Why is Bureau of Met manipulating data re Cyclone Marcia ?

[vicr3000]

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 ?

[vicr3000]

Scientist Jennifer Marohasy who has a house near where cyclone Marcia crossed the coast has some interesting observations...

"...tropical cyclone Marcia made landfall ... just after passing over Middle Percy Island ...There is a weather station on Middle Percy, and it recorded a top wind speed of 156 km/h, the strongest gust was 208 km/h, and the lowest central pressure was 972 hPa. This raw observational data is available at the Bureau’s website and indicates a category 3 cyclone..."

http://jennifermarohasy.com/

[idlewhile]

BOM is under investigation for manipulation and harmonizing data to suit their agenda.

As for the feeding frenzy of TV weather sensationalisation. That's what they do, its like OH look there's a unicorn!!!! they are lazy and incompetent.

[vicr3000]

And we all know what that Agenda is

It was funny, straight after the storm hit, the "2 Cat 5 Cyclones, Global warming headline,

more cyclones down south to come" came out.

[idlewhile]

---

@vicr3000 wrote:

And we all know what that Agenda is

It was funny, straight after the storm hit, the "2 Cat 5 Cyclones, Global warming headline,

more cyclones down south to come" came out.

---

The ABC is running a climate change agenda that is totally biased, wrong and partisan. They are a disgrace and we should have a say in selling it off.

[vicr3000]

I reckon the BOM manipulating data and removing highs and lows
from the past to be far worse.

[2106greencat]

So.......... whatchamean? ........should people complain that is was a cat 3, not a cat 5 ???

Sorry, not quite sure what point you are trying to make.....if it is that the BOM get things wrong, then DUH - where ya been ?

As to the residents who were 'lucky' getting a cat 3, they may argue that point, once they have rebuilt thier homes that is!

[ladydeburg]

---

@vicr3000 wrote:

I reckon the BOM manipulating data and removing highs and lows
from the past to be far worse.

---

Yes I agree, It's not a bureau  we can  rely on ever again. they have been polluted by left ideology like many of our institutions.

[vicr3000]

No, not complaining.

The wind speeds were still coming in, they didn't get wiped out
like say Tracy so they had accurate wind data all the way.

In other words, they should not have made it a Cat 5 and blown it out of all proportion.

They had an Agenda to push, make it worse than it was.

[***super_nova***]

I thought it was 5 and was downgraded by the time it hit land.  Maybe some news outlets missed that bit and kept reporting it was 5.