The BOM (Bureau of Meteorology) today has come under increased attention as its revealed (yet again, but this time by the unfolding of Climategate) the sorry state of its climate data. The code commented on as ‘false’ and ‘a bloody mess’ by climategate BOM says “It was unlikely to have come directly from the bureau’s centre because unchecked, raw data was rarely requested for climate analysis“. Hmmm, unusual – normally scientists want the raw data without all the artificial BOM adjustments so they CAN analysis the data. I would say a lot of scientists would be curious as to whether BOM also didnt ‘hide the decline‘. Like the American stations the Australian stations seem a mess, Anthony Watts at Surface Stations has been auditing the American Stations and what he has found isnt pretty. Warwick Hughes comments on BOM problems here. Warwick also says the BOM is a national disgrace! Even the BOM acknowledges that “the majority of stations do not have a complete unbroken record for any given element”. Doesnt seem to stop them issuing climate alarmism! More here
Does anyone use the WMO standards anymore?
The HUGE question is, if the raw records were unadjusted would it show that the solar connection is as robust as was previously believed BEFORE the AGW scam? And if so, and with the current solar slumber shouldn’t our Governments be rushing to look at policy for global cooling instead. The longer they delay the longer peoples lives are put at risk! As David Archibald says “The earth is getting colder and this WILL accelerate”
Dont begrudge the skepticism it can only help the debate, one flaw that wipes out the crisis, a climate scientist responds to climategate, climategate goes uber-viral, Copenhagen IGNORES climategate, Climategate needs an independant investigator, I was wrong!, Poliwood – climategate hits hollywood, Global warming bulldozer