Archive for the ‘Hansen – NASA GISS – NOAA – USGS – NCDC – HadCRU – CSIRO – NIWA – government scientists’ Category

Scandal in Oz, Part 2


“It is not climate change that is threatening the coastal towns of Australia.

It’s exaggerated predictions of rising sea levels that are slashing property values, driving away small businesses and making residents tear out their hair.  …

Gosford Council is “prepared to write off 9000 families…by introducing draconian development controls that ultimately are designed to turn all of Davistown & half of Woy Woy and Empire Bay into derelict suburbs,” says [Pat] Aiken [secretary of Coastal Residents Incorporated].

Coastal councils stacked with risk-averse dupes and green agitators have been imposing ad hoc restrictions on development near the water in anticipation of catastrophic sea inundation by the end of this century, as promised by the likes of Al Gore and Tim Flannery.  …

The council was promoting a policy called a “reactive management strategy” which [homeowner Stephen] Hunt describes as “a hideous policy that gives the council and state government the power to turn off the utilities within the street and force landowners to walk away from their properties without any financial compensation”.  …

Similarly, in Port Albert, Victoria, residents claimed property prices fell 38 percent after the local council enacted absurd planning laws requiring new houses to be built 1.5m above the ground to avoid rising sea levels, while requiring roof heights to remain the same. This prompted angry residents to complain their houses would be suitable only for pygmies.  [see Higher floors, lower roofs: the town being shrunk by climate change angst]  …

[S]imilar nonsense continues up and down the east coast, with each township having to mount a defence against the catastrophists. With wildly varying predictions of sea level rises as high as 75m coming from NASA, the IPCC and experts such as Flannery, councils were opting for the extreme precautionary principle.”  “We must see level heads or our coast is doomed

Scandal in Oz


“Amid exaggerated predictions that sea levels would rise by 75m, [coastal engineer Doug] Lord made the career-ending mistake of actually measuring the sea level and trying to publish the results.

This caused him to be “let go” from his government job and have peer-reviewed scientific papers pulled at the last minute from a conference in Shanghai last year, from a conference in Perth in September and from a journal where they were to be published this year.

Not only that, but he was banned by his bosses at the NSW environment department from representing Engineers Australia, whose national coastal committee he chaired, at a 2009 parliamentary inquiry into managing climate change.  …

With colleague Phil Watson, Lord examined 110-year tide gauge records from Fort Denison in Sydney Harbour, and other sites. They found the sea level was rising at less than 1mm a year …

In 2009 Watson published the results, putting the lie to [then Minister for Climate Change and Water] Penny Wong’s claims sea level rises would wipe out beaches and hundreds of metres of coastline. “The analysis reveals a consistent trend of weak deceleration at each of these gauge sites throughout Australasia over the period from 1940 to 2000,” he wrote in the Journal of Coastal Research.  …

This was an inconvenient truth to governments who were busy beefing up climate risk assessments at the time. The federal government predicted a sea level rise of 1.1m by 2100. NSW came up with 0.9m.

But Lord’s data showed they had exaggerated the rise by 1000 per cent. His measurement of 1mm a year gives you a sea level rise of no more than 90mm [~ 3.5 inches], (0.09m) by 2100.  …

Last year, Lord and Watson were banned from presenting three papers they had prepared for the International Conference on Coastal Engineering in Shanghai.

“(At the time) the government was finalising its sea level rise policy,” he said. “I was told [the department] wouldn’t support the three papers because they weren’t consistent with the policy that was being developed.”

By this stage, Lord had lost his job, after a departmental “restructure”.

Nevertheless, he and Watson wrote another paper, which was peer-reviewed and approved for publication in the journal of Australian Civil Engineering Transactions. In September, just before publication, the department refused Watson, still an employee, permission to publish.

Then a conference paper the two men were to present at a Coasts and Ports conference in Perth was pulled.”  “Tide rises against climate lies

DOI issues new model-based alarmist report


“Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today released a report that assesses climate change risks and how these risks could impact water operations, hydropower, flood control, and fish and wildlife in the western United States. The report to Congress, prepared by Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation, represents the first consistent and coordinated assessment of risks to future water supplies across eight major Reclamation river basins, including the Colorado, Rio Grande and Missouri river basins.  …

The report, which responds to requirements under the SECURE Water Act of 2009, shows several increased risks to western United States water resources during the 21st century. Specific projections include:

  • a temperature increase of 5-7 degrees Fahrenheit;
  • a precipitation increase over the northwestern and north-central portions of the western United States and a decrease over the southwestern and south-central areas;
  • a decrease for almost all of the April 1st snowpack, a standard benchmark measurement used to project river basin runoff; and
  • an 8 to 20 percent decrease in average annual stream flow in several river basins, including the Colorado, the Rio Grande, and the San Joaquin.  …

To develop the report, Reclamation used original research and a literature synthesis of existing peer-reviewed studies. Projections of future temperature and precipitation are based on multiple climate models and various projections of future greenhouse gas emissions, technological advancements, and global population estimates.”  “Interior Releases Report Highlighting Impacts of Climate Change to Western Water Resources

Some things never change


“When confronted with the fact that the current global temperature anomaly is not significantly different than the warmest part of the Medieval Warm Period, the Gorebots will resort to the claim that the rate of warming in the late 20th century was unprecedented.

