Climate change another name for Weather

[2020hindsight]

There are liars, outliers, and out-and-out liars.

and, like I say, 1998 was an outlier

out·li·er ... A value far from most others in a set of data.

 

[Smurf1976]

I'm reliably told by an electrical wholesaler that standard incandescent bulbs are now "getting hard to get" and that there have been quite a number of large volume purchases which have essentially wiped out their stock. So it looks like not everyone is so keen on filling the house with compact fluorescent lights (CFL's).

As for me, I'm using CFL's where practical and worthwhile but not everywhere. Yes, I've done the maths and here's what I decided based on that. It's influenced by being in a climate where heating is needed most of the time and I don't have an air-conditioner - so the heat given off by a bulb isn't really being wasted.

Dining - CFL dimmable

Lounge - CFL (3 of them)

Hall - CFL

Garage / Workshop - Ordinary fluorescent tubes.

Kitchen - Halogen (not recessed downlights) and I've been unable to find a viable CFL or LED replacement with sufficient light output. A shame given the $20 cost of the special 75W halogen bulbs of which there are 3.

Family room - Incandescent. I can't find a CFL or LED of adequate rating that fits in the light fitting unfortunately. So I'll be sticking with the special 8,000 hour incandescent bulbs I've bought for this one until I can find something else that fits.

Home office / computer room - The old incandescent blew up rather violently so I replaced it with a self-ballasted mercury vapour lamp I happened to have on hand. I'll get a CFL next time now that some nice and bright ones are easily available.

Sensor lights, front entrance, bedroom, toilet, laundry - I've done the sums and I don't see an overall environmental benefit using CFL's in these applications so I'll stick with ordinary bulbs. LED's would be a far better alternative than CFL's but they aren't quite there yet with light output and quality - not far off now though. In the meantime, I've got a box of spare bulbs stashed under the house.

 

[prawn_86]

Well into our second calender week of 'summer' and they are forecasting the weekend to be 19 degrees.

I think we have only had one day above 35 since about April, whereas usually it would be 30+ most days throughout Spring and definitely by now...

 

[jonojpsg]

Well into our second calender week of 'summer' and they are forecasting the weekend to be 19 degrees.

I think we have only had one day above 35 since about April, whereas usually it would be 30+ most days throughout Spring and definitely by now...

Hmm, methinks Prawn that you should check your stats. Adelaide mean max temps for Sep through Dec are mid 20s. Not sure that 30+ most days fits into that?

 

[prawn_86]

Hmm, methinks Prawn that you should check your stats. Adelaide mean max temps for Sep through Dec are mid 20s. Not sure that 30+ most days fits into that?

Usually, from my experience, we get a sustained buildup with increasing temps the further into spring then summer we get, however this yr it just hasn't happened. Still forecasting days below 20 degrees ands its virtually the middle of December...

 

[basilio]

Spooly, that was good research you brought up on the possibility that melting ice floes might start some negative feedback loop in the oceans. I think I can remember scientists suggesting seeding the oceans with iron oxide to stimulate plankton.

Don't think it will be anywhere near a solution but at least it is not a positive feedback loop like many others.

It is an unusually cool summer for the moment Prawn. Thank heavens for that. In fact the world as a whole has been a little cooler this year. It's because we have a La Nina (the opposite of the El Niño) which in Australia's case should have resulted in heavier than normal rainfalls. Didn't quite get that part of the story in southern Australia. It seems that the over riding impacts of global warming have also changed the westerly wind patterns that bring us the spring rains.

Excellent discussion on El Niño/La Nina in Wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Niño

 

[2020hindsight]

thanks bas.
And when El Niño hits next, things will change significantly for the worse.

Good to see someone who looks into this deeper than whether or not they have to wear a jumper last week or not.

 

[spooly74]

Climate inquiry will not question global warming science.

http://www.3news.co.nz/News/Politic...tabid/419/articleID/83484/cat/67/Default.aspx

A parliamentary committee inquiry into climate change policy will not relitigate the science that blames humans for global warming, according to new terms of reference.

The National government has put the emissions trading scheme (ETS) on hold while it conducts a complete review.

What a load of $hite! A complete review my :arsch: !
GW Science is now not even questionable?

Ladies and Gents .... that it not how science works.

 

[Wysiwyg]

Usually, from my experience, we get a sustained buildup with increasing temps the further into spring then summer we get, however this yr it just hasn't happened. Still forecasting days below 20 degrees ands its virtually the middle of December...

Prawn, my suspicion has been confirmed.NASA has just informed me of the reason why South Australia has become cooler than usual.If you take a high vantage point on the Eyre Peninsula and look seaward you will see for yourself.I`m sorry.Goodbye.

 

[jonojpsg]

Prawn, my suspicion has been confirmed.NASA has just informed me of the reason why South Australia has become cooler than usual.If you take a high vantage point on the Eyre Peninsula and look seaward you will see for yourself.I`m sorry.Goodbye.

He he he

 

[prawn_86]

LOL, oh well I had a good run.

Not much here in SA anyway, i doubt we'll be missed :

 

[basilio]

Hi,

Couple of just published articles that forum members might find useful in this discussion.

Firstly the evidence around the world on the accelerating pace of global warming is becoming terrifying. There isn't a more appropriate word.

But at the same time the willingness of deniers to disregard reality( to possibly preserve some mental sanity ) also expands exponentially.

Really worth checking these out. George Monbiot does an excellent job of spelling out how completely deceptive some of the deniers materiel has become.



[

Cyberspace has buried its head in a cesspit of climate change gibberish[/B]
The Stansted protesters get it. The politicians of Poznan don't quite. But online, planted deniers drive a blinkered fiction
Comments (670)

* George Monbiot


We all create our own reality, and shut out the voices we do not want to hear. But there is no issue we are less willing to entertain than man-made climate change. Here, three worlds seem to exist in virtual isolation. In the physical world, global warming appears to be spilling over into runaway feedback: the most dangerous situation humankind has ever encountered. In the political world - at the climate talks in Poznan, for instance - our governments seem to be responding to something quite different, a minor nuisance that can be addressed in due course. Only the Plane Stupid protesters who occupied part of Stansted airport yesterday appear to have understood the scale and speed of this crisis. In cyberspace, by contrast, the response spreading fastest and furthest is flat-out denial.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/09/climate-change-science-environment

Too late? Why scientists say we should expect the worst
As ministers and officials gather in Poznan one year ahead of the Copenhagen summit on global warming, the second part of a major series looks at the crucial issue of targets

* David Adam
* The Guardian, Tuesday December 9 2008

At a high-level academic conference on global warming at Exeter University this summer, climate scientist Kevin Anderson stood before his expert audience and contemplated a strange feeling. He wanted to be wrong. Many of those in the room who knew what he was about to say felt the same. His conclusions had already caused a stir in scientific and political circles. Even committed green campaigners said the implications left them terrified.

Anderson, an expert at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at Manchester University, was about to send the gloomiest dispatch yet from the frontline of the war against climate change.

Despite the political rhetoric, the scientific warnings, the media headlines and the corporate promises, he would say, carbon emissions were soaring way out of control - far above even the bleak scenarios considered by last year's report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Stern review. The battle against dangerous climate change had been lost, and the world needed to prepare for things to get very, very bad.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/dec/09/poznan-copenhagen-global-warming-targets-climat

 

[spooly74]

Hi,

Couple of just published articles that forum members might find useful in this discussion.

Firstly the evidence around the world on the accelerating pace of global warming is becoming terrifying. There isn't a more appropriate word.

Sorry, Basilio, but your above quote (my bold) is garbage. The IPCC couldn't model a haircut. What evidence btw?

Now Rudd is in the firing line....about time too. Hypocrite.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24778428-421,00.html

 

[basilio]

Spooly,

Good story on Kevin Rudd and the amount of CO2 emitted in Kirribilli. I agree that as a matter of principle and leadership Kirribilli house should be a good example. And now is the time to do it. No question at all.

The question of O/S travel is more difficult. The times are demanding. Kevin Rudd does offer a better than average input on world economic issues. I don't think it makes much sense for a PM to simply close up shop. But your right air travel is a big cause of GW gases.

With regard to evidence for the accelerating pace of global warming....
The article I began below details the evidence that is terrifying scientists. Worth a read.

And of course Monbiots story explains how the blindingly obvious is being denied while completely wrong statements on GW are vigorously promoted.

Too late? Why scientists say we should expect the worst
As ministers and officials gather in Poznan one year ahead of the Copenhagen summit on global warming, the second part of a major series looks at the crucial issue of targets

* David Adam
* The Guardian, Tuesday December 9 2008

At a high-level academic conference on global warming at Exeter University this summer, climate scientist Kevin Anderson stood before his expert audience and contemplated a strange feeling. He wanted to be wrong. Many of those in the room who knew what he was about to say felt the same. His conclusions had already caused a stir in scientific and political circles. Even committed green campaigners said the implications left them terrified.

Anderson, an expert at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at Manchester University, was about to send the gloomiest dispatch yet from the frontline of the war against climate change.

Despite the political rhetoric, the scientific warnings, the media headlines and the corporate promises, he would say, carbon emissions were soaring way out of control - far above even the bleak scenarios considered by last year's report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Stern review. The battle against dangerous climate change had been lost, and the world needed to prepare for things to get very, very bad.[/QUOTE

]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...targets-climat

 

[2020hindsight]

Well many would argue (including that previous adviser to Tony Blair - already posted - he's included in the ABC debate on the Great Global Warming Swindle) that it's moved past the science (where the massive majority of scientists agree anyhow - it's now entered the "security" stage. (where even if the IPCC is half right, then there's still a hell of a problem out there in the future, between deserts on the one hand, and sea levels on the other.

This article just added to the ABC website a couple of hours ago :-

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/10/2442933.htm?section=justin

Protect climate change refugees, conference hears
Posted 2 hours 13 minutes ago
Updated 2 hours 14 minutes ago

There has been a call today for human rights protection for people who are forced to leave their homes because of rising sea levels.

Experts and representatives from affected island nations met in Canberra today for a United Nations-sponsored conference to discuss the forced displacement of people because of climate change.

One of the organisers, Scott Leckie, says the majority of people who will be forced to migrate will be from the larger nations such as China and Bangladesh, rather than small islands.

"Current predictions indicate that 50 million to 1 billion people are going to be forcibly displaced from their homes and lands over the next 40 to 50 maybe 100 years due to climate change," he said.

"Each one of these people are rights holders and they need to be treated as rights holders in the context of what happens when they need to flee their homes and lands because of displacement."

On the 60th anniversary of the Declaration on Human Rights, representatives from nations who face forced climate migration are sharing their stories.

Betarim Rimon from the Republic of Kiribati says rising sea levels are affecting his nation's entire population and he is pessimistic about his island nation's survival.

"Our days are numbered and that's a great concern and fear to all of us," he said.

Mr Leckie says governments need to address the issue from a human rights perspective.

"People are already moving, people are moving from the atolls north of Bougainville and Papua New Guinea to Bougainville right now as we speak," he said.

 

[2020hindsight]

PS
As posted elsewhere, this is what the Brits are ultimately on about with the global warming debate ... the last speaker on this youtube (Rowley) was an adviser to Blair.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=277569&highlight=Rowley#post277569

Great Global Warming Swindle ABC Debates Part 6/9

"Nick Rowley, Climate Change Strategist - of UK gives a great summary...
balancing the risks of getting this wrong

on the subject of observed global warming , if you look at the great bulk of the world's climate scientists, around 98% of them really accept that basic science, - that is as close to certain - almost - as you can get - in relation to science.

Yet there are uncertainties, essentially about the future - and a future prediction is always going to be uncertain - and that's why, when you look at the IPCC reports, you have scenarios - lower, middle, and upper scenarios - and for mine, I very much hope they are wrong .

I very much hope we don’t HAVE a problem. But I think when you look at the balance of evidence, we DO. So when you look at those scenarios, and where we are travelling in relation to that warming , where it actually gets scary is not with the warming effects, it's with the severe climate effects are going to be of that warming.

And that's when we had briefings - from major scientists and others - at 10 Downing St, THAT's when it gets very frightening. That's when scientists actually become ashen faced. , and say "well, I can't really say what is really gonna happen with THAT amount of carbon in the atmosphere, and THAT amount of warming, and therefore what's gonna happen with respect to severe weather.

THat's when this issue is not actually about science.

It's about security
It's about economic security
It's about our physical security
in relation to the human population movements that may well occur IF the future predictions prove even half right.

As Rowley says (from the Brit point of view) ...

"essentially it's not the science, it's actually the policy responses to the magnitude of the risk. "

So even if UK stays pleasantly cool , thanks to changes in Gulf stream etc , there will be a problem from the environmental refugees of the future (remember Greymouth NS is the same latitude south as Portugal is north - obviously the gulf stream is a major factor - so matter what some around here would say )
Remember that the sea level has risen 175mm (7") in100 years, and the rate is increasing.

 

[awg]

I think it is interesting to note that aprrox 12,000 yrs ago, the climate changed from Ice Age, and heated up to an estimated average up to 4 degrees hotter than today, ( over several thousand years) according to info quoted in a book i read by Jared Diamond.

It has been postulated that this lead to large scale glacial melting, with many effects, including one theory, that the rising Mediteranean flooded the Black Sea, via the Bosphorous Strait, about 8000 yrs ago, leading to widespread great flooding mythology, such as Noahs Ark, Tale of Gilgamesh etc.

There is considerable geological evidence to support this.

in fact it is known beyond doubt, that sea levels have fluctuated vastly over time.

IMO, greenhouse gases, human factors, are certainly impacting on this natural process, just no one can say exactly how much.

One thing i think can be said for certain is that sea levels are rising, and will continue to rise, unless a new Ice Age kicks in.

So those super beachfront locations like Wamberal, Collaroy ( and Bangladesh) are going to be worth less than they are now.

fortunately (for me), my place is atop a high cliff

 

[wayneL]

This is getting hysterical.

I beginning to believe it's actually some form of mass psychosis.

It's certainly noting to do with science.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

This is getting hysterical.

I beginning to believe it's actually some form of mass psychosis.

It's certainly noting to do with science.

Agree totally.

Science is ongoing.

This is godbothering.

Weather is weather.

Stick your head out the window, don't call a loser like Al Gore.

gg

 

[So_Cynical]

This thread is a great example of why its best to avoid threads like this.:sheep::bonk::error::chainsaw:

There is a great sailing book called "Heavy Weather Cruising" it's about
handling heavy weather in small yachts on the open ocean...anyway ill
always remember a line from it that goes something like this.

"being able to predict weather with modern equipment is helpful, however
the weather will be whatever it is, and that is what you will have to deal with."

The Scientific consensus is that, the ultra long range forcast is for
increasing GW and climate change...and thats what we have to
prepare for...it would be grossly irresponsible to do anything else.


http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Adlard-Coles-Heavy-Weather-Sailing/Peter-Bruce/e/9780071592901