Scientists begging for a global assessment. Source ChatGPT
Alarmism Climate Science Government funding of science Opinion

Big cuts to CSIRO Aussie Science Jobs, but Climate Research is Protected?

3 days ago
Eric Worrall
26 Comments

Essay by Eric Worrall

Scientists are claiming CSIRO job cuts will impede climate research. But the CSIRO has testified to the Senate there will be no impact on “the scale of research” into Climate Change.

Scientists call for urgent funding as hundreds of CSIRO job cuts loom

In short: 

Further details about the up to 350 jobs losses expected at the CSIRO are likely to be announced this week.

A CSIRO scientist fears the cuts will harm Australia’s ability to adapt and respond to climate change, but the science agency says that’s not the case.

What’s next?

A union branch representing CSIRO scientists is calling for urgent funding to stop the job losses.

…

The Environment Research Unit is expected to be hit hardest with 130—150 positions, or up to 21 per cent of its workforce, flagged for cuts.

But the CSIRO has told a Senate inquiry the changes “will not impact the scale of research that the CSIRO undertakes in relation to climate change”.

…

The CSIRO staff association told a Senate inquiry it believed “fundamental research lacking industry partners” was vulnerable to cuts, even if it was essential to the public.

“Examples included research related to air quality and smoke detection, the integration of long-term field modelling with complex vadose modelling, biotechnology and climate modelling research,” it said.

…

Read more: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-03-10/csiro-call-for-urgent-funding-as-job-cuts-loom/106433192

This follows on from big environmental science cuts in Canada.

Even Canada is Walking Back Environmental Funding

Interesting that climate modelling “fundamentally” lacks in industry partners. You would have thought green industry champions like Twiggy Forest would have provided a bit of support.

I had to look up “vadose modelling”, apparently it relates to the speed at which pollutants enter the water table. Water table pollution and salt contamination is a big deal for Aussie farmers, so I’m surprised agricultural associations aren’t providing some support.

There were hints elsewhere in the article that some scientists thought the environmental science department was pushing funding into questionable activities, but that might be the usual academic back stabbing.

I find it fascinating both Australia and Canada are cutting environmental science funding at the same time.

In the Canada article above I hypothesised that Canadian cuts were because of government revenue shortfalls, and that may play a part, but why would both Australia and Canada announce the same cuts in the same short space of time? Why cut real world observations while allegedly maintaining funding for climate modelling? If anyone has more insight into what is happening, please leave a comment.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
By subscribing, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of service.
5 7 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
Register
26 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
J Boles
March 9, 2026 6:08 pm

We know all we need to know – climate models don’t work, they really are worthless.

33
Fraizer
March 9, 2026 7:02 pm

“…changes “will not impact the scale of research that the CSIRO undertakes in relation to climate change”…”

Well, yeah. It just doesn’t take that many people to make stuff up.

31
Clive Bond
Reply to  Fraizer
March 10, 2026 4:15 am

And that’s what the CSIRO does with climate change.

3
RickWill
March 9, 2026 7:33 pm

CSIRO – Nn point in having an Industrial Research Organisation when there is no industry other than Climate Change™ scamming.

Australia’s economy is flushing faster than Germany and likely neck and neck with UK.

The easy way to stop burning coal is to kill off heavy industry and manufacturing. Australia is going well on that front.

32
Pop Piasa
March 9, 2026 7:47 pm

I’m thinking maybe God put the land of Oz at the bottom of the globe for a reason…

0
Mr.
Reply to  Pop Piasa
March 9, 2026 8:44 pm

Yep.
To keep it sane while the rest of the world went gaga.
(And then they imported all the craziness. Poor fella my country)

7
KevinM
Reply to  Mr.
March 10, 2026 7:54 am

In Australian schools, are maps and globes “upside down”, ie Antarctica on top?

0
Redge
Reply to  Pop Piasa
March 9, 2026 11:27 pm

I’m thinking maybe God put the land of Oz at the bottom of the globe for a reason…

No one knows if the north is “the top” of the Earth in any literal, scientific, or objective sense, because the Earth is (roughly) a sphere floating in space, and space has no inherent up or down, top or bottom.

So Australia could be at the top of the globe … for no reason.

4
Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Redge
March 10, 2026 8:53 am

The axis on which is spins defines a top and a bottom, but does not define which is at which pole.

