Agmates

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) has been instrumental in working with CSIRO to build climate models to predict what our climate will be like in 50-100 years time.

It is these predictions on which Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has based his decision to fight climate change with an emissions trading scheme aka. carbon tax.

Back on the 26th of September we ran an article that showed the BOM’s prediction for rainfall and temperature for just the next 3 months (not 50 years).

Lets have a look how accurate they were.

The first was the probability of exceeding mediam rainfall  (1961-1990) between October and December 2008.

Map Source: Bureau Meteorology.

Now here is the Map of where the rain actually fell for that 3 month period.

Map Source: Bureau Meteorology

You’d have to say, they were not even close.

Now for the temperature prediction. The probability of exceeding average maximum temperatures ( again based on the average maximum from 1961-1990) between October and December.

And bloody hell they were predicting it would be hot.

Map Source: Bureau Meteorology

Now the results for the 3 months have not been posted yet, but here is the first month of Summer - December.

Map Source: Bureau Meteorology.

See the Green, that’s 1-3 degrees Celsius below the average. Thank God for Global warming or we’d be freezing to death - in summer.

The BOM can’t get anywhere near right with their 3 month predictions, but we’ll wreck our economy with an emissions trading scheme based on the Bureau’s 50-100 year predictions.

Apparently we are to believe that while they are hopeless at knowing what the weather will do right now, they are reliable with predictions that are 50-100 years into the future.

It would be ridiculous for anybody to believe that,  except if your Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd who obviously finds it perfectly plausible.

Have Your say.

Once again its not doing what the Climate Change Models are predicting.

Australian Rainfall to the 15th of December. Source Bureau Meteorology

Australia is a big paddock. Not a bad start to summer rainfall, 2 weeks in.

Have Your Say!

We are tracking how the BOM’s weather forecast for October - December across Australia is going.

November rainfall in percentages From the Bureau’s web site

This map compares the rainfall received since the start of the current month with the long-term average for the entire month.

Note areas in Light blue, dark blue and purple are 200% - 400% above the long term average.

November maximum temperature anomalies From the Bureau’s web site:

Monthly mean maximum temperature anomaly for Australia. All temperature anomalies are calculated with respect to the average over the 1961 to 1990 reference period.

Note the areas in light green to blue are -1 to -5 below the average (almost 2/3rds of Australia.)

You’d have to conclude November across Australia was wetter and cooler across the vast majority of the country.

Update 8pm 1/12/2008

A VERY wet November over most of the continent has rescued spring.

November rainfall records were set at sites across the nation, from Albany in WA, around Alice Springs, and just inland from Brisbane.

2008 is probably going to end up coming in somewhere around 10 to 12th warmest year on year for Australia.

Have your say!

I’m going to conduct an interesting little experiment here. The Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) has posted their forecast for October to December for the whole of Australia.

Come January we will be able to pull BOM maps and see how the period compares to these forecasts.

These maps are sourced from the BOM site. The probability of exceeding mediam rainfall between October and December.

The Bureau notes:

• Western Australia - The chances of exceeding the median rainfall are between 75-80pc in the Gascoyne region, Central to Western WA @ 60-70pc with Eastern dropping to 55-60pc.
• Queensland - The chances of exceeding the median rainfall are between 70pc and 75pc for Central Queensland with most remaining areas of the state expected to have a 60-70pc chance of exceeding the median.
• Northern Territory - Eastern NT that has been drought stricken this year has between 60-70pc while Western NT has 55-60pc
• New South Wales - Northern NSW is looking at 60-70pc, Central 60pc and southern 50pc
• In what is not good news for the Murray darling the Bureau predicts drier conditions in southeastern Australia, including Tasmania.
• Victoria - Southern Victoria is predicted to have little hope at 25-40pc. The rest of the state is little better with 40-50pc
• South Australia - Eastern South Australia is given only a 30-40pc chance. Mid North, Eyre Peninsular, Flinders Ranges and pastoral country just 40-50pc. The desert country in the north east 60-65pc.
• Tasmania - Not much hope at all at just 30-40pc for the whole apple island.

