being lambasted here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/17/frank-lansner-on-foster-and-rahmstorf-2011/
Lansner notes Foster and Ramnstorf make the elemetary mistake of assuming no lagged or accumulated effect from solar; elementary really which is why Stokwell’s new paper is so brilliant:
http://vixra.org/pdf/1108.0032v1.pdf
So CAOs in a greenhouse world is totally predictable.
No grudgingly at all – decadal is the big modelling cheese in AR5. And nothing to do with sceptics.
Paper? you mean speculative un-reviewed draft manuscript
No xmas cheer from luke.
Weather zone has also done this for Casino in NSW. 1908 – 2009 has been replaced by the 1965 -2009 averages. This eliminates the 1940s which was Casino’s hottest decade on average. At least the BOM still has the monthly/ yearly averages from 1908 but all records now only have to beat those from the last 46 years, a cooler period for this part of the state.
Re the airport debate. Casino has two weather stations at its airport. One is a manual, the other an automatic. The manual is surrounded closely by a road and buildings. The AWS is in the middle of an oval. The manual averages 0.5C more than the AWS for max temps – and they are only 300m apart. That’s what I call an UH effect.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2066240/Second-leak-climate-emails-Political-giants-weigh-bias-scientists-bowing-financial-pressure-sponsors.html
But we already knew this, that the climatariat were colluding with Governments to produce the otucome they and the NG’/s wanted…nothing new here
So boring and more sceptic crap – what do the various alternative analyses reveal – the same friggin answer. How desperate – how scummy.
What the criminally stolen personal emails reveal – human nature, deadlines, exasperation, off hand comments, disagreements – gee UNHEARD of – never ever happened before in the history of humanity.
luke
“gee UNHEARD of – never ever happened before in the history of humanity.”
——————————————————————————
Not at all Luke, I’m sure it happened before, is happening now and will be happening in the future by all sorts of scientists and others we don’t know about and who’s findings have no measurable influence in the scheme of things.
The problem here Luke is, that these people and their action have a profound effect on our politics economy and our future prosperity.
Therefore it matters greatly because public policies are being driven by uncertain, manipulated “science”!
Do you drive a hybrid, Luke?
http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/amyoliver/2011/12/18/green_technologythat_pollutes_the_planet/page/full/
This, purportedly, from Jones: ‘Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden. I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.’
This, purportedly, from Overpeck: ‘The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guide what’s included and what is left out.’
Then there’s this, from someone described as a “nervous scientist”: ‘The figure you sent is very deceptive.’
Then there’s this, from “another”. ‘I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run.’
My problems with the Daily Mail article are that the emails, if not fake, were indeed stolen; the journalist does not indicate whether Jones and Overpeck were definitely the authors by their own admission or by objective proof; lastly, two of the emails quoted were by “a nervous scientist” and “another”. The journo covers himself initially with “purporting to be” and “appears to show” – then proceeds as if there were no doubt.
Those are my problems with the journalism. My problem with the actual emails is that, if genuine, they make the Daily Mail’s reporting seem rigorous and transparent by comparison with climate research at the University of East Anglia.
IF the emails are genuine, we also need to consider context for at least some of them. For example: ‘The figure you sent is very deceptive.’ Is the figure referred to directly related to a major climate issue? Was it a joke? A private issue? Was the criticism of the figure accepted? What’s the context?
I’m not defending Jones and the others. They represent what Eisenhower warned about in his departing speech, AFTER the eagerly quoted bit about the the military-industrial complex. “The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded…we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
But there has to be a better way of proceeding against these dubious “researchers”. I just don’t want anyone stealing my emails, faking my emails, or quoting my emails without context. Like Eisenhower said, it’s a liberty thing.
Sorry for you guys struggling with such a small handfull of old metro records.
The sub tropics have in fact moved south and we can prove it with all the extra heat as it was, rain as it is and hail. Hail’s been the curse for NSW stone fruit growers through our traditional areas several seasons in a row.
Last Sunday, tired as I was then our Koel tree was located. Then I saw his mate in twilight slip in and out of the canopy quite silently as they do. SD, we now have a breeding Rainbird pair. Last time I regularly heard these birds was when my late wife stayed with her offspring near Cabulture. Running through ACT sighting records shows a most definite trend.
Gavin, in my very OLD reference book (first published ’31, my edition ’59) the Koel’s migration zone extends to north eastern Victoria, where it can appear after September. Re bad and repeated hail in the cherry country: that was ancient news when Cliff Richard made his first single.
As to the old “metro” records, don’t be sorry for us. There’s no “struggling”. Those records are superficial but useful references of limited value – like all statistics – and we just want them back.
Gavin, as Robert says, the southern limit of the Koel is near the Vic Border but they use many other birds to hatch and raise their kids so it depends where the other birds are and that depends on many, many things.
At the present time with these great seasons we are having, the whole of Australia is an oasis and the birds have spread far and wide.
You have to be a pessimist to consider the glass half empty.
It needs Fred Dagg to remind us:
read it and get angry lads
“The main lesson I took away from the conference was this: there is no consistent contrarian science, and there is no defining contrarian ideology or motivation. Some are sincere. Others are angry at their lack of funding. Some appear to be envious of the IPCC scientists’ success, and others have found a niche that gets them attention they would not otherwise get. Only a few appear to be motivated by politics. No single label applies to them, and I found myself referring to them as “contrarians/skeptics/deniers/enablers/provocateurs/publicity-seekers”.”
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/12/climate-cynicism-at-the-santa-fe-conference/
Why aren’t you out plucking turkeys luke? Your usual link to RC contains the usual; Monckton has:
“no understanding of science or the scientific method, and when I asked him about scientific prediction, he called it a “fool’s errand”.”
And Curry apparently was in a storm of straw men; jealous luke, you being a straw man?
But what interested me was the conference organiser, Petr Chylek; I note the author observed:
“After three years of convening climate-related sessions at AGU, I have yet to receive an abstract that argues against anthropogenic global warming. ”
He should have asked Chylek who did this:
http://www.lanl.gov/source/orgs/ees/ees14/pdfs/09Chlylek.pdf
SD, the Regent Bowerbird is now making appearances on my place. I’m sure they’re as big a nuisance as the Satins and Koels – all my thousands of pieces fruits are stripped – but the male Regent must be one of the most glorious of all Australian birds. Apparently, they do make bowers, but hard to find. Not like a Satin, who’ll build the bloody thing in the middle of a path. Since no Bowerbird was ever stupid, I take it as impudence. Have not observed any Spangled Drongoes, but they may be around. Such a good season, in spite of the cool December, so anything could be anywhere.
That fostering thing is extraordinary, isn’t it? I’m sure the Satins let all the others do the baby-minding work while they go off feasting. I’m told that Satin Bowerbirds now have a Faculty of Human Studies at Southern Cross Uni. Hope all that lefty education makes them a bit more compassionate towards us.
“…there is no defining contrarian ideology or motivation.”
At last, somebody understands us!
Little Lukey,
why would we need consistency or a consensus when you are WRONG?!?!?!?!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Luke said,
“The main lesson I took away from the conference was this: there is no consistent contrarian science, and there is no defining contrarian ideology or motivation.”
Why can’t you just accept that the climate behaves as it always had?
Why do you need a “contrarian”, or any science?
What’s wrong with natural variation?
Almost like climbing the greasy pole, we have to because it’s there!
We are not a bit closer to explaining the climate, or predict the weather than the shamans did in the olden days, except we make it sound as if we knew what we are talking about instead of just chucking a couple of virgins into the lake or a volcano.
Come to think of it we have to, where do find virgins these days?
“Why can’t you just accept that the climate behaves as it always had” – well except that it doesn’t – there are trends everywhere. Even the paleo record points to a diversity of events.
“We are not a bit closer to explaining the climate” WRONG – except for vast knowledge about many oscillations
“or predict the weather” WRONG – demonstrated skill
A ridiculous non-scientific set of propositions.
Even the paleo record points to a diversity of events.
—————————————————————
My point exactly Luke, we are nowhere nearer to the TRUE cause, ( I don’t think there is any ONE!!) we just have more options and for reasons political and greed we pursue the CO2 line
A ridiculous non-scientific set of propositions.
———————————————
Your opinion, but pursuing the CO2 line is not a whole lot better.
At least with the virgins people had the drama and tears, with the carbon tax all we have is the tears!
