CC3 -- Why I believe that a third option is needed for climate change

Pa ElGrande · 21-12-2019 11:11pm

Carol25 wrote: »

Incorrect
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-australia-50837025

The BBC and other media organisations are reporting what has been put on the wire services. They have not actually checked the data.

Here is an anecdotal report from 1896 of the effects.

The Death Roll.

A Melancholy List.

Apoplexy, Thirst, and Sunstroke.

SYDNEY, Tuesday.

William Clark, aged 51, proprietor of the Royal Hotel, Singleton, died yesterday of heat apoplexy.

Arthur Hassett, a director of the White Reef Company, Wyalong, was attending a meeting inside the company's office, when he was stricken. His condition is critical.

John McCarker, 26, of Jerilderie, seized with heat apoplexy, has expired.

Six infants have died at Goulburn since January 1 through the excessive heat.

A child sent to the mountains to escape the city heat died at the moment that the train arrived.

The coroner at Collarendabri has returned to the town after holding an inquest on the body of a man which was found in the bush at Burren. The verdict was that deceased (whose name is supposed to be George Schweiss) had cut his throat, having apparently become insane through the heat and want of water.

A little girl has died at Mount Hope as an effect of the heat.

Two more deaths have occurred at Bourke. One, Mrs. Costello, aged eighty, was found dead in her chair.

This makes at least a dozen victims in the Bourke district.

There were many casualties in the city.

A man at Surry Hills sustained a sunstroke. He was taken to the hospital, where he recovered.

A young girl walking along a city street suddenly became demented.

Sydney Merewether, aged 63, a miner from New Zealand, was transacting some business in the Union Bank, when he was stricken down.He was at once removed to the hospital, but expired.

William Foulston, employed at the post-office tunnel works, was taken to the hospital unconscious through the excessive heat, and died.

James Quinn was working at the embankment at Lady Macquarie's Chair, when he was overcome, and very soon died.

Several men were taken to the hospitals and, under proper treatment, recovered.

Duggle McLachlan, a widower with four children, residing at Balmain, was returning to his home from the city, when he was stricken. Before medical help could be obtained he was dead.

A man, his wife, and their child went out in a boat at Balmain, hoping to escape some of the heat. They were caught in the buster and the boat was capsized. The child was drowned.

source

Gaoth Laidir · 21-12-2019 11:19pm

Carol25 wrote: »

Are you really going to deny the scale of what is happening in Australia. Take a look at this map of the current fires burning. Are they all arson? All at the same time? Where is all the water to put them out? Nowhere because they have none due to severe drought.
Are you a supportter of their current PM climate denier who flew to Hawaii on a 250million private jet, wants to increase coal production and left his volunteer fire fighters to die while trying to deal with this mess?

Nobody is denying what's going on in Australia. I don't know where you've got that from.

And the BBJ that the prime minister uses is nowhere near 250 million (you didn't say the currency), but in US dollars the typical cost is around 60-80 million. It's not his own, it's a state aircraft leased from Belavia.

Carol25 · 21-12-2019 11:20pm

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

The BBC and other media organisations are reporting what has been put on the wire services. They have not actually checked the data.

Here is an anecdotal report from 1896 of the effects.

Here is a map of current fires burning across the whole continent of Australia, apologies I haven't found an easier way to share this - this is unprecedented.

https://yaleglobal.yale.edu/sites/default/files/resize/images/AustraliaMap-750x434.png

The older temperature records I have serious reservations about, take for example Ireland's highest temperature record from the same time period. I highly doubt their instruments, location, etc., were like for like with what we use nowadays.

Akrasia · 21-12-2019 11:25pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

The link said it was unsecure for me.

You love your verbs. "Surged" and other such superlative verbs are used instead of a simple "increased". But anyway, you say 0.2 degrees, but it's pretty notable the difference of about 0.12 degrees between the HADCRUT and GISTEMP datasets at the most recent point. When fractions of a degree per decade are being argued over, those datasets should be pretty damn well overlapping.

Here's the chart you were trying to post. I wonder if the current most recent spike will last the same as the exact same spike that occured in the 1940s. Time will tell.

