Jennifer Marohasy Puts BOM On The Chopping Block

HEADS need to start rolling at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology. The senior management have tried to cover-up serious tampering that has occurred with the temperatures at an experimental farm near Rutherglen in Victoria. Retired scientist Dr Bill Johnston used to run experiments there. He, and many others, can vouch for the fact that the weather station at Rutherglen, providing data to the Bureau of Meteorology since November 1912, has never been moved.

Senior management at the Bureau are claiming the weather station could have been moved in 1966 and/or 1974 and that this could be a justification for artificially dropping the temperatures by 1.8 degree Celsius back in 1913.

Surely its time for heads to roll!

Who’s going to be sacked for making-up global warming at Rutherglen? | Jennifer Marohasy

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

35 Responses to Jennifer Marohasy Puts BOM On The Chopping Block

  1. norilsk says:

    The rot really does run deap. How much more corrution is out there waiting to be exposed? The problem was clearly stated by Mark Twain. “A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” The problem is once a politician believes a lie, they will carry it to their grave.

    • omanuel says:

      Yes, the rot runs very, very deep – far deeper than anyone imagined when Climategate emails surfaced in late Nov 2009.

      George Orwell started writing “1984” in 1946, within months of the time

      1. Stalin’s USSR troops captured Japan’s atomic bomb plant at Konan, Korea in late Aug 1945, and

      2. The United Nations was formed on 24 Oct 1945.

      The rot had accumulated for sixty-four years (2009 – 1945 = 64 yrs) when Climategate emails surfaced.

      Will heads roll? Certainly! But we do know when the ancient law of karma will reaffirm:

      “Truth is victorious, never untruth!”

  2. Eliza says:

    No heads will roll, they will simply be retired or moved sidewards. To be honest its not this site or anyone (other skeptic sites) who are winning this battle its the weather stupid! (it ain’t warming).

    • Streetcred says:

      Here, in Australia, there is a time honoured process of promoting incompetence and liars in the bureaucracy.

      • Streetcred says:

        custom not ‘process’ … too early in the morning, not enough caffeine.

        • James the Elder says:

          Just had a thought: If this scam was going on in, maybe, China or Russia, how long before the scammers assumed room temperature? Love’em or hate’em, they do tend to thin the herd rather quickly.

        • philjourdan says:

          The scammers are cowards. They tried it with the Russian data – from the safety of East Anglia. The Russians called them out on it.

    • Gail Combs says:

      That is why I am hoping for a descent into glaciation SOON to smarten people up and to give the brain dead politicians something REAL to worry about.

      The rank and file people of the world (not the mouthy activist left) have just about had it.
      See: one of Delingpole’s latest articles.

  3. tom0mason says:

    A quote from Joanne Nova says it all –

    The BOM rely on the usual vague wordy explanation with the unscientific reasoning that homogenization is necessary according to “international literature”. (I guess there is a consensus then, and we all know what that’s worth.) It is the scientific equivalent of saying “we’re experts — trust us”. No one would accept that from a company accountant, why from a scientist?

    • tom0mason says:

      My question is what “international literature” and has it been correctly appraised for use continent-wide in Australia to the highest scientific standards?

      In a tiny little country like the UK homogenization would barely make much difference to the temperature record, but somewhere larger like Australia, or the US, it will mask important meteorological data.

      • tom0mason says:

        Of course the Climategate emails offer a little light –

        To: Phil Jones
        Subject: Re: FW: retraction request
        Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 08:21:57 -0400
        …. Phil Jones said the following on 6/19/2007 4:22 AM:
        Nothing much else to say except:
        1. Think I’ve managed to persuade UEA to ignore all further FOIA
        requests if the people have anything to do with Climate Audit.
        2. Had an email from David Jones of BMRC, Melbourne. He said
        they are ignoring anybody who has dealings with CA, as there are
        threads on it about Australian sites.

        3. CA is in dispute with IPCC (Susan Solomon and Martin Manning)
        about the availability of the responses to reviewer’s at the various
        stages of the AR4 drafts. They are most interested here re Ch 6 on

        ref – 1182255717.txt

    • Brad says:

      I know of three apologists that support the “vague wordy explanation” and defend anywhere and everywhere.

