• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Recent climate observations disagreement with projections

I will not argue with macdoc again about that graph...
I will not argue with macdoc again about that graph...
I will not argue with macdoc again about that graph...
I will not argue with macdoc again about that graph...

:D
 
Wangler said:
In my experience, the reverse is true: node spacing should ideally be driven by the expected gradient.

Large gradient, more nodes, tighter node spacing.

Small gradient, fewer nodes, sparser node spacing.
Click to expand...

Stating the apparently obvious. However, consider a node-spacing so fine that one contains a park and an adjacent node a shopping mall and car-parks.

The question remains (since Herzblut has already chosen a gradient) : what node size does he envision? An eager public awaits.
 
Tapio said:
So...the most basic conflict in the differing opinions of, say macdoc and Poptech, is essentially (once again) what counts as evidence and why?
Click to expand...

Not so much in their opinions but in their minds. macdoc's is discriminating while PopTech's isn't. macdoc looks to the data, while PopTech eats whatever pap he's fed by trusted sources.
 
macdoc said:
Argue with your government - they publish it and you can pick any damn period you like and mean temp, max temp, minimum temp ad infinitum as nauseum.....:rolleyes::garfield:
Click to expand...

As DogB once did to good effect. Let's not get into it again. The fact is that Australian conditions have not yet gone definitively beyond the range of previous variation, but they are getting ever closer to it. And there's no sign of this episode ending.
 
Capel
Sorry but there is no way you can in any way show that trends have at any time anywhere close over a 30 year period.

The climate HAS shifted, rainfall patterns and temperature.

The gov knows it.....

There may well have been equivalent short term excursions in one metric or another that exceeded or equalled current peaks.......

That's not what climate change is about and Australia has perhaps the clearest trendlines due to the particular nature of it's geosystems and how it is situated on the planet.

It is not heavily populated and has distinct climate regime bands ..that's why it's a size large canary...

There is probably no other similar mix anywhere on the planet to observe...and the first world facilities to do so and an edgy agriculture sector that is rather fragile as was pointed out by Jared Diamond'.

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2005/s1314531.htm

snip from below

Australia, the driest inhabited continent on earth, is regarded as highly vulnerable. A study by the country’s blue-chip Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation identified its ecosystems as “potentially the most fragile” on earth in the face of the threat.
Click to expand...
http://climateprogress.org/2009/02/...cks-in-are-the-southwest-and-california-next/

Not a lot of buffering available.

The physics of GHG energy retention are only heading in one direction ...... if it's already edgy and fragile it's only going to get worse...

That's why Australia trends are important..and bear repeating...:biggrin:

Just in case you think I'm hammering the point home over the top....I'm not....


NOAA stunner: Climate change “largely irreversible for 1000 years,” with permanent Dust Bowls in Southwest and around the globe
January 26, 2009

Important new research led by NOAA scientists, “Irreversible climate change because of carbon dioxide emissions,” finds:

…the climate change that is taking place because of increases in carbon dioxide concentration is largely irreversible for 1,000 years after emissions stop…. Among illustrative irreversible impacts that should be expected if atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations increase from current levels near 385 parts per million by volume (ppmv) to a peak of 450-600 ppmv over the coming century are irreversible dry-season rainfall reductions in several regions comparable to those of the ”dust bowl” era and inexorable sea level rise.
Click to expand...

continues

http://climateprogress.org/2009/01/...e-irreversible-1000-years-drought-dust-bowls/
 
Last edited:
macdoc said:
Capel
Sorry but...
Click to expand...

Now CD, repeat after me.

I will not argue with macdoc again about that graph...
I will not argue with macdoc again about that graph...
I will not argue with macdoc again about that graph...
I will not argue with macdoc again about that graph...

:D
 
Has the climate shifted, or does it just contually shift? Consider this study which juxaposes several sea level rise sources and concludes:

there is now good reason to believe that the IPCC’s “faster rate [of sea level rise] for 1993 to 2003” better “reflects decadal variability” rather than much of “an increase in the longer-term behavior.”

....for global warming alarmists, a declining rate of sea level rise certainly doesn’t do much for “cause.”

References:
Holgate, S. J., 2007. On the decadal rates of sea level change during the twentieth century, Geophysical Research Letters, 34, L01602, doi:10.1029/2006GL028492.
IPCC, 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., pp. 996.
 
DogB said:
Warm today. 4c above average. Magnificent sunny winter day.

Looks like this – but I’d rather be here.
Click to expand...
A live cam is not good to make your argument stable. What about a snapshot? I can argue the opposite by using snapshots (then "winning" the debate on the eyes of the average public, but not by logical means). As each average sound person in the Northern Hemisphere knows, when you go southwards all becomes hotter and hotter, the spicy food, the girls "calienteih, mamacitah ....chiquititah ....wowwww!", with the sole quantum singularity of the South Pole that looks like the Universe one minute "before" the Big Bang (that's why it has neither East nor West and anyone can get disoriented :rolleyes:).