I don’t understand your points. Are you saying climate change hasn’t been accelerating when you take the full dataset? Or do you just want to focus on snippets of time that suit your narrative (cherry-picking)

Carol25 · 21-12-2019 11:25pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Nobody is denying what's going on in Australia. I don't know where you've got that from.

And the BBJ that the prime minister uses is nowhere near 250 million (you didn't say the currency), but in US dollars the typical cost is around 60-80 million. It's not his own, it's a state aircraft leased from Belavia.

People are denying why Australia is in the mess it is now in. When I was there, i was surprised how their approach to everything was fossil fuel, the bigger the truck/car the better. Their own Great Barrier Reef is bleaching and you've a PM and others denying any changes in heat/temperature... Some of the scientific links here are interesting to read, so thank you to all the contributors for those.

Gaoth Laidir · 21-12-2019 11:26pm

Carol25 wrote: »

Here is a map of current fires burning across the whole continent of Australia, apologies I haven't found an easier way to share this - this is unprecedented.

https://yaleglobal.yale.edu/sites/default/files/resize/images/AustraliaMap-750x434.png

The older temperature records I have serious reservations about, take for example Ireland's highest temperature record from the same time period. I highly doubt their instruments, location, etc., were like for like with what we use nowadays.

What causes you to doubt it? And if you do, do you also then doubt the early global instrumental record against which our current warming is being measured?

Akrasia · 21-12-2019 11:34pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

That link now works for me. I'm just curious, with people accusing others of cherrypicking, did the WMO do a similar study for the 10 years befoe 2015, you know, where there was no real warming? As I said, just curious.

This is gas, I show a graph the entire temperature series since records began to make the point that we shouldn’t engage in cherry-picking while you keep trying to pick out short carefully selected periods from the series that you think support your argument (the very definition of cherry-picking)

Gaoth Laidir · 21-12-2019 11:35pm

Akrasia wrote: »

I don’t understand your points. Are you saying climate change hasn’t been accelerating when you take the full dataset? Or do you just want to focus on snippets of time that suit your narrative (cherry-picking)

You mean global warming (let's give it its original name)? There is very little acceleration between the early 19th century and the past few decades. Certainly not enough to support the runaway projections of ice-free summers and inundated cities in the next few decades (or the end of civilisaiton in the next one).

And on the topic of cherrypicking...you posted a link dealing with just the 2015-19 period. Kettle and pot. And you didn't give me that link on report on the flatter trend immediately preceding it.

Gaoth Laidir · 21-12-2019 11:36pm

Akrasia wrote: »

This is gas, I show a graph the entire temperature series since records began to make the point that we shouldn’t engage in cherry-picking while you keep trying to pick out short carefully selected periods from the series that you think support your argument (the very definition of cherry-picking)

You are joking, right?

Pa ElGrande · 21-12-2019 11:37pm

Carol25 wrote: »

The older temperature records I have serious reservations about, take for example Ireland's highest temperature record from the same time period. I highly doubt their instruments, location, etc., were like for like with what we use nowadays.

They were using Stevenson screens and calibrated mercury thermometers back then so that argument does not stand. It may interest you to know that modern instruments are also subject to error, effects of local site conditions and instrumentation failures if you want to stick with that argument and occasionally those errors taken with modern instruments have been allowed to stand.

So, as Graham Lloyd explains on page 5 of today’s Weekend Australian, the Australian Bureau of Meteorology have discarded the first 40 years of the temperature record for Bourke. This includes the hottest ever temperature recorded in a Stevenson screen for, I think, anywhere in Australia. A rather hot 51.7 degree Celsius was recorded in a new Stevenson screen in the yard of the Bourke post office on 3rd January 1909.

source

Akrasia · 21-12-2019 11:43pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

You are joking, right?

No. I’m not. Every single one of your replies to me has included some attempt at cutting out a slice of data to refute the significance of the overall accelerating trend in global warming

The accelerating trend is undeniable (Unless denying facts is something you make a habit of doing)

Pa ElGrande · 21-12-2019 11:47pm

Carol25 wrote: »

People are denying why Australia is in the mess it is now in. When I was there, i was surprised how their approach to everything was fossil fuel, the bigger the truck/car the better. Their own Great Barrier Reef is bleaching and you've a PM and others denying any changes in heat/temperature... Some of the scientific links here are interesting to read, so thank you to all the contributors for those.

Here is Dr. Peter Ridd on the matter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WbGVAo1hyQ

5:40 minutes in talks about bleaching statistics.

In 2016, 8% of the reef died, but regeneration is rapid — it can recover in a year.
The general rule for corals is the hotter the better. If you want to see the worst corals, go and see Sydney Harbour. There are even corals in Scotland. If it was warmer, there would be more corals. Temperatures for coral go right up to 38C in the red sea and corals are happy with that.

Gaoth Laidir · 21-12-2019 11:48pm

Akrasia wrote: »

No. I’m not. Every single one of your replies to me has included some attempt at cutting out a slice of data to refute the significance of the overall accelerating trend in global warming

The accelerating trend is undeniable (Unless denying facts is something you make a habit of doing)

But you're the one who brought up the 2015-19 report. You said the temperature has surged by 0.2 degrees. Is that not cherrypicking?

And what about my point on the difference in datasets. What do you think?

21-12-2019 11:55pm

Carol25 wrote: »

Here is a map of current fires burning across the whole continent of Australia, apologies I haven't found an easier way to share this - this is unprecedented.

https://yaleglobal.yale.edu/sites/default/files/resize/images/AustraliaMap-750x434.png

The older temperature records I have serious reservations about, take for example Ireland's highest temperature record from the same time period. I highly doubt their instruments, location, etc., were like for like with what we use nowadays.

If you doubt accuracy in the past maybe it was even warmer? Why would the error of necessarily be to support your pov?

Akrasia · 22-12-2019 12:00am

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

But you're the one who brought up the 2015-19 report. You said the temperature has surged by 0.2 degrees. Is that not cherrypicking?

And what about my point on the difference in datasets. What do you think?

I was responding to MT saying global warming had slowed recently. In the most recent few years it has more than made up for the so called hiatus

And over the full dataset, the accelerating trend is clear

Akrasia · 22-12-2019 12:02am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If you doubt accuracy in the past maybe it was even warmer? Why would the error of necessarily be to support your pov?

Because the Arctic is melting and most of the worlds glaciers are shrinking with some on the brink of collapse

There are direct climate measurements as well as proxy records which support the consensus

Gaoth Laidir · 22-12-2019 12:05am

Akrasia wrote: »

I was responding to MT saying global warming had slowed recently. In the most recent few years it has more than made up for the so called hiatus

And over the full dataset, the accelerating trend is clear

So did the WMO write that report on the flatter trend or not? Have you not found it yet?

s7ryf3925pivug · 22-12-2019 12:07am

Naggdefy wrote: »

MT states.. 'about two-thirds natural and one-third anthropogenic in origins'. So your synopsis is incorrect. Also very disingenuous to throw around cheap trite labels like 'climate change denier' to someone with as distinguished and scholarly a background as the OP.

Who is he? (Assuming you aren't referring to his boards posts.)

Akrasia · 22-12-2019 12:09am

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

So did the WMO write that report on the flatter trend or not? Have you not found it yet?

Why would I bother?

Nobody ever expected global warming to be a smooth curve with no peaks or troughs. ‘Skeptics’ seem to only care about the troughs and like to distract from the peaks except when comparing them to subsequent troughs

Carol25 · 22-12-2019 12:16am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If you doubt accuracy in the past maybe it was even warmer? Why would the error of necessarily be to support your pov?

This is the issue I have with internet debates. Some useful data and knowledge can be shared on a thread like this. But it just descends into a completely for or against debate.
I believe MT set this thread up to debate ideas and possible solutions as to what can be done to try and lessen the impact. Not for pages of arguments and silly responses like this one.
I highlighted Australia as it is a live situation, and anyone who looks at a map of a whole continent on fire and doesn’t question why it is happening is just in denial. I do not know of an event where a whole continent has been in flames previously. Anecdotal evidence of a heatwave in one small area - Sydney in the past doesn’t suffice as a counter argument to that.

Gaoth Laidir · 22-12-2019 12:50am

Akrasia wrote: »

Why would I bother?

Why indeed.

So what for you is a reasonable minimum timeframe to analyse a dataseries? 10 years? 20?

Gaoth Laidir · 22-12-2019 12:53am

Carol25 wrote: »

This is the issue I have with internet debates. Some useful data and knowledge can be shared on a thread like this. But it just descends into a completely for or against debate.
I believe MT set this thread up to debate ideas and possible solutions as to what can be done to try and lessen the impact. Not for pages of arguments and silly responses like this one.
I highlighted Australia as it is a live situation, and anyone who looks at a map of a whole continent on fire and doesn’t question why it is happening is just in denial. I do not know of an event where a whole continent has been in flames previously. Anecdotal evidence of a heatwave in one small area - Sydney in the past doesn’t suffice as a counter argument to that.

But you cast doubt on a temperature record and I was merely asking you what your reasons are. This is a science forum, so if you make a claim then it should be backed up.

igCorcaigh · 22-12-2019 1:21am

I think, with all respect, the OP is wrong.
The global mean temperature is rising, mostly due to the burning of fossil fuels.

It's quite simple, and we need to stop it.

Akrasia · 22-12-2019 1:45am

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Why indeed.

So what for you is a reasonable minimum timeframe to analyse a dataseries? 10 years? 20?

IPCC use a rolling average. I wanted to avoid cherry-picking so I showed the entire series

paleoperson · 22-12-2019 1:50am

M.T. Cranium wrote: »

Nice larp. Could have used a few selectively-chosen graphs.

Akrasia · 22-12-2019 1:50am

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

But you cast doubt on a temperature record and I was merely asking you what your reasons are. This is a science forum, so if you make a claim then it should be backed up.

It’s a pretty legitimate doubt to query an individual outlier record from a Time when record keeping
was less reliable and instruments were less accurate.

Individual records are always subject to doubt. Repeatedly confirmed records are less doubtful and the overall trend is much more important than individual snapshots from outlier records

As someone who is scientifically minded you should agree with everything I just said

Gaoth Laidir · 22-12-2019 2:16am

Akrasia wrote: »

It’s a pretty legitimate doubt to query an individual outlier record from a Time when record keeping
was less reliable and instruments were less accurate.

Individual records are always subject to doubt. Repeatedly confirmed records are less doubtful and the overall trend is much more important than individual snapshots from outlier records

As someone who is scientifically minded you should agree with everything I just said

She said, and I quote

The older temperature records I have serious reservations about, take for example Ireland's highest temperature record from the same time period. I highly doubt their instruments, location, etc., were like for like with what we use nowadays.

She highly doubts. That would imply a particular reason related to this Kilkenny record. I was just asking what the reason was. Of course she or anyone else is entitled to cast doubt on anything, but not without sound reason. If she knows that the Kilkenny station was poorly sited - just like the current one at Shannon Airport is, and many others around the globe - then why would she not show it? Just because a record is from over 100 years ago does not automatically mean it's unreliable.

On your point about trends. Yes, I've already dealt with that earlier but you've so far ignored my point. I asked what you think of the relatively large difference today between the various datasets you posted but you've yet to answer.

Mr Bumble · 22-12-2019 3:08am

Coles wrote: »

My qualifications to say "listen to the science"? What qualifications do I need?

So you have no credentials then?

Pa ElGrande · 22-12-2019 7:34am

igCorcaigh wrote: »

I think, with all respect, the OP is wrong.
The global mean temperature is rising, mostly due to the burning of fossil fuels.

It's quite simple, and we need to stop it.

It is not simple. For context we have been hearing scare stories about rising temperatures for 30 years now and not one of the disaster scenarios predicted has emerged, not one. Everyone born after 1984 has heard nothing but global warming all their lives and in that time the global population has risen and in general standards of living have risen globally in that time, they have been born into a better world than their descendants and there is no empirical evidence to support the doom laden predictions made by the UN.
Death and taxes are certain, catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is not.

U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked
June 30, 1989

UNITED NATIONS (AP) _ A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.

Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ″eco- refugees,′ ′ threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP.

He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.

source

fits · 22-12-2019 7:36am

Mr Bumble wrote: »

So you have no credentials then?

Why on earth would anyone post credentials here that could identify them almost immediately.

CC3 -- Why I believe that a third option is needed for climate change

Comments