The MASM Forum
General => The Colosseum => Topic started by: hutch-- on July 02, 2022, 05:50:10 PM
-
There is some no account climate prophet going by the name of something like Flim Tannery who told us that it may never rain in OZ again, currently in Sydney we are getting tropical levels of rain again and that is after no summer when it would not stop raining.
While I am a fan of not making a mess of the environment that we all live in, some of this "climate science" sounds like fairy tales. With rain at this level, all of these poor bastards who live in flood prone areas get their house wrecked again, cars get washed away and at times, some people die in these conditions.
-
I'm afraid you are confusing "climate" and "weather". Global average temperatures are definitely on the rise, at a higher pace than in the past 100 Million years, but that doesn't mean that in one precise spot like Sydney it gets hotter, or drier. Be prepared for all kinds of surprises. Italy, for example, experiences a draught without precedence right now.
-
:biggrin:
Weather is produced by climate. The middle of OZ is genuinely hot and its only the monsoon that makes it wet again in the wet season. We share the monsoon with India, they get it in our dry season and we get it in their dry season. Now before poor Flim Tannery pissed off to Melbourne, he was making predictions that simply did not happen, the definition of a false prophet.
Its like the heat wave that was supposed to melt Antarctica years ago, they had trouble investigating it down there because it was so much colder. Then you have to deal with Australia's weird weather cycles, back just after 1800 was a massive drought, then through the 19th century there were multiple droughts and none of them were caused by fossil fuel, cars, planes or industrial activities.
The problem is the theory tries to override the evidence. It was raining so heavily this morning that I had to walk around to get my morning coffee.
-
Define "evidence" ;-)
(https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ContentWOC/images/globaltemp/global_gis_2015-2019.png)
-
Hi Hutch!
some of this "climate science"
There is no "climate science" because science is about to know what is true making experiments, and it's not possible to make experiments with climate because you have only one climate.
It was raining so heavily this morning that I had to walk around to get my morning coffee.
That it's a bad news. You know that, because ENSO, when OZ have floods here we have severe droughts :sad:
-
Pissing rain when our climate guru says otherwise. Climate science (sic) when its hot, it climate change, when its cold its climate change, when its a drought it climate change, when its pissing rain its climate change. when nothing changes its climate change.
Refer to Kark Popper, when something is neither verified or falsified, its trivial therefore climate change as voiced by the gurus is trivial.
Now man made climate change is another matter, clear fell a forest and you change the climate in that forest.
-
Hector,
I blame that malicious Mexican and his girlfriend, El Nino and la Nina.
-
Hi JJ!
at a higher pace than in the past 100 Million years
Climate is changing all the time. How you know the "pace" in the past 100 Million years?
-
I blame that malicious Mexican and his girlfriend, El Nino and la Nina.
:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: (They are peruvians!!)
-
Climate is changing all the time. How you know the "pace" in the past 100 Million years?
I don't know (I am just a hobby coder), but experts say so (https://news.stanford.edu/news/2013/august/climate-change-speed-080113.html):Stanford climate scientists warn that the likely rate of change over the next century will be at least 10 times quicker than any climate shift in the past 65 million years
-
I have no doubt they have been around for 65 million years to verify such a claim. :tongue:
-
I don't know (I am just a hobby coder)
:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: One " just a hobby coder" increased the lie in 54%.
Don't worry, your charlatans increased that by millons, perhaps "pace" is faster now than 65 years ago :thumbsup:
(but not so sure about "pace" measurement 65 years ago)
-
Sounds like these "climate scientists" have never heard of the "Younger Drias". In time scale terms, it happened really fast. There was at least one ice age after the dinosaurs, the sea rose about 400 feet about 12 thousand years ago, these guys are just sprouting bullsh*t but then that is what "climate science" is about. :tongue:
-
Sounds like these "climate scientists" have never heard of the "Younger Drias". In time scale terms, it happened really fast. There was at least one ice age after the dinosaurs, the sea rose about 400 feet about 12 thousand years ago, these guys are just sprouting bullsh*t but then that is what "climate science" is about. :tongue:
Looking back we had several ice ages and between them warmer periods
When northern countries became ice free after an iceage humanity adapted ,probably happy about getting lot more hunting ground/ farming land to feed growing population
Now instead marching against climate changes while we have many billions population growing fast
Why dont adapt and look on the bright side if antarcitca become ice free so much new acres become aviable to farm and populate
?
