Hello everyone,

Here is the link to the article In Independent Australia to the article by James Lawrence Powell, which I asked everyone to read before continuing to comment. You may have to cut and paste into your browser.

http://www.independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/only-1-of-9136-recent-peer-reviewed-authors-rejects-global-warming,6094

Brian, great article. Now please point me to one peer reviewed article that proves AGW.

Pretty simple request, you would think, since there are so many which claim evidence of warming. Hard and fast proof please.

SteeleRedux sounds like a character from a 1970's porno movie; anyway Steele, your support for the BOM is commendable but naïve. The BOM is an unabashed supporter of AGW and its homogenisation of the Australian temperature record has been found to be biased; Stockwell and Stewart detail this in their paper:

http://landshape.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/06-Stockwell[1].pdf

The previous High Quality temperature network [HQ] from BOM was replaced by the ACORN network after a request for an audit of the HQ network was made; see;

http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/audit/anao-request-audit-bom.pdf

The background to the audit is described here:

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/03/australian-temperature-records-shoddy-inaccurate-unreliable-surprise/

After the switch to ACORN it was found the same bias which the HQ network had was still present in ACORN:

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/06/threat-of-anao-audit-means-australias-bom-throws-out-temperature-set-starts-again-gets-same-results/#comment-1070341

As for the process of homogenisation or adjustment by the BOM that process of homogenisation was called unreliable and subjective by Della-Marta et al:

http://reg.bom.gov.au/amm/docs/2004/dellamarta.pdf

The fact is the BOM is NOT producing reliable and scientifically transparent climate information. It displays the same faults, obfuscation and manipulation as AGW science does generally.

Brian of Buderim - and anybody really
When you read that that Bureau of Meteorogy's credibility is being trashed. Or CSIRO's, or the IPPC's - do you not just feel like giving up on this so-called "debate".
I know that I do.

We all still go along believing the accepted experts in medical science, and in many other areas, such as road safety, architectural design safety - and many others. We accept their expert opinions as valid - even though we ourselves have not thoroughly researched their field of expertise.

Along comes climate change. Even here, for what small amount it counts - our own anecdotal evidence shows us that things are changing - as well as current photographs and news items - about rising global temperatures, shrinking glaciers, rising sea levels.
The authoritative climate agencies tell us that human caused global warming is happening.

Suddenly, along come these anonymous people telling us not to trust the climate scientists, telling us that they are part of a big conspiracy against us, or at best, are just stupid. I find both of these propositions quite unlikely.

Noel
'Even here, for what small amount it counts - our own anecdotal evidence shows us that things are changing - as well as current photographs and news items - about rising global , shrinking glaciers, rising sea levels.

The authoritative climate agencies tell us that human caused global warming is happening.'

Let's check

'Current Photos' of the Artic Ice cap August 12 and August 13 from NASA an 'authoritative climate agency...'show a 50% increase in ice cover.

surface 'global temperatures' are shown to be not rising by IPCC an 'authoritative climate agency...'in their 2013 report.

'shrinking glaciers' is a claim no longer asserted by anyone currently.
'rising sea levels' ask Chris Flannery why he bought a riverfront property in an estuary.

The BOM this year predicted 12 cyclones for Australia.

So far there has been one. There are about 8 weeks left in the cyclone season. There need to be one and half cyclones each week for their inflated warming terrorist prediction to be correct. Given there are none on the horizon ... and the monsoon is still very weak and patchy ... well you know.

'anecdotal evidence shows' we have had an unusual summer in Brisbane. We have had dry lightening, very few storms and little summer rain.
The BOM in line with warming terrorism keep predicting increasing and severe storms and more rain.
One only has to take a look at the prevailing winds to see how wrong that terrorism is. The SE Trades refuse to blow.

The anecdotal evidence and actual weather is the direct opposite of the predictions from the experts at the BOM.

As a sailor well experienced in meteorology as I saw a late and weak monsoon this year I predicted no or very few cyclones and as I realised the trades were not arriving I challenged the BOM every time it has predicted massive and destructive storms for Brisbane. Every time, not occasionally but every time, the massive and destructive storms did not arrive. In fact even weak rainstorms seldom eventuated.

How's that for trumping your unsupported assertions?

The BOM failed to predict the QLD 2010 floods; that should be sufficient in itself for a judicial enquiry into their predictions.

Warwick Hughes and Ken Stewart have been showing how dud the BOM is in their predictions for years.

And Jennifer Marohasy and John Abbott and their pattern analysis model put together for about $22 flogs the predictive might of the multi-million POAMA models from BOM:

http://jennifermarohasy.com/2013/12/costly-climate-model-just-a-big-boys-toy/#more-10950

BOM is an activist front for AGW ideology and Australia is suffering because of its failures. It is a scandal.