The BOM has been fudging the numbers
The Australian
A forensic audit has uncovered false readings and widespread errors in the Bureau of Meteorology’s raw climate data, including blocks of temperature readings copied and pasted across different years and seasons, raising questions about the integrity of records used for climate
The BOM has been cooking the books to deliberately cool the past to exaggerate warming in the future.
The BOM used to be a trusted institution of scientific excellence, now it’s a corrupt politicized institution that pushes false data to enhance the climate cult.
The BOM can no longer be trusted.
Investigator Tom Berger, a former computer engineer and specialist in data-based deception analysis, said the bureau had “acknowledged a few trees but denied the existence of the forest”. He said the anomalies identified were so statistically unlikely they would be like winning the lottery every week for a year.
“These are not subtle statistical anomalies; they are obvious patterns of human intervention that should have been flagged by any competent quality control system,” Mr Berger said.
Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.
George Orwell, 1984
By Jo Nova
In science, the raw data is sacrosanct, but a new type of analysis shows hundreds of anomalies and oddities in BOM Raw data, and whole months of supposedly raw records have been cut and pasted, in one instance as far as 40 years earlier.
By Graham Lloyd, The Australian
The raw data duplications are still visible on the BOM website. See the minimum data for 1867 at Sydney Observatory and compare it to 1907.
What are the odds of 31 days in a row of the exact same temperatures to a tenth of a degree?
Some readers will recognize Geoff Sherrington’s name because for years he was an integral part of the group of volunteer BOM auditors that published many examples of strange, dubious, misleading or unbelievable things in the Australian BOM records.
I have a copy of the full report, and will publish it if Sherrington and Berger give permission (possibly after editing).
The Australian has published two articles today and an editorial that calls for an independent forensic audit.:
