M. A. McRae, author: Global warming - The Science is settled?

Global warming - 'The Science is settled,' they said. If that is so, why do they need to fudge the figures?

These past years, announcements of 'record' hot temperatures have become routine. It is odd, 'the hottest summer ever?' It didn't seem a particularly hot summer to me. Yes, a heat wave early on, but perfectly ordinary from then on. And was it the summer before last when they shrieked that they had to put another colour on their weather maps to denote those places that reached over 50 degrees Celsius? (That's Centigrade, for those who don't know.) 122 degrees Fahrenheit!

But the places they were talking about have always been known to sometimes have extreme temperatures. 50 degrees is horrendous. It's why some Outback towns have most of their living areas underground - and that didn't happen just in the last decade.

So now I have some explanation - they've been fudging the figures. They call it homogenisation, though it's strange how the homogenised temperature records show results all in the direction of a warming trend.

This article below: Records detail heat that 'didn't happen.' The Weekend Australian, August 30-31, 2014. Article by Graham Lloyd, Environment Editor.

Find it online -
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/weathermans-records-detail-heat-that-didnt-happen/story-e6frg6xf-1227041833824?nk=d292919b6d9f4798f95dad35fb9775b1#

The source is Ian Cole, who's a farmer in Bourke, inland NSW. Bourke is well known for its extreme temperatures. His father kept detailed temperature records for most of his life. It is fortunate that they were not simply lost, as they do not support the current religion of Global Warming. (called Climate Change more recently, since the temperature has obstinately refused to rise as predicted.)

But the records have been changed - 'homogenised in line with world's best practice.' So now what was a slight warming trend has become a real warming trend. And what was a cooling trend is now a warming trend.

Actual figures, as recorded manually - no, they do not show a warming trend. Quoted from the article: 'A 1.7 C cooling trend in the maximum temperature series in the raw data for Bourke has been changed to a slight warming.'

'The Bourke cotton farmer may be managing director of the local radio station 2WEB but Mr. Cole can only broadcast temperature records that date back to 2000 because the Bureau of Meterology won't supply historic records to service provider Weatherzone.'

I've heard something like that before - that a record announced is not really a record because it only dates back around 10 years.

There is also this - that a carefully noted temperature of 51.7 C, recorded on January 3rd, 1909, was dropped from the records 'on the assumption it was a clerical error.' And this: 'All the data for Bourke for 40 years before 1910 has been discarded from the official record.' If that is true, it is quite simply criminal. Scientists are supposed to note and understand what is, not ignore or change data to fit a theory.

Homogenisation - 'used by equivalent metereological organisations across the world.' Homogenisation seems to be about comparing temperatures with temperatures recorded from 'neighbouring' areas, and eliminating the blips.

'World's best practice?' Used as justification. I guess that means that the whole world is being lied to.

Global Warming became a religion, though surely a few of its adherents might be beginning to lose faith by now. But as we know, religious people are always extremely reluctant to admit an error.

But fudging the figures, and worse, trying to 'lose' old records that do not support the theory - that's going too far.

There are places in Australia known for extreme temperatures.
This is not Bourke, but somewhere around Mt. Isa, Queensland.

PS: 5th September, 2014

A little more evidence of fudging the figures.

This is copied direct from Andrew Bolt's blog -

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/how_much_of_this_warming_is_real/

How much of the warming in Australia was produced back at the lab?

SOME of Australia’s long-term temperature records may contain faults introduced by the Bureau of Meteorology’s computer modelling, according to a widely published expert.

David Stockwell said a full audit of the BoM national data set was needed after the bureau confirmed that statistical tests, rather than direct evidence, were the “primary” justification for making changes.

Dr Stockwell[’s] ... published works include a peer-reviewed paper analysing faults in the bureau’s earlier High Quality Data temperature records that were subsequently replaced by the current ACORN-SAT.

Dr Stockwell has called for a full audit of ACORN-SAT homogenisation after analysing records from Deniliquin in the Riverina region of NSW where homogenisation of raw data for minimum temperatures had turned a 0.7C cooling trend into a warming trend of 1C over a century.

The bureau said it did not want to discuss the Deniliquin findings because it had not produced the graphics, but it did not dispute the findings or that all of the information used had come from the BoM database.

There is a huge risk of confirmation bias in this process.