Resisting Climate Hysteria

[trainspotter]

I think the "horror" is to do with the realisation of how fragile the ice sheet was and understanding the consequences if this swift break up of huge ice shelfs was normal.

Let us not forget that National Geographic is a magazine and not an authority on GW

 

[basilio]

Let us not forget that National Geographic is a magazine and not an authority on GW

And lets not forget the whole story was based on the work of the glaciologists research. They didn't just dream it up.

 

[basilio]

Renewable energies ain't all they are cracked up to be going by what is happening in South Australia and other parts of the world which is pushing up power prices far in excess of what they should be.

Coal is by far the cheapest source of energy.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opin...6199bd2c743a6a

Trouble with The Australian Noco is that they just get it wilfully wrong on issues of climate change and renewable energy. They are total muppets.

The piece you quoted was a justification for coal by trying to say renewable energies arn't reliable enough and far too variable.

Turns out they totally stuffed up the information on what happened in South Australia. What is curious is that the real figures were so far out of kilter but the journalist was incapable/unwilling to recheck them. The error was 30 fold.

Oz’s wind claim deflated

The Australian’s front page “exclusive” attack on wind energy on 20 July was convincing. “Business blows ups as turbines suck more energy than they generate” suggested that South Australia’s wind turbines were drawing electricity from the grid just as the state was experiencing a shortage.

But as Renew Economy pointed out the figures were wildly inaccurate. It took a few days but the Oz admitted its figures were way off the mark. “Figures provided to the Australian by a third party were wrongly adjusted. On 7 July all wind farms in South Australia were producing 189.72MW between 6am and 7am, not 5780MW, and by mid-afternoon energy generation by all wind farms was minus 2MW not minus-50MW.”

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...ions-den-and-circles-the-elephant-in-the-room

 

[noco]

And lets not forget the whole story was based on the work of the glaciologists research. They didn't just dream it up.

Yeah!!!!!!!..says you.....Take a cruz up to Alaska.....go into Glacier Bay and you will see 5 or 6 glaciers falling into the sea as they have done for thousands of years.....Glaciers are moving all the time from the weight of new snow falling higher up.

I have seen with my own eyes...I have lots of photos of them, the same photos that most of these so called scientists take to try and prove a point of Global Warming.

Please Bas, if you can afford it take the cruz and see it for yourself...I did it in 2012......It will amaze you to see chunks of ice the size of a bus falling into the sea....Glacier Bay is full of floating ice.

 

[basilio]

Yeah!!!!!!!..says you.....Take a cruz up to Alaska.....go into Glacier Bay and you will see 5 or 6 glaciers falling into the sea as they have done for thousands of years.....Glaciers are moving all the time from the weight of new snow falling higher up.

I have seen with my own eyes...I have lots of photos of them, the same photos that most of these so called scientists take to try and prove a point of Global Warming.

Please Bas, if you can afford it take the cruz and see it for yourself...I did it in 2012......It will amaze you to see chunks of ice the size of a bus falling into the sea....Glacier Bay is full of floating ice.

Your on a treadmill aren't you Noco ? You see one picture and that is the only piece of information you want to remember and so you repeat it forever.

What is happening with the breakdown of vast ice shelfs and the rapid speeding up of glaciers is a totally different phenomenon to the natural attrition of glaciers down the fiords.

By the way do you still want to believe the wildly wrong predications of the Australian (as long as they support coal and challenge CC )? Thought so..

 

[noco]

Your on a treadmill aren't you Noco ? You see one picture and that is the only piece of information you want to remember and so you repeat it forever.

What is happening with the breakdown of vast ice shelfs and the rapid speeding up of glaciers is a totally different phenomenon to the natural attrition of glaciers down the fiords.

By the way do you still want to believe the wildly wrong predications of the Australian (as long as they support coal and challenge CC )? Thought so..

Bas, you have been told 100 times, it has all happened 1000 years ago and it will happen again.....Get over it.

 

[noco]

The Sun and it's affect on Earth.

Enjoy this scary U-Tube.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/TLUgEXI9RYI?rel=0

 

[basilio]

The Sun and it's affect on Earth.

Enjoy this scary U-Tube.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/TLUgEXI9RYI?rel=0

Well that was a fascinating trip down a huge rabbit hole (or sink hole.)

I think they lost me when they tried to say that the Sun was slowing the earths rotation because of the reduction in solar storm activity. And then the creative analysis of how the stray electrons are causing the earth to move and split and, bingo, huge sinkholes.

Just goes to show anyone can anything on the net and anyone can believe it. Plasma Cosmology folks. 1.1m million views in 4 months.

 

[Smurf1976]

Turns out they totally stuffed up the information on what happened in South Australia. What is curious is that the real figures were so far out of kilter but the journalist was incapable/unwilling to recheck them. The error was 30 fold.

Anyone can check the output of every power station in the National Electricity Market at any time they choose since AEMO (Australian Energy Market Operator) publishes the data online.

It requires some understanding of the grid and which power station is which to understand it, but AEMO also has that data on its public website for all to see. Also available on the AEMO site is interstate power flows both present and historical.

www.aemo.com.au

For those wanting a simplified state by state view have a look here. This data includes estimated production from small (eg household) solar systems as well as large coal, gas, hydro, wind farms, biomass (that's most of the "other"), solar farms and oil-fired power stations. http://www.nem-watch.info/widgets/RenewEconomy/

Most electricity generation companies don't publish detailed data about their fuel stocks and operations online but Hydro Tas does and it's here: http://www.hydro.com.au/system/files/water-storage/storage.pdf

Hydro's historical storage data for the past 6 years is also published and it's here (requires Excel or equivalent to view): http://www.hydro.com.au/system/files/water-storage/storage_summary-4.xls

There's far less secrecy in the power industry than many seem to think and with the modern era of the internet no excuse for someone to get their facts wrong.

For what it's worth, in the pre-internet days obviously live data wasn't available to the public but the SECV, HEC and other state utilities put both average output and peak production for each power station during the past year in their annual reports for many decades so again no secrecy. Fuel consumed was also reported by type (coal, oil etc). And Hydro has been giving out storage data to anyone who phoned to ask or who wanted to publish it (newspapers mostly, usually in the context of recreational use of the lakes) for many decades since it was realised that someone was actually interested in knowing. So again no secrecy.

 

[noco]

When will Tim Flannery ever give up with dud predictions.....

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/tim_flannery_flops_again/

 

[noco]

From: "cairnsnews.org" <comment-reply@wordpress.com>
Subject: [New post] WA engineer destroys global warming myth
Date: 1 August 2016 at 10:33:26 AM AEST
To: dbr2728@bigpond.com
Reply-To: "cairnsnews.org" <comment+pwbx91osfsci5lfqayx09ww@comment.wordpress.com>

Respond to this post by replying above this line

New post on cairnsnews.org



WA engineer destroys global warming myth
by cairnsnews



Miranda Devine
Respected journalist Miranda Devine published the article below October 4, 2015, throws engineered evidence supporting taxpayer funded environmentalist empires selling global warming/ CO2 doomsday/climate change Armageddon to instigate damage control protection of their gravy train.
Dr David Evans makes this statement in the video below that is a must view for concerned Australians - “Official climate science, which is funded and directed entirely by government, promotes a theory that is based on a guess about moist air that is now a known falsehood. Governments gleefully accept their advice, because the only way to curb emissions are to impose taxes and extend government control over all energy use. And to curb emissions on a world scale might even lead to world government ”” how exciting for the political class!”

Harry Palmer - sosnews.org

Source: Miranda Devine- Perth Now - news.com.au - October 4, 2015
A MATHEMATICAL discovery by Perth-based electrical engineer Dr David Evans may change everything about the climate debate, on the eve of the UN climate change conference in Paris next month.
A former climate modeller for the Government’s Australian Greenhouse Office, with six degrees in applied mathematics, Dr Evans has unpacked the architecture of the basic climate model which underpins all climate science.
He has found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly.
He has fixed two errors and the new corrected model finds the climate’s sensitivity to carbon dioxide (CO2) is much lower than was thought.
It turns out the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has over-estimated future global warming by as much as 10 times, he says.
“Yes, CO2 has an effect, but it’s about a fifth or tenth of what the IPCC says it is. CO2 is not driving the climate; it caused less than 20 per cent of the global warming in the last few decades”.
Dr Evans says his discovery “ought to change the world”.
“But the political obstacles are massive,” he said.
His discovery explains why none of the climate models used by the IPCC reflect the evidence of recorded temperatures. The models have failed to predict the pause in global warming which has been going on for 18 years and counting.
“The model architecture was wrong,” he says. “Carbon dioxide causes only minor warming. The climate is largely driven by factors outside our control.”
There is another problem with the original climate model, which has been around since 1896.
While climate scientists have been predicting since the 1990s that changes in temperature would follow changes in carbon dioxide, the records over the past half million years show that not to be the case.
So, the new improved climate model shows CO2 is not the culprit in recent global warming. But what is?
Dr Evans has a theory: solar activity. What he calls “albedo modulation”, the waxing and waning of reflected radiation from the Sun, is the likely cause of global warming.
He predicts global temperatures, which have plateaued, will begin to cool significantly, beginning between 2017 and 2021. The cooling will be about 0.3C in the 2020s. Some scientists have even forecast a mini ice age in the 2030s.
If Dr Evans is correct, then he has proven the theory on carbon dioxide wrong and blown a hole in climate alarmism. He will have explained why the doomsday predictions of climate scientists aren't reflected in the actual temperatures.


