• If you are having trouble logging in to the forum please contact admin@puntroadend.com // When reseting your password or awaiting confirmation please check your junk/spam emails.

Global Warming

HR

Tiger Superstar
Mar 20, 2013
1,428
138
OMG the deniers are lining up to show their intelligence.

No matter where you put the 24 hour period you can get 2 peaks a long way apart and 2 peaks close together, if we measure daily temperatures over a 24 hour period this is inevitable. Since a day is 24 hours it is logical to measure it over a 24 hour period.

Let me outline this in a way even you lot may understand:

In the not too distant future the following occurs:

It is January 15 2021, the BOM announces that it will now alter the way daily temperatures are measured, they will no longer use the traditional meteorological day which was 9am to 9am, they will now measure temperatures from midnight to midnight starting in Feb 2021.

In Melbourne on Feb 3 2021 it is extreme, the temperature reaches a maximum of 46C.

In the late afternoon clouds appear locking the heat in as the wind drops.

At 12.01am the temperature remains 35C.

During the night a light Southerly appears and blows the cloud and some of the heat away, the following day is mild, the temperature drops to around 20 degrees by 8.59am and only rises to 21C by 6pm, dropping to around 19C by 9pm.

BOM Maximum for Feb 4 2021: 35C.

This is immediately seized upon by Roy Spencer. He writes an outraged blog post: the BOM change has led to a 0.5C increase in the average maximum for the month of February for Melbourne, all caused by a change in the definition of a day by the BOM. The blog post appears on WUWT within hours and Breitbart points to a conspiracy to inflate temperature readings by the BOM, emails are rumoured to have been sent and Judith Curry is demanding they be released.

FFS

DS
David you need to chill dude, you will have a stress related heart attack way before the smoke takes you out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Midsy

I am the one who knocks.
Jan 18, 2014
2,592
245
47
London
Most people would assume the daily ‘high’ would occur somewhere between 7.00am and 8.00pm. A reading taken at 8.45am for the previous day is clearly illogical for the lay person, despite its necessity for scientific continuity.
 

HR

Tiger Superstar
Mar 20, 2013
1,428
138
Most people would assume the daily ‘high’ would occur somewhere between 7.00am and 8.00pm. A reading taken at 8.45am for the previous day is clearly illogical for the lay person, despite its necessity for scientific continuity.
I have read in articles previously that historical records were taken by a sole person and weekends were not necessarily recorded either. 9am until 9am is understandable even for us tin foil hat wearing socialist deniers.
 

HR

Tiger Superstar
Mar 20, 2013
1,428
138
Do the deniers here actually care about the environment we live in on this planet at all?
Are you joining the labelling crew now ToO?
The only way someone can be seen as a friend of the environment is to just accept everything we read and hear from 4 or 5 posters on this site?
Apart from bad mouthing, virtually abusing some, finishing most debates with vitriol and being tne most virtuous posters on this site are they actually following their moral compass and showing due care for the planet let alone some regular posters?
Come on mate, caring about the environment is not really something you can show by choosing to turn up at a protest travelled to in a car or a train and scream abuse at the sides of buildings after spending your day in a high rise office building with the aircon on and the lights glowing.
We dont all live in the bubble ToO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Tigers of Old

I’ll die a happy Tiger.
Jul 26, 2004
64,428
1,576
Are you joining the labelling crew now ToO?
The only way someone can be seen as a friend of the environment is to just accept everything we read and hear from 4 or 5 posters on this site?
Apart from bad mouthing, virtually abusing some, finishing most debates with vitriol and being tne most virtuous posters on this site are they actually following their moral compass and showing due care for the planet let alone some regular posters?
Come on mate, caring about the environment is not really something you can show by choosing to turn up at a protest travelled to in a car or a train and scream abuse at the sides of buildings after spending your day in a high rise office building with the aircon on and the lights glowing.
We dont all live in the bubble ToO.
That’s a long way of saying no.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user

MD Jazz

Tiger Champion
Feb 3, 2017
3,914
575
A bit dehydrated today and bought a bottle of cold water at Flinders Street about 5.pm. I start drinking it on the platform and I fear the the plastic is deteriorating as its grainy and uncomfortable and strange tasting. I then realise I am taking in with my water the particles floating in the air. Once on the train the water tastes OK. Now this begs the question about that grainy crap we are inhaling but not noticing quite how crap it is. Try and stay indoors until this stuff clears a bit.
Makes you appreciate how lucky we are that we don't have to live with poor quality air permanently like many.

Not sure about the long term impacts of air pollution for a week.

In China life expectancy in polluted cities is greater than the average for the rest of the country. Beijing (one of the ten most polluted cities in the world) life expectancy is around 82, Changzhou is in the top ten also and its life expectancy is also 82. Shanghai, the largest city in China, has a life expectancy just under 84.

.
 

LeeToRainesToRoach

Get out Gillon
Jun 4, 2006
24,206
1,355
Melbourne
Do the deniers here actually care about the environment we live in on this planet at all?
Too much environmental care made these fires much worse than they needed to be.

The simple facts are that 40 years ago, prescribed burning in Victoria covered 300,000 hectares a year; in the lead up to Black Saturday it was 120,000 and in the past three years it was 65,000 (with much of that in the Mallee where it is of limited use).

There has been a dramatic shift away from prescribed burning despite numerous studies illustrating its benefits. It is only right that those responsible are held accountable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Tigers of Old

I’ll die a happy Tiger.
Jul 26, 2004
64,428
1,576
Too much environmental care made these fires much worse than they needed to be.

