Thread: Climate Change and our Land of Fire, Flood and Drought.

Originally Posted by 4bee

Wot, like you pray the sun shines each day? Not in Sinney then?

Nah, 4bee, I use it every SUNday!

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

The world is awash in scientific evidence for climate change. You can easily do your own research, you don't need any help to find it. I'm not doing your research for you.

Just to be 101% clear here.
I'm not doing 'research' here.
Never have, never will .. not interested.
As has been stated and implied by others, I'm a non scientist, know nothing forum dwelling, possibly red-neck type.
BUT, I can read and understand stuff.
So I dunno what you've been reading, but my posts have all been about the research done by your so called scientists.
Yet you still reply with these similarly toned responses that somehow I'm doing some research of a non scientific nature or something.

All I've done is post links to climate science claims and data that conflict, or in some cases actually state that they're not really sure they fully understand what they're seeing.

Back on page 80 of this thread, you posted this reply:

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Human activity is increasing global warming. Global warming is heating the oceans which is changing current flows which affects the weather. Africa is having more severe floods while Australia is having more severe droughts. More severe droughts mean less rainfall. Less rainfall means drier land and vegetation, which means fires are more likely and burn hotter and more dangerously, as we've just seen on the East Coast. Wet rainforests have plants which are killed by fire, so if the plants are there it means the rainforest has never burnt. When wet rainforests which have never burnt are burning, as they have during the last month, you know the situation is extreme.

Was asked of you to show the data that supports this. And by data, that means actual data, comparative data from 100 years ago to modern post warming era .. not claims made by scientists or emotionally driven news outlets that clearly defy reasoning.
Scientific data clearly shows that most of the globe(incl Aus) is seeing more rainfall, not less. Droughts are clearly shown to have been worse 100-200 years ago in Aus .. not now.

An obvious question is how do our modern droughts and floods stack up against earlier events? Of the five most extreme single years of drought in the past 500 years (when averaged across all of eastern Australia), not one occurred after 1900.

HERE

That's an excerpt from one of your preferred emotionally driven(which translates to clickbaiting information!) news outlets, saying on one hand that droughts have historically been worse prior to the year 1900 .. when the globe was cooler!
But then on the other another page, basically with the same breath, that droughts are getting worse!
Which is it?
They don't even understand the breadth of their lunacy .. because that's what it is. Contradictory news.

I've posted that the data from the BoM(again, your so called science experts) clearly show that most of Aus rainfall data is on the rise, mainly in the drier parts of the country. The areas that have dropped are the already comparatively high rainfall areas, Vic, Tas and southwest .. and so when averaged out over the whole continent total rainfall for the country has risen in the past 120 odd years.

SO! I've done my reading(not research .. READING!) ... posted the links for you to read if you like. You obviously don't like to read the science created by your scientific community, yet still post the same abrasive output? Why?

Would like to read this "scientific evidence", that you speak of, that shows that rainfall is less, and droughts are worse now.
Only thing the world is "awash" with in these post warming times is rainfall.

And also, don't fall into the trap that rainforests are 'wet' .. there's basically no such thing. Even they 'dry out' .. the most blaring example of this has been the Sahara. 5-8K years ago was a rainforest/forest .. now 3000sq klms of sand. Dried out .. totally.
Land changes, environments change. New Zealand(one of the wettest places in the southern hemisphere) experiences droughts too.
You've fallen into the same trap as the masses .. you see todays news as 'the worst' .. there's no way you, I or anyone on here can remember the previous worse droughts from early settlement. All we know of is todays news. Yesterdays news is always forgotten.
And that's the syndrome that many folks fall into.
I'm young enough to remember the fires of 83, and 06 and 09(here in Vic)
83 dad had friends in Cockatoo, and we took a car load of donatables to the donation centre
06, smoke covered half of Vic from the high country fires. Months of it, unrelenting, for me, some photo opportunities to be had.
09, had to evacuate mum as they lived about 5-7klm south of where the southern boundary of the Kinglake fire happened. Sis had to go get her and take mum to her house.

In their respective days, they were 'the worst' bushfires that ever happened. As an idiot, I also believed these rubbish claims.
People don't seem to want to exercise their grey matter beyond todays news. Yesteryears news is boring!
What happened yesteryear is forgotten, didn't affect us, so is not newsworthy. And todays news is excessively hyped to sell more ad space. But what happened in the past still happened.
Just because YOU prefer to casually dismiss it, doesn't mean it never happened tho.

Originally Posted by 4bee

True to form, I don't understand, nor can follow a word of all that published bollocks on Methane, manic.. Has anyone stopped to consider that their many Cows **** & fart not to mention they burn cow**** on domestic fires?

Back in 2011, our then Federal Government, became celebrated, world stage actors in Methane reduction by contemplating a CO2 credit system for the culling of Australia's million or so camels, even though camels put out less Methane per head (or tail) than sheep or cattle.

