AGW – Talkabout V

As suggested, this where you can argue all you like about human-induced climate change. We’re up to page 5 already.

425 comments on “AGW – Talkabout V

  1. There is a theory going the rounds that if you look back 88 years the weather is similar to now.

    ttp://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/changing-artic_monthly_wx_review.png

    There is a sine wave to illustrate this.

  2. ooops…

    ‘The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway.

    ‘Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes.

    ‘Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.

    ‘Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.

    ‘Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.’

    Washington Post, November 2, 1922 as reported by the AP.

  3. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/science/earth/extreme-weather-grows-in-frequency-and-intensity-around-world.html?pagewanted=all

    All I have to say about this article is “poppycock”, pure and simple…So tired of reading these subjective “scare pieces”. Not a shred of real “science” in them…

    “Worse its been in 100 years or since records started being kept”! LMAO..100 years out of 4.5 billion!!!!!! If this were a study in medicine we would call such an absurdity a “sampling error” and pay it no mind but not with AGW; LOL Can’t get a good “cause and effect” from such a limited data set…Gotta love the “Times”; brilliant as always….Of course, it must be AGW to blame, quick we need a carbon tax so we can make up for our budget shortfalls/lavish gov spending under the guise of doing something for the environment, quick; before we all melt. It must be for the “children”…heheheheheh

  4. Where would el gordo be without being able to quote the discredited Watts?

    Another piece of proof you have lost the fight when all you have to fall back on is one source and that source has been well and truly discredited many times, and it’s a source that’s paid for and controlled by vested interests to deliberately put out falsehoods and muddy the science.

    You would be better off using this source: Wotts Up With That

  5. I’m not quoting Watts, his space is a resource to be mined.

    So Mo, you have nothing to say on the 1922 article?

  6. A resource to be mined, you have to be absolutely joking. Do you want me to post all the information out there discrediting Watts and showing the false data and misleading information he deliberately peddles?

    There’s a wealth of it, even on how he falsely used web page hits to say how popular he is.

    That you almost exclusively “mine” this source or sources linked to this source proves you have no credit in this discussion.

    What 1922 article, and if it’s a link to Watts then forget it?

  7. You can discredit Watts as much as you like. I go to SS all the time to get both points of view, you should try that approach.

    The Washington Post article from 1922 proves conclusively that the sceptics are on the money.

    Excuse these two pars from hate media.

    ‘AS Australians sweltered through a record-breaking summer heatwave this week, one of the world’s leading scientific bodies revised down its five-year projection for the world’s average temperature.

    ‘The revision, slipped quietly into the public domain on Christmas Eve by Britain’s Met Office, has fuelled a significant and growing debate about what exactly happened to global warming.’

    Graham Lloyd in the Oz

  8. Sparta

    So you are happy to believe what happened 4.5 billion years ago based on scientists methodology but you refute scientists claims, predictions and fact based on factual records since those true factual records began. Talk about manipulating science for your own denial. Sadly you and those like you WILL condemn future generations of children to global warming and the destruction of our environment. But hey as long as the billionaires make more money it is ok. After all money is god isn’t it !.

  9. The Washington Post article from 1922 proves conclusively that the sceptics are on the money.

    How does it do that? You and your always wrong emphatic statements. Please layout exactly how it “conclusively” proves the sceptics are right?

    You can discredit Watts as much as you like. I go to SS all the time to get both points of view, you should try that approach.

    I call crap on that. Even if you did go to get both sides you almost exclusively cherry pick and post that information which is contrary, and that’s all you are about on all subjects, contrariety. If you were serious on the subject you would not constantly post isolated single paragraphs of opposing nonsense with no sources and done purely to provoke a response, in other words trolling.

    And is an illustration of why you have no credibility is the constant posting of localised cold weather events from around the world, rarely hot weather events and only when it’s pointed out you don’t post hot weather events do you throw one or two in.

    In constantly doing this you aren’t discussing climate at all, you are purely trolling and treating the people who visit here as idiots.

    ‘The revision, slipped quietly into the public domain on Christmas Eve by Britain’s Met Office, has fuelled a significant and growing debate about what exactly happened to global warming.’

    Oh you mean the Met Office Rose scam that went around the world and is still repeated as fact by many clueless denier sites today?

  10. Oh for fuck sake.

    So I did a search on the Met Office revision and yes they have revised down, just as periods have been revised up and down before, but do they conclude that global warming has stopped as The Australian article contends, or was it quietly slipped in, no on both accounts.

    Another Ltd News beat up on climate change.

    Do a search on reputable news and science source on the outcome of the Met Office report and you will see a different picture to the one the Oz is attempting to paint and el gordo in very selectively quoting paragraphs from it without the context.

    “I despair of the way data such as this is translated as ‘global warming has stopped’. Global mean temperatures – whether measured or predicted – are not the issue. What matters is the energy balance of the planet and the changes that an energy imbalance will drive in the climate system – as well as the consequences for humans,” said Chris Rapley, a climate scientist at University College London.

    If anything, the Met Office’s down-revision of their estimates shows how the science of climate change is maturing hopefully to give more realistic projections.

    As Myles Allen, a climate modeller at the University of Oxford put it: “While every new year brings in welcome new data to help us rule out the more extreme (good and bad) scenarios for the future, it would be equally silly to interpret what has happened since the early-2000s as evidence that the warming has stopped.”

    For those interested the deniers have jumped on this because the MET Office has revised down the next 5 years as warming 0.1 degrees when the IPCC said the next decade would warm 0.2 degrees.

    Talk about clutching at ephemeral denier straws.

  11. ‘Talk about clutching at ephemeral denier straws.’

    Where’s your positive feedback Mo, put up or shut up. The warmistas are pathetic cowards!

  12. “So you are happy to believe what happened 4.5 billion years ago based on scientists methodology but you refute scientists claims, predictions and fact based on factual records since those true factual records began”

    I believe there is ample evidence to suggest previous warming and cooling throughout the history of Earth on a greater scale dude; of course. Not really the point I was making though, with all do respect. So your saying what, 100 years of data is a good sample out of 4.5 billion? I think if our early ancestors were able to survive the last ice age and as a result “evolve bigger brains” (as they theorize), we can survive warming for Christs sake, get a grip Shane.

    “Talk about manipulating science for your own denial. Sadly you and those like you WILL condemn future generations of children to global warming and the destruction of our environment.”

    Let a man answer first; geesh…My god Shane, your one of those…Yikes!

    “But hey as long as the billionaires make more money it is ok. After all money is god isn’t it !”

    “Ground control to Major Tom”…Hello, they are making a killing off you saps now, “green, organic” blah, blah..Sucker in every market as I mentioned earlier….Like I said, this AGW thing is big money, after all, anything subsidized by government usually is and everybody is going to get a piece. Pink batt insulation ring a bell?

  13. Your framing of warmistas and denialiti is a false one el gordo, you haven’t even got that right.

    You and the other deniers do this ID tactic in an attempt to lend a credibility to the deniers that doesn’t exist by associating those who support the vast majority of climate scientists and the science in the same league as the deniers.

  14. “THE carbon tax has failed to incite a tsunami of complaints from the public, with new data from the consumer watchdog indicating Labor’s policy may have fallen off the public radar.
    July to Oct 60 complaints per day
    Beginning of October 10 -15 complaints per day
    October to January 3 complaints per day”
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/abbott-wont-gain-much-bounce-in-carbon-tax-stance/story-fn59niix-1226552338445

    which makes you wonder why Greg Hunt in an article in the Drum claims the Opposition will cancel the carbon tax within 6 months on getting into govt.

  15. Tabit wants to wipe out the embarrassing remnants of complete an utter green stupidity.

    The CO2 tax and all green energy, like wind farms and solar arrays should be scrapped. Free enterprise can take over if they think it will pay.

  16. Cold Air Outbreak (CAO) guffaw

    ‘Up to a foot of snow will fall over the weekend as a blast of Arctic air creates treacherous conditions across the country.

    ‘Forecasters expect up to four inches of snow to fall in parts of Britain from tomorrow until Monday as temperatures in the countryside drop to a finger-numbing minus 8C (18F).’

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2260499/UK-weather-Up-foot-snow-expected-fall-country-weekend-wake-Arctic-blast.html#ixzz2HiEaXbs2
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  17. So, el gordo, you tell us it’s cold in Siberia, Slovenia, Oklahoma, Osaka, Iceland, Greenland, Newfoundland, New York, Alaska, Armenia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Tazikstan and Timbuktu.

    Get off your computer and go outside for a while. You might discover it’s hot in NSW.

  18. That’s the point, we have heatwaves in summer and its normal.

    I’m arguing that the increase in northern hemisphere snow is an important trend… towards cooling.

  19. If climate change is the most important moral challenge of our time, then climate change deniers are amongst the most immoral of people.

  20. Paul Ehrlich bounces out of his corner with yet another prediction..
    http://royalsociety.org/news/2013/avoiding-global-civilization-collapse/

    “A new paper published yesterday in Proceedings of the Royal Society B addresses the likelihood that we are facing a global collapse now. The paper concludes that global society can avoid this and recommends that social and natural scientists collaborate on research to develop ways to stimulate a significant increase in popular support for decisive and immediate action on our predicament.
    Paul and Anne Ehrlich’s paper provides a comprehensive description of the damaging effects of escalating climate disruption, overpopulation, overconsumption, pole-to-pole distribution of dangerous toxic chemicals, poor technology choices, depletion of resources including water, soils, and biodiversity essential to food production, and other problems currently threatening global environment and society. The problems are not separate, but are complex, interact, and feed on each other. ”

    Problem is Ehrlich’s previous predictions have been thoroughly discredited. Here’s a brief written in 2010 on Ehrlich…http://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/07/ehrlichs-lifetime-of-hot-air/

    “His body of work – at least, his work that impinges on politics and human events – has had three things in common.

    He’s blamed Western Civilization – especially our economic freedom – for successive waves of self-caused, predicted catastrophes.

    He’s prescription to deal with these catastrophes has been, in every case, for the individual to surrender his/her autonomy, and even future, to an all-wise, all-knowing, all-powerful central entity that’ll make all the hard, life and death choices for them.

    And he’s been wrong on every count. Humans, rather than sitting in caves waiting to get eaten by sabre tooth tigers, invented spears. Faced with floods, we invented the sandbag as an alternative to drowning and mildew. And faced with shortage of resources, we adapt. And humanity in the past forty years has adapted – learning to grow crops where we didn’t before, learning to conserve farmland and water, developing new crops and practices.”

  21. silkworm
    JANUARY 12, 2013 @ 12:41 PM
    “If climate change is the most important moral challenge of our time, then climate change deniers are amongst the most immoral of people”

    Problem for you is that climate change is NOT the most important moral challenge of our time…

  22. Mobius wrote about the Met Office revision…
    “Talk about clutching at ephemeral denier straws”

    You wouldn’t be clutching at an ephemeral warminista straw would you you now? Of course not! Warmenistas slag off on climate sceptics with impunity because they’re saving the planet, or so they think.

  23. Mobius wrote:

    “You and the other deniers do this ID tactic in an attempt to lend a credibility to the deniers that doesn’t exist by associating those who support the vast majority of climate scientists and the science in the same league as the deniers.”

    Trouble for you Mobius is that the credibility of the so called majority of climate scientists, their dogma, their conflicts of interest and indeed the IPCC has taken major hits in recent times.

    One of my favorite lyrics is the Van Morrison/Mark Knopfler collaboration The Last Laugh…

    And don’t you love the sound
    The last laugh goin’ down?
    Well, don’t you love the sound
    Of the last laugh, on Mobius et al goin’ down

  24. How has it taken a hit Treeman? Again in this right wing fantasy world.

    The science is sound and still not confuted, more are acting on it and it is becoming sounder each day. The vast majority of climate scientists still support it.

    What we have to prove it is scams that the right fall for hook line and sinker every time, vested interest groups throwing in even more money and effort to muddy the waters and the wingnuts going crazier and getting louder with empty rhetoric like those here.

    With the number of scams and discredit opposition it is the deniers who are taking all the hits and are looking like fools in doing so.

  25. “I’m arguing that the increase in northern hemisphere snow is an important trend… towards cooling.”

    Well el gordo then argue it and give us your data and scientific paper to show these cold weather events in northern winter are indicating a global cooling trend, because at the moment you are not arguing the point at all but just throwing in post after post of local cold weather reports that are meaningless in the isolation you present them.

    Please show us the link and the cause of your global cooling if you are seriously going to argue the case?

  26. Then if we go on your premise el gordo if these same regions have heat waves in summer than it must prove global warming.

    Looking forward to you posting all the hot weather events coming up in the Northern summer and contending it’s due to global warming.

  27. el gordo, you ignore it was Labor and Liberal policy for years.

    It was Margaret Thatcher that first raised the issue.

    Ie was far from Green policy alone.

    Why not stick to the facts. Easier than making things up.

  28. We have models to predict the future. I suspect we put in the available data, and out comes the prediction.

    Now no prediction behaves strictly to the model. Cannot, as we never know or understand all the variables.

    That is true of all models we used for predictions in all fields.

    We look at why the prediction did not behave as we believe if would. We then put the new data in, and out comes another prediction.

    Now this is what happened. As much as the deniers would like to make it, the new one still predicts warming. albeit at a slower rate. Only slightly slower.

    Down the track, the process will be repeated with similar variations.

    As the scientist and understand more, there will be reliable.

    This has been pointed out on many sites. It is elementary and not rocket science. Deniers, once again cherry picking what is said.

  29. From the resident Climate Change Expert…
    “We have models to predict the future. I suspect we put in the available data, and out comes the prediction.”

    Very scientific..”I suspect we put in and out comes the prediction” HA HA HA

    “Now no prediction behaves strictly to the model. Cannot, as we never know or understand all the variables…That is true of all models we used for predictions in all fields.”

    Ha Ha again what rubbish you write!

    “We look at why the prediction did not behave as we believe if would. We then put the new data in, and out comes another prediction. Now this is what happened. As much as the deniers would like to make it, the new one still predicts warming. albeit at a slower rate. Only slightly slower. Down the track, the process will be repeated with similar variations. As the scientist and understand more, there will be reliable.

    This has been pointed out on many sites. It is elementary and not rocket science. Deniers, once again cherry picking what is said.”

    CU, you need to go off the meds, you’re writing complete nonsense.

  30. “…you’re writing complete nonsense.”

    What as compared to the rubbish fulminations you constantly put out her writings are a sea of lucidity.

    As compared to the one paragraph void of rationality guff el gordo puts out Cu’s postings are a tower of reason.

  31. Bacchus
    JANUARY 12, 2013 @ 2:19 PM
    Well it’s a WAY more lucid explanation than anything you’ve posted Trollman

    Only for those well versed in obscure and irrelevant granny speak!

  32. And I could post links from science based sites that say the opposite, and not vested interest ones like the Heartland Institute.

    Now post a scientific consensus of the failures Treeman with the facts not the ravings of rabid right wing sources.

  33. While I didn’t check out all the links, I did look at the article written by Conrad Black. Perhaps he did his research while in the ‘big house’.

    Talk about credibility.

  34. Nearly all hard right wing organisations.

    Heartland are on record stating they will do anything to undermine the science behind AGW.

    I wonder if Treeman believes that smoking cigarette tobacco is bad for your health and that of your children through second hand smoke?

  35. ‘Then if we go on your premise el gordo if these same regions have heat waves in summer than it must prove global warming.’

    No, if you go back to the Little Ice Age its the weather extremes which catch the eye. The Great Fire of London happened in a hot droughty time in the middle of the LIA, so weather extremes will become the new norm.

    I don’t see it as catastrophic, at least sea level will fall.

  36. Fred (the backpeddler) Pierce on Has global warming ground to a halt?

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23060-has-global-warming-ground-to-a-halt.html

    “Atmospheric warming has certainly slowed greatly in the past decade. The Met Office says this appears to be due to natural cycles that are counteracting the warming effect of greenhouse gases. After incorporating new analysis of natural cycles into its latest model of atmospheric and ocean circulation, it has concluded that we are in for a few more years of little change….

