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

Originally Posted by bob10

Prove it.

The proof is in the data.
Data = how many people now compared to before, and how much more capacity created to serve those additional folks.

The problem with proof is from the climate change zealots .. literally no proof other than the temperatures are rising.
Zero proof that water availability in the environment is decreasing, as a result of warming, and proof exists(in the data) that it's actually increasing(as expected both historically and logically).

To say that artesian wells are diminishing as a result of global warming is ludicrous.
Wells diminish as a result of consumption. They take years to replenish. eg. the GAB .. it's not going to fill up again in 50 or 100 years .. it takes thousands to millions of years for it to replenish.
It's current level is not due to global warming(a totally stupid notion), if global warming has happened as a consequence of human activity over the past century, then it should still be as full as it was when those rains filled it a million years ago.

So what would cause the GAB to have lowered by an estimated 50% or more in 200 odd years?
Or are you implying that global warming has been an issue for millions of years now?

You can't have your cake and eat it .. it's one or the other. Global warming is only a recent phenomenon, or it's a long term issue.

Why the GAB has been diminished .. roxby downs alone uses 42 Mlt /day!

If you want 'proof' that more rains come with a warming globe .. already posted .. several times. If you choose to ignore proof and have a preference to believe 'conjecture' as proof .. then that's your call.

As with what Tombie posted re the BoM's predicted outlook for rainfall in the future.
You don't need the BoM to tell you this! It's historically captured over the course of 120+ years .. next year will bring above average rainfall. It's happened before .. countless times.
The problem(once again) is "Short Memory"(just like The Oils sang it) .. people aren't looking at what happened where it's important.
They read what happening as if it's a new issue.

And to be sure it's not missed AGAIN! .. when you hear the term drought, this doesn't simply mean a lack of rain .... it means a lack of rain for the amount of consumption required.
So, more rain + more consumption = drought.
When you read it in this manner .. it's no wonder we always seem to be in some newly declared catastrophic drought condition, we're consuming too much.
But be under no illusion .. rainfall across most of Aus has increased since global warming has been an issue.

I think that it’s more about - build the new green systems, then shutdown the coal ones.

It seems that the government’s sell of the coal power stations to private owners, who let them get into a state of disrepair, amd then they get closed down.

Meanwhile the government has already spent the money and the new power stations aren’t yet ready or don’t have the same capacity as the coal ones.

I am all for green - but let’s get it in place before shutting down the coal ones...

It’s kinda logical isn’t it?

Originally Posted by Tombie

Best read all of it, not just the bits you like (the doom and gloom)

Bottom line of the IOD paragraph...

I read it all. You run true to form, If some one disagrees or has a different view, out comes the name calling and bully boy tactics. Or out comes some obscure article from years back . No doubt you come out on top of arguments by intimidation or shouting down. I don't play that game. And bullies have never intimidated me. Live well. Take care.

Originally Posted by bob10

I read it all. You run true to form, If some one disagrees or has a different view, out comes the name calling and bully boy tactics. Or out comes some obscure article from years back . No doubt you come out on top of arguments by intimidation or shouting down. I don't play that game. And bullies have never intimidated me. Live well. Take care.

That IOD report was issued on 03/12/2019 and it covers the early 2020 season, So 2 days old is an "obscure article from years back"

Originally Posted by bob10

I read it all. You run true to form, If some one disagrees or has a different view, out comes the name calling and bully boy tactics. Or out comes some obscure article from years back . No doubt you come out on top of arguments by intimidation or shouting down. I don't play that game. And bullies have never intimidated me. Live well. Take care.

Re-read your comments - anyone disagreeing with you got a nice serve in your posts Bob. Perhaps a little self reflection on your part is in order?

You are adamant your stance is the only option, keep posting as such, and then get angry (how it reads) when things are highlighted.

There was no intimidation, if that’s how you choose to read comments opposing your beliefs that’s entirely up to you.


The entire CC issue requires more consideration, validation of data, and the critical “follow the money”. When global finance requires new cannon fodder any topic can become the next issue.

Will the world implode? I doubt it. Will it change? Absolutely. Humans resistance to change is well documented, those small almost ghost towns where people refuse to move on is evidence of this. Mankind’s desire to modify its surroundings or maintain the status quo through expensive means is evidence of this.

Interesting times ahead.

Originally Posted by trout1105

.... So 2 days old is an "obscure article from years back"

Originally Posted by Tombie

.... Perhaps a little self reflection on your part is in order?

....

I'd recommend a bit more critical analysis of what one reads would be the better path to take.

Reading doom and gloom prophecies from others, just to confirm one's own belief system doesn't make for progress.
Wasn't there some "we're all doomed" hype way back in the day predicted for 2012? Out of some idiotic Mayan(or similar) legend?
How did that pan out?
Actually, it kind'a almost did and we missed it by a few weeks(info on PBS Space Time), but the point is that it didn't.
The main take away is to not believe doom and gloom when all the points made on those predictions contradict the data collected.

And the main data to date re a warming globe, is that it has never impacted human progress .. ever!
OTOH, a rapidly cooling globe may well do so.
And note how early on in the hype phase it went from a 'global warming' issue, to a more broad scale 'climate change' issue.
It's far easier to account for global cooling when they call it climate change, as opposed to global warming!
How do you reconcile a cooling globe when it's supposedly global warming that's the issue .. you change the terminology to hedge your bets so to not look foolish .. that's how.

It's going to be an interesting period at some point in the future to see them explain, that when it does start to cool and CO2 levels continue as they are .... rising ... how!
We'll have to argue those points when the time comes I guess.

It was interesting that the water level in Lawn Hill Gorge was 1.5 metres lower than normal when we were there recently. That water seeps underground from Western Australia and PNG. So the aquifer water level is lower than normal.

Actually, it's wrong to talk about there being less water. No one is making or destroying water. The planet still has the same amount of water, it's just moved.
Instead of being frozen at the poles its now melting and flowing into the oceans, which are warming, affecting the climate.
We can use it on land, but it's salty in the oceans. We think there is less water, but it's still out there, causing the oceans to rise.

But, Arthur, we are doomed I tell you. Doomed!

The luminosity of the Sun will steadily increase, resulting in a rise in the solar radiation reaching the Earth. This will result in a higher rate of weathering of silicate minerals, which will cause a decrease in the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. In about 600 million years from now, the level of carbon dioxide will fall below the level needed to sustain C₃ carbon fixation photosynthesis used by trees. Some plants use the C₄ carbon fixation method, allowing them to persist at carbon dioxide concentrations as low as 10 parts per million. However, the long-term trend is for plant life to die off altogether. The extinction of plants will be the demise of almost all animal life, since plants are the base of the food chain on Earth.^[12]