Dr David Evans, who says climate model architecture is wrong, with wife Jo Nova who hosts climate change skeptics blog - joannenova.com.au
Dr David Evans, who says climate model architecture is wrong, with wife Jo Nova, Picture: australianclimatemadness.com
“It took me years to figure this out, but finally there is a potential resolution between the insistence of the climate scientists that CO2 is a big problem, and the empirical evidence that it doesn’t have nearly as much effect as they say.”
Dr Evans is an expert in Fourier analysis and digital signal processing, with a PhD, and two Masters degrees from Stanford University in electrical engineering, a Bachelor of Engineering (for which he won the University medal), Bachelor of Science, and Masters in Applied Maths from the University of Sydney.
He has been summarising his results in a series of blog posts on his wife Jo Nova’s blog for climate sceptics.
He is about half way through his series, with blog post 8, “Applying the Stefan-Boltzmann Law to Earth”, published on Friday.
When it is completed his work will be published as two scientific papers. Both papers are undergoing peer review.
“It’s a new paradigm,” he says. “It has several new ideas for people to get used to.”
Editorial:
Unable to find any peer review for Dr Evans findings does not dismiss those finding. It does however keep the gate wide open for environment engineers and their loyal supporters of the gravy train environmental express.
Further, peer review factor is the current tool of the loony greens which is understandable when they develop climate change doom reports having it endorsed only by capitulating peer review.
Posted 2011 - Dr Evans four fatal pieces of evidence- http://joannenova.com.au/2011/09/dr-david-evans-four-fatal-pieces-of-evidence/
posted 2011 - Unknown climate change supporters opinion to Dr Evans - http://www.skepticalscience.com/david-evans-understanding-goes-cold.html
Harry Palmer

cairnsnews | August 1, 2016 at 11:33 am | Tags: Climate Change Skeptics, Dr David Evans, Environmental Fictional Engineering, government corruption | Categories: Agenda 2030, Climate Change, corruption, environment engineering, Global warming, mythmanagement, New World Order, People Control | URL: http://wp.me/p2dFb5-1YG
Comment
See all comments



Unsubscribe to no longer receive posts from cairnsnews.org.
Change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.
Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://cairnsnews.org/2016/08/01/wa-engineer-destroys-global-warming-myth/




Thanks for flying with WordPress.com

 

[trainspotter]

Bluff Knoll Cafe’s Chris Thomas said it had been “very, very cold” for the past few weeks but the snowfall had taken locals by surprise.

“Rangers say that unless the wind is from the south, it’s unlikely,” he told PerthNow.

The last time it snowed in WA was also at Bluff Knoll, which copped two falls within weeks of each other in August and September last year.

Temperatures dipped to 3C at Ongerup, about 70km from Bluff Knoll, on Sunday morning, while Norseman, 726km east of Perth, shivered through an icy -2.9C overnight.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wes.../news-story/13ef81f6a836073960b23dfc25c8a49e?

Yeah ... gotta love global warming

 

[basilio]

When will Tim Flannery ever give up with dud predictions.....

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/tim_flannery_flops_again/

While Andrew Bolt peddles lies and misinformation and people like yourself keep swallowing and regurgitating them as pellets of wisdom you will all stay in an echo chamber of madness.

Noco have you ever actually seen what Tim Flannery said about the ongoing effects of CC ? (that was so expertly twisted..)

So every time it rains or there is a good crop somewhere in the world, we have an attack on Flannnery.

The constant repetition of this nonsense has some saying that Flannery claimed it would never rain again.

