JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Humans live from -50C to +40C, but two more degrees will kill us. Panic now.

Humans can adapt to live in locations where the monthly average is over 40°C, and as low as -50°C. That’s a 90°C range. The world has warmed by 0.9°C in 100 years (or less, depending on adjustments). This warming was so dangerous that global population only expanded from 1.7 to 7 billion.

Now, if the IPCC are right, we might heat up by another half a degree by 2100 — shifting those extremes from -49°C up to 41°C.

Prof. Andy Pitman, one of Australia’s leading climate scientists, responds to this risk with all the usual careful analysis we’ve come to expect from mainstream climate experts. Here’s another “children won’t know what snow is” type of Global Panic quote:

“I expect by 2050 … people just don’t go outside,”

– Professor Andy Pitman, director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science at UNSW.

So that’s the end of golf, surfing, and picnics then. Somewhat confusingly, he also said (in the same interview) that we won’t necessarily notice that extra warmth: “… because humans acclimatise to heat quite quickly”. This is what 95% certainty looks like in 2015, ladies and gentlemen — abject panic and nothing to see here, both at the same time… journalist Lucy Cormack swallows it all, trained by the Sydney Morning Herald to ignore wild claims and bizarre contradictions.

The hottest inhabited places on Earth

There is a lot of competition for the “hottest” town on Earth.

Marble Bar, Western Australia

Marble Bar, Western Australia

Dallol, Ethiopia has an average July monthly high of 45.6°C (114F), so it is usually top of the “hottest inhabited location lists”. But  is practically a ghost town so it doesn’t quite count, though miners lived there from 1960-1966 and the 45°C record heat was recorded during these years. The annual average year-long maximum temperature is 41 °C (105 °F). Summer nights in Dallol get down to 32°C (90F).
Marble Bar, West Australia, has an average of 41°C in January for the last 100 years. It holds a world record for having 160 days above 100F from 31 October 1923 to 7 April 1924. About 200 people live there. (See more Marble Bar photos.)
In Kebili, Tunisia, the average July max is 41.7°C and sixty thousand people still live there, so I think it gets the medal for “hottest inhabited town”. Curiously in this warming world, Wikimedia notes that the hottest temperatures (all 50°+C) were recorded from 1888 – 1930, and not since. Presumably those old thermometers needed adjustment.

Humans, apparently, have lived in area’s around Kebili for at least 2,000 years, and maybe, possibly, 200,000 years. (I expect they are probably used to it by now.)

The coldest inhabited places

Coldest Inhabited Place on Earth, Oymyakon

Oymykon, Russia

Five hundred people live in Oymyakon, Siberia, Russia, almost in the Arctic circle at 63N.  The average temperature for January is -50°C. The village is called the coldest permanently inhabited settlement in the world, and there doesn’t seem to be anyone arguing about it. (Though technically, the research station at Vostok, Antarctica has a monthly average of – 68°C, and about a dozen people manage to live there.)  In winter in Oymakon, there are only three hours of sun a day, and people have to heat their garages, or run their cars 24/7 to keep them usable.

The coldest ever temperature recorded in Oymyakon was -71.2°C. Read more at Dailymail, and Wired.

The photo (and more glorious ones) was by Amos Chapple.

————————————

PS: Great minds think alike:  I did the first draft of this January 17th, but spookily ROM in comments had the exact same thought 2015/06/05 and 2015/04/17.

PPS: There must be someone out there with a really good shot of Marble Bar heat. Please send in that better photo…

Top Photo: Marble Bar, WA. Exploreroz Member Ups and Downs.

UPDATE: h/t to Marakai for the following photo and links to Marble Bar shots.

Photo Marble Bar

Welcome to Marble Bar | Tripmondo Photo: Davidmemb

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.1/10 (91 votes cast)
Humans live from -50C to +40C, but two more degrees will kill us. Panic now., 9.1 out of 10 based on 91 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/qg3dxv8

284 comments to Humans live from -50C to +40C, but two more degrees will kill us. Panic now.

  • #
    Kevin Lohse

    “Humans have lived in Kebili for about 200,000 years”. You sure of that? I thought the earliest known human settlements were in India and China, and were not more than 10,000 years old.

    71

    • #
      Bulldust

      It’s on Wikipedia – must be true ;)

      81

    • #

      No Kevin, I’m not sure. I’ve added “apparently” and more info.

      Though human settlements are (apparently) recorded from Ethiopia to Morocco circa 200,000ish plus or minus a lot. So it’s not unbelieveable, but a better reference would be good.

      Obviously proving continuous human habitation is a joke, but hey, it was colder for most of the last 200k anyway.

      142

      • #
        Dennis

        It is interesting to Google: ancient gold mines africa

        There are a number of links to be found including one or two fascinating links about stone wall circles thought to be ancient cattle yards or similar and now being considered remains of an electricity capture device.

        71

      • #
        Owen Morgan

        Homo sapiens has definitely survived one Ice Age and probably most of an interglacial, which seems to prove Jo’s point. We are quite adaptable. In the cases where extreme temperature has, historically, led to great loss of life, it has tended to be the cold that has been the problem: the retreat from Moscow, the Year Without a Summer, Kolyma etc. etc..

        Mark Steyn has a joke about how the temperature never actually changes in England (“This 16th December, it’ll be 54F in Stoke-on-Trent, but wind chill will make it feel like 53… This 16th June, it’ll be 54F in Stoke-on-Trent, but the heat index will make it seem like 55.”), but British people managed to explore an awful lot of the world, traversing a huge range of temperatures, without spontaneously combusting. So did the French and Mark Steyn’s joke wouldn’t work for France, which has a pretty impressive temperature range within its own territory.

        We are a young species. There is no very good reason to assume that older species are less able than we to adapt to variations in temperature.

        200

      • #
        ROM

        I got most of the way through a post on North African human occupation last night and lost the lot GRRR!

        Jo is actually correct up to a point with her suggestion that the Kebili Oasis has been the site of human habitation now for some 200,000 years.
        What Jo might have suggested is that very hot Tunisian Kebili Oasis would seem to have been the site of regular human and proto human occupation or some half a million years or maybe a lot longer than that.

        The item to remember here is that Kibili is one of those absolutely essential oasis’s in the North African coastal deserts that have supported proto human populations for some hundreds of thousands of years and proto Homo Sapiens for the last couple of hundred thousands of years .
        Oasis’s of course often being the sole source of drinkable water for tens or hundreds of kilometres around plus having sufficient water for the growing of crops and the sustaining of grazing animals in times of water shortage thus supporting sometimes small, sometimes large humaniod and human occupations.

        From Wiki ; Kebili

        Kebili is one of the oldest Oasis in Tunisia and North Africa. Kebili holds the earliest hard evidence of human habitation in Tunisia (found near the town) and dates back about 200,000 years. Kebili, as many others Tunisian towns, entered under the control of Roman Empire after the Punic Wars.

        But the Tunisian oasis such as at Kebili also served another function.
        They became the route for the crossing of the bed of the Mediteranean when it consisted of a series of large lakes in a vast below sea level depression when the last great ice age had lowered global sea levels by up to 140 metres and the rock sill at the Straits of Gibraltar kept the Atlantic from flooding the Mediterranean depression.

        So our early human forebearers could walk and canoe their way across the long land traverse between what is now Tunisia plus other North African locations to coastal Europe in the north via Sicily as one route but a map of other probable routes for this crossing are provided in the paper below;

        Below quoted from the paper;

        Coastal and marine palaeo-environments and human dispersal points across the Africa-Eurasia boundary

        Many prehistoric submarine sites have been found in the Mediterranean.
        The evidence that sites can survive at least 45,000 years and possibly 500,000 years under the sea suggests that future discoveries on the continental shelves of the Mediterranean and Red Seas could provide essential clues to understanding human and pre-modern human contacts between Africa and Eurasia.

        Abstract

        Submarine prehistoric archaeological sites on Mediterranean coasts contribute to understanding human migrations in the last 2 million years. “Out of Africa”,
        “Multi-regional”, and “Trellis” models of human origins and dispersal depend on what environments attracted hominid and modern human occupation, and
        how temporal and spatial variations in environments facilitated or impeded population dispersal and gene flow.

        A determining factor for migration routes, and possible two-way dispersal across potential boundaries, was the level of the world ocean, and the degree of obstruction presented by straits, channels, estuaries, and semi-enclosed seas.
        During the last 2 million years, the recurrent high latitude glaciations caused the sea level to fluctuate between -140m and +10m relative to present sea level, changing the potential crossing points.

        During periods of low sea level hominids and anatomically modern humans could probably cross from Morocco to Spain, from Tunisia to Sicily, and from Djibouti/Eritrea to Yemen, as well as by the land route through Sinai.
        It is probable that at these points, the process was two-way, with communities on opposite shores in regular cultural communication.

        The down-stream migrations into north-west Europe, Arabia, India, and SE Asia may also have been profoundly affected by episodic exposure of the continental shelf, and changes in climate and intensity of the monsoons.

        &
        2 Archaeological background

        Hominids, the precursors of modern man, have lived on the North African coast, the Red Sea area, and in the Levant since at least 1.0-1.4 million years ago
        (Klein [30](p.316-317)), and on the North coast of the Mediterranean since at least 0.9 million years BP.

        Homo heidelbergensis and then H. neanderthalensis lived in central and southern Europe after 900ky BP, until H. neanderthalensis was replaced by H. sapiens over the period about 100ky to 30ky BP.
        Thus the Mediterranean and Red Seas have been a focal zone, obstacle, or crossing corridor for human migrations and interactions for over 1 million years.

        Figure 1 shows possible crossing zones in addition to the Sinai dry land route, without any assumption as to which is most probable or possible at different dates.

        50

    • #
      TdeF

      It is established that there were two major migrations from Africa, 70,000 years ago largely to the fertile crescent and 50,000 years ago. The second group included the Australian aborigines. By combining archaeological data and genetic tag information, there is now a clear picture of when each country was inhabited and by whom. The Pacific islands were the last, NZ only a few hundred years ago. Even large masses like Taiwan/Formosa were only recently settled, although there were some aboriginal peoples. That is why the wailing about coral atolls is so silly. They are only just settled and frankly are in a flood zone built on sand on coral just above the tide. Trying to stop the planet from evolving, stop the climates changing, stop the process of natural selection, stop the world is just not rational, a fantasy. Besides, who said the world was perfect?

      It is puzzling to read of talk of human artefacts from hundreds of thousands of years ago. That is not possible. The neanderthals perhaps? Modern man, no.

      140

      • #
        TdeF

        Dear moderator, please tell me which words caused moderation. My gab is flastered.

        80

      • #
        Tanner

        Tdf
        “It is puzzling to read of talk of human artefacts from hundreds of thousands of years ago. That is not possible.”

        “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy” William Shakespeare

        The Archeologists have their theories about human evolution and development. When discoveries are made that go against their theories then the discoveries are often ignored or revised to suit their theories. When artefacts are discovered predating “humans” then the dating is wrong! When “primitive” tribes describe “gods” visiting from the heavens then this is a “religious belief”.

        The great pyramid in Giza was supposedly built by the Egyptians about 4000 years ago as a burial chamber yet the pyramids themselves have not been dated! The burial chambers in the valley of the kings were full of artefacts, hieroglyphs, and drawings yet nothing in the great pyramid. There are no hieroglyphs depicting the pyramids being built or mentioning building the pyramids. Why is that? All we know is that the great pyramid exists in Egypt and there is evidence of people living there about 4000 years ago. That the people that lived there built the great pyramid is a possibility not a fact. The same as the theory of evolution and human development and migration. These are theories! That “human artefacts from hundreds of thousands of years ago” is not possible – is a theory.

        There are many unexplained phenomena on earth. Thousands of people have seen or experienced unusual things. Are all these people mad or delusional or is there maybe some truth behind these experiences? Is there some truth to mythology?

        There are many facts taught in the past that have now proven to be false. I think it is good to keep an open mind and look at different sources of information before dismissing something out of hand. If there are artefacts older than 200 000 years then the implications are enormous and we should be reviewing our history!

        All the best
        Tanner

        21

        • #
          Dariusz

          Gravity is a theory and yet it does exist.
          We have theories everywhere but that does not mean there is no credence to them. Theory of evolution has been confirmed by a variety of independent sources and really should not be called theory anymore. In fact the common fruit fly illustrates the theory of evolution on steroids with fast population adaptation in response to changing conditions. Virus and bacterial are also obvious examples illustrating fenomenal survival skills.
          Extending this further, the existence of god is just a theory too and yet we have more than >50% of humans believing with absolutely no proof. What is that telling us about the humanity? Gullible, stupid, insecure, cultural heritage. And yes I come from a strong catholic family and took me 10 years to shed the fear of religion.

          20

        • #
          TdeF

          It is great to read real reverence for history. However the “pyramids themselves have not been dated!”. This puzzles me. You can radio carbon date anything within the last 20,000 years. We have amazingly continuous records of of Egypt from these times to the present. They kept recording when the Mycean and Minoan empires collapsed with the explosion of Santorini. It was the one stable empire in the Western world and thanks to Napoleon and Champollion, we can read so much detail which was lost to the Egyptians themselves. So we understand a great deal and now we know with certainty not only the history of early times, but the pattern of migration from Africa. Modern humans are a very recent species. Have we finished evolving? No. Will we be around in another 200,000 years? Unlikely. Enjoy.

          30

    • #
      Christian

      Off topic, but here is a European site with almost 1 million years of occupation by hominids and homo sapiens.
      http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/989

      41

      • #
        TdeF

        If beyond 50,000 years, these are not modern humans. You would not invite them over for drinks.

        Certainly the extinct Homo Erectus and then Homo Ergaster, Homo Heidelbergensis and very much later as suggested, modern humans and Neanderthals. Homo Erectus had a very large range but we are not descended from Homo Erectus. There is even an Homo Erectus Georgicus from Georgia, but these are not our ancestors. However there is a possibility of Homo Sapiens in Kibili, Tunisia 200,000 years ago as the archeologists think the species arose in East Africa 200,000 years ago, but that would be the upper limit.

        60

        • #
          Alfred

          you forgot ‘Australopithecus’

          40

        • #
          sophocles

          I think you’ll find we, as a species, have been around a bit longer than 200 kY. Your genes say so, according to Dr Brian Sykes in The Seven Daughters of Eve. I remember reading a possible age of 500,000 years from Homo Sapiens Sapien’s genetic data.

          We’re one of the youngest species on the planet and one of the fastest evolving. Your DNA shows it, like it or not.

          31

        • #
          William

          The problem with these assertions is that they are based on minuscule evidence. A couple of bones with a bump here and a depression there: “voila! a new species”.

          There is sufficient archaeological evidence around to indicate that humans had perfectly well developed intellectual capacity a very long time ago; it is pure speculation that suggests that the species started out “dumb”, and intelligence evolved over time.

          It is perfectly reasonable to suggest, based on existing archaeological evidence, that one species of “human” appeared on earth, fully developed and with an intellectual capacity indistinguishable from modern man. The physical variations on this one species can be explained as biological outliers or pathological specimens; as opposed to being distinct species.

          The obvious question is where did humans come from? We can disregard the nonsense of evolving from apes.

          30

          • #
            Hugh

            Nono. Please.

            I think it is nonsense to take lessons of biology from Veda, Bible, or Quran for that matter. You don’t take antibiotics based on those, or build a house, or drive a screwdriver, or research particle physics. Why would you make an exception here? You don’t get far in science by assuming Adam is our only father 6000 years back.

            Humans, apes and all other life on the Earth have a common ancestor, which is clearly written in anatomy, physiology, genetics and paleontology. You may, if you insist, keep a god of holes which fills in the gaps of knowlegde by magic of unexplained. It is, in the long run, a bad way of faith as human knowledge advances.

            If your God created the world, I’m not sure humans could understand how it happened. But surely God would not jest by making 6000 year old world look like a 13 billion year old universe.

            /end creation talk

            31

          • #
            Dariusz

            We did not evolve from apes. We evolved together along each other from a common ancestor. We have more in common with the chimpanzee than chimpanzee with gorilla according to the DNA.
            Hugh said the rest.

            20

          • #
            el gordo

            ‘The obvious question is where did humans come from?’

            The null hypothesis is that we evolved from the primordial soup. If you are going to discuss intelligent design, I think it unlikely that we have been created purposefully.

            10

          • #
            William

            Whoa!!!
            You lot are making a lot of assumptions reading into my posting. You are projecting your own thoughts, not mine.
            I made two points:
            1. There is a large body of evidence that suggests human intelligence existed in its “modern” form for a lot longer than that held by current theories.
            2. Comparative anatomical studies of both humans and simians reveal numerous, and very significant, differences. The number of physical and biological changes required to transform one from the other, even if we start from the assumption of “a common ancestor”, are such that it is totally nonsense to suggest that this occurred by a process of transformational evolution.
            The logical conclusion from the available evidence is that humans, and simians, appeared as fully formed creatures with both physical and mental faculties pretty much as they are now.
            The only question is: “how did this occur?” I don’t know; neither does anybody else.
            The “primordial soup” theory is so far removed from any concept of reality that it is not even worth commenting on.

            10

  • #
    Scott L

    I wonder how effective solar and wind are in Oymyakon, Siberia ??

    140

    • #
      TdeF

      Siberia is lovely in summer. The woman on the pier seems very stylish, as does the lacework and street lights. It is the middle of nowhere, but you have to admire someone dressing up for the cold.

      Like most of North American and Canada, winter is only part of the story. In summer it is a different place and all the animals, birds and fish and seals go North. They do not want arctic ice or glaciers or skiing. In fact no animal wants ice and snow, except perhaps Polar Bears who adapted to the awful environment about 50,000 years since the split from Brown Bears. The Brown Bears would rather sleep through winter. Smarter than their silly cousins, but not as cute.

      120

      • #
        ROM

        TdeF @ # 2.1

        Polar bears and Brown bears diverged genetically about 600,000 years ago but there has been some crossbreeding and the resulting hybridization has confused matters genetic re bears for a number of years.

        Two studies published in 2012 sought to determine when the polar bear lineage diverged from the brown bear lineage using nuclear DNA data. The first, published in April in Science, put the split at 600,000 years ago and concluded that polar bears carry brown bear mitochondrial DNA due to past hybridizations. The second, published in July in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, suggested that brown bears, black bears, and polar bears diverged around 4 to 5 million years ago, followed by repeated episodes of hybridization between polar bears and brown bears.

        There is also another later paper in Science May 2014 verifying the genetic separation and giving a somewhat younger age of that separation..

        Polar Bear Evolution Was Fast and Furious

        which has indicated that polar bears are truly a distinct species that at times lived apart from brown bears and at times intermingled and interbred with them. But researchers disagree about when the polar bear began to split off from brown bears, with estimates ranging from about 600,000 years to as much as 5 million years ago.

        In the latest sequencing effort, Willerslev and researchers from Denmark, China, and the United States analyzed the genomes of 80 polar bears from Greenland and 10 brown bears from North America and Europe. “[It’s] the most comprehensive genomic data set to date, as far as bears are concerned,” says Frank Hailer, an evolutionary biologist from Goethe University Frankfurt in Germany.

        Drawing on that data, Willerslev and his colleagues conclude that polar bears split off from brown bears between 343,000 and 479,000 years ago. Although little more than a blink in time from an evolutionary perspective, that was long enough for key genetic differences to evolve, they note in a report today in Cell.

        60

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        A lot of Siberian women are absolutely stunning to look at, and many of them have those crystal blue eyes.

        At least, they are stunning until they smile, then it was not so good. Beautiful people, with Soviet dental care.

        122

        • #
          Glen Michel

          Da tovarich! Na zadrovie!

          20

        • #
          TdeF

          A lot of Russian women generally. St. Petersburg in particular is full of Maria Sharapovas. Lovely people living a hard life but they love being Russian. Amazing country, rich in so many ways and highly recommended. They are rightfully suspicious of the British, the French and the Germans and anyone else.

          121

          • #
            Hugh

            I ‘m rightfully suspicious of KGB ex-official Putin.

            Who has had war-like conflict with far too many of neighbours.

            72

            • #
              TdeF

              He is a strong man, but seems sensible, not crazy. You could list the countries who have not tried to invade and slaughter Russians in the last two hundred year. It is a small list. Even the armies at Stalingrad were 2/3 not Germans. Croats, Romanians, Italians, just as with Napoleon. As for the French and Germans themselves? Can you trust them? Can the Russians trust them?

              The Crimea was so Russian. We have suburbs here and streets in Melbourne named after the battles, when it was the heart and soul of Russia. Anyone over 60 was born in Russia and Kruschev gave it away for no known reason. When I was there three years ago on Russia day, it was apparent they were all Russians. The Crimea was only 2% of the Crimea anyway and an economic basket case losing $1Bn a year and the people are all much better back as part of Russia. Soldiers’ pension doubled, for example.

              I just cannot see the problem with those people wanting to escape oppression from Kiev, which seems to be run by a criminal class, something hardly mentioned in the Press. In most cases the US would support this move back to Russia, but you get the feeling everyone wants to grab the Ukraine, as always. So I would take very negative French, German and US views of Putin and be very skeptical, like most Russians.

              80

            • #
              Leonard Lane

              Agree, former KBG agents usually take a dim view of democratic processes, especially in their own country. And, Russia seeks hegemony in all the countries surrounding it. Not a situation likely to produce freedom nor peace.

              10

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                Leonard,

                I assume you are referring to the Russian Federal Security Service, the FSB? They are roughly the equivalent of the US FBI.

                01

          • #
            Manfred

            Do they wail as loudly before doing anything strenuous?

            10

    • #
      handjive

      Who built this Siberian summer palace… and why? (siberiantimes.com)

      Experts still divided over mysterious 1,300-year-old fortress-like structure located on island in middle of lake.

      What puzzles the experts, however, is the lack of rudimentary heating systems, particularly given that Por-Bajin sits at 2,300metres above sea level and endures harsh Siberian weather.

      If anything it suggests that the complex was only ever occupied for a brief period of time, or was used as a seasonal home in the warmer summer months.

      Some experts even say that the climate, or other natural occurrences in the region, brought occupation of the site to an early end in the 9th century.

      60

  • #
    Robber

    The highest recorded temperature in Dubai is 52.1 °C (126 °F) in July 2002. Doesn’t seem to keep the tourists away.
    And according to Guinness: On 13 September 2012 the World Meteorological Organisation disqualified the record for the highest recorded temperature, exactly 90 years after it had been established at El Azizia, Libya, with a measurement of 58 C. The official highest recorded temperature is now 56.7 C (134 F), which was measured on 10 July 1913 at Greenland Ranch, Death Valley, California, USA.
    But just you wait. NASA will homogenize those temperatures.
    And according to NASA: What is the coldest place on Earth? It is a high ridge in Antarctica on the East Antarctic Plateau where temperatures in several hollows can dip below minus 133.6 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 92 degrees Celsius) on a clear winter night. Researchers analyzed 32 years’ worth of data from several satellite instruments. They found temperatures plummeted to record lows dozens of times in clusters of pockets near a high ridge between Dome Argus and Dome Fuji, two summits on the ice sheet known as the East Antarctic Plateau. The new record of minus 136 F (minus 93.2 C) was set Aug. 10, 2010.

    60

    • #
      Yippiy

      Good one, Robber.

      The reference to Vostok as coldest inhabited place “the research station at Vostok, Antarctica has a monthly average of – 68°C, and about a dozen people manage to live there” is true but they don’t live in the open air. At those temperatures, there is NO carbon dioxide in the air and it takes residents 1-3 weeks to acclimatize to working outside.
      I wonder what happens to the solid carbon dioxide around there (and the NASA hollows) and how it shows in ice cores.

      60

      • #
        RB

        Like the dew point can be less than 0°C in arid regions (frost point) while the temperature is sufficiently low for solid CO2 to form, its concentration is too low.

        20

        • #
          Yippiy

          Thanks RB. Where does the CO2 go? If not in the air and concentration too low for solid, that means CO2 rain – wow!

          00

          • #
            RB

            The partial pressure is about 0.0004 atm. According to this graph, carbon dioxides frost point should be around -140°C

            00

            • #
              RB

              I’ll also add that the estimate is based on CO2 behaving like an ideal gas. I don’t know what the effect of having a surface that the CO2 can adsorb to is.

              00

      • #
        Graeme No. 3

        A very good point!
        Could it be that the low CO2 levels in the ice cores reflect the average composition of the air, between 0 in the depths of winter to ? In the Antarctic summer?
        I have always wondered why the low point of vegetation coincided with the low point in the level of CO2.

        10

        • #
          Yippiy

          Agreed, G No3
          I imagine all sorts of goings on, particularly for gases, in the ‘fern’ zone lasting 60-90 years generally, before compacted ice is developed. Maybe that could explain the age dating disparity in ice cores – gas age is mixed in the fern and so younger than ice age.

          00

      • #
        Greg Cavanagh

        “1-3 weeks to acclimatize to working outside”, in a -68C environment (probably comming from a +25C environment.

        Well, I’d call that very fast adaptation. Not much like the world warming 2C over 100 years and killing everyone at all.

        00

  • #

    “Curiously in this warming world, Wikimedia notes that the hottest temperatures (all 50°+C) were recorded from 1888 – 1930, and not since. Presumably those old thermometers needed adjustment.”

    Please no!!

    I’ve seen the academics who edit the climate articles publishing papers just to stop sceptics forcing them to change the climate articles.

    Now you’ve given them a new target!

    142

  • #

    Amazing how people can create a different world just to be able to earn a lot og cash just doing nothing . . .

    50

  • #

    AND BTW . . . where has the host humans settled the last 100 years? Not in the extreme parts of earth rather somewhere snow isn´t that common etc.? And CO2 has increased and the groth of all green species grovs more, deserts are decresing . . somehow the climate change is the living for alarmists while the rest of just live without having a trouble. The real environment/climate alarmist are close or even adapting a religion without discussion. We have to have biofuel so we remove most rainforest on Borneo etc.

    101

  • #
    TdeF

    Having lived in Colorado from winter lows of -40C to weeks of summer highs of +40C (at night), there is no problem. As locals said, it is not as bad as Alaska. The highs are uncomfortable, but so? Only 96% humidity too and apparently not as bad as Texas.

    -40C is deadly, 16C or more colder than your freezer, but the ground 4 metres down is always 12C. In Colorado, every house has a basement and all the services are 4 metres down. No problem. At -50C you can drown from exercise, so it is a court martial offence in the US military to run. Still, people live there.

    In Ekaterinberg, Russia, I was amazed that hot water is free or a standard charge in a radius from the supply. This limits the city totally. Hot water is the key to survival, on the edge of Siberia. It is used for everything.

    So mankind cares little about 1C or 2C in an average. You only experience an average twice a day.

    In the tropics, everything is moderated by water anyway, so the temperature is rarely above 32C, but no one mentions this. So the technically sunniest and hottest places never get too hot. It is only in the waterless deserts that there is a problem, not the wet temperate or tropical or coastal zones where most of humanity lives.

    I was surprised with the comment about Dubai? When the US troops entered Baghdad in stifling chemical gear, it was reportedly 56C every day in the sun, but I guess only 50C in the shade, but what shade? I have been in Egypt in higher temperatures, but not in the Nile Valley, moderated by the mist and humidity. It is why 90% of Egyptians live along the river, the world’s only linear country. You have to watch the water in such conditions as in Saudi. You do not seem to sweat but need litres per day.

    The IPCC must be in thermostat controlled air conditioned offices, fed by coal powered electricity. They would not survive in the real world, but they do not live there. Real people like farmers know the weather. Greenies only live where they can ride bicycles. Try riding on ice or in Baghdad.

    222

    • #
      RB

      In the tropics, everything is moderated by water anyway,

      Just outside the tropics but Alice Springs is currently going from a minimum 0f -4 to a maximum of 17°C. It should drop overnight to 0 and climb to 23 tomorrow.

      20

      • #
        TdeF

        The Tropics to me always meant water, not the tropic itself. Some of the world’s greatest deserts border the tropics of Capricorn and Cancer at 22 degrees, say the Sahara, Chile, Saudi Arabia, Australia, Namibia. In total contrast, 0-15 is very wet but the area from 30-16 is very dry and so subject to these enormous temperature ranges. Yes, if you want heat and cold extremes, try Alice Springs or Dubai on the Tropic and surrounded by desert and a clear sky at night.

        That is why it is puzzling to me that someone can construct a representative World Temperature at all, when the hottest parts should be at the equator but they are so moderated by water that they are the steamiest, not the hottest parts of the planet, from Kenya to the Congo, Brazil to Ecuador and Indonesia. Sure, you can create a temperature for any given point, but how do you average it across a planet.

        I think the answer is that people create a representative temperature and look for relative changes in it. However to believe that this is an absolute measure is rubbish. Differences of 0.8C are probably barely meaningful in an absolute sense and may not actually represent Global Warming at all.

        60

        • #
          John F. Hultquist

          “ … when the hottest parts should be at the equator …

          The Sun’s most direct rays hit on Earth at the “sub-solar point” and this moves latitudinally. It moves most rapidly as it crosses the Equator and almost not at all at the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn. This is shown with an analemma and a few simple calculations. The word “solstice” comes from the idea that the sun stands still in the sky for a number of days, tending to warm things up there.
          Graphs of insolation by latitude are of interest in this regard but need to be examined with hours of sun light in mind.

          20

          • #
            TdeF

            Point taken, but the real tropics never cool down unlike places on the tropic at the Solstice. Northern Queensland can be quite cool in summer, even on the tropic. It was snowing last week. Singapore, Darwin, real tropics are always 32. The heat out of these areas drives so much of the world’s weather and circulation of air and water. That is why I have a problem with averages. If the ‘average’ goes up 2C, does Singapore? Do some places go up more than others? Are they places where people live? There is so much more to this world average temperature concept which needs examination. The world will not get a uniform 2C hotter because of water which covers 2/3 of the planet and fills the air and covers the ground. Water is the key especially with phase changes from solid to liquid and liquid to gas. These complexities and the heats of transition make a simple definition of world temperature difficult and possibly quite misleading for human environments.

            20

            • #
              Bobl

              I have made this point repeatedly. Before you can declare warming dangerous you need to say where AND when it warms. Brisbane is 5 deg warmer than Melbourne on average. But has lower maximums, because it’s the minimums that move the most.

              If warming occurs at the poles or over the ocean or in the Sahara or Simpson desert,then I couldn’t give a rat’s because it doesn’t affect anyone. Likewise if warming is only in winter.

              Fact is there’s plenty of scope for warming while actually reducing extremes. Prove that doesn’t happen before spending Trillions trying to stop it!

              Warmists always assume the extremes would increase but actual experience show that when the average temp rises anywhere there is enough water, the weather becomes more tropical, that is the minimums rise and the maximums fall because of the moderating effects of water vapour.

              For example Brisbane is about5

              10

              • #
                llew Jones

                From memory the suggestion from climate scientists is that winter and night time temperatures are the most likely to be affected by AGW. Not sure if any “experts” have given us a breakdown that includes the non winter months and daytime temperature changes.

                Is it not just possible that given that scenario is correct there could be little or no change in the severity of summer daytime hot days and their frequency even in the unlikely event the global average was to go up a few degrees?

                10

        • #
          RB

          There are a lot of problems with using the average of the max and min temperatures for a day.

          There is a big difference between the average of the half hour readings of automated stations and the average of the the lowest and highest recorded (not necessarily the official max). Both can vary by degrees within 10 km and not consistently.

          Then there is the change in weather patterns affecting the average when the stations are not evenly spread out and they are supposed to calculate the global monthly anomaly to within ±0.05°C? (and the closeness with the satellite data suggests that the random error is only 0.01). Something is very wrong.

          20

    • #
      PabloNH

      > weeks of summer highs of +40C (at night)
      That’s never happened in Colorado.

      > Only 96% humidity too
      That’s never happened anywhere on earth.

      > In Colorado, every house has a basement
      No – there are a lot of mild places in Colorado where houses are often built on slabs.

      > all the services are 4 metres down
      Again, no.

      > At -50C
      This has happened only a handful of times in the entire state, and never in a heavily populated area. Record lows in most large Colorado cities are around -35C; the record in Denver is not even that cold.

      > I have been in Egypt in higher temperatures
      Highly unlikely. The all-time record high tempe

      07

      • #
        TdeF

        I have to disagree with all your disagreement.

        It was 98 every day and 102-104 at night. 1990. Six weeks of it. See link, highest temperatures 120F or 48.9 in 2011.

        Consider these simple numbers over only since 2010

        Highest humidity in Denver, Colorado?
        Lowest apparent temperature -38.9F (-40F = -40C)

        “That’s never happened anywhere on earth?” The table shows 99%. That is high. I have been in supersaturated air in Shanghai in summer, like a fog of rain with a sudden drop from 37C.

        (Sure, -50C not in suburban Colorado. I never experienced below -50C but -40C was common)

        Often built on slabs? I saw whole estates built where they always dug a basement first. This was back in the 1980s/1990s. In fact it is happening everywhere now, even in Australia as the yellow machines can excavate whole properties so easily and in the cities now, land is at a premium. Services have to run deep just to stop the water freezing. Power, telephones, sewerage, water, all underground as it should be everywhere. A basement makes access convenient, a shelter from tornadoes which are common enough on the high plains and an escape if the heating fails. A slab would be dangerous.

        In fact I had an 1888 house, one of the first Victorian mansions and it had a massive full height basement. This was critical for survival.

        So I do not know where you are getting your facts?

        110

      • #
        TdeF

        Canyon City is slightly milder than Denver

        “Canon City has average lows for Dec, Jan, and Feb of 24F, 22F and 23F respectively. The record lows for those same months are -25F, -24F, and -30F. Snowfall averages 36.6 inches each winter.”

        Note that these are only average lows. The record low for this famously benign climate is a warm -32C. (-25F). Almost outdoor swimming weather.

        20

    • #

      Note where TdeF says this:

      It is why 90% of Egyptians live along the river, the world’s only linear country.

      The most startling way to highlight that fact is to look at the image shown at this link which shows a satellite image of Africa at night. (and to highlight how little electrical power Africa really has, note the comparison with Europe to the North)

      On that image, with Egypt in the upper North East of Africa, note the single pure white long slash along the Nile River and at the Delta.

      There are 54 separate Countries which make up Africa. Egypt has the second highest total power generation of those 54 Countries.

      Egypt generates 155TWH of power each year, and for perspective, that is around 70% of what we generate in total here in Australia, and Egypt has 4 times the population of Australia.

      Only South Africa generates more power, 240TWH (about 12% more than Australia, for 2.5 times Australia’s population)

      Tony.

      40

      • #
        TdeF

        Tony, are you sure? This is a link to the interesting Geology.com site but I cannot find the picture you mention.

        00

        • #

          Hmm! I’ve noticed this in the last week or so, the problems with copying and pasting links, and how they are recently failing to materialise in the manner I have previously taken as accepted.

          When I click on that image above, I am immediately taken to the correct image I linked to, but that, umm ….. may be because I have previously opened the image, so it just refers me straight back to it.

          However, for anyone having a problem accessing the image then try this link here, which is for the home site of that image. Scroll down a little to the Africa image.

          Anyone else encountering these problems, which only seem to be recent?

          Tony.

          10

          • #
            Sceptical Sam

            Interesting Tony.

            Any ideas on what’s with Portugal’s massive light intensity?

            00

          • #
            Sceptical Sam

            And check out Australia. Who has left the lights on in the Western Australian deserts?

            That just doesn’t make sense.

            10

          • #
            Sceptical Sam

            Ah! That’s it.

            The Min min lights!

            00

          • #

            There’s something that is absolutely awful in those power numbers for Egypt and South Africa.

            Just those 2 Countries alone generate just under 60% of all the power generated in the whole of Africa.

            So, the remaining 40% of ALL power being generated in Africa is all the power available to 985 Million people in 52 Countries.

            For perspective Australia has 20 Million people and generates 210TWH of power each year.

            Those 52 Countries with 985 Million people have a total power generation of 280TWH, so 34% more than the whole of Australia with almost 45 times the population we have here in Australia.

            And the UN wants to give them solar panels and some wind towers.

            Someone, somewhere, needs to collectively hang their heads in shame.

            And Greens celebrate this.

            Give me strength.

            Do we attempt to help them, or would those Green followers have us go back and join them?

            Tony.

            30

          • #
            TdeF

            Thanks. It is amazing that you can see a river from the lights along it for 1,000km.

            10

      • #
        Brill

        Tony, When I was in Egypt (quite a few years ago now) one thing that struck me was that the street lights were on 24/7/365. At least they were on major roads. The minor and very minor roads had no street light. Also, Egyptian drivers don’t have their head lights on all the time. The ones I drove with just flashed them every now and then. Very scary when on a minor road with no lights. I was staying with and being driven by locals, not a tour group. The Aswan dam was bad for fertilising the soil in the Nile Delta but good for more comfortable living.

        10

        • #
          ROM

          Re the Nile [ and Black Sea ]; Something to think about and it can never ever happen again can it??

          Earth’s Climatic History

          The period from 2,000,000 – 14,000 B.P. (before present) is known as the Pleistocene or Ice Age. During this period, large glacial ice sheets covered much of North America, Europe, and Asia for extended periods of time. The extent of the glacier ice during the Pleistocene was not static. The Pleistocene had periods when the glacier retreated (interglacial) because of warmer temperatures and advanced because of colder temperatures (glacial). During the coldest periods of the Ice Age, average global temperatures were probably 4 – 5 degrees Celsius colder than they are today.

          The most recent glacial retreat is still going on. We call the temporal period of this retreat the Holocene epoch. This warming of the Earth and subsequent glacial retreat began about 14,000 years ago (12,000 BC). The warming was shortly interrupted by a sudden cooling, known as the Younger-Dryas, at about 10,000 – 8500 BC. Scientists speculate that this cooling may have been caused by the release of fresh water trapped behind ice on North America into the North Atlantic Ocean. The release altered vertical currents in the ocean which exchange heat energy with the atmosphere. The warming resumed by 8500 BC. By 5000 to 3000 BC average global temperatures reached their maximum level during the Holocene and were 1 to 2 degrees Celsius warmer than they are today. Climatologists call this period the Climatic Optimum. During the Climatic Optimum, many of the Earth’s great ancient civilizations began and flourished. In Africa, the Nile River had three times its present volume, indicating a much larger tropical region.

          From 3000 to 2000 BC a cooling trend occurred. This cooling caused large drops in sea level and the emergence of many islands (Bahamas) and coastal areas that are still above sea level today. A short warming trend took place from 2000 to 1500 BC, followed once again by colder conditions. Colder temperatures from 1500 – 750 BC caused renewed ice growth in continental glaciers and alpine glaciers, and a sea level drop of between 2 to 3 meters below present day levels.

          The period from 750 BC – 800 AD saw warming up to 150 BC.
          Temperatures, however, did not get as warm as the Climatic Optimum.
          During the time of Roman Empire (150 BC – 300 AD) a cooling began that lasted until about 900 AD.
          At its height, the cooling caused the Nile River (829 AD) and the Black Sea (800-801 AD) to freeze.

          There is also a second claimed freezing of the Nile River in about 1010 AD by some sources.

          The outcomes of all this is that the global temperature goes up!
          The global temperature goes down.
          And it does so in a quite climatically spectacular fashion all by itself without needing any input or interference from some hubris laden and rather ignorant climate scientists and their running dogs in the media and in the green left enviro mobs who are arrogant enough to believe they can alter and control the global climate.
          —————
          To the warmists and Climate catastrophe cultists who want to destroy our life supporting, energy driven civilisation to “Save the Planet”.

          When you can clearly demonstrate to me you can control a Volcano then come back and we will discuss the controlling of the global climate

          70

  • #
    Safetyguy66

    Great news for the residents of Oymyakon, they can look forward to some balmy -48c

    And situation normal for Dallol because everything after 40c is hot and I don’t think many people could tell the difference between 44c and 46c without good equipment. Lets face it, The BOM cant do it.

    121

  • #
    Mervyn

    Consider winter temperatures in Central Australia. They can vary from zero degrees centigrade early morning rising to 22 degrees centigrade at mid-day before cooling again into the evening. It’s been happening for millennia. Yet all forms of life adapted nicely to such immense temperature variations and to temperature variations between winter and summer when it can reach in the mid-forties. Worrying about global average temperature variations of a fraction of a degree is just a beat up!

    80

  • #
    el gordo

    “I expect by 2050 … people just don’t go outside,”

    Its a delusional projection.

    111

    • #
      Bulldust

      I’d believe it, but not for the reasons they imply. If we are all strapped into a better than life matrix, then there’d be a reason most would be inside.

      50

  • #
    David Maddison

    I have asked this question before but have not received an answer. When referring to past Australian temperature records, e.g. Marble Bar having an average Jan temperature of 41C for the last 100 years, how do we know if the BoM database from which such figures are obtained is the real original data or the data that has been deliberately altered by recent BoM activities? How do we got hold of original, unaltered temperature measurements, assuming they haven’t been destroyed? And all altered data in the BoM database should be labelled as such so honest researchers know not to use it.

    181

    • #
      macha

      Old newspaper articles….they can’t change the print. Yay.

      100

    • #
      Harry Twinotter

      David Maddison.

      The BOM have not altered anything, that is a hoax. I think people get confused when they hear about ACORN-SAT – it has been adjusted to remove non-climatic influences.

      The raw data is the log books kept by whom ever was responsible for making the observations.

      The AWAP data set is the closest to a computer record of raw data that I have been able to find. There might be a bit more but you have to request it from the BOM. There are some records which have not made it into AWAP.

      The ACORN-SAT data set is the climatic record used as a reference and has been homogenised.

      Bottom line for headline temps I use AWAP (more likely to match what is in an old newspaper say), for a climatic record I use ACORN-SAT because it will better reflect long-term temperature trends.

      231

      • #
        Just-A-Guy

        Tarry ‘The Self-cotradictory Troll’ Twinotter,

        You wrote:

        The BOM have not altered anything . . .

        And then wrote, in the same sentence:

        it has been adjusted . . .

        Please oh Enlightened One, please explain to all of us lowly humans the difference between altered and adjusted.

        Abe

        273

        • #
          Harry Twinotter

          Just-A-Guy,

          are you still around? I blocked you a while back.

          You really do have too much spare time on your hands, I have not been stalked by a troll in years.

          You really should use your spare time to read up on WMO baseline guidelines.
          [If any blocking is to be done, the moderators will do it. Please stick to the subject matter of the post - Fly]

          336

          • #
            Just-A-Guy

            Stop with the red-herrings and answer the question.

            What is the difference between altered and adjusted?

            Abe

            272

          • #
            Harry Twinotter

            “[If any blocking is to be done, the moderators will do it. Please stick to the subject matter of the post - Fly]”

            Moderators, gladly if he will stop calling me names and posting pointless comments against many of my posts. I have reported his posts on this forum several times. It is clear he is just trying to provoke me. This does not add to the discussion in any way.

            Until then, I have him blocked.
            [Just-a-Guy is not blocked by us. He, like you, is free to participate in the conversation. As long as people remain polite, and stay more-or-less on topic, they are free to comment. We do not censor because of differences in opinion. - Fly]

            117

            • #
              RB

              I’ll help you, princess. To alter is to modify, as is adjust but the latter is to fit speecific requirements. So to alter data to make it look like more warming is to adjust.

              133

              • #
                Harry Twinotter

                RB.

                You are a court-jester or fool, but you know you are actually correct (probably by accident).

                One of the objectives of the adjustments is to re-align any trends that were disrupted by the non-climatic changes. So in that sense the adjustment is done to fit specific requirements.

                Either way AWAP is unadjusted. If people do not want to allow for the non-climatic changes, they can use AWAP to calculate the trends and averages.

                119

              • #
                RB

                You are a court-jester or fool, but you know you are actually correct (probably by accident).

                I looked up a dictionary.

                02

            • #
              Harry Twinotter

              Moderator.

              It is the name-calling and pointless comments. I am surprised you missed that. I never mentioned opinion.

              120

      • #
        StefanL

        “… adjusted to remove non-climatic influences …”
        Climate is just average, long-term weather, so how can there be any non-climatic influences ?

        143

        • #
          Harry Twinotter

          StefanL

          The removal of non-climatic influences on the temperature record such as station moves and merges, thermometer replacements, environmental changes (trees, lawn watering etc).

          The non-climatic influences cause little jumps up and down in the temperature series.

          117

          • #
            RB

            A station move should be recorded. While they are more likley to be moved to a less bulit up area, they are moved because the area became more built up, gradually. Homogenisation adjusts for the former and not the latter greating a warming trend.

            Thermometers are calibrated. Even the old ones measure to 0.1 degree. People only stop watering lawns. Trees are cut down near stations, buildings and roads built, the reverse is rare. Why does homogenisation tend to adjust older temperatures down?

            Weather patterns are not constant and make a bigger difference to local weather than the global temperature change and the non-climatic changes you listed. What are the chances that is being altered rather than a shift that is not backed up by records?

            133

            • #
              Harry Twinotter

              RB.

              The station moves are recorded.

              The thermometers are not calibrated according to the doco I read. It is assumed they operate within tolerances. I think they are checked from time to time to ensure they are still within tolerance.

              Actually a lot of weather stations were moved from town centres to airports. I do not have the exact number.

              “Why does homogenisation tend to adjust older temperatures down?”

              I do not know that it does; homogenisation can move a series up and down, have a look at the BOM doco. It stands to reason that if a station has moved from a town centre to say an airport, the airport will usually record lower temps so they will adjust the series down to compensate.

              Homogenization is not designed to preserve absolute temperatures, it is designed to preserve the trend in the anomaly. After thinking about it, I am now recommending to people to use AWAP for the “headline” temperature, not ACORN. Personally I do not care about headline temps, but some people do feel more comfortable with the absolute min and max, especially if a record was broken.

              117

              • #
                RB

                The station moves are recorded.

                Jo has written about the problem

                Bob Fernley-Jones has been going through the BOM records for six of Australia’s state capitals, looking at the original raw data (at least, as is recorded in the BOM’s climate data online, called CDO). Bob compares the new “corrected” dataset called ACORN for these locations — that’s the all new marvelous adjusted data. He finds many step changes that can’t be explained by known site moves or the UHI effect. Many step changes occur in either minima or maxima, but not in both at the same time, which is also odd. As we already know, the adjustments usually cool the past — especially the minima (see all the blue lines on graphs below

                Calibration is not novel. It might not have been done by the staff but certainly by the manufacturer, and as RW points out, they checked that they didn’t have a dud.

                Airports usually have an average temperature that is lower than the former town site but there are months where the average at the airport is greater than the town. Its much harder to pick out a non-climatic change than is portrayed. Worse, the gradual change of build up of a town is considered small but the sudden change needs to be corrected for.

                11

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            Harry,

            Are you saying that modern meteorology has the ability to know that a station move, from outside the post office, to outside the library, in a particular town, 100 years ago, would have caused a discrepancy of 1.03 degrees? And are you saying that, historically, replacements of thermometers were not done by using them in tandem for a month or so, so that the new one could be calibrated against the old one (you do know that the old meteorological thermometers could be adjusted, I hope). And are you saying that a log entry was made every time somebody threw a bucket of water out the door (getting rid of dirty floor washing water, and watering the lawn, at the same time).

            And finally, do you claim that the causes of “little jumps”, from “non-climatic influences” can be applied uniformly across the entire network?

            If you can answer, “yes” to all these questions, then I might be able to interest you in a bridge, that I happen to have for sale.

            When people talk of “minor adjustments” to data, to correct historic “anomalies”, they are fudging history to align with a theory. If that is done with Company Financial Records, the Police Fraud Squad tends to get involved.

            183

            • #
              Harry Twinotter

              Rereke Whakaaro.

              If you had read any of the papers on homogenisation, you would know the answer to that question.

              Also refer to the “argument from personal incredulity” fallacy.

              118

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                Ah, so you don’t know. I thought not. All wind and no substance, eh Harry?

                You walk into the simplest of traps.

                Now I do happen to know the answer to my question – it is my job to know.

                But I want you to demonstrate that you actually know, and are not just posturing and playing to your pre-pubescent cheerleaders.

                So how about it Harry? Can you answer my question?

                51

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        ACORN-SAT – it has been adjusted to remove non-climatic influences.

        And what might those “non-climatic influences” be?

        And how did they get into the data set in the first place, and how come the original recording meteorologists did not adjust for them at the time?

        And how does BOM now know about them, in sufficient detail to be able to make adjustments to accurately allow for them?

        Remember, we are talking about tenths of one degree here.

        184

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Don’t bother replying Harry. Everybody (apart from you, apparently), knows the BOM are fiddling with the data to get the results expected by whatever theory they are following, today.

          234

          • #
            Harry Twinotter

            Rereke Whakaaro.

            As I said before, it is not possible to argue with a Conspiracy Theory.

            “Remember, we are talking about tenths of one degree here.”

            You are right about this though, the adjustments have not made much difference to the climatic record. Both the ACORN and AWAP data sets show a warming trend, albeit a noisy one which is not surprising considering ocean temps are not included in the series.

            123

  • #
    tom0mason

    It’s not only humans that live within such a range, the whole of nature has methods to ensure survival, thrive even, with temperatures staying within normal natural limits of variation. That said, as climate changes some species are stressed and may die out, while others flourish. This is all perfectly natural. In nature if you can not adapt then extinction is the road for you.

    On the other hand elevated levels of CO2 (but within normal natural limit) ensures the base vegetable growth, upon which all animals depend, thrives well. And note that CO2 at 400parts per million in the atmosphere is within normal limits.

    Only those with a stasis view of climate will not understand this, or the fact that nature will exploit all niches in the evironment. They utterly misunderstand that in the natural world it is normal for species diversity to happen at the expense of one stronger species dominance over a weaker one that is in the genetic/ecological cus-de-sac (e.g. the cheetah, with its low reproductive rate and population density, highly homogenic genetic make-up across the population, and very limited ability to adapt from a very specialize hunting technique within a limited environment).

    160

    • #
      David Maddison

      And surely CO2 is a fertiliser for plant growth? More CO2 is good for the environment.

      171

      • #
        tom0mason

        David Maddison

        I thought that is what I said with “…elevated levels of CO2 (but within normal natural limit) ensures the base vegetable growth, upon which all animals depend, thrives well.”

        My point is that with CO2 levels rising (but within normal historical natural limits) the majority of plants will thrive. However the natural ecosystem will change as those plants better able to exploit this abundance will flourish better relative to those that can’t. This abundance will filter across to all animal life (including insects).

        50

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Don’t tell the market gardeners that! The next thing you know, they will be pumping it into their greenhouses.

        140

      • #
        TdeF

        As I have written before, CO2 is not a fertilizer. It is the plant. All life on earth starts with CO2 capture through photosynthesis. Plants and thus people are almost solid CO2. Everything, CO2 and H2O. Dried, we burn like wood. Almost nothing from the ground except water. More CO2 and H2O and more plants. No CO2, no life on earth.

        90

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Plants and thus people are almost solid CO2.

          I think that is a little bit oversimplified. There is some biochemistry involved, I understand, that makes some fairly complicated molecules out of the CO2, and some other stuff that is lying around. Biochemistry is not something I have ever understood, but I am reasonably sure that we are not just solid CO2. We are warmer than dry ice, for example.

          50

          • #
            TdeF

            Exactly, simplified to make my point. You have to startle people. Trees and humans are made ‘from’ CO2.

            All our carbon in our bodies came from CO2 captured by photosynthesis, whether via meat or straight from grains or vegetables. Plants only get Carbon from the air. So all oil, gas, coal is old plant matter, made entirely from CO2. It is all ‘natural’ and none of the carbon is man made. All sunlight energy captured many millions of years ago in CH2 chains. The missing O2 is what we breathe and use to burn the carbohydrates, turning everything back to H2O and CO2 again. The cycle of life on earth.

            Carbohydrates for example are Cm(H2O)n. Decayed matter is largely hydrocarbons of different length (CH2)n. The 1840s breakthrough was to crack these to make oil useful. Prior to this it was useless and we used whale oil (remember them). The Romans read by the light of an olive oil lamp. Baleen whales are interesting as they live directly on shrimp (krill) which in turn live on phytoplankton, which supply half the world’s oxygen. Whales are mammals which went back and cut out the middle man.

            In the weight of a human, eliminate H2O combinations and you come up with 86% Carbon by weight. All from CO2. We are carbon lifeforms. Similarly with plants, but without bones. Organic chemistry is more complex involving many of the elements, especially Nitrogen. Biochemistry gets far more complex but essentially you are what you eat.

            So I like to say a tree is solid atmospheric CO2. Plus water. There is virtually nothing else in the formula for making trees. Almost nothing comes from the soil. A 50 tonne tree is not made from the dirt. There is no hole around the tree.

            Basically there were only 92 elements. Most of human life is about the light ones H, C, O and N. Then all the metals like Iron, Calcium, Sodium, Phosphorous, Potassium even Iodine in very small quantities. After all, you have to be made from something and its carbon and water. So Carbon Dioxide and Water are obviously pollutants, like us.

            70

            • #
              TdeF

              An interesting calculation
              Elements in the body by weight Oxygen 65%, Carbon 18.5%, Hydrogen 9.5%, Nitrogen 3.2%, Calcium 1.5%, Phosphorous 1%
              This is 97%.

              A rough calculation is Oxygen is O16 and Hydrogen 1, so in H2O the H2 is 2/18th. Take out the Oxygen and 1/9th of 65 or 7.3% of the hydrogen leaves Carbon 18.5%, Hydrogen 2.2% plus the other 5.7%, so Carbon has jumped to 18.5/26.5 or 70% of human body mass without H2O is carbon by weight. If you consider that Hydrocarbons are CH2, the Hydrogen required is 2/14 or 1/7th. The Carbon 18.5% would need 2.6% H to make CH2s, so you could argue we are 76% hydrocarbon.

              50

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                That was impressive. I even understood it. But please don’t ask me to repeat it.

                30

          • #
            Rod Stuart

            Rereke, bro:
            My aortic valve is pure carbon. Does that count?

            50

            • #
              Rereke Whakaaro

              I didn’t know that.

              That explains why you always seem so staunch, bro.

              Thanks for sharing.

              40

        • #
          Robert O.

          A lot of people do not understand the photo-chemical reaction photosynthesis and its implications on life. Only plants synthesise carbohydrate which is the basis of most of life’s biochemistry and requires CO2, the more the better within limits; also gives us oxygen to breathe.

          Why would you want to demonise it, that is the real question?

          80

          • #
            Popeye26

            Robert,

            “Why would you want to demonise it, that is the real question?”

            The ONLY answer – two words – MONEY & POWER.

            Cheers,

            70

      • #
        John F. Hultquist

        CO2 is the main component of plant growth and not usually thought of as a fertiliser, such as N, P, & K. Maybe the distinction is useful – or not.

        30

        • #
          TdeF

          Succinct. Yes and the corollaries. No CO2 or water, no plants. More CO2 and H2O more plants.

          Apart from trace metals and nitrogen as you point out, you can grow plants with only CO2 and H2O. So to argue that CO2 is a man made pollutant is really mad. More CO2 and the world would be a far greener place, better for humans. After all the CO2 we release is plant matter anyway, returning to the ecosystem from where it came.

          It is only this hairbrained opportunistic politcally motivated theory of a critical level of CO2 at an incredibly convenient and unlikely tipping point in runaway global warming caused by CO2 which is the concern. So what it the chance that this is true? Zero.

          In fact the planet in 1860 was at a level of CO2 which was incredibly low. At 0.02% it is believed plant growth would stop completely, ending life on earth. As Dr Patrick Moore suggested, if we did cause the increase in CO2, it was just in the nick of time.

          Then you get those huge oil fields, old plant matter. What was the world like when they were formed? How much green vegetation did it take to create green litter on that scale? How much CO2 was in the air at the time, clearly much more than today. It was obviously a warmer, greener, more lush environment than today in places like Colorado, Patagonia and Northern China. So why is the UN worrying so much? Or is it simply self justifying for the IPCC? Would an unelected, independent, self justifying ultimately political formed and motivated body blatantly lie to the world just for money, careers, power and political purposes? Of course not.

          The IPCC is the problem. It cannot be trusted and serves no useful purpose. Global Cooling will be next on the IPCC agenda for money and power. You can safely predict democracies will be the cause of all of man’s problems and Christiana Figueres openly demands the end of the ballot box. Australians should not go to Paris. Check your local council for those signed for Agenda 21.

          70

    • #
  • #
    Bob Fernley-Jones

    Some decades ago I purchased an interesting looking “vinyl recorded music playing disc” known as a 33⅓ RPM LP. For, it had blazoned across its sleeve inspiringly monumental words emphasizing that it was “high Fi”.
    But, I was disappointed at hearing a very poor acoustical rendition of one of my favourite Rachmaninov things and threw it out. (Charitable donation without would have been offensive)

    “Professor Andy Pitman, director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science at UNSW.”

    Erh, Australian Research Council’s Centre of Excellence at UNSW?

    Eh? Wot?
    How can we be proud of the several universities that tolerate such utter fund seeking CRAP?

    102

    • #
      Glen Michel

      Check out what the History Dept. Dishes out. Witchcraft,Lord of the rings LSD induced inter- dimensional travel.Planetary realignment using voltonian metronomes.Sorry,could be Southern Cross uni. Acadème! What a joke!

      100

  • #
    RogueElement451

    There is no such thing as bad weather merely bad attire to suit the weather.

    170

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      That’s a bit profound for a Monday.

      110

      • #
        llew Jones

        Particularly on a freezing cold Monday evening in Melbourne.

        “The missus said this morning: “Hey I just broke the ice on a puddle next to my car. I last remember doing that on mornings going to school in the early 1940s”. I advised my lil gal that that is an indicator of natural cyclical climate change. The sort these pseudo scientists imagine is caused by we humans burning fossil fuels.

        (Not 200,000 years ago but enough to tell us what causes real (periodic) climate change).

        When our son was doing Ag Science at La Trobe, some years ago, he was taught there were rural cropping areas in Australia that periodically went out of and back into production over extended periods of time because of that sort of observed natural climate change.

        .

        90

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          I have it on good authority, that the concept of breaking a puddle next to a car, was totally unknown prior to the modern industrial age.

          30

    • #
      handjive

      I don’t know about “climate change” but I do know why the weather changes – to give poor people the illusion of travel.

      80

    • #
      David Maddison

      The origin of that saying is at http://www.babylonstoren.com/documents/1398767037/bad_weather.pdf I am a bush walker and very familiar with the concept… (The document won’t allow copying and pasting.)

      40

      • #
        Just-A-Guy

        David Maddison,

        If you move your mouse pointer near the bottom of the .pdf, you’ll get the option to save the file. Once the file is saved on your hard disk, you can open it from there and copy/paste will be enabled automatically. :)

        Just-Sayin’. ;)

        Abe

        40

      • #
        tom0mason

        David Maddison,

        Have downloaded your file.
        You said “The document won’t allow copying and pasting.” that is because there is no ‘text’ in the .pdf file, there is just a scanned image from a Canon brand device.

        File Information says –

        CreationDate: D:20130819071326Z00’00

        Producer: Adobe PDF Scan Library 1.0e for Canon imageRUNNER

        Creator:Canon iR-ADV C5035 PDF

        20

        • #
          tom0mason

          This particular pdf contains an image, i.e. its like a photo and not text. Therefore you can not just highlight ‘copy’ and ‘paste’ as you could with a text file.
          You could try pasting a selection to an image editing program (MSpaint or photoshop ?), but that still only give you an image file format.

          To ‘get’ the text you have to pass this file through a character recognition program (similar to OCR program), these output text files from image files.

          20

          • #
            Just-A-Guy

            tom0mason,

            Thank’s for the correction. I’ve done the save-copy-paste many times but didn’t bother to try it here.

            Live and learn.

            Abe

            30

  • #
    • #
      MarloweJ

      As a boy in the 60′s I lived in Port Hedland. I was often out fishing all day and was never bothered by the heat. One day my family took a Cessna flight to Marble Bar and it was so hot we spent the whole day in the air conditioned pub, drinking lemon squash. We were used to a bit of heat but it was almost intolerable to spend any time outside.

      60

    • #

      Tom, beautiful shots there. Since we are talking of people living in this heat, I don’t suppose you have less prosaic shots of the actual town or houses?

      PS Love that ochre soil and blue sky. My favourite combination.

      80

    • #
      Bob Fernley-Jones

      NICE (very)

      30

  • #
    PeterS

    “I expect by 2050 … people just don’t go outside,”

    Perhaps true but not for the reason the AGW alarmists think. I bet there’s one factor none of the climate models are taking into account. It’s a known fact that the Earth’s magnetic field is weakening faster and faster. Surely this and the sunspot variability will have an important impact on the climate, probably far more significant than that due to CO2 variability. It’s also known that magnetic pole reversal have occurred very quickly and frequently, much faster than previously supposed. We could face one in our life time according to some scientists. So, climate change may be significant but not because of CO2. As usual, the leftists are barking up the wrong tree. If we are to prepare for any dangerous climate change event, there should be a serious study of all these factors, not just CO2. That’s what real science should be about – searching for the truth.

    171

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      The wise oracle, he say: Do not be flying, when magnetic pole reverse.

      110

      • #
        Glen Michel

        Bit like my flying simulator! Rudder,ailerons and elevators all west.Try flying over Stalingrad during the winter of 1942/43 with non configured controls.Whiskey bottle consumed!

        50

    • #
      tom0mason

      Another variable not researched much for its effects on climate is cosmic dust.
      Here is a paper called ‘Evidence of high cosmic dust concentrations in late Pleistocene polar ice (20,000-14,000 years BP)’, so it is known to have probably happened historically.

      Are there currently any measurement systems in place to monitor cosmic dust or its impacts?

      70

      • #
        ROM

        .
        Re tom0mason @ # 16.2
        *

        Measuring Cosmic dust; The CODITA project

        CODITA: measuring the cosmic dust swept up by the Earth

        [ quoted ]

        “We have a conundrum – estimates of how much dust comes in vary by a factor of a hundred,” said Plane. “The aim of CODITA is to resolve this huge discrepancy.”

        Satellite observations suggest that 100-300 tonnes of cosmic dust enter the atmosphere each day. This figure tallies with the rate of accumulation in polar ice cores and deep-sea sediments of rare elements linked to cosmic dust, such as iridium and osmium. However, measurements in the earth’s atmosphere indicate that the input could be as low as 5 tonnes per day. These measurements include meteor radar observations, laser observations of the sodium and iron atoms from evaporating dust in the upper atmosphere, and measurements by high altitude aircraft of meteoritic iron in the lower stratosphere.

        “If the dust input is around 200 tons per day, then the particles are being transported down through the middle atmosphere considerably faster than generally believed; if the 5-tonne figure is correct, we will need to revise substantially our understanding of how dust evolves in the Solar System and is transported from the middle atmosphere to the surface,” said Plane.

        The metals injected into the atmosphere from evaporating dust particles are involved in a diverse range of phenomena linked to climate change.

        “Cosmic dust is associated with the formation of ‘noctilucent’ clouds – the highest clouds in the Earth’s atmosphere. The dust particles provide a surface for the cloud’s ice crystals to form. These clouds develop during summer in the polar regions and they appear to be an indicator of climate change,’ said Plane. “The metals from the dust also affect ozone chemistry in the stratosphere. The amount of dust present will be important for any geo-engineering initiatives to increase sulphate aerosol to offset global warming. Cosmic dust also fertilises the ocean with iron, which has potential climate feedbacks because marine phytoplankton emit climate-related gases.”

        [ more ]

        50

        • #
          tom0mason

          Thank you ROM, I searched unsuccessfully a few times for more info on cosmic dust. Thanks for the link.

          So, our tiny solar system within the universe may enter a patch dustiness but we’ll only find out after the event starts.
          Umm, well we wouldn’t want to waste research money on fully quantifying and understanding all the effect on this planet of cosmic dust would we, not while CO2 is the apparent great evil.

          10

          • #
            ROM

            Actually some years ago a hypothesis was put forward that suggested that the great Ice Ages could be linked to and caused by the Solar System transiting the major dust bars of our Milky Way galaxy.
            The theory being that the density of the dust in the bars would reduce the radiation of Sun that was received by Earth leading to the onset of another of the five known major Ice Ages over the last 2.4 billion years.

            The Solar System is travelling around the galaxy at around 220 kms / second. It takes roughly about 230 million to 250 million years to do one circuit of the Galaxy, the Cosmic Year.
            Recently astronomers have begun to believe there are in fact a number of minor dust bars as well as the few major ones the solar system transits through whilst completing it’s 240 million year long Cosmic Year rotation around the Galaxy.

            20

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Hmm, the dust under my desk, is at cosmic proportions. Is that the same thing?

        20

        • #
          ROM

          Grab yourself a Black Hole to suck all that stuff up.

          Oops! If its like my desk there is a strong likelihood of a Black Hole being buried somewhere on it or under it already!

          20

  • #
    toad

    Those lucky enough to have travelled along the Silk Road in Xinjiang, Western China, will probably have seen the “World’s Tallest Thermometer” in the Turpan Depression, the third lowest point on Earth.
    The record temperatures here are+48 degrees C and – 52 degrees C.
    In January it’s about – 10 and in July +32, yet due to the 2500 year old irrigation system the area produces some of the World’s juiciest melons, along with grapes, peaches, nuts, wheat, cotton and silk.
    “Two Degrees and we’re all going to fry!” – don’t make me laugh.

    110

  • #
    Hugh

    “I expect by 2050 … people just don’t go outside,” said Professor Andy Pitman, director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science at UNSW

    Hilarious.

    So in 25 years people don’t go outside. Surely they won’t know what snow is?

    90

    • #
      Hugh

      That said, in -20C people tend to arrive punctually at the bus stop and find reasons to not go there at all.

      Whereas 25C at 21:00 causes a sudden burst of joy which makes you wonder if you are really in Finland and not in Rome. People go out, dine there, and have fun.

      Maybe. This year it hasn’t happened.

      90

      • #
        Another Ian

        Re your comment about people at bus stops.

        I was once at a conference in Calgary in February with those sort of minus temperatures and us visitors were amazed to see the number of “ladies of the night” on the down town street corners.

        Adaptation?

        10

        • #
          Rod Stuart

          The “oldest profession” adapts well to the cold it would seem.
          A nice brisk evening of minus 35 in Edmonton doesn’t seem to have an effect on the streetwalkers.
          Regardless of the low temperatures in Oymyaken, they say the coldest place in the world is the corner of Portage Avenue and Main Street in Winnipeg in January.
          Minus 35 with a 40 km/hr wind is mighty cool. Seems to have little effect on the “working girl”, though.

          20

  • #
    pat

    “I expect by 2050 … people just don’t go outside”

    or travel? seems the CAGW elitists don’t much like the plebs moving around the world, experiencing those varying temps!

    17 July: NYT: Elizabeth Becker: The Revolt Against Tourism
    COPENHAGEN – The question, says Henrik Thierlein, a spokesman for the city’s tourism office, is: “How do you take advantage of the growth in tourism and not be taken over by mass tourism?”
    Outraged by tourists’ boorish and disrespectful behavior, and responding to the complaints of their constituents, local officials around the world have begun to crack down on tourism, and the tourism industry, even in the face
    of opposition from their national governments, which want the tax revenue from tourists…
    In Asia, alarm has centered on Chinese tourists; there are more of them than from any other nation. China began loosening severe travel restrictions only about 25 years ago, and the rapid rise of the middle class has sent curious – but often naïve, rude or even destructive – visitors throughout
    Southeast Asia.
    In Thailand a Chinese tourist was recently caught on video ringing and kicking sacred bells at a Buddhist temple as if he was in a game arcade.
    There have been reports of Chinese tourists littering beaches and even defecating in public. One tourist even opened the door of an airplane, as it prepared for takeoff, reportedly to get fresh air…
    Tensions are bound to get worse.
    ***Notwithstanding worry about carbon emissions, more of the world’s peoples are crossing borders for leisure than ever before. Now tourism accounts for one in 11 jobs worldwide…
    The United Nations World Tourism Organization projects that by 2030, global tourism will reach 1.8 billion trips a year. ***It is now so big that it will inevitably be part of conversations about climate change, pollution and
    migration. Without serious government attention, many beloved places will be at risk of being trammeled and damaged – what those in the tourism industry call being loved to death.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/19/opinion/sunday/the-revolt-against-tourism.html?_r=0

    51

  • #
    pat

    btw for those who don’t link to the NYT/Elizabeth Becker anti-tourist article, she doesn’t reserve her distaste only for Chinese tourists.
    while admitting she, herself was there, she writes:

    - Of course, the Chinese aren’t the only culprits. In Cambodia, half a dozen foreigners, including three Frenchmen and two American sisters, were deported in February for posing nude in the temples at Angkor. ***I was in Cambodia when the scandal broke, leading a discussion near the temples about protecting cultural sites visited by tourists. -

    ah, the joys of travel should only be available to the likes of Becker!

    51

  • #
    el gordo

    Joe D’Aleo is pulling no punches, after this next El Nino its curtains.

    http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Screen_shot_2015-07-17_at_10.19.56_AM.png

    60

  • #
    pat

    20 July: AAP: Climate change refugee loses NZ bid
    Ioane Teitiota had for years argued his family’s health was at risk if they returned from New Zealand to low-lying Kiribati, which suffers from rising sea levels and water supplies that are contaminated by salt and sewage.
    The Supreme Court of New Zealand on Monday declined an appeal by Teitiota to overturn a decision to not grant him refugee status on those grounds.
    In its ruling, the court said it did not believe there was enough immediate threat to Teitiota to cover him under international refugee laws…
    However, it said its decision should not be taken as ruling out the possibility of people being granted refugee status due to environmental degradation or climate change in the future…
    https://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/28930185/climate-change-refugee-loses-nz-bid/

    30

  • #
    David Maddison

    I assume it is a troll that “dislikes” so many of the posts here?

    51

  • #
    mc

    “abject panic and nothing to see here, both at the same time”… Jo Nova.
    Funny you should say that, the contradictions abound. The phrase that’s been floating around in my mind lately is “the ability to chew gum and not chew gum at the same time”.

    50

    • #
      Another Ian

      MC

      How about a double panic at the same time?

      https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2015/07/20/flooding-drought-comes-to-california/

      And there is this comment


      p.g.sharrow says:
      20 July 2015 at 8:07 pm

      We are not suffering from a record drought here in California. We are suffering from a record level of mismanagement by government officials. Some due to record levels of ignorance and some to a record level of arrogance in favor of special interests. pg”

      90

    • #
      ROM

      [ former US President ] ” Jerry Ford is so dumb he can’t fart and chew gum at the same time.”

      [ Later morphed to ; "Jerry Ford is so dumb he can't walk and chew gum at the same time". ]

      Lyndon B. Johnson

      30

  • #
    pat

    20 July: AFR: from Financial Times: Pilita Clark: France raises expectations for December climate deal
    A groundbreaking UN global climate change deal is edging closer, according to a French government document, as countries scramble to avoid a repeat of the conference that ended in acrimony six years ago.
    Diplomats are making more progress than they have made public, although many important differences remain. These include costs, legality and timing of the deal due to be signed in Paris in December, the five-page paper seen by the Financial Times shows. That means that any final accord could still be too weak to slow global warming.
    But the paper refers repeatedly to “common understanding” and “shared recognition” on the basic shape of an agreement requiring almost virtually all countries to take voluntary but progressively tougher action from 2020 to stop global temperatures rising more than 2°C from pre-industrial times.
    This level of agreement is far from evident in the poorly worded negotiating text produced by weeks of talks this year, which Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general, has criticised for moving at “a snail’s pace”…
    The French document was prepared for a two-day informal Paris meeting of ministers representing more than 60 countries, including the EU, starting today aimed at helping to sharpen the UN negotiations…
    Laurence Tubiana, France’s chief climate envoy, told the FT the ministerial meeting would not pre-empt what might be in a final Paris agreement, but would offer more political guidance for negotiators struggling to deliver a very different type of climate accord.
    “This is a very new thing,” she said. “This is a process where countries progressively do more and more . . . This is a long and deep transformational process that will extend over the next 40 to 50 years and beyond.”
    http://www.afr.com/news/world/france-raises-expectations-for-december-climate-deal-20150720-gifzgu

    19 July: Economic Times India: PTI: Don’t introduce new agenda in Paris conference: Javadekar
    India today cautioned the developed nations against introduction of any new agenda at this “late hour” if they want to make the crucial climate change conference in Paris scheduled for later this year a “success”.
    Environment MinisterPrakash Javadekar said that the convention should not be “rewritten” and appealed to the nations to make the Paris conference an event for celebration of a universal yet differentiated new agreement, where every country takes action which it
    determines on its own ..
    He was reacting to suggestions from some countries that “Annexes” should not be reflected in the new agreement as Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) will themselves result in differentiation through self differentiation.
    He cautioned “the developed world that for the success of Paris and for giving a chance to the action under INDCs, no new agenda should be introduced at this late hour.”…
    http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/environment/global-warming/dont-introduce-new-agenda-in-paris-conference-javadekar/articleshow/48135741.cms

    81

  • #
    Harry Twinotter

    “Now, if the IPCC are right, we might heat up by another half a degree by 2100″

    Not really, the IPCC think an increase much more than that is likely. The expected climate sensitivity is around 3C for a doubling in the CO2 concentration.

    I am calling factual error on this one.

    533

    • #
      tom0mason

      Harry, you said –

      “Not really, the IPCC think an increase much more than that is likely. ”
      What IPPC figures about the fictional dangers of CO2?
      As usual no figures, no links, all just your unsubstantiated opinion. Or is this your only reference point?

      :)

      184

    • #
      ROM

      Harry Twinotter @ #26

      The expected climate sensitivity is around 3C for a doubling in the CO2 concentration.

      I am calling factual error on this one.

      You called Factual error on this one.

      Well you got yourself your own nice little factual error ;

      The trend line for global temperature increases have already dropped out of the bottom of all the climate models error bands bar one.

      In short the global temperature trend has plateaued which is contrary to the IPCC’s AR5 model predictions.

      The AR5 Summary for Policy Makers which is a political document whereas the AR5 WG1 science report is very coy about even providing a specific TCR or ECS.
      The SPM has this to say about the various CO2 scenarios which are listed in increasingly unattainable concentrations within the time period the models covered.

      OK for your enlightment HT ; , ECS is “Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity ” and TCR is “Transient Climate Response”

      Relative to the average from year 1850 to 1900, global surface temperature change by the end of the 21st century [ edit; 200 to 250 years ] is projected to likely exceed
      1.5°C for RCP4.5, RCP6.0 and RCP8.5 (high confidence).

      Warming is likely to exceed
      2°C for RCP6.0 and RCP8.5 (high confidence),

      more likely than not to exceed 2°C for RCP4.5 (high confidence), but unlikely to exceed 2°C for RCP2.6 (medium confidence).

      Warming is unlikely to exceed 4°C for RCP2.6, RCP4.5 and RCP6.0 (high confidence) and is about as likely as not to exceed 4°C for RCP8.5 (medium confidence). {12.4}

      Most of the CMIP5 and Earth System Model simulations were performed with prescribed CO2 concentrations reaching
      421 ppm (RCP2.6),
      538 ppm (RCP4.5),
      670 ppm (RCP6.0), and
      936 ppm (RCP 8.5) by the year 2100.

      Including also the prescribed concentrations of CH4 and N2O, the combined CO2-equivalent concentrations are 475
      ppm (RCP2.6), 630 ppm (RCP4.5), 800 ppm (RCP6.0), and 1313 ppm (RCP8.5). For RCP8.5, additional CMIP5 Earth
      System Model simulations are performed with prescribed CO2 emissions as provided by the integrated assessment
      models.
      [/]
      ————
      The CO2 will have to get a move on to get past 600 ppm maximum by 2100 as it has taken some 50 years or more to get from a supposed 280 ppm [ more realistically about 320 ppm with data from plant stomata and with the re-asessment of the 1800's measurements of atmospheric CO2 that were removed from the record by Guy Callender which thus reduced the claimed atmospheric CO2 in the mid 20th century down to 280 ppm ] to the 400 ppm which the CO2 concentration seems to have trouble passing.
      Maybe a cooling South Pacific Ocean is soaking all that CO2 up and creating even more trouble for the climate change cultists of this world.

      Meanwhile in the real world of climate research the projected but still undefined climate sensitivity which after 30 years of very expensive research the estimate climate sensitivity just keeps right on declining.

      Nic Lewis has a post on Climate Audit on his recent paper. Implications of recent multimodel attribution studies for climate sensitivity in which he says ;

      The revised best (median) estimate for ECS in Lewis (2014) using the objective Bayesian approach, after correcting data handling errors, was 2.2°C. It seems likely that estimate was biased high by the use of temperature data spanning just the 20th century, which started with two anomalously cool decades.

      The new study’s best estimate for ECS is almost identical to that of 1.64°C obtained in Lewis and Curry (2014). That study used a simple single-equation energy budget model to compare, between periods spanning 1859–2011, the rise in GMST with forcing and heat uptake estimates given in AR5.
      As it relied on the expert assessment of aerosol forcing given in AR5, which spans a very wide range, the ECS estimate upper uncertainty bound was higher, at 4.05°C, than in my new study.

      The ECS estimate in my new study is also very similar to that in Lewis (2013). That study compared the evolution of surface temperatures in four latitude zones with simulations spanning 1860– 2001 by the MIT 2D global climate model (GCM). Many simulations were performed with differing parameter settings and hence varying model values of equilibrium/effective climate sensitivity (ECS), ocean effective vertical diffusivity (Kv) and aerosol forcing – which can be tightly constrained when zonal rather than GMST data is used. The parameter combination that best fitted the observational data gave a median estimate for ECS of 1.64°C. With non-aerosol forcing etc. uncertainties adequately allowed for, the 5–95% uncertainty range was 1.0–3.0°C.

      ———–

      So we spend a day or so outdoors, a dozen or so hours or maybe a lot longer and then we step inside and suffer a fifteen degree increase in temperatures for the next ten or twelve hours.
      Thats providing of course we don’t fall over dead from the increased heat if we are to believe the likes of Harry Twinotter that a couple of degrees or so increase in temperature will be deadly .

      264

      • #
        ROM

        So we spend a day or so outdoors, a dozen or so hours or maybe a lot longer and then we step inside and suffer a fifteen degree increase in temperatures for the next ten or twelve hours.

        Written by someone currently freezing his proverbials off in our Victorian winter.
        Reverse order if you are tropical or in the middle of a decent summer.

        133

      • #
        Just-A-Guy

        ROM,

        Kudos for such a well researched response that uses IPCC, Inc., figures to put quiet the uninformed Twinotter.

        Special kudos for your use of the word ‘simulations’ as that is technically what they are. We should all adopt this more accurate descriptor.

        I had originally thought that this comment by Harry was O/T and should have been moved to the original Monckton of Brenchley thread where it belongs. even e-mailed Jo with that suggestion. After this response I’ve changed my mind. I was wrong. Leaving the O/T comment here, fresh for all to see your response is more of a benefit in that it once again shows the low level of Harry’s discourse exposing his ineptitude.

        Abe
        PS – Did I say Kudos for this comment? ;)

        174

      • #
        tom0mason

        Well said ROM, but it would have been fun to wait for the uninformed Twinotter return.

        Still a very good reply, and all your hard work sifting through the UN-IPCC’s tangled and often illogical sophistry, just to show how the UN-IPCC doesn’t get it. That is to say, there is a huge difference between the real world observations and their modeled unreality.

        124

        • #
          Just-A-Guy

          tom0mason,

          Not two hours have passed and you’ve got your wish. Heeeeere’s Harry!

          Thetorical question (or not):

          Can a troll also be a clown?

          Abe

          104

          • #
            tom0mason

            Funny!

            But I’ve always assume him to be some spotty teenager*,
            And from your wiki reference

            In Chinese, trolling is referred to as bái mù (Chinese: 白目; literally: “white eye”), which can be straightforwardly explained as “eyes without pupils”, in the sense that whilst the pupil of the eye is used for vision, the white section of the eye cannot see, and trolling involves blindly talking nonsense over the internet, having total disregard to sensitivities or being oblivious to the situation at hand, akin to having eyes without pupils.

            So apt.

            *…locked in a thirty-five year old body, while heading to an early mid-life crisis over still having to live with his mother.

            114

    • #
      Bob Fernley-Jones

      Hairy,
      You do not appear to have adequately read the literature.

      135

      • #
        Harry Twinotter

        Bob Fernley-Jones.

        An ad hominem. Is that the best you can do? Probably.
        [That comment itself, is an ad hominem. Stick to the subject matter of the post - Fly]

        325

        • #
          Harry Twinotter

          Moderator.

          “[That comment itself, is an ad hominem. Stick to the subject matter of the post - Fly]”

          I hope you are also giving that advice to the people posting the original ad hominems.

          414

      • #
        Just-A-Guy

        Harry ‘The Projector’ Twinotter,

        You wrote:

        An ad hominem.

        No. It’s not. He’s just pointing out an obvious fact. Obvious to all. Had you read the report, and then used your head, you’d realize how wrong your conclusions are. Now, please review ROM’s response to your original comment and reply directly to the points he made.

        Your repeated red-herring responses will not distract the people here from the obvious truth. You have nothing to offer and bring nothing to the table in the form of rational discourse. Nothing at all.

        Abe

        244

    • #
      Harry Twinotter

      I am surprised that so many do not appear to have read the IPCC AR5 report. From the report:

      “Estimates of the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) based on
      observed climate change, climate models and feedback analysis, as
      well as paleoclimate evidence indicate that ECS is positive, likely in
      the range 1.5°C to 4.5°C with high confidence, extremely unlikely less
      than 1°C (high confidence) and very unlikely greater than 6°C (medium
      confidence). Earth system sensitivity over millennia time scales including
      long-term feedbacks not typically included in models could be significantly
      higher than ECS (see TFE.6 for further details). {5.3.1, 10.8;
      Box 12.2}”

      427

      • #
        Just-A-Guy

        Harry ‘Cherry-pick’ Twinotter the Magnificent Obfuscator,

        You must be jocking with this, right?

        ROM just quoted the IPCC, Inc. AR5 and basically elaborated on the same quote you now present. The difference being he, ROM, was diligent enough to expand on that summary thereby showing he has an understanding of the subject matter, whereas you just copied and pasted. No explanation. No elaboration. No discussion as to why your quote is relevant, pertinent, or otherwise enlightening to the conversation at hand.

        LOL! :)

        So. Rather than reply to ROM, you chose to sumarize the same info he quoted and make it look as though . . .

        And to top it all off, you’ve accused others of cutting and pasting!

        You’re a truly sorry excuse for a warmist.

        Abe

        254

        • #
          Just-A-Guy

          Jocking should read joking. My bad.

          Abe

          123

          • #
            Yonniestone

            JAG be careful with your Jocking, Hairy Twinbeaver might get the wrong idea. ;)

            134

          • #
            Carbon500

            ‘My bad’?
            Just-A-Guy, please use proper English! ‘My bad’ is truly awful – I imagine it has its origins in America.
            Why not say ‘Sorry, my mistake’ or something similar?

            41

            • #
              Rereke Whakaaro

              Post Normal Science: He cannot admit to making a mistake – mistakes are not allowed in post normal science, they are just homogenised with correct actions, to make them go away.

              83

            • #
              Just-A-Guy

              Carbon500,

              Because I grew up on the streets in Brooklyn from the age of five, yo! You can take the kid outta Brooklyn but you can’t take Brooklyn outta the kid, hear me?

              And on a more serious note, the colloquialisms of the different regular commenters on this blog make for a very interesting experience. It also shows the diversity of the people who frequent here. A big plus for this site, IMHO. ;)

              Abe

              40

              • #
                Carbon500

                Just-A-Guy,
                I agree entirely re. the colloquialisms on this site.
                I’ve only seen ‘my bad’ in the last few weeks, so I’ve learnt something new about its origins – thank you!
                I think the tendency to simplify language carries a huge risk of losing information. As an example, ‘actors’ these days refers to males and females. I don’t see ‘actress’ in the newspapers these days. The same goes for murderers and murderesses.
                I think I’d better stop here!

