Resisting Climate Hysteria

[wayneL]

So I think “lukewarmer” is just a subset of “denier” –

You have just disqualified yourself from reasonable discussion altogether.

If it was possible for me to having a lower opinion of you, this comment would have done it.

 

[Calliope]

WOW That must be great great stuff your smokin Calliope. I was desperately trying to figure out just how you saw me as a creationist

More obfuscation - no denial.

 

[wayneL]

More empirical data conflicting with models http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/06/25/antarctic_ice_not_melting/

Twenty-year-old models which have suggested serious ice loss in the eastern Antarctic have been compared with reality for the first time - and found to be wrong, so much so that it now appears that no ice is being lost at all.

"Previous ocean models ... have predicted temperatures and melt rates that are too high, suggesting a significant mass loss in this region that is actually not taking place," says Tore Hattermann of the Norwegian Polar Institute, member of a team which has obtained two years' worth of direct measurements below the massive Fimbul Ice Shelf in eastern Antarctica - the first ever to be taken.

According to a statement from the American Geophysical Union, announcing the new research:

It turns out that past studies, which were based on computer models without any direct data for comparison or guidance, overestimate the water temperatures and extent of melting beneath the Fimbul Ice Shelf. This has led to the misconception, Hattermann said, that the ice shelf is losing mass at a faster rate than it is gaining mass, leading to an overall loss of mass.

The team’s results show that water temperatures are far lower than computer models predicted ...

 

[basilio]

You have just disqualified yourself from reasonable discussion altogether.

If it was possible for me to having a lower opinion of you, this comment would have done it.

Well given that you have never been capable of having a reasonable discussion that is no loss.
In fact the real problem with "luke warmer" just being a subset of "denier" is its accuracy. As I pointed out it's not a good look to be an out and out denier. It is therefore it is far more strategic to suggest that while AGW may be true (even though the evidence is not all in .. and of course never will be . ..) in your view the impact of AGW will not be that bad. We can all cope with it.

Trouble is the overwhelming evidence to date does not support that view.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

I suppose a more constructive question is to ask what scientific evidence would cause you to acknowledge that AGW was not only real but capable of causing quite traumatic effects on the environment and our place in it ?

Or alternatively how absolutely certain are you that there won't be the dramatic effects currently predicted by climate scientists? In the business world no business would accept even a 1-2% chance of a catastrophic outcome ie plane crash, bridge failure.

 

[OzWaveGuy]

Discussing Climate with basilio is like talking to a screaming child....there is no longer any logic, just emotional tears and the impending "end of days" unless a bottle can be found.



A baby simply cannot understand waves of corruption or the now too obvious agenda behind a carbon tax that won't actually change the temperature.

Back to the AGW lapping bowl.

 

[basilio]

More empirical data conflicting with models http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/06/25/antarctic_ice_not_melting/

Excellent.. Perhaps the ice is not melting as quickly as feared in Antarctica. But did you also notice the other story on the same page referring to the rising sea levels off Americas East and West Coast ?

Wayne I could fill this thread with a thousand current studies which delineate the rapid rate of change of ecosystems and temperature patterns around the world. Trying to deflect the argument with one or even a few more "no change stories" just doesn't balance the far greater majority of research evidence.

The depressing part about the changes we have seen is that (according to scientists) there is at least another 1 degree C warming that will happen regardless of any change we make because of the current CO2 levels and stored heat in the oceans.

For what its worth anyone can check out the latest offerings from our scientific community at the Royal Society reference below.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/06/25/sea_level_reports/
http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/365/1549/2019.full.pdf

 

[Calliope]

Where's basilio when you need him?

BRISBANE temperatures have failed to make 20C for four days in a row, the largest run of cold days in four years - and there's more to come.

Large parts of the state also face more cold and miserable school holiday weather today and tomorrow and more comfortable conditions are not expected until Friday.

Some places struggled to get into double figures over much of the central and southern half of the state yesterday.

 

[OzWaveGuy]

Where's basilio when you need him?

The the bubble of make believe AGW warming is further discussed.....here

I suggest Basilio is suckling on the corrupt bottle of AGW hysteria somewhere.

 

[Smurf1976]

Failed to reach 20?

Try 7 degrees. And that's inside this morning at my house. Outside was about zero - frost on the ground and the car was iced up.

 

[sptrawler]

Also smurph, when I phoned my elderly aunty in U.K last weekend, she said it was freezing and summer hadn't arrived. We are talking late June

 

[sails]

Also smurph, when I phoned my elderly aunty in U.K last weekend, she said it was freezing and summer hadn't arrived. We are talking late June

Coldest weather in Qld since the mid 1980s.

If the globe is warming, surely we shouldn't be having record cold weather? Doesn't make sense. It's nothing but an excuse to lift more money from hard working and self supporting Aussies. Shameful, imo.

 

[basilio]

Just to put another perspective on AGW cast your eyes on what is happening in America at the moment (and perhaps recall the catastrophic bushfires in OZ in feb 2008)

US wildfires are what global warming really looks like, scientists warn

The Colorado fires are being driven by extreme temperatures, which are consistent with IPCC projections

Scorching heat, high winds and bone-dry conditions are fueling catastrophic wildfires in the US west that offer a preview of the kind of disasters that human-caused climate change could bring, a trio of scientists said on Thursday.

"What we're seeing is a window into what global warming really looks like," said Princeton University's Michael Oppenheimer, a lead author for the UN's climate science panel. "It looks like heat, it looks like fires, it looks like this kind of environmental disaster … This provides vivid images of what we can expect to see more of in the future."

In Colorado, wildfires that have raged for weeks have killed four people, displaced thousands and destroyed hundreds of homes. Because winter snowpack was lighter than usual and melted sooner, fire season started earlier in the US west, with wildfires out of control in Colorado, Montana and Utah.

The high temperatures that are helping drive these fires are consistent with projections by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which said this kind of extreme heat, with little cooling overnight, is one kind of damaging impact of global warming.

Others include more severe storms, floods and droughts, Oppenheimer said.

The stage was set for these fires when winter snowpack was lighter than usual, said Steven Running, a forest ecologist at the University of Montana.

Mountain snows melted an average of two weeks earlier than normal this year, Running said. "That just sets us up for a longer, drier summer. Then all you need is an ignition source and wind."

Warmer-than-usual winters also allow tree-killing mountain pine beetles to survive the winter and attack western forests, leaving behind dry wood to fuel wildfires earlier in the season, Running said.

"Now we have a lot of dead trees to burn … it's not even July yet," he said. Trying to stop such blazes driven by high winds is a bit like to trying to stop a hurricane, Running said.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jun/29/us-wildfires-global-warming-scientists?intcmp=122

 

[Glen48]

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/doomsday-called-off/
Some thing to ponder:

 

[OzWaveGuy]

Just to put another perspective on AGW cast your eyes on what is happening in America at the moment (and perhaps recall the catastrophic bushfires in OZ in feb 2008)




http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jun/29/us-wildfires-global-warming-scientists?intcmp=122

Are you suggesting that there's been no bushfires until now, because of a trace gas? And humans contribute 3% of this trace gas and you claim as other extremists do that it causes fires? And what about the floods? caused by the same human component of co2 as well?

you're a 100ml short of Full bottle of hysteric awg milk, keep lapping, I'm certain that your the only one left listening to this dribble.

 

[Calliope]

Are you suggesting that there's been no bushfires until now, because of a trace gas? And humans contribute 3% of this trace gas and you claim as other extremists do that it causes fires? And what about the floods? caused by the same human component of co2 as well?

you're a 100ml short of Full bottle of hysteric awg milk, keep lapping, I'm certain that your the only one left listening to this dribble.

Aw, I don't know. I think that Doomsday Baz adds a touch of comedy to this thread. However I am sure he is aware that tomorrow is the Tipping Point when the world will slowly start to regress to another Ice Age, when a bushfire would be welcome.

Tomorrow Gillard's Carbon Tax Kicks In.

 

[Smurf1976]

4 years ago, there seemed to be a lot of genuine concern in Australia about climate change and thoughts along the lines of what we can do about it.

I don't recall hearing anything about that for quite some time now. The entire debate, at least so far as the general public is concerned, has become about the carbon tax itself and not about actual climate change. I have no firm basis to say this, it is just my observation, but my perception is that the Australian population has essentially lost interest in climate change as such, but is very focused on the carbon tax as a tax.

I see and hear plenty of people worried about electricity bills, installing solar panels and the like. But I don't see to many doing anything non-tax related to address the issue. There's still no major trend against air travel for example and much of the push for economical cars seems to have died out too. Just an observation that the tax itself, rather than actually reducing emissions, has become the main focus of the debate.

 

[drsmith]

There's still no major trend against air travel for example and much of the push for economical cars seems to have died out too. Just an observation that the tax itself, rather than actually reducing emissions, has become the main focus of the debate.

Something people will slowly come to understand is the above comes with time as the cost of these activities is pushed slowly but surely beyond the reach of a greater percentage of the population.

 

[sails]

It will be interesting when people get their first power bills after carbon tax is implemented. And their rates bills, etc. Some things won't go up by much, but collectively they will add up.

Why should people pay for a tax that is supposed to help the environment but is most unlikely to do anything of the sort. Shameful, imo.

 

[Glen48]

Peoples attitudes will change as the depression deepens and all of a sudden it will be fighting for survival and the carbon tax will be as about important as who won the 1932 a Melbourne cup.
As things get worse all will move down a notch as each hiccup comes along.

 

[MACCA350]

Was just looking at the Melbourne Water site and found this graph showing the Thompson Dam storage levels from 1985 to 2011:


If you look at this page http://www.melbournewater.com.au/content/water_storages/water_report/water_report.asp you'll see that Thomson Dam is currently at 63.9% capacity. If you draw that on the graph we are back to pre 1998 levels.

Looks to me like the drought has broken. 10yrs of wet, 10yrs of dry, looks like a cycle to me.......nothing more.

Cheers