Global Warming

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

excluding 'now' from a data set is unorthodox to put it nicely L2

let me give you another example of what that technique can do to the truth.

yet, it has now been 40 years since Richmond last won a premiership (2017, 2019 excepted)

I know this is pointless, buts I make the point for the benefit of the primary school aged kids who might be reading, thinking ' hmmmm L2 may have a point there'.

under many, increasingly vindicated, climate change models,

rainfall doesn't necessarily decline, its temporal and spacial distribution changes. It falls in different places or different times boys and girls.

where I live, for example, gets about 2000mm annually, historically with a predictable wet and dry season.

As the climate changed, we got a 1 in 100 year flood followed by a 1 in 100 year drought.

so in the last 5 years, we still got our historical 10 metres of rain, except distributed in a fashion which makes it very expensive and tough to try run a business, keep tourists happy, grow food, preserve infrastructure, catch and store water, conduct civil works, manage natural resources etc etc etc etc (the list is quite long kids, just google IPCC warnings and predictions, and what the best brains in the known universe said will happen, is happening. Oh, and kids, if you grow up to be a statistician and are set the assignment about power and integrity of data representation, it would be judicious to review L2's posts on this thread as your starting point on how data can be represented without any integrity or power)

As you lot would repeat every time I'd rev you up by saying how cold it was, "weather is not climate". Likewise, one year of record low rainfall is not climate or climate change. If we get another giant +IOD in 2020, bump this post and demand a response!

As for "1 in 100", I'm still waiting for the 1-in-100-years storm the BoM promised us a while back.

Gotta go, we're about to be hit by a terrifying thunderstorm of biblical proportions, complete with 5-15 mm of rain. Someone has to man the panic stations!

'Very dangerous': Weather alert for Melbourne area (paywalled)

 

[IanG]

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.

Further info:

It's climate change, not 'greens' standing in the way of fuel reduction burns | John Thwaites

Higher temperatures, dryer fuel and strong winds in autumn and spring are making it unsafe to burn

www.theguardian.com

 

[IanG]

That would be another no then Giardiasis.
Now it makes sense why your username is a parasite.

They won't listen which is why debating this here is pretty much pointless.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

It's climate change, not 'greens' standing in the way of fuel reduction burns | John Thwaites

Higher temperatures, dryer fuel and strong winds in autumn and spring are making it unsafe to burn

www.theguardian.com

"Bushfire experts say that in normal years hazard reduction is a way to control the behaviour of fires"

So 2019 was an abnormal year. Accepted. What about 2018, 2017 and 2016?

Another article by that same paper features a claim that prescribed burning does nothing to mitigate bushfires, despite literally dozens of studies showing the opposite. They've run a number of defensive articles lately, since the Royal Commission began looming as a possibility.

One side of my family which hails from eastern Victoria, where a great-grandfather made his fortune from logging, has been saying for 25+ years that greenies are buggering things up in the bush. I'm as sure that this isn't 100% of the answer as I am that "climate change" isn't the sole driver.

 

[DavidSSS]

Some have cited shortening autumn/spring pre-burn windows in defence of reduced pre-burning, yet Australia-wide rainfall (2019 excepted) has not declined.

OMG, you do like doubling down on the bulls*** don't you?

As was explained to you on Jan 6 (see page 293, although you would need to regenerate the trends on the BOM site) Australia is a bloody big place and rainfall has increased in some areas and decreased in others. Your citing of rainfall figures for the whole continent was irrelevant to the fires in SE Australia back a week and half ago, and it remains irrelevant to SE Australia.

I'll just repost the long term rainfall trend again:

And you wonder why some talk to you as if you are a simpleton.

DS

 

[tigerman]

One side of my family which hails from eastern Victoria, where a great-grandfather made his fortune from logging, has been saying for 25+ years that greenies are buggering things up in the bush. I'm as sure that this isn't 100% of the answer as I am that "climate change" isn't the sole driver.

All those trees your Great Grand Father cut down, imagine all the the CO2 those trees could've absorbed

 

[Djevv]

I had an interesting conversation wuth a Kiwi today. We were talking about Chinese ownership of assets/land which is an issue over there as here. She told me one of the assets the Chinese buy is forested land as carbon credits to offset their coal based electricity grid. I’m not sure how this works because as I discussed these trees emit as much carbon as they absorb! I wonder how much credit you get per ha of forested Kiwi land?

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

OMG, you do like doubling down on the bulls*** don't you?

As was explained to you on Jan 6 (see page 293, although you would need to regenerate the trends on the BOM site) Australia is a bloody big place and rainfall has increased in some areas and decreased in others. Your citing of rainfall figures for the whole continent was irrelevant to the fires in SE Australia back a week and half ago, and it remains irrelevant to SE Australia.

I'll just repost the long term rainfall trend again:

And you wonder why some talk to you as if you are a simpleton.

DS

This simpleton's interpretation of the map is, a lot of the west and north has seen an increase of 0-20mm per decade, while a lot of the east has seen a decrease of 0-40mm per decade. We've just had 16mm in Melbourne since 5pm, so over a decade, we're not talking about a huge difference.

(This simpleton also doesn't think the colour contrast between 0 to +10 and 0 to -10 is optimal.)

However this simpleton struggles to see that Victoria has experienced unprecedented low summer, autumn or winter rainfall of late, as claimed by some sources.

Spring is a little different. Perhaps some adjustment to burnoff times is required?

 

[eZyT]

As you lot would repeat every time I'd rev you up by saying how cold it was, "weather is not climate". Likewise, one year of record low rainfall is not climate or climate change. If we get another giant +IOD in 2020, bump this post and demand a response!