    Are these cycles just something scientists have invented to explain away the lack of recent warming?
    No. The Met Office admits that we still know far too little about how these natural cycles work, and how big they are. And climate scientists are open to the charge that they ignored the potential impact of natural variability when it was accelerating global warming. According to Brian Hoskins of Imperial College London, it now looks like natural cycles played a big role in the unexpectedly fast warming of the 1990s”

    Pierce like the good alarmist he is goes on to channel Paul Ehrlich…

    “What’s the outlook?
    Scary. If oceanic cycles do what the Met Office and others expect, then global average air temperatures will stay fairly stable – though still hotter than they have been in the past – until later this decade. The cycles will then flip into a new phase and the oceans will probably start releasing heat instead of soaking it up. Combined with continued accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, that could mean that sometime round 2020, warming will start to race away again as the atmosphere makes up for lost time.”

  37. Ah the old cherry picking of paragraphs to intimate something that isn’t.

    Read the whole thing people including the links and sources, it’s not what the wingnuts are attempting to make out. Pay particular attention to the margin of error and what’s said about it and also if you want to chase it up look at the IPCC report for the next decade. Much is made about it being 1 degree more than the UK Met Office, but that’s also being deliberately misrepresented.

    Plus you have to laugh at the way the hypocritical Right are attempting to paint all this as being alarmist. The Right live on scaremongering, it’s their very core of how they gain support and keep the people in fear of just about everything, carbon pricing, mining taxes, roof insulation, right wing think tank government takeovers (NRA anyone) and the list goes on.

    So from jumping from one denier meme to another and recycling them, there’s a list out there, they now throw up the alarmist one when they are the ones being alarmist about global warming somehow being this huge conspiracy to take over everything and make lots of money for governments and the UN.

    As the saying goes, give me a break from these hypocrites.

  38. So if I understand you correctly el gordo northern hemisphere winter cold spells prove global cooling and northern hemisphere summer warm spells also prove global cooling?

    Can you please show us the science behind that contention? If you can prove this then you have turned all climate science on its head and should be in line for a Nobel science prize.

  39. “The Right live on scaremongering, it’s their very core of how they gain support and keep the people in fear of just about everything”

    What rubbish! It’s the very scare mongering from the alarmist left that we counter and champion of that is Al Gore. Australians with form are Flannery, Gergis and Karoly, aided and abetted by John Cook and lately GetUp…

    Mobius, you’re a hypocrite of the highest order!

  40. ‘And that link does what to prove your contention of global cooling and a warm northern summer proving it.’

    The link above was for Col, ignore the words and look at the graph, sea level falls when the climate becomes cooler.

    If we are entering a LIA there would be signs, but its not easy to see the signal through the noise.

  41. Oh please stop pretending you understand it, it detracts further from the credibility you haven’t got.

    You just come across something on a website somewhere, bookmark it or commit it to short term memory to throw up here with acronyms replete and an all knowing attitude.

    You like the rest of us are no kitchen scientist, and you prove time and again that you most likely know less about climate than the rest of us by reinforcing it with the nonsensical single paragraph guff like that in the last paragraph in the last post.

  42. ‘So if I understand you correctly el gordo northern hemisphere winter cold spells prove global cooling and northern hemisphere summer warm spells also prove global cooling?’

    It depends what’s happening with the jet stream at the time, weather extremes are not uncommon in a mini ice age.

    ‘…. a rare extremely warm period during the LIA. In northern France in 1788, after an unusually bad winter, May, June, and July were excessively hot, which caused the grain to shrivel.

    ‘On July 13, just at harvest time, a severe hailstorm (which typically occurs when there is very cold air aloft) destroyed what little crops were left. From that bad harvest of 1788 came the bread riots of 1789 which led to Marie Antoinette’s alleged remark “Let them eat cake,” and the storming of the Bastille.’

  43. So you are now contending that we are going to have significant reduced solar activity combined with global massive volcanic activity that will cause an ice age and extreme weather conditions?

  44. The Russians think the mini ice age will begin in 2014 and that AGW is a ‘tool’ of America.

    Russian scientists are contending ‘that we are going to have significant reduced solar activity’ which will lead to a LIA.

  45. But it is contended that reduced significant solar activity on its own was the cause for the last little ice age, so are the Russians also saying they are going to explode nuclear bombs in the world’s volcanoes?

  46. I see the Russian are experimenting with exploding volcanoes at the moment but stuffed up. The ash is coming out of the side of Plosky Tolbachik instead of out of the main crater and high into the air.

    Bit of work to do yet before we have another little ice age.

  47. The Royal Society has a team on standby to do geoengineering, hopefully there won’t be any money available for those crackpots.

    As I said earlier, there are no tipping points in sight for a LIA.

    Have you had any luck with your tipping points?

  48. ABC news 7pm, Professor Karoly talking on the high temperatures across Ausrtalia, increased fire risk and the rise in temperatures of 1 degree in the last century, to counter the Professor, they then get opinion of long time resident of the Alice.”yes i remember the heatwave of the 50′s it was hotter than.’

  49. Media is doing a good job in beating up this heat.

    ‘Australia has posted nine days of average maximum temperatures above 39 degrees in 2013. Seven of the 20 hottest days by average maximum have been registered just this month.

    ‘A delayed northern monsoon means there is less moisture and cloud cover over the continent, leaving a huge inland area to bake for most of the past two weeks.’

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/new-high-reached-during-great-heatwave-20130112-2cmbw.html#ixzz2Hkk66WWv

  50. Did you ever consider the possibility that the climate scientists might be right el gordo? I’m guessing not. A rational mind couldn’t be that closed, surely?

  51. All over the place like a mad woman’s $#!+. Certainly anything but a rational mind. Not for the first time – seek professional help el gordo…

  52. seek professional help el gordo

    Sound advice. But I’m afraid el gordo seems too far gone. Seriously!

    It’s like being at the scene of a traumatic accident and there’s no
    avenue to seek assistance. Clearly, I believe there’s a genuine problem here. A view formed over a long period of time BTW.

    I suspect that somewhere down the track, someone, somewhere will speculate/pontificate on the responsibility of ‘blog masters’/contributors et al who ‘recognose’ but fail to … whatever.

    But that’s for the future.

  53. It’s a very delicate issue. No one wants to be in the business of censorship. At a theoretical level, el gordo can say what he/she likes. No matter how ‘irrational’ it may appear to others. it’s what ‘freedom of expression’ is all about.

    But at a deeper and perhaps more significan level, when it’s posted so often – again and again and again- with so many illogical ‘contradictions’, then one wonders whether it’s simply a ‘cry for help’, that’s being ignored.

    Perhaps there’s an ‘expert’ reader who might offer some advice.

  54. You are saying global warming is real, humans have caused it, and catastrophe is only a tipping point away.

    By comparison I say global cooling is real, natural and dangerous….. and is only a stone’s throw away.

    There is little between us, so we all need professional help.

  55. “But at a deeper and perhaps more significan level, when it’s posted so often – again and again and again- with so many illogical ‘contradictions’, then one wonders whether it’s simply a ‘cry for help’, that’s being ignored”

    That sounds just like many here. Philippa Martyr sums it up succinctly…
    “The IPCC’s WGII AR5 documentation has been leaked. Here’s the full list of contributors to the Australasia section”

    https://docs.google.com/viewer?pid=explorer&srcid=0B3J65opoNdSuSnZ3aUladEtMWHM&docid=a7379d02a124ff595106f1ebe9234836%7C77966cda0b0e88f9c23bdb278e586f00&chan=EgAAAM9/f7BlipnEpYNJ3LTIex6Obt8yUQQk0Zf4bUWnSCrZ&a=v&rel=zip;z1;WGIIAR5-Chap25_FODall.pdf

    “Trouble is, they’re all the usual suspects, and the Australasia list is a case in point. What’s particularly striking about the entire list is the degree to which every single person on it depends on climate change catastrophe for their living.

    If their thesis – anthropogenic climate change at its most drastic and terrifying – was disproven publicly tomorrow, and also discredited by the world’s media, almost every single one of them would have to start looking for a new job”

    Case in question and a sign of things to come is Greg Withers, made to stay on after his wife Bligh’s defeat in Queensland and dismantle the mad green schemes he’d set during the death throes of the Bligh government.

    At a deeper and perhaps more significan level those whispering at cafe’s of little consequence will certainly be needing help when the shit hits the fan!

  56. eg

    “assuming the place is still running.”

    You can’t make the assumption this cafe will still be running. For mine it will implode before the shit hits the fan!

  57. This is the man who predicted Gillard would be out by the end of last year, and several times before that.

    This man couldn’t predict his next birthday date if it’s circled on his fridge calendar and he has a Facebook reminder a year ahead. Can’t get climate change right. Can’t get the LNP or Abbott right. Can’t be right though is Right.

  58. You can’t make the assumption this cafe will still be running. For mine it will implode before the shit hits the fan!

    It’s my bet that this this place will far outlive your presence here.

  59. Miglo, they will have as much success of seeing this site imploding, as Abbott has of seeing the Gillard government doing so. Both on a futile campaign.

    It will be interesting times when the Abbott shit eventually hit the fan, as it surely will. Would not like to be in the near proximity of that fan. It will smatter all within its range. Maybe why many in the Opposition have been really invisible in such a long time.

    “Professor Karoly says climate change has worsened this heatwave by extending it and increasing its intensity.

    “What climate change is doing is worsening the conditions associated with heat waves so it makes them longer, it makes the intensity of the heat wave worse and together they lead to more frequent extreme fire danger days,” he said.

    AUDIO: Heatwaves exacerbated by climate change (AM)
    Australia’s average temperature has increased by 0.9 of a degree since 1910, and the report says small changes in average temperature can have a significant impact on the frequency and nature of extreme weather events.

    Professor Karoly says, based on current projections of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, the long-term outlook is even more dire…..

    …………………….Not every summer will be hotter than the one before. In fact this year is markedly hotter than the last couple of years when we had relatively milder and wetter conditions.

    But what we are going to find on average is more of the hot extremes and faster increases in the future, over the next 10 and 30 years, that we have seen over the last 30 years – more hot extremes, more heatwaves and more extreme fire conditions.

    Climate scientists have been talking about these increases for more than 20 years in Australia. We are now seeing exactly what was predicted more than 20 years ago.

    Professor David Karoly………

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-12/climate-commission-predicts-more-heatwaves-bushfires/4461960

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-12/heat-waves-exacerbated-by-climate-change/4462014

    http://climatecommission.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/CC_Jan_2013_Heatwave4.pdf

  60. ……………..Not every summer will be hotter than the one before. In fact this year is markedly hotter than the last couple of years when we had relatively milder and wetter conditions.

    But what we are going to find on average is more of the hot extremes and faster increases in the future, over the next 10 and 30 years, that we have seen over the last 30 years – more hot extremes, more heatwaves and more extreme fire conditions.

    Climate scientists have been talking about these increases for more than 20 years in Australia. We are now seeing exactly what was predicted more than 20 years ago.

    Professor David Karoly…….

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-12/climate-commission-predicts-more-heatwaves-bushfires/4461960

  61. ““Professor Karoly says climate change has worsened this heatwave by extending it and increasing its intensity.”

    That would be the same Karoly that was forced to withdraw a scary prediction based on fudged data

    https://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/06/11/paper-claiming-hottest-60-year-span-in-1000-years-put-on-hold-after-being-published-online/

    Flo you must really do better than this. Karoly has little credibility left

    http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/10622-gergis-et-al-hockey-stick-paper-withdrawn-finally

  62. How come you never pick up the fudges and manipulated data from those you link to Treeman?

    Cherry picking to fit you extremely narrow ideological ostrich point of view no doubt.

  63. “How come you never pick up the fudges and manipulated data from those you link to Treeman?

    How come you don’t accept that the science isn’t settled and that those depending on government subsidies for climate research are really the ones with the most to loose?

    A narrow ideological ostrich point of view springs immediately to mind and BTW much of your own so called rebuttals are full of holes…cherry picked and chewed at by the wailing who are well and truly on the back pedal.

    WAKE UP!

  64. Again you get it so wrong Treeman. What is it about the Right and their utterly closed minds.

    If you bother to read my past posts on the subject and indeed a conversation I had with el gordo once, I have often said the science isn’t settled, and indeed the true climate change proponents and the vast majority of scientists who advocate the global warming theory do the same.

    It’s the wingnuts like you who say it’s settled that it’s false whilst accusing the proponents of saying it’s settled. This is another of the vested interests tactics that follows the ID tactic.

    Also the shout to wake up is a dead giveaway you are clutching at straws.

  65. From Mo’s lnk

    ‘The peer-reviewed national survey conducted in mid-2011 and published late last year found 39 per cent of respondents viewed climate change as ”the most serious problem facing the world in the future if nothing is done to stop it”.

    You can’t stop global warming with a tax… that’s cargo cult stuff.

    And we can’t stop global cooling, which according to the Russians will begin next year, unless we do some geoengineering.

  66. That’s bullshit el gordo and I’ve posted on it showing where it’s bullshit.

    Nova is the second skeptic to falsely claim the Met Office quietly dropped their prediction so as intimate an underhandedness.

    The Met Office openly published their drop in prediction and stated the reasons why. There was no quietly involved.

    Remember the last time the UK Met Office was accused of “quietly” changing a report finding, it turned out to be a scam that you and Treeman fell for hook line and sinker, just like both of you fall for every piece of quackery on climate that comes along.

  67. ‘Denialists deny evidence…’

    That’s not true, we have seen your evidence and found it wanting.

    One things for sure, if the Russians are wrong then I’ll be joining the sceptics.

  68. ‘The Met Office openly published their drop in prediction and stated the reasons why.’

    Natural variability is the elephant in the room?

  69. ‘Now you may feel is the time to ‘get it on’ here in the US. Of course, we have not been short of weather stories the past 4 years with 9 major snows for the eastern cities, more for the Pacific Northwest, floods, droughts, heat weaves, Irene and Sandy also related to global cooling and low solar that causes strong persistence of weather patterns and an amplified Rossby wave pattern.

    ‘A major stratospheric warming is taking place that should result in 4 to 6 weeks of harsh weather for the Europe and North America. Sub zero old will afflict Boston and Chicago and single digit mornings in NYC, Philadelphia and maybe Baltimore/Washington. Snows will increase the snowcover again. The hemisphere had a record snowcover for December.’

    Joe D’Aleo (Icecap)

  70. ‘A new report from the Federal Government’s Climate Commission says the heatwave and bushfires that have affected Australia this week have been exacerbated by global warming.

    ‘The report – Off the Charts: Extreme Australian Summer Heat – warns of more extreme bushfires and hotter, longer, bigger and more frequent heatwaves, due to climate change.

    ‘It says the number of record heat days across Australia has doubled since 1960 and more temperature records are likely to be broken as hot conditions continue this summer.’

    Australian Brainwashing Corporation

  71. el gordo and tree, it is not us you need to convince, It is a great section of the public out there. Many do not seem to follow your views.

  72. Global Surface Temperature proved accurate.

    Nature Confirms Global Warming and Temperature Record Accuracy

    Climate contrarians frequently dispute the accuracy of the instrumental surface temperature record, as is evident by the fact that this argument comes in at #7 on our list of most used climate myths. In fact, we recently pointed out the fundamental errors in a draft paper which disputed the temperature record’s accuracy.

    A new paper published in Geophysical Research Letters by Anderson et al. (2012) tests this myth by creating a new global surface temperature record reconstruction using records from 173 natural temperature-sensitive changes (in corals, ice cores, speleothems, lake and ocean sediments, and historical documents), with 67 of these records extending as far back as 1730.