Robert, you’re lucky having the Regent BB in such numbers but I suppose not at the expense of all your fruit. Their bower is supposed to be pretty meager and I too have never come across one. Maybe like the Satin, they build in places in backyards where the Scrub Turkeys won’t scratch them to pieces.
One swallow doth not a summer make
One koel doth a globol warming make?
Ian,
Koels rely on hysteria to drive their message. A bit like gav and luke and the rest of the AGW bedwetters.
But the world has rarely been in better shape weather wise.
Even the worlds sea-ice is normal:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg
Actually, Luke, what is anti-science is the reversal of the scientific process by the AGW believers.
skeptics are under no obligation to have any one perspective.
Many have pointed out problems of the AGW consensus data, methods, failures of predictions, suppression of dissent, rewrites of history, missing troposhpere hotspots, missing heat content in oceans, similarity of historical experience and evidence: far more than the normal standard of falsifying a hypothesis.
But AGW believers will have none of that. Instead they want the negative proven, and on their own terms.
Sorry, but that makes you look about as credible as those sad lost youth you seem to like on Youtube.
AGW stands falsified.
A pair of Rainbirds Ian and although I can vouch after 25 years here they are not so common in the ACT they have been sighted recently south of Melbourne.
So what does it mean? Weather station records don’t give us the rise and fall of hail damage or the suitability of a place for migratory species season by season.
Gav,
A Japanese [Latham’s] Snipe recently turned up here. They breed in the Hokaido wetlands which were inundated by the Tsunami and return to Australia by way of the East Asia wetlands which are fast disappearing with coastal reclamation.
Imagine what these poor little buggers have to go through to survive with loss of habitat.
Yet they do, and “climate change” would be the least of their problems.
I feel sorry for the Young cherry growers but that sort of puts the “cherry pickin” problem in perspective.
Little Lukey waxes philosophical,
“…well except that it doesn’t – there are trends everywhere.”
And a trend is only useful if it has real science to explain it, and if it is measure reasonably well. Going back through history we could pick any number of periods which have “trends everywhere” that could be used as alarmist talking points.
Sorry about that old bean.
Well real science is what sceptics don’t have. As well as not agreeing on anything including where the sun rises (what a bunch of mavericks, oddballs and disaffected old codgers) – they don’t publish, hang around in secret societies, and are prone to alarmist ranting.
What a mob
Luke
“Well real science is what sceptics don’t have – –
– they don’t publish, hang around in secret societies, and are prone to alarmist ranting.”
Like “Jones’ CRU/IPCC Data Lost, Corrupted & Unrepeatable” ?
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/17760
Like “Foia – Agenda 21” ?
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2011/12/18/foia-agenda-21/
zzzzzzz – so someone (many others) else replicates the work – and gee the answer is the same. Nothing to see here …. move on. zzzzzzzzz
bye bye SWWA wheat belt http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2011/2011GL047943.shtml
bye bye SWWA wheat belt
computer models Luke!
I wonder what you will say when the drought brakes there as it inevitably will, just like it did in most places?
Luke
” move on. zzzzzzzzz”
Rip van Luke in action
We all have our fave climate disaster projections. I’d like to mention one of mine.
Guys, if you ever get the chance to tyrannize over an entire Asian country, and your economic management is even worse than that of the impossibly incompetent Mao, there’s no need to blame bourgeois sabotage and people who wear specs. We now have climate change.
“The repeated natural disasters that hit the DPRK (North Korea) are attributable to the abnormal weather caused by global warming. The speed of warming in Korea at present is three times the average speed of global warming.”
So said the North Korean news agency, prior to that country’s ratification of Kyoto. When you think about it, commie nation building and climate modelling have much in common. Both require fantastic levels of computation and complication…all in the service of bovine simple-mindedness.
“Well real science is what sceptics don’t have”
Well it depends upon ones definition of what is real science doesnt it
The extremists who pass themsevles off as scientists in order to spend the public dollar doing shonky shit dont cut the mustard in producing” real science” either
…similarly delusional academic cretins who validate WWF and other NGO’s glossy material in order to pass it off as PR’d ” real science ” certainly dont earn any browny points either.
Chalk up another for “real science” and the models!
“Hansen’s Arrested Development”
“Normally these days I prefer to only deal with scientific papers, which of course leaves activist pleadings like Hansen’s stuff off the list. But in this case I’ll make an exception. Here’s my sole reason for bringing this up. Hansen’s paper says the following (emphasis mine):
The precision achieved by the most advanced generation of radiation budget satellites is indicated by the planetary energy imbalance measured by the ongoing CERES (Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System) instrument (Loeb et al., 2009), which finds a measured 5-year-mean imbalance of 6.5 W/m2 (Loeb et al., 2009). Because this result is implausible, instrumentation calibration factors were introduced to reduce the imbalance to the imbalance suggested by climate models, 0.85 W/m2 (Loeb et al., 2009).
I bring it up because it is climate science at its finest. Since the observations were not of the expected range, rather than figure out why the results might be wrong, they just twisted the dials to “reduce the imbalance to the imbalance suggested by climate models.”
”
More at http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/20/hansens-arrested-development/#more-53430
Are these the wheat belt problems you’re talking about, Luke:
http://saveaustralianfarming.org/heavy-rain-in-wa-floods-bumper-crop-forecast.aspx
Another Ian; that photo of Hansen being arrested is priceless; I wonder if he likes men in uniform?
Gee Spanglers – a datum point. Just hope it keeps raining …
Lets see how water supply trends are trending over say 30 years or more http://www.watercorporation.com.au/_images/Dams/Streamflow_graph_2011.png
hmmmm….
Another one for “real science” and the models!
“A Curiousity In Australia
21
12
2011
So there was / is a cold summer in Australia (especially up around Brisbane).
When you look at a map of Australia, Brisbane is just about in the middle of the country on the coast on the right (east) side.
What’s a bit curious, is that while the locals are saying it is Way Cold, GIStemp is just not seeing it. In fact, even looking back into the PAST cold, it isn’t there. It is as though the extremes are simply erased. (I’ve suspected this from what we’ve seen in the “QA Process” where stations must be ‘close enough’ to nearby airports or their data are rejected).
What brought this on? Bikinis.
No, honest! With a h/t to George on the Open Talk page where he noted:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/8965155/Cold-Australian-summer-sees-swimwear-profits-plummet.html
Coldest summer in Australia in 50 years. ”
More at http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2011/12/21/a-curiousity-in-australia/#comments
And I’ve seen much more computer today thanks to another 47mm of AGW permanent drought limiting outside operations.
“The unusually wet spring has meant that in some cases self-sown crops are higher than those ready to be harvested.”
Yeah, big drought luke. Never gonna rain again.
http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/awap/rain/index.jsp?colour=colour&time=latest&step=0&map=percent&period=cmonth&area=nat
The models are having a bad day!
http://www.real-science.com/giss-fries-planet
More utter drivel and sceptic slops – where is it published that it will never rain again or cold events will never happen again. Sound of crickets chirping. LMAO – a datum point.
Strange that the lads failed to draw my attention to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autumn_2011_United_Kingdom_heat_wave
and
http://climatecrocks.com/2011/08/10/this-is-not-cool-heatwave-2011-2/ you’ll luv the vid
How is a wet spring/summer a datum point?
And in tonight’s news the water is so cold in the prawn farms they are not going to be big enough for Christmas.
Not only are deniers oblivious to the recent autumn heat in Britain, they seem to have quite forgotten that New York and Northeast heatwave of ’96, and the 1500 deaths. Ten days of 90F+, 90% humidity, no wind, little temp drop by night. And the president did nothing!
Fortunately, Police Commissioner Theodore Roosevelt distributed free ice.
No. seriously. These heat disasters, like the the baked Thames in 1858, US in 1896, France in 2003, were more lethal because of urban conditions. North America, including much of Canada, in 1936 may still be the real doozie, coming upon a large and unprepared population after a freezing winter in the dustbowl era.
http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/July_2006/18/heatwave.html
Personally, I don’t use air-con, but I think it’s wonderful and should be universally available and affordable. Of course, the answer is to renew all our coal facilities for more efficiency and cheaper energy prices. Gradually add some nukes, for competition’s sake. The answer is NOT to erect idiotic toy energy facilities and to supplement these Great Green Fetishes with decrepit and crushingly taxed coal-power generation. While we send 75% of our coal and most of our uranium offshore. If there’s a sillier game than that…
Ah but Robert – I’ve been assured by the best sceptics that we’d be in an ice age by now. I think we’re not.