That claim, like most other Gorebot claims, is false.

Here is the HadCRUT3 global temperature anomaly (GTA) for 1977-2010 plotted with the GTA for 1911-1944”

HadCRUT3 Global Temperature Anomaly 1911-1944 & 1977-2010

“Same as it ever was”… The rate of warming.

NOAA: "adjusting" a decline into an increase


“In the original NOAA US data base, NOAA had an adjustment for urban heat island [UHI] contamination. The combination of longer term station stability and this adjustment made that data base (1221 climate stations), the best in the world. This is what it showed in 1999.

Note even with the super El Nino of 1997/98, the trend from the 1930s/1940s was down.  Indeed James Hansen in 1999 remarked “The U.S. has warmed during the past century, but the warming hardly exceeds year-to-year variability. Indeed, in the U.S. the warmest decade was the 1930s and the warmest year was 1934.”

NOAA and NASA had to constantly explain why their global data sets were showing warming and the US, not so much. NOAA began reducing the UHI around 2000 and then in USHCN version 2 released for the US in 2007 and individual stations in 2009, the urban heat island adjustment was eliminated which resulted in an increase of 0.3F in warming trend since the 1930s.”  “WHY NOAA AND NASA PROCLAMATIONS SHOULD BE IGNORED

All you need to know about government scientists


“Gabriela Chavarria of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has been picked as the science adviser for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Trained as an entomologist, Chavarria studied neotropical bumble bees and has since worked in conservation policy at Washington, D.C.–based NGOs. Since 2006, she has directed NRDC’s science program. Before that she was vice president for science and conservation at Defenders of Wildlife and headed conservation policy at the National Wildlife Federation. Chavarria was also a member of the Invasive Species Advisory Committee and served on the recovery team for the endangered black-footed ferret.

Among other issues, Chavarria will provide advice on how the agency should deal with climate change.”  “Fish and Wildlife Service Names Science Adviser

Adjusting Pennsylvania


Abstract: This report compares the raw with the United States Historical Climatology Network Version 2 (USHCN V2) adjusted temperature records for the twenty-four USHCN listed temperature stations in the state of Pennsylvania. Averaging over the twenty-four stations the raw data yielded a small linear decline with temperatures trending -0.1 ± 0.1 ºC/century, while the U.S. Historical Climatology Network (USCHN) Version 2 adjusted data revealed an increase of 0.7 ± 0.1 ºC/century.  …

Conclusions: In the state of Pennsylvania the raw temperature record reveals no significant change in temperature over the period from 1895 to 2009. The USHCN V2 adjusted temperature record shows an increase of less than a degree Celsius over those years.  … In both the short and longer term cases the USHCN V2 adjusted data yielded trends that were roughly 1ºC per century higher than those found in the raw temperature records.”  “A REVIEW OF THE UNITED STATES HISTORICAL CLIMATOLOGY NETWORK VERSION 2: ADJUSTED TEMPERATURE RECORD FOR PENNSYLVANIA, U.S.A.

NCDC adjusts the U.S.


Anthony Watts had a post awhile ago (while I was on the Colorado River) discussing the new paper “CONTIGUOUS U. S. TEMPERATURE TRENDS USING NCDC RAW AND ADJUSTED DATA FOR ONE-PER-STATE RURAL AND URBAN STATION SETS” by Edward R. Long, Ph.D., illustrating both the urban heat island (UHI) effect and the faulty adjusting of urban and rural raw data in the U.S.  The two graphs here are from the paper (extracted by Anthony).

The first graph shows rural versus urban raw data.  What is striking is that (1) the raw rural data show that the 1930s were warmer than today and (2) the UHI effect is evident and large.

The second graph shows the same data after NCDC adjusts it.  One would expect that the rural raw data would not be adjusted and that the urban raw data would be adjusted downward to take into account the UHI effect.  But instead NCDC adjusts the rural raw data upward until it nearly matches the urban data!  The NCDC adjusted temperature record is clearly urban biased.

Adjusting the U.S.


“And this is the “Temperaturegate” aspect: The NCDC’s massaging — they call it “adjusting” — has resulted in an increase in the rural values, from a raw value of 0.11oC/century to an adjusted value of 0.58oC/century, and no change in the urban values. That is, the NCDC’s treatment has forced the rural value to look more like that of the urban. This is the exact opposite of any rational consideration, given the growth of the sizes of and activities within urban locations, unless deception is the goal.”  “A Pending American Temperaturegate”  h/t Hide the decline

Adjusting Matanuska


“Say what? What could possibly justify that kind of adjustment, seven tenths of a degree? The early part of the record is adjusted to show less warming. Then from 1973 to 1989, Matanuska is adjusted to warm at a feverish rate of 4.4 degrees per century … but Matanuska is a RURAL station. Since GISS says that the homogenization effort is designed to change the ”long term trend of any non-rural station to match the long term trend of their rural neighbors”, why is Matanuska  being adjusted at all?”  “Fudged fevers in the frozen north