Aussie scientists caught sexing up temperature data

[dogtowner]

http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/31/australia-weather-bureau-caught-tampering-with-climate-numbers/

Naughty naughty

 

[The Scotsman]

Naughty naughty

indeed....

BOM has been put under the microscope before for similar manipulations. The agency was accused in 2014 of tampering with the country’s temperature record to make it appear as if temperatures had warmed over the decades, according to reports in August 2014.

Marohasey claimed at the time that BOM’s adjusted temperature records are “propaganda” and not science. She analyzed raw temperature data from places across Australia, compared them to BOM data, and found the agency’s data created an artificial warming trend.

if it ain't broken.....errrrmmmm.......manipulate it so it looks broken then tax everyone up to the tonsils so they can fix it......and keep on fixing the numbers so they can keep on taxing

 

[dogtowner]

indeed....

if it ain't broken.....errrrmmmm.......manipulate it so it looks broken then tax everyone up to the tonsils so they can fix it......and keep on fixing the numbers so they can keep on taxing

And so we arrive at the core of climate change.

 

[palerider]

Well, at least the warmers aren't on this thread trying to defend the indefensible, and excuse the inexcusable. The times they are a changing.

 

[dogtowner]

Well, at least the warmers aren't on this thread trying to defend the indefensible, and excuse the inexcusable. The times they are a changing.

Yup.
Read today that since they started playing straight, temps are amazingly falling like a paralyzed falcon.
Maybe we can get NOAA to do it too !

 

[Old_Trapper70]

http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/31/australia-weather-bureau-caught-tampering-with-climate-numbers/

Naughty naughty

As is usual, the headlines were good enough for you. No sense in actually reading the article:

“The bureau’s quality control system, designed to filter out spurious low or high values was set at minus 10 minimum for Goulburn which is why the record automatically adjusted,” a bureau spokeswoman told reporters Monday. BOM added that there are limits placed on how low temperatures could go in some very cold areas of the country.

Bureaus Chief Executive Andrew Johnson told Australian Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg that the failure to record the low temperatures at Goulburn in early July was due to faulty equipment. A similar failure wiped out a reading of 13 degrees Fahrenheit at Thredbo Top on July 16, even though temperatures at that station have been recorded as low as 5.54 degrees Fahrenheit.

Failure to observe the low temperatures had “been interpreted by a member of the community in such a way as to imply the bureau sought to manipulate the data record,” Johnson said, according to The Australian. “I categorically reject this implication.”

 

[palerider]

Failure to observe the low temperatures had “been interpreted by a member of the community in such a way as to imply the bureau sought to manipulate the data record,” Johnson said, according to The Australian. “I categorically reject this implication.”

Wow...a government employee denies wrongdoing when they get caught red handed?...and they attempt to place the blame somewhere else?....what an original idea. And let me guess, you believe it wholeheartedly. I bet you believed richard nixon wasn't a crook also.

I guess it is coincidence that the BOM is destroying historical data as a simple matter of practice as well...and in your alt.universe, I suppose that is good scientific practice.

http://joannenova.com.au/2017/08/an...-data-is-being-destroyed-as-routine-practice/

The fact is that man made climate change is a scam....and most of the apparent temperature change over the past 150 years is the result of data manipulation.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Wow...a government employee denies wrongdoing when they get caught red handed?...and they attempt to place the blame somewhere else?....what an original idea. And let me guess, you believe it wholeheartedly. I bet you believed richard nixon wasn't a crook also.

No PR, unlike you I look for actual evidence not that os some blogger who was not there, or even involved in the process. I know how you hate to face reality, and love to repeat your own lies (e.g ASSuming I support "man made" climate change rather then man CONTRIBUTING TO ) but that is the alternate reality you, and others like Dog, live in. Kind of like believing Trump doesn't lie.

Now, I know you went no deeper into the article then the headlines, just like Dog, so I would suggest you actually read what the article is based on, and pay attention to paragraphs 8-10:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/gu...I30-5838_Charges Decision_20141223_signed.pdf

Get you head out of your ass PR, and face the real world.

 

[palerider]

No PR, unlike you I look for actual evidence not that os some blogger who was not there, or even involved in the process. .

Really? I don't think so as evidenced by your inability to provide even one shred of observed, measured, quantified evidence that supports the AGW claim over natural variability...or even the claim that we are contributing to the changing global climate. You don't look for evidence...you accept opinion pieces provided by bloggers and anyone else who says what you want to hear...look at the joke sites you provided as evidence...now contrast those to the peer reviewed evidence I provided. Most of the warming claimed over the past 150 years has been due to data manipulation as evidenced by the fact that when you look at the temperature records of individual regions, it becomes clear that the globe isn't warming...some regions are, but most are either stable or cooling. If you looked for actual evidence, your position would be quite different.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Really? I don't think so as evidenced by your inability to provide even one shred of observed, measured, quantified evidence that supports the AGW claim over natural variability...or even the claim that we are contributing to the changing global climate.

There you go lying again. I have presented many articles from scientists, climatologists, etc., that support the belief that man is contributing to climate change such as the rising temperatures in the oceans. You are just too set in your 8th. grade science class to see it. Then too, you never seem to want to discuss how man is polluting the earth feeling as you do that the earth cannot be overpolluted. Kind of like this thread. In the article you posted it speaks of losing some numbers for a few months at two airports in Australia. Now, I happen to think Aussie land has more then a few measuring components at more then just two airports. Of course, you seem to think they don't. And, in fact (you know. The real world) your "Dr." Johnston did not even buy the information available.

As usual, you rely on ********* to support your ideology.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/government-report-sees-drastic-climate-change-impact-us-023047976.html

 

[palerider]

There you go lying again. I have presented many articles from scientists, climatologists, etc., that support the belief that man is contributing to climate change such as the rising temperatures in the oceans.

Maybe you don't understand the difference between an opinion piece...even one written by a climate pseudoscientist and observed, measured, quantified data that supports one hypothesis over another. If you don't, just ask and I will be happy to explain it to you.

You are just too set in your 8th. grade science class to see it.

Sorry trapper, but alas, it is you who is stuck in 8th grade mode. Remember, I have seen what passes for "evidence" in your mind. Someone tells you a thing and you believe it. If you remember, that was the nature of primary school science, once we got older, experiment, observation, and measurement became the method...and learning the difference between correlation and causation.

Every piece of pseudoscience you have provided thus far states an opinion...not a single piece of observed, measured, quantified evidence that supports the claim that we are contributing to the global climate over simple natural variability.

Then too, you never seem to want to discuss how man is polluting the earth feeling as you do that the earth cannot be overpolluted.

Have I not stated categorically that I favor draconian fines and prison sentences for polluters? But pollution and climate change are two different things. Start a pollution thread and we can talk about it and lament the trashing of the earth, and spoiling of the water as much as you like...but pollution is not climate change and is not contributing to global climate change.

Kind of like this thread. In the article you posted it speaks of losing some numbers for a few months at two airports in Australia. Now, I happen to think Aussie land has more then a few measuring components at more then just two airports. Of course, you seem to think they don't. And, in fact (you know. The real world) your "Dr." Johnston did not even buy the information available.

Typical...attempting to defend the indefensible, and excuse the inexcusable. They are tampering with the records in an attempt to maintain the warming narrative...

But back to that statement you made about seeking "actual evidence" lets see some...no...lets see a single piece...a single shred...one piece of observed, measured, quantified data that supports the claim that we are contributing to the changing global climate rather than simply observing natural variability.

 

[palerider]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/government-report-sees-drastic-climate-change-impact-us-023047976.html

Well, there you go...more opinion and not the first shred of actual observed, measured, quantified data. Well, lucky for us, at least one of us is interested in science and not the cultish worship of pseudoscience.

Your article begins with a bald faced lie...a demonstrable bald faced lie.

Average US temperatures have risen dramatically and fast, with recent decades the warmest of the past 1,500 years, according to a draft federal government report cited by The New York Times on Tuesday.

This statement is quite simply false and can be proven to be false.

Back in the earliest years of the 21st century, a system went on line, designed and placed by NOAA. It is called the USCRN. That is the United States Climate Reference Network. It consists of triple redundant, temperature data stations that are so pristinely placed, that the data requires no adjustment. There is no possibility of the urban heat island effect having any influence on the temperatures taken..and being triple redundant, it never misses a thing.

Here is a graph of the temperatures of the US for the decade ending in 2015.

For obvious reasons, data from the USCRN doesn't show up in the news, and the sources you apparently visit would avoid the data like vampires avoid the sun. The fact is that the US has been in a cooling phase since the CRN went on line. Your opinion piece is a lie and since despite your claims, you aren't really interested in actual evidence, you have been left believing a lie.

Your report says that Americans are feeling the effects of this temperature increase...what effects might those be? The ones that they are told to feel?...the ones that are just made up for press releases? The emperor is naked no matter how beautiful you think his new clothes are.

They claim that how much more the climate changes will depend on emissions...that is a claim...do you have a single shred of observed, measured, quantified data that demonstrates that additional CO2 will cause the atmosphere to warm? Any at all, because I have been looking for decades and can't find it. Plenty of assumptions....plenty of claims....plenty of logical fallacies supporting the claim, but actual data?....not the first piece.

The gist of your "evidence" was that they are pissed at Trump for pulling out of the Paris accord. And this sort of milquetoast pap is what passes for evidence in your mind? No wonder you have been so thoroughly duped, and little wonder at all that you play the part of useful idiot passing the steaming piles of bullshit that pass for evidence in your mind on to others at every opportunity. You wouldn't recognize the scientific method if it bit you right on the ass.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

https://assets.documentcloud.org/do...aft-of-the-Climate-Science-Special-Report.pdf

 

[palerider]

https://assets.documentcloud.org/do...aft-of-the-Climate-Science-Special-Report.pdf

All of that and still not a single piece of observed, measured, quantified data that favors even a small human contribution to the changing global climate over natural variability....not one.

But, by all means, I would like to see what passes for such evidence in your mind...It is always interesting to see what passes for actual data supporting the AGW hypothesis in other people's minds.