Now for Temperature: The probability of exceeding average maximum temperatures between October and December.

At least with temperatures the BOM is consistent. I’m mean with global warming its supposed to be getting hotter.

They have predicted the median maximum temperature for October to December is between 60pc and 75pc for much of Australia, including the eastern states, most of SA, eastern and northern parts of the NT, and southern WA.

So we’ll see in January - won’t we.

.

Have Your say!

.

Got a tip off, article or have you seen a video or item you’d like to be seen by the Agmates Community? If so please email it to us at news@agmates.com

Farmers are more in tune with climate change and nature than any Gaia worshiping dreadlocked greenie or white coated, climate modeling laboratory closeted CSIRO / BOM scientist.

Farmers are the metaphoric “Canary in the Coal Mine” when it comes to Global Warming.

The weather / climate is the most critical external factor in all farming enterprises. Farmers monitor the weather and nature everyday. Walk into any farmers office and you will find meticulously completed rainfall charts for the property going back decades. Every millimetre received on any given day is faithfully recorded on one of the charts.

Farmers even know by watching nature what the coming weather will be and in lots of cases those signs are more accurate than the weather bureau.

.

“IF YOU want to predict the wet, look to the wild. That’s the advice from farmers who say unusual animal activity, such as twin lamb births, loud frog croaks, turtle movements and ant invasions - are a sign of impending storms.“

.

It is really interesting to look at The Old Farmer’s Almanac which has been published in the USA every year for the last 218 years (since 1792).

At the Old Farmers Almanac they know there is climate change, but they like most farmers are Skeptical of the AGW mantra:

.

“Over the past century, climatic conditions have run from cool in the 1900s to warm in the ’30s to cool in the ’60s to warm in the ’80s, and many of us have come to believe that mankind has been responsible for the swings.

Scientists have blamed us for generating warming greenhouse gases, then polluting the air with sun-blocking particulates, and raising temperatures through urbanization, deforestation, and greenhouse gases.

There is another possible explanation for-or, at least, influence on-climate change. This involves natural factors, most notably the Sun and Earth’s oceans.

We at the Almanac are among those who believe that sunspot cycles and their effects on oceans correlate with climate changes. Studying these and other factors suggests that a cold, not warm, climate may be in our future.

.

Follow this link to their site. You can purchase the 2009 Old Farmers Almanac at their online book store. Below is a great pictorial time line from their site.

After two centuries of watching the weather and listening to the wild and exaggerated prophesy of future doom through world warming then ice ages, farmers experience, nous and affinity with nature means they will be the first to know if castasptophic climate change was occurring.

Contrary to what green groups, environmentalist and scientists try and convince the public, Farmers are the ‘Canary in the coal mine‘ when it comes to climate change.

That being the case, ask yourself why the vast majority of farmers are climate change deniers. Farmers live every year like a canary in a coal mine. Like the canary, if farmers stop singing its time to get out.

By they way farmers are still singing especially about this years

“Record world grain harvest, thanks to perfect weather”.

.

Have Your say!

.

Seen a video or you’d like to be seen by the Agmates Community? If so please email it to us at news@agmates.com

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Murray Darling Basin chief executive Dr Wendy Craik are adamant that the drought and water crisis in the Murray Darling Basin is caused by climate change.

Rudd & Craik have both stated that the science proves the link between the current drought and global warming. But are they telling the truth?

Recently Rudd mocked opposition leader Brendan Nelson for saying that it had nothing to do with climate change.

.

BRENDAN Nelson was yesterday accused of being “blissfully immune” to the effects of climate change after he said the crisis in the Murray-Darling Basin was not linked to global warming… “You need to get with the science on this,” the Prime Minister said. “Look at the technical report put together by the CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology.”

.

Dr Wendy Craik [pictured below] says the current drought affecting Australia’s largest river system has the fingerprints of climate change all over it. …

.

