Global warming

[mhaze]

Of course they do. They're used to the hot weather. They have air conditioners and fans and know to drink lots of water and not exhaust themselves. Most Europeans don't. Climate change is just that - change. New threats we're not used to.

It's akin to how Houston would grind to a halt whenever snowed even the least bit there. Tiny amounts of snow, barely enough to cover the ground, is no issue in temperate Bergen, Norway, but in sub-tropical Houston it was crippling as the Houstonians were not used to it.

You've just made Lomberg's point. Unless you think that people are really, really stupid. Solutions follow.

Hypothetical. Europe is too hot.
Certain, Cheap Engineering solution. Europe buys air conditioners.

Hypothetical. Houston gets snow.
Certain, Cheap Engineer Point of View. Houston buys snow plows.
​

Lomberg is saying you can adapt easily and inexpensively, and it is very expensive and uncertain to mess with planetary climate which is very poorly understood.

 

[hamelekim]

You've just made Lomberg's point. Unless you think that people are really, really stupid. Solutions follow.

Hypothetical. Europe is too hot.
Certain, Cheap Engineering solution. Europe buys air conditioners.

Hypothetical. Houston gets snow.
Certain, Cheap Engineer Point of View. Houston buys snow plows.
​

Lomberg is saying you can adapt easily and inexpensively, and it is very expensive and uncertain to mess with planetary climate which is very poorly understood.

Easily adapt? It would cause massive economic problems in second and third world countries. In the first would the governments could help people but it would be expensive and it would definitely cause economic disruption. Then you have crops drying up and a reduction in the food source. A lack of grass for grazing would reduce levels of cattle and other animals we eat.

We would have to switch to vertical farming and grow our meat instead of raising it. We should do that anyway but it's very expensive to start something like that.

 

[oponol]

Perhaps.

Perhaps the last 30 years is just the upward rise of the 60-80 year natural climate cycle.

You asked for a period of correlation, I gave it. Now you are correctly pointing out that correlation doesn't prove causation. Which is why I cannot understand your demand for an example of correlation. It wouldn't prove anything so why do you want one?

Surely it is possible to put some numbers to this empirically, instead of a bunch of arm waving about the models say so?

The models reflect current understanding of physics which is what the theory is based upon. Of course current understanding of physics is based on empirical data, but if you are after empirical evidence that co2 is causing current warming then there is no direct evidence.

Of course one could go back to the ice cores, also. Other historical records of various sorts. Atmospheric CO2 measurements that predate the current monitoring station on the side of the volcano.

The problem is that in the past few hundred thousand years of ice core history, co2 rise and fall has been largely caused by temperature change. That makes it impossible to derive precisely how much of the temperature change is due to co2 and how much is due to the other factors.

It would be nice to have a period where co2 goes up due to a cause other than temperature, but the only known period when that has happened is the last 200 years.

 

[mhaze]

Easily adapt? It would cause massive economic problems in second and third world countries. In the first would the governments could help people but it would be expensive and it would definitely cause economic disruption. Then you have crops drying up and a reduction in the food source. A lack of grass for grazing would reduce levels of cattle and other animals we eat.

In the second and third world countries it would cause massive economic problems?

Go back a few messages and read the excerpt from Lomberg. He notes that there could be a ripple effect on the 2nd and 3rd world from the 1st world stopping buying things, not from climate.
​

In the first world the governments would help people?

Really.

Okay let's test that out. Somebody in Texas has a ranch and it's hot. He can fix the problem himself or the government can fix it (they say). Here is the way it comes down:

A. The rancher buys a window AC unit.

He's cool. End of problem.
​

B. The Government says,

"We'll tax you and fine you and make you cap and trade and this will lower the CO2 in the air and then your whole ranch will be cooler."
​

Would you believe the shyster that said he'd air condition the whole ranch?

Questions to ask.
Is there a guarantee?
Like, a ten year warranty?
Do you get your money back if (B) does not work?

 

[mhaze]

You asked for a period of correlation, I gave it. Correlation doesn't prove causation. Which is why I cannot understand your demand for an example of correlation. It wouldn't prove anything so why do you want one?

Granted, there is a lot of what appears to be noise in the climate system, although it is really autocorrelated and trending according to dynamics that we do not clearly understand.

The IPCC predicates CO2 as the main driver. One would think that even if the causation could be be clearly pointed to, there would be some serious correlations in stretches of data over the last 150 years.

If we derived a simple relationship between the temperature and the atmospheric CO2 for the last 30 years, then with that alone we should be able to predict future temperatures. Or go backwards to the 1850-1970 era, where CO2 was beginning it's climb, and validate it.

If there were some stretches of time in that century and a half where CO2 in the atmosphere went down, then a causative relationship would seem to emerge.

 

[a_unique_person]

You've just made Lomberg's point. Unless you think that people are really, really stupid. Solutions follow.

Hypothetical. Europe is too hot.
Certain, Cheap Engineering solution. Europe buys air conditioners.

Hypothetical. Houston gets snow.
Certain, Cheap Engineer Point of View. Houston buys snow plows.
​

Lomberg is saying you can adapt easily and inexpensively, and it is very expensive and uncertain to mess with planetary climate which is very poorly understood.

We are already messing with planetary climate, like it or not. Europe is just one example, the desert countries that are already very hot, such as Australia, are going to suffer a lot more.

 

[mhaze]

We are already messing with planetary climate, like it or not. Europe is just one example, the desert countries that are already very hot, such as Australia, are going to suffer a lot more.

It's only your opinion that we are having an effect on planetary climate. Others do not share that. And it's your opinion that the effects would be mostly bad. Again, others do not share that.

Note the Sahara desert is .... shrinking.

For every bad thing you can mention in current day environment (which is allegedly due to CO2) I can mention a good thing in current day environment.

It isn't CO2 that's caused your population to increase 4x since WW1, it's your immigration policies. Project that into your future. That's the strain on your natural resources, not CO2.

 

[a_unique_person]

It's only your opinion that we are having an effect on planetary climate. Others do not share that. And it's your opinion that the effects would be mostly bad. Again, others do not share that.

Note the Sahara desert is .... shrinking.

For every bad thing you can mention in current day environment (which is allegedly due to CO2) I can mention a good thing in current day environment.

It isn't CO2 that's caused your population to increase 4x since WW1, it's your immigration policies. Project that into your future. That's the strain on your natural resources, not CO2.

Australia is a country the size of continental USA, with less then 1/10 the population, and already we are struggling. I was amazed I couln't buy tomatoes at the supermarket yesterday, they can't get their hands on any.

 

[a_unique_person]

It's only your opinion that we are having an effect on planetary climate.

Correction, it's scientific research making that claim, I am just passing it on.

Others do not share that. And it's your opinion that the effects would be mostly bad. Again, others do not share that.

Once again, you are partly correct, it's scientific research making that claim, it's opinion that's denying it.

Note the Sahara desert is .... shrinking.

For every bad thing you can mention in current day environment (which is allegedly due to CO2) I can mention a good thing in current day environment.

It isn't CO2 that's caused your population to increase 4x since WW1, it's your immigration policies. Project that into your future. That's the strain on your natural resources, not CO2.

Dessication is growing, once again you appear to be cherry picking. What crops are the worst in years, and no tomatoes

 

[CapelDodger]

It's only your opinion that we are having an effect on planetary climate.

It's a minority opinion that we aren't.

Others do not share that.

Well there's a thing. A minority disagrees.

And it's your opinion that the effects would be mostly bad.

It's bleedin' obvious the effects will be mostly bad. The vast majority of the world's population do not suffer from the weather being too cold or the sea too low. They are where they are because the weather's just-so and sea-level is dependable

Again, others do not share that.

And don't wish to. So they don't.

Note the Sahara desert is .... shrinking.

So what? Do you have any clue why, or even care?

I won't add the Sahara to my list of contrarian refuges yet, but it's on notice.

For every bad thing you can mention in current day environment (which is allegedly due to CO2) I can mention a good thing in current day environment.

Give us some good things first.

It isn't CO2 that's caused your population to increase 4x since WW1, it's your immigration policies.

I guess that White Australia Policy missed something, then. Too appealing, perhaps.

Project that into your future. That's the strain on your natural resources, not CO2.

Since most of the added population lives in Australia's cities today, and the reduction in water flowing into the cities today is the problem, that makes no sense at all.

 

[CapelDodger]

I was amazed I couln't buy tomatoes at the supermarket yesterday, they can't get their hands on any.

It's a straw in the wind. I've been warning you for a while now. Get out while you can.

 

[CapelDodger]

It would be nice to have a period where co2 goes up due to a cause other than temperature, but the only known period when that has happened is the last 200 years.

The next industrialised species will at least have something to go on . Of course, they won't find much easily-availiable coal and oil unless they're way up the line. More likely to be evolved to cope with the effects of a nuclear-fueled industrial revolution. Until they overdo it.

I'm in danger of slipping into science-fiction.

 

[a_unique_person]

Note the Sahara desert is .... shrinking.

The desert appears to be jumping the Mediteranean to Spain.

 

[a_unique_person]

You've just made Lomberg's point. Unless you think that people are really, really stupid. Solutions follow.

Hypothetical. Europe is too hot.
Certain, Cheap Engineering solution. Europe buys air conditioners.

Hypothetical. Houston gets snow.
Certain, Cheap Engineer Point of View. Houston buys snow plows.
​

Lomberg is saying you can adapt easily and inexpensively, and it is very expensive and uncertain to mess with planetary climate which is very poorly understood.

Buy air conditioners? Lomborg is really that stupid?

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2007/s2034474.htm

TONY EASTLEY: There are alarming predictions of rising food prices and shortages as farm crops continue to fail because of a lack of water.

Australians are being warned to brace themselves for a hit in the hip-pocket come Christmas time.

Paula Kruger reports.

PAULA KRUGER: Farmers say if there is no spring rain over Australia's inland farms by the end of this month, there will be a catastrophic crop failure.

Kris Newton is the Chief Executive of the Australian Horticulture Council.

KRIS NEWTON: I can't think of another disaster, agricultural or otherwise, that comes close to this. This will make equine influenza and Cyclone Larry combined look like a storm in a teacup.

We're talking about huge tracks of inland Australia at immediate and desperate risk.

PAULA KRUGER: For many, there is no way of surviving under the current water restrictions, and because the average farmer is over 55 years of age, some believe there is no point trying.

KRIS NEWTON: So you can imagine that if someone 55 or 60 or 65 years old looking at anything up to ten years before they get a commercial crop again, they may not be prepared to do that, and that's perfectly understandable.

So one of the things that we'll be wanting to talk with government about is exit with dignity packages; restructuring opportunities for people who have decided that's enough and that they wish to get out of the industry or indeed, retire.

PAULA KRUGER: Kris Newton will be representing farmers in the horticulture sector at a crisis taskforce meeting in Canberra later this week with the Minister for Agriculture, Peter McGauran, and Centrelink officials.

It seems the Federal Government is willing to give farmers more assistance if that is what's needed.

The Prime Minister used his weekly radio message to say government spending on drought-hit regions is more than $26-million a week, but that it could do more.

We get less food, food prices go up, and aid to farmers rockets up. How do airconditioners fix that problem.

 

[mhaze]

Buy air conditioners? Lomborg is really that stupid?

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2007/s2034474.htm




We get less food, food prices go up, and aid to farmers rockets up. How do airconditioners fix that problem.

You are actually blaming the "Australian drought" on global warming. Unbelievable.

Please check these charts and data from your own country then tell me if you still believe that. I agree you may be being told this is the by factions in your country.


http://gustofhotair.blogspot.com/

as shown here rainfall in australia over the last 6 months have been low i the south west - north of perth. High in the north and especailly north west Australia.

No sign of drought there.

The last 12 months has seen low rainfall in the far seaboard west and low in the mid south, and south east. Higher has been recorded in central north and north west.

No sign of a drought there either, with some up some down.

Seems to me that Australia's rainfall is not decreasing in total (as is shown here), (which also shows if anything increasing Australian rainfall), but rather the places that are getting less rainfall are in the south east highly farmed land, and the places are are not are in the northern non farmed land.

Is Australia getting less rainfall? No, the graph above shows this. Its just been unfortunate that the rainfall of late has fallen on the places that don't use the land for agriculture.

Maybe Co2 causes the rain to only fall where we don't need it. Nasty thing Co2
​

 

[mhaze]

What crops are the worst in years, and no tomatoes

Is this the sort of propaganda that your ascribe to?
Greens:


We're all doomed, unless...you...err....vote for us

The green party of Australia have released a flyer that is sent to households. In it it describes the consequences if you vote liberal or labor at the forthcoming election.

It describes that, given a liberal vote, world wide temperature will rise by at least 3 degrees and a labor vote by at least 2 degrees. This will result in:
​

- "seas up to 25m higher", yep that's right, we are all going to be under water. 25 meters! wow

- "No snow on the Europe's Alps." Well if there is no snow there, we can assume that there will be no snow anywhere. Say good bye to skiing and the winter olympics

- "30-95% species extinction". Yep you heard correctly, up to 19 in 20 species will become extinct. Maybe humans will be one of them

- "No ice on the poles". Yep the north and south pole will, according to the greens be iceless. So the only place one will be able to view ice is at the local petrol station. No ice, amazing.

- "97% loss of the great barrier reef" Lucky 3% will remain, but I guess it will be 25 meters under water. Which begs the question, how can coral survive being 25 meters under water? I'd like to see how they got the 97% statistic.

- "Greenland melts" And it becomes green again.

- "'Super droughts' across the world" - i guess just like the recent worst drought in 1000 years.

- "Oceans become acidic, destroying sea life" - yep, no more fish. Sea life will die. No more dolphins, whales, fish and those cute octopussies. Get your ocean basket at your local restaurant while you can.
​

Of course the greens are they key, and a vote for them and none of the above will happen. We'll just be in economical ruin, and therefore will have no money to spend stopping the above.

​

 

[a_unique_person]

You are actually blaming the "Australian drought" on global warming. Unbelievable.

Please check these charts and data from your own country then tell me if you still believe that. I agree you may be being told this is the by factions in your country.


http://gustofhotair.blogspot.com/

as shown here rainfall in australia over the last 6 months have been low i the south west - north of perth. High in the north and especailly north west Australia.

No sign of drought there.

The last 12 months has seen low rainfall in the far seaboard west and low in the mid south, and south east. Higher has been recorded in central north and north west.

No sign of a drought there either, with some up some down.

Seems to me that Australia's rainfall is not decreasing in total (as is shown here), (which also shows if anything increasing Australian rainfall), but rather the places that are getting less rainfall are in the south east highly farmed land, and the places are are not are in the northern non farmed land.

Is Australia getting less rainfall? No, the graph above shows this. Its just been unfortunate that the rainfall of late has fallen on the places that don't use the land for agriculture.

Maybe Co2 causes the rain to only fall where we don't need it. Nasty thing Co2
​

No, you are falling for Lomborgs habit of shallow analysis. The simple stats don't tell the story of mostly useless localised flooding, lack of steady, soaking rain, and farmers finding the early promise of rain disappearing. The rainfall failing yet again, and more and more farmers are ending up with little show for the year. The rain up in the North West is mostly useless, as no-one lives up there. It's like saying it's OK if there's a drought in Italy, it's raining in Poland.

 

[a_unique_person]

From last year.

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2006/s1744758.htm

MARK COLVIN: The nation's wheat crop is expected to be a lot smaller than first predicted.

The Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics, ABARE, predicts farmers will produce 26 million tonnes of wheat, down 36 per cent on last year.

Never in the last decade or so of droughty conditions has a crop prediction fallen so much in one year.

Continuing dry conditions and low rainfall over winter have dramatically reduced the forecast.

Brigid Glanville reports.

BRIGID GLANVILLE: Nick Redden is a grain grower from Narromine in Central West New South Wales. With no decent winter rainfall, his wheat crop is ruined and he won't be able to harvest the 600-hectare crop.

It's the first year since the early '90s that Nick Redden won't have any wheat to harvest.

NICK REDDEN: This year the situation is not really good. Our crops are just hanging on.

We've probably got a week to go before we put stock on them, and I can't see us harvesting anything at the moment unless it rains very shortly.

BRIGID GLANVILLE: And if it does rain, will that save the crop or is it too late?

NICK REDDEN: I think it's too late. We're just hanging on in the hope that... looking at forecasts and a few things like that, there's actually no rain forecast until the end the month and by then it will be too late.

BRIGID GLANVILLE: For Nick Redden and most farmers, the wheat crop is his family's main source of income for the year.

NICK REDDEN: This wheat crop is probably one of our main enterprises. So we're very very dependent on it financially and it's going to make a long hard battle for the next couple of years just to get back on top of things.

BRIGID GLANVILLE: Do you normally plant summer crops?

NICK REDDEN: We normally plant summer crops, but this year we've got a zero allocation out on Burrendong Dam, so I'd say the window of opportunity for planting cotton closing's very quickly.

The AGW denying depart ABARE, had this to say.

http://www.abareconomics.com/interactive/ac_june07/htm/wheat.htm

world stocks remain low
In 2007-08, global wheat stocks are forecast to remain historically low at around 117 million tonnes, with production and consumption being roughly in balance.
Stocks in the major exporting countries are expected to remain relatively stable in 2007-08, with US and EU stocks likely to change little from 2006-07. Stocks were drawn down significantly in 2006-07 as demand remained strong and poor seasonal conditions reduced production. Total stocks in the five major exporting countries (Australia, Argentina, the United States, the European Union and Canada) are forecast to be 33.5 million tonnes in 2007-08, 6 million tonnes below their five year average.

Australian production to increase
Livestock producers who reduced animal numbers in 2006-07 in response to drought will be turning to more cropping, where feasible, to improve short term cash flows. As a result the area sown to winter grain crops in 2007-08 is forecast to increase by around 10 per cent from last season to just over 20 million hectares.

As a result of the early break to the season, the area sown to wheat is forecast to be 11 per cent higher in 2007-08 at around 12.4 million hectares. Australian wheat yields are also expected to recover in 2007-08 and are forecast to be around historical averages. As a result, Australian wheat production is forecast to more than double, to 22.5 million tonnes, which in turn is expected to lead to a recovery in domestic wheat stocks.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1775676.htm

MAXINE MCKEW: The latest report from a government forecasting body has described the nation's key winter crops of being in the grip of a severe drought, one which will whip more than $6 billion off farm production, and the bureau of agricultural and resource economics has made another substantial cut in its estimates of production from the nation's major crops of wheat, barley and canola, only one month after its last forecast. Helen Brown has the story.

HELEN BROWN: Just one month in spring without rain has significantly worsened the outlook for the nation's grain growers. The Prime Minister was being told how farmers are now just hoping to save a few seeds from dying crops, so they have something to plant next year. See how the head's shrivelled up and died. There will be no grain in it.

The government forecaster has slashed another 2.8 million tonnes off the harvest of wheat, barley and canola.

TERRY SHEALES: People are talking of this drought being comparable to what happened in World War II. The old-timers tell us that. The history books also suggest there was the federation drought at the turn of the 20th century - that was also extremely severe.

HELEN BROWN: Output from the nation's key cropping industries is estimated at 13.6 million tons, down 63 per cent on last year.

TERRY SHEALES: Financially we're talking about - for the main cropping and livestock industries we're talking about earnings being down 16 per cent from real terms in 2002 and 2003. It is worse across those industries and more broadly that would also apply.

HELEN BROWN: Pastoral growth has been stunted, which will mean even less feed for sheep and cattle, and the outlook for summer crops such as cotton is looking grim. ABARE forecasts that $6.2 billion will be lost in agricultural production, chopping 0.7 per cent of economic growth.

The trend in rainfall is as predicted.

 

[mhaze]

No, you are falling for Lomborgs habit of shallow analysis. The simple stats don't tell the story of mostly useless localised flooding, lack of steady, soaking rain, and farmers finding the early promise of rain disappearing. The rainfall failing yet again, and more and more farmers are ending up with little show for the year. The rain up in the North West is mostly useless, as no-one lives up there. It's like saying it's OK if there's a drought in Italy, it's raining in Poland.

Nonsense. I suppose your concept of C02 control is going to make rain fall just where you want it to?

Repeating...

Is Australia getting less rainfall? No, the graph above shows this. Its just been unfortunate that the rainfall of late has fallen on the places that don't use the land for agriculture.

Maybe Co2 causes the rain to only fall where we don't need it. Nasty thing Co2
​

 

[a_unique_person]

Nonsense. I suppose your concept of C02 control is going to make rain fall just where you want it to?

Repeating...

Is Australia getting less rainfall? No, the graph above shows this. Its just been unfortunate that the rainfall of late has fallen on the places that don't use the land for agriculture.

Maybe Co2 causes the rain to only fall where we don't need it. Nasty thing Co2
​

Australia is about the size of continental USA. Rainfall patterns are changing, due to global warming, as predicted.

Meanwhile, Anthony Watts was predicting the wheels are about to fall off the AGW wagon.

http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com/search/label/Anthony Watts

Not quite.

Ultra deniers Anthony Watts and Steve McIntyre have been hard at work. Anthony Watts has ranked about one third of U.S. surface stations according to the new CRN siting guidelines. Meanwhile, Steve McIntyre and several of his commenters have graphed the resulting temperature trends from the "good" (CRN class 1 and 2) stations as well as the "bad" (CRN5) stations. It would be fair to say that both expected the warming trend apparent in the GISSTEMP (Goddard Institute For Space Studies) data set to disappear once this had been done. As Anthony has written, "you have to wonder if the whole house of cards isn't about to start falling down". It would be fair to say, however, that they have both been disappointed. Their preliminary results are given in the above graph, provided by one John V (a frequent poster on Climate Audit), who writes:

....

If the Deniers can't deny it, then I think we're on pretty solid ground. But McIntyre's not giving up yet. He's standing on his head and looking at the data all squinty eyed, to see if he can't make the numbers go in another direction. So far, however, the resemblance is astonishing.

Ouch! That's gotta hurt! No more appearances on Rush Limbaugh for these two.