3
Harold Pierce
March 9, 2026 8:16 pm

Harold The Organic Chemists Says:
“No Warming In Adelaide Since 1857”

Shown in the chart (See below) is a plot of the annual mean temperature in Adelaide from 1857 to 1997. In 1857 the concentration of CO2 in air was ca. 280 ppmv (0.55 g CO2/cu. m. of air) and by 1997 it had increased to ca. 367 ppmv (0.72 g of CO2/cu. m. of air), but there was no increase in air temperature in this port city. Instead there was a cooling that began in ca. 1940. In 1997 the annual mean temperature was
16.7° C.

To obtain recent Adelaide temperature data, I went to:

https://www.extremeweatherwatch.com/cities/adelaide/average-temperature-by-year.

The Tmax and Tmin temperature data from1887 to 2025 is displayed in a long table. The computed annual mean temperature was 17.4° C. In 2025 the concentration of CO2 in the air was 426 ppmv (0.84 g CO2/cu. m. of air.). The slight increase in the annual mean temperature of 0.7° C is well with in the range of the natural variation of the annual mean temperature.

The reason there was no increase in the air temperature in Adelaide with increasing CO2 concentration is quite simple: There is too little CO2 in the air to absorb enough out-going long wavelength IR light to heat up the air. This chart also falsifies the claims by the IPCC that greenhouse gas CO2 cause global warming and is the control knob of climate change.

Perhaps CSIRO could use this “overlooked research and data” to convince Premier Anthony A. and the Canberra Climate Cartel to abandon their draconian climate agenda and the goal of Net Zero by 2050. Australia is mostly desert. Does CSIRO really need so many researchers to study the vast desert. How many researchers in the universities are conducting the same or similar research?

The chart was obtained from the late John L. Daly website: “Still Waiting For Greenhouse” available at http://www.john-daly.com. From the home page, page down to the end and click on “Station Temperature Data”. On the “World Map” click on “Australia”. There is displayed a list of stations. Click on “Adelaide”. Use the back arrow to return to the list of stations. Clicking on the back arrow again displays the “World Map”. John Daly found over 200 weather stations located around the world that showed no warming up to 2002.

NB: If you click on the chart, it will expanded and become clear. Click on the “X” in the circle to contract the chart and return to Comments.

Be sure to check the new website: https://www.extremeweaterwatch.com.
On the home page there are links in light blue to the weather and climate data of a great many weather stations in the NOAA and CRU data bases.

adelaide
9
Chris Hanley
March 9, 2026 9:05 pm

If anyone has more insight into what is happening, please leave a comment

Paging Nick Stokes … Paging Nick Stokes ,,, Paging Nick Stokes.

6
John in Oz
March 9, 2026 9:15 pm

“I find it fascinating both Australia and Canada are cutting environmental science funding at the same time.”

Mr Carney was in Oz recently so perhaps they have decided to merge efforts so are removing duplication

See:
http://www.pm.gov.au/media/australia-canada-joint-statement

for more fluffery on our relationships

Only 2 mentions of ‘climate’

7
leefor
March 9, 2026 11:25 pm

When even Labor can’t support paradigm, something has to give.

3
PariahDog
March 10, 2026 12:45 am

A CSIRO scientist fears the cuts will harm Australia’s ability to adapt and respond to climate change, but the science agency says that’s not the case.

Of course it won’t have any impact. Any LLM can churn out a junk climate science paper for a fraction of the cost of a “real” climate scientist.

13
Forrest Gardener
Reply to  PariahDog
March 10, 2026 1:30 am

Yes but can an LLM churn out the fake data to go with the fake paper and the fake peer review.

Silly question. Of course it can.

Full speed ahead and damn the torpedos.

6
Eng_Ian
Reply to  Forrest Gardener
March 10, 2026 1:35 am

If not LLM, then AI will dot the Is and cross the Ts.

Jobs for the boys is soon to be jobs for the toys.

5
Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Eng_Ian
March 10, 2026 8:58 am

Wrong. AI will dot the Ts and cross the Is. 🙂

0
Forrest Gardener
March 10, 2026 1:22 am

“harm Australia’s ability to adapt and respond to climate change”?

What ability to adapt and respond?

And what ever can the CSIRO possibly be contributing to this non existant ability.

I thought they gave up cloud seeding years ago. Or perfected it. Or something.

3
Tom Abbott
Reply to  Forrest Gardener
March 10, 2026 3:45 am

As if actions by Australia could have any effect on the Earth’s climate.

Ignorant hubris. Expensive, economy-destroying hubris.

