I was late getting off to sleep on Sunday night, because, having left the windows open for cooling, I found myself having to fend off autumn mosquitoes. Usually, the little monsters are leaving me alone well before March ends. How I wish we didn't have ancient windows that are unsuitable for insect screens!
The Weather bureau tells us that unseasonably warm, sunny days will continue in Sydney for the rest of the week, peaking on Friday with a top of 26 degrees, or about 4 degrees above average.
Some of my American and English friends mocked advocates of global warming during the northern winter because of the extreme cold they experienced. As I remarked then, weather is not climate. And, in Sydney this week, the weather is not the climate, either.
In fact, the expectation is that, sometime on Saturday, temperatures will drop quickly, and ANZAC Day (Sunday) will be quite cold in the morning, warming to a maximum of 23 degrees.
The cause of the change will be the movement of an intense cold front through Victoria and NSW, bringing rain and cool winds
.
On the climate side, Professor David Hand, President of the Royal Statistical Society, a participant in the review of the so-called "climategate scandal", recently concluded that the University of East Anglia scientists had behaved honestly and fairly and had not engaged in deliberate scientific malpractice. In fact, re-analysing the data, he concluded that it shows a clear warming signal.
However, Professor Hand was also critical of the scientists' use of inappropriate statistical methods, which have exaggerated some of the effects of warming. He rejects the infamous "hockey stick" curve which has been criticised by warming sceptics in the past. Hand was surprised that scientists working in the climate change field, where statistical analysis is so vital, had chosen not to obtain more assistance from professional statisticians.
The unfortunate comment by Professor Phil Jones of East Anglia, about a "trick" to "hide the decline" in temperatures was accepted in the report as a mere reference to a statistical technique rather than a devious act to misrepresent data.
An earlier investigation had also concluded that the expression "hide the decline" was scientific shorthand for the act of discarding erroneous data and that, when Jones spoke of a "trick" he meant it was a neat way of handling evidence -- a fairly common use of the term.
One good result of the entire kerfuffle is that, regardless of the outcome of a third investigation focusing on Freedom of Information issues, it is unlikely that climate scientists will be as inclined to hoard raw data or attack their opponents as the East Anglia scientists obviously have been. But, most importantly, the investigations are reinforcing the argument that we are facing climate changes which are at least to a significant extent caused by human activities. And that's something to worry about and act quickly upon.