And I just found it strange that the lads hadn’t drawn my attention to those extreme events. You know – given their intense interest in extremes and records.
No probs with nukes myself.
Spanglers – a year in many many years is a datum point. A seasonal conditions datum point is a single rainfall season in many many years. Many years (plural data) compromise what climate science calls a time series – and if you squeeze really hard you might even utter the term “trend”. Isn’t that all so sciencey. Sigh ….
Prawns – whats problems http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/christmas-prawns-aplenty-despite-problems-20111221-1p555.html
SSTs are that cold are they http://www.weatherzone.com.au/climate/indicator_sst.jsp?lt=wzcountry&lc=aus&c=ssta
damn alarmist sceptics
“and if you squeeze really hard you might even utter the term “trend”.”
Well, if I’d known you wanted some long term data.
Trouble is it only makes your argument dumber:
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/graphs/lappi/gisp-last-10000-new.png
Yawn – you’ve already been told haven’t you http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/08/richard-alley-on-old-ice-climate-and-co2/
Luke,
Professional bureaucrats like your gang should be able to mislead people better than you are on this thread.
“like your gang” – do wank on.
Luke knows he lives in the lucky country. Lucky from his point of view because he can always throw around dire predictions of drought and doom and he will always find someone to listen because Australia has always done drought.
But then Australia also does bounty and magnificence which really depresses Luke so to cheer himself up he gets out that old record: “Oh, it ain’t gonna rain no more, no more, it ain’t gonna rain no more.”
His trouble is that he never puts his head out the window to see what’s really happening and that really undermines his misleadership.
Only Drongos ignore 30 year trends with a shrug ! Drongos ignore mechanisms and science preferring to rely on anecdotes. hmmm I wonder why governments commission scientists to investigate such worries?
And only lukes can scream “DROUGHT!” standing under an umbrella.
“hmmm I wonder why governments commission scientists to investigate such worries?”
Could it be because of pressure from some advocate scientists who want a huge grant to find the “human fingerprint”?
And guess what? Those same clever scientists always manage to find it.
Pigs botty. So after a vast amount of science lobbied for by industry, agriculture and water resources – we have the findings of IOCI and SEACI – but not good enough for our Spanglers – it was actually the scientists who “conspired” to stop it raining for all those years and create all that concern. Do prattle on. Put on your tinfoil hat matey. And we all know Spanglers level of science – looking up BoM’s rainfall web site. That’s about it.
In fact dorkus in SEQ they “didn’t find it”. http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2010JCLI3501.1 but lets not allow facts to intrude on a good rant.
“(SEQ). There, austral summer rainfall has been declining since around the 1980s, but the associated process is not understood.”
[Submitted 2009, just before the drought broke from a period following very high rainfall]
What cherry-picked crap Luke!
“it was actually the scientists who “conspired” to stop it raining for all those years and create all that concern.”
“If we can’t control the weather, we can at least control the data, eh baby?”
At least they claim it only “may” be the cause.
I wonder if they understand it any better in hindsight? But I’m sure you do.
DROUGHT! DROUGHT! DROUGHT! EH?
Tom Wigley sees the light:
Even CRU’s/NCAR’s Dr. Tom Wigley knows this as illustrated in a ClimateGate2.0 email:
“Quantifying climate sensitivity from real world data cannot even be done using present-day data, including satellite data. If you think that one could do better with paleo data, then you’re fooling yourself. This is fine, but there is no need to try to fool others by making extravagant claims.”
But Jim still keeps plugging away:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/20/hansens-arrested-development/
What are you on about Spanglers – find the published paper that says CSIRO predicted an end to La Nina and that it would never rain again. In fact these beloved researchers have done most of the local work on ENSO and IPO. If you are fair dinkum you should now say that ENSO and IPO do not exist – otherwise why are trusting them selectively.
I suppose you like to think there are no mechanisms at play as you seem to object to science attempting to solve them.
And indeed local information about a big wet last year was well known and disseminated by mid-year – again why would you trust such information from same researchers?
Nothing like a big wiff of hypocrisy. And when cornered make bluster, lay smoke, and change tack.
I don’t ignore “30 year trends”, I’m the one who keeps pointing out what a great cycle we are now in, with diminishing weather extremes c/w cool.