“from the Bureau of Meteorology, the CSIRO and places, there are elements we’re seeing in the current water shortage availability that are relevant to climate change.

“The reduction in late winter and autumn rainfall is linked by the Bureau of Meteorology to the intensification of the subtropical ridge and that’s linked to global warming.

“There are features of the current phenomenon that we find ourselves in - water shortage, drought, whatever you want to call it - that are linked to climate change.

“CSIRO scientists … say this drought has the fingerprints all over it.”

.

Agmates has on a number of occasions pointed out how dodgy the science is that Kevin Rudd and Wendy Craik are relying on.

Now Associate Professor Stewart Franks [pictured below] , a hydroclimatologist and an associate professor at the University of Newcastle School of Engineering, very clearly & precisely explains to Prime Minister Rudd and MDB chief Dr Wendy Craik what the science in fact does say:

.

“IS the ongoing drought in the Murray-Darling Basin affected by climate change? The simple answer is that there is no evidence that CO2 has had any significant role…

In fact, the drought was caused by an entirely natural phenomenon: the 2002 El Nino event… In short, the drought was initiated by El Nino, protracted by further El Nino events and perhaps more importantly, the absence of substantial La Nina events…

A key claim is that the multiple occurrence of El Nino is a sign of climate change. This is speculative at best. Recent analysis showed the nine-year absence of La Nina was not unusual…”

.

Fanks then goes onto deal with Dr Craik’s statements:

.

“Indeed, Wendy Craik, the chief executive of the Murray Darling Basin Commission has stated that temperatures were warmer, leading to more evaporation and drier catchments.

This is disturbing to hear from the head of the MDBC, as it is completely at odds with the known physics of evaporation… [ Franks explains the science in detail here]

Craik is not alone in her desire to view CO2-induced climate change as proven and affecting the drought.

Numerous politicians, environmentalists and especially scientists have made spectacular leaps of faith in their adherence to the doctrine of climate change over recent years, too many to document here.”

.

Then Stewart Franks delivers a stingy rebuttal to the Prime Minister:

.

However, the most literally fantastic claim on climate change must go to Kevin Rudd, who has guaranteed that rainfall will decline over coming decades; one can only assume he’s based his view on deficient climate models and bad advice.

There is no direct evidence of CO2 impacts on the drought, nor is there any rational basis for predicting rainfall in 30 years time.

.

Franks last statement will put a chill up the spine of each of us that live and work in rural and regional Australia.

.

One just hopes that sensible and sustainable management from our leaders will enable struggling rural communities to weather the vagaries of climatic and political extremes.

.

So folks, that is what the science actually says. So why does Kevin Rudd and his long serving Public Servant Dr Wendy Craik keep churning out this global warming alarmist hype?

Are Rudd & Craik deceiving the public or are they just hopelessly ill informed by the 100% Government funded CSIRO and BOM ?

.

Have Your say!

.

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd yesterday launched an attack on opposition leader Brendan Nelson for saying the Murray Darling crisis is not the result of climate change:
.

BRENDAN Nelson (pictured) was yesterday accused of being “blissfully immune” to the effects of climate change after he said the crisis in the Murray-Darling Basin was not linked to global warming.

The Opposition Leader told the ABC on Monday night:

“What’s happening at the moment in the Murray-Darling Basin is a consequence of two things: mismanagement of the entire system for almost 100 years and also the worst drought in 100 years.

And it is quite wrong for people to suggest that what we’re seeing at the moment is a consequence of climate change.”

.

Dr Nelson is 100% correct. In fact average annual rainfall has increased according to the very source that Prime Minister Kevin Rudd quotes - the Bureau of Meteorology.

There is no way anybody can blame the drought in Southern Australia on Climate Change, why because its all happened before.

In his attack on Brendan Nelson the PM says:

.

“You need to get with the science on this,” the Prime Minister [kevin Rudd pictured] said. “Look at the technical report put together by the CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology.”

.

In fact it is Prime Minister Rudd who needs to look at the science on this. The report that the PM is referring to predicts more frequent and horrific droughts.

Ecological niche modeler Dr David Stockwell, has checked the report’s modeling and assumptions and found them seriously flawed:

.

“The most worrying failure was that simulations showed increases in droughted area over the last century in all regions, while the observed trends in drought decreased in five of the seven regions identified in the CSIRO/Bureau of Meteorology report.

Therefore there is no credible basis for the claims of increasing frequency of Exceptional Circumstances declarations made in the report.

These results are consistent with other studies finding lack of adequate validation in global warming effects modeling, and lack of skill of climate models at the regional scale.”

.

But wait Dr Stockwell is not the only person who says that the science that PM Rudd is relying on is dodgy.

Ian Castles, is the former head of the Australian Bureau of Statistics He’s also checked the Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO’s controversial report on future droughts, that the Kevin Rudd wants Brendan Nelson to take a look at.

.
The key finding of the report, as presented in the opening words of Australia’s Primary Industry Minister Tony Burke’s [ pitured] media release of 6 July, was that:

.

‘Australia could experience drought twice as often and the events will be twice as severe within 20 to 30 years.‘ …

.

What the Minister Tony Burke didn’t mention was that the report hadn’t been reviewed by outsiders….

.

“As it happens, a peer-reviewed study of the prospective incidence of droughts in Australia has just been published.

The paper ‘Comparison of suitable drought indices for climate change impacts assessment over Australia towards resource management’ appears in the current (August 2008) edition of the International Journal of Climatology - the journal of the UK Royal Meteorological Society.

It is authored by four CSIRO scientists, three of whom were also authors of the BoM/CSIRO report (Freddie Mpelasoka, Kevin Hennessy and Bryson Bates) and two of whom were Coordinating Lead Authors of the IPCC’s 2007 Assessment Report (Kevin Hennessy and Roger Jones)…

In short, the simulations from the two models (of the CSIRO and the Canadian Climate Centre) suggest that in the medium-term (20-30 years) there will be a tendency towards a small increase in drought frequency in most of Australia, but with decreases in drought frequency in some areas.

Although the peer-reviewed study comes from several of the same scientists, it gives no support to the cries of alarm and disaster which have accompanied the release of the BoM/CSIRO report…

The impression given by the peer-reviewed paper is vastly different from that given in the report to the Australian Government.”

.

Or would Mr Rudd like to read what Steve McIntyre had to say. A new scientific paper has tested 18 years of predictions by global warming models against real-world rainfall and temperature. The result found is that when compared to what has acually already happened the climate models are useless.

.

“Geographically distributed predictions of future climate, obtained through climate models, are widely used in hydrology and many other disciplines, typically without assessing their reliability. Here we compare the output of various models to temperature and precipitation observations from eight stations with long (over 100 years) records from around the globe. The results show that models perform poorly, even at a climatic (30-year) scale. Thus local model projections cannot be credible,”

.

However as demonstrated on the recent 60 Minutes program the Prime Minister has undying faith in the IPCC findings. He will let his ‘fact’ not be confused by any amount of new scientific data that does not confirm his beliefs.

Its now about ‘faith’ not science for PM Rudd.

.

DAVID EVANS: I urge them [the Rudd Government] to look at the modern science, the evidence isn’t there. There is no evidence that carbon emissions cause a significant amount of global warming.

PM KEVIN RUDD: I am not, myself, a qualified scientist. I’m elected as Prime Minister of Australia to act on the basis of the considered scientific advice.

TARA BROWN: But it’s never too late to continue the debate is it?

PM KEVIN RUDD: Look at your kids in the eye tonight and ask yourself this question - “If we have this much evidence available to us now “on climate change and just refuse to act, “then what are the consequences for them?” The alternative, however, is to just stick your head in the sand and hope it all goes away.

.

Brendan Nelson should be telling Kevin Rudd “You need to get with the science on this”.

.

…………………………………………………………………………

.

Have Your say!

.

In todays Brisbane Courier Mail the Headlines scream - “The Future is Grim reveals Climate Change Report”

Courier Mail reporter Peter Michaels reports -

QUEENSLAND will become hotter and super-cyclones will batter the coast as far south as Brisbane by 2070, the nation’s top scientists have warned.

“In a top-level ministerial briefing note (that was just by coincidence, funny that) seen by The Courier-Mail, the Reef and Rainforest Research Centre, the co-ordinating body for the nation’s 15 peak scientific bodies, offers stark predictions about climate change.”

Thats the spin - what a pity a professional journalist does not check the facts. He’s what the so called global warming has done in creating Super cyclones in Queensland from none other than the governments own Bureau of Meteorology.

It would have taken Mr Michaels about 5 minutes to find that information.

Scientists are also saying that they can’t find a trend in cyclones. Independent Scientist are questioning the CSIRO’s findings that temperatures are set to soar and drought’s become as frequent as every second year.

The standards of mainstream journalist in Australia is on a downward spiral. It would seem that they are happy to write and print anything that the Government spoon up to them without verifying its credibility.

I wonder if Prime Minister Rudd told them that they sky was falling would they print that. - just maybe?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Have your say!

Last weekend Senior weather forecasters Predicted the best soaking rains for 2008.

“We’ve been watching several computer simulations for the past few days and they are indicating that some of the best rain for 2008 is likely next week, and this is forecast to fall over some of our worst drought affected areas,” Mr Whitaker said in a statement.

“Widespread rainfall totals of 25 to 50mm are likely over large areas of western Queensland, western NSW, northern Victoria and South Australia from Monday to Friday.

Well this is where the rain fell.

The map above is from the Bureau of Meteorology from the 1st to 10th of July. Areas that received over 25mls (1 inch) are green. You can see for yourself how accurate these prediction were just a few days out. They were wrong - what a surprise.

Apparently the scientists can’t be accurate 3 days out, but 30 years from now they can. What a ridiculous assumption / conclusion that is.

Each day we hear of the dire predictions for our rainfall and temperature in 20-30 and 50 years time. We are expected to take this computer modeling seriously (and unbelievably State and Federal governments are) when they aren’t even remotely accurate just days ahead.

Climatologist Stewart Franks an expert in hydro-climatic variability at the University of Newcastle in NSW said scenarios set out by Ross Garnaut in his Emission Trading Scheme recommendations were simply wrong. He said

“The whole idea that you can say that by 2030 or 2040 rainfall will be a certain percentage less is a complete nonsense because it ignores the natural variability,”

Read all that Stewart had to say in an article in this weeks Australian Newspaper. Garnaut scenario ’simply wrong’

New South Wales Treasurer Michael Costa caused a stir this week when he called parts of Professor Garnaut’s report “Chicken Little arguments” (You know -The Sky is falling”) In his column in the Australian he says:

“For example, claims from some quarters that the Great Barrier Reef would be destroyed if Australia, which emits less than 2 per cent of global greenhouse gases, does not adopt an ETS are patent nonsense.

Chicken Little arguments are no substitute for getting right the important details on issues of far-reaching consequence.”

Photo 2: Below is a BOM map showing the % of rainfall received across Australia for the last 2 years compared to the mean.

Federal agriculture minister Tony Burke (pictured below) earlier this month released a joint assessment by the Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO. In particular, the study found exceptionally high temperatures would occur almost yearly, while low rainfall would almost double in frequency from current figures. He said:

“While this is a scientific report, parts of these high level projections read more like a disaster novel than a scientific report.”

“What’s clear is that the cycle of drought is going to be more regular and deeper than ever.”

Minister Burke even though he was being serious is quiet correct. It is just science fiction.

Finally, lets keep it all in a bit of perspective. Heres the BOM map showing the area of Australia that is in drought for the last 2 years. To paraphrase Stewart Franks - we have seen it all before and we’ll see it all again. The good seasons and the bad.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Have your Say! Am I “barking mad” or is all the climate change hysteria something these people are going to look back at and be very embarrassed about?