|
|
Post by Ariete on Jan 1, 2020 15:55:12 GMT -5
Wrong. And are you saying climate change isn't a threat to all life on earth, you heretic?
Nobody is saying that the human race would go extinct.  |
|
|
|
Post by knot on Jan 1, 2020 16:21:48 GMT -5
The map clearly labels the dataset The map does not identify even a single weather station; computer-modelled temperatures, as opposed to physically-measured observational data. This is evident by the manner in which the supposed data is taken from every corner of the Earth's surface—even in regions whereby no physical data exists in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by lab276 on Jan 1, 2020 19:31:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by knot on Jan 1, 2020 19:35:24 GMT -5
lab276 Might I so boldly ask of you...what does that have to do with climate change?
|
|
|
|
Post by knot on Jan 1, 2020 19:44:35 GMT -5
A graph of Earth's temperature through the ages. As you can see, we live in a time of unprecedented catastrophic instability unsuitable for life.  Upon taking a closer look at this graph, I have found that it applies the fraudulent Hockey Stick (of Mann, Bradley & Hughes [1999]) to the Holocene period; whereby the Medieval Warm Period, Roman Warm Period, Minoan Warm Period, and Holocene Maximum were largely erased; as evident by the strikingly flat trend-line astride the Holocene—i.e. preceeding the Little Ice Age. Next time, make sure to double-check your sources! This is a fatal error on your part. |
|
|
|
Post by lab276 on Jan 3, 2020 1:16:54 GMT -5
Really bad news for the Shoalhaven tomorrow, it's making me very nervous. I'm back in Sydney, but all the same. There's gotta be at least 60-70,000 people in the danger zone.  |
|
|
|
Post by knot on Jan 3, 2020 1:58:40 GMT -5
Really bad news for the Shoalhaven tomorrow, it's making me very nervous. I'm back in Sydney, but all the same. There's gotta be at least 60-70,000 people in the danger zone. What, precisely, is your message here? That bushfires are caused by CO2? If so, then you are not only a witless cretin, but also a heartless lout. Too, I find it highly offensive that you so blatantly use this bushfire outbreak as a means of "proving" your propaganda; utterly vile behaviour, and you should feel ashamed of it. |
|
|
|
Post by lab276 on Jan 3, 2020 2:45:49 GMT -5
Bushfires are not caused by CO2. But there's a chain there is a chain there of more CO2, more heating, drier conditions, drought, increased fuel loads, higher temperatures and so on. Sydney has been choked with smoke for weeks and weeks, I was just down in Jervis Bay, and smoke was constant, just constant, not like it was in Sydney where you couldn't breathe, but in the air, blocking the sun. There's people stranded on beaches because the ocean is literally the only thing stopping the fires. In Victoria, they're evacuating via the sea, because the roads are still blocked. An area the size of Belgium has burned. It's *never* been like this before. Fires happen, this conflagration is unprecedented. Regeneration can happen too, but only with decent rains.
That's to say nothing of the federal response which has at best been apathetic, but really just totally inadequate. Cometh the hour, cometh the man, as they say, and old Smoco has been found out, just a total empathy vacuum who isn't fit to lead. He's like a dear in fucking headlights, and he can't respond more forcibly because that would be just straight out admitting that he's got no answers, that the last six years in government were completely wasted on the climate front. We've got no moral authority, we can't be global leaders because we can't make the difficult choices to change our behaviour.
FWIW I find your head in the sand response pretty shameful. You've got no sense of the bigger picture. The rains will come again, the forest will grow and we might have years between now and the next fire catastrophe, but with an attitude like yours we wouldn't even be buying firefighting choppers and planes because that would be like admitting we didn't do enough this time round, that there might be a problem bigger than any one individual or country.
Take dam levels, we're at under 50% in Sydney and falling, in two years we lost half our water. What did we do during the wet times to try and ensure enough water? Were there more desal plants built, or water recycling plants, or even just water tanksin the suburbs. Fuck no. Because why do we need to? We're getting plenty of rain, why waste that money? And on top of that, let's sell our only desal plant to a foreign company and then pay for the privilege of using our own sea water when we need to use it. That's your attitude right there. It's fucked us over. Now we have no alternative but to wait for the rain.
