Tim Flannery on Radio National's "Life Matters" this morning talking about the 'extraordinary number of severe events'.
After all his stuffing up (the dams will never fill again, etc) he can he still be paid to go on sprouting his dire predictions?
I've only lived in Queensland for 20 years but can never in this time remember such a cool, wet summer. Hardly breaking any heat records here!
Yet even the maniacal advocate Hansen has grudgingly doffed a cap to the "twenty years pause" in global warming.
And the acolytes are stuck on tthe dogma.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/new-research-confirms-global-warming-has-accelerated.html
New Research Confirms Global Warming Has Accelerated
Posted on 25 March 2013 by dana1981
A new study of ocean warming has just been published in Geophysical Research Letters by Balmaseda, Trenberth, and Källén (2013). There are several important conclusions which can be drawn from this paper.
Completely contrary to the popular contrarian myth, global warming has accelerated, with more overall global warming in the past 15 years than the prior 15 years. This is because about 90% of overall global warming goes into heating the oceans, and the oceans have been warming dramatically.
As suspected, much of the 'missing heat' Kevin Trenberth previously talked about has been found in the deep oceans. Consistent with the results of Nuccitelli et al. (2012), this study finds that 30% of the ocean warming over the past decade has occurred in the deeper oceans below 700 meters, which they note is unprecedented over at least the past half century.
Some recent studies have concluded based on the slowed global surface warming over the past decade that the sensitivity of the climate to the increased greenhouse effect is somewhat lower than the IPCC best estimate. Those studies are fundamentally flawed because they do not account for the warming of the deep oceans.
The slowed surface air warming over the past decade has lulled many people into a false and unwarranted sense of security.
Abbott to 'shoot messenger' on climate
Date
Ben Cubby
Environment Editor
Opposition Leader Tony Abbott said he ''suspects'' Tim Flannery, the head of Australia's Climate Commission, would be made redundant if Mr Abbott becomes prime minister.
Mr Abbott has pledged to abolish the Climate Commission - the federal government's agency for explaining climate science to the public - if elected, along with repealing the carbon price.
...A Climate Commission report released on Wednesday examined links between Australia's extreme weather and human-induced climate change. It found natural events were being influenced by climate change, because greenhouse gases are accumulating and trapping extra energy in the Earth's atmosphere and oceans.
The extra energy meant that natural events were being given an extra kick, meaning heavier bursts of rainfall, more intense heatwaves, and more prolonged dry spells. While heatwaves are not uncommon in summer, eight of Australia's 21 hottest days on record have occurred this year.
The report's lead author, Professor Will Steffen, said the report relies upon the known physics of the climate system, empirical observations of past and present weather, and the variety of mathematical models that can test assumptions from different angles.
''We have seen this basic shift in the climate system, where natural events are amplified because there is more energy in the system,'' he said. ''The different lines of evidence all point to this conclusion.''
It is part of a theme however... if one is listening.
Wayne, that was very deceptive piece of writing you quoted with regard to the paper which explored global temperature changes over the past 11,300 years.
Lets go back to the point of the research.
How can you be so certain that the entire knowledge field built up by climate scientists over the last 40 years (and going back to the 1890's ) is wrong?
Its a big call isn't it ?
Wkiskers the increase in temperatures in Australia of .9C has happened over a hundred years period not two.
That would be catastrophic...
Another observation.
How can you be so certain that the entire knowledge field built up by climate scientists over the last 40 years (and going back to the 1890's ) is wrong?
Its a big call isn't it ?
The first was the controvosy over the actual data.
One apparently confounding point from the article I posted earlier is the temp is apparently increasing more in the deep ocean and under the polar ice cap.
Which apparent controversy do you refer to?
Would you post the source data and research associated with?
Thanks
It was a long time ago, but a google search found this Time magazine article which talks about some of it. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1946935,00.html
The third paragraph of the article
... and note the last par in the context of previous post.
That poses the question of whether the source is more to do with movement in the earths molten core and variations in the mantle thickness with contentional shift, volcanic activity (visible and looming) and solar flares and suttle changes in inter planetary gravitational forces and the cumulative effect on the position of the molten core.
And what was the take away point for you about that "controversy"? i.e. what was the specific evidence from that "controversy" that adjusted your views.
And which part of that study suggested:
Pretty much as I said before... if you come from a psychological/behavioural perspective, the lack of real consensus, hard evidence and the politicking, ie a fear of not being believed without question coupled with the intent to suppress anything that might give critics something to argue with, leaves the integrity of the reporting wide open to 'reasonable doubt' .
Note they mention the decreasing sea surface temperatures in the southern ocean... decreasing as in getting colder.
That poses the question of whether the source is more to do with movement in the earths molten core and variations in the mantle thickness with contentional shift, volcanic activity (visible and looming) and solar flares and suttle changes in inter planetary gravitational forces and the cumulative effect on the position of the molten core.
“The paradox is that global warming leads to more cooling and more sea ice around Antarctica,” says Richard Bintanja, a climate researcher at the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute in Utrecht. Bintanja and his colleagues show that enhanced melting of the Antarctic ice sheet ”” which is losing mass at a rate of 250 gigatonnes yearly ”” has probably been the main factor behind the small but statistically significant sea-ice expansion in the region.
Scientists have known for several years that meltwater from ice sheets can form a cold, fresh layer on the ocean surface that protects sea ice from the warmer waters below. But they were not sure whether that aided the observed expansion of Antarctic sea ice as the new study suggests.
“The paradox is that global warming leads to more cooling and more sea ice around Antarctica,” says Richard Bintanja, a climate researcher at the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute in Utrecht. Bintanja and his colleagues show that enhanced melting of the Antarctic ice sheet ”” which is losing mass at a rate of 250 gigatonnes yearly ”” has probably been the main factor behind the small but statistically significant sea-ice expansion in the region.
So the part where you said:
Was not based on any indication from the study that you referred to?
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?