In an almost unprecedented meeting at the Australian Parliament on Monday, well-respected researcher and author Dr Jennifer Marohasy was invited, along with climate sceptic Bob Carter, to debate with three alarmist scientists. She was particularly emphasising the differences found between real world data and computer modelling and the need to disclose which was which.
At the meeting, I explained how Rutherglen is one of 104 weather stations used to construct the contrived official temperature trend for Australia, and that every single temperature time series was adjusted. In general, like at Rutherglen, the adjustments have the effect of cooling the past and thus making the present appear relatively hotter.
I mentioned that it was a travesty that Minister Greg Hunt had prevented a proper inquiry into the Bureau last year, and suggested that the senators and members in the room needed to ‘wake-up’ and do something. Public policy, I suggested, needed to be based on real data/real evidence, not contrived temperature series.
After my presentation, Professor Howden began with slides indicating that because of climate change there had been a decline in crop yields. He was interrupted by one of the MPs who asked whether the charts on display represented actual real historical data, or output from a computer model. The Professor acknowledged that he was showing computer output.
At that point, I really wanted to applaud when several of the MPs promptly got up and walked out.
Sadly, the good work done on Monday was countered on the Tuesday when there was Parliamentary Information session in Canberra sponsored by the Global Change Institute and the University of Queensland at which, JM reports, " many government-funded climate scientists told members and senators that the end is nigh. That is unless Australia signs on to the United Nations Development Goals and the upcoming COP21 in Paris."
TM