@plantagenet please link to said prediction by the BOM.

First of all, I would refer you to Graham's piece in Ambit Gambit.

All you amateur climate scientists need to realise that the presence of polar ice has a stabilising influence on sea temperatures. If you take a glass, add ice to it and then fill it with water and leave it in a warm place, the temperature of the water will remain at zero degrees until all the ice has melted. Graham’s graphs prove nothing except what I have just explained.

Regardless of temperature measurements, it is a fact that sea ice is melting at both poles at an alarming rate and glaciers are also receding world wide. You don't have to be a Rhodes' scholar to come to the conclusion that this is the result of global warming. I will leave it to the real scientists to postulate a cause, but I would put my money on the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere.
David

Anyone who wants to be alarmed about something, like VK3AUU, will find some concocted story to suit them.

There were 1000 peer reviewed, papers posted in scientific journals in the last 3 years, refuting the possibility that CO2 can do what the fraudsters have been pushing for a couple of decades.

As the fraudsters have yet to produce any actual evidence to support the scam, all sensible folk have seen the light, & ignore the rubbish.

VK3AU has a pretty tenuous grasp on reality. While it is true that, due to the latent energy involved in moving a substance from one state to another, if you put ice in a glass of water the water will not warm until all the ice has melted, that only works at the scale of a glass of water.

The sea off the Gold Coast will be warm at the moment, off Sydney much more refreshing, and off the coast at Hobart you will risk hypothermia without a wet suit. So, sea temperature varies, independently of ice melting.

What's more, the sea is the engine that drives global temperature, so if the sea is not getting hotter, then neither is the temperature. So, bear that in mind if you look at the graphs on my blog.

You might also be interested to look at sea level rises, which I have covered in a separate post at http://www.ambitgambit.com/2017/01/10/so-how-fast-is-the-sea-really-rising/. There is a gradual rise, but not alarmingly so. This is caused in part by melting of glaciers, but more generally by the increase in volume of water as the temperature of the water heats - another strike against VK3AU's understanding of science.

The article hasn't indicated the purpose of the alleged "intent".

If the "intent" is to somehow falsify data to show the earth is warming, what is the "real intent?"

Reinterpreting data is not done for it's own sake. It's not the equivalent of a global game of Pokemon Go played by scientists to hoodwink humanity.

Scientists believed that temperatures would begin to rise about 40 years ago and we would be seeing the first signs now and that seems to be the case. It didn't happen as a result of Al Gore narrating a documentary.

Where are the usual associated claims of global conspiracies, corrupt scientists, Jewish bankers, One World Governments and so on?

What stake does the author's organisation - the IPA - have in maintaining the energy industry status quo, and perhaps it's own financial sponsorship?

What purpose does this article serve except as a further attempt to muddy the waters? The same strategy was successfully used by the tobacco companies years ago and tried again for DDT and industrial acid rain fallout from industries.

If there is an intent here, what is it and who is it really for?

Rache,

We are clearly motivated by different things. I'm curious - you seem more interested in the status quo and politics.

You ask my intent, and suggest I'm out to 'muddy' the water. I'm a radical empiricist after the truth.

I've spent some years attempting to understand the historical temperature record for Australia; including developing a best method for quality control of raw data - the actual measurements.

I've also been around long enough to know that when it comes to environmental issues getting to the truth can be difficult: because too many people want a politically correct, and simply answer. Yet the natural world is far from simple, and global averages are often meaningless.

To understand the extent to which environmental sciences (including climate science) have become riddled with noble cause corruption consider reading this book by Prof Ansley Kellow (University of Tasmania, Department of Government): https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/science-and-public-policy?___website=uk_warehouse

As regards the IPA, their leader is generally much more cautious than me when it comes to this issue; indeed, on balance, I am a risk to their reputation. They did, however, kindly take me in, after I was recently evicted from Central Queensland. You can read about me here: http://jennifermarohasy.com/about/

My recent publications in the area of climate science are here: http://climatelab.com.au/publications/

Some of us care intensely about the truth - seeking it becomes an overriding motivation that does not wane with age.