8
AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Forrest Gardener
March 10, 2026 4:10 am

Ironically, Australia’s “ability to adapt and respond” is being “harmed” by only one thing – the economic destruction of “climate policies.”

4
Rod Evans
March 10, 2026 2:30 am

There are some interesting notes to this story.
The fact the CSIRO claim the cuts will not impact their climate change science investigations suggests they are not doing much in that field beyond table top research or modelling activity back in academia.
It might of course mean the long established ‘settled science’ position of so many of the institutions has resulted in no studies being carried out anyway, I mean what is the point of studying the established science???
The various international bodies tasked with scientific investigation across the World, might do well to remember Feynman’s truth.
“If observations do not match the theory then the theory is wrong”.
With that in mind, it might be worth deploying the fewer remaining CSIRO operatives to field work looking for the markers of the CO2 drives climate change theory, to see if they can actually find any evidence of it being true. That would of course mean getting out of the office and away from the modelling computers which might be a request too much for our modern scientific investigators….

8
AGW is Not Science
March 10, 2026 4:13 am

“The (climate) scientists” are the ones claiming that “the science” is “settled.” It is therefore only natural that their budget should be “net zeroed.”

8
bobclose
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
March 10, 2026 5:00 am

Well said AGW! The CSIRO has been negligent over climate issues for two decades and deserves punishment for sticking with the UN climate orthodoxy over CO2, when we know water vapor controls the greenhouse IR effect. It’s more recent pronouncements on the energy transition have if possible been more irresponsible, with its excoriated GenCost 2023 report on relative energy generation costs, that surprise-surprise supported the Government’s `cheap’ renewables program over costly nuclear or coal power.
The CSIRO is now a failed entity and like the BoM needs the tender mercies of a real Royal Commission to expose its faults, omissions and disinformation in relation to both the nonexistent climate emergency and its support for the current climate-useless energy transition policy process. As predicted by science and engineering realists, this transition is failing badly, causing our industrial economy to contract, forcing cost of living increases and reducing our power security thus weakening national defense security. The only people making money these days are the public servants, politicians and the renewable power industry lobby, well done Labor and the Greens/Teals.

5
ntesdorf
March 10, 2026 3:51 pm

The very CSIRO staff who are involved in ‘Climate Change’ research are the first ones who should be sacked. The ones being sacked are the productive staff.

0
sherro01
March 10, 2026 7:34 pm

I was employed by CSIRO for a couple of years as I finished a B.Sc degree and then became a post-grad employee. Apart from copious recreation, learning to play a better bridge game, we did serious work on the import and testing and spreading of improved pasture legumes and grasses for northern Australia’s beef cattle industry. My boss of the Division, Dr. Les Edye, won the valued CSIRO Medal for this work.
At this time, 1960-70 era, CSIRO was on the world scene for the development and distribution of the technique and instrumentation for Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry, AAS. This led to a significant improvement globally in detection limits and accuracy of chemical analysis for a number of metals.
CSIRO was also in global radio telescope science with its involvement at Parkes, being in the Southern Hemisphere where it was placed to receive signals from the Apollo 11 moon landing.
CSIRO developed the mineral Partially Stabilised Zirconia PSZ, then developed its use as an oxygen sensor in high temperature environments such as furnaces and smelters.
There were other original advances that helped the world with science. Notably, some of these resulted in physical devices, whereas in recent years the CSIRO output seems to be more in words.
I was proud of the CSIRO. I only saw it in non-political mode. Geoff S

0
hdhoese
March 11, 2026 8:16 am

“I had to look up “vadose modelling”, apparently it relates to the speed at which pollutants enter the water table.” Is this similar to “climate-change velocity” occurring in National Parks according to a 2026 paper in Conservation Biology. Vados is not in my out of date dictionary. Did they mean vacuous? “Emptied of or lacking content?” Pollution problems, including rates, used to be solved before the days of “new math.”

0
wpdiscuz   wpDiscuz

Related Posts

Alarmism Climate Propaganda

Climate Change — Where the Experts Make Fools of Themselves

8 hours ago
Guest Blogger
Alarmism Opinion

Study: “The strange and persistent psychological distance between us and climate disaster”

12 hours ago
Eric Worrall
Alarmism Bad science journalism Drought

Sorry, The New Republic, Climate Change Isn’t Causing Somali Migration. Blame Civil Strife and Poverty

16 hours ago
Guest Blogger
Climate Politics Net-Zero Opinion

Guardian: Net Zero would be Less Expensive than One Persian Gulf Oil Crisis

20 hours ago
Eric Worrall