Thursday, 27 October 2016

CSIRO BOM State of Climate Report 2016:

More doom and gloom at the taxpayers’ expense
Anthony Cox

The lads and lassies at the sky is falling CSIRO and BoM have produced their annual the end is nigh report.

I’m not going to say they lie or that the report is bullshit, just that they are wrong. A few examples based on claims from the report:

1 Australia’s climate has warmed in both mean surface air temperature and surrounding sea surface temperature by around 1 °C since 1910.
 There is a superficial truth to this: if you accept the official BoM temperature record which has major problems due to inexplicable adjustments (also here, here, here, here, here, and here). But even if you accept the official temperature record there has been a pause in temperature over land (from Ken Stewart):

That’s a pause in temperature rise for 21 years.

The Sea Surface Temperature (SST) is a bit more complicated. Around Australia the BoM shows a
consistent increase over the 20thC. However in the neighbouring Pacific Islands SST has not been showing this increase in SST which is shown in Australia. For instance, in Vanuatu there is no such trend in SST:


2 The duration, frequency and intensity of extreme heat events have increased across large parts of Australia
This is plainly wrong. David Stockwell shows there has been no increase in droughts which contradicts the official DECR report. Geoff Sherrington shows heatwaves are not trending upwards:

Cyclones are not increasing as the BoM shows:

3 May–July rainfall has reduced by around 19 per cent since 1970 in the southwest of Australia. There has been a decline of around 11 per cent since the mid-1990s in the April–October growing season rainfall in the continental southeast. Rainfall has increased across parts of northern Australia since the 1970s
Rainfall has changed around Australia. None of this has anything to do with alarmism. Overall rainfall has increased in Australia:

How is this a bad thing? Of course, any good news is excluded from these reports. They are for one purpose only: to instil fear and force politicians to make policy decisions consistent with the zealots who produce these reports.

4 Finally sea level. 

The report says: Sea levels have risen around Australia. The rise in mean sea level amplifies the effects of high tides and storm surges
This is classic alarmism. A statement which is nominally correct used to justify fear-mongering. Sea level was looked at in Watson’s paper which showed no increase in the rate of rise:
This rate of sea level rise is far less than predicted by alarmists; around 1 mm PA in long standing sites like Port Arthur as the 2003 Hunter, Coleman and Pugh paper shows. Or 0.5 mm PA at Fort Denison:

This rate of between 0.5mm and 1 mm PA is not only shown in other locations around Australia but also inconsistent with CO2 emissions and modelling by the IPCC as Ken Stewart shows.

Globally today’s sea levels are completely normal and not exceptional at all. At the Monash University site the Sahul Time interactive graph shows that previous sea levels were up to 135 meters less than today and 4 meters higher, with no correlation with CO2 levels.

So, this report will get the usual level of coverage from the media, even Graham Lloyd has reported on it, and when it is revealed to be, well, let’s be frank about it, bullshit, the media cycle will have moved on. I would like to see Senator Roberts put questions to the authors. Maybe then the cycle will be broken.

1 comment:

  1. CSIRO will be less of a 'prophet' Andy Pitman, a climate scientist at the University of New South Wales, questioned whether the nature of climate change had been fully understood. Pitman said that over time, a partnership between Bureau of Meteorology, CSIRO and the university sector had built a collaboration that had the capacity to guide adaptation to climate change. “That partnership is breaking up and I think that is going to be to the deep regret of governments in the future.”
    CSIRO’s oceans and atmosphere flagship is a world leader on many aspects of climate science.
    Tsk. Now if they would concentrate on analysing data over unfounded computer games we might get useful analysis.


All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!