• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Scientists wrong on Greenhouse Warming, Again.

a_unique_person

Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
a_unique_person
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
49,588
Location
Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20350407-1702,00.html

AUSTRALIA'S rapid climate change had caught scientists by surprise, a leading water expert said today.
Professor Peter Cullen, from the National Water Commission, said experts had expected the changes, which have left much of the country suffering drought conditions, but thought they would take much longer to take effect.
"I don't think any of us expected the climate change we have experienced over the last five years. I was expecting climate change but I was expecting it to take 30 years," he said.
Prof Cullen said Australia was drying out quickly and with water restrictions already in place in many areas, governments needed to consider all available options, such as recycling and desalination, to prevent an impending water crisis.
Click to expand...


Yes, they underestimated it by a long way.
 
AUSTRALIA'S rapid climate change had caught scientists by surprise, a leading water expert said today.
Professor Peter Cullen, from the National Water Commission, said experts had expected the changes, which have left much of the country suffering drought conditions, but thought they would take much longer to take effect.
"I don't think any of us expected the climate change we have experienced over the last five years. I was expecting climate change but I was expecting it to take 30 years," he said.
Prof Cullen said Australia was drying out quickly and with water restrictions already in place in many areas, governments needed to consider all available options, such as recycling and desalination, to prevent an impending water crisis.
Click to expand...

Optimus Prime works for the Australian National Water Commision?
 
A five year drought in Australia. Who's have thought that Australia was susceptible to droughts? Obviously the link between droughts and greenhouse warming has been fully established. Not.

Meanwhile, the world's oceans have suddenly cooled, which was predicted by exactly no climate models and cannot be explained by "Greenhouse warming"

The paper is in preprint here

....the reported over 20% loss of upper ocean heat content between 2003 and 2005, which had accumulated between 1955 and 2003, is a very important observational finding. According to the paper, this cooling corresponds to -1.0 (+/- 0.3) W/meter squared global radiative imbalance over this time period.

This is a significant observation, which has important climate science implications as has been discussed in the Climate Science weblog of August 8, 2006. None of the multi-decadal global climate models predicted such a cooling.

The explanation of the cooling will be the focus intense research (and speculation) in the coming months.
Click to expand...

But not here, where the warming of the oceans is a key prediction of greenhouse warmers and climate alarmists, and so will be ignored.
 
It's not a five year drought, it's more like 8 or nine, and with El Nino getting ready, no end in sight. When he says the past five years, he is referring to the time beyond what is normal for a drought.

It's easy for you to say there is nothing to worry about, water shortages will have a massive economic and human impact.
 
Last edited:
a_unique_person said:
It's not a five year drought, it's more like 8 or nine, and with El Nino getting ready, no end in sight. When he says the past five years, he is referring to the time beyond what is normal for a drought.

It's easy for you to say there is nothing to worry about, water shortages will have a massive economic and human impact.
Click to expand...

Where did I say there was nothing to worry about? Nowhere. The choices for Australians are the same for everybody - don't try to restrain climate change because you'll fail, instead ADAPT and use technology.

It's just the traditional cherrypicking of extreme weather events that "confirms" this or that dread apocalyptic viewpoint. Nothing more. Five years from now we'll have massive flooding and rainstorms in Australia in the news and THAT will be blamed on Greenhouse gases as well.

Australia is subject to multiyear droughts and has been for millions of years. Even so, Australia got slightly wetter during the 20th Century, which is consistent with a warmer climate generally.

Five years, ten years or fifty years is not long enough to establish a climatic trend.
 
Do I get the gist of the Aussie drought: that it is thus far, a between-the-El Nino phenomenon?

Haven't El Ninos been definitely linked to sun spot cycles, NOT GW?

Since El Ninos are shifts in global weather patterns, mighn't they effect southern hemisheres differntly than the expected warming we benefit from in the north? I.E, cooling rains?
 
Diamond said:
But not here, where the warming of the oceans is a key prediction of greenhouse warmers and climate alarmists, and so will be ignored.
Click to expand...
Ocean warming is surely a prediction of climate warming, be it anthropogenic or not. Have any proponents of non-anthropogenic warming speculated on the causes of the measured upper-oceanic cooling?

I expect some denialists have grasped at this as evidence that a global cooling non-anthropogenic phase has (at last) kicked in, but not here, obviously. Two years is hardly long enough to establish a bidding convention, let alone a climate trend.

The explanation of the cooling will be the focus intense research (and speculation) in the coming months.
Click to expand...
Only months? This is red meat for oceanographers, pre- and post-doctorate. It'll run for years at least.
 
Am I being too simplistic in thinking that the reason for the ocean cooling might be from the amount of ice melt increasing?
I've seen some truly scary pictures of the Northern ice cap disappearing.
 
NO NO NO! Don't look at the actual data NASA and other scientific bodies use! That information shows glaciers and ice caps melting like crazy! There is no gloabla warming!! Repeat over and over. Because if you believe it, it will be true!
 
mmmk. So there's global warming. What should we do about it?

(pulling right leg back to prepare to kick in the nuts anyone who mentions the Kyoto protocol)
 
Diamond said:
Meanwhile, the world's oceans have suddenly cooled, which was predicted by exactly no climate models and cannot be explained by "Greenhouse warming"
Click to expand...

This one paper sits among many (Josh Willis of JPL in 2004, Sydney Levitus of NOAA in 2005, etc.) that have confirmed ocean warming in line with the projections of Global Warming. Also, the complete loss of 20% of the heat content of the upper oceans from the ocean system would have resulted in sufficient thermal contraction to cause a noticeable drop in sea level that has not been observed.

As such a drop was not recorded, for the cooling to be real either; (a) the 'missing' heat is still in the ocean, or (b) the decrease in sea-level caused by the cooling was more than compensated for by an enormous increase in the rate fresh (melt) water is entering the oceans. Neither scenario is particularly comforting.

But let's take a step back for a minute.

Climate change alarmism is certainly a real effect, and is most apparent whenever a new 'weather record' is set (e.g. "hottest July on record", "wettest Labour Day since JFK's death", "most active hurricane season since the last one", etc.), when frequently some pundit - and infrequently an actual climatologist - has a microphone shoved in his face and is asked "Is this due to Global Warming?". A good climate scientist will probably end up on the editing-room floor for pointing out that it's pretty hard to make a convincing argument for an increasing trend in a time-series of global averages from a single data point.

Naysayers do much the same only in reverse. A local cold spell or a single decreasing trend (of whatever magnitude and duration) is instantly the death-knell for anthopogenic climate change and/or global warming in general.

It's a single paper, with problems. It's not the smoking gun that did for GW, any more than last year's hurricane season was proof positive that climate change is going to wipe Florida off the map!
 
Bruce said:
mmmk. So there's global warming. What should we do about it?

(pulling right leg back to prepare to kick in the nuts anyone who mentions the Kyoto protocol)
Click to expand...


1) Buy a more efficient car. Over 20% of the US's carbon emissions come from light to medium vehicles (Jackson and Schlessinger, PNAS [2004]) with an average fuel economy of under 20 mpg (EPA [2006]). An average European car does about 35 mpg, a Toyota Prius gets 55 mpg.

2) Use low energy lighting. About the only place in my house I want the light to come on in an instant is in the john; everywhere else I could live with 30 seconds of half light while a compact fluorescent tube warms up. That's an 11W bulb for every 60, an 18W for every 100, multiplied by a trillion hours of bulb use in the US each year.

3a) Stick a solar panel on your roof. No seriously, the acreage of land that sits facing the sun all day on the tops of buildings is mind-bending. Just one average-sized photovoltaic panel on your roof would probably provide at least half the electricity needed to run your A/C. Multiplied by the (around) 50 million individual homes, that's a lot of carbon that isn't being emitted.

3b) Paint your roof white and halve the amount of work your A/C has to do.
 
DeviousB said:
1) Buy a more efficient car. Over 20% of the US's carbon emissions come from light to medium vehicles (Jackson and Schlessinger, PNAS [2004]) with an average fuel economy of under 20 mpg (EPA [2006]). An average European car does about 35 mpg, a Toyota Prius gets 55 mpg.

2) Use low energy lighting. About the only place in my house I want the light to come on in an instant is in the john; everywhere else I could live with 30 seconds of half light while a compact fluorescent tube warms up. That's an 11W bulb for every 60, an 18W for every 100, multiplied by a trillion hours of bulb use in the US each year.

3a) Stick a solar panel on your roof. No seriously, the acreage of land that sits facing the sun all day on the tops of buildings is mind-bending. Just one average-sized photovoltaic panel on your roof would probably provide at least half the electricity needed to run your A/C. Multiplied by the (around) 50 million individual homes, that's a lot of carbon that isn't being emitted.

3b) Paint your roof white and halve the amount of work your A/C has to do.
Click to expand...

Sage advice. Let's take this to Pat Robertson, Pope Ratzinger, and the major bible publishers and get this meme inserted into evangelical and catholic christianity asap.
 
DeviousB said:
1) Buy a more efficient car. Over 20% of the US's carbon emissions come from light to medium vehicles (Jackson and Schlessinger, PNAS [2004]) with an average fuel economy of under 20 mpg (EPA [2006]). An average European car does about 35 mpg, a Toyota Prius gets 55 mpg.

2) Use low energy lighting. About the only place in my house I want the light to come on in an instant is in the john; everywhere else I could live with 30 seconds of half light while a compact fluorescent tube warms up. That's an 11W bulb for every 60, an 18W for every 100, multiplied by a trillion hours of bulb use in the US each year.

3a) Stick a solar panel on your roof. No seriously, the acreage of land that sits facing the sun all day on the tops of buildings is mind-bending. Just one average-sized photovoltaic panel on your roof would probably provide at least half the electricity needed to run your A/C. Multiplied by the (around) 50 million individual homes, that's a lot of carbon that isn't being emitted.

3b) Paint your roof white and halve the amount of work your A/C has to do.
Click to expand...

1b) Switch to high pressure tires. There are a lot that can run in the 40-50 psi range now, rather than the typical 30-35 psi range. Higher pressure decreases rolling resistance, and improves gas mileage buy up to 10%.

You're being all reasonable, and stuff, Devious. We have to find a way to make this sexy in order for it to catch on.
 
casebro said:
Do I get the gist of the Aussie drought: that it is thus far, a between-the-El Nino phenomenon?

Haven't El Ninos been definitely linked to sun spot cycles, NOT GW?

Since El Ninos are shifts in global weather patterns, mighn't they effect southern hemisheres differntly than the expected warming we benefit from in the north? I.E, cooling rains?
Click to expand...

The El Nino phenomenon leads to dry conditions in Australia. This is pretty well understood, now. The La Nina phenomenon which normally balances El Nino in a cycle of around 5 years each way has not lead to the normal wet conditions in Australia over the last five years, due mostly to very weak La Nina conditions. Thus Australia has been suffering drought conditions pretty much every year for the last ten years, and El Nino is about to turn up to create another five years of dry conditions.

Check http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/ahead/soicomp.shtml for details of El Nino/La Nina effects on Australia.
 
Bruce said:
mmmk. So there's global warming. What should we do about it?

(pulling right leg back to prepare to kick in the nuts anyone who mentions the Kyoto protocol)
Click to expand...

Having no nuts, I feel safe in endorsing the Kyoto protocol. If the planet becomes unliveable, politics and economics will mean nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom