What a horrible state of affairs when any debate about climate is reduced to ‘Alarmist’ or ‘Denier’ and ‘belief’ is the guiding force. It’s not a religion so why is belief needed unless the facts are a bit thin on the ground.
The Sydney Observatory has temperature records going back to the mid 1800s – easily found online - and they don’t show anything other than normal yearly fluctuation. Good luck if you’re looking for continent wide records – most weather stations were on the East Coast with a few in W.A. and fewer still in the hot heart of the country. There are implications to this lack of detail.
Newspaper records do show a constant stream of record breaking heat ‘outback’ and can be found at the National Library’s on line service via something called ‘Trove.’
The mercury thermometer was invented in the early 1700s so there are less than three hundred years of records to work with.
Here’s the thing that’s most puzzling – ‘97% of all climate scientists agree …. ‘ Really? Asked every single one and they all responded? Obviously not true. Why are those studies not available to the general public when so much is at stake?
I want to know what questions were asked, how the questions were framed and the reason for this and why it matters is that ‘Climategate’ occurred, a very dubious – actually, fraudulent is more correct – massaging of temperature figures to fit a desired outcome.
Bushfire calamities have much more to do with fuel load, drought and a moving of people from cities further into the bush than a 1% temperature rise. It takes very little to break a record.
My purpose in writing this isn’t to start an argument nor to be derided but to caution against a blind belief in what we’re being told.
I do recall scientists saying that tobacco wasn’t harmful. There were other scientists who stated the opposite but somehow their voices were drowned out.