Mongering Catastrophe - a Lifetime of Climate Fear as a Career

Then and now; same guy.

Breathe Easy: The Great Barrier Reef Is OK

Delingpole: Barrier Reef ‘Dying’ Scare Exposed as Fake News

Strike Two For Aussie Temperature Measurements

Yes, calibration is necessary:

Ooops! Australian BoM climate readings may be invalid due to lack of calibration
Anthony Watts / 24 hours ago September 11, 2017

Dr Jennifer Marohasy writes by email:

There is evidence to suggest that the last 20 years of temperature readings taken by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, from hundreds of automatic weather stations spread across Australia, may be invalid. Why? Because they have not been recorded consistent with calibration.

Somewhat desperate to prove me wrong, late yesterday the Bureau issued a ‘Fast Facts’ that really just confirms the institution has mucked-up. You can read my line-by-line response to this document here: http://jennifermarohasy.com/2017/09/bureau-management-rewrites-rules/

This comes just a few days after the Bureau issued a 77-page report attempting to explain why, despite MSI1 cards being installed into weather stations preventing them from recording cold temperatures, there is no problem.

Earlier this year, specifically on Wednesday 26 July, I was interviewed by Alan Jones on radio 2GB. He has one of the highest rating talkback radio programs in Australia. We discussed my concerns. And according to the new report, by coincidence, the very next day, some of these cards were removed…

You can read why my husband, John Abbot, thinks this 77-page report is “all about me” in an article published just yesterday at The Spectator: https://www.spectator.com.au/2017/09/not-really-fit-for-purpose-the-bureau-of-meteorology/

I’ve republished this, and much more at my blog.

People Caused These Hurricanes...?

Global warming. I think it is an observable fact. But:

All global temperature data is corrupt, another observable fact. But:

Let's stipulate that the global warming does, exist. Let's stipulate that CO2 is rising. What is the empirical proof that human-produced CO2 is THE cause of global warming? There are some ways to test this hypothesis (it's only a hypothesis, at this point). What is needed is firm empirical data of output variability due solely to input variation - a transfer function relationship, and accompanying graph.

How can we get that?

1. First we need another planet, identical to earth in composition and history and and dating, but with no humans. OK? Doesn't work? OK.

2. Or we need to be able to adjust human CO2 generation, and observe the actual variability of the output (warming) with the changes in the input (controlled variation of human CO2 input). Hm. Nope, can't do that either.

3. So we have to guess at human system input change in CO2, and then measure the entire earth surface and oceans, top to bottom with complete accuracy and reliability for output change. What does that give us?

First we have only a guess for the input to the system (which incidentally is buried in other, larger simultaneous system inputs, also variable). For the output we have spotty and falsified temperature data which has been jiggered in advance of its use by modellers by the addition of a nonlinear rising function applied to the falling function of the actual source temperature data. Thus we have probably (almost certainly) false system output data for use in computer climate models.

So what we actually have to work with is a guessed input, and a false output. There is no rational transfer function to be derived from this. None.

Now maybe it is possible that a warmer globe will produce stronger, more infrequent storms. But I don't actually know that, and neither do the AGW activists and the model programmers who depend on AGW for their living.

Therefore, in terms of actual knowledge, not Narrative, no one can possibly know that "people caused" these hurricanes. In fact, that statement is at least two serial fallacies removed from empirical factoid status. AND empirical factoid status is always purely contingent: not truth.

So the statement "people caused these hurricanes" is false in its intent and false in its content.

AGW: FRAUD in Science Results in Nonsense in Policies

100% Of US Warming Is Fake

This is the adjustment that has been added to the temperatures. There is no justification for a non-constant, non-linear adjustment. However, it comports fully with ideology, and is a fraudulently created justification based not on observed data, but on manipulated, fully fake data.

When confronted about their data tampering, they say “our algorithm works exactly as designed.”

In other words, the fraud is intentional. But I’m not done yet. The fraud is worse than it seems (if that is possible.) Almost 50% of USHCN adjusted data is now fake, but they have only lost 25% of their data. So they are throwing out a large percentage of their measured data.

The Raw Data had no incline, or rise, in average temperatures. The data was manipulated by the addition of this upward curve. Note that there is no constant added, as might be needed if a different type of sensor were substituted at some specific time. This curve is an increasing, non-linear function, not a constant. Such non-linearity would be necessary in order to simulate a gradual, but exponentially increasing, rise which is not inherent in the original data.

It has been shown before that earlier temperatures were adjusted down in the same manner. Over-all a consistent temperature set was manipulated with these "adjustments".

Similar fraud was found in Australia, just a few weeks ago.

This is outright purposeful FRAUD, and nothing less.