-
There was an article in one of the Brisbane rags (aka newspapers) that talked about the gov cloud seeding since the 1960's.
The last lot of rain, the one that flooded up here in the Lockyer Valley, I took screenshots of the radar about every hour. It must be magic that the clouds seemed to hit a wall and disappear. See the attached.
-
You get some very heavy rain up in QLD, mate and I drive my Falcon GT Coupe to Hervey Bay years ago and about half way up from Brisbane we hit the most massive rainstorm. Mate was driving so I sat in the middle of the back seat and told him to stay out of the left lane to avoid collision with any stopped cars. We drove out of it into bright sunlight.
-
Sounds like these "climate scientists" have never heard of the "Younger Drias".
They surely have, it's being taught in the basic elementary courses of climatology, along with Milankovitch cycles and similar stuff.
Recent warming has occurred about 10 times faster than warming at the end of an ice age.
The increase of carbon dioxide due to human activities is occurring more than 250 times faster than at the end of the last Ice Age
From an Australian source (https://www.csiro.au/en/research/environmental-impacts/climate-change/climate-change-qa/how-fast-is-climate-changing) :smiley:
-
CSIRO are a good source but I still have the same problem, who was around at the end of the last ice age to calibrate the 250 times faster ?
You do get some data from rock stratas and Antarctic ice cores but I doubt that gives you the calibration of climatic change speed. We do know from sources of that type going back much further that there have been significant temperature rises and falls of some magnitude but I have yet to see the connection to carbon dioxide over that time scale.
Roman period was hotter than current, middle ages were colder than current and apart from a couple of very bad seasons due to Icelandic volcanos, it has been warming progressively ever since.
I support the things that are far less theory laden, stop clear felling forests, don't dump chemicals in the sea, stop using throw away plastic and use the cleanest energy you can manage without freezing to death. The real culprit for any form of global warming is the sun and that is awful hard to change. :tongue:
-
Well, you cited the Younger Dryas: since 1981, the rate of warming is 18K/1000 years. During the roughly 1,400 years of Younger Dryas, it was only 14K/1000 years.
See it from another angle: since the age of the dinosaurs, it took nature 250,000,000 years to transform atmospheric CO2 into the wonderful deposits under the soil of Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and others.
It took mankind less than 200 years to blow it all back into the atmosphere.
But no problem, old friend, keep defending Australian coal mines. We are hobby coders, nobody reads our friendly exchanges here :biggrin:
-
:biggrin:
If you have ever enjoyed a real coal fire in a house, smoke and all, you would pollute like the rest and for the folks in northern Europe, that may be their best option in the coming winter. The alternative is to start burning the furniture. With using coal as a fuel, it can be done really dirty like the old power stations or it can be done a lot cleaner with later technology.
We still have a building just west of the CDB that was one of the old ones and it was decommissioned about 40 years ago. The more modern ones that have been decommissioned in the last few years were much cleaner, from memory they used a pulverised coal that burned a lot more efficiently than the old ones.
The thing that is still missing with "green" energy is continuous base line power. There are two sources, nuclear and gas/coal, so called green energy is intermittent and even with decent battery storage, it has yet to be capable of replacing fossil fuels. When the alternative is freezing your arse off and going hungry, you use fossil fuel while you are designing cleaner energy sources.
Something I have yet seen developed is tidal energy. There is a place in northern OZ that is colloquelly called the "Horizontal waterfall" and the amount of energy shot in and out of the narrow opening twice a day would run a city or two. The necessity is large tidal height changes common near the equator. When you have about 10 or more meter tides, the energy potential is massive and it does not stop like wind or sunlight.
Driving populations back to the stone age is an act of stupidity and with intermittent power, that is the choice.
-
Driving populations back to the stone age is an act of stupidity
Driving populations forward to a new dinosaur age is an act of what?
-
a new dinosaur age
That is today :biggrin:
(https://i0.wp.com/www.booknerdmommy.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/if-I-had-a-dinosaur-1.jpg?fit=1024%2C683)
-
There is this strange bright light outside, it called sunlight ! :dazzled:
-
:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: