- Joined
- 24 December 2005
- Posts
- 2,601
- Reactions
- 2,065
As I was saying folks...Rob has a rude, arrogant, bombastic and bullying manner and just does not seem to be able to recognize his problem or control himself as confirmed by his current post.
First, you are either dishonest in your remarks, or not bright enough to work out you were.
Second and thirdly, you have displayed utter ignorance of climate science in the majority of your posts.
I really don't care who you respect here as it does not change what you post, nor the science which you are incapable of appreciating, even after being told.
You feign vilification, whereas you will not stop posting rubbish.
Ann, defend what you write on climate and there will be no problems.As I was saying folks...Rob has a rude, arrogant, bombastic and bullying manner and just does not seem to be able to recognize his problem or control himself as confirmed by his current post.
Anne,
you mentioned you have adult dyslexia, AKA Dementia. I was wondering maybe, if your having a bad day ?
I read your posts, and do wonder.
Dementia and the Late Onset of Dyslexia
This post examines the differences between Semantic dementia (SD), a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by loss of semantic memory in both the verbal and non-verbal domains AND Semantic Aphasia (AD), a progressive neurodegenerative disorder or aphasia, characterised by the loss of recognition of the meaning of words and phrases.
https://dyslexiauntied.blogspot.com/2012/08/dementia-and-late-onset-of-dyslexia.html
Back to what is happening with regard to Global warming. A nerw reality that is not going to go away or become cooler.
March was Australia's hottest on record, with temperatures 2C above average
Hot weather came after sweltering summer and unusually dry season in Western Australia and the Northern Territory
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...-on-record-with-temperatures-2c-above-average
Bas, I don't understand this. I am guessing it is my dyslexia, so I will talk it through with you and perhaps you can clarify it for me....
On the BOM site it says...
(1) March was the warmest on record for Australia as a whole.
(OK, I am understanding this statement, I believe) It was the hottest March the whole of Australia has ever had since records began. (OK so far?)
(2) The national mean temperature was warmest on record, at 2.13 °C above average.
(I am understanding this statement I believe) The mean temperature for all of Australia was 2.13C above average for the whole of Australia since records began. (OK so far?)
(3) The mean maximum and minimum temperature for the month were both second-warmest on record, at 2.35 °C and 1.90 °C above average respectively.
This statement at (3) is what is getting me stumped. If I translate this it says to me, the mean maximum and minimum temperature for March for the whole of Australia were both the second-warmest March on record but not the warmest March on record as said in (1) and (2).
This is the problem with dyslexia, I have to translate in my mind every word I read and then I have to make sure when I put those words together it makes sense. This can take several readings in order not to be misunderstanding things. It is a long process. Occasionally, as in this instance I cannot come to a conclusive understanding of what is being said as it appears to me to have two different conclusions.
Although I haven't read the BOM data, those 3 statements are not incompatible from a mathematical point of view Anne.
As I see it, the first two are relating to the average temperatures between 0:00 and 24:00 for March for the whole of Australia and the 3rd is relating to the average maximum and average minimum for each day in March for the whole of Australia.
Firstly the 3rd piece of data can be relative to March data from two different years. The average for this March for the 24 hours is the highest on record. However, the minimum average may be less than that of March in year X that had a higher minimum average and the maximum average may be less than March in year Y that had a higher maximum average. March year X may have had fairly high minimum averages but not particularly high maximum averages. The opposite for year Y. It may have had high maximum averages, but the night time temperatures were not particularly high.
And it is even possible to have 3 still valid if X and Y are March of the same year. In March of that year the daily minimums may have been high and the maximums were also high, but the later may have been reached just for say 1 hour in the day and quickly fell back. For this year, the minimum and maximum for March may have been lower than March that year, but during the day the temperature stayed near the high point for several hours in the day.
It's the distribution of temperatures throughout the day that allows those statements to be compatible.
Thanks, I really appreciate you taking the time to try to explain this to me bellenuit. My takeaway from what you said is it all depends on how figures are presented as to what the outcome may be. Got it!
Monthly average temperatures use each the measured maximum and minimums. This inclusive figure was the warmest for a March month in Australia.This statement at (3) is what is getting me stumped. If I translate this it says to me, the mean maximum and minimum temperature for March for the whole of Australia were both the second-warmest March on record but not the warmest March on record as said in (1) and (2).
Not that I am aware as we do not yet use technology which measures hourly temperatures and averages these across the day. See here.t's the distribution of temperatures throughout the day that allows those statements to be compatible.
None of your post was about the actual science.The Apocalypse Has Been Postponed
In recent years, the controversial subject of global warming and a potential “climate disaster” has received a lot of media attention.
There are progressive politicians who are now arguing that unless profound changes in public policy are made to reduce worldwide carbon emissions, we face an impending world-wide climate related catastrophe.
Former Presidential aspirant and Vice-President Al Gore was one of the first national personalities to raise the subject of global warming and the potentiality of an impending climate related catastrophe with the release of his Oscar-winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth in 2006.
Needless to say, such dire prognostications have gained the attention of both the scientific and political communities. So important is the issue of global warming, in 2016, many different countries around the world agreed to sign the “Paris Agreement,” an accord within the United States Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC), pertaining to greenhouse gas-emissions and other climate related issues.
The Paris Agreement’s long-range aspiration is to regulate the economy to keep the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels; and to limit the increase to 1.5 °C, since this, it is claimed, would substantially reduce the risks and effects of climate change.
However, the Paris Agreement has had its detractors, as evidenced by U.S. President Donald Trump who announced in June 2017, that he would withdraw the United States from the agreement.
In the nation of France itself, the Paris Agreement has been controversial and gave impetus to the “Yellow Vests movement,” a populist grassroots protest movement that saw hundreds of thousands of citizens mobilize against French President Emmanuel Marcon and his government for significantly raising taxes at the pump in an effort to reduce fossil fuel consumption out of concerns related to global warming.
Conversely, many political progressives in the United States have decried and protested President Trump’s decision to pull out of the Paris Agreement and have argued that the citizens of earth are sitting on a virtual ticking time bomb and have issued dire warnings that we have just a decade to avert an unparalleled catastrophe of unfathomable proportions.
Some of these progressive politicians and purveyors of the “Green New Deal” have argued that unless the United States government spends trillions of dollars on combating the epic destruction almost certain to come in approximately a decade or a little more, it is almost certain that the world will come to an end due to climate related foods, droughts, epidemics and killer heat waves without parallel in human history.
While I will not contest that we all need to care about the environment and avoid polluting the earth, I find it interesting that those who say that there is an impending climate disaster, keep pushing the date further into the future when such a worldwide cataclysm is supposed to take place.
Case in point: Al Gore distributed his documentary An Inconvenient Truth to the American public in 2006. In that film, Gore argued that the world come to an end in ten years due to global warming from the release of that film.
However, that was thirteen years ago, and we now find ourselves in the year 2019 and the global warming apocalypse has not yet taken place.
Similarly, progressive superstar Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said recently that she thinks that there is an urgency needed in addressing man-made climate change, warning that it will "destroy the planet" in a dozen years if humans do not address the issue, no matter the cost.
The fever pitched alarmism over global warming seen in the contemporary progressive circles appears to be a form of “secular apocalypticism,” that foretells that the eminent destruction of the earth is just right around the corner.
The main function appears to be to convince voters and taxpayers to acquiesce to ever-higher taxes to combat climate change. But it has apparently become necessary to keep pushing the date for such an impending climate related catastrophe further and further into the future. As the Steve Miller Band song once said, “Time keeps on slippin', slippin', slippin' into the future.”
OK, I think I am getting this Rob with your more succinct delivery, thank you. So with the first one they are measuring the average high temperatures for each day of March which some are higher than on record and then they measure the average low temperatures for the month. Then they average these figures.Monthly average temperatures use each the measured maximum and minimums. This inclusive figure was the warmest for a March month in Australia.
Separately the maximum temperatures are averaged, and the minimum temperatures are averaged.
There has been one hotter mean maximum March and one hotter mean minimum March.
As soon as anyone uses Al Gore in their diatribe, you can pretty well throw their message out the window.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?