Darwin Temperatures Lying Adjustments

By Bob Irvine -Re-Blogged From WUWT

Darwin Australia is one of only two temperature stations in an entire NASA grid and, therefore, has a disproportionate influence on the NASA-GISS global temperature reconstruction. The other station used by NASA in this grid is Gove (Stn. # 014508). Gove only goes back to 1985 which leaves Darwin as the only station in this grid that dates back to the early part of the 20th century.

Jennifer Marohasy has been an absolute warrior in pursuit of the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BOM). She has doggedly confronted their bureaucratic maze and called out their consistent and brazen manipulation of Australian temperature data. Her blog post on the recent changes to historical Darwin temperatures is copied below.

https://jennifermarohasy.com/2019/02/changes-to-darwins-climate-history-are-not-logical/

I have used a couple of her plots and added a few of my own in this post.

Fig. 1, Mean maximum annual temperatures as measured at the Darwin Post Office (014016) and airport (014015) shown with the new remodeled ACORN-SAT Version 2, which is the new official record for Australia.

Fig. 1, Mean maximum annual temperatures as measured at the Darwin Post Office (014016) and airport (014015) shown with the new remodeled ACORN-SAT Version 2, which is the new official record for Australia.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #354

Brought to You by www.SEPP.org, The Science and Environmental Policy Project

By Ken Haapala, President

Quote of the Week: “I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth, if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.” – Leo Tolstoy [William Readdy]

Number of the Week: Up to 100 times more

Why I Don’t “believe” In …: Judith Curry brought up a thoughtful essay by Robert Tracinski illustrating how politicians and the like try to persuade others to accept their views by manipulating meaningful terms to the point of rendering the terms meaningless. Currently it is fashionable to invoke the term “science” to justify one’s political policies and beliefs.

Continue reading

Climate Science Needs a Critical Review by Skeptical Experts

By Myron Ebell – Re-Blogged From WUWT

WASHINGTON — Is global warming a looming catastrophe? President Donald Trump has often said he doesn’t think so even while his administration continues to release official reports warning that it is.

The president will soon find out who is right by convening a high-level commission to do a critical review of the fourth National Climate Assessment issued last November and other government reports.

Surprisingly, most of the climate science funded by the federal government has never been subjected to the kind of rigorous and exhaustive review that is common practice for other important scientific issues and major engineering projects.

Continue reading

Approve the PCCS!

By John Droz – Re-Blogged From WUWT

America absolutely needs outside expert review of climate claims used to oppose fossil fuels

Should the United States conduct a full, independent, expert scientific investigation into models and studies that say we face serious risks of manmade climate change and extreme weather disasters?

As incredible as it may seem, US government climate science has never been subjected to any such examination. Instead, it has been conducted by government agencies and assorted climate, environmental, history, psychology and other “experts” paid by the same government agencies – to the tune of literally billions of dollars per year.

Moreover, all that time, effort and money has been spent on studies that claim carbon dioxide and other “greenhouse gases” are causing unprecedented climate and weather cataclysms, requiring the immediate and total elimination of fossil fuels that supply 82% of all US energy. Virtually none of it has been spent on studies of the powerful natural forces that have driven global warming and cooling, other climate changes and innumerable extreme weather events throughout Earth and human history.

Replacing all that energy – under the Green New Deal we hear so much about lately, or some similar schemes – would cost this country up to $93 trillion by 2030! That’s $65,000 per family per year!

Continue reading

Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #341

Brought to You by www.SEPP.org, The Science and Environmental Policy Project

By Ken Haapala, President

Quote of the Week: “On what principle is it that with nothing but improvement behind us, we are to expect nothing but deterioration before us?” – Lord Macaulay, [H/t Matt Ridley]

Number of the Week: Up to a 50% increase in efficiency?On to Chile: Some seem to be disappointed with the outcome of the 24th Conference of Parties (COP-24) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Katowice, Poland, in a coal mining district. Rather than adopting hard, fast rules for the implementation of the Paris Agreement, the delegates adopted vague generalities and promised to do more. Reading through the “bureaucratic speak,” of the concluding remarks by the UN Secretary General, António Guterres, read by Patricia Espinosa, Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, the stated goals were not accomplished. The Secretary General wrote:

“I’d first like to thank the Presidency of the COP for the enormous efforts it deployed to organize this 24th session in Katowice, Poland.

Continue reading

“100s of Millions of People will Die”

By Eric Worrall – Re-Blogged From WUWT

h/t Bob in Castlemaine; The Head of the Australian Conservation Foundation Kelly O’Shanassy delivered a solemn warning last Tuesday to a packed audience of journalists, claiming that if we continue to burn coal and breach the 1.5C IPCC climate limit, “100s of millions of people will die”.

Continue reading