“And indeed local information about a big wet last year was well known and disseminated by mid-year”
You mean they correctly assessed the future flooding during a drought?
If they’d’ve done that correctly then they couldn’t have said that rainfall was declining since the 1980s.
More uncertainties that the climate models ignore:
http://judithcurry.com/2011/12/21/a-biologists-perspective-on-ice-ages-and-climate-sensitivity-part-i/#comment-152072
luke says: “What are you on about Spanglers – find the published paper that says CSIRO predicted an end to La Nina and that it would never rain again.”
Here you go luke:
http://www.daff.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/721285/csiro-bom-report-future-droughts.pdf
Speaking of “adjusting”
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/17772#more-17772
So Cohers – where is the part that says “CSIRO predicted an end to La Nina and that it would never rain again”
It’s there luke; and here:
http://www.csiro.au/news/Study-indicates-a-changing-climate-in-the-south-east
And here:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/archive/business-old/dams-not-an-option-in-labor-food-plan/story-e6frg95o-1225828061772
Just read between the lines.
“The year in Josh – 2011
Posted on December 22, 2011 by Anthony Watts
What would we do without the comic relief from Josh? So much hilarity.”
View at
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/22/the-year-in-josh-2011/#more-53562
Thanks for that cohers.
Bureaucrats can’t read between the lines. Reading between the lines is like putting your head out the window. You’re confronted with reality. Bad.
Even when la Nina was starting in Oct 2010 they were in denial about rainfall and the future of dams.
Have you heard anything on new problems with desal water being high in Boron content and dangerous to health and having to be heavily diluted into big dam storages to be made safe?
21st century. The evolution of the white dinosaur!
Yes Cohers – and that would be right too ! Climate is NOT a year or two.
Dam policy is errr….. policy.
“Dam policy is errr….. policy.”
Yeah! Great policy!
Sending the country broke and wasting all that beautiful rainwater!
Labor govts spout “sustainability” and build desal plants.
What with you and your droughts, Labor and its droughts and Flummery and his droughts, we’re droughted into the poor-house.
“A Christmas Pantomine”
http://fenbeagleblog.wordpress.com/2011/12/17/211/
Now now now – don’t you worry about that – “Can Do” and “red Bob” will wack a couple of dams on the Flinders and Gilbert for you. You’ll have dams before you know it. All evaporating like they’ll do. hmmmm …. Need to solve that evaporation business.
“Broke” pigs botty – you’ve never had it so good. Stop ya whinging. And ya gotta ya one of them thar water grids next time the big dry turns up. And the good burgers of Wolfdene won’t even have to lynch ya for flooding them out.
“you’ve never had it so good.”
Yeah, “♪ we don’t know how lucky we are ♪”
Wolfdene! More Labor disasters! Kevin Rudd at his head-kicking and leg-cutting best for Goss, tries to win the seat of Beaudesert by promising to scrap the Wolfdene dam after the coalition govt had battled their own supporters and finally got it through. Didn’t win the seat, Kev Lingard was too good but they won power and had to scrap a great dam and then try to build other second raters like the Wyaralong and Traveston to take its place and when that only half worked they created the Tugun Desal disaster and the alconnex water grid which has set the Qld impoverishment in place. But what’s another million-a-day interest bill plus a doubling of water rates for a couple of million people to a dumb bureaucrat?
Cohenite; it’s been my job, not yours to “read between the lines” cause practice = science at the grass roots.
Only a little Google reveals CSIRO and Dr David Post had an historic focus on large scale change, note those quotes in your link and all Post related seminars since for a contrast with Evans Nova etc.
But there is more and I choose this link to illustrate the detail in these projects. It’s my place, there is a variety of food production though it’s not THE bread basket and it’s all about scientific models to fit the quality of records available to us.
http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/waterforahealthycountry/tassy/pdf/TasSY-3Arthur-Inglis-Cam.pdf
Now, Luke, SD can keep their damn QLD stuff out of it for at least new year
More Flummery crap from gav.
With the sort of good reliable rainfall available in that area it should have water storage for all the usual energy and food purposes.
Look what’s really happening:
http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/awap/rain/index.jsp?colour=colour&time=latest&step=0&map=totals&period=18month&area=nat