Global Warming

[AngryAnt]

No, sorry. That is a myth propagated by activists.

Tropical Cyclone Trends

Cyclones are not the only form of extreme weather Lee. Prevalence of floods, heatwaves, heavier rainstorms, droughts and fires have all increased markedly - and here's some actual science that demonstrates that.

National Climate Assessment

The National Climate Assessment summarizes the impacts of climate change on the United States, now and in the future.

nca2014.globalchange.gov

New data confirm increased frequency of extreme weather events: European national science academies urge further action on climate change adaptation

New data show that extreme weather events have become more frequent over the past 36 years, with a significant uptick in floods and other hydrological events compared even with five years ago, according to a new publication.

www.sciencedaily.com

 

[Coburgtiger]

The reason(s) for the Permian Mass Extinction is unknown. There are only theories.

I'd suggest you double check the definition of that word.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Quoting an actual non fake source is a big tick for you Lee.

Probably helps if you read what you cite though.

The time series of analysed tropical cyclone activity in the Australian region (south of the equator; 90-160°E) show that the total number of cyclones appears to have decreased. However, there was a change to the definition for tropical cyclones in 1978 which led to some systems which would previously have been classified as tropical cyclones instead being considered sub-tropical systems. This contributes somewhat to the apparent decline in total numbers.

and

There is substantial evidence from theory and model experiments that the large-scale environment in which tropical cyclones form and evolve is changing as a result of global warming. Projected changes in the number and intensity of tropical cyclones are subject to the sources of uncertainty inherent in climate change projections. There remains uncertainty in the future change in tropical cyclone frequency (the number of tropical cyclones in a given period) projected by climate models, with a general tendency for models to project fewer tropical cyclones in the Australia region in the future climate and a greater proportion of the high intensity storms (stronger wind speeds and heavier rainfall).

Try these also.

Downward trends in the frequency of intense Atlantic hurricanes during the past five decades

Recent historically low global tropical cyclone activity

Not even the IPCC disputes that the incidence of major hurricanes has declined worldwide since the 1950's. There was a tiny paragraph acknowledging this in the last UN climate report.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

I'd suggest you double check the definition of that word.

Climate change? Volcanoes? Asteroids? Microbes?

Tell me definitively which it was and score yourself a Nobel Prize.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Cyclones are not the only form of extreme weather Lee. Prevalence of floods, heatwaves, heavier rainstorms, droughts and fires have all increased markedly - and here's some actual science that demonstrates that.

Suggest you look up the "Federation Drought".

What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.

- Ecclesiastes 1:9

 

[eZyT]

No, sorry. That is a myth propagated by activists.

Tropical Cyclone Trends

no, sorry, its a fact.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

no, sorry, its a fact.

FFS. Here it is, from the horse's mouth.

"Numerous studies towards and beyond AR5 have reported a decreasing trend in the global number of tropical cyclones and/or the globally accumulated cyclonic energy... Using a relatively short (20 year) and relatively homogeneous remotely sensed record, Klotzbach (2006) reported no significant trends in global cyclonic activity, consistent with more recent findings of Holland and Bruyère (2014).... Moreover, studies that have used more homogeneous records, but were consequently limited to rather short periods of 20 to 25 years, have reported no statistically significant trends or decreases in the global number of these systems .There is consequently low confidence in the conclusion that the number of very intense cyclones is increasing globally."

“low confidence in the sign of drought trends since 1950 at global scale"

“low confidence... that anthropogenic climate change has affected the frequency and the magnitude of floods”

2018 IPCC Report

You're an intelligent man. Are you really throwing in your lot with those deranged layabouts who were at the Convention Centre last week?

 

[AngryAnt]

Suggest you look up the "Federation Drought".

What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.

- Ecclesiastes 1:9

sure, but what's that got to do with the increasing frequency of extreme weather events?

 

[DavidSSS]

Meanwhile

It keeps getting warmer.

DS

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Meanwhile

It keeps getting warmer.

DS

I much prefer this one - true global coverage unadulterated by metropolitan focus, heat island effect, "extrapolated" historical figures and other compromising factors.

 

[AngryAnt]

I much prefer this one - true global coverage unadulterated by metropolitan focus, heat island effect, "extrapolated" historical figures and other compromising factors.

Not sure why you like that better. It only goes back to 1979 but still shows a clear uptrend anyway.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Not sure why you like that better. It only goes back to 1979 but still shows a clear uptrend anyway.

That's how long the satellite's been up there. When I first joined this debate in earnest I was told that high historical temperatures couldn't be relied upon due to the primitive nature of the equipment in use at the time. But there we have it in David's chart, a depiction stretching back to 1860.

You're all aware that this chart contains measurements that were never taken, right? That values (especially for the southern hemisphere where coverage was sparse) were "estimated" from real measurements at real stations?

Left half of the UAH chart shows an increase. If there's an overall increase since 1998, it isn't large.

 

[eZyT]

FFS.

Well may we say FFS,

cause nothing will save us.

A dystopian future is a thing of the past

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Well may we say FFS,

cause nothing will save us.

A dystopian future is a thing of the past

What did you say when Magic Wand shot to the front?

 

[AngryAnt]

That's how long the satellite's been up there. When I first joined this debate in earnest I was told that high historical temperatures couldn't be relied upon due to the primitive nature of the equipment in use at the time. But there we have it in David's chart, a depiction stretching back to 1860.

You're all aware that this chart contains measurements that were never taken, right? That values (especially for the southern hemisphere where coverage was sparse) were "estimated" from real measurements at real stations?

Left half of the UAH chart shows an increase. If there's an overall increase since 1998, it isn't large.

Half a degree in 20 years? Extrapolate that out a bit and see what happens

 

[eZyT]

What did you say when Magic Wand shot to the front?

*smile* *smile* *smile* *smile* *smile* *smile* sucker mother *smile* *smile* arse

But of course Shakespeare said it best of all ...

one swallow does not a summer make.

trouble is, there's heaps and heaps of swallows

heaps. Its the festival of the *smile* swallow.

and the little *smile* are gonna keep coming thick and fast

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Half a degree in 20 years? Extrapolate that out a bit and see what happens

Exaggeration is the #1 issue most have with climate agitators. The rate since 1979 is 0.13 degrees per decade.

 

[AngryAnt]

Exaggeration is the #1 issue most have with climate agitators. The rate since 1979 is 0.13 degrees per decade.

Your preferred dataset only goes back to 1998 so any temperatures before then are unknowable.

 

[AngryAnt]

From a man who has fought fires and seen fire seasons lengthen and grow for the last two decades, based on a century of data from the NSW fire services.

The NSW bushfires are different. Climate change is the culprit

amp.smh.com.au

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

From a man who has fought fires and seen fire seasons lengthen and grow for the last two decades, based on a century of data from the NSW fire services.

The NSW bushfires are different. Climate change is the culprit

amp.smh.com.au

greening planet = more fuel
expanding population means settlement pushing into previously uninhabited areas and more people at bushfire risk

Yes, climate change is a factor. He is concerned about his (the brigade's) people, which is understandable.

Dry conditions with low rainfall, yet too wet to backburn presents a contradiction, though.

This man is an expert on bushfires, not climate change. He makes the leap from increased bushfire incidence to greenhouse emissions without a shred of self-consciousness. It's this sort of logic (or illogic) that causes thinking people to say, hang on a minute.