    • Streetcred says:

      But but but … it’s common practice!

  4. philjourdan says:

    Glad you caught that. I meant to post a link to Joanne Nova’s article on it.

  5. thegriss says:

    Anywhere that the alarmistas have got their grubby mitts onto the raw data, they have CREATED a warming trend.

    Combine all these fabrications together, you get GISS and HadCrut.

    • tom0mason says:

      What the Brits do with their own data is small stuff, after all you could homogenize all of the UK to one temperature with very little effect to the rest of the world, probably not even on the UK itself.
      No, what is more sinister is HadCrut’s influence over other national agencies globally, and their ablility to persuade others to follow in homogenizing temperature data across vast areas of the globe.
      IMO homogenizing is scientifically and ethically wrong, as it hides the useful anomaly information. These abnormalities, these location specific exceptional particularities, are where the clues to a better understanding of our weather and climate would would be hidden, and/or may appear there first.
      With homogenize temperature data little research can be done in this direction – we have obscurred the pathway, hidden the light.

      • cdquarles says:

        I have another, more serious issue with homogenization. It simply can’t be done to intensive properties such as temperature, which are specific to a defined sample of matter at a specified time and place.

        Like this ‘newfangled’ term, temperature field. That implies, to me, extensive properties of a vector nature; such as gravitational field or electrical/magnetic fields.

        • Gail Combs says:

          That is why I keep bring up the point that the sample size is ONE. You do not get a reduction in error and you can not add a couple decimal places by using the statistics of large numbers.

          Then there is the fallacy of krigging which is what you are talking of I think.

  6. Eliza says:

    More skeptics should comment here
    They are there are ripping the article to pieces. Poor ol Seth Boreinstein is having his last days as a credible reporter keep em coming. The Australian story is making lots of comments!

  7. Eliza says:

    Abbot will eventually get ear of this don’t worry. Heads will not roll but be moved (we all know how the Australian Gov works)..Already comments in mainstream US are using this info thank you again J. (My father was an atmospheric physicist studied with Einstein in 1935-37 at the Max Planck Institut Fur Physic in Leipzig and a WMO expert.and published 3 papers in Nature about trans-evaporation and particle physics) He told me in 1997 it was a scam to get money he did not even bother to explain why.(The Science) as I was still very young and not very interested LOL

  8. omanuel says:

    Thank you, Jennifer, for displaying the ability to see the truth and having the courage to speak out.

    Unreported CHAOS and FEAR of nuclear annihilation in late August 1945 seems the simplest and most likely explanation for the widespread corruption of science worldwide after WWII.

  9. This “Homoginisation” process was Peer Reviewed… its data adjustments are “robust”!!

    YOu guys are just in denial.. flat earthers… non-scientists, right wing nutz, conspiracy nutz.. what did I leave off… oh yea… racist bigot homophobe..

  10. Justa Joe says:

    It’s a rap. The warmists have corrupted our temperature record. Averaging all of these local records to come up with some kind of “global” temperature seemed useless to me even before they contaminated the data.

  11. gregole says:

    It’s just real shame there isn’t more actual science being done by the folks with the funding – something is going on climate-wise, and there always is, isn’t there? Instead it seems around the world, and now in Australia, we find that so-called scientists are doing nothing more that fiddling around faking-up the data. They ought to try doing some real science sometime.

    Here is a citizen scientist who has done some very interesting work with temperature data:
    JR Wakefield.

    Sure would be nice if the people being paid to do this work actually did some of it.

    Maybe someday.

  12. geologyjim says:

    At extreme risk of “politically-correct” criticism, I have to say that Jennifer Marohasy (Happy 51st B-Day, dear!) could command a considerable video audience dissecting a subject as dry and analytical as temperature records, and their manipulations by government agencies, wearing this little red dress (I-CCC 9, Las Vegas 2014, H/T Steve/Tony “one hot climatologist”)

    Hell, I’d listen with rapt attention if she were clad in a three-piece suit, but media attention is all about OPTICS, after all.

    I admire your analysis and persistence, Jennifer. Go forth!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *