The people love to play

Our  BOM ( Bureau of Meterology ) are loved to death , partly because they have heaps of data to play with .
Like all institutions they have their limitations.   
The failed science class (FSC ) who run this country , have their limitations, but they too often have no idea how little they know. 
The failed science class have no idea how little they know because their favoured Authority is overrated and not seen in its proper context. 

The thin walls of political correctness are often built around scientific and practical ineptness. Most Aussies are not good or serious about solid scientific method,  but they will dabble . That dabbling would be fine if that meddling doesn't define the media landscape ( inc internet )as it does now 

The failed science class in   media think old institutions and Academia know things when they don't --both play pretend games, especially when the matter is practical, complex and edgy like fluid and dynamic living world science .

While  I put down the dumbness of BOM to being  not even fit for bookeeping , they also suffer, like all old receptacles of power and influence of NOT being able to resist mad adulation and reform when the many dipsticks and sycophants of instititions  overstate their intelligence and calling ( they are not water engineers)  . 

Most Aussies are not good or serious about solid scientific method,  so they trust the advertisers and noisy ones. This makes us natural gamblers some of the most wasteful smart arses in the world , Try to get a loan if noone knows the odds on your ideas !

Current manipulation of  BOM data  identified  Oct 2026 

Smoothing works, like noise filters on computer files to make things look and sound good to the roving eye.
Its useful when you know what you are doing , but not all errors occur in transcription or can be dealt with that way . 
The fact is particularly with high rainfall in the past , BOM clearly ( say in the Otways ) didn't trust their own volunteers which made the BOM completely unprepared when the Toowoomba floods ( and maybe now Lismore ) came ,

BOM heirarchy wouldn't be the first bunch of graduates to think they know something others don't - esp us bushies. see my story .look up floods here 

We need to tackle the govt on relying on only ONE favoured source when there are many involved ( geomorph , geology , engineers) and many complex interactions producing mere data . http://misplacedconcrreteness.blogspot.com

 ·

Keep at it because the thin walls of political correctness are often built around scientific and practical ineptness. Most Aussies are not good or serious about solid scientific method, but they do dabble .

The failed science class in media think old institutions and Academia know things when they both play pretend games, especially when the matter is practical, complex and edgy like fluid and dynamic living world science .

While I put down the dumbness of BOM to being not even fit for bookeeping , they also suffer, like all old receptacles of power and influence or being unable to resist adulation and reform when the many dipsticks and sycophants of intuitions overstates their intelligence and calling ( they are not water engineers) .

You need to tackle the govt on relying on only ONE favoured source when there are many involved ( geomorph , geology , engineers) and many complex interactions producing mere data . http://misplacedconcrreteness.blogspot.com 

Some people in Authority presume to know things they do not. 

Good men whom  I knew very well and who were quite disgusted  were the official recorders  for Tanybryn ( P O Connor )       Benwerrin ( E Babbington ) and  Boonah. late 80 's ?? Some lost paddocks of potatoes as well . They did their jobs well and having spoken to them many times. I knew their grievance with BOM to be sound. Infact , in 1995 I with the help of mother nature on site ,  got to prove them right . 

I wrote a sound account of the huge 20hr load drop between Boonah and Benwerrin in Nov 1995. These effects are clearly local orographic effects that the bean counters in the BOM couldn't digest then so what hope have we that they are going to own up to being secondrate advisors . in at least some areas now they a re worshipped to support" extreme event prediction " and they don't even factor in orography in their modelling .  

When Toowoomba rain did the same thing recently the dummies were not even ready for such a predictable  flood events . Lismore ?

With SRWSC Vic roads , GWB and Shires in the 80's we were designing structures in streams and could see the picture in effects from top to bottom . I even wrote a piece for the Institute of Engineers to change their flood estimate procedures . 

Even though SRWSC was huge . I thought they didn't employ their scientists well . 

BOM are overated, their ability overstated and no one is going to confession about the inadequate pictures being painted using their limited data and focus  . I will send details to those who show sound interest in repudiating and getting rid of the role of  the failed science class activists who try to run these complex discussions and who don't engage with a range of practical scientists and engineers. One wonders if the govt still have any, let alone any able to operate independently 

Try the survey .

You will note that at least we are serious about the lack of credibility on the subject of CC( Anthropomorphic Climate change) and CT ( Carbon Tax) by NOT lumping them together .Please help readers to decide whether to trust the politicians on this by putting your thoughtful reactions HERE.

Even Charles Darwin wouldn't believe we could be so dumb

As to talk about the Kiribati islands,  as if the sea level is rising on them .( as ABC TV did after 9pm on 9th October 2011)  when SUBSIDENCE is what makes them what they are. 
After all Charles Darwin ,  did the initial research on atolls over 150 years ago and it still stands today . The PC correct junkies at the ABC know better of course.
This week in parliament( with its grand ambition of changing the world with yet another tax)  ,  like this new week at the ABC,  is built on a lie.
 The tax is--- for what purpose and
---what will it achieve


except more innovative chair moving in the halls of the growing government and the media hype industries?
Only fair to warn you , as a earth scientist , that the the biggest landslides we know of occur off these atolls , with the movement often not stopping till kilometres below the surface . The highest coastal cliffs in the world are formed this way ( Hawaiian Island) Charles Darwin, who discovered the mechanism of atol formation over 150 years ago , would , I feel sure, not believe our age could be so filled with such ignorance and arrogance.The island is Kiribiti's ocean island -only about 3 kilometres wide , a few metres high and sea as deep as 3 kilometres all around it

Carbon overview suggests we know little

We certainly aren't told enough ; Our pollies rant and rave about my area of expertise in sequestration in a  manner akin to excited schoolboys playing with gunpowder.  The earth too is more resilient than the MAIN worry warriors would have us believe  ( what would they know really?) . The graph below comes from IPCC and shows the huge volumes of carbon that are captured each year by photosynthesis (450 for land ). It also shows how some form of equilibrium is established in spite of 29 . As the concentration  of carbon dioxide is rate limiting for terrestrial photosynthesis  , the case for increased sequestration by plants and structures  must be better stated before we tax ourselves silly.  Let alone the case for sequestration and use from water bodies (338) R ememember YOU heard it first HERE see earlier posts copyright Emperors academy .

More about emotion than reason?

In an age of reason , we all like to think ourselves very reasonable indeed. However the evidence is against us at a public level as they say (Scientists talk about drivers or equations )when you look at what's driving public debate in march 2011 ( Carbon tax for eg in Australia but also responses to recent disasters ) .  Tell me I am wrong
 Emotion is in the drivers seat.  

 How then can we claim that the strange amalgum of opinion that is the public's is reasonable . We know many of us feel guilty about say , " driving around in heavy machines "( our cars )  so we tend to project the problem onto someone else ( "the government must do something"  )
Why trust such reasoning ?
There is also the persistent myth in secular circles that mere technology (reason) will solve all risk problems .We need a technology to manage humans?  - Some leaders call the technology " a tax"  .
But who drives the use of the tax ? Would you trust either of them  (government or the market?) We have humans in charge - is there really then a way forward? 

Why are so many people in a state of fear ?

Sometimes it seems that the only lasting legacy of the green movement will be to create a sense of fear .
fears  that finally prove pointless .
After all we do need to be careful - but the media and many of the old cynics  around seem to feed on it . What do you think ?
If young people were looking for hope , there is some amongst even the worst real disasters of the year 2010/11.
The panic about water has been doused by immense amounts o water to restore Australia and
 A meltdown in a nuclear reactor in J pans worst case scenario risk situation (emergency  water supply also cut off) isn't expected  to spread waste  very far - so why should we be in too great a panic about well managed reactors .?
Why do we let the media worry young people to the point of panic and inertia ? Julia Gillard has identified the problem but is she too guilty as charged ?

What if carbon oxides are huge buffering agents

You mean they aren't ? Not according to our polys - "who belives polys esp the  ones who talk market but distrust business ?"? The media seem to - strange allegiance - how long can it last ?
As for the basic chemistry controls ( there are a few others but here is one )
While the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere remains the rate limiting factor for photosynthesis, and nearly every leaf on the planet provides evidence of that , I see no reason to worry too much about the very low levels of carbon dioxide  in the atmosphere.
Even Lomborg may have to get used to the idea that his welcome focus on the real issue of alternative energy sources ( rather than Co2) is publicly to lose its biggest driver . 
The eco point is that no civilization will survive change if it mistakenly perceives a threat let alone quickfixes it ( as he is saying most so called responsive governments have done in the last  20 years ) The true focus of all effective sustainability action is that it anticipates the truth - and is not distracted by quickfiz