Why is Bureau of Met manipulating data re Cyclone Marcia ?

vicr3000
Community Member

 

Why is Bureau of Met manipulating data re Cyclone Marcia ?

 

They said it was a Cat 5 cyclone, yet all the wind speeds, sustained and gusts show that it was only a Cat 3.

In addition, the pressure level never got down to a Cat 5.

 

And regardless of the better building codes compared to Darwin/Tracy in 1974, the damage was no where near a Cat 5.

For a start, the trees still had leaves on them. In all the Cat 5 cyclones in the last 30 years, no trees had leaves

left on them.

 

In addition, "Data for Middle Percy Island has disappeared from the BOM site, but Jennifer Marohasy kept a copy.

(I’m sure the BOM will be grateful!)..."

 

Have a read of this.

 

http://joannenova.com.au/

 

 

IN ADDITION

 

It seems some of the media outlets wewre dissapointed that the damage wasn't worse. That was the impression I got.

Almost like Disaster porn.

 

Any comments ?

 

 

 

 

 

Message 1 of 129
Latest reply
128 REPLIES 128

Re: Why is Bureau of Met manipulating data re Cyclone Marcia ?

Yes 2 large cyclones at once is unusual, so is the extreme cold and snow in the US  ATM Maybe all the snow iis really from a snow machine. Lol

 

global warming means extreme and unusual weather, not just warmer temps though 2014 was the warmest year so far on record

Message 21 of 129
Latest reply

Re: Why is Bureau of Met manipulating data re Cyclone Marcia ?

Maybe the data from cyclone Marcia  was damaged or lost as ithe cyclone crossed the island. Isn't that possible?

Message 22 of 129
Latest reply

Re: Why is Bureau of Met manipulating data re Cyclone Marcia ?

I think I'm going to have to bring out the laughing smiley again. 

Joono
Message 23 of 129
Latest reply

Re: Why is Bureau of Met manipulating data re Cyclone Marcia ?


@j*oono wrote:

I think I'm going to have to bring out the laughing smiley again. 


I think the idea that a stuff-up by Australia's BOM would qualifiy as proof that global warming doesn't exist deserves more than one laughing smiley, Joono. Maybe :Man LOLRobot LOLSmiley LOLWoman LOLCat LOL even 

Message 24 of 129
Latest reply

Re: Why is Bureau of Met manipulating data re Cyclone Marcia ?

Was anyone in eBay in Darwin when Cyclone Tracy went through? I was and believe me it was as bad as it could be. Early Christmas Eve the cyclone went back out to sea, sighs of relief were heard all round and then everyone got on with Christmas Eve parties.

 

But it came back in and only 1 person had stayed back at the bureau, & it was he that got the news out to the rest of Oz

 

Quote 1  "By the time it made landfall, Tracy was packing ferocious winds, with gusts officially estimated at up to 230 km/h—the Bureau’s anemometer at Darwin Airport reached 217 km/h before it was wrecked by flying debris".

Quote 2 "While the official estimate holds maximum wind gusts of about 230 km/h, reconstructions of the night have placed the winds at the Radio Australia transmission station at Charles Point, near where Tracy made landfall, as high as 300 km/h".

 

http://media.bom.gov.au/social/blog/625/remembering-cyclone-tracy-lessons-from-a-perfect-storm

 

I was living in a Darwin suburb at the time and we weren't hit as bad as other places but it was bad enough. We all got evacuated, I went to my sister in Perth but returned to Darwin when we were allowed and no I was NOT a child at the time with bent memories.

 

Were there leaves still on the trees? yes, some, but only in the less hit places.

Was there any power or clean water? nope.

Was there looting? oh you better believe it, my place had next to nothing left in it when I returned with my kids.

Did the Navy do the clean-up? yes some of them did but it was mainly the Army that did the dirty work.

Was the death toll only 60 - 90 people? NO! it was much higher than that but no one will ever know the true number

 

So vicr, just shut your mouth, you weren't there so you don't know - believe everything you read do you? what a fool you are - Sandra

 

 

Message 25 of 129
Latest reply

Re: Why is Bureau of Met manipulating data re Cyclone Marcia ?

Down

The guy I stay with in NT each year at Xmas was in Darwin when it hit.
Took most of his house away.
Message 26 of 129
Latest reply

Re: Why is Bureau of Met manipulating data re Cyclone Marcia ?


@vicr3000 wrote:

Two Cat 4/5's at once, one much further down south than normal.

Same as manipulating (removing) inconvenient temp data, the higher temps now can be made to look more extreme.

I am not saying it is a conspiracy (re the Cyclones), just seems weird when they had actual AND ACCURATE wind data coming in that they forecast it as so high.

Remember, this Cyclone passed directly over an Island just off shore that had accurate wind readings so it's not like they were guessing.

If no Island had been there, then I would understand guessing a bit
but factual data, hard to refute.




'

When dataset was slightly changed there was logical reason given.  The BOM does not change figures for non scientific reasons.  

Message 27 of 129
Latest reply

Re: Why is Bureau of Met manipulating data re Cyclone Marcia ?

glee

Rubbish. Total removal of some data from the set.

"Heat is on over weather bureau ’homogenising’ temperature records"
Some good investigative journalism has been done on the subject.

I have posted the links before so not going to look for them again.


Message 28 of 129
Latest reply

Re: Why is Bureau of Met manipulating data re Cyclone Marcia ?


@gleee58 wrote:
 The BOM does not change figures for non scientific reasons.  

 

 

So, iis it ok to change figures for "scientific" reasons?

 

How very conveniant.

I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Message 29 of 129
Latest reply

Re: Why is Bureau of Met manipulating data re Cyclone Marcia ?


@poddster wrote:

@gleee58 wrote:
 The BOM does not change figures for non scientific reasons.  

 

 

So, iis it ok to change figures for "scientific" reasons?

 

How very conveniant.


Read the reasons before rubbishing the messenger.

Message 30 of 129
Latest reply