Nauseous with outrage.... and just returned from the 16th Int Conf on Lyme Borreliosis and other Tickborne diseases. Mostly false, misleading, statistically invalid conclusions that adversely the health of millions of people.
Talking with Bill Johnson of Bomwatch.com.au he has traced several ship voyages in the 1800s where sea temps were taken every hour.. up the NSW QLD coast..
He found similar temps to today and very similar relationships with latitude.. has a paper ready to publish but it’s been challenged..
one paper I read showed rises in temps for coastal station but not inland eg Dubbo has similarly hot temperatures in the 30-40s to recent temps.. of 2000s Australia has three wide spreads drought decades the Federation 1901 to 06, WW2 droughts 36 to 46 and the millennial 2000 to 2010 droughts that have a large influence on temps..they often use 1950 to 80 as our reference a cool wet period..
There is much made of the Great Barrier Reefs plight of coral bleaching but virtually nothing said about the reef of Western Australia? Nor the plethora of happy coral in the tropics..
It is fairly obvious that if temps warmed the reefs would simply grow further south and coral from the tropics would migrate further south too..
Latest data shows the reef is in the best condition for many years..
Now that is fabulous. I haven't looked at ship data as yet - being lazy I only grab the easy to grab stuff. The coastal/inland split is something I'll touch on in a future newsletter but, yes, the coral story was another crock of sh*t and it's great to see the lies being exposed.
We have two very outspoken Senators.. Malcolm Roberts and Gerrad Rennick who have science background and argue well but not often heard.. https://fb.watch/fpwW-mlszX/
So if the ipcc use warming from 1900 and you draw a linear regression line from that point, ignoring the earlier part of your data, you get a lovely round ~1.5degrees yeah?
Pretty much. I'll see if I can rustle up a slide showing just this while the kettle boils but the thing to remember about anomalies is you can do simple things like subtract the mean value from one period from another.
I can’t find the location of the met-station at Heathrow in the early 50’s but the airfield was still under development.
Winter 1962/63 is well documented as really cold in SE and nationally.
I had not mentioned this earlier because I was expecting you to discover statistical evidence of CRU fraud. I noted Ned Nikolov, Ph.D. and Karl Zeller, Ph.D. published a paper July, 2022
in which they also find evidence (by comparison to Solar Surface Radiation) of HadCRUT data tampering:
“we conclude that researchers in charge of the HadCRUT dataset have likely removed the 1962 – 1983 cooling episode from the records before the publication of HadCRUT1 in 1994 in an effort to hide evidence contradicting the UN Resolution 43/53 from 1988, which proclaimed a global warming caused by greenhouse gases as a major societal concern, and urged Governments to treat it as a priority issue in climate research and environmental protection initiatives”
JD. I seem to have lost the icon which allows me to comment on later posts a month after I subscribed. I paid an annual lumpsum; Maybe that misfired? Anyway, this comment is about Part 9:
JD. This is a very interesting comparison of the two data sets. We all know there was a “white-wash” inquiry into data fiddling after “Climate-gate” but nobody internally could discover how they had cooked the books. Computer programs were used by CRU used to “filter” and “homogenise” Northern Hemisphere must exist and there is so little measured 2m data at sea level (Atlantic and Pacific), obviously most data for their “gridded” anomalies (based on land stations far removed from the majority of them) is invented. Inland stations surely have a wider spread of Tmax and Tmin; Not to mention the decision process of which stations to include/exclude (non-continuous records, etc.) cherry picking. The fudge is obviously baked in. Given the hysteresis effect of the oceans my bet is the windy sea level land-based land stations are the key to demonstrating the extent of CRU fraud?
Afternoon! I've checked STRIPE and your payment went through OK with everything looking fine in terms of subscription. Not quite sure what might have caused the icon to disappear but we do get system glitches now and then. If we can't figure it I can always try sending you a comp.
Yes, it'll be a complex operation to get the data crunched, with genuine errors and missing records thrown in for good measure. In that kind of process it will be easy to hide anything rather naughty going on and very few people would be in the know.
I like your windy sea level land-based litmus test - I shall at some point start turning the handle on a cross-sectional study to try and nail location factors. One other thing I can do, which is rather saucy, is to use SST, Arctic Sea Ice, CO2 and other records to model what the land temps should theoretically have been. Another trick is to reverse all time series data and predict the past - I did this back in 2017 to discover they'd artificially cooled pre-industrial SST.
Nauseous with outrage.... and just returned from the 16th Int Conf on Lyme Borreliosis and other Tickborne diseases. Mostly false, misleading, statistically invalid conclusions that adversely the health of millions of people.
Quite. The tricky aspect of all this work is trying not to blow a gasket each day.
Talking with Bill Johnson of Bomwatch.com.au he has traced several ship voyages in the 1800s where sea temps were taken every hour.. up the NSW QLD coast..
He found similar temps to today and very similar relationships with latitude.. has a paper ready to publish but it’s been challenged..
one paper I read showed rises in temps for coastal station but not inland eg Dubbo has similarly hot temperatures in the 30-40s to recent temps.. of 2000s Australia has three wide spreads drought decades the Federation 1901 to 06, WW2 droughts 36 to 46 and the millennial 2000 to 2010 droughts that have a large influence on temps..they often use 1950 to 80 as our reference a cool wet period..
There is much made of the Great Barrier Reefs plight of coral bleaching but virtually nothing said about the reef of Western Australia? Nor the plethora of happy coral in the tropics..
It is fairly obvious that if temps warmed the reefs would simply grow further south and coral from the tropics would migrate further south too..
Latest data shows the reef is in the best condition for many years..
Now that is fabulous. I haven't looked at ship data as yet - being lazy I only grab the easy to grab stuff. The coastal/inland split is something I'll touch on in a future newsletter but, yes, the coral story was another crock of sh*t and it's great to see the lies being exposed.
We have two very outspoken Senators.. Malcolm Roberts and Gerrad Rennick who have science background and argue well but not often heard.. https://fb.watch/fpwW-mlszX/
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02Zth7MpBBVDP3fSvd9xhyNdKsTW1sT73kZDemd5U1gTtgohoYK7C4N6bcm6JzstpVl&id=100050536897317
On the Barrier Reef Prof Peter Rid has been outstanding but suffered a lot..
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02hbgwBLJjJb2JtnCW2UAyGkvTBLB3XKuAh9agRkc32HcKoHFzGiDhTBgrHuPrZ3P7l&id=100057436540408
So if the ipcc use warming from 1900 and you draw a linear regression line from that point, ignoring the earlier part of your data, you get a lovely round ~1.5degrees yeah?
Pretty much. I'll see if I can rustle up a slide showing just this while the kettle boils but the thing to remember about anomalies is you can do simple things like subtract the mean value from one period from another.
Right then, try this...
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tLb9j9UEmAc17BJWwV2wz41T9pccqrXD/view?usp=sharing
very very very interesting.
and again there is the big rise from around 1986... what happened around 1986?
That's what we are going to find out! Lots more to come on all manner of topics.
So, have you been bitten by a shark, or are the scars from AI and Big data? Just gotta be clear on that!
LOL - no sharks as yet, just big data and AI (neural network stuff, especially Multilayer Perceptron).
Always refreshing to read honesty and clear thinking.
I wonder if you would be kind enough to check out my article on https://whatdoino.substack.com/
I hope you'll find it interesting and important.
Why thank you kind sir! Will read with interest.
JD. The wobbly mínimum is interesting. The temperature dip in 1954 is documented.
https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/qj.49708134927
I can’t find the location of the met-station at Heathrow in the early 50’s but the airfield was still under development.
Winter 1962/63 is well documented as really cold in SE and nationally.
I had not mentioned this earlier because I was expecting you to discover statistical evidence of CRU fraud. I noted Ned Nikolov, Ph.D. and Karl Zeller, Ph.D. published a paper July, 2022
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2022/07/11/ned-nikolov-does-a-surface-solar-radiation-dataset-expose-a-major-manipulation-of-global-temperature-records/
in which they also find evidence (by comparison to Solar Surface Radiation) of HadCRUT data tampering:
“we conclude that researchers in charge of the HadCRUT dataset have likely removed the 1962 – 1983 cooling episode from the records before the publication of HadCRUT1 in 1994 in an effort to hide evidence contradicting the UN Resolution 43/53 from 1988, which proclaimed a global warming caused by greenhouse gases as a major societal concern, and urged Governments to treat it as a priority issue in climate research and environmental protection initiatives”
!gato encerrado!
JD. I seem to have lost the icon which allows me to comment on later posts a month after I subscribed. I paid an annual lumpsum; Maybe that misfired? Anyway, this comment is about Part 9:
JD. This is a very interesting comparison of the two data sets. We all know there was a “white-wash” inquiry into data fiddling after “Climate-gate” but nobody internally could discover how they had cooked the books. Computer programs were used by CRU used to “filter” and “homogenise” Northern Hemisphere must exist and there is so little measured 2m data at sea level (Atlantic and Pacific), obviously most data for their “gridded” anomalies (based on land stations far removed from the majority of them) is invented. Inland stations surely have a wider spread of Tmax and Tmin; Not to mention the decision process of which stations to include/exclude (non-continuous records, etc.) cherry picking. The fudge is obviously baked in. Given the hysteresis effect of the oceans my bet is the windy sea level land-based land stations are the key to demonstrating the extent of CRU fraud?
Afternoon! I've checked STRIPE and your payment went through OK with everything looking fine in terms of subscription. Not quite sure what might have caused the icon to disappear but we do get system glitches now and then. If we can't figure it I can always try sending you a comp.
Yes, it'll be a complex operation to get the data crunched, with genuine errors and missing records thrown in for good measure. In that kind of process it will be easy to hide anything rather naughty going on and very few people would be in the know.
I like your windy sea level land-based litmus test - I shall at some point start turning the handle on a cross-sectional study to try and nail location factors. One other thing I can do, which is rather saucy, is to use SST, Arctic Sea Ice, CO2 and other records to model what the land temps should theoretically have been. Another trick is to reverse all time series data and predict the past - I did this back in 2017 to discover they'd artificially cooled pre-industrial SST.