  73. Renewables provide 25% of all of Italy’s electricity demand. Solar PV meets 5.6%

    49 Gigawatts of new capacity: China unveils big renewable energy ambitions for 2013

    Renewables delivered 32% of power in Spain last year, a slight drop on previous two years

    List of countries that get 60%+ of their energy from renewables:

    Uruguay set to become wind power world leader as part of plans to get 90% of its electricity from renewables by 2015

    51% of all renewables in Germany are owned by citizens or farms, over $100 billion of investment.

    Carmaker VW will soon supply its German facilities with 75% highly efficient heat&power and self-generated renewables

    99.9% Renewables: 72GW provided by 17GW of solar 68GW of offshore wind and 115GW of inland wind.

    Just a fraction of the reporting on the increasing use of renewables where in some areas it’s now cheaper than gas and nuclear.

  74. “It’s the wingnuts like you who say it’s settled that it’s false whilst accusing the proponents of saying it’s settled. This is another of the vested interests tactics that follows the ID tactic.”

    And WTF do you mean by that? Look at what you wrote, it’s complete nonsense!

  75. Mo the Anderson et al paper is essentially correct, we were emerging from the LIA, pity he stopped at he end of last century.

  76. Slaps palm on forehead.

    Read up on the tactics that the intelligent design mob used to make out they were espousing a legitimate scientific principle whilst maligning evolutionary theory for being “settled”. It was one of the things that ID lost it’s court case on when it was demonstrably shown that the evolutionary scientists and the science didn’t contend the theory was “settled”.

    It’s the same tactic being used by the deniers and the vested interests like the Heartland Institute, and the same reality exists transposed onto the AGW theory argument.

    I have never said it was settled and at one stage was actually glad and said so when I though that global warming had been conclusively and scientifically proven as false. Turned out to be yet another scam and I quickly ascertained it is such by a cursory search, something the deniers didn’t bother doing.

    But for the deniers the opposite is the case. You, but especially el gordo, talk in absolutes of the science and theory being proven false, even though time and again you fall for scams and the data thrown up is shown to be false.

    So it’s the deniers who emphatically say it’s settled for their side that the theory is false and many without a reservation state the globe is cooling whilst they espouse that the proponents of AGW theory are the ones who say the science is settled, when at the scientific level they haven’t contended that.

  77. Looking over the list of countries that get 60+% of their energy from renewables…
    When you take out the hydro there is not a lot left in other renewables, the ones which are/have been heavily subsidised, if not directly by the governments of the countries involved then through aid funding from developed countries. If you take out the hydro and the subsidies there is not much left at all!

  78. What’s the general definition of a pollutant el gordo? Just because you keep saying it isn’t doesn’t make it so. And I know you’ve been pulled up on that statement before and will ignore it when proven wrong yet again.

  79. ‘So it’s the deniers who emphatically say it’s settled..’

    The denialati say the world was warm last century and now its cooling … this is scientifically verifiable.

    The science is never settled, but it looks like the AGW theory is badly flawed.

  80. I hate this furphy of “heavily subsidised”.

    Is coal heavily subsidised?
    Is nuclear heavily subsidised?

    Both are far more subsidised than any renewable energy and have been for a long time having untold billions of public money thrown at them for inefficient returns for a very long time now.

    So you reproach renewable energy being subsidised but not fossil or nuclear fuel energy. That’s being a hypocrite.

  81. Q&A: Can renewables alone (with storage) power the grid?

    Conventional wisdom among many utilities and analysts says that renewable energy is expensive and unreliable because the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine when electricity demand is highest, and because grid-scale storage is expensive and not ready for prime time.

    As a result, many in the electric power industry believe that to power entire regional electrical grids, we must continue to rely on fossil fuels for much of our baseload power.

    Last month, Willett Kempton, a renewable energy expert at the University of Delaware, reported a detailed analysis turning conventional wisdom on its head.

  82. ‘Last year The Mail on Sunday reported a stunning fact: that global warming had ‘paused’ for 16 years. The Met Office’s own monthly figures showed there had been no statistically significant increase in the world’s temperature since 1997.

    ‘We were vilified. One Green website in the US said our report was ‘utter bilge’ that had to be ‘exposed and attacked’.

    ‘The Met Office issued a press release claiming it was misleading, before quietly admitting a few days later that it was true that the world had not got significantly warmer since 1997 after all. A Guardian columnist wondered how we could be ‘punished’.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2261577/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-Met-Office-report-reveals-MoS-got-right-warming–deniers-now.html#ixzz2HqXomppM
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  83. At Coonabarabran with my mother. Out of control fire in the Warrumbungles to the west of the town. Sky black with smoke, can see the red glow and flames from the house. 70km winds. Water bombing planes over house every couple of minutes. Two homes destroyed and part of Siding Springs damaged. Burnt leaves and bark falling from the sky. Wifi internet almost non existant. One fiery and one civilian on hospital with severe burns.

  84. ‘What a scream!’

    Yes, why not attack the messenger, its so much easier than admitting the obvious.

    Global warming has stopped because natural variability overrides AGW and with the sun on the blink there is little chance it will rev up anytime soon. If the Russian scientists are correct, it could be another 20 years before we see an uptick.

  85. Fire is burning from Warkton about 30km south of Coona to Bugaldie about 20km north west of Coona. From the eye view looking around the town horizon it appears to be a massively long front.

  86. Neighbour is on roof watching flames to the north and west and south. You can really smell the fire in the air now. Winds are quite strong and seem to be changing direction. It takes ages to get CW up to post a comment and it keeps dropping out.

  87. Yes Migs floods at home and now fires at my mothers. Internet is really bad so going to sign off, however I think it will be a sleepless night when you can see a red glow to the northwest, west and southwest and the smell of buring bush permeating the air, as you never know what is going to happen overnight. Will give an update tomorrow morning if possible.

  88. Hi Migs, Min, Bacchusand all. Thanks for your concern. Well everything is calm this morning and the temperature is much cooler with the winds down. The fire reached 10km from Coona before thankfully heading north due to a wind change. If the southerly winds did not arrive then the town was really under threat so while they were strong they were a blessing in disguise to save the town.32,000 hectares burnt out and at least 6 properties destroyed. It now threatens the tiny hamlet of Bugaldie. Watching the glow in the sky and flames leaping into the air was quite worrying for many hours. Internet seems to be working well again this morning. I have pictures but forgot to bring my cord for the phone so will post them when I can. Have a great day everyone.

  89. Yes, why not attack the messenger, its so much easier than admitting the obvious.

    Because the messenger has been outed for his deliberate false stories and scams in the past. He falsifies data and has been proven to do so. The messenger is shot because he’s giving false information and is a proven liar.

    Global warming has stopped because natural variability overrides AGW and with the sun on the blink there is little chance it will rev up anytime soon.

    And this doozy from el gordo. After all this time and hundreds if not more than a thousand posts over a long time saying there is no global warming, putting up all those one paragraph bits of unsourced nonsense and links to graphs with no context to prove there is no global warming, el gordo now says there was AGW but it’s stopped.

    So again el gordo changes their position as el gordo has done several times before, shifting and twisting with the eddies of the latest denier meme winds.

  90. ‘el gordo now says there was AGW but it’s stopped.’

    It must have been the heat, I’m drifting towards the sceptics camp.

  91. ‘PARTS of Australia’s biggest observatory, at Siding Spring, west of Coonabarabran, were destroyed by a ”fast moving, large and dangerous” bushfire on Sunday night, as the fire emergency continued across large areas of NSW.

    ‘Two homes also burned down as the fire pushed through Warrumbungle National Park after a sudden change in the wind.’

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/it-looked-like-an-atom-bomb-20130113-2cnnz.html#ixzz2HtKE6jjr

  92. “However, both versions are consistent in predicting that we will continue to see near-record levels of global temperatures in the next few years.”

    I doubt that, the Russian tipping point into a cool regime starts next year.

  93. Thanks Mobius was up at the caravan park this morning where a local couple were staying as they were evacutaed from their home on Timor Rd. She was there but husabnd was away to see what had happened so she did not know. While I was there her husband came back with black hands and just shoot his head and she broke down. Thye have lost everything but the few clothes they grabbed when ordered to leave. The heat was so hot their quad runner and other machinery metal had melted and run along the ground. He was saying it is like a moon scape.

  94. “……………..This latest prediction anticipates a bit less global surface warming than the prediction from last year, as the Met Office explained:

    “The latest decadal prediction suggests that global temperatures over the next five years are likely to be a little lower than predicted from the previous prediction issued in December 2011.

    However, both versions are consistent in predicting that we will continue to see near-record levels of global temperatures in the next few years.”

    “…changes in ocean surface temperatures in some parts of the world over the past year are understood to have made a key contribution to the difference between the 2011 and 2012 forecasts, but other factors will also have played a role.”

    In other words, the Met Office anticipates that natural factors which have dampened the global surface warming over the past decade (a preponderance of La Niña events and low solar activity, for example), may continue to have an overall dampening effect over the next 5 years……….”
    http://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=1814

    Still two processes at work. Natural and man made.

    We cannot do much about the natural. We can about the man made.

  95. Avoiding a False Sense of Security
    Although many natural influences have acted to dampen global surface warming over the past decade, and potentially for the next 5 years if the Met Office prediction is correct, allowing this coincidence to lull us into a false sense of security would be a mistake. Eventually the preponderance of La Niñas will end, solar activity will rise, and so forth. If we have not reduced human greenhouse gas emissions in the meantime, we will face the harsh reality that the time wasted will force steeper and more painful emissions cuts in the future if we are to avoid dangerous climate change.

    Let’s get real. Global warming is (still) happening. Humans are causing it. If we don’t do something to stop it, the consequences are going to be very bad. So let’s stop looking for distractions and excuses to delay action, and get on with solving the problem, before we run out of time.

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=1814

  96. ‘We cannot do much about the natural. We can about the man made.’

    For all our efforts we cannot stop CO2 building up in the atmosphere, apart from the human induced stuff there is a lot coming out of the oceans.

  97. It’s coming out of the oceans because they are warming and are saturated with the addition of the man made CO2.

  98. For all our efforts we cannot stop CO2 building up in the atmosphere, apart from the human induced stuff

    Does this mean that you now accept that we CAN do something?

  99. My friends who own one of the caravan parks in town called to let me know they lost everything on their farm, house all buildings and nothing left. I am heading up there again soon to console and just be with them during this terrible time. At least they have the caravan park.

  100. Sorry to hear about your friends shaneinqldinqld, but, as you say, at least they are OK, and you and yours too I hope

  101. ‘Does this mean that you now accept that we CAN do something?’

    Ah, no. Humans will continue along their merry way pumping out CO2 and because the atmosphere has been warm there is more CO2 being liberated from the oceans.

    This will go on for quite some time, hopefully through the mini ice age which begins next year (according to some Russian scientists) and as you know CO2 is a essential for agriculture.

  102. Information from locals indicates many more homes destroyed.

    Sad to hear shane. I’m sure the RFS will get updated in time, but I recon they need to verify and verify in order not to be putting out false information. Reckon feet on the ground at the moment would be the priority.

    And remember what ME said, safety first.

  103. 40 thousand hectares. ABC 24. 14 properties.

    Very erratic yesterday afternoon with wind gusts. Perimeter of 89 kilometers.

    Better idea late this afternoon.

    Now more that 100 kilometer perimeter. Still lot of active burning. 15 homes destroyed, plus other buildings.

    Expect to detect more fires.

  104. http://radioadelaidebreakfast.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/coreywatts1401.mp3

    Have you ever thought summer seems to get hotter each year?

    The current heat wave is now unprecedented, with an average maximum daily temperature of 40.3 degrees celsius across the country.

    Such hot and dry conditions have allowed catastrophic bushfires to rage across the country burning hundreds of homes and destroying many lives.

    So how much of this is to do with Climate Change?

    Corey Watts, the Regional Project Manager from The Climate Institute, spoke to Angus Randall.

    http://radioadelaidebreakfast.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/bushfire-and-climate/#comments

    http://vimeo.com/channels/theclimateinstitute

  105. ‘For those who missed it’

    It was nicely constructed, but they hardly mentioned our star, just a few words which require closer analysis.

  106. Much amusement.

    The vid was great but I object to them claiming CO2 is the culprit with only a cursory glance in direction of our star.

    The Russians say that’s where we should be looking for CC and AGW is only a ‘tool’ of capitalism.

  107. It’s Death of Little Nell time again in the field of climate “science.” The New York Times – aka Pravda – has announced the closure of its Environment Desk. Rumours that the entire environment team, headed by Andy Revkin, have volunteered to be recycled into compost and spread on the lawn of the new billion dollar home Al Gore bought with the proceeds of his sale of Current TV to Middle Eastern oil interests are as yet unconfirmed. What we do know is that it’s very, very sad and that all over the Arctic baby polar bears are weeping bitter tears of regret.
    A spokesman for the New York Times, quoted in the Guardian, has reaffirmed the paper’s commitment to environmental issues.
    “We devote a lot of resources to it, now more than ever. We have not lost any desire for environmental coverage. This is purely a structural matter.”
    Absolutely. It’s what newspapers always do when they’re committed to a particular field: close down the entire department responsible for covering it.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100197832/now-even-pravda-admits-the-global-warming-jig-is-up/

  108. Well then el gordo please provide us with a direct link to the NASA article as that site doesn’t. It does your disingenuousness of putting up graphs with no link or context to the source.

    So it would be good if you could give us a link to the source please.

  109. Bushfire caused by father and son ‘torching meth labs…NOT CLIMATE CHANGE

    A bushfire in the Blue Mountains National Park was sparked by a father and son who allegedly torched clandestine meth labs the day police were supposed to raid the multimillion-dollar operation.
    NSW Drug Squad police charged Peter Martin, 55 and Jim Martin, 27, both of West Hoxton, on Sunday night after two laboratories deep in bushland 60 kilometres west of Camden were set on fire last Wednesday.

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/bushfire-caused-by-father-and-son-torching-meth-labs-20130114-2cofk.html#ixzz2HvxnxLlY

    http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/bushfire-caused-by-father-and-son-torching-meth-labs-20130114-2cofk.html

  110. Germany’s green energy transition has only led to greater coal consumption;

    “Black coal’s share of electricity jumped from 18.5% to 19.1%. The share of electricity from lignite-coal rose a full percent to 25.6%, thus making it Germany’s largest source of electrical power.

    Germany’s use of coal has increased and thus has not gotten more green; it has gotten dirtier. That’s what we are getting for the tens of billions of euros in added electricty costs incurred from adding renewable energy capacity.

    http://notrickszone.com/2013/01/12/germanys-green-energiewende-energy-transition-has-only-led-to-greater-coal-consumption/

  111. Creeping fascism in Australia (aided and abetted by whispered of little consequence)

    “As Greens blame coal miners and SUV drivers for contributing to firestorms that destroy houses, ponder that one man tried to reduce the risk of fires and cleared firebreaks on his property in WA in 2011 and is currently in jail for it, serving a 15 month sentence. Most of the cleared land had been cleared before in 1970 or 1983. This was mere scrubby regrowth. He was trying to separate his property from DEC (Dept of Environment and Conservation) managed land with a 20m wide fire-break.

    This was true civil disobedience. Mr Szulc is a conscientious objector, and cleared the land as a protest against laws he sees as completely unjust. Why should a landowner need to get permission to clear firebreaks on his own property?

    In a western democracy we all assume that it’s One Law for Everyone. But what if a government department made every business put in a separate management plan for approval? Isn’t that just fascism by any other name? The government department is then free to approve, deny or delay approval on a case by case basis. This pits individual farmers against the state and each other, and puts them under the direction of the state. Sure they “own” their land, but they have to do what the state says — that’s fascism, where the state allows private ownership but commandeers property at will (under communism you neither control nor “own” property). Corruption can’t be far behind.