In the first place, Flannery’s statement was not a prediction.

It was a statement about the reduced runoff that was actually occurring as a result of higher temperatures. Here is what Flannery said before the part that Mr Bolt quotes:

We’re already seeing the initial impacts and they include a decline in the winter rainfall zone across southern Australia, which is clearly an impact of climate change, but also a decrease in run-off. Although we’re getting say a 20 per cent decrease in rainfall in some areas of Australia, that’s translating to a 60 per cent decrease in the run-off into the dams and rivers. That’s because the soil is warmer because of global warming and the plants are under more stress and therefore using more moisture.

Here is the “prediction” part, after the bit Mr Bolt quotes:

If that trend continues then I think we’re going to have serious problems, particularly for irrigation.

The “prediction’ is what is known in logic as an If, then statement. It does not require the ‘If’ part to be fullfilled to be correct.

It is false only when the warming trend continues, and this does not result in serious problems particularly for irrigators.

Anyone want to argue that?

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/tim_flannery_flops_again/

 

[wayneL]

So you're annoyed that leftist tactics are used against leftists basilio?

 

[basilio]

So you're annoyed that leftist tactics are used against leftists basilio?

Actually I'm just interested in the facts Wayne.

 

[trainspotter]

Actually I'm just interested in the facts Wayne.

No seriously

 

[basilio]

Just so fascinating.

A few posts ago Noco come out for the 16,791st time quoting Andrew Bolt on how spectacularly wrong Tim Flannery was in suggesting dams might not fill again.

This piece of deliberate misquoting has been corrected numerous times but of course that is irrelevant to climate deniers. far more fun to just ignore facts and repost lies. So I chose for the umpteenth time to point out what Tim Flannery actually said and the context of the statement.

Just the facts.

The response from Wayne ? Just another cheap shot attempting to equate Andrew Bolts repeated lies with the work of all recognised climate scientists.

And TS of course who still can't recognise a fact if it jumped out of a birthday cake and bit him on the nose.

 

[wayneL]

The response from Wayne ? Just another cheap shot attempting to equate Andrew Bolts repeated lies with the work of all recognised climate scientists.

Actually bas, I did nothing of the sort.

You should try integrity in your arguments the odd time mate, just a thought.

 

[wayneL]

...and why do you like subjective facts when that is so oxymoronic?

 

[Smurf1976]

Noco have you ever actually seen what Tim Flannery said about the ongoing effects of CC ? (that was so expertly twisted..)

It was / is misquoted extensively by both sides of the debate.

Those on the "green" side twisted it to "dams will never be full again" with an inference that building more dams would be a bad idea. Greens have never liked dams, it's the issue that lead to the party's formation after all, and this was a convenient argument against building more of them.

Those on the "pro-coal" side have mocked it ever since it started raining. Last thing the coal lobby wants is someone with credibility pointing out that climate change isn't just a theory and that it is actually happening right now.

Looking at it factually, well here in Tas I can assure you with 100% certainty that the issue is being taken very seriously and we're all too aware that higher temperatures will reduce runoff into storages even if rainfall remains constant. If rainfall also declines then that's a double impact and the end result is lower inflows.

We're had two abrupt "steps" down in inflows in Tas, one since about the mid-1970's and the second since about the beginning of this century. WA has experienced a similar but more severe trend also with abrupt "steps" occurring at exactly the same time as observed in Tas, thus ruling out any local factors as the cause.

WA's water authorities have responded by downgrading their expectations of surface water availability and have increasingly turned to ground water and desalination to make up the shortfall.

In Tasmania the Hydro has publicly acknowledged the situation, Hydro has done a lot of research into it, and it's publicly disclosed that Hydro is working on the basis that future inflows will be 85% of the 20th Century average for future planning purposes. That 15% downgrade, implemented in two steps along with the changing climate, isn't an arbitrary figure, it's based on actual observations across the system. Hydro has also spent about $400 million on capital works trying to get back some of what has been lost - things like diverting minor creeks into existing storages, a lot of "tweaks" to the system to operate better with the present climate reality and so on. $400 million worth all up, that's a lot of individually small creeks and tweaks, and there's more to come.

The other response in Tas has been major irrigation development for agriculture in a place where, in the past, it just wasn't necessary for most farms to be irrigating on a large scale. Big $ being spent there both by farmers and government.

Back to Flannery, well yes he has been misquoted widely by both sides.