Resisting Climate Hysteria

[Ijustnewit]

Ei nino etc, just a name (highlighted in the Howard era to divert media attention from the term climate change) for weather patterns. Warmth of oceans under El Nino increased substantialy since the term came to prominence, why? Global warming.

I tend to disagree that John Howard invented the term El Nino , it has been known of for the last 10,000 years. Thus the EL and La .

Cultural history and prehistoric information ( from Wikipedia)
Average equatorial Pacific temperatures
ENSO conditions have occurred at two- to seven-year intervals for at least the past 300 years, but most of them have been weak. Evidence is also strong for El Niño events during the early Holocene epoch 10,000 years ago.[86]

El Niño affected pre-Columbian Incas [87] and may have led to the demise of the Moche and other pre-Columbian Peruvian cultures.[88] A recent study suggests a strong El-Niño effect between 1789 and 1793 caused poor crop yields in Europe, which in turn helped touch off the French Revolution.[89] The extreme weather produced by El Niño in 1876–77 gave rise to the most deadly famines of the 19th century.[90] The 1876 famine alone in northern China killed up to 13 million people.[91]

However I will agree that as above we will probably see destruction of cities and people due to it's effects in this modern era as well.

 

[Ijustnewit]

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/wor...ion-about-climate-change-20151228-glw0lw.html

__________________________________________________________


Two possibilities.

1) Crash program in reducing GG emissions over 20 years. Temperature still keep rising to around 2C. Widespread floods, big changes shorelines as sea rises, unknown changes in climate. Millions of people displaced . Final (maybe ) stabilisation of climate in 100 years at unknown temperature

2) Ignore everything. Business as usual. Temperatures just keep climbing and climbing . Feedback loops kick into effect as perma frost melts, forests die and so on. By 2100 almost everyone has nothing to worry about.

http://globalwarming.berrens.nl/globalwarming.htm

Thanks also Bas ,
So I might live enough to see to the emissions reducing targets met. But I will missing seeing the climate stabilize ,
It will be killing me while I'm dead to see if you guys are correct .
Hottest Xmas on record 36 degrees in Hobart the other day and now 7 days in a row of Tornadoes in the U.S also a new record . Thank goodness that something is being done to reverse it.

 

[explod]

I tend to disagree that John Howard invented the term El Nino , it has been known of for the last 10,000 years. Thus the EL and La .

Cultural history and prehistoric information ( from Wikipedia)
Average equatorial Pacific temperatures
ENSO conditions have occurred at two- to seven-year intervals for at least the past 300 years, but most of them have been weak. Evidence is also strong for El Niño events during the early Holocene epoch 10,000 years ago.[86]

El Niño affected pre-Columbian Incas [87] and may have led to the demise of the Moche and other pre-Columbian Peruvian cultures.[88] A recent study suggests a strong El-Niño effect between 1789 and 1793 caused poor crop yields in Europe, which in turn helped touch off the French Revolution.[89] The extreme weather produced by El Niño in 1876–77 gave rise to the most deadly famines of the 19th century.[90] The 1876 famine alone in northern China killed up to 13 million people.[91]

However I will agree that as above we will probably see destruction of cities and people due to it's effects in this modern era as well.

I did not assert that John Howard created the description, it was highlighted under his watch.

I still maintain that it is the description of a weather system

 

[Ijustnewit]

I did not assert that John Howard created the description, it was highlighted under his watch.

I still maintain that it is the description of a weather system

Okay no worries .

 

[explod]

Reports out today that temperatures in the Arctic hitting 40 degrees above normal. It is winter up there and should be 40+ below but recordings slightly above zero are being picked up.

A number of new weather patterns are apparently forming with the possibility of storm disturbances towards the US and Europe in the next week or so that could be even further off the scale.

The Age today- Peter Hannam p. 6

 

[noco]

Reports out today that temperatures in the Arctic hitting 40 degrees above normal. It is winter up there and should be 40+ below but recordings slightly above zero are being picked up.

A number of new weather patterns are apparently forming with the possibility of storm disturbances towards the US and Europe in the next week or so that could be even further off the scale.

The Age today- Peter Hannam p. 6

Peter Hannam is a Global Warming alarmist and has been caught out misreporting on more than one occasion.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...un/comments/the_misreporting_of_peter_hannam/

Then Hannam adds this:

As UK prime minister, Mrs Thatcher was one of the first global leaders to identify climate change as a threat.

She told a 1988 meeting of the Royal Society the increase of greenhouse gases had led some “to fear that we are creating a global heat trap which could lead to climatic instability. We are told that a warming effect of 1 degree per decade would greatly exceed the capacity of our natural habitat to cope”.