As for "1 in 100", I'm still waiting for the 1-in-100-years storm the BoM promised us a while back.

Gotta go, we're about to be hit by a terrifying thunderstorm of biblical proportions, complete with 5-15 mm of rain. Someone has to man the panic stations!

'Very dangerous': Weather alert for Melbourne area (paywalled)

your rear guard action is getting less and less convincing and becoming a bit of a tragicomedy.

which is saying something, cause your front on, emboldened assaults were an entirely unconvincing tragicomedy.

You have to understand the basics of statistics to run the footy data you do,

You pretending you don't understand the concept of 1 in 100 leaves me no room to move other than to declare you

A Troll.

I love what you bring to PRE L2, but the complete crap you spouting on here is getting worse and worse.

I don't want to block you, cause I really like your footy stuff, so I'll just stay off this board.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

your rear guard action is getting less and less convincing and becoming a bit of a tragicomedy.

which is saying something, cause your front on, emboldened assaults were an entirely unconvincing tragicomedy.

You have to understand the basics of statistics to run the footy data you do,

You pretending you don't understand the concept of 1 in 100 leaves me no room to move other than to declare you

A Troll.

I love what you bring to PRE L2, but the complete crap you spouting on here is getting worse and worse.

I don't want to block you, cause I really like your footy stuff, so I'll just stay off this board.

Please accept my apology. I skimmed through the rest of your post after the "primary school" bit. Obviously some areas have had a harder time with drought and floods than others. Didn't mean to make light of what your particular region has gone through. After reading the HS's spruiking of a "dangerous" storm, I felt it was time for a bit of levity.

After years of back and forth, we all know where each of us stands on this issue. A lot of what is disseminated about climate change is flawed or speculative or has been shown to be just plain wrong, and I refuse to entertain it at this point, given that it is being used as a battering ram for global socialism.

I happily concede that I'm an idiot, relatively speaking, in comparison to experts on both sides of the debate. I've changed sides once and can't say that it won't happen again.

 

[Brodders17]

"Bushfire experts say that in normal years hazard reduction is a way to control the behaviour of fires"

So 2019 was an abnormal year. Accepted. What about 2018, 2017 and 2016?

Another article by that same paper features a claim that prescribed burning does nothing to mitigate bushfires, despite literally dozens of studies showing the opposite. They've run a number of defensive articles lately, since the Royal Commission began looming as a possibility.

One side of my family which hails from eastern Victoria, where a great-grandfather made his fortune from logging, has been saying for 25+ years that greenies are buggering things up in the bush. I'm as sure that this isn't 100% of the answer as I am that "climate change" isn't the sole driver.

I'm shocked a logger is complaining about greenies. pretty hard to hard to argue with that i would think.

 

[Midsy]

This thread was a good read until the personal insults started. A shame, as the actual climate conversations were good.

Not sure why some revert to name calling and labelling, when there's plenty to discuss anyway.

 

[Giardiasis]

That would be another no then Giardiasis.
Now it makes sense why your username is a parasite.

 

[Coburgtiger]

This thread was a good read until the personal insults started. A shame, as the actual climate conversations were good.

Not sure why some revert to name calling and labelling, when there's plenty to discuss anyway.

I'm glad the end of the world is a good read for you.

 

[Tigers of Old]

A good news story. The Wollemi pines were saved in the fires.

 

[HR]

I'm shocked a logger is complaining about greenies. pretty hard to hard to argue with that i would think.

You are just shocked. All the time.
Please tell us all how advanced your history is and how your "Brodder" super genes have bypassed carbon footprints throughout time.
You must hate yourself.

 

[HR]

Please accept my apology. I skimmed through the rest of your post after the "primary school" bit. Obviously some areas have had a harder time with drought and floods than others. Didn't mean to make light of what your particular region has gone through. After reading the HS's spruiking of a "dangerous" storm, I felt it was time for a bit of levity.

After years of back and forth, we all know where each of us stands on this issue. A lot of what is disseminated about climate change is flawed or speculative or has been shown to be just plain wrong, and I refuse to entertain it at this point, given that it is being used as a battering ram for global socialism.

I happily concede that I'm an idiot, relatively speaking, in comparison to experts on both sides of the debate. I've changed sides once and can't say that it won't happen again.

Please dont apologise L2, you maintain your composure way better than any of the other views seen on this site. Their inability to maintain their *smile* will be their downfall again.
Being labelled a "troll" from a poorly veiled comedicdairyfarmer isnt worth the energy that was wasted in his post and many of his recent ones. Its actuallty a real shame he went where he did. Such a good bloke for not blocking you either, there could have been 2 of us in his club. As for the rest, well lets hope they practice what they preach.
Chin up.

 

[HR]

I'm glad the end of the world is a good read for you.

Whats your address Coburg?
I'll head to the post office tomorrow and send you some resilience. Often unseen in the inner city suburbs but well used elsewhere.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Is it a myth or is it real?

Yes Disco it's real alright.

 

[Coburgtiger]

Whats your address Coburg?
I'll head to the post office tomorrow and send you some resilience. Often unseen in the inner city suburbs but well used elsewhere.

What's your point? Yes, we are in the process of ending our way of life on this planet, but we should just give it all a darned good British style thrashing, six of the best trousers down?

Well, tally Ho, pip pip and Bernard's your uncle.

By the way, if you're planning on sending me something you may have to wait. Deliveries across Australia are at a standstill cause the whole country's on fire.