JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Books

Unexpected UK EarthHour at peak time Friday — just after Wind Power hits new high?

Fragile grids

UK FlagOver a million people customers lost power in the UK yesterday thanks to the sudden outage of a gas and a wind plant. Some of the country’s biggest railway stations were inoperable.  Passengers were stuck on trains for up to seven hours. Others stayed in hotels, walked miles or paid “hundreds” for taxis. The outpatient sections of Ipswich Hospital were blacked out for 15 minutes when backup generators failed. “At the height of the Friday rush hour, all trains out of King’s Cross were suspended and remained so for most of the evening.”BBC. Commuters resorted to using their phones as torches to get out of tunnels in the dark.

Urgent Investigation called for into “fiasco”

According to headlines, at this early stage before the investigation all we know for sure is that wind power is definitely not to blame, but Boris might be. (Seriously, it’s the no-deal Brexit that hasn’t happened).

Officially, people are saying in solemn knowing tones that it is “extremely rare”  for two generators to go out at once. But the odd thing about this is how small the loss was. Barfield Gas power is only a 730 MW generator, and Hornsea Wind “Farm” is, at most, 1.2 GW. The whole UK grid is more in the order of 60-80GW. The word on twitter was that this was only a 1.4MW loss. If so — wow. For some reason this small loss meant the grid frequency fell from the usual 50 Hz to a heartache 48.889 Hz (disastrous in grid terms). At that point, pre-programmed emergency “load shedding” kicked in.

“One source at a local energy network said: “I’ve never heard of anything like this in 20 years.”…” – Financial Times

Hmm. This could be a clue – a storm was sweeping through and wind farms were running full tilt just before things fell apart. Half an hour before the crash the National Grid was bragging about a new wind power record: 

At 16 minutes past four on Friday a press officer at National Grid put out a tweet which seemed to signal Britain’s progress towards its much-vaunted zero-carbon economy. The proportion of UK electricity generated by wind power, ‘it boasted, had just reached a record high of 47.6 per cent. 

–Ross Clark, Spectator.

With such a high proportion of wind power the system inertia would have been very low, which would mean the system was much less able to adapt to any disruption. (And if that is the case then this is a renewables problem. Too many intermittent generators, not enough spinning reserve). Large baseload turbines have spinning weights in the order of 200 – 600 tons, and they turn at 3,000 rpm. Solar and wind power just can’t provide that stability. Wait and see, but there are similarities with the South Australian blackout of 2016.

UK power cut: National Grid promises to learn lessons from blackout

Keep reading  →

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.4/10 (77 votes cast)

Feast your eyes on Streaky Bay’s thermometer — over bitumen for 31 long hot years

Ken Stewart rates the Streaky Bay site as one of the worst he has seen  This is an influential site because it’s in a remote area, is used to “correct” official ACORN sites, and has been running for a long time. Last October the BOM finally moved it to a completely new (and much better site) only three decades too late.  Strangely, they didn’t give the new site a new station number? Normally the old and new sites would be run concurrently with two different numbers so the data from both could be compared and the differences in temperature between them could be worked out. Is that an accident? Does it hide the terrible quality of the previous site?

The Streaky Bay information (site 018079) tells us it opened in 1865 but the site only has monthly data from 1926 and daily data from an even shorter period. The rest presumably hasn’t been digitized yet. As best as I can tell, the station metadata appear to mark this site as being at the post office from 1865 to 2018, and record the ground cover as becoming asphalt in July 1987. That means for 31 years the Australian Bureau of Meteorology knew the site was sitting on hot bitumen and couldn’t be bothered to move it? The BOM gets more than a million dollars a day, and claims there’s a dire crisis running, and they don’t even care enough to measure climate change properly? They’re not even trying.

According to Stewart, Streaky Bay’s artificially hot data was used to “correct” the Acorn sites at Adelaide, Ceduna, Eucla, Forrest, Kyancutta, and Port Lincoln.

Streaky Bay, Bureau of Meteorology, Screen on Asphalt, SA.

Streaky Bay, Bureau of Meteorology, Screen on Asphalt, SA. |    ©2019 Google. Image Capture Mar 2010.

Was any of this infrastructure there in 1865? We all know the answer to that.

The aerial view shows just how much asphalt surrounded the site in the centre of town last year.

