|
|
Post by knot on May 5, 2019 17:16:49 GMT -5
RSS data is completely raw and unaltered, which is why I chose to use that as my example. What you're talking about are historical reconstructions of temps which have been created by NOAA etc and have been minutely "corrected" over time.(I.) Again I invite you to find a single example of raw observational data or a single (unaltered) station that doesn't show warming.(II.)I. Those "mere corrections" yield more influence on the final results than you'd think; just glance at the BOM graphs, for instance—rapid, continuous, relentless warming! Yet the stations, somehow, only show warming in the major cities (and I'll address that now)... II. If you were to look at the majority of Southern AU stations, the vast agreement is that there is plentiful cooling taking place—both in regards to minima and maxima, all year-round, albeit with a drying trend as well. And why is it that only the major cities or vastly built-up regions show warming? Because of the modern UHI influence; Sydney was naught but a mere colonial outpost back in the 19th Century, so ~2° C of warming is very natural when you consider the environmental transition from a colonial shanty, to a labyrinth of concrete jungle. Just ask yourself: why do the more inland, remote stations show cooling instead? No UHI; within these stations alone, inland centres such as Bathurst, Orange, or Wagga Wagga show downright cooling, in pretty much every season of the year. Once upon a time, >50° C was intermittently reached or surpassed in the Aussie Outback—why does it struggle to nowadays, if so much "warming" is taking place? Riddle me this. |
|
|
|
Post by AJ1013 on May 5, 2019 17:24:24 GMT -5
knot Find me a station proving you right. This might be of some interest to you. "forcing" means impact on the earths absorption of radiation=impact on temps  Also nobody here is claiming "so much" warming has taken place. Warming thus far is between 0.5C and 1C.
|
|
|
|
Post by nei on May 5, 2019 17:28:51 GMT -5
When does "impending" and "running out of time" start to sound funny to you people? This shit's been going on for longer than most of us have been alive. I can't believe how intelligent folks like you can lap up this bullshit so easily. It's quite common. Replace "this bullshit" with any number of philosophies, religions, fads, cults, propaganda, movements, causes, etc. Them resorting to equating AGW-skepticism with "flat earthers" tells me everything I need to know, which is to say, an honest scientific discussion is not possible because skepticism and criticism have no place in science today if it goes against consensus. Climate change is not the only scientific field this is true in, unfortunately. As LKJ the Wise would say - "It's so EASY to understand folks!!"As I said, stuff "like heat-trapping don't trap heat" is nonsense and mostly a physics error. There's obviously plenty of uncertainty that is debatable, but no offense a lot of the stuff seems crank-like. |
|
|
|
Post by Speagles84 on May 5, 2019 17:33:39 GMT -5
It's hard to deny climate change once you've been to Alaska. There is clear evidence the arctic region is warming quickly.
|
|
|
|
Post by nei on May 5, 2019 17:33:47 GMT -5
If you believe in the wisdom of the market, it appears the market believes climate change is real. Perhaps the market betters are full of brainwashed AGW-believing pooftas. If so, you can make money betting against them!   The IPCC has 4 global warming scenarios: RCP 2.6, 4.5, 6.0 and 8.5 (numbers refer to radiative forcing, same units as AJ1013 's graph). Betting markets seem to think 4.5 is the most likely. IMO, 4.5 or maybe 6.0 are the most likely looking at the last 15 years. Media usually focuses on 8.5, of course. The blue is line is actual station data, last couple of years had lots of warm records. |
|
|
|
Post by knot on May 5, 2019 17:34:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by AJ1013 on May 5, 2019 17:37:35 GMT -5
knot Those really old temps look suspect. My guess is that the radiation covers at the time were inadequate. It doesn't make sense that highs would increase that dramatically, only in the high sun season, with lows that were colder and higher precip.
|
|
|
|
Post by nei on May 5, 2019 17:52:54 GMT -5
When does "impending" and "running out of time" start to sound funny to you? It's been going on for longer than most of us have been alive. I can't believe how intelligent folks like you can lap up this bullshit so easily. Every year that goes by only proves our side's point. For what it's worth, I was an AGW believer as well until I started looking into why the damn poles aren't melting already like the consensus had been telling me they should have, which is to say, why I'm being lied to.