What Hannam fails to add is that Thatcher later saw the light:


It is not widely appreciated, however, that there was a dramatic twist to her story. In 2003, towards the end of her last book, Statecraft, in a passage headed “Hot Air and Global Warming”, she issued what amounts to an almost complete recantation of her earlier views.

She voiced precisely the fundamental doubts about the warming scare that have since become familiar to us. Pouring scorn on the “doomsters”, she questioned the main scientific assumptions used to drive the scare, from the conviction that the chief force shaping world climate is CO2, rather than natural factors such as solar activity, to exaggerated claims about rising sea levels. She mocked Al Gore and the futility of “costly and economically damaging” schemes to reduce CO2 emissions. She cited the 2.5C rise in temperatures during the Medieval Warm Period as having had almost entirely beneficial effects. She pointed out that the dangers of a world getting colder are far worse than those of a CO2-enriched world growing warmer. She recognised how distortions of the science had been used to mask an anti-capitalist, Left-wing political agenda which posed a serious threat to the progress and prosperity of mankind.

In other words, long before it became fashionable, Lady Thatcher was converted to the view of those who, on both scientific and political grounds, are profoundly sceptical of the climate change ideology.

Hannam’s omissions make his article deceptive. This is not reporting but propagandising

 

[explod]

Noco, the money lobby tapped her on the shoulder.

Stick to what is happenning.

Surely you are not suggesting that in climate instability as we are seeing it play out now that we don't have a problem.

A search just indicated a number of other independent sources to this report.

But as usual if all else fails attack the person.

 

[Smurf1976]

I tend to disagree that John Howard invented the term El Nino , it has been known of for the last 10,000 years.

Known about in scientific circles for a long time certainly but the general public seems to have only recently become aware of it.

I mentioned it at a public meeting about 20 years ago in the context of drought in Australia. Would have been a few hundred people in that room and every single one of them had a blank look on their faces. In contrast, these days I think most would at least recognise the terms and know that El Nino is associated with drought in parts of Australia.

Today, we're in that same place with the Indian Ocean Dipole. Another cycle that has an impact in Australia, in some areas it's actually more significant than El Nino / La Nina, but there's relatively little public knowledge about the IOD thus far.

ENSO conditions have occurred at two- to seven-year intervals for at least the past 300 years, but most of them have been weak.

Another factor with the impact is the intensity of resource use.

If you go back to pre-1950 then to a very large extent we made no effort to utilise an entire natural resource. We built a dam on a river to supply a town with water, but the town only used a few % of the available water and the rest went down the spillway. The impact of drought was less water going down the river but it had no impact on the town's water supply unless it came to the point of the river literally drying up.

Much the same with agriculture in Australia. We had more than enough land and most of it unused so it wasn't overly difficult to just scale up farming as needed.

Same with hydro power. We've been generating power from the South Esk River (Tas) since 1895, so that's 120 years, but it wasn't until 1955 that sufficient capacity was installed to use the full non-flood flow of the river. So pre-1955, any variation in water flow affected how much water didn't go through Duck Reach power station but had no effect on the power station itself (well, OK, the 1929 flood disaster wrecked the plant and a lot of other things, including many lives lost, but that's another story).

Past - we went to whatever land or river and used a bit of what was available to supply the needs of the time.

Today - we use the whole lot apart from any land or water set aside for reasons of maintaining the natural environment.

So modern society, whilst in some ways seemingly insulated from weather (big cities, global distribution of food etc), is actually more sensitive to weather variation than in the past to the extent that that variation leads to reductions in water availability (for whatever purpose) or food production.

 

[Smurf1976]

As UK prime minister, Mrs Thatcher was one of the first global leaders to identify climate change as a threat.

She told a 1988 meeting

Emphasis mine.

So, the UK PM identifies CO2 as a problem in the midst of massive unrest about coal mine closures driven by her government.

Whether or not she ever believed in there being a problem, it would certainly have been convenient politically at the time to find a problem with coal.

 

[wayneL]

Now that the all the Apocalyptic claptrap has died down somewhat, some science from UofGlasgow.

http://www.gla.ac.uk/news/headline_437014_en.html

'Unprecedented’ storms and floods are more common than we think

Related links
Dr Larissa Naylor
School of Geographical and Earth Sciences


Issued: Wed, 09 Dec 2015 10:50:00 GMT

The recent ‘unprecedented’ flooding in north-west England might be more common than currently believed, a group of scientists has warned. Flooding

A team of experts from the Universities of Aberystwyth, Cambridge and Glasgow have drawn on historic records to build a clearer picture of the flooding.