    If the bureaucrat doesn’t like the farmer, they can make life tough. They can selectively enforce the rules. Farmers know that, which is probably why they have been so silent as other individual farmers have either been jailed, or driven to bankruptcy by bureaucrats who don’t have to answer to anyone. Who wants to stick their heads up over this parapet?

    http://joannenova.com.au/2013/01/in-australia-if-you-try-to-clear-a-firebreak-on-your-land-you-could-go-to-gaol/

  112. You’re just as much a dishonest p#!(k as elgordo Trollman. :evil:

    @ 6:50 pm:
    You left out a relevant part of the first paragraph. Why?

    The BDEW says the trend for renewable energies is positive. The share of electricity produced by renewable sources rose in 2012 to about 21.9% (2011: 20.3). However, the share of CO2-free nuclear energy fell from 17.7% to 16%. The drop in nuclear energy was partly offset by a rise in coal-fired electricity, meaning increased CO2 emissions.

    So it seems the changes in Germany have more to do with sensible decisions taken after Fukushima, rather than their “green energy transition

    @ 6:52 pm:
    The nutter Maxwell Szulc is in jail for contempt of court. Other nutters may try to make out that he’s some sort of martyr, but the simple fact is, don’t defy the court, don’t go to jail…

  113. Mobius wrote:
    “So it seems the changes in Germany have more to do with sensible decisions taken after Fukushima, rather than their “green energy transition”

    You would think that wouldn’t you?

    “The nutter Maxwell Szulc is in jail for contempt of court. Other nutters may try to make out that he’s some sort of martyr, but the simple fact is, don’t defy the court, don’t go to jail”

    That’s right, dismiss out of hand a bloke who has a demonstrable gripe against pedantic bureaucrats. Perhaps you’re one of those?

  114. The “gripe” is only “demonstrable” to other nutters.

    He cleared 345 hectares & was ordered by a court to cease & desist. Non-nutters would take that as a good indication that that should not clear any more land without going through the appropriate processes…

    Maxwell Szulc was convicted of two counts of contempt for failing to comply with a clearing injunction.

    He served three months in prison in 2010 for the same offence.

    The court heard that, when he was released from custody, Szulc illegally cleared or ploughed dozens of hectares of native vegetation from his property.

    In sentencing, the judge said his breaches were wilful, deliberate, premeditated and showed a disregard for the authority of the law.

    Sorry – that’s a nutter…

  115. At the moment it looks like the worst is over for Coonabarabran. It was really bad again around 4 hours ago however internet would not work to give you an update. Planes and helicopters were really frantic again for a few hours there only 5km from town, They are now focussing on the west and we are on the east. Baradine is apparently going to be evacuated but that is yet to be confirmed. The Senior RFS officer admitted that it was only the wind change at 6pm yesterday that saved Coonabarabran. I think it will be a more peaceful sleep for most of the towns residents tonight as the sky does not look like armageddon tonight like it did last night.

  116. Shane, I’m glad it’s not me or mine going through the trauma. I wouldn’t wish that level of anxiety upon anyone, friend or foe. As many have said – above all, stay safe!

  117. …….The evidence for an increase in such weather is clear. The CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology have reported that Australia has experienced fewer very cold days and more very hot days than it did 50 years ago.
    The current heatwave is breaking many temperature records. The nation’s hottest day occurred on Monday, January 7. For seven days in a row, from January 2-8, the average maximum temperature across Australia was above 39 degrees. And with the extreme heat has come bushfires, destruction, health problems, and disruption of infrastructure.
    Record-breaking heat is, by definition, weather not experienced for as long as records have been kept. But it’s not just unprecedented heat the nation is facing.
    In 2011, sea-surface temperatures to the north-west of Australia reached record highs. Increased water evaporation contributed to the wettest year on record in Australia. The vegetation of the inland flourished. But then the region experienced its longest period ever without rain, drying the vegetation. Now, the record heatwave is allowing fires to flourish.
    It’s a chain of climatic extremes that can have deadly consequences.
    Climate sceptics are trying to play down the significance of these events. This weekend the Climate Commission published a report by some of Australia’s most eminent climate scientists on the connection between climate change and the extreme heat Australia is experiencing.
    The report concluded that: “The length, extent and severity of this heatwave are unprecedented in the measurement record. Although Australia has always had heatwaves, hot days and bushfires, climate change has increased the risk of more intense heatwaves and extreme hot days, as well as exacerbated bushfire conditions. Scientists have concluded that climate change is making extreme hot days, heatwaves and bushfire weather worse.”…………………………………

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/rising-temperatures-make-mockery-of-rising-scepticism-20130114-2cpnz.html#ixzz2HzDd8mQw

  118. As Australia recovers from the events of last week, we face a future of increasing average temperatures and more severe extreme events: heatwaves, bushfires, cyclones, floods. It is getting harder to accept the obfuscation and delaying tactics of the fossil fuel interests and their supporters. Some are still saying they doubt the science, even though it has been correctly predicting what would happen for 25 years.
    It is a question of risk. Even if we thought there was still some doubt about the science, how much should we be prepared to gamble on the hope that it might be wrong? Nobody would get into a car if they knew there was a 90 per cent chance its brakes or steering would fail and risk their life. Few would be prepared to accept a 10 per cent chance. Even the prime minister warned people in Tasmania of the likely consequences of failing to take concerted action to slow climate change. But we don’t yet have a policy response that reflects the urgency of the situation.

    Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/politics/its-happening–just-like-climate-scientists-said-it-would-20130113-2cnej.html#ixzz2HzFWQz7n

  119. …………………..The report attempted to look at the various positions that exist around climate change. Not only did it weigh up the evidence, but it also provides us with important insights into both scientific research and the nature of knowledge.

    On the evidence before it, the Royal Society stated that there remains some uncertainly about climate science. But at the same time, it also makes the point clearly that uncertainly means the evidence is incomplete rather than that the phenomenon is not happening. As scientists tend to be a conservative bunch, they tend to use words like ‘uncertainty’ and ‘probability’, and like to set caveats pointing out when something remains “poorly understood”.

    This is responsible behaviour — there are many feedback loops in nature that we do not understand or have yet to discover. Making predictions with certainty is something that is best left to the economists — they have got so many things wrong that what they say no longer matters……………

    http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/i-wish-oh-i-wish-i-was-a-climate-skeptic1/

  120. …………………….Lewandowsk also looked at the number of peer-reviewed articles published by scientists at the UNSW’s Climate Change Research Centre that support arguments against anthropogenic global warming since 2007. The results? Zero to the sceptics — out of 110 peer-reviewed articles on climate change.

    So what has been the response of climate sceptics? Over the last few months I have been analysing the various prominent sceptic websites and articles and here is a summary of their positions

    1.The first is that all scientific research is fraud: sceptics questions every step and assumption, looking for weaknesses and uncertainties, and seeing this as fraudulent rather than accepting that this is the nature of scientific research into complex systems;

    2. All academics are on a gravy train – unlike the mining magnates who are assumed to be unbiased: this is an accusation that is continuously repeated about everyone from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to Tim Flannery (and me). The argument is that we are only in it to access government research funds;

    3. We humans cannot possibly impact the climate – its too big: They fail to accept that we already have had an impact on the oceans, arable land, deserts and forests.

    4. Various high profile sceptics like Alan Jones understand science and research better than the scientific community: while the scientists put caveats of uncertainty around complex models, the confidence in which such sceptics refute the research seems to confirm their superiority; and

    5. The process of peer review is a crock while industry-funded research seems reliable and credible: While I agree that the procedure of blind peer-review has many limitations and frustrations, it is one that attempts to limit bias and open up everyone to criticisms by their peers. Industry-funded research rarely has that luxury.

    In a recent twitter exchange, a climate change sceptic accused me of fraudulently creating anxiety and fear amongst my students………
    http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/i-wish-oh-i-wish-i-was-a-climate-skeptic1/

  121. The Denialati have been warning people for years too, but nobody will listen.

    And its unfair for the Warmista to claim all the severe weather is due to CO2.

  122. So much for the worst being over it has turned and is now only a couple of ks from town at skywatch just out the Timor Road. The smoke is billowing up again and looking real nasty. Apparently there is standby now to evacuate all of the motels in town.

  123. I might add that Shane was kind enough to send me some photos he’d taken over the last couple of days. I’ll find a way of putting them in the post.

  124. Migs I have some even better ones and will try and email them to you tonight, they are terrible compared to the ones I sent you. The fire has broken containment lines. Police were at the caravan park this morning and it appears that the town may suffer an attack from the fire from the south as well as the west when the winds change in less than 36 hours time.

  125. ………………………….He called on the media to take responsibility for the stories they run. “Unfortunately in several parts of the world, the media gives disproportionate coverage to those who take a contrarian view, even if they represent a very very small percentage of either the scientific consensus or public opinion. They get almost equal billing, and to my mind that seems a little unfair,” he said.

    Pachauri said climate change was particularly serious for Australia: ”From the looks of it, Australia is very very vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, you have droughts, you have heat waves. Sea level rise could be a serious problem in some parts of the country. So Australia undoubtedly is very vulnerable, perhaps more so than several other places in the world.”

    The Australian has long run a sceptical line on climate change, particularly in its opinion pages. Today’s story, written by environment editor Graham Lloyd, relied on a paper co-authored by Australian scientist Dr John Church. The paper apparently “said it could not link climate change and the rate of sea level rises in the 20th century”.

    But Church, a sea level expert with the CSIRO, told a media conference today that was not an accurate description of the paper.

    “So sea level clearly is linked to climate change, it is clearly linked to increases in greenhouse gases, and that’s actually in the paper which was quoted by The Australian. So the quote is, I’m sorry, inaccurate,” said Church, a co-ordinating lead author with the IPCC.

    While The Australian claimed the paper had found no increase in the rate of sea level rise, Church said the paper showed the rate of sea level rise had increased between the 18th and 19th centuries, and research showed a further acceleration of the rate during the 20th century………………

    http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/01/15/ipcc-chief-calls-for-sane-voices-in-local-climate-debate/

  126. I am using a friends computer which is on broadband to give you an update however my laptop is on wifi and that is almost non existent due to the emergency, so will try my best to get the pics to you. Also have pics of friends devastated famr house and property. Although pictures do not do the emergency and destruction justice.

  127. Thanks Mobius. I was going to visit a friend in dubbo I had not seen for 3 years but decided to stay put in Coona in case I need to evacuate my mother as I know she will want to stand her ground at home like the elderly do.

  128. We’ve heard a lot about the promise of so-called “green” energy over the past few years…

    And how it will finally lead us all to energy independence.

    But let’s face it: “Green energy” as we know it is a scandalous rip-off — and a total failure.

    After countless big promises (and billions of taxpayer dollars), wind, solar and geothermal provide a mere 9% of America’s energy needs.

    Just one look at Solyndra, the once-heralded solar company, sums up the whole “green” scam quite nicely…

    These guys alone leached $535 million (more than half a billion dollars!) in public funds before going belly-up and undergoing an FBI investigation.

    But they’re far from the only culprits in this whole fiasco…

    Just a couple of months ago, a company by the name of Himin Solar had their IPO terminated and was suspended from the stock exchange entirely.

    Then there’s BrightSource Energy, the outfit bailed out by Obama last year despite being $1.8 billion in debt.

    The scary thing is these are only a few names on a long list of companies just like them…

    In just the last year alone, dozens of other solar, wind, and geothermal firms filed for bankruptcy or are on the verge of doing so… after gorging themselves on $90 billion of OUR money.

    Take a look at a short list of the biggest “green” scam artists in recent memory:

    https://images.angelpub.com/2012/46/17114/greenhoax-1.png

    http://greenbuzzdaily.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/this-is-terrible-news.html

  129. HEALTH AND SCIENCE
    Sea rise ‘not linked to warming’, says report
    THE latest science on sea level rises has found no link to global warming and no increase in the rate of glacier melt over the past 100 years.

    A paper published last month in Journal of Climate highlights one of the great uncertainties in climate change research – will ocean levels rise by more than the current 3mm a year?

    The peer-reviewed article, “20th-century global-mean sea-level rise: is the whole greater than the sum of the parts?” by JM Gregory, sought to explain the factors involved in sea-level rises during the last century. It found that sea-level rises had not accelerated “despite the increasing anthropogenic forcing” or human influence.

    Australia’s pre-eminent sea-level scientist, John Church, contributed to the paper, which said it could not link climate change and the rate of sea-level rises in the 20th century.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/sea-rise-not-linked-to-warming-says-report/story-e6frg8y6-1226553928313

  130. HEALTH AND SCIENCE
    For the latest on climate change, turn to your local real estate agent

    THE ABC’s flagship news programs have favoured advice from a non climate scientist based on speculation from a Byron Bay real estate agent over less alarming research from one of the world’s leading scientific organisations.

    In the first of a week-long climate change special to coincide with a meeting of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scientists in Hobart, the ABC did not mention the fact that Britain’s Met Office had reduced its forecasts for average global temperatures up to 2017. The ABC has not reported the issue despite widespread debate internationally.

    Instead, the ABC, which is running the series on its main radio and television news programs, yesterday focused on the threat to coastal living from possible sea level rises without discussing the great uncertainties that exist in future sea level projections. Australia’s pre-eminent sea level expert, John Church, highlighted concerns about the melting Greenland ice sheet. And the report did mention a Climate Commission report that a 1m sea-level rise could potentially expose 250,000 homes to inundation.

    But the ABC did not mention recent scientific findings that there was no firm link to sea-level rises and climate change in the 20th century.

    A key ABC source was Alan Stokes from the National Sea Change Taskforce, a body set up in 2004 to highlight the stresses on regional infrastructure from increased migration of coastal centres. Mr Stokes told The Australian he had based his sea level rise forecast of 80cm to 1.1m on differing advice to local governments from the commonwealth and state governments. The IPCC’s 2007 report forecast sea level rises of between 18cm to 59cm by 2100. The CSIRO has since published a medium scenario of 80cm and a “high-end scenario” of 1.1m by 2100.

    The current rate of global sea level increase is 3mm a year.

    Mr Stokes said climate change was already having an impact on coastal property. “I’ve heard cases of people wanting to sell up and even trying to sell up, but finding that you know the market suddenly isn’t working with them, that the values of their property have dropped,” he told the AM program. After the broadcast, Mr Stokes told The Australian he was referring to a report about Byron Bay property in The Sydney Morning Herald.

    Erosion problems at Belongil Beach have been blamed on engineering works further along the coast that had stopped the natural flow of sand.

    The ABC declined to answer questions specifically about its lack of reporting on the Met Office report, released on Christmas Eve, or sea-level rises.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/for-the-latest-on-climate-change-turn-to-your-local-real-estate-agent/story-e6frg8y6-1226553897397

  131. Migs it might be more appropriate to have this conversation here.

    ‘The 4.2 ka event is coherent with the termination of urban Harappan civilization in the Indus valley. Thus, drought may have initiated southeastward habitat tracking within the Harappan cultural domain.

    ‘The late Holocene drought cycles following the 4.2 ka BP event vary between 200 and 800 years and are coherent with the evolution of cosmogenic 14C production rates. This suggests that solar variability is one fundamental cause behind Holocene rainfall changes over south Asia.’

    Sea level fell about a meter, because it was in the Holocene. So they would have come by boat.

    The monsoons probably failed and they were forced to migrate or starve.

  132. But the ABC did not mention recent scientific findings that there was no firm link to sea-level rises and climate change in the 20th century.
    :lol:

    Then perhaps you could mention them?

  133. Tom, maybe they did not report it, as it has been shown the report did not say what the Os claimed.

  134. as it has been shown the report did not say what the Os claimed.
    So in other words, the complaint should be

    “But the ABC did not mention recent scientific findings that wthfuwt interpreted to say that there was no firm link to sea-level rises and climate change in the 20th century. Even though it said no such thing”

    Thanks for clearing that up CU ;)

  135. Tom R
    JANUARY 16, 2013 @ 8:59 AM
    “wthfuwt ” should be wtfuwt (What The F…s Up With That)

    Tom, wtf is up with you? Watts has won the science category in the weblog awards twice. And your qualification?

  136. The Anointed ‘mindset’ behind the 10:10 group; their ‘Splattergate’; and human biomass…and what a similarity to the mindless groupthink here!

    “It’s been more than two years since ‘splattergate’ and it is now more than 16, 18 or 19 years with no statistically measurable rise in Average Global Temperatures (depending how you interpret the data). It is therefore timely perhaps to reflect on the mindset that enabled these high profile ‘spattergate’ people to donate their highly priced time to such a grotesque project as this.

    Watch the three (3) minute ‘splattergate’ advertisement by 10:10 here and read what James Delingpole predicted correctly on October 1st 2010,

    “….that No Pressure – Richard Curtis’s spectacularly ill-judged eco-propaganda movie for the 10:10 campaign – would prove a disastrous own goal for the green movement.

    But what I could never have imagined was how quickly public disgust – even among greenies – would reach such a pitch that the campaigners would be compelled to withdraw it from the internet.

    That, at any rate, is what they keep trying to do – cancelling it whenever it appears on You Tube, pulling it from their campaign website and so on.

    Unfortunately their efforts are being frustrated by people on the sceptical side of the climate debate, who keep peskily insisting on reposting the video where everyone can view it. And rightly so. With No Pressure, the environmental movement has revealed the snarling, wicked, homicidal misanthropy beneath its cloak of gentle, bunny-hugging righteousness.”

    Many people have forgotten this little ‘turning point’ in the debate on human induced catastrophic global warming. They have practised a wilful blindness involving substantial effort and a powerful blind faith powered by their ‘knowledge’ that they are right and that then end justifies the means”

    http://www.lordmoncktonfoundation.com/blog/view/354/the_anointed__mindset__behind_the_10_10_group__their__splattergate___and_human_biomass

    And just for good measure have a second look:

    Oh thats right, many of you here will not qualify to watch as you’re under age!

  137. Watts has won the science category in the weblog awards twice. And your qualification?

    lol. That’s a popularity contest genius, not a scientific endorsement.

  138. Catching up
    JANUARY 16, 2013 @ 8:53 AM
    “Tom, maybe they did not report it, as it has been shown the report did not say what the Os claimed”

    Ahh the ever watchful resident climate change expert and defender of alarmism. How has it been shown and by whom?

  139. tree, suggest you take time off us to listen to the news during the day.

    The crowd from that meeting that is going on in Tasmania, spent all day yesterday correcting the misreporting of Oz.

    It was said by the people who released the report. I assume theu know what is in it.

    I must really get under your skin, for you to attack me as you do. I have never claimed to be an expert. In fact, I have only said I rely on the experts in the fiield for what I believe.

    I am sure that the many denialist that write here have no idea of the science whatever. Most is pure rubbish,

  140. ‘I am sure that the many denialist that write here have no idea of the science whatever.’

    Speaking for myself, I’ve been critically studying CC for 20 years.

  141. “I am sure that the many denialist that write here have no idea of the science whatever. Most is pure rubbish,”

    The use of the term denialist is a giveaway and you don’t get under my skin at all. If you read attack into what i write you clearly have no understanding of what taking the piss is all about!

    As for the corrupt mob pontificating in Tasmania…Pachauri should be tarred and feathered!

  142. ‘…dismissing much science, to arrive at your belief.’

    No, in the early 1980s I accepted what the scientists said about global warming but, on closer inspection, discovered AGW is a monstrous scam.

  143. As for the corrupt mob pontificating in Tasmania…Pachauri should be tarred and feathered!

    Yes, perhaps the term ‘denialist’ is too nice by far.

  144. al gordo, your problems is that the allegations you mob make, do not stand up to any scrutiny at all.

    Shame that.

  145. There is ‘Glaciagate’, but that was then and this is now.

    “I suppose I am one of those incurable optimists who would never take a pessimistic view on anything. Looking at the extent of awareness that is growing on some of these issues; even in the case of North America there is clearly a shift in perception.”

    “Now, whether that is purely temporary or has some firm roots that would allow it to last; I don’t know. But it’s also very heartening that at the ground level, in parts of the world there are some very admirable actions taking place at the level of cities, states and provinces.”

    “I think something is happening and things are changing. Whether this will lead to some tangible outcomes in the next year or two, I don’t know, but 2015 is still a couple of years away. I expect things will certainly move in the right direction by then.”

    Pachauri in Hobart town.

  146. Miglo

    Amazing to think one of the world’s greatest civilisations, the Harrapans of the Indus Valley, migrated to Australia and interbred 4200 years ago..

  147. making a mistake, and then owning it, can hardly be described as ‘making shit up’

    Unless of course you have reached the bottom of the barrel

    again

  148. Climate Disruption

    ‘This incredible satellite image shows the extent of the snowfall that has blanketed Britain over the last few days, causing accidents, chaos on the roads, grounding flights and causing delays on the railways.

    ‘It was taken at around 11am yesterday morning as more than half of Britain was covered in snow as fresh band of storms struck the East Coast – causing chaos in Norfolk.’

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2262616/UK-weather-White-UK-Satellite-map-shows-Britain-covered-snow-30-minute-storm-hits-Norfolk-causing-spate-accidents.html#ixzz2I7a4cZrD
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  149. These incredible satellite images show simultaneous cyclones and massive fires over Australia.

    Is there a reason you keep giving us UK local winter weather reports. If you like their weather so much to daily report on it, but only in their winter, then move there… please.

  150. The reason for showing the snowy weather in the northern hemisphere winter, is to illustrate there has been a decade of normalcy.

    Global warming has stopped for the moment.

  151. Scientists told us that snow in the UK would become a thing of the past and they were wrong.

    Can you point me to where they said that please?

    And Matt Ridley loses badly.

  152. Did they say when it would become a thing of the past. What was the timeline for that prediction. Now or down the track.

  153. “However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”.

    “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.”

    Cannot see where it said there would be no more snow. Did say that is where we are heading.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html

    Same misreporting as you have done with others.

  154. The effects of snow-free winter in Britain are already becoming apparent. This year, for the first time ever, Hamleys, Britain’s biggest toyshop, had no sledges on display in its Regent Street store. “It was a bit of a first,” a spokesperson said.

    Fen skating, once a popular sport on the fields of East Anglia, now takes place on indoor artificial rinks. Malcolm Robinson, of the Fenland Indoor Speed Skating Club in Peterborough, says they have not skated outside since 1997. “As a boy, I can remember being on ice most winters. Now it’s few and far between,” he said.

    Michael Jeacock, a Cambridgeshire local historian, added that a generation was growing up “without experiencing one of the greatest joys and privileges of living in this part of the world – open-air skating”.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html

  155. Disingenuous again el gordo I see.

    They say “are becoming” despite what the headline states.

    You should know by now as we’ve pointed it out so many times in the Media threads and other topics that the media headline often doesn’t reflect the actual story.

    The main guts of the story is about the cultural effects of loss of snow but there in the second last paragraph is this:

    “Heavy snow will return occasionally, says Dr Viner, but when it does we will be unprepared.”

    So I guess heavy snow has returned as predicted by Dr Viner.

    Now if you were honest you would equally report hot weather events.

  156. I did read the whole article Mo and I let that ride because they said in 20 years it might be snowy and chaotic.

    Fail

  157. ‘David Parker, at the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in Berkshire, says ultimately, British children could have only virtual experience of snow. Via the internet, they might wonder at polar scenes – or eventually “feel” virtual cold.

    ‘Heavy snow will return occasionally, says Dr Viner, but when it does we will be unprepared. “We’re really going to get caught out. Snow will probably cause chaos in 20 years time,” he said.’

    Pretty dogmatic, methinks.

  158. Especially when they are talking about the facts, that the data that there researched has revealed. Very dogmatic.

  159. Global cooling will not be a catastrophe, but it will cause a lot of economic disruption and premature death.

    That’s why the IPCC have their junket in Van Dieman’s land…. in summer.

  160. CU, the resident climate expert dredges up an alarmist story from the year 2000 which states categorically that snowfalls are now just a thing of the past. The same article quotes the venerable Dr Viner from the infamous CRU who makes the qualifier that “heavy snow will return occasionally”

    CU then goes on to write this rubbish: “Especially when they are talking about the facts, that the data that there researched has revealed. Very dogmatic”

    What facts CU…the piece in The Independent is utter rubbish, alarmist claptrap to be imbibed by the gullible and spat out as fact.

  161. Meanwhile Dr. James Hansen and Reto Ruedy of NASA GISS have written a paper with a remarkable admission titled Global Temperature Update Through 2012.

    http://www.columbia.edu/%7Ejeh1/mailings/2013/20130115_Temperature2012.pdf

    BTW, Hansen is the “can we diffuse the Global Warming Time Bomb” guy who has been alarming folk in the US for decades.

    In his latest non peer reviewed paper Hansen is at last back-pedalling.
    “An update through 2012 of our global analysis reveals 2012 as having practically the same temperature as 2011, significantly lower than the maximum reached in 2010. These short-term global fluctuations are associated principally with natural oscillations of tropical Pacific sea surface temperatures summarized in the Nino index in the lower part of the figure. 2012 is nominally the 9th warmest year, but it is indistinguishable in rank with several other years, as shown by the error estimate for comparing nearby years. Note that the 10 warmest years in the record all occurred since 1998.

    The current stand-still of the 5-year running mean global temperature may be largely a consequence of the facr [sic] that the first half of the past 10 years had predominantly El Nino conditions, and the second half had predominantly La Nina conditions.

    The approximate stand-still of global temperature during 1940-1975 is generally attributed to an approximate balance of aerosol cooling and greenhouse gas warming during a period of rapid growth of fossil fuel use with little control on particulate air pollution, but quantitative interpretation has been impossible because of the absence of adequate aerosol measurements”

  162. And there is another nail in the coffin of the so called settled science.

    Science Gets The Stratosphere Wrong

    “Time and again the proponents of catastrophic climate change use the mantra of “settled science” to shout down their critics. This is nothing less than blind faith that science actually knows what is going on in the complex environment that regulates this planet’s climate. Imagine a part of that system that is literally only 10km from anywhere on Earth, a component of our environment that science thought it understood quite well. Now imagine the embarrassment when a major review in a noted journal finds that previous datasets associated with this component are wrong and have been wrong for more than a quarter of a century. Yet that is precisely what has happened. The area in question is Earth’s stratosphere and the impact of this report is devastating for climate scientists and atmospheric modelers everywhere.

    Scientists have been launching instrument packages into the upper portions of Earth’s atmosphere for a long time. Instruments used for such research were standardized decades ago and programs to collect such data on a world wide basis put into place. If any part of atmospheric science was considered well in hand, if not actually “settled” (a phrase seldom used by real scientists) it would be the long term monitoring of global stratospheric temperatures. However, a report in the 29 November 2012 issue of Nature, “The mystery of recent stratospheric temperature trends,” says that things are not so”

    http://theresilientearth.com/?q=content/science-gets-stratosphere-wrong

  163. And last but not least, the GREEN WEENIE OF THE WEEK . This must have been written with green weenies like ME and CU in mind.

    Here are a few excerpts…
    The steady, relentless collapse of the climate campaign proceeds apace,

    The media is slowly starting to give up on the whole game

    A lot of climateers are striking their best Kevin Bacon “All-is-well” poses (from Animal House), but this looks to me just like what happened around the time of 9/11, when urban affairs reporters who couldn’t stop churning our five-part features on how suburban sprawl was ruining St. Louis (or plug in your own local metropolis) were reassigned to other beats…

    Not to be left behind, Reuters has decided that it may as well switch sides completely, with a feature today that “Climate Change Doesn’t Have To Be All Bad.”

    And if the climate campaign wasn’t already in denial about being abandoned by The One, their media allies, and new carbon riches baron Al Gorezeera, a new report coming out this week from Harvard’s Theta Skocpol should really harsh their mellow. Skocpol, a prominent liberal political scientist, argues that environmentalists deserve most of the blame for the defeat of their agenda.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/01/green-weenie-of-the-week-the-climate-campaign-again.php

  164. ‘The five-year mean global temperature has been flat for the last decade, which we interpret as a combination of natural variability and a slow down in the growth rate of net climate forcing.’

    James Hansen

  165. Tree, the facts that you conveniently dismiss. The facts that you say are a part of a conspiracy. The facts that over 90% of scientist who work in the fieled bleive and support.

  166. the ’97% of scientists’ is an urban myth.

    I don’t recall you disproving this fact?

    Don’t forget the complete sentence either grodo ;)

  167. Tom R wrote:

    “I don’t recall you disproving this fact?”

    What that the ’97% of scientists’ is an urban myth?

    Own goal Tom….think about what you just wrote…hahah

  168. think about what you just wrote

    try it, in context.

    Perhaps you can have a go at disproving the fact that 97% of climate scientists agree with the theory of AGW?

  169. Perhaps you can have a go at disproving the fact that 97% of climate scientists agree with the theory of AGW?

    Easy

    “It originated from an endlessly reported 2009 American Geophysical Union (AGU) survey consisting of an intentionally brief two-minute, two question online survey sent to 10,257 earth scientists by two researchers at the University of Illinois. Of the about 3.000 who responded, 82% answered “yes” to the second question, which like the first, most people I know would also have agreed with.

    Then of those, only a small subset, just 77 who had been successful in getting more than half of their papers recently accepted by peer-reviewed climate science journals, were considered in their survey statistic. That “98% all scientists” referred to a laughably puny number of 75 of those 77 who answered “yes””

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that-scientific-global-warming-consensus-not/

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

    The nail in the coffin…

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that-scientific-global-warming-consensus-not/

  170. That’s not a nail Treeman but yet another deception. Do a search and you will find plenty shooting that down.

  171. ‘Science achieves a consensus when scientists stop arguing.’

    That’s can’t be true, scientists are advocates and the science is far from settled in a chaotic system like earth’s climate.

  172. That’s can’t be true

    Unfortunately, it is, when you read the interpretation of ‘arguing’. It is not like what happens in this thread, it is in the sense of scientists ‘arguing’.

    There are lots of people ‘nitpicking’, but they aren’t ‘arguing’, in the sense of putting forward papers to contradict the validity or otherwise of the theory. In that sense, there is consensus.

    A scientist, (or anyone) can challenge it with a scientific paper. It’s just that none have.

  173. Tom that is completely bogus, we have had this argument over and over, the peer review system on environmental science has been corrupted by the Klimatariat.

    Many boffins will need to retract their preconceived silly notions, in the light of new evidence which is readily available, CO2 is not causing global warming.

  174. the peer review system on environmental science has been corrupted by the Klimatariat

    No it hasn’t. You just disagree with their findings. That doesn’t make it wrong. Just unpalatable to you

  175. The Australian’s climate correction
    Published 12:38 PM, 17 Jan 2013
    Updated 1:12 PM, 17 Jan 2013
    Tags
    climate change, global warming, sea level rise, The Australian, Environment
    Login or register to post comments

    Daniel Palmer
    Branded in red as an ‘exclusive’, a front page headline on The Australian on Tuesday turned more than a few heads with the assertion that sea level rise was ‘not linked to warming’. It now appears the story was rather optimistic in its reading of an abstract of a scientific paper.
    Pointing to a study in the Journal of Climate from November last year, the article said:
    “The latest science on sea level rise has found no link to global warming and no increase in the rate of glacier melt over the past 100 years.”
    In the report it was noted that “Australia’s pre-eminent sea level scientist, John Church, contributed to the paper”, although he, nor any other contributors to the study, were quoted. Hours later, however, he was heavily quoted around the nation after telling journalists:
    “Sea level clearly is linked to climate change, it clearly is linked to greenhouse gases and that was in the paper quoted by The Australian…
    “Sea level has already increased the rate of rise from the 18th and 19th century. The instrumental record would indicate an acceleration during the 20th century and the projections will indicate a further acceleration during the 21st century.”
    Sea level rise is a major talking point when it comes to climate change with the greatest near-term risk seen to low-lying island nations like Kiribati and the Maldives. The issue was heavily discussed last year in light of a record ice melt in the Arctic and the effects of Hurricane Sandy on New York (likely exacerbated by higher sea levels).
    While most climate scientists believe sea level rise is accelerating, The Australian article claimed “one of the great uncertainties in climate change research” is whether ocean levels will rise more swiftly in the years ahead.
    The article has now completely disappeared online – replaced by a “page not found” 404 error message – with a correction today issued in print:
    “A report in The Australian on Tuesday… said a paper by JM Gregory, with a contribution from John Church, had “found no link to global warming and no increase in the rate of glacier melt over the past 100 years”. In fact, the paper found the effect of anthropogenic global warming on the rate of sea-level rise would have been greater in the 20th century but for volcanic activity. It found that in the past two decades, the rate of sea-level rise had been larger than in the 20th century.”
    There is one problem with the correction: it is buried in a small paragraph on the side of the second page. The initial story, in contrast, was considered front page material. In other words an inaccurate story had a prime spot, but the accurate revision was comparatively hidden.
    Awkward timing
    The study has now received considerable attention from media outlets and on blogs, but one thing has been missed: the timing of the article.
    A number of climate sceptic blogs commented about the abstract of the study in December, with the study itself published in November. It then appeared as an exclusive in The Australian on Tuesday January 15, the same day that some of the world’s leading scientists were meeting in H…………………………

    http://www.climatespectator.com.au/commentary/australian-s-climate-correction?utm_source=Climate%2BSpectator%2Bdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Climate%2BSpectator%2Bdaily

    Lying bastards those mob in Tassie are.

    el gordo, I bow to your twenty or more years of study. Maybe you could give me ten names disputing that man made climate change is not a reality.

    They have to be qualified, experience, scientists, that work in the field of climate.

    I have been having provblems of finding such people.

    Also could you let me know were they work, their qualification and who pays them.

    we know there are a gathering of 200 or more, meeting now in Tassie with the opposite view.

  176. ‘we know there are a gathering of 200 or more, meeting now in Tassie with the opposite view.’

    guffaw …. pigs in a trough.

  177. Roger is one scientist…

    ‘In an area where I have expertise on, extremes and their impacts, the report by the US Global Change Research Program is well out of step with the scientific literature, including the very literature it cites and conclusions of the IPCC.

    ‘Questions should (but probably won’t) be asked about how a major scientific assessment has apparently became captured as a tool of advocacy via misrepresentation of the scientific literature — a phenomena that occurs repeated in the area of extreme events.

    ‘Given the strength of the science on this subject, the USGCRP must have gone to some effort to mischaracterize it by 180 degrees. How is it that it got things so wrong? –Roger Pielke Jr., 15 January 2013

  178. When an organisation like Munich Re issues a report like that, people, business and politicians sit up and take notice. The bottom line is that, due to the identified increased risk of damage and loss due to more severe weather events in North America, they are going to charge more for their insurance underwriting services. They have made a link between climate change and the wallets of America. And it’s when a dollar cost can be placed on something as esoteric as climate change science that people begin to take notice — we live in societies governed by economists, not scientists.

    Indeed.

    An AusSMC rapid reaction early that day included these comments from Dr Markus Donat, a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Climate Change Research Centre, at the University of New South Wales:

    “In recent studies we have analysed how extreme temperatures have changed globally. For most regions, including Australia, we found that extremely high temperatures have become more frequent and more intense, while extremely low temperatures are occurring less frequently than they did in the middle of the 20th century.

    “Counting the number of very warm days (in this specific case defined as the warmest 5 per cent during the 1951-1980 period) we found that during the most recent 3 decades 1981-2010 the frequency of days in this warmest category has increased by 40 per cent globally.”

    http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2013/01/17/3670931.htm

    Still waiting for a reaction to Muller’s statement:

    Call me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_Earth_Surface_Temperature

  179. Here’s some more scientists not happy with the AGW theory.

    Freeman Dyson, Physics & Mathematics
    Richard Lindzen, Atmospheric Physics
    Garth Paltridge, Atmospheric Sciences
    Hendrik Tennekes, Aeronautical Engineering
    Antonino Zichichi, (Nuclear) Physicist
    These Scientists believe that global warming is a natural process:
    Khabibullo Abdusamatov, Mathematician & Astronomer
    Sallie Baliunas, Astronomer
    Reid Bryson, Atmospheric Scientist, Geologist, & Meteorologist
    George V. Chilingar(ian), Petroleum Geologist
    Ian Clark, Hydrogeologist
    Chris de Freitas, Climate Scientist
    David Douglass, Solid-State Physicist
    Don Easterbrook, Geologist
    William M. Gray, Geographer, Meteorologist, Geophysicist
    William Harper, Physicist (Optics & Spectroscopy)
    William Kinimonth, Meteorologist
    David Legates, Climatologist
    Marcel Leroux, Climatologist
    Tad Murty, Oceanographer
    Tim Patters, Paleoclimatologist
    Ian Plimer, Geologist
    Tom Segalstad, Geologist
    Frederick Seitz, Solid-State Physicist
    Nicola Scafetta, Research Scientist; physics
    Nir Shaviv, Astrophysicist
    Fred Singer, Atmospheric Physicist
    Willie Soon, Astrophysicist
    Roy Spencer, Research Scientist,
    Philip Stott, Biogeographer
    Henrik Svensmark, Physicist
    Jan Veizer, Environmental Geochemist
    These Scientists believe the cause of global warming is unknown:
    Syun-Ichi Akasofu, Geophysicist
    Claude Allegre, Geochemist
    August H. Auer Jr., Meteorologist
    Robert C. Balling, Jr., Geographer
    John Christy (IPCC contributor.), Atmospheric Scientist
    Petr Chylek, Theoretical Physicist
    David Deming, Geologist
    Craig D. Idso, Geographer
    Sherwood Idso, Agronomist, Botanist
    Patrick Michaels, Ecological Climatologist.
    Ivar Giaever, Physicist, Nobel Laureate

  180. :Roger is one scientist…:

    Name would be a help, followed by qualifications, experience and who he works for. I forgot, also the field.

  181. Yes Col, just like Watts who promised he would abide by the outcomes of an in depth study of temperature stations, something he had been railing against for a long time. He agreed that those conducting the study were legit and the terms of the study were kosher.

    That is until the study complete with reams of open data didn’t conclude what Watts had assumed it would, then he back flipped and put out doctored data as he often does.

  182. CU … Kelvin Kemm is another one and with full CV.

    ‘If it turns out that man-made industrial CO2 is not leading to climate change then the whole carbon market could disappear faster than a puff of wind.

    ‘Remember that the measured increase in the earth’s atmospheric CO2 concentration over the last century does not match global temperature increase very well; in fact, a good correlation is distinctly absent. Furthermore, a competing theory argues that the sun’s magnetic influence on incoming cosmic radiation seems to match the observed temperature profile of the planet a lot better; this theory relates to varying cloud cover, influenced by the varying amount of incoming cosmic radiation.

    ‘The carbon trading business seems too good to be true. Money trees are not common. Warning bells should be ringing.’

    ___________

    Dr. Kelvin Kemm is a nuclear physicist and business strategy consultant in Pretoria, South Africa. He is a member of the International Board of Advisors of the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), based in Washington, DC (www.CFACT.org) and received the prestigious Lifetime Achievers Award of the National Science and Technology Forum of South Africa.

  183. Liars and cheats

    Really, you should either back that up. or retract it.

    Really, a look back up this thread, and I really bemoan the fact that a lying little rodent like grodo is responsible for the loss of a contributor like LOVO

    I want my money back!

  184. To be quite honest, I can well understand LOVO’s frustration with el gordo. The self-admitted ‘he’ is a a real pain in the ar*e. As far as I can tell he has no scientific credentials and certainly no scientific claim to fame. Moreover, he constantly cites sources that have been discredited again and again. Talk about a slow learner.

    Why should one give credence to a complete loser, at least in the scientific sense.

    Frankly, el gordo is in need of professional help and if employed that responsibility would fall on the employer. All the signs are there. But I’m not sure whether Centrelink bears that responsibility, even though el gordo’s main source of income is from that source.

  185. Yes el gordo The Australian that Treeman loves to quote as a credible source on all things but especially Climate Change.

    Scams, shonks, deceptions, misdirections and The Australian, falls for them all with nary a thought.

  186. ‘…even though el gordo’s main source of income is from that source.’

    You’re a nasty piece of work.

  187. Sorry el gordo if you think I’m nasty (but really I don’t care), but I’ve raised any number of issue with you but you choose not to respond. From what I can deduce you make frequent references to how you and your (business?) partner are constant visitors to Centrelink. Your (foolish) choice to post. Under no compulsion, I assume.

    If you don’t want me to cite such visits then don’t post such (personal) information. It’s your choice

    Now how about telling me about your qualifications to make ‘scientific judgements’?

  188. Fairfax also gets things wrong, as does the ABC.

    Not with the frequency, blatancy and partiality the oo does

    Sorry el gordo if you think I’m nasty

    Coming from a proven lying, backstabbing, two-faced thing like grodo, it really means nothing Col

    I WANT LOVO BACK!

    Can we do a swap?

  189. On scientific qualifications, youngest who is about to complete her PhD in molecular bioscience said to me, Not my field, but the debate on whether or not climate change is “real” finished a decade ago in all countries except Australia and some redneck parts of America.

  190. ‘…you make frequent references to how you and your (business?) partner are constant visitors to Centrelink.’

    My business partner went yesterday, the first time in years, because our town is in recession. That’s the relevance.

    And as for scientific judgement its clear that you have been brainwashed by the ‘faith’, whereas I can still think for myself.

  191. “Not my field, but the debate on whether or not climate change is “real” finished a decade ago in all countries except Australia and some redneck parts of America.”

    This M.D. agrees with that PhD but that isn’t the question here…Whether “we” are the cause, is….

  192. except Australia and some redneck parts of America.

    Isn’t Australia really just a redneck part of America?

    It often feels like it :(

  193. Tom, unfortunately in both nations the almighty dollar rules, so that there is far more money to be had in attempting to maintain the status quo re the big polluters than there is in trying to find solutions such as alternative energy sources. Hence the reason that the USA in particular is now lagging well and truly behind in this field, the Germans and the Chinese having taken over. I see that Japan is now investing heavily in wind energy.

  194. LONDON, Jan 17 (Reuters Point Carbon) – ‘EU carbon prices hit a fresh record low on Thursday as poor economic data from Germany and relatively healthy supply of coal continued to force European power and coal prices lower.’

  195. “Now how about telling me about your qualifications to make ‘scientific judgements’?”

    A self confessed kitchen table scientist with a stated interest in weather.

    Also lumped me in with being a kitchen table scientist once, something I immediately rejected and also rejected that el gordo or anyone else here was any type of scientist, amateur, kitchen table or otherwise.

    The fact is the contrary stance for most of those opposing climate change here is purely along ideological grounds, but with el gordo my personal opinion is that it’s to be contrarian for the sake of it, just as el gordo throws in single paragraph often nonsensical contrary statements on other topics.

  196. ‘climate change here is purely along ideological grounds,’

    Only in your mind, the leftards and watermelon brigade are defending the faith …. they claim global warming is unnatural and a buildup in CO2 will destroy the planet.

    This view of the earth’s atmosphere is misguided and short sighted.

  197. See being contrary for the sake of it with the well and truly quashed “faith” meme.

    It’s the deniers who are running on faith as they don’t have the science to back them up yet they idolise shonks like Monkton whose hooked up with the Catch the Fire mob who believe in ID.

  198. We have the science to back us up, nothing unusual is happening with our climate, whereas the Klimatariat are trusting in models which have failed.

  199. More shameless cherry picking … Cold Air Outbreak (CAO).

    ‘Shoppers have emptied the shelves of a supermarket as severe weather warnings for expected snow showers prompted panic buying in Wales.

    ‘Anxious customers stripped a South Wales’ shop’s shelves of bread and milk in preparation for blizzards which are expected to hit Britain tonight, as the Met Office issued its first red warning for snow in two years.

    ‘The rare and most serious severe weather warning – issued for Wales – means everyone should take action to protect themselves and others from the impact of extreme weather.’

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2263837/UK-weather-Snow-forecast-UK-motorists-told-travel-avoid-it.html#ixzz2IHCOIIi8
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  200. ‘…they expect the longer-term trend will be more warming at a more dramatic rate.’

    Temperatures have plateaued since the 1998 El Nino spike, which accounts for the continual high readings.

    The pace of cooling should pick up next year and….

  201. We have the science to back us up, nothing unusual is happening with our climate, whereas the Klimatariat are trusting in models which have failed.

    Three lies in one sentence. A new record.

  202. The pace of cooling should pick up next year and may last a couple of decades.

    Temperatures might rise again quite quickly after 20 years and could rise 2.5C degrees to the level of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP).

  203. …………………………………………….The lead-in climate conditions for this event were four months of very warm temperatures across Australia. September to December 2012 was the warmest such period on record (since 1910) for daily maximum temperatures.
    During November, a precursor of the January heat wave affected many parts of the country for a prolonged period. It set the highest spring temperature on record for Victoria (and NSW fell just short of its record; it couldn’t beat the extreme heat that occurred in 2009). In this context, the recent heat wave is little more than an extension of a record hot four months for Australia, made worse because it is mid-summer.
    We’re seeing more record-breaking heat events than cold events
    A relatively small change in the average temperature can easily double the frequency of extreme heat events. Australia has warmed steadily since the 1940s, and the probability of extreme heat has now increased almost five-fold compared with 50 years ago.
    Within the past decade, the number of extreme heat records in Australia has outnumbered extreme cold records by almost 3:1 for daytime maximum temperatures and 5:1 for night-time minimum temperature.
    The duration of heat waves has increased in some parts, especially in the northern half of the continent. Put another way, the frequency of abnormally hot days (above the 90 per cent percentile) has increased by 30 per cent and the frequency of hot nights (above the 90 per cent percentile) has increased by 50 per cent.
    It is worth noting the summer just gone in the US was the warmest on record, with extreme heat records broken at a rate never previously seen before. Studies here and overseas are now showing that many of the recent extreme summer heat events around the world – such as the European heat wave of 2003, the Russian heat wave of 2010, and US heat waves during 2011 and 2012 – would have been very, very unlikely without the influence of global warming.
    Global warming is not only warming summer but also broadening the summer-like period of the year, creating the perfect set-up for record extreme heat.
    Of great concern in Australia is the substantial increasing trend in severe fire weather – weather conducive to the spread and intensification of bushfires and grass fires – in about half of the monitoring sites studied around the country, with a concentrated increase in the southeast of the continent. The fire season is now longer, reducing the time for preparation such as fuel reduction.
    Again this is not surprising, and has been predicted in advance – the combined impact of warming and cool season drying is increasing the fire danger in a region already highly fire prone.
    We expect extreme warm weather events will occur more often
    Future warming of the climate due to greenhouse gas emissions will very likely lead to further increases in the frequency of unusually hot days and nights and continued declines in unusually cold days and nights.
    These changes will result in weather events which are increasingly beyond our prior experiences.
    And it’s not just temperature extremes. Climate model projections indicate that the frequency of many different types of extreme weather will change as the planet warms.
    Neil Plummer is Assistant Director Climate Information Services with the Bureau of Meteorology. Blair Trewin is a climatologist at BoM. David Jones is Manager of Climate Monitoring and Prediction at the Bureau. Karl Braganza is the Head of Climate Monitoring at the Bureau of Meteorology’s National Climate Centre. Rob Smalley is a climatologist at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    http://www.climatespectator.com.au/commentary/what-s-causing-australia-s-heat-wave?utm_source=Climate%2BSpectator%2Bdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Climate%2BSpectator%2Bdaily

  204. A First Fleeter Reports

    “But even this heat [of 27th Dec 1790] was judged to be far exceeded in the latter end of the following February, when the north-west wind again set in, and blew with great violence for three days.

    ‘At Sydney, it [the temperature] fell short by one degree of what I have just recorded [109F]: but at Rose Hill, [modern day Parramatta] it was allowed, by every person, to surpass all that they had before felt, either there, or in any other part of the world. Unluckily they had no thermometer to ascertain its precise height.”

    “Were I asked the cause of this intolerable heat, I should not hesitate to pronounce, that it was occasioned by the wind blowing over immense deserts, which, I doubt not, exist in a north-west direction from Port Jackson, and not from fires kindled by the natives.”

    Watkins Tench

  205. @ Mo,

    and also rejected that el gordo or anyone else here was any type of scientist, amateur, kitchen table or otherwise.

    (my emphasis) :smile:

    Generalisations can be problematic. I confess to post-grad qualifications in a couple of disciplines (applied computing, biology).

    Although retired I worked in research, and in the application of current and ongoing scientific research and practice to problems concerning practical land management in a variety of ecosystems. Such work involved much cross-disciplinary research and learning, although not including climatology :lol:

    Although not a practicing research scientist, I am certainly familiar enough with scientific tools methods and principles to comment on science in general, and in some cases in particular as well :smile:

    I haven’t mentioned it much, as I prefer to base my arguments in reason and logic, rather than by attempting to “pull rank” :evil:

    I really can’t be bothered with the dimwitted trolls and their religious ranting, except when a particularly egregious lie “jumps out” as I scroll on by, and commend those attempting to quell the tides of ignorance..

    If I might make one argument “from authority” it would be that a general awareness of science (matriculation, or earlier), is quite sufficient to understand the generalities behind AGW, and to dispose of most of the oft-repeated lies of the denialists.

    Sites such as Skeptical Science and Real Climate are useful to those who wish to check the “plausibility” of a denier’s assertions against reality.

    That each of these sites provide ready answers to the common lies propagated by the denialists, means, of course they will (and do)attempt to brand these sites as being part of the “grand conspiracy” of scientists, reality and the left wing in general, bent on global domination. As with their other assertions of faith, no evidence will be provided.

    Just sayin’ :mrgreen:

  206. Fair enough pterosaur1.

    I also like the site where they have three sections to each topic ranging for the simple non-scientific explanation t the full scientific.

  207. Why does one of my age feel a little Déjà vu,when the science of climate change is discussed.

    Why does one see so many similarities to the scientific arguments in my youth, re the damage that smoking tobacco does to the human body.

    The denialist were wrong then. Suspect they will be again.

    Have no problems with sceptics. That is normal and healthy. One must always challenge,

  208. @Cu

    Why does one see so many similarities to the scientific arguments in my youth, re the damage that smoking tobacco does to the human body.

    One of the reasons may be that in many cases, its the same people pushing the same anti -scientific message(s).? Something they also hold in common with deniers of evolutionary theory who peddle the junk science of ID.

    Pretty much all examples are also denizens of the extreme right, as it wages its war on reality. Which is, of course. doomed. :twisted:

    Skeptical Science is the site you refer to Mo, – they also have an app for smartphones(or maybe just iphones ?).

  209. Yes pterosaur1. The same PR people, the same tactics of wheeling out paid scientists to peddle junk science, the same quackery and quacks to confuse the science and empirical data, the same disregard for the damage done, lives destroyed and it will end in the same result, the science being proven, but then they don’t care as the delays have gained them the time to shore up more money and walk away much richer at the cost of the people and their planet.

    Also similar are the birdbrained doing their work for them in spouting the falsehoods they manufacture and denigrating the scientists and the science. They must laugh at the idiocy of these people, mostly right wing ideologues, who mindlessly repeat their fabrications whilst they are being screwed by them along with the rest.

    I remember well the arguments in Letters to the Editor, on TV and in pubs by those who said that smoking was proven harmless because they saw a scientist hired by a tobacco company saying they have proven that smoking doesn’t cause cancer, and the medical research showing the link as being falsified. Then the newspaper columns devoted to the “proof” that smoking was harmless and then when that was no longer tenable, that second hand smoke was harmless, which was the tobacco companies second line of attack against the evidence.

    The similarities are many and the outcome will be the same, too late by far but the same.

  210. Comparing the “tobacco” debate with the “AGW now climate change” debate is as absurd as comparing the struggle for civil rights of African Americans to that of “marriage equality” for homosexuals! We get it, doing so makes said arguments more appealing to the “layman” but with very little logic, easily broken apart. Apples and oranges gentleman…Especially when some have all but implied or admitted the AGW debate is more about the “end justifying the means” more so than anything to do with “climate”…Very entertaining to peruse though…

    So in this analogy, we can consider “big tobacco” whom in this scenario? Oh that’s right, warming is killing us so “skeptics” must be “big tobacco”…LMAO…Yeah, keep pushing that one, bound to be as effective as taxing a trace gas….When are we banning gaseous H2O again? You guys are hilarious, honestly…

    Asbestos exposure, tobacco use etc, all VERIFIABLE in vitro, through scientific investigation aka the scientific method; AGW…NOPE! Why does it not surprise me “some” here don’t seem to grasp that little concept? I guess it doesn’t!

  211. LONDON, Jan 18 (Reuters Point Carbon) – ‘European carbon prices plunged by as much as 10 percent on Friday after energy bourse EEX cancelled a German auction for 4 million EU Allowances, citing a lack of demand.’

  212. Its been hot in Sydney, but nothing is new under the sun.

    ‘An immense flight of bats driven before the
    wind, covered all the trees around the settlement, whence
    they every moment dropped dead or in a dying state, unable
    longer to endure the burning state of the atmosphere.

    ‘Nor did the ‘perroquettes’, though tropical birds, bear it better.
    The ground was strewn with them in the same condition as
    the bats’ (Watkins Tench 1793).

  213. ‘Weather Channel forecaster Leon Brown said that the prolonged cold snap is a once in a decade occurrence. She said: ‘We expect very cold conditions to last another week – and a two-week period such as this, with sub-zero nights and days close to freezing is a one in 10 year occurrence.

    ‘We could see -15C to -20C lows later in the week in the Midlands, mid Wales and Scottish Highlands.’

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2264917/UK-weather-Treacherous-black-ice-causes-travel-chaos-country-forecasters-predict-snow-afternoon-Heathrow-cancels-200-flights.html#ixzz2IU0SX1Sq
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  214. The EU Carbon market tanks…
    “EU carbon plummets 10 pct on German sale cancellation
    18 Jan 2013 17:12
    LONDON, Jan 18 (Reuters Point Carbon) – European carbon prices plunged by as much as 10 percent on Friday after energy bourse EEX cancelled a German auction for 4 million EU Allowances, citing a lack of demand.

    “The value of the world’s carbon market fell by 36% last year, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance, the first annual contraction to hit the CO2 reduction mechanism since 2008.

    The worth of traded EU carbon allowances and UN emissions credits fell from €95 billion in 2011 to a reported €61 billion. Analysts blame a near halving of the average price of carbon allowances from €11.2 a tonne in 2011 to €6.4 a tonne by the end of 2012″

    It’s now skidding along at €5.. and Australians are paying $25…no wonder Swan is ripe for the plucking and Gillard’s on skid row!

  215. And there is much more to be made of the folly not to carry out controlled burning. One of my oldest friends is the RFS co-ordinator in Northern NSW and he plants the Greens firmly in the frame on this one.

  216. @treetroll

    …….and he plants the Greens firmly in the frame on this one.

    Then, like you, he doesn’t know what he is talking about, just looking to blame the greens for something, anything, rather than face reality.

    If you had a clue. you would have checked the Green’s policies rather than make a continuing fool of yourself. :lol:

  217. The Australian Greens believe that:

    ‘Human induced climate change poses the greatest threat to our world, and urgent and sustained local, national and global action is required in this critical decade to 2020 to ensure a safe climate.

    ‘A safe climate will require a return to an atmospheric concentration of 350ppm or lower of greenhouse gases (and CO2 equivalents).’

    In light of NOAA’s revelation that climate is insensitive to CO2 and there are no positive feedbacks, the Greens are completely out of touch with scientific reality.

  218. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=new-simulations-question-gulf-stream-role-tempering-europes-winters

    In Brief

    Three new climate studies indicate that our long-held belief about the Gulf Stream’s role in tempering Europe’s winters may not be correct. Yet the studies themselves do not agree.

    Two of the three studies ascribe a surprisingly large role to the direction of the prevailing winds, and one focuses on the heat lost from the ocean.
    Many climate models indicate that extensive melting of Arctic ice would not actually shut down the Gulf Stream, as previously thought.

    The ocean’s influence on climate in Europe and elsewhere should become clearer within a decade, now that a global array of more than 3,000 floating ocean sensors called Argo is making near-real-time maps of temperature and salinity down to 2,000 meters.

    LMAO…Well, at least the scientist know “the debate isn’t over” even if the “flock” does….

  219. Doing an el gordo


    Globally sea levels have risen, with accelerations and decelerations due to natural variability and climate change. CSIRO

  220. “……………..Peer review is an essential part of science. Journal editors recruit scientists to provide expert opinion on manuscripts submitted by other scientists. Reviewers are expected to identify major errors and determine if an article presents new and significant science.

    And while peer review is essential, it can fail.

    Peer review prevents many, but not all, substandard articles from being published. Such failures are usually annoying but inconsequential, as poor quality articles are generally ignored. But when peer review fails on an article with contentious conclusions, this failure can be amplified by bloggers, the media and political campaigns.

    Alberto Boretti’s paper on sea level rise near Sydney – which was published in the journal Coastal Engineering in June 2012 – is one such failure.

    This week, Coastal Engineering has published a commentary in which we discuss major flaws in Boretti’s paper, some of which would be unacceptable in an undergraduate lab report.

    Despite these flaws, Boretti’s conclusions were reported uncritically in the Australian Financial Review, Quadrant Online, The Australian and by Andrew Bolt over the past year…..”

    How did this happen?

    http://theconversation.edu.au/peer-review-isnt-perfect-and-the-media-doesnt-always-help-11318?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+22+January+2013&utm_content=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+22+January+2013+CID_5c10b48e29665269aaa7c5c8e90ab951&utm_source=campaign_monitor&utm_term=Peer%20review%20isnt%20perfect%20%20and%20the%20media%20doesnt%20always%20help

  221. BoM and CSIRO are the Klimatariat.

    CU for greater clarity we should agree that ‘climate change’ is ‘crap’ and that ‘global warming’ is the correct wording.

  222. What went wrong?

    When science reporters discuss new studies and their claims, they usually seek expert commentary. Is the paper as significant as claimed in the press release or by blogs? What are the implications of the study? Are there good reasons to doubt the results?

    Australia has significant expertise in the science of sea level rise. However, you won’t find any expert commentary on Boretti’s claims in The Australian Financial Review, Quadrant Online, The Australian or Andrew Bolt’s Blog. (Some articles quote experts on sea level rise, but not on Boretti’s specific claims.)

    To make matters worse, Andrew Bolt’s Blog and The Australian’s Cut & Paste juxtaposed Boretti’s bogus claims with the conclusions of more rigorous studies, such as those of CSIRO scientists. In doing so, the journalists created an illusion of controversy, using Boretti’s sloppy pseudoscience to undermine real science.

    The faith of the media in Boretti seems particularly strange given his lack of expertise. Sure, he’s an Associate Professor … but with expertise in car engines, not sea levels.

    Unfortunately the media’s faith in Alberto Boretti (who has changed his name to Albert Parker) isn’t as strange as it should be. Some journalists have given up critically analysing claims that support their agenda … even if that means relying on pseudo-scientists who turn 78 into 50.

    http://theconversation.edu.au/peer-review-isnt-perfect-and-the-media-doesnt-always-help-11318?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+22+January+2013&utm_content=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+22+January+2013+CID_5c10b48e29665269aaa7c5c8e90ab951&utm_source=campaign_monitor&utm_term=Peer%20review%20isnt%20perfect%20%20and%20the%20media%20doesnt%20always%20help

  223. “The faith of the media in Boretti seems particularly strange given his lack of expertise. Sure, he’s an Associate Professor … but with expertise in car engines, not sea levels.”

    As many experts used by deniers. Not experts in the field.

  224. Does not global warming, change the climate.

    What I am talking about, is the man made climate change, caused by the increasing emissions of carbon and other elements into the atmosphere.

  225. “,,,,,,As natural disasters happen more often, rising insurance premiums will force the private sector to take action on climate change. AAP
    Hurricane Sandy may or may not be a direct result of climate change, but what is certain is that the incidence of extreme climate events is increasing.

    Such events are predicted by climate models, according to the IPCC, which has warned that “a changing climate leads to changes in the frequency, intensity, spatial extent, duration, and timing of extreme weather and climate events, and can result in unprecedented extreme weather and climate events”.

    Breaking records in terms of wind ferocity, Hurricane Sandy hit land in a densely populated area on the East Coast of the US as well as devastating large parts of the Caribbean. The storm surge caused widespread flooding and damage. Not only was it a human tragedy, but property damage is likely to cost $50 billion. The direct costs to the insurance industry are lower, in the order of between $10 and $20 billion.

    http://theconversation.edu.au/climate-change-is-everybodys-business-11480?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+22+January+2013&utm_content=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+22+January+2013+CID_5c10b48e29665269aaa7c5c8e90ab951&utm_source=campaign_monitor&utm_term=Climate%20change%20is%20everybodys%20business

    President Obama has put climate change on the top of his list to do.

  226. “a changing climate leads to changes in the frequency, intensity, spatial extent, duration, and timing of extreme weather and climate events, and can result in unprecedented extreme weather and climate events”.

    Like heavy snow in Russia, Europe and UK is also climate change.

  227. Dr. Roger Piekle Jr. said today in a tweet that:

    ‘So with EU ETS carbon “worthless” Aussie gov’t linkage to EU ETS now looking like a cost-free bit of political genius with no policy effect.’

  228. “The earth has warmed up many times, for purely natural reasons, and those episodes often featured huge shifts of climate, partial collapse of the polar ice sheets and substantial increases in sea level.”

    Yes…We are all very aware of this, well at least those who are a bit more “balanced”…

    “Skeptics who play down the importance of global warming like to note that these past changes occurred with no human intervention. They argue that the climate is ever-changing, yet humans or their predecessors managed to prosper.”

    Glad you guys are openly acknowledging it yourselves; might lead to a balanced, rational conversation!

    “But most climate scientists reject the idea that this history means human-induced climate change will be benign. They add that the fossil record indicates nothing quite like today’s rapid release of greenhouse gases and its parallel effect of raising the planet’s temperature, changes that are occurring in a geologic instant.”

    Based on what exactly? You first have to subscribe to the “theory” that fundamental to all previous changes in temperature, it was all predicated on CO2 and nothing else. Even if I subscribe to CO2 having a large role what drove it? It is a fundamentally flawed concept to assert a cause when you cannot even explain such phenomenon in the past.

    Can any of the flock here send me anything that explains “how” or “why” this change is “different” from before; based on what? I am dying to see how they have extrapolated this change “now” as occurring in an unprecedented fashion.

    “Absolutely, unequivocally, nature has changed before,” said Richard B. Alley, a leading climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University. “But it looks like we’re going to do something bigger and faster than nature ever has.”

    LMAO! Again, how do you know this? Based on what? Ice cores? Most importantly as you continue reading this interesting omission on many levels you extract a couple themes.
    1) The old earth is warming, again and we are all going to die now.
    2) The earth has warmed and cooled many times before but it is “different” now because it is happening faster than before based on what, they don’t say.
    3) We admit there are powerful natural forces that caused all previous changes in temperature throughout the last 4.5 billion years but we KNOW without a doubt that it is CO2 that was responsible, or do we? No, they don’t as the article highlights. They FAIL to explain all past changes (simply allude to orbital wobble) but now have a “hunch” it is without a doubt “us” and not any of those natural forces before. Well because if you even suggest that it may be something else out of our control, funding goes away quickly as does our other ideologically driven wish lists.
    4) Say it is all the fault of CO2 then, what drove the rise before that couldn’t be driving it now?

    “Previous efforts to estimate the maximum rise of the sea in the Pliocene did not take full account of some factors now known to be important.”

    Good article as it really does highlight how little the “consensus” really knows about this topic (for all they do know) and who could blame them. Very complex system, many variables we are only just beginning to understand but hey, THE DEBATE IS OVER, says the “flock”….LOL

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/22/science/earth/seeking-clues-about-sea-level-from-fossil-beaches.html?adxnnl=1&pagewanted=1&adxnnlx=1358859628-xkpdHNyrGFvC6yxwxXQZFg

  229. Is this another urban myth that is being put to bed. Could not possibly be true, if we believe what many here say.

    “….CARBON emissions from the electricity sector have dived in the first six months under the carbon tax, with much greater use of renewable energy and cutbacks in consumption.

    While the government believes the 8.6 per cent fall in carbon emissions shows its policies are working, it also means it will collect less from the tax than the $4 billion it anticipated this year.

    The drop in revenue comes after the minerals resource rent tax, forecast to raise $2bn this year, failed to raise any revenue from the big three miners in the first six months of the year.

    Total emissions from the electricity sector in the December half were 7.5 million tonnes lower than in the same half of 2011.

    The government cautions that a big abatement task remains, cutting total emissions by 33 million tonnes from 2011 levels by 2020. The fall in electricity demand was not anticipated by the Australian Energy Market Operator and is unlikely to have been included in Treasury’s budget forecasts.

    RECOMMENDED COVERAGE

    PM praises Obama’s pledge on climate

    Analysis by Climate Change Minister Greg Combet’s staff shows that total electricity production in the first half of the financial year fell by 2.7 per cent, compared with the corresponding period of 2011-12.

    However, the analysis shows there has also been a big change in the mix of power, with much greater use of renewable energy from hydroelectricity from the Snowy Mountains and Tasmania, and also wind farms, while there have been cuts in use of both black and brown coal.

    This has reduced emissions by a further 6 per cent in the first six months of the financial year….”

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/emissions-drop-signals-fall-in-carbon-tax-take/story-e6frg6xf-1226559632995

  230. Personally I do not believe any debate in science is ever over. There are always new discoveries that mean we have to go back and revise establish belief.

    I also do not see any new discoveries that would make one reject the proposition that man made emissions of carbon lead to global warming.

    Yes, there are always fraudulent science and peer review. It is also true that the system always, in time, reveals such fraud.

    Most today, accept that asbestos and tobacco, in any amount, leads to ill health and death. Most have faith in vaccination and fluoride, to protect the help of their children.

    This in spite of the known side effects that exist for some. The benefits over come the negatives.

    We also known, thanks to science, we will always find better ways to do things in the future.

    The research into the dreaded Aids, teaches us this.

  231. David Attenborough is a Malthusian

    ‘The television presenter said that humans are threatening their own existence and that of other species by using up the world’s resources.

    ‘He said the only way to save the planet from famine and species extinction is to limit human population growth.

    “We are a plague on the Earth. It’s coming home to roost over the next 50 years or so. It’s not just climate change; it’s sheer space, places to grow food for this enormous horde. Either we limit our population growth or the natural world will do it for us, and the natural world is doing it for us right now,” he told the Radio Times.’

    Louise Gray UK Tele

  232. I see mass sterilisation as the solution..or maybe a one child policy..perhaps not..neither of these historically have been very successful.

  233. Something new for a change,

    “………….Could grinding up rock and tipping it into the ocean be the answer to global warming?

    A new study by German scientists from the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in Bremerhaven claims that dissolving large quantities of rock in the sea could absorb carbon emissions and slow down global warming.

    Chief investigator for Centre of Excellence for Climate Systems Science, Peter Strutton spoke today about this interesting topic………………”

    http://radioadelaidebreakfast.wordpress.com/2013/01/25/global-warming-comes-to-a-grind/#comments

    http://radioadelaidebreakfast.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/rocks.mp3

  234. Well done, you right-wing morons. Doing the donkey work for billionaires, hastening resource depletion, and impelling the future of our children.

    Exclusive: Billionaires secretly fund attacks on climate science

    A secretive funding organisation in the United States that guarantees anonymity for its billionaire donors has emerged as a major operator in the climate “counter movement” to undermine the science of global warming, The Independent has learnt.

    The Donors Trust, along with its sister group Donors Capital Fund, based in Alexandria, Virginia, is funnelling millions of dollars into the effort to cast doubt on climate change without revealing the identities of its wealthy backers or that they have links to the fossil fuel industry.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/exclusive-billionaires-secretly-fund-attacks-on-climate-science-8466312.html

  235. Nobody is casting doubt on climate change, it happens, but global warming is something that ended last century.

  236. Yes cuppa and the mindless zombie trolls here fall for it hook line and carbon sink, as they do every scam put up, even when the scams are exposed they jump onto the next.

    The go around Googling anti-AGW searches soaking up every shonky paid for by oil backed funding article, and the really indolent deniers source everything from a handful of discredited anti-AGW sites that have been exposed as being funded by those vested interests. Whilst they do this they project climate scientists as being in it for the grants, when it’s the sources they quote who are being paid large amounts of money to falsify and muddy the science, considerably more money than any climate scientist makes.

    Will this and other revelations of the underhanded funding, scams, shonky reports, falsified data and misrepresented/fabricated facts stop them from continuing to use these discredited sources known to be funded by vested interest groups and the fossil fuel industries?

    Don’t be silly, their ideologically closed minds won’t let them question or examine their sources to any reasonable degree. Those sources are laughing at how easy it is to get a whole bunch of zombie trolls to spread their falsified and corrupted messages for nothing whilst they pay some mouthpieces, online bloggers and websites to initiate the false information.

  237. CU the idea of adding smashed up rocks into oceans to absorb CO2 is geo engineering gone mad.

    The natural sinks are coping quite well.

  238. Around 4,400 years BP there was a sudden climate shift and people went on the move. The Harappan from the Indus Valley eventually came to Australia by boat and interbred with the local aboriginal population a couple of hundred years later.

    The new arrivals brought technological advances to the hunt, with the invention of the throwing spear and small tools for carving.

    The dingo turned up at the same time and didn’t travel overland through south-east Asia to get here, which supports the theory that they were originally the pariah dogs from India and brought to Australia by boat.

    The Harrappan was a civilisation with pottery, but the new immigrants had none which suggests they had become nomadic and forgot the craft.

  239. Exclusive: Billionaires secretly fund attacks on climate science

    Audit trail reveals that donors linked to fossil fuel industry are backing global warming sceptics

    A secretive funding organisation in the United States that guarantees anonymity for its billionaire donors has emerged as a major operator in the climate “counter movement” to undermine the science of global warming, The Independent has learnt.

    The Donors Trust, along with its sister group Donors Capital Fund, based in Alexandria, Virginia, is funnelling millions of dollars into the effort to cast doubt on climate change without revealing the identities of its wealthy backers or that they have links to the fossil fuel industry.

    However, an audit trail reveals that Donors is being indirectly supported by the American billionaire Charles Koch who, with his brother David, jointly owns a majority stake in Koch Industries, a large oil, gas and chemicals conglomerate based in Kansas.

    Millions of dollars has been paid to Donors through a third-party organisation, called the Knowledge and Progress Fund, with is operated by the Koch family but does not advertise its Koch connections. …

    Robert Brulle, a sociologist at Drexel University in Philadelphia, has estimated that over the past decade about $500m has been given to organisations devoted to undermining the science of climate change, with much of the money donated anonymously through third parties.

    The trust has given money to the Competitive Enterprise Institute which is currently being sued for defamation by Professor Michael Mann of Pennsylvania University, an eminent climatologist, whose affidavit claims that he was accused of scientific fraud and compared to a convicted child molester.

    Dr Brulle said: “We really have anonymous giving and unaccountable power being exercised here in the creation of the climate countermovement. There is no attribution, no responsibility for the actions of these foundations to the public.

    “By becoming anonymous, they remove a political target. They can plausibly claim that they are not giving to these organisations, and there is no way to prove otherwise.”

    http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/exclusive-billionaires-secretly-fund-attacks-on-climate-science-8466312.html

  240. Old news. Watch this:

    But they also funded BEST

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_Earth_Surface_Temperature

    Call me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause

    Mugged by a reality.

  241. I remember that Col but it seems it’s something the denier deliberately overlooks.

    The vested interest groups fund a study to find against AGW and after a comprehensive transparent study they find that lo and behold, AGW.

    It’s like the other transparent comprehensive studies that are conveniently overlooked by the denier, some involving dozens of scientists and long term field and/or laboratory studies with unrelated groups doing disparate studies not in collaboration having similar results for AGW.

  242. (highlight mine)

    A recent review paper, put together by both solar and climate scientists, details these studies: Solar Influences on Climate. Their bottom line: though the Sun may play some small role, “it is nevertheless much smaller than the estimated radiative forcing due to anthropogenic changes.” That is, human activities are the primary factor in global climate change.

    Solar irradiance changes have been measured reliably by satellites for only 30 years. These precise observations show changes of a few tenths of a percent that depend on the level of activity in the 11-year solar cycle. Changes over longer periods must be inferred from other sources. Estimates of earlier variations are important for calibrating the climate models. While a component of recent global climate change may have been caused by the increased solar activity of the last solar cycle, that component was very small compared to the effects of additional greenhouse gases.

  243. Haha Treeman. Towards the end of the second source from Norway.

    Climate issues must be dealt with

    Terje Berntsen emphasises that his project’s findings must not be construed as an excuse for complacency in addressing human-induced global warming. The results do indicate, however, that it may be more within our reach to achieve global climate targets than previously thought.

    Regardless, the fight cannot be won without implementing substantial climate measures within the next few years.

    So they are advocating a levelling off but not a stopping of global warming, something other climate scientists have also proposed, and most importantly they still say that AGW is real and a problem.

    That is diametrically opposed to what you allege.

    Another forehead slap emoticon.

  244. So it appears Treeman is declining into the el gordo slap dash method of quoting sources. Link anything, no matter how tenuous the relevancy or even if it actually accords with the denier stance proposed, as long as it seems to accord that’s all that matters.

    In other words treat the readers as mugs.

  245. “In other words treat the readers as mugs.

    C’mon lizard…that’s your forte.

    “So they are advocating a levelling off but not a stopping of global warming, something other climate scientists have also proposed, and most importantly they still say that AGW is real and a problem.”

    They would say that, the key point is the admission that there has been no warming.. Get it?

  246. No Treeman, again it is you who miss the point. I guess even if it you were fish slapped across the face with it you still wouldn’t get it or would refuse to see it.

    And the schoolboy throw back again, nothing original in the very narrow repertoire.

  247. The reality is that global warming has levelled off, remember I called it a ‘plateau’, but if warming fails to pick up over the next decade we can still imagine its because of global warming produced by carbon pollution.

  248. ‘It is interesting to note that since the IPCC says anthropogenic influences on the climate dominate – post 1980 – the global temperature has risen by 0.3 – 0.4 degrees C in a third of a century.

    ‘If this rate were sustained then by 2100 the global temperature would have risen by another 0.9 – 1.1 degrees C. This is much less than the much touted 2 degrees C safety limit.’

    ‘Of course many maintain that in the past 16 years natural climatic influences have been acting in the opposite direction to man-made global warming. They expect these influences to diminish and an average rate of warming of 0.2 degrees per decade to occur.’

    David Whitehouse

  249. Does that article say that global warming has stopped?

    Does it say that AGW is not real?

    Does that article say we should do nothing and ignore carbon pollution?

    Did or did they not use models to come their conclusion? You know those models that are bunkum according to the deniers.

    What is Berntsen’s conclusion as to the warming, and note it’s still warming, being less than the prediction and why global warming is still a danger because of that?

    ———————————
    I remember you saying a lot of things el gordo from it not existing to us going into global cooling. Consistency hasn’t been your strong point.

    Now read it carefully and one stand alone paragraph reveals it.

  250. And of course el gordo on the comeback drops back into quoting with no context or link. If you do this it means you don’t trust the source or the revelations in it.

    That automatically rules it out.

    I’ll leave others to research Whitehouse but I will reveal he’s not a climate scientists and is head of a contrarian global warming foundation. That won’t surprise anybody here.

  251. Yes, yes and yes to your first three questions.

    ‘and note it’s still warming’

    It can’t be a plateau and still warming, that’s a physical impossibility, but its quite feasible that it won’t get significantly cooler in the decade ahead.

    This would be a great disappointment for the denialati, although the sceptics would be as pleased as Punch.

  252. “Does that article say we should do nothing and ignore carbon pollution?”

    Yes…CO2 is not a pollutant. It’s the gas of life and without it plants would die and so would we. Only dimwits would tax the gas of life!

  253. CO2 is our raison d’etre.

    The warmista say too much is a bad thing, but with each passing day this theory (based on dodgy models) is being brought into question.

    So you would be well advised to think about your future in the absence of continual global warming.

    The UK government, facing a great depression, will scuttle their green machine and we will follow suite.

  254. They slaughter animals in some places by putting them in chambers of CO2.

    We can’t survive too much nitrogen, the gas that makes up most of the atmosphere, and breathing in too high an oxygen concentration is also harmful.

    Anything is harmful in higher concentrations than a band that is conducive to life, and that goes for CO2 on several levels apart from its greenhouse effect.

    But we’ve gone through this all before and it will be ignored as before and lots more inane posts will continue as they continue to live in an alternate reality.

  255. This belongs here, among some of the ever repeated stupidity one sees on this post. Sorry, to upset some with the truth. From one that just does not get it and is out of her depth.

    “…….Mr Abbott again took aim at the carbon tax.
    “Just think of how much hotter it would have been the other day but for the carbon tax,” he said to laughter from the party faithful.
    “Isn’t it bizarre that this government thinks that somehow raising the price of electricity is going to clean up our environment?”

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/abbott-rallies-the-troops-in-sydney-20130127-2dekd.html#ixzz2JDlasaHf….”

    Also, would have been hotter in over a million homes, if Labor had not wasted all that money on insulation.

  256. Not only that Cu carbon emissions and electricity use from non-renewable sources have dropped since the introduction of the carbon price. It’s working exactly as it should.

    Abbott wants to destroy all that as he wants to destroy so much else. The wrecking ball through our economy isn’t the carbon tax it’s in the mirror every time Abbott looks into it.

  257. If Howard did not much up the sale of Telstra, we would have been much closer to having a fibre system.

    Was it 17 or more attempts that Howard tried with no success.

    Yes, Labor’s first attempt also failed, but they quickly realised that the copper wire needed to be bough back into the fold, and Telstra taken out of the picture,

    It has to be completely fibre, and even Turnbull envisages this down the track. Just a wasteful process in the meantime, hooking it onto copper.

    The copper wire will go, using the holes in the ground, to thread the fibre along.

    We, for a country our size, and the small population will have a world class system.

    Cannot see the young voting for a government, that only promise is to demolish what Labor is building.

    Yes, expensive up front, but cheaper in the long run.

    Would ,love to see it speeded up, as I appear to be on the end of the list.

  258. For those who don’t know, Spencer is one of the rare real climate scientists in the denier camp.

    Put him in context.

    He advocates Intelligent Design.

    Spencer has been revealed to manipulate data to find an outcome he wants.

    He’s a member of the board of the Marshall Institute something he doesn’t disclose. That institute is an anti-regulatory group funded by oil and gas.

    Again do you see the pattern here and why he’s a darling of the deniers?

    Whilst claiming climate scientists who are proponents for climate change are on the take for the grants all those sourced by the deniers are actually on the take for the money paid by vested interest groups. Inevitably when you search they all come back to the same extreme right wing groups and monies.

  259. It would be hard to make a case that six (once in a century) weather events happening in a decade is due entirely to human induced global warming.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s