Streaky Bay, Thermometer siting, Bureau of Meteorology, South Australia.

There was sea of asphalt surrounding the thermometer.    | Imagery  ©2019 CNES / Airbus, Map data, Google

The site history: Please check…

The detailed site information here indicates the site moved on  26 OCT 2018: “STATION Changed to Open farmland, grassland or tundra”. See page 31. But how long was it at the Post Office? On 12/JUN/1980 the metadata records “Changed to Town 1000 to 10,000″ which possibly just means a category change as the population grew, not a site change. There is no concurrent longitude or latitude change. Am I right?

On 12/JUN/1980 STATION surface_type Changed to bare ground. On the 08/JUL/1987 the STATION surface_type was “Changed to asphalt.”. On the 16/MAR/2000, the STATION soil_type was changed to “unable to determine”. Why? Because the soil was under bitumen and no one knew what was there?

The Bureau of Meteorology needs an independent audit

There are many questions this site raises. It’s very odd that the site number stays the same — even though the site moved to a dramatically different area. I wonder if that means their “secret algorithm” will treat the old hot data here as if it came from the new grassed site? It’s hard to believe that would be useful for them, since the new readings will be cooler. Usually when a site moves to a cooler location it allow the BOM to post hoc “cool” all the previous readings. Site moves are an excuse to cool data from the original good sites in paddocks which slowly became polluted with urban infill as buildings and roads were added around and under it. The UHI and site effects will have gradually increased temperatures in lots of little steps, but the correction for that rising trend is a backwards single “step” adjustment, which rewrites history, and lowers all the decades before the move down in one flat brutal step. Thus are the original old good sites deemed to be reading falsely hot.

How about a Royal Commission?

Ken’s post: The Wacky World of Weather Stations: No. 11- Streaky Bay (SA)

Go and see his work on this and so many other stations.

Rutherglen,   | Viewbank  | Nuriootpa    | Roseworthy    | Robe  | Ararat Prison  | Echuca Airport  | Albury Airport  | Dartmouth

Why is this important work being left to volunteers if the planet is at stake?

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.7/10 (80 votes cast)

IPCC announces Fatwa on meat eating

Planet Wrecking Steak

The Steak is coming to get you.

Good news, the Intergovernmental Holy Panel has finally released the new World-Saving IPCC Diet (WSID) which will stop storms, volcanoes and the spread of jellyfish. It also solves all those difficult dietary questions — instead of worrying about your weight, your blood pressure, or your brain, you can sip on a soy latte and know that even if you get dementia from the B12 deficiency or the tofu, you are A Virtuous Signaller. Lucky you.

And even though an atmospheric physicist supposedly can’t advise us on the climate, it’s fine for a climate scientist to tell us what to eat. They already tell us what car to drive and how many kids we should have. Why not?

Vegetarian diets and a “sin” tax on unsustainable meat could help to limit climate change, a major new report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says.

–The Australian

Sinning with meat for 2 million years?

Humans have been eating meat for 2.6 million years at least, or about 100,000 generations, but it’s time to take the precautionary principle and toss that genetic heritage to the wind.

Meat is a good (as in “the only”) source of Cobalamin, known as vitamin B12, which your body uses to make the myelin sheath on nerves among other things (it’s the insulation on your personal electricity grid). The side effects of not getting enough include:

…demyelinisation of peripheral nerves, the spinal cord, cranial nerves and the brain, resulting in nerve damage and neuropsychiatric abnormalities. Neurological symptoms of vitamin B12 deficiency include numbness and tingling of the hands and feet, decreased sensation, difficulties walking, loss of bowel and bladder control, memory loss, dementia, depression, general weakness and psychosis.3,4 Unless detected and treated early, these symptoms can be irreversible.  — Zeuschner et al 2013

Meat is also the best source for creatine, carnitine, methionine, DHA, taurine and iron. Obviously millions of people do fine without meat, but it’s a bit of a bummer for those with defective enzymes or SNP (single nucleotide polymorphisms) in any of these pathways. Some people just shouldn’t be vegetarians. (I know, I was one).

Then there is the infamous Honolulu Heart Study and the dementia-increasing effect of soy, which appears to be replicated in elderly Chinese, Indonesians and Japanese Americans. Other researchers say soy consumption may be a significant contributor to Alzheimer’s dementia. (So may a lot of other things, it has to be said). We could call this side effect “Global Dumbing”. If only it were a joke.

There looks like some unfortunate trade-offs in trying to reduce global temperatures with our dinner plates. I have barely got started on the health effects, the risks, the costs involved.

If only the ABC / BBC / CBC had well funded specialist science units which could ask those kind of questions. Oh wait…

As it is, dieticians have a torrid time trying to figure out what humans should eat, only a cult fanatic would think climate models would do it better.

In the IPCC SRCCL (Book of  Chapter 7 titled: Risk management and decision making in relation to sustainable development  they talk about trade-offs, and poverty, but don’t mention SNPs, or cobalamin, or B12, or even the word “vitamin”. Perhaps it’s in some other chapter? It’s not in the Summary for Policymakers, and not in Chapter 1. Nevermind.

Tax the oceans instead

In any case the reason cows and sheep are being targeted in the first place were because of methane emissions, and as Tom Quirk found here, global methane levels appear to be mostly due to El Ninos, rainfall and leaky Russian pipes.

How many healthy people do we sacrifice to the weather Gods this time?

Save the forests, burn more coal

If the IPCC are so concerned about forest destruction the best thing they could suggest is to cut back solar and wind power and biofuels which use up to 500 times as much land area as fossil fuels or nuclear power does.

And if people are concerned about food security ponder that the IPCC says that about a third of food is lost or wasted. (Quoting Pep Canadell, executive director of the Global Carbon Project and a researcher at CSIRO). Sounds like we have plenty to spare then, especially if we stop trying to feed good food to cars instead of people .

The IPCC Press release  is titled — Land is A Critical Resource. Like we didn’t know that.

Keep reading  →

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.4/10 (75 votes cast)

So hot that we can see those Urban Heat Islands from space

During the June heatwaves in Europe NASA was studying the “Ecostress” of various cities.

The heat coming off Charles DeGualle’s  Orly Airport’s runways is easily visible from space. (As are all the other ideal locations for putting climate change thermometers.) CORRECTED Charles de Gaulle airport runways are (I think) beyond the top right of the heat map.

h/t To AndyG

EU heat Map - Madrid

The NASA Ecostress map for Paris   | Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

 

Hands up who thinks thermometers in 1880 were reading too warm? Anyone…

The shots were taken in the early morning:

They show how the central core of each city is much hotter than the surrounding natural landscape due to the urban heat island effect – a result of urban surfaces storing and re-radiating heat throughout the day.

he fact that surface temperatures were as high as 77-86 degrees Fahrenheit (25-30 degrees Celsius) in the early morning indicates that much of the heat from previous days was stored by surfaces with high heat capacity (such as asphalt, concrete and water bodies) and unable to dissipate before the next day. The trapped heat resulted in even higher midday temperatures, in the high 40s (Celsius) in some places, as the heat wave continued.

 So these heat sinks have had all night to lose their extra heat yet here they are still radiating. Even at lunch time the next day.

EU heat Map - Madrid

Rome- Ecostress Heat map  |   Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

Nice of them to mark the airports.

See Milan and Madrid below.

Keep reading  →

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.6/10 (102 votes cast)

The diesel generator behind the electric car charging point

It’s a diesel powered electric car point:

Diesel generator attached to EV charging station.

The fossil fueled electric car…

It’s becoming a joke all around the world — the EVs in Australia powered by dirty diesel. But what’s the difference? Most EV’s in Australia are running on fossil fuel — the generators are just hidden behind longer extension cords. (Ones that carry 240,000V). EV’s on our grid are running on 80% fossil fuels every day.

The sign on the charger above says “Nullarbor” — the vast treeless and grid-free centre of Australia — but this is actually a test site in Perth (the trees were the giveaway).

The 3,000 kilometer trip across the Nullarbor from Perth to Adelaide is such an achievement for an EV that it’s practically a news story each time one makes it. Electric Car owners carry a chip about not being able to drive across the country like any real car owner could. So Jon Edwards, a retired engineer from Perth, set up this test site in his backyard. He wanted to know if it could be a realistic stop-gap for our far remote roads.

To me, this looks like a chain of efficiency losses going from diesel to mechanical to electrical to battery to mechanical, but Edwards tested it with ten friend’s cars last December and estimates it works out slightly better on fuel use than just driving a diesel. Readers can check out all his calculations and tables on his page — at a glance it’s a respectable effort. He is an engineer. The charger is a Tritium Veefil 50kW DC (a big fast one) and took 9 hours to charge all 10 cars and used 108L of fuel. Good for fuel. Bad for time. (The 6,600km return trip across the Nullabor took 13 days in case you were wondering, though they were not in a race).

There’s a good reason EV’s are only 0.2% of all new Australian car purchases — with vast distances, a fragile grid, expensive electricity and heavy towing loads. Plus these fast chargers are like adding “20 houses” to our grid, so will cripple the system or require billions of dollars of infrastructure costs. The dumbest thing is that as long as they run off fossil fuels, they’ll probably increase our CO2 emissions, doing the exact opposite of what they’re supposed to be doing, but yet perversely helping plants grow. Their big environmental benefit being mainly achieved by failing to do what they are intended to do.

Good for Jon Edwards for financing his own experiment. but there was one funny moment when he mentioned tax:

…he tells The Driven that driving to Adelaide and back in an electric car, “I felt like a third class citizen.”

“I’m a tax paying citizen and I’m driving an EV, why haven’t we got infrastructure to service us?” he says.

…and the first commenter, Pedro, reminded him that EV owners don’t pay the fuel taxes that maintain the roads the EV’s drive on.

But, hey, he’s in the comments there explaining himself. Give him points, just please don’t give him more of our taxes.

Keep reading  →

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.6/10 (113 votes cast)

How to destroy the solar industry — lesson from the Socialist republic of Victoria

Showing their mastery of business, the Victorian Government is helping the local Solar industry to death. To prop up the failing, uneconomic but “fashionable” industry the Andrews government decreed that they will throw an extra $2,225 at homes earning less than $180,000 that want to install solar. (This is on top of the Federal subsidies). Because free money is always popular, they decided to limit this to 3,333 rebates per month but now it’s a stop-start monthly bloodbath out there.

The applications for this months allocation went online on the first of August and were all gone in 106 minutes. Some people had waited all month but their internet connections were too slow, and according to them “the orange wheel of death” kept spinning, but no magic money appeared. Now they have to wait another month. Who’s going to install solar now, if you might get two thousand dollars off it by waiting a few weeks?

It’s all utterly predictable, but killing small solar installers. For some, not one of their customers scored a rebate. So they’re saying they have no work for the next month now, no more will come in, and no way to pay their staff.


As the placards on the protest signs read: Thanks Vic Solar for killing the industry and small business.

Warwick Johnson, Reneweconomy:

August has smashed last month’s record for the amount of time it took Victoria’s Solar Rebate slots to run out. Three days? How about two hours?  Already at a crisis level, the rebate scheme has now entered nightmare territory, with solar installers across the state – already hurting – forced to sit out another month without sales.

What the government created, the government can destroy. There goes the Victorian solar market. If only those businesses were selling something that people wanted to buy without a subsidy?

The up/down artificial cranking of the market will shake out all the small businesses.

Waste, waste and destruction

The rebates paid off people who would have installed the panels anyhow:

The program took residential installation levels from 3,000/month up to 5,000/month for that eight-month period. So, on the up-side, it brought 16,000 new solar installations that wouldn’t have proceeded without the rebate.

But it also funded 16,000 that would have happened anyway. And such was the impact of the scheme, only 1,000 customers/month of the original 3,000/month were ineligible for the rebate.

That makes it problematic even to simply dump the program. In the space of 12 months, the government has conditioned two-thirds of the original market to expect a rebate, and those customers will take a long time to return to the market in the absence of a rebate. Hence the crater

Solar PV Market, Grapoh, Victoria.

Oops. Spot the bubble. This is the state rebate on top of the Federal version.

Solar Panels are still not worth installing without a subsidy

Watch the fans at Reneweconomy dance around the high cost of solar PV. Here is how to not say that solar is too expensive for homeowners to want to buy it voluntarily:

…past experience with premium feed-in tariff schemes in various states has shown that scrapping the scheme outright would throw the industry into the doldrums, as consumers will feel that they’ve missed out. While the case for purchasing a solar system in Victoria without the current rebate is much more favourable than it was 5-10 years ago, it may take the average Victorian some time to become aware of this fact.

Some time? It may take 20 years for the panels to start being economic. Or 100.

If solar panels saved people money on their extremely high electricity bills they’d figure it out. The real problem is the solar panels are junk tech, solving a crisis that doesn’t exist in the most expensive and stupid way possible.

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.8/10 (72 votes cast)

Climate Expert or UN certified Seer? Joelle Gergis does “gut-wrenching” grieving horror, volcanic rage

Remember when scientists were dispassionate, cautious people? Well, forget that.

h/t ClimateDepot, Travis T, Jones

Joelle Gergis unleashes a message of full gut-wrenching, stomach sinking, terrible truth and brutality. Lordy, 50 per cent of the Great Barrier Reef is dead. Sometimes she cries after her talks. She has a vision, a precognition of awful events, but only she and a few other UN certified seers can see. Climate change is the terrifying eco-disaster that sounds more and more like a Stephen King novel. How does a scientist sell climate change? — with pools of blood. It’s like a brain haemorrhage. Seriously.

Her grief is rapidly being superseded by rage. “Volcanically explosive rage”. 

What are the odds that a scientist like this would consider her results impartially — would be willing to toss out her pet ideas if 28 million radiosondes, 3,000 ocean buoys, 120 proxies, 1,000 tide gauges and 40 years of satellite data were all wrong, and all wrong in the same direction? This is the same woman who whipped up a storm of headlines about how Australia was warmer now than 800 years ago based on a 0.09C warming so small it’s less than the error bars and only “measured” with two stands of trees in  Tasmania and New Zealand.

Is she hunting for the truth or looking for fame, status and a captive audience? Once upon a time scientists used to talk in caveats and careful qualifiers. Not any more.

And the irony — after all this hyperbolic unleashed emotion, she twists the knife to call for… wait...”an urgent and pragmatic national conversation.” Where’s the pragmatism in doing science as an unrelated horror movie analogy.

Preparing for this talk I experienced something gut-wrenching. It was the realisation that there is now nowhere to hide from the terrible truth.

“We are witnessing catastrophic ecosystem collapse of the largest living organism on the planet.”

Being willing to acknowledge the arrival of the point of no return is an act of bravery.

Holy Horrors: This woman is so special — Look at me, so brave, so visionary!

She’s a messiah in the making.  Joelle Gergis is one of the chosen ones:

As one of the dozen or so Australian lead authors on the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) sixth assessment report, currently underway, I have a deep appreciation of the speed and severity of climate change unfolding across the planet. Last year I was also appointed as one of the scientific advisers to the Climate Council, Australia’s leading independent body providing expert advice to the public on climate science and policy. In short, I am in the confronting position of being one of the few Australians who sees the terrifying reality of the climate crisis.

She’s so smart almost no one else sees what she sees.

Because climate change is like a brain hemorrhage. Explain to me how this has any scientific link at all — it’s mere theatre — the two topics connected by personal “shock”. She’s shamelessly milking family grief for propaganda mileage.

Preparing for this talk I experienced something gut-wrenching. It was the realisation that there is now nowhere to hide from the terrible truth.

The last time this happened to me, [finding there was "no where to hide"] I was visiting my father in hospital following emergency surgery for a massive brain haemorrhage. As he lay unconscious in intensive care, I examined his CT scan with one of the attending surgeons who gently explained that the dark patch covering nearly a quarter of the image of his brain was a pool of blood. Although they had done their best to drain the area and stem the bleeding, the catastrophic nature of the damage was undeniable. The brutality of the evidence was clear – the full weight of it sent my stomach into freefall.

 Which part is emotionally frozen?

Increasingly after my speaking events, I catch myself unexpectedly weeping in my hotel room or on flights home. Every now and then, the reality of what the science is saying manages to thaw the emotionally frozen part of myself I need to maintain to do my job. In those moments, what surfaces is pure grief. It’s the only feeling that comes close to the pain I felt processing the severity of my dad’s brain injury. Being willing to acknowledge the arrival of the point of no return is an act of bravery.

Sure. Blood n’ guts one minute, analytical the next:

As a climate scientist at this fraught point in our history, the most helpful thing I can offer is the same professionalism that the doctor displayed late that night in Dad’s intensive-care ward. A clear-eyed and compassionate look at the facts.

Dear Joelle, any time you want to start the clear eyed commentary, go right ahead.

@joellegergis

 

Some scientists opt to be seers,
Deluded by false climate fears,
Then project and assume,
A future of doom,
In papers acclaimed by their peers.

–Ruairi

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.8/10 (111 votes cast)

Weekend Unthreaded

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.0/10 (33 votes cast)

Maitland SA: Another expert thermometer site — and with incinerator “forcing”

Some days in Maitland are hotter than others.

Maitland, South Australia, Bureau of Meteorology, Temperature siting.

The very non-compliant Maitland, SA, thermometer site  #022008 |   Imagery  ©2019 Google, Oct 2014.

Thanks to Ken Stewart, the tour through the Great sites of the Australian Bureau of Meteorology continues.

Once again, the experts have carefully graphed, diagrammed, checked and ignored all the things that shouldn’t be within 30 meters of a thermometer. See Maitland Site Info. That fence is described as “Galvanised iron”. The ground is bitumen. The incinerator is labeled “incinerator”. And there are two tanks just out of view to the right, not to mention the tin sheds, trees, buildings and wind breaks.

In 1967 the site only had two tin sheds within a 30 meter radius, which was still not compliant, but vastly cooler than present. The incinerator is about 6 or 7 meters from the Stevenson Screen, and only appears on the maps in 2014.

As Ken says “the site is a heat sink”. It’s not an official “ACORN” star site, but records here get mentions in the media. Worse, Maitland  is one of the sites used to adjust official ACORN data in Adelaide, Cape Borda, Ceduna, Kyancutta, Port Lincoln, and Snowtown.

Ken has also looked at Eudunda, Meningie, and Warooka this week. Anyone happening to be driving past Warooka post office? Please send us a shot to admire from out the back. The screen’s not visible from the street.

______________________

If people want to send in more site photos, start at the BoM page for Climate Data Online. Type in the town, and “Find” the nearest site. On that site’s page look to the top right for a button marked “Details” to find out the lat and long. You can enter them in Google Maps as: 34.3745S, 137.6733E (for example). If you visit a site, please respect the privacy of any homeowners, don’t share street addresses or car number-plates publicly. Email me: joanne AT this site domain.Site details button, BoM, Bureau of Meteorology.

Ken Stewart blogs at Ken’s Kingdom:  The Wacky World of Weather Stations! Go thank him.

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.8/10 (91 votes cast)

Animals’ body sizes shrinking from climate change, study finds, based on a group of wagtails?

Another climate classic today: Animals’ body sizes shrinking from climate change, study finds
by University of Cape Town

Nice theory if you can get funding for it:

“All else being equal, larger animals can tolerate cold conditions better than smaller animals, so one could expect that a warming  is relatively more advantageous for smaller animals,” said Professor Altwegg.

There are 8.7 million species on Earth and this is based on “one” of them:

To investigate this idea and whether it could be true, the research team looked at a group of wagtails living along the Palmiet River.

It’s “a” group — just the one — and a temperature change of less than one fifth of a degree over 23 years:

Based on data from a local weather station near the Palmiet River, the researchers knew that temperatures in the area had increased by 0.18 °C. But they didn’t know how this had affected the birds’ size.

What they found supports the idea that  can shrink Earth’s animals.

“Supports” the idea? The study’s big achievement was only that it didn’t extinguish the idea at the “back of envelope” stage…

Their results showed that as temperature increased along the Palmiet River, the mountain wagtails living there had become lighter. Specifically, they found lighter individuals were replacing heavier ones in the population and that they survived better under high temperatures. This indicated that an evolutionary pressure was acting on the birds to become lighter.

Or maybe food, predators, fertility, rainfall, and disease were more important than 0.18 degrees C which may or may not be larger than the error bars of South African meteorology. Who knows. Australian meteorology has larger “adjustment bars” than this.

But this is definitely evolution. Look closely and we can see evidence that smaller minded researchers are outcompeting larger ones.

This appears to occur in every soft left environment there is, no matter what the climate.

REFERENCE. Seriously?

Jorinde Prokosch et al. Are animals shrinking due to climate change? Temperature-mediated selection on body mass in mountain wagtails, Oecologia (2019). DOI: 10.1007/s00442-019-04368-2

(What are the odds this is pure spoof? I mean, a bunch of wagtails….  fergoodnesssake– Jo)

h/t oldbrew in a comment somewhere at Tallblokes.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.7/10 (72 votes cast)

How many silent skeptics are there at NOAA? Dr. Rex Fleming speaks out after years of working there

Dr Rex Fleming has a PhD in Meteorology and spent years at NOAA, as he said involved with climate research from the beginning, and responsible for funding scientists who “pushed” the theory of man-made global warming. He’s written a book called The Rise and Fall of the Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climate Change (2019) and has just done a podcast with James Delingpole.

When David Evans first spoke out as a skeptic we were contacted by someone inside NOAA who said there were many skeptics there, but none of them could speak. We know there are others out there, still silent.

h.t Climate Depot

NOAA Atmospheric scientist Dr. Rex Fleming


My rough notes: Dr Fleming did a PhD in uncertainty in climate and was involved in something called “The weather experiment in 1979.”. He talks about “people who fiddled with the data — ocean data, atmospheric data..”, and about how they “won’t admit they put their temperature sensors too close to cities.”

AAAS LogoJames Delingpole asks what motivates these researchers and Fleming replies along the lines of soft corruption, how people just want to keep the funds coming in. That people are just not willing to fight it. He repeats that Under Obama they would get sacked. So people don’t speak up until the retire. (@ 7 minutes)

A large part of the problem are the science organisations. Fleming talks about how there are three scientific organisations in the USA which will not allow discussion from any skeptical point of view and he points the finger at: American Meteorology Society (AMS), American Geophysical Union — AGU, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science — AAAS (which publishes “Science” supposedly one of the prestigious science journals in the world).

They will not support a “denier”, I could not get published.

Keep reading  →

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.2/10 (121 votes cast)

114 Private Jets flying into Google Global Summer Camp Party thing

It’s so much fun saving the planet 114 private jets at a time

Sicily beach photo

The glitterati are descending on a ritzy Sicilian seaside resort this weekend to discuss how to save the world. As usual, a bit of wrecking-the-world on the way is fine if it’s “for a good cause” — meaning fame, status, and hot three day summer camps in an Italian resort.

It’s known as Google Camp – the place where famous VIP’s get some training and incentives not to stray off the Google Groupthink-Ranch:

The billionaire creators of Google have invited a who’s who of A-list names— including former President Barack ObamaPrince HarryLeonardo DiCaprio and Katy Perry — to the Sicilian seaside for a mega-party they’ve dubbed Google Camp.

The three-day event will focus on fighting climate change — though it’s unknown how much time the attendees will spend discussing their own effect on the environment, such as the scores of private jets they arrived in and the mega yachts many have been staying on.

It’s only going to cost Google $20 million or so. It’s a small investment in their pet team of lobbyists for Big Government.

Small governments, after all, like to break up monopolies, encourage competition and cut subsidies…

What starling would want to announce they were a climate denier and get crossed off this invitation list?

h/t Pat

Related stories: Google is unbiased, impartial and just happens to be run entirely by Democrat voters

Keep reading  →

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.3/10 (69 votes cast)

Midweek Unthreaded

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.0/10 (29 votes cast)

Murray Bridge, South Australia, where thermometers record junk every day

Thanks to Bill in Oz sending in the shot of Mt Barker, Ken Stewart started auditing other sites in South Australia and discovered this masterpiece of expert siting. And thanks to Ken, you can see The Wacky World of Weather Stations: No. 2- Murray Bridge.

Bureau of Meteorology, South Australia, Murray Bridge, Urban Heat Island, ACORN.

Year opened: 1885. Who thinks the site looked like this 130 years ago?  | Image capture Mar 2018, Google ©2019

As he points out:

The screen is in a houseyard near concrete paths, vegetable gardens and shrubs, close to a picket fence, within 5 metres of sheds, sheltered from the south by a 1.6 metre high fence, with buildings to the east, north, and west, and less than 10 metres from the bitumen road.