I can show the snowstorms here yesterday that covered a vast area (you can compare that area with that ranging from Brisbane to Hobart, Hobart to Adelaida and Adelaida to Brisbane). This is how it looked:

Bahía Blanca, BAS (about Melbourne's latitude, sea level, with neighbouring sea port)
bblanca.jpg


This lady in Guaymallén, MZA (about Sidney's latitude) was taking a sun bathe -watch the palm trees- and was surprised by the sudden fall of an unknown white fluffy substance, then she got heavy dressed and asked somebody to take a picture
guaymallen.jpg


This was happening towards Buenos Aires

pringles.jpg


while 14 million people in the Buenos Aires-La Plata Area were coping with cold temperatures, 30km/h winds and swine flu as they could
bsas.jpg


Even strange critters were spotted

critters.jpg


nobody knows if sudden spontaneous darwinian adaptations of local fauna or coming from other latitudes (some big foot steps were also spotted).

And they are saying there's GW, and an anthropogenic one! Shame!

They are well known for using this kind of weather stations ... look! look!
shame.jpg


The fact is that average temperatures have raised up to 1°C here, what is made from summers and summer-like weather that went from 100 to 150 days a year and automm-like winters with more frequent far-from-average episodes of polar air masses invading the country tweaking down the averages but still a signal for more energy an imbalance.

The sophists just shred argumentations, in this forum by shredding the subject into different thread topics, then arguing whatever off-topic topicality they need to prove that their carefully selected shatter is not at all a proof of "it", being "it" whatever they don't want proved.[dizzying grammar, isn't it?]
 
Last edited:
aleCcowaN said:
....with more frequent far-from-average episodes of polar air masses invading the country tweaking down the averages but still a signal for more energy an imbalance......]
Click to expand...

Energy imbalance of natural...

Weather.
 
mhaze said:
Energy imbalance of natural...

Weather.
Click to expand...
Yeah! It'll continue to be known that way even with AGW proved or on the verge of a new ice age. Languages don't evolve so quickly, it's just people and their tailored use of it.

By the way, a couple of hours ago, at Jujuy, about Rio de Janeiro's latitude but 1200m above sea level.

ssjujuy.jpg


It's global cooling! Our prayers were answered! Be gone palm trees! Welcome balsam fir!
 
It is a phenomenom called winter. Most people actually have heard of it.
 
mhaze said:
Has the climate shifted, or does it just contually shift? Consider this study which juxaposes several sea level rise sources and concludes:

there is now good reason to believe that the IPCC’s “faster rate [of sea level rise] for 1993 to 2003” better “reflects decadal variability” rather than much of “an increase in the longer-term behavior.”

....for global warming alarmists, a declining rate of sea level rise certainly doesn’t do much for “cause.”

References:
Holgate, S. J., 2007. On the decadal rates of sea level change during the twentieth century, Geophysical Research Letters, 34, L01602, doi:10.1029/2006GL028492.
IPCC, 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., pp. 996.
Click to expand...
Why did you snip the quotation just in the interesting part? (bold typeface not in the original text):

...Hopefully this fact will find its way into the next IPCC report.

And for global warming alarmists, a declining rate of sea level rise certainly doesn’t do much for “cause.” Couple the slowing rate of sea level rise with the slowing rate of temperature rise and you should have a slowing rate of public concern.
Click to expand...
People must be the duh! kind, mustn't they?

About the references:
Holgate's

The other: Not found something with that exact title. By adding "science" it shows up a book with 996 pages, contribution of working Group I

Any "central limit theorem" is your friend, aren't they?
 
Alec - don't fall for mHaze crap - he cites a "report" which is merely an opinion piece from a known denier site - no attribution, no author

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/i...vel-rise-an-update-shows-a-slowdown/#more-383

here is some background
http://scienceblogs.com/effectmeasure/2007/09/climate_denier_denies_to_discl.php

then uses some snips of information in THAT "report" and lists

these as if they were the source of the report....

References:

Holgate, S. J., 2007. On the decadal rates of sea level change during the twentieth century, Geophysical Research Letters, 34, L01602, doi:10.1029/2006GL028492.

IPCC, 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., pp. 996.
Click to expand...

:dl:
 
Last edited:
macdoc said:
... an opinion piece from a known denier site - no attribution, no author

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/i...vel-rise-an-update-shows-a-slowdown/#more-383

here is some background
http://scienceblogs.com/effectmeasure/2007/09/climate_denier_denies_to_discl.php
Click to expand...
Thank you for those links.

I wanted to ask you a question about a subject you know well. We have here in the city a number of bird species, including native non-migratory species, migratory (the swallows of Capistrano Mission for instance) -some of them brought here last year the West Nile virus from USA- and some exotic species brought by immigrants -wood pigeon, house sparrows-, exotic species that become a plague. Some 30 years ago when we were in our week-end house I used to get away for whatever was the serious business of that tender age. Mi mother would say to me "don't go, it is about to rain, look, the birds were singing loudly a moment ago but they are quiet now", I would say "no, the showers are going toward the river (Plate) now" and left. Fifteen minutes later I would come back soaking wet and coughing. When I was about 12, I had already learnt to never take my mother's advice but to always listen the birds'.

In recent 10 years I lived many many experiences of watching through the window birds flying low, taking shelter in their nests, and me thinking "it doesn't look as if it is going to rain" and effectively it wouldn't. Also I saw many times birds leaving their safe places to fly into what'd become a sudden storm.

Is this behaviour common? Are there signals of species loosing their "radar"? Is there a name for that?
 
No idea but there is a twitcher ( bird watchers ) thread on this forum....post it up there and be prepared to translate a bit :D

Some critters are smart....you can always count on a hawk to have a good flying thermal, some are dumb.....seagulls are not the smartest when it comes to soaring......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom