We now also know, thanks to a recent FOI (freedom of information) request at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BoM), that they also ignore WMO guidelines and manufacture artificial warming trends by using electronic probes in place of traditional mercury thermometers.
Independent scientists–that is, those whose wages are reliant on the establishment–have long argued that when the BoM changed from traditional mercury thermometers to electronic probes that it would create an artificial ‘man-made’ warming bias across Australia’s temperature record. But the BoM continually argued that the equipment change made no difference.
Electronic probes take a reading every single second of the day, and the highest value in a 24-hour period becomes the maximum reading for that day; electronic probes measure variances that would not be measured by traditional mercury.
In doing this the BoM is also ignoring WMO guidelines which recommend that readings from probes “be averaged over at least one minute”. These guidelines are in place because the WMO know that one-second readings give inflated temperatures — an anomalous and momentary ‘spike’ in the equipment is then logged as that day’s official high. Even if the average temperature logged by a probe was the same as a mercury thermometer, the extremes will likely be quite different. The behavior of air, turbulence and variability at 3PM, when maximum temperatures are usually recorded, is different to the pre-dawn minimum hour of day. And again, it is the extremes that the new probes now log as the official daily temperature.
But this isn’t even the crux of the matter, at least not for me. If BoM employees want to play around with probes then who am I to argue, each to their own. The issue here is the agency’s flat-out refusal to release the traditional thermometer data alongside the new probe data in order for independent comparison, in order to draw two separate datasets.
The BoM clearly felt it had something to hide too, and fought Freedom of Information requests in court to keep this data hidden. There is no acceptable/innocent excuse for this. The BoM don’t even try to give one: a publicly-funded agency used public money to hide data from the public — fact.
And finally, after more than three years of fighting in court, a group of Independent scientists lead by John Abbot won FOI access, on Easter eve after the matter was taken to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal–but to just a fraction of the parallel mercury data. Upon review of the pages it is obvious why the agency fought so hard to keep it secret.
The scientists got hold of just 20% of the parallel records held for the Brisbane airport site, one of 38 sites originally requested under FOI, but the limited data still reveals a bombshell: the electronic probe at Brisbane Airport logged temperatures up to 0.7C warmer than the airport’s traditional mercury thermometer.
Add to this the BoM’s inexplicable decision (again, they don’t even try to give a reason) to reduce the sizes of the Stevenson screens–found to artificially increase temperature readings by up to 1C–and the logical conclusion is that Australia’s official climate agency is cooking the temperature books in order to support the anthropogenic global warming narrative.
Even in the face of these dependencies, the BoM insists that there is no ‘significant’ difference (already backtracking from their original position of ‘no’ difference then), yet analysis of the data by scientist Jennifer Marohasy has found a statistically significant difference does indeed exist. Over the three-year period for which records have been made available, probes returned temperatures higher than the mercury thermometers placed alongside them 41% of the time and lower 25.9% of the time.
The BoM is not disputing this fact, says Dr Marohasy, they’re simply ignoring it. She also points out that the data represented just three of the 14.5 years (January 2008 to July 2022) of parallel data that the bureau held for Brisbane Airport: “It is also just a fraction of the 760 years of parallel data the bureau holds for 38 different locations spread across the landmass of Australia,” she added.
The pages released by the BoM included 1094 A8 reports with handwritten daily maximum and minimum temperatures from both probes and traditional liquid-in-glass thermometers recorded from instruments in the same shelter/Stevenson screen.
The BoM does have electronic data, I presume?, but one can only imagine the damning picture those digital files would paint given their omission from the FOI release.
Moreover, the official probe-skewed temperature records for Brisbane still show cooling, with last winter (2022) finishing as the city’s coldest winter ever recorded. The official data also shows Australia as a whole experienced a colder-than-average winter of 2022, as well as a colder-than-average spring of 2022 and most recently summer of 2022-23. Even according to the BoM’s manipulated data, Australia appears to be cooling.
This isn’t the first time BoM methodology has been called into question, either.
In 2017, thanks again to the diligence of Dr Marohasy, the bureau was caught red-handed regulating temperatures to keep them above a predetermined minimum, including at least two NSW automatic weather stations.
Dr Marohasy continues to question why perfectly good raw data is manipulated to turn a cooling trend into a warming one.
Independent auditor Ken Stewart has studied thousands of records and has consistently demonstrated the BoM has a case to answer, accusing it of frequent data manipulation, which improbably cools the past to warm the present.
The bureau also stands accused of giving Mother Nature an occasional helping hand.
Case in point, Sydney’s main weather station at Observatory Hill was recently on the cusp of holding below 32C for an entire year–for the first time since records began 163 years ago. But a strategically placed solar panel ‘appeared’ pointing directly at the weather station which The Daily Telegraph, among others, say conveniently prevented the site from achieving this historic benchmark. Equally suspicious, after questions were raised the panel ‘vanished’ just as mysteriously as it appeared.
Australia may be a relatively small player in this vast global deception, but my hopes that exposing the BoM’s dishonest data collation might trigger a domino effect. We know the majority of the world’s population haven’t fallen for the AGW Party’s ruse. We see this in ALL public comment sections–that is, where they’re permitted (so not the BBC then)--which reveal a highly skeptical average Joe. It should stand that the inclination or ‘gut feels’ of the masses prevail–right or wrong.
In the free market place of ideas, and if we live in a democracy (ha), anthropogenic global warming does not exist and by extension neither does the climate emergency, of course. The establishment has failed to convince the people of the threat, even after some 40+ years of propaganda and an unimaginably monstrous budget.
The climate simply hasn’t played ball for them: the ice caps haven’t melted, the polar bears haven’t perished, the Great Barrier Reef hasn’t vanished, the planet has barely warmed, for crikey-sake. The theory has been proven wrong by each and every dire “tipping point” deadline passing uneventfully by, and the public as a whole is no longer naive or illiterate on this topic for they poses the sense of sight and touch and they have memories — yet the establishment insists on flogging a dead horse. Why?
Because it benefits them, both politically and financially. The Great Reset is rooted in the global warming hypothesis. The likes of the IPCC wouldn’t exist without it. They’ve pushed things way too far to turn back now. Even in the face of a BS-calling public, our governing bodies, ruling elites and their MSM lapdogs are continuing to sell us “the end of the world” but very few are still buying it–only indoctrinated youth and aging complainers with savior complexes.
Recommend this post and follow
The birth of modern Man
No comments:
Post a Comment