So fuck your moralising, honestly. We're not prepared for these fires, or the drought, or the heat because we have our head in the sand and it's conservatives like you who sow doubt and make any kind of change, however small, impossible.
|
|
|
|
Post by knot on Jan 3, 2020 5:29:43 GMT -5
Bushfires are not caused by CO2. But there's a chain there is a chain there of more CO2, more heating, drier conditions, drought, increased fuel loads, higher temperatures and so on. Sydney has been choked with smoke for weeks and weeks, I was just down in Jervis Bay, and smoke was constant, just constant, not like it was in Sydney where you couldn't breathe, but in the air, blocking the sun. There's people stranded on beaches because the ocean is literally the only thing stopping the fires. In Victoria, they're evacuating via the sea, because the roads are still blocked. An area the size of Belgium has burned. It's *never* been like this before.(I) Fires happen, this conflagration is unprecedented. Regeneration can happen too, but only with decent rains. That's to say nothing of the federal response which has at best been apathetic, but really just totally inadequate. Cometh the hour, cometh the man, as they say, and old Smoco has been found out, just a total empathy vacuum who isn't fit to lead. He's like a dear in fucking headlights, and he can't respond more forcibly because that would be just straight out admitting that he's got no answers, that the last six years in government were completely wasted on the climate front. We've got no moral authority, we can't be global leaders because we can't make the difficult choices to change our behaviour.
FWIW I find your head in the sand response pretty shameful. You've got no sense of the bigger picture. The rains will come again, the forest will grow and we might have years between now and the next fire catastrophe, but with an attitude like yours we wouldn't even be buying firefighting choppers and planes because that would be like admitting we didn't do enough this time round, that there might be a problem bigger than any one individual or country.(II)Take dam levels, we're at under 50% in Sydney and falling, in two years we lost half our water. What did we do during the wet times to try and ensure enough water? Were there more desal plants built, or water recycling plants, or even just water tanksin the suburbs. Fuck no. Because why do we need to? We're getting plenty of rain, why waste that money? And on top of that, let's sell our only desal plant to a foreign company and then pay for the privilege of using our own sea water when we need to use it. That's your attitude right there. It's fucked us over. Now we have no alternative but to wait for the rain.(III)So fuck your moralising, honestly. We're not prepared for these fires, or the drought, or the heat because we have our head in the sand and it's conservatives like you who sow doubt and make any kind of change, however small, impossible.(IV)Much to your misinformation, the 19th century summers in Australia were tremendously hotter than nowadays; chiefly straddling the Federation Drought (spanning 1895-1903). Raw data sourced from BoM's climate archives suggest a cooling trend in Australian climate since the 19th century; too, much of it recorded by the Stevenson Screen instruments—of which were largely installed since 1887 in NSW; i.e. the state which holds the grand majority of historical Australian temperature data. The BoM calculates their "hottest on record" nonsense accordingly via the ACORN-SAT dataset; raw data spanning merely to 1957, and severely adjusted data prior to 1957 down to 1910; any data preceeding 1910, inadequately discarded. II. Nice strawman! When did I ever mention my views on fire-fighting aircraft? In fact, I strongly support the notion of major funding for the Rural Fire Service and their ilk. Alas, if the "Greens" had their way, i.e. taxing and/or "phasing-out" petrol, oil, etc...then there would be little to no fuel left for the firemen to adequately confront the inferno(s). Think properly before you throw petty strawmen at me, so to avoid exposing your pathetic incompetence for what it really is. III. I find it most amusing how you bring up dam levels, because the "Greens" (more appropriately, Browns) are fiercely opposed to the construction of more dams; their excuse is, usually, "but muh frogs will lose their ecosystem". Contrarywise, One Nation and