Like Mt Barker, this is another site which is not an ACORN “top ranked” site that the Bureau of Meteorology use, but results from here are used to adjust ACORN sites like Mount Gambier, so it is de facto a part of that network.  Sites like this are also used to create propaganda, sorry, press releases about “hottest ever records”.

The BoM know exactly how bad this site is, and in carefully measured detail.

Somewhere a paid bureaucrat has dedicatedly measured and mapped all the things that shouldn’t be there within a 30 meter radius.

Ponder the awesome attention to detail for a site that should never have been selected. In that single PDF link, there is not just one map like this but 14 separate maps of this same site dated roughly once a year since 2004. Would private industry spend so much money documenting failure or would they just … move the dang site?! And then there are more maps from before that of the site when it was located near the railway station (see below for that photo).

More meaningless expert data

Would any private company spend money analyzing the exact time of day shadows fall on this thermometer each month of the year, or would they just find a 30 by 30 meter square plot of clear land in the most empty inhabited continent on Earth? Does anyone think a supercomputer could calculate what the thermometer should have recorded, and if so, why bother having a thermometer at all?

Murray Bridge, skyline, Bureau of Meteorology, climate data.

Murray Bridge, skyline, Bureau of Meteorology, climate data.

As Ken says, don’t blame the householder, blame the BoM. As Jo says, send a message to your elected representative.

If life on Earth depends on climate science why don’t the Bureau of Meteorology care about the data? We give them over a million dollars a day, yet they use sites like this to tell us that Australia has “unprecedented” warming.

Modern junk used, old quality forgotten

The thermometers scientists installed in 1896 which recorded extreme heat then may be more accurate than the modern “expert” network, yet the BoM ignore those and use junk like this.

Here’s the expanded view of the site that was chosen in 2004 (white arrow marks the spot). At a glance, there are other sites you might think were better, like the sort under the red dots. Just a thought?

Keep reading  →

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.6/10 (68 votes cast)

Mt Barker — How not to measure the temperature

Thanks to Bill in Oz who sent in this photo of the Mt Barker site in South Australia.

Ken Stewart at Ken’s Kingdom writes: The Wacky World of Weather Stations: No. 1- Mount Barker

Mt Barker, Photo, Bureau of Meteorology site.

Photo: Bill in Oz.

Count the ways this site breaches the Bureau of Meteorology own rules:

Ken Stewart finds the relevant BoM guidelines. Clearly this site is on a slope, too close to buildings, too close to tall foliage, too close to heat sinks, it should not be artificially watered, or near asphalt. It should have a 30 meter buffer zone, and not be shielded from the sun, rain or wind. BillinOz points out that it is totally screened from the southerly cold winds, and the cold air will be drained from the spot down the slope.

How much do the Bureau of Meteorology care about climate change? — About 1m out of 30m or 3% of their advertised “care” factor.  That’s a a 97% Junk-Science rate. The future of life on Earth is supposedly at stake and the “experts” can’t even be bothered accurately measuring the climate change they tell us we need to pay billions of dollars to solve.

Mt Barker, Bureau of Meteorology site, 2015.

Could it be worse? Sure — in 2015, the Mt Barker thermometer was on the other side of the block next to the driveway and the van.  | Imagery  ©2019 Google

Obviously every record claimed at this site is scientifically meaningless. This sort of error can’t be homogenized or adjusted away, but taxpaying Australians might think that installing a proper site would be possible when we pay them over a million dollars a day.

Mt Barker’s temperatures are published at their Latest Weather Observations page. As Stewart points out this flawed site is used to adjust temperatures at official superstar ACORN-SAT sites at Adelaide, Cape Borda, Nuriootpa, Robe, and Snowtown. And thus does bad data pollute Australia’s temperature records and the press releases that are used to scare the public into paying more money to fix a climate problem no one can be bothered to even measure properly.

The bottom line? Ask our M.P.’s to audit the Bureau of Met. If the environment matters, there must be an independent audit. Skeptics have asked, and the Bureau threw out the whole dataset to avoid the audit. They admit they won’t describe their methods. If the Greens or Australian Conservation Foundation cared about the environment, they would demand an audit like we do.

In 2015 this site was on the other side of the block next to the driveway and car. “Lucky” the BoM realized, and … moved it to another inadequate spot.

Those fantasy bureau guidelines:

Keep reading  →

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.6/10 (100 votes cast)