except the consensus doesn't. For example, September sea ice projections from climate models has an enormous spread but no has literal "water by the north pole today". Average by RCP 4.5 [ RCP 8.5 is a deliberately extreme scenario as I said before] has around 5-6.5 million square km of arctic sea ice in September  via www.the-cryosphere.net/6/1383/2012/tc-6-1383-2012.pdf not sure where you got the consensus from, but a simple google search of "arctic sea ice projections summer" would have shown you what it is |
|
|
|
Post by knot on May 5, 2019 17:57:33 GMT -5
knot Those really old temps look suspect. My guess is that the radiation covers at the time weren't high enough quality. It doesn't make sense that highs would increase that dramatically, only in the high sun season, with lows that were colder and similar precip. Much to your misinformation, Stevenson Screens were the standard in most Aussie stations from the 1880's onwards. Surely, the 49.6° C at Deniliquin in January 1878 is a little exaggurated by non-Stevenson measures, but that doesn't change the cooling trend one bit—as it yielded a Stevenson Screen for the remainder of the 19th Century. Wagga's 47.2° C, however, was not exaggurated at all; 47.2° C initially in February 1897, then 47.2° C again in January 1939...its modern record, you ask? A petty 45.2° C in January 2009. With regards to Stevenson Screens in Australia: joannenova.com.au/2015/02/the-mysterious-bom-disinterest-in-hot-historic-australian-stevenson-screen-temperatures/New South Welsh measures began installing Stevenson Screens in 1887, but not until 1908 did every single station receive the Stevenson Screen. Deniliquin was amongst the earliest of receivers. |
|
|
|
Post by Yahya Sinwar on May 5, 2019 19:23:40 GMT -5
When does "impending" and "running out of time" start to sound funny to you? It's been going on for longer than most of us have been alive. I can't believe how intelligent folks like you can lap up this bullshit so easily. Every year that goes by only proves our side's point. For what it's worth, I was an AGW believer as well until I started looking into why the damn poles aren't melting already like the consensus had been telling me they should have, which is to say, why I'm being lied to.
except the consensus doesn't. For example, September sea ice projections from climate models has an enormous spread but no has literal "water by the north pole today". Average by RCP 4.5 [ RCP 8.5 is a deliberately extreme scenario as I said before] has around 5-6.5 million square km of arctic sea ice in September via www.the-cryosphere.net/6/1383/2012/tc-6-1383-2012.pdf not sure where you got the consensus from, but a simple google search of "arctic sea ice projections summer" would have shown you what it is Tbf it sucks that you had people with influence and organizations with power claiming a blue arctic by 2012 which obviously didn’t happen (coincidentally it was a record low). Reality and science has always shown that the first blue arctic event won’t happen Except at random next 10-20 years then likely won’t be common place till even later . |
|
|
|
Post by nei on May 5, 2019 19:33:43 GMT -5
Tbf it sucks that you had people with influence and organizations with power claiming a blue arctic by 2012 which obviously didn’t happen (coincidentally it was a record low). Reality and science has always shown that the first blue arctic event won’t happen Except at random next 10-20 years then likely won’t be common place till even later . Don't really remember that, my memory of the low summer arctic sea ice in 2012 was a "wow, climate models didn't predicted sea ice would be so low this early". And then perhaps afterwards scientists overcorrected. Looks like the low 2012 sea ice wasn't out of my range of the graph I showed. The "blue arctic by 2012" was probably by a couple of people that got amplified because it sounded dramatic. Sea ice right now is really low, will be interesting to watch to see if it recovers similar to last year; or if it results in a 2012-like summer. Depends on summer arctic storms, of course. |
|
|
|
Post by 🖕🏿Mörön🖕🏿 on May 5, 2019 20:26:01 GMT -5
Tbf it sucks that you had people with influence and organizations with power claiming a blue arctic by 2012 which obviously didn’t happen (coincidentally it was a record low). Reality and science has always shown that the first blue arctic event won’t happen Except at random next 10-20 years then likely won’t be common place till even later . Don't really remember that, my memory of the low summer arctic sea ice in 2012 was a "wow, climate models didn't predicted sea ice would be so low this early". And then perhaps afterwards scientists overcorrected. Looks like the low 2012 sea ice wasn't out of my range of the graph I showed. The "blue arctic by 2012" was probably by a couple of people that got amplified because it sounded dramatic. Sea ice right now is really low, will be interesting to watch to see if it recovers similar to last year; or if it results in a 2012-like summer. Depends on summer arctic storms, of course.But that's the thing. Sea ice position and extent, Arctic coastal erosion, and similar -- have no relation (or a weak relationship at best) to increasing CO 2 as those things are caused by specific weather events which are caused by fluctuations in oceanic circulations, wind direction, and the presence of storms, and not some laughably marginal planetary-wide warming in the atmosphere. I mean, I certainly cannot prove that hypothesis but it makes sense to me. I have no doubt that those Alaska Natives' anecdotes of coastal erosion (for example) are true, but humans have a short memory (and life). |
|
|
|
Post by nei on May 5, 2019 22:25:45 GMT -5
Don't really remember that, my memory of the low summer arctic sea ice in 2012 was a "wow, climate models didn't predicted sea ice would be so low this early". And then perhaps afterwards scientists overcorrected. Looks like the low 2012 sea ice wasn't out of my range of the graph I showed. The "blue arctic by 2012" was probably by a couple of people that got amplified because it sounded dramatic. Sea ice right now is really low, will be interesting to watch to see if it recovers similar to last year; or if it results in a 2012-like summer. Depends on summer arctic storms, of course.But that's the thing. Sea ice position and extent, Arctic coastal erosion, and similar -- have no relation (or a weak relationship at best) to increasing CO 2 as those things are caused by specific weather events which are caused by fluctuations in oceanic circulations, wind direction, and the presence of storms, and not some laughably marginal planetary-wide warming in the atmosphere. I mean, I certainly cannot prove that hypothesis but it makes sense to me. I have no doubt that those Alaska Natives' anecdotes of coastal erosion (for example) are true, but humans have a short memory (and life). It's not marginal, and the arctic warms much more than the global average. Obviously year to year weather plays a role, but that doesn't mean there's a general trend that's more than just weather  even the biggest years of the last five years are far lower than the least ice of the 1980s; maybe it's all just storm patterns with no warming but doesn't seem likely to me. |
|
|
|
Post by knot on May 5, 2019 22:56:15 GMT -5
Bureau of Misinformation strikes yet again... joannenova.com.au/2019/05/albany-robbed-of-its-coldest-ever-april-day-bom-adjusts-temp-up-15-degrees-c/The most recent homogenisation: 10.4° C maximum for Albany on the 19th of April, 2019 (its lowest ever April maximum reading), was adjusted 15° C upwards! This requires some hefty investigation, if not the interference from the Royal Commission. The BOM are criminals, and they shall be dealt with accordingly. You alarmist ponceys can try justifying this one! I shall await your answer(s). Same deal with the Goulburn and Thredbo scandals back in 2017—upwards adjustments. |
|
|
|
Post by urania93 on May 6, 2019 1:25:47 GMT -5
I'm wagering that none of you had actually watched the provided materials earlier?  AJ1013 Ariete jgtheone urania93 If you had sincerely tooken your time to watch them, then you'd have learnt something by now. Those sources are as bad as the random online articles saying that the Earth will melt in a decade (=biased). If you want a decent material, look at the source (aka, the original papers) and judge by yourself if you agree with them or not. |
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on May 6, 2019 12:02:12 GMT -5
So you admit to being a sheeple? Good to know.
Am I a sheeple also because I don't deny the Holocaust and the 6 million figure?
|
|
|
|
Post by knot on May 6, 2019 12:19:13 GMT -5
Am I a sheeple also because I don't deny the Holocaust and the 6 million figure?
Are you seriously sinking this low as to correlate AGW with the Holocaust? Get a grip of yourself, matey. Of course I believe in the Holocaust—it is proven by hard evidence, much unlike Global Warming...you see, the problem here is the "Global"; not everywhere is warming (in fact, many regions such as Southern Australia are also cooling), so it shall be renamed Regional Warming for me to believe it. |
|
|
|
Post by flamingGalah on May 6, 2019 16:06:05 GMT -5
Bureau of Misinformation strikes yet again... joannenova.com.au/2019/05/albany-robbed-of-its-coldest-ever-april-day-bom-adjusts-temp-up-15-degrees-c/The most recent homogenisation: 10.4° C maximum for Albany on the 19th of April, 2019 (its lowest ever April maximum reading), was adjusted 15° C upwards! This requires some hefty investigation, if not the interference from the Royal Commission. The BOM are criminals, and they shall be dealt with accordingly. You alarmist ponceys can try justifying this one! I shall await your answer(s). Same deal with the Goulburn and Thredbo scandals back in 2017—upwards adjustments. More than likely an error. AWS's can give erroneous readings from time to time or there can be a problem with the data link, no technology is infallible. It will no doubt be picked up at some point with quality control. |
|
|
|
Post by knot on May 6, 2019 16:32:52 GMT -5
More than likely an error. AWS's can give erroneous readings from time to time or there can be a problem with the data link, no technology is infallible. It will no doubt be picked up at some point with quality control. Except, they haven't even bothered to correct it; they had simply extracted the 25.1° C figure from Albany Airport prior to the polar front striking, i.e. the 18th of April. Nothing fixed yet, and probably never: www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/201904/html/IDCJDW6001.201904.shtmlInstead of the coldest maximum being 10.4° C as it should've been (accordingly to observations), it is now 14.5° C, with much higher averages than it should yield. They didn't even bother to re-adjust that figure with something even the slightest bit more believable, because they know themselves that they won't be punished for it—it goes along nicely with what they ultimately seek to prove; an act of convenience, alongside their abuse of power and position. |
|
|
|
Post by Wildcat on May 6, 2019 16:41:08 GMT -5
Hmm, I guess no one has a response to my question on page 4.
|
|