the Shooters, Fishers & Farmers Party are in favour of dam construction, chiefly in rural regions. Senator Malcolm Roberts has investigated the Murray-Darling Basin Plan back in August-September (of 2019), and had found that the river banks were laid largely eroded from the excessive springtime melt-water which flowed from the Snowy Mountains, due to an exceptionally snowy winter (with snow-levels down to the streets of Tumut, NSW, at 250-300 m AMSL); this was due to environmental fear-mongering from the officials at Dartmoor and Hume Reservoir(s), as well as climatic ignorance, prompting the excessive release of water into SA via the Murray River...and none into where it was actually needed, i.e. Central NSW and northwards. Worse yet, the Labor government under Paul Keating had introduced Australia to the catastrophic Kyoto Protocol, thereby stripping farmers of their land rights; such as back-burning, a practice of which greatly mitigates bushfire extent. Prior to colonial settlement, the Aborigines traditionally utilised back-burning as a means of bushland regeneration and, likewise, superior control over the extent of bushfires...unfortunately, such vital practices were outlawed in the name of "progress". IV. "Green" policies destroy farmers and the countryside alike, and it's urban elitist fuckwits like yourself that need to shut their pompous mouths, and let the fellows that actually yield rural expertise and knowledge to properly manage the Australian countryside. Thank you very much! |
|
|
|
Post by nei on Jan 4, 2020 11:08:14 GMT -5
Hotter and drier in Australia = wildfires
|
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on Jan 4, 2020 11:37:24 GMT -5
Because Bogan Creek's hottest day was recorded in 1874 AGW is a hoax, and the BOM falsify recordings anyway.
Libs owned. |
|
|
|
Post by knot on Jan 4, 2020 18:50:25 GMT -5
Because Bogan Creek's hottest day was recorded in 1874 AGW is a hoax, and the BOM falsify recordings anyway.
Libs owned. Actually, "Bogan Creek's" AVERAGES from 1861-1890 and 1871-1900 were much hotter than 1981-2010. Learn to read, my troubled pupil. |
|
|
|
Post by knot on Jan 4, 2020 18:51:42 GMT -5
Hotter and drier in Australia = wildfires Again, sourced accordingly via the severely adjusted ACORN-SAT dataset. |
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on Jan 5, 2020 10:10:46 GMT -5
Actually, "Bogan Creek's" AVERAGES from 1861-1890 and 1871-1900 were much hotter than 1981-2010. Learn to read, my troubled pupil.
So? There is a world outside Bogan Creek and that one is much warmer than the 1871-1900 normals.
|
|
|
|
Post by knot on Jan 7, 2020 0:02:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by 🖕🏿Mörön🖕🏿 on Jan 7, 2020 0:16:05 GMT -5
Just another case of people fear mongering over one isolated event.
But, those poor 500,000 animals that died!
|
|
|
|
Post by Hiromant on Jan 7, 2020 2:17:49 GMT -5
Yep, reminds me of the Californian permadrought that lasted all of two years. When will these poor people learn.
|
|
|
|
Post by nei on Jan 7, 2020 8:52:32 GMT -5
no, it's that Australia has gotten hotter with time, more heat = more evaporation. See the Rhode graphic I posted, recent years in red. |
|
|
|
Post by nei on Jan 7, 2020 9:09:01 GMT -5
A graph of Earth's temperature through the ages. As you can see, we live in a time of unprecedented catastrophic instability unsuitable for life. I don't see how this graph proves your point. Past warming/cooling events were either at a much longer timescale or have resulted in drastic biome shifts and/or mass extinctions. Hiromat's graph is really flawed; the temperature graph is made from sources of varying time resolution, you can't compare how fast previous climate changes were with that graph. The future projection if it happened in the past would be smoothed in any past graph. Projection is also the rather extreme RCP 8.5 scenario. Even more moderate climate projections would involve very fast temperature changes compared to earlier natural changes, but we don't really have the capability of knowing for sure since measuring past climate accurately is hard. |
|
|
|
Post by jgtheone on Jan 7, 2020 9:12:14 GMT -5
The average rainfall in Australia is also potentially skewed towards a higher value because of freak flooding/heavy rain events in the north of the country in recent times. That doesn't discount the fact that it's been mostly drier down here in the south, save 2010/11.
|
|