They conclude that 21st-century flood events such as Storm Desmond are not exceptional or unprecedented in terms of their frequency or magnitude, and that flood frequency and flood risk forecasts would be improved by including data from flood deposits dating back hundreds of years.

Dr Tom Spencer from the University of Cambridge said: “In the House of Commons on Monday (December 7), the Environment Secretary called the flooding in north-west England ‘unprecedented’ and ‘consistent with climate change trends’. But is this actually true?

“Conventional methods of analysing river flow gauge records cannot answer these questions because upland catchments usually have no or very short records of water levels of around 30 or 40 years. In fact, recent careful scientific analysis of palaeoflood deposits (flood deposits dating back hundreds of years) in the UK uplands shows that 21st-century floods are not unprecedented in terms of both their frequency (they were more frequent before 1960) and magnitude (the biggest events occurred during the 17th–19th centuries).”

Professor Mark Macklin, an expert in river flooding and climate change impacts at Aberystwyth University, said: “UK documentary records and old flood deposits dating back hundreds of years indicate that these floods are not unprecedented, which means we are grossly underestimating flood risk and endangering peoples’ lives.

“In some areas, recent floods have either equalled or exceeded the largest recorded events and these incidences can be ascribed to climate variability in Atlantic margin weather systems.

“It is of concern that historical data suggests there is far more capacity in the North Atlantic climate system to produce wetter and more prolonged flood-rich periods than hitherto experienced in the 21st century. Looking forward, an increased likelihood of weather extremes due to climate change means that extending our flood record using geomorphology science must be placed at the centre of flood risk assessment in the UK.”

Professor Macklin suggests that new approaches to flood risk analysis be adopted to include instrumental, documentary and most importantly palaeoflood records.

He added: “Current approaches using flood frequency analysis and flood risk assessment based on 40–50 year long flow records are far shorter than the design life of most engineering structures and strategic flood risk planning approaches. They are not fit for purpose now, let alone in a changing climate.”

Professor John Lewin from the University of Aberystwyth said: “What is needed, is far more resilience for already-developed floodplains, and much more serious insistence that future floodplain development should be virtually curtailed. Somewhere along the line floodplain development has been allowed by local authorities and the UK government to continue regardless.”

Dr Larissa Naylor from the University of Glasgow said: “These floods and the 2013/14 storms have shown us that our landscape is dynamic rather than static – where rivers reshape floodplains and erosion remodels our coastline – with large economic and social costs. We need to urgently consider how we plan our cities and towns, and rebuild in the wake of large flood and storm events, to live safely in our changing landscape.”

Spencer, Lewin, Macklin and Naylor are members of the British Society for Geomorphology’s Working Group on Stormy Geomorphology, who are currently finalising a global state-of-the-art analysis of the role geomorphology science can play in an age of extremes in the Wiley journal Earth Surface Processes and Landforms.

 

[basilio]

So Wayne.

Exactly what is the problem with recognising that there may in fact have been some serious flooding in UK in the past and also acknowledging that the current changes in climate brought about by global warming are adding their own impact ?

 

[basilio]

There is also another view on why the current heavy rains in the UK are causing such widespread flooding.

George Monbiot has penned a piece which demonstrates that a very big factor in the floods has been drainage and flood works designed to protect farmland from flood at the direct expense of towns downstream.

This flood was not only foretold – it was publicly subsidised
George Monbiot

The government pays grouse moor owners to drain their glorified outdoor chicken runs. Meanwhile it’s the proles downstream who get a soaking

A drain cut into blanket bog on the Walshaw Moor estate in the Pennines above Hebden Bridge.
‘Eighteen months ago I visited Hebden Bridge, where activists told me that, thanks to the damage inflicted on the bogs of the moors, it was only a matter of time before the town was wrecked again by flash floods.’

Wednesday 30 December 2015 03.52 AEDT

These floods were not just predictable; they were predicted. There were clear and specific warnings that the management of land upstream of the towns now featuring in the news would lead to disaster. On 9 December one of my readers told me this. “I live in the middle of Foss drainage board land above York, where flooding would not harm a single property but water is sent down as fast as possible to York.” A few days later another reader wrote to me, warning that “upstream flood banks now protect crops, not the city of York”. On 26 December the Foss exploded into York.

It is a complaint I’ve heard repeatedly: internal drainage boards – which are public bodies but tend to be mostly controlled by landowners – often prioritise the protection of farmland above the safety of towns and cities downstream. By straightening, embanking and dredging rivers where they cut through fields, the boards accelerate the flow of water, making flooding downstream more likely. When heavy rain falls, some land must flood. We have a choice: fields or cities. And all over Britain, we have chosen badly.

For several years campaigners in Hebden Bridge have been begging the government to stop the drainage and burning of the grouse moors upstream. Eighteen months ago I visited the town, where activists told me that thanks to the damage inflicted on the bogs and deep vegetation of the moors, which reduces their capacity to hold water, it was only a matter of time before Hebden Bridge was wrecked again by flash floods. Their warnings were not just ignored, but – if such a thing is possible – actively disregarded.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/29/deluge-farmers-flood-grouse-moor-drain-land

 

[noco]

So Wayne.

Exactly what is the problem with recognising that there may in fact have been some serious flooding in UK in the past and also acknowledging that the current changes in climate brought about by global warming are adding their own impact ?

What Global Warming??????....there has been no global warming and that is why the ALARMISTS decided to call it climate change....Yes, we have had climate change for thousands of years and it is all to do with SUN....But the naive still continue to believe the propaganda on Man Made Global Warming these crooks put out on a daily basis.......There was Al Gore at the last Paris conference clapping away as if there had been consensus on man made Global Warming when in actual fact it achieved very little in terms of all countries agreeing to the one thing....They may have been singing from the same song book but they were all out of tune.

It is a farce and a rort started by Al Gore, Tim Flannery and Bank-ki Moon to make money out of emissions trading schemes that Al Gore set up all around the world.

Psst!

 

[explod]

What Global Warming??????....there has been no global warming and that is why the ALARMISTS decided to call it climate change....Yes, we have had climate change for thousands of years and it is all to do with SUN....But the naive still continue to believe the propaganda on Man Made Global Warming these crooks put out on a daily basis.......There was Al Gore at the last Paris conference clapping away as if there had been consensus on man made Global Warming when in actual fact it achieved very little in terms of all countries agreeing to the one thing....They may have been singing from the same song book but they were all out of tune.

It is a farce and a rort started by Al Gore, Tim Flannery and Bank-ki Moon to make money out of emissions trading schemes that Al Gore set up all around the world.

Psst!

So what do you say is causing the extreme warmer conditions in the arctic circle. No sunshine at all in thier winter either.

 

[noco]

So what do you say is causing the extreme warmer conditions in the arctic circle. No sunshine at all in thier winter either.

Sonny, I don't know what they taught you at school but in my high school days we were taught the basics of how the Earth travels in an elliptical movement around the Sun and not a circular track as so many believe....Sometimes the Earth is further from the Sun than at other times...The Earth axis also change its angle to the Sun which creates variations on temperature.......The Sun also has massive explosions equivalent to 60,000 Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs which which radiates to Earth causing variations to Climate Change.

The North Pole can have higher temperatures while the South Pole has much lower than normal temperatures.

I have lived in North Queensland for 44 years and experienced the longest winter in 2015 and so far the summer here has been a mild one with lower than normal temperatures....It has been a very pleasant year although very dry until Xmas when we received 107mm of very acceptable rain.

Perhaps if you do some research on the subject instead of believing these so called GW Science experts who have their so called papers "PEER REVIEWED", you might just get a better grip on the handle of climate change

Ah yes, climate change is all about the weather.

 

[Smurf1976]

There is also another view on why the current heavy rains in the UK are causing such widespread flooding.

It's a very well understood, if apparently ignored, concept that altering the catchment upstream results in a change in runoff downstream.

The idea was actually around in Australia 50 years ago that if we ran short of water at some future time then one way to get more would be to "modify" the catchments in terms of vegetation (primarily) and land form so as to increase run-off from the same amount of rainfall. It wasn't done to any real extent, at least not for the specific purpose of increasing runoff, but the concept is certainly well understood.

Part of the trouble is that in general, the public has a very poor understanding of this sort of stuff such that all manner of silly ideas go ahead and hardly a word is said until disaster strikes.

 

[explod]

Sonny, I don't know what they taught you at school but in my high school days we were taught the basics of how the Earth travels in an elliptical movement around the Sun and not a circular track as so many believe....Sometimes the Earth is further from the Sun than at other times...The Earth axis also change its angle to the Sun which creates variations on temperature.......The Sun also has massive explosions equivalent to 60,000 Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs which which radiates to Earth causing variations to Climate Change.

The North Pole can have higher temperatures while the South Pole has much lower than normal temperatures.

I have lived in North Queensland for 44 years and experienced the longest winter in 2015 and so far the summer here has been a mild one with lower than normal temperatures....It has been a very pleasant year although very dry until Xmas when we received 107mm of very acceptable rain.