The simple facts are that 40 years ago, prescribed burning in Victoria covered 300,000 hectares a year; in the lead up to Black Saturday it was 120,000 and in the past three years it was 65,000 (with much of that in the Mallee where it is of limited use).

There has been a dramatic shift away from prescribed burning despite numerous studies illustrating its benefits. It is only right that those responsible are held accountable.
Just on this I don't think it's that simple.

Shane Fitzsimmons made some really good points on this if you haven't seen it. It's definitely worth a watch.

 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

123kid

Tiger Superstar
May 1, 2016
1,679
465
The study below puts the figure at 8%. Not a big ratio, but it equates to a substantial number of people.

Public Opinion on Religion and Science in the United States
That study says 2% of scientists believe in creationism.

And they only look at America (creationist hotbed), while polling a subset of scientists in the AAAS, which states they’re aiming to influence politics.

If the most favourable conditions possible for producing a creationist scientist only creates 2% of them, then what would be the real figure throughout the world?

No scientistic who understands the scientific method and has honestly attempted to learn even the basics of evolution can be a creationist. It’s directly contradictory to everything a scientist does.

Political agendas might influence the odd scientist to say otherwise.

If your basis for rejecting climate change is data from a creationist scientist covering a 2-5 generation timescale... I’d expect there’s significantly better data out there.

I don’t know anything on the topic though, so I’m just learning the basics from what I’m seeing by you guys on here and haven’t seen any data myself.
 

LeeToRainesToRoach

Get out Gillon
Jun 4, 2006
24,206
1,355
Melbourne
Just on this I don't think it's that simple.
No its not that simple. By "held accountable" I mean put on the stand to explain and have the reasoning put under the microscope. The strength of a Royal Commission is that it has the power to cut through all the bullshit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

123kid

Tiger Superstar
May 1, 2016
1,679
465
Too much environmental care made these fires much worse than they needed to be.

The simple facts are that 40 years ago, prescribed burning in Victoria covered 300,000 hectares a year; in the lead up to Black Saturday it was 120,000 and in the past three years it was 65,000 (with much of that in the Mallee where it is of limited use).

There has been a dramatic shift away from prescribed burning despite numerous studies illustrating its benefits. It is only right that those responsible are held accountable.
I agree with this point though.

Environmental care ironically has become a policy that needs to go up in flames.
 

LeeToRainesToRoach

Get out Gillon
Jun 4, 2006
24,206
1,355
Melbourne
That study says 2% of scientists believe in creationism.
It pretty clearly says 8% of members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science believe that "man evolved over time guided by a supreme being". If that's not a refutation of evolution, it's its full brother.
 

123kid

Tiger Superstar
May 1, 2016
1,679
465
It pretty clearly says 8% of members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science believe that "man evolved over time guided by a supreme being". If that's not a refutation of evolution, it's its full brother.
Aren’t we talking about creationism?

Creationists adopt a literal interpretation of the bible where everything “of a kind” was created in its “current form”.

What you’re referring to above is the subset of scientists who accept evolution as true, but when asked how the first cell came about, the say “God did it”.

You originally claimed “plenty of scientists are creationists, especially biologists”.

But in the world’s creationist hotbed, while polling a politically-minded association of scientists, only 2% are creationist and up to 8% believe “god did it” regarding the first cell.

Worldwide, there’s practically no scientists who are creationists, and zero biologists who are creationists.

Are your views on climate change largely influenced by creationist scientists such as the one you quoted earlier?

Could getting information from the fringes be problematic?
 
Last edited:

IanG

Tiger Legend
Sep 27, 2004
16,000
193
Melbourne
Too much environmental care made these fires much worse than they needed to be.

The simple facts are that 40 years ago, prescribed burning in Victoria covered 300,000 hectares a year; in the lead up to Black Saturday it was 120,000 and in the past three years it was 65,000 (with much of that in the Mallee where it is of limited use).

There has been a dramatic shift away from prescribed burning despite numerous studies illustrating its benefits. It is only right that those responsible are held accountable.
Its not that simple:

 

LeeToRainesToRoach

Get out Gillon
Jun 4, 2006
24,206
1,355
Melbourne
Its not that simple:

No it's not simple, acknowledged. But the claim that "we are burning smarter, not more" needs to be closely scrutinised.

The article claims that "state governments are not necessarily doing less fuel reduction burns", which is patently untrue.

Also says "In Victoria, 130,044 hectares of public land was burned in 2018-19" without any context, inferring that it is a high figure.

The article's purpose is to hose down criticism. Bring on the investigation.

I don't think a national approach, as called for by the ex-fire chief, will work given the different terrains and vegetation from state to state. But I also don't think the states can be left to their own devices.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

LeeToRainesToRoach

Get out Gillon
Jun 4, 2006
24,206
1,355
Melbourne
What you’re referring to above is the subset of scientists who accept evolution as true, but when asked how the first cell came about, the say “God did it”.

You originally claimed “plenty of scientists are creationists, especially biologists”.
Fair enough. I misinterpreted the purpose of a study when looking at numbers from each field of science, which heavily favoured biologists. I was wrong.

But there are a few about.
e.g.

Alfred, BraxtonEmeritus Professor of Anthropology, University of British Columbia. Has claimed that he tried systematically to indoctrinate students with evolution for 33 years before he discovered and was converted to Intelligent Design.

Interestingly, Spencer is not listed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user