Originally Posted by AK83

All you've shown is another link to an opinion piece.
There is zero data offered as proof in that link.

This section from that link:



proof that they are blithering idiots!

How is it that more hot days and less cold days defines an extreme!?
This exact situation is what constitutes global warming .. more hotter days -> thus globe is warming up.
This is not extreme. Just because they can't handle some warm days, doesn't make it extreme weather.

what defines extreme weather events is the variance from one end of the spectrum to the other .. ie. extreme events .. not just one end increasing!

if you just landed in Aus on a 28°C day(and a little humid) from Sweden which was -10°C .. does this mean the weather is extreme in Aus?
No! .. it's just 28°C .. to us it's normal. 40°C in Aus is normal. A heat wave of 40°C or so over 3 days is suddenly an extreme weather event ?

Last Christmas, I was looking forward to heading out to mid central Sth Aus(Broken Hill/Arkaroola area) .. forecast was for 6-7 days straight of 43°C or more!
Looking to head there for that exact reason! .. but according to some soft organed scientist .. this is an extreme weather event.
Far as I can remember .. it's been normal for most of anyone's existence on the continent!

Can't fathom what's wrong with people nowadays.

Anyhow .. the data you're looking from me (personally) was posted back in reply #589 .. look at the graph. Make up your own mind.
Note that extreme weather events should be defined as variances from one end of the scale to the other .. not just how much happened at one end.
Put another way .. it's the range of the weather .. not just what type of weather we're seeing .. eg. how much flood compared with how much drought in a given period(like a decade, or 4 decades or whatever).

That graph I posted in #589 is BoM .. look it up for yourself.
I also posted for others to view the BoM data on their sites. Some others have, but fail to see the obvious. Winters are warming at about 1.0°C over the record period, whereas Summers have only warmed by 0.7°C.
Granted it's a small difference, but a difference nonetheless! .. ie. winter is becoming less so, more like summer.
At that rate, in 5000 odd years from now, people of that era will not know what a winter is! Winter and summer weather will have equalised in terms of average temperatures.
A ridiculous notion to assume that the globe will warm by 1°C per century ... indefinitely(or at least 5000 years) without any variance or anomaly period. Never happened ever in history, no data to indicate that it will.
And if it does, that would mean an average global temp in the mid 70's.

I won't post links to moron opinion pieces, that seek fame and fortune!
I prefer data.
And to be clear, yes that has been a very slight making of extreme weather in the past ~70 years(BoM records). They only start from 1950 for this data set.
Again, for you to find the links posted on numerous occasions, but BoM data shows that intensity of lows and intensity of highs have changed in those 70 years.
FWIW, the actual numerical value in percent terms is less than 0.07% difference.
Average intensity of lows(cyclones) has dropped from 1002hPa to just above 1001hPa .. ie. on average modern cyclones are averaging out to be 0.07% more intense than 70 years ago.

Same with the high pressure systems .. about a 0.05% increase in their intensity.
The data is all there to be seen on the BoM site.

Here's some data - my son at 7 years old experienced the same level of extreme hot days as I did by the time I was 36.

See how climate change has impacted the world since your childhood - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

The data might show a slim change in averages but you also need to consider the prevalence of very hot days (above 40 degrees for example) and their prevalence each year since weather reporting began. The increase is almost exponential.

And here's doctor Karl explaining the difference between belief and acknowledging the science.

Australia's Science Channel | Dr Karl - Do you believe in climate change?

AK83 - I was also keen to see if you have heard about the dis-information campaign by big oil?

Originally Posted by Saitch

Nah, 4bee, I use it every SUNday!

Bless you my son. Go in peace. [Makes sign of the cross.]

Originally Posted by gusthedog

And here's doctor Karl explaining the difference between belief and acknowledging the science.

Australia's Science Channel | Dr Karl - Do you believe in climate change?

AK83 - I was also keen to see if you have heard about the dis-information campaign by big oil?

"1974". Get the feeling there is a lot of slow joes? "1989" science accepted it. Oddly we see a lot of cynics suggesting science makes rash decisions despite that Scientist research and took 15 years to agree to the consensus. The misinformation campaign (Lies) 1991 spooky+++.

Originally Posted by Saitch

Back in 2011, our then Federal Government, became celebrated, world stage actors in Methane reduction by contemplating a CO2 credit system for the culling of Australia's million or so camels, even though camels put out less Methane per head (or tail) than sheep or cattle.

Huh? Unbelievable! I wonder if that took into account the exhaust gases from Camel searching aircraft & many vehicles, Gas from the millions of exploding SLR (probable weapon of choice) rifle rounds, decaying camel corpses left on the ground, water pollution to Stock dams etc, etc,etc?


For what?!