Perhaps if you do some research on the subject instead of believing these so called GW Science experts who have their so called papers "PEER REVIEWED", you might just get a better grip on the handle of climate change

Ah yes, climate change is all about the weather.

Champ, . I have been a very close weather watcher from the bush from childhood. I have quoted books of substance on this forum to which you have never commented.

Yes unusually cold up your way which adds further to the displacement of cold from the poles due to Co2 global warming. As stated "40+ degrees warmer on some recent measurements in the arctic".

The sun does play a minute part but never on the scales we see now. I have studied the science and knew all the planets orbits etc at school too.

I am only 70 but do not think your attack of the person "sonny" adds to your credibilty very much.

Again you attack the person for credibilty but it really does the opposite.

 

[Ijustnewit]

Whilst not entirely agreeing with Noco . I think that there are certainly other natural climate changes and the tilt of the Earth and the Sun at play here.
The trouble is the Climate Change / Global Warming pushes rarely speak of such non man made influences on our climate . They see it as a religion that man is responsible and any one who dares disagree is a denier , sceptic and the like. I feel though that the masses have been led astray and brainwashed by a scam / scheme as Noco has stated to make money from Carbon Credit and Trading. It reminds me of when you book and airline ticket and they ask " do you want to offset your carbon footprint for this trip. Honestly , what the ?? get real ! Where do you think the monies raised actually go and what portion gets siphoned off for profits ?
I see S.A and particular Adelaide will have it's hottest December on written records following it's hottest ever November on written records. How much of this can be contributed to man made pollution ? How much of this will be because of naturally changing Climate patterns , and how much is because as predicted we are in claws of one of the worst El Nino's to date.
Was there ever any debate and two vast differences of opinion when the Hydrocarbon , Ozone depleting gas issues was found to be impacting on the Atmosphere and UV levels. I think most people took the evidence as gospel and the World made changes to arrest the situation and stop using Hydrocarbons. Why is then that this time that people are wary of the science and others are full on believers ? Is it because the evidence is so hard to prove this time ?

 

[explod]

Whilst not entirely agreeing with Noco . I think that there are certainly other natural climate changes and the tilt of the Earth and the Sun at play here.
The trouble is the Climate Change / Global Warming pushes rarely speak of such non man made influences on our climate . They see it as a religion that man is responsible and any one who dares disagree is a denier , sceptic and the like. I feel though that the masses have been led astray and brainwashed by a scam / scheme as Noco has stated to make money from Carbon Credit and Trading. It reminds me of when you book and airline ticket and they ask " do you want to offset your carbon footprint for this trip. Honestly , what the ?? get real ! Where do you think the monies raised actually go and what portion gets siphoned off for profits ?
I see S.A and particular Adelaide will have it's hottest December on written records following it's hottest ever November on written records. How much of this can be contributed to man made pollution ? How much of this will be because of naturally changing Climate patterns , and how much is because as predicted we are in claws of one of the worst El Nino's to date.
Was there ever any debate and two vast differences of opinion when the Hydrocarbon , Ozone depleting gas issues was found to be impacting on the Atmosphere and UV levels. I think most people took the evidence as gospel and the World made changes to arrest the situation and stop using Hydrocarbons. Why is then that this time that people are wary of the science and others are full on believers ? Is it because the evidence is so hard to prove this time ?

Do not disagree here. We all realise it is a combination. As well we can throw in deforestation, farming methods and overpopulation.

However evidence suggests that our coal and oil burning is the straw that is tipping the ballance. The sun, its orbit and effects have always been here, oil and coal burning have only gained huge traction in the last fifty or sixty years.

And why are we having such a hot El nino? Climate change in my view.

 

[noco]

Champ, . I have been a very close weather watcher from the bush from childhood. I have quoted books of substance on this forum to which you have never commented.

Yes unusually cold up your way which adds further to the displacement of cold from the poles due to Co2 global warming. As stated "40+ degrees warmer on some recent measurements in the arctic".

The sun does play a minute part but never on the scales we see now. I have studied the science and knew all the planets orbits etc at school too.

I am only 70 but do not think your attack of the person "sonny" adds to your credibilty very much.

Again you attack the person for credibilty but it really does the opposite.

Son..You are still only a boy...I am old enough to be your father and have definitely seen more weather changes in my time than most people.

The Sun has far more than a minute part in the weather...It has a major part and far more than this CO2 man made Global Warming scam that you and the lefties purport to be.

And now don't forget, the ALARMISTS are now in the minority..

Happy New Climate Change New Year and don't let the skeptics boil your blood , it is no good for your health.