Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

Yes, he points out that the sun has been quieter for while now producing less
radiation, yet as his shows most of the anomalies are warming despite this. In fact, he thinks if this was the only factor we should be entering another mini ice age and yet the opposite is occurring. Not sure why you think this supports your argument.​

He is talking about the positioning in the ocean of the warm currents Knobby. This stuff is heavy and needs to be read carefully. He is suggesting this positioning of warm currents is causative of colder weather in certain areas.

In recent history, strong El Nino’s that were “eastern-based” generally have been associated with warmer-than-normal winters in the eastern US whereas “centrally-based” weak-to-moderate El Nino’s have been often correlated with cold and snowy winters. For instance, two strong and "eastern-based" El Nino’s that resulted in warm winters in much of the eastern US took place during the winters of 1972-1973, 1982-1983 and 1997-1998. On the other hand, two weak-to-moderate El Nino's that were "centrally-based" and resulted in cold and snowy winters occurred in 2002-2003 and 2009-2010.

There are a couple of reasons why a weak-to-moderate strength and "centrally-based" El Nino can increase the chances for a cold and snowy winter in the eastern US. First, the higher the temperature of the ocean, the more water vapor is released into the atmosphere and this extra moisture tends to energize the southern branch of the jet stream. An activated southern branch of the jet stream, in turn, raises the chances for a storm track across the southern and eastern US. As a result, coastal storms will be much more favorable this winter as compared with last year’s La Nina (colder-than-normal) pattern and east coast storms are generally more favorable for snow in places like the big cities of the I-95 corridor - as long as there is sustainable cold air. Second, a “centrally-based” El Nino tends to favor the formation of higher pressure ridging over the western US with a downstream trough over the eastern US and this type of atmospheric pattern usually allows for numerous cold air outbreaks into the central and eastern US. The findings in a recent publication support the idea of an increased chance for a cold and snowy winter in the southern and eastern US during a "centrally-based" El Nino winter season.

Then he goes on to explain about the importance of snowpacks...

Northern Hemisphere snowpack
In addition to oceanic and solar cycles, the snowpack in the Northern Hemisphere during the autumn season is an important consideration for a couple of reasons when preparing a winter outlook. First, a deeper snowpack across the Northern Hemisphere this time of year will likely result in the formation of colder and denser air masses in the important cold air source regions (e.g, Canada, Alaska, Greenland, Siberia). In fact, Greenland has been exceptionally cold since July which is a bullish sign for cold air mass formation. Second, research studies and empirical observations suggest that snowpack in the Northern Hemisphere during the autumn season can be valuable as a predictive tool with respect to “high-latitude blocking” patterns during subsequent winter seasons.
Specifically, research studies (e.g., Dr. Judah Cohen, AER, Inc.) have actually pinpointed the region in Siberia below 60°N during the month of October as critical with respect to the likelihood of “high-latitude blocking” patterns during the following winter season. If snowpack consistently expands during October in that particular part of Siberia, studies have shown that there is an increased chance for more frequent “high-latitude blocking” configurations in subsequent winter months. Indeed, there has been an increase in snowpack in parts of Siberia during the first part of October and computer forecast models suggest there will be additional accumulating snow in that general region in coming days - so far, a neutral to slightly bullish signal for wintertime “high latitude blocking”. The Northern Hemisphere as a whole experienced above-normal snowpack at the end of September ranking it as the 9th highest snow cover extent in the last 50 years and North America had its highest level ever in that same time frame.

Yes Knobby, there is a very strong suggestion (not spoken of here, other than illustrating how things work climate-wise) according to long measures of climate cycles we are heading toward another mini iceage/global cooling which will be somewhat more unpleasant than global warming. Global cooling will cause cloudier skies (bad luck for solar), higher winds colder weather, higher incidents of plagues (more serious influenza outbreaks and so forth), more intense winter conditions, higher risk of drought as the precipitation which is normally falls on the earth will be held in icepacks.
 
......and for those who hate trying to understand scientific reports like the one I posted above, here is a very easy to understand, well produced documentary. Using highly qualified scientists in their field they give an excellent presentation of what is likely to cause global warming and it certainly isn't poor little CO2. Added to that they address the reason behind the great push to propagandize CC. I hope everyone concerned about CC and society in general takes the time to view this.

 
Ann, if you are relying on The Great Global Warming Swindle to back your view that CC is either just not happening or that greenhouses have little to do with the result - perhaps try again ?

It was sheer rubbish in 2007 and ten years later the facts of steeply increasing global temperatures and the effects of this on crops, forests, ice melt and the entire ecosystem are crystal clear (if you can see past the forest fire smoke).

If you would like a detailed analysis of lies and misrepresentations made throughout this program check out the following.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle
 
Basilio, your little eight minute video is a wonderful example of Climate Change propaganda. Not too long to take up too much peoples' time and not too short so as not to get their agenda across. It is short sweet and will appeal to those who don't bother to find out if it has an agenda or not. As a lot of the genuine scientists who have tried to voice their scientific opinion have complained of being cried down with ever more shrill behaviour from activists with an agenda.

Let's look at who made this little bit of shrill junk, Peter Sinclair is he a scientist? NO!

He graduated from the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor Bachelor of Fine Arts. In the 90's he worked as a graphic artist, is the author of Alex's Restaurant, which was picked up by King Features Syndicate in 1990, after which it appeared in about 50 newspapers. He was a cartoonist, then when the strip was dropped he became a paramedic and then an emegency room nurse. The cartoon strip was about a guy wanting to start vegetarian restaurant.

"Sinclair saw the strip as a way to tap into a social trend he noticed sprouting as the Reagan era drew to a close. Demographers call his target audience “cultural creatives,” a group that transcends traditional political ideology in favor of a path that embraces spirituality, ecology, and holistic health."

Here is a link to the the cartoon and the above quote. https://visualhumor.wordpress.com/2012/06/25/alexs-restaurant-by-peter-sinclair/

He is a self confessed environmental activist whose focus is on climate change and has stated that his concern about global warming results from concerns about the future of his children.

There is a very large well funded Ecology Centre in Ann Arbor, (the area where Sinclair studied his graphic art) which was started in 1970 (during the yippie hippie era) by a group of environmental activists. Sinclair would have been around 17 years old. If you read the link to the comic strip you will see things mentioned in his foreward such as "computer astrology, ginseng beer, aerobic yoga, rune stones, high tech shamans, herbal deodorant, organic petfood, fire walking and drumming circles. (Possibly slighly indicative of his interest in the alternative, co-op/opt-out society).

He is associated with the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, a research center within the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies at Yale University who conducts scientific research on public climate change knowledge, attitudes, policy preferences, and behavior at the global, national, and local scales....... it put out a daily 90 second audio program carried by around 350 radio stations, articles in the media, and a series of videos published monthly, and provided training to help television weather presenters and reporters discuss climate change.

As of 2017 the program was led by Anthony Leiserowitz, who is a human georgrapher at Yale University who studies public perceptions of climate change.

Anyone who can't see a link to self interested groups using spin tactics and propaganda, ignoring genuine sientists and pushing their own barrow is a fool.

As Sinclair said at the end of that video "On the internet nobody knows you are a fraud" Well guess what Pete Sinclair, it is not hard to find out you are a fraud given an hour or two of following the links!
 
Why is our electricity so expensive? Listen to Professor Ian Plimer. First let's see how qualified he is to speak on this subject. ( I am biased, his book 'heaven+earth" is a fascinating read but a really hard read. It seems more like a theses than a book).

A few of his Wiki listed qualifications...

Professor Ian Plimer is an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne,[1] previously a professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide.
Ian Plimer started as a tutor and senior tutor in earth sciences at Macquarie University from 1968 to 1973.[9][10] After finishing his Ph.D., he became a lecturer in geology at the W.S. and L.B. Robinson University College of the University of New South Wales at Broken Hill from 1974 to 1979.[9][10] Plimer then went to work for North Broken Hill Ltd. between 1979 and 1982, becoming chief research geologist.[6][9][10] Due to his publication of a number of academic papers, he was offered a job as senior lecturer in economic geology at the University of New England in 1982.[6][9][10] After two years, he left to become a professor and head of geology at the University of Newcastle through 1991.[3][6] Plimer later served as professor and head of geology of the School of Earth Sciences at the University of Melbourne from 1991 to 2005.[3][6] He was conferred as professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne in 2005,[2] and was a professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide. The list goes on.....

 
Why is our electricity so expensive?
As I’ve posted in great detail on this forum on many occasions, fossil fuels versus renewables is a factor but it’s by no means the biggest influence.

The creation of a false market in what remains a single system is a far, far bigger contributing factor.
 
Well Ann you must have done a lot of research to come up with that debunking of Peter Sinclair. Maybe I can add to that CV later on.

But... what are your thoughts about the points made regarding the documentary you quoted ?
1) The initial complete lie regarding the amount of CO2 volcanoes emit which was edited out very swiftly

2) The second lie where they tried to show a "NASA: graph which was never a NASA graph and in fact attempted to deceive viewers into believing there was relatively little global warming towards the end of the 20th century.

3) The conversation about the Oregan paper by Willee Soon et al which was a documented scientific fraud. That's right the program used as one of its pillars a research paper that was proven to be a fraud.

4) What about the graph that tried to show the Medieval Warm period was "warmer than now ". Another delibrate lie. The graph was 20 years behind then (30 now) and global temperatures have jumped steeply.

5) What about the the creatrivity about the warmth of the Holocene period 6000 years ago which turns out to be quite different to the comments made on teh film ?

6)The next point ? They used the work of Dr John Christy to say that temperatures in the upper atmisphere has not increased and therefore CC was not real. They however neglected to say that Dr Christy had to readjust his figures because "there were errors in the satellite and radiosonde dat that have been identified and corrected" And in 2018 there is no significant differece between the elevated blobal temperatures and corresponding lower atmosphere figures.

7) How about the misrepresentation of Dr Carl Wunsch ? He makes it clear in his interview that he regards global warming as real and very dangerous. However his interview is re-edited to make it appear he did not see see GW as real.

8) Finally the complete flat out lie that tries to correlate what is happening on the Sun with what is happening on earth. The sun does effect the earths climate as it dims and brightens but this effet is small and has been completly outweighed by the effects of increased GG gases in the past 50 years. However this film chose to to show a correlation between sun activity and the earths temperature - but then omitted the last 30 years data which show sun activity falling as the earths temperaure rose sharply. Obviously this fact would have blown their hypothesis out of the water.

Peter Sinclair works very closely with Climate Scientists and creates very accesible videos that explain the often complex nature of the science behind CC. He is also exceptionally good at researching and identifying the mistakes and/or deceptions created by those attempting to undermine reasearch in this area.
https://climatecrocks.com/peter-sinclair-photos-and-bio/
http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=OISM
 
basilio, what you need to understand, science is and should always be open to debate. This is how science advances. To have a group of scientists saying the "the case is closed" about any scientific theory is highly unscientific.

The whole Climate Warming scenario is based around computer modelled projections. These models are merely data imput with a projected outcome. If data imput is skewed to a particular biased outcome, then that is what will spit out.

I don't see the scientists who are seriously questioning the validity of anthropogenic climate change, having a set of spin doctors to advance their cause teaching newsmen and journaists how to think as do the Environmentalists.

The danger I see with all this is when eventually the climate cycle turns and we have long ranging power cuts because of inefficient power production, the mob will turn on all things environmental and throw the whole body out with the bathwater. I can see the Environmental movement losing all its credibility and people will turn away from it all. We only need a few very cold Northern winters and the freezing population will turn away instantly. Watch it happen!
 
But if anyone is interested in just why CO2 is NOT responsible for GW check this out.
http://www.whyitsnotco2.com/

basilio, I am guessing you have no idea what this link is all about. Either that or you are capitulating your stance on GW.

I am guessing it is the former. I can only think you were trying to make a point about temperature differentiation between Medieval warming and current warming using the graph on the top of the linked article to prove it is warmer this time. Sadly the graph you were potentially refering to was a graph plotting planetary orbits not temperature.

global warming.jpg


However, I read on and it appears the person was writing a reasonably complex Physics argument refuting the radiating greenhouse hypothesis. Interesting, worth a read.

His name is Douglas J Cotton B.Sc.(physics & math), B.A. (econ), Dip.Bus.Admin
(former Researcher Officer for Government, part-time Educator and now Researcher into Atmospheric and Sub-terrestrial Physics.
 
These two nutters with their simple methods could be the answer to reversing climate change.

If you don't have much time, watch video link number two for before and after result of Allan Savory's style of Holistic Management.

How to green the world's deserts and reverse climate change | Allan Savory
2.5 million views


Allan Savory - before and after result of his Holistic Management
Examples of Grassland Restoration - Excerpt from Talk by Allan Savory at Tufts University


Our very own, Peter Andrews
How Peter Andrews rejuvenates drought-struck land | Australian Story
 
These two nutters with their simple methods could be the answer to reversing climate change.

If you don't have much time, watch video link number two for before and after result of Allan Savory's style of Holistic Management.

How to green the world's deserts and reverse climate change | Allan Savory
2.5 million views


Allan Savory - before and after result of his Holistic Management
Examples of Grassland Restoration - Excerpt from Talk by Allan Savory at Tufts University


Our very own, Peter Andrews
How Peter Andrews rejuvenates drought-struck land | Australian Story


SuperGlue, I am sorry you feel Allan Savory is a nutter. He has some interesting theories on bunched moving livestock. Joel Salatin runs his stock in a similar way and has lectured down in Tasmania and has a lot of followers there.
 
The danger I see with all this is when eventually the climate cycle turns and we have long ranging power cuts because of inefficient power production
I claim no credentials on the CO2 issue beyond looking at weather trends, some lab experiments and listening to / reading what others have to say on the subject.

On the issue of energy supply however I've gone into rather a lot of detail on this forum in the past as to my concerns that it's going to end badly. The problems in Australia are many and they are entrenched.

CO2 is just one of the issues there however and it is by no means top of the list in terms of either reliability or cost, there's a few other things more important in both cases.

For clarity though I'll repeat my previous warnings that so long as current practice continues it's basically gambling and luck will run out someday, probably with spectacular results when it does.

Power system control, or rather the lack of it, is a problem.

Lack of installed generating capacity is a problem.

Falling reliability of existing plant is a problem compounded by the lack of capacity.

Inadequate fuel supplies being maintained at certain facilities is a problem.

Lack of co-operation between theoretically "rival" companies is another spanner in the works.

Put it all together and it's only a matter of time until it all goes wrong. The details are anyone's guess, that's the nature of power systems, but you can't keep gambling and not expect to lose at some point. :2twocents
 
SuperGlue, I am sorry you feel Allan Savory is a nutter. He has some interesting theories on bunched moving livestock. Joel Salatin runs his stock in a similar way and has lectured down in Tasmania and has a lot of followers there.

It's just a figure of speech. I'm sure in his early struggle to convince the scientific world he is onto something right or him culling of 40,000 elephants, he would have been called one at some stage.

I've watched many of Allan's videos and he did mention in one of his videos that his 20 minute presentation on Ted talk has created worldwide attention than he could have done on his own over his lifetime.
I'm am definitely sure that Allan is onto something right mimicking nature.

Are you running a chicken farm like Joel Salatin does?
 
These two nutters with their simple methods could be the answer to reversing climate change.
I don't know about them reversing climate change, but from watching the video's they may know something about land degradation, which Australia has been doing for years.
Just fly over our farmlands and see the salt pans.
 
Top