                10

      • #
        tom0mason

        Harry,
        I don’t read much fiction, but just for you dear I might change! :mrgreen:

        104

        • #
          tom0mason

          Harry,

          The IPCC is only permitted to say AGW is a significant problem because they are tasked to accept that by UN mandate. Therefore for them there is a “risk of human-induced climate change” which requires “options for adaptation and mitigation” that can be selected as political polices and the IPCC is tasked to provide those “options”. This is regardless of anything that happens in reality; reality is not within their remit only ‘AGW/climate change’ is.

          The models and the scare stories are the tools by which the IPCC attempts to legitimize this alarmist call. Thankfully for them they have ensured that the true workings and methods of the computer models remain hidden.
          The emails from the ‘climategate’ scandal highlighted some of their devious methods. Since the email leaks have shown that the surface temperature data upon which the IPCC relies is based on distorted raw data and tainted algorithms. The emails also show how reluctant they are to share data and methods with others in the science community.
          Also apparent was that scientists/researchers and functionaries implicated in Climategate have misused peer review process while pressuring journal editors to prevent publication of research that questions the basics of CAGW.
          These paid advocates have taken control of the IPCC process and they have smeared opponents personally, rather than critiquing the research. The concern at the top about “climatechange” is not genuine, just as there are hidden motives behind the global warming hysteria.

          Maybe it is a good place to requote the UN people that pushed for the UN-IPCC to be formed (for full references, see Jaworowski 1999). –

          • Maurice Strong, senior advisor to Kofi Annan, UN Secretary-General,and chaired the gigantic (40,000 participants) “UN Conference on Environment and Development” in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Strong, who as responsible for putting together the Kyoto Protocol with thousands of bureaucrats, diplomats, and politicians, stated:
          “We may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse.”
          Maurice Strong elaborated on the idea of sustainable development, which, he said, can be implemented by deliberate “quest of poverty … reduced resource consumption … and set levels of mortality control.”

          • Timothy Wirth, U.S. Undersecretary of State for Global Issues, seconded Strong’s statement:
          “We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”

          • Richard Benedick, a deputy assistant secretary of state who headed policy divisions of the U.S. State Department, stated:
          “A global warming treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the [enhanced] greenhouse effect.”

          The take home message is the UN-IPPC was and is about politics and money, and NOT about science.

          So what has this to do about your quote?
          The IPCC is about the politics of wealth redistibution it is not about science. Weather and climate is a distraction with CO2 levels as the lie at it’s heart. CO2 does not control the planets temperature — PERIOD!

          I hope that in the not–too–distant future when all the hype will have died down, future generations will look back on the current madness and wonder what it was all about. Why did we impoverish these future generations? They will be left with little but the sad historic reminders with movies like An Inconvenient Truth , and documentaries like The Great Global Warming Swindle to show them what mass hysteria can do when driven hard by the current UN elitists.

          243

          • #
            Harry Twinotter

            tomomason

            “The IPCC is only permitted to say AGW is a significant problem because they are tasked to accept that by UN mandate”

            Ummm, no, that is not true. Factual error.

            318

            • #
              Rereke Whakaaro

              What then, was the role of the UNFCCC, if not to set the mandate for the IPCC.

              103

            • #
              tom0mason

              Harry you do not know.
              You are ignorant of the facts!
              What is the mandate of the UN-IPCC as ordered by the UN after the settlement of the Kyoto Protocol?

              Find it, read it, and may be (for you) understand it.

              62

              • #
                tom0mason

                Try the phrase –
                “stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic [i.e., human-induced] interference with the climate system”

                in your search engine of choice.

                72

            • #
              Harry Twinotter

              “the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.”

              Sounds fine to me. You need to understand something before you can work out the risk. If the IPCC had found no risk, they probably would have called it a day.

              216

              • #
                tom0mason

                Harry wrong again.

                Now what is the IPCC for, obviously you would want to be seen to be arguing from ignorance. Or would you?

                I’ve spoon fed you a starter ‘line’ because I understand (from the evidence of your postings) you have difficulty finding references,reading, and understanding them.

                132

            • #
              Harry Twinotter

              Actually the full one reads better. Never trust a partial quote.

              “ROLE

              2. The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the
              scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of
              risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.
              IPCC reports should be neutral with respect to policy, although they may need to deal objectively with
              scientific, technical and socio-economic factors relevant to the application of particular policies.

              3. Review is an essential part of the IPCC process. Since the IPCC is an intergovernmental body,
              review of IPCC documents should involve both peer review by experts and review by governments.

              114

              • #
                tom0mason

                Harry,
                That is from the IPCC principles and not what I asked. Stop cherry-picking!

                What and why did the UN through the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change set up the IPCC what is the rational for it to exist.

                142

              • #
                Harry Twinotter

                tomomason.

                Why would I bother to answer an off-topic question?

                You would not be trying to divert from climate sensitivity would you?

                Like I said to just-a-gag, you have way too much spare time on your hands.

                115

              • #
                tom0mason

                Harry, is that anyother red herring of your own projection? Certainly looks like it.

                121

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                Tomo,

                We have both mentioned the UNFCCC, and all Harry hears is the whooshing sound of it passing over his head.

                In my view, he doesn’t know very much about the history of the subject at all. I would not put it past some of the folks on the gravy train, to set poor Harry up to be the fall guy, for a bit of fun, at his, and Jo’s expense. I know some academics who would think that, a huge joke.

                In my imagination, whoever has set him up, has armed him with a copy of Blogging for Dummies, and a list of Ad Hominem statements, so he can address questions he cannot answer, by claiming that the questioner is breaking the rules.

                11

      • #
        tom0mason

        Harry Twinotter,

        Some perpective about confidence levels quoted by the UN-IPCC.

        The first “Summary for Policymakers” statement on the man-made increase of CO2, is a cornerstone of the IPCC report, and of the global warming edifice.
        This statement is a semantic and political manipulation and a half-truth. It is true that CO2 is “the most important anthropogenic [trace] greenhouse gas,” but what is unsaid is a much more important greenhouse factor is the water naturally present in the atmosphere, which contributes some 95% to the total greenhouse effect.
        This basic facts about water and water vapor are totally omitted from the “Summary for Policymakers.” Also not mentioned is the fact that 97% of the total annual emission of CO2 into the atmosphere comes from natural emissions of the land and sea; all human beings add a mere 3%. That is 3% of the 400 parts per million of CO2 currently in the atmosphere. This man-made 3% of CO2 emissions is could only be responsible for a tiny fraction of the total greenhouse effect, probably close to 0.12%. But that is only true if the UN-IPCC’s theory of CO2 warming has any merit.

        Propositions of changing, or rather destroying, the human requirement for energy system global because of this tiny human contribution, in face of the large short-term and long-term natural fluctuations of atmospheric CO2, are utterly irresponsible, if not criminal.

        153

        • #
          tom0mason

          No matter how many times I re-read the mistakes still occur … proofreader please!

          “This man-made 3% of CO2 emissions is could only be responsible for a tiny fraction of the total greenhouse effect, probably close to 0.12%.”

          Should be –
          This man-made 3% of CO2 emissions could only be responsible for a tiny fraction of the total greenhouse effect, probably close to 0.12%.

          Last para should be –

          Propositions for changing, or rather destroying, the basic human requirement for energy systems just because of this tiny human contribution, in face of the large short-term and long-term natural fluctuations of atmospheric CO2, are utterly irresponsible, if not criminal.

          163

          • #
            ROM

            Harry Twinotter @ # 26.4.2.1.1 is scoring well today with his very own and second “Factual error” in a row;

            “The IPCC is only permitted to say AGW is a significant problem because they are tasked to accept that by UN mandate”

            Ummm, no, that is not true. Factual error.

            ___________________

            PRINCIPLES GOVERNING IPCC WORK

            Approved at the Fourteenth Session (Vienna, 1-3 October 1998) on 1 October 1998, amended at the Twenty-First Session (Vienna, 3 and 6-7 November 2003), the Twenty-Fifth Session (Mauritius, 26-28 April 2006), the Thirty-Fifth Session (Geneva, 6-9 June 2012) and the
            Thirty-Seventh Session (Batumi, 14-18 October 2013)
            _________________________________________________________________________________

            INTRODUCTION

            1. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (hereinafter referred to as the IPCC or, synonymously, the Panel) shall concentrate its activities on the tasks allotted to it by the relevant WMO Executive Council and UNEP Governing Council resolutions and decisions as well as on actions in support of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change process.

            [ edit; The IPCC has received its instructions on what research angle it is to pursue from the UNFCCC as above ]

            ROLE

            2. The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.
            IPCC reports should be neutral with respect to policy, although they may need to deal objectively with scientific, technical and socio-economic factors relevant to the application of particular policies.

            3. Review is an essential part of the IPCC process. Since the IPCC is an intergovernmental body,
            review of IPCC documents should involve both peer review by experts and review by governments.[ edit ;ie political interference in the science outcomes and conclusions is both catered for and condoned ]

            ——————-
            The IPCC’s BOSS!

            UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE

            The Parties to this Convention,

            Acknowledging that change in the Earth’s climate and its adverse effects are a common concern of humankind, Concerned that human activities have been substantially increasing the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, that these increases enhance the natural greenhouse effect, and that this will result on average in an additional warming of the Earth’s surface and atmosphere and may adversely affect natural ecosystems and humankind,

            Noting that the largest share of historical and current global emissions of greenhouse gases has originated in developed countries, that per capita emissions in developing countries are still relatively low and that the share of global emissions originating in developing countries will grow
            to meet their social and development needs,
            [ more ]
            &

            Article one

            Definitions;

            2. “Climate change” means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.

            [ cont ]

            —————–

            And there you have it; The UNFCCC has laid down the rules by which the IPCC shall operate;

            And those UNFCC rules are quite specific in saying ”

            2. “Climate change” means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere”

            ———————-
            [ HT @ # 26.4.2.1.1
            “The IPCC is only permitted to say AGW is a significant problem because they are tasked to accept that by UN mandate”

            Ummm, no, that is not true. Factual error.]

            Your very own “Factual error 2″ and the second in a row “, Harry Twinotter!

            153

  • #
    richard

    Birds , bees, flowers and trees and half the world’s population are now living and thriving in Urban areas up to 16 degrees hotter than the surrounding countryside.

    80

  • #
    Ruairi

    Alarmists continue to tout,
    Confusion,panic and doubt,
    That to warm two degrees,
    Would bring life to its knees,
    Reveals what their cause is about.

    194

  • #
    pat

    ??? an El Nino that’s barely able to crawl, but Andie knows it is taking hold! experts? the UN:

    20 July: ABC: Andie Noonan: Pacific nations must prepare for more natural disasters as El Nino takes hold, experts warn
    The south-west Pacific has experienced its fair share of natural disasters in the past two years and experts warn more may be on the way.
    The region has always been at the mercy of wild weather, but it is now also in the grip of an El Nino cycle…
    (Sune Gudnitz, The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs OCHA): “The Pacific is now more or less in a constant state of cyclone season, at least as long as we have El Nino going on, and we can’t really take a break.”…
    (Neville Koop, managing director of Fiji’s Nadraki weather service in Fiji): “What we’ve observed in the past five, 10 years, is an increase in the number of and severity of extreme events.
    “Now, can we unequivocally associate that with climate change? Probably not at this stage, insofar as there needs to be a lot more analysis of data and so forth, but it’s certainly consistent with what we thought was going to happen.”
    Mr Koop said the El Nino system in the Pacific was only just starting and forecasts show the region may experience a cycle as strong as that seen in 1997-98 which caused widespread drought.
    “We’re really talking about an event here that’s barely able to crawl, let alone stand up and walk, so the worst of this is yet to come,” he said…
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-20/pacific-nations-headed-for-more-natual-disasters/6634008

    41

  • #
    Popeye26

    Well – they’d better hurry up and finish there whinging about CO2, coal and oil. (That includes the “peak” oil people as well).

    Metal battery VERY close to commercial production – fill up your electric car with water and off you go. Refill with water to keep going further.

    Phinergy has already signed deals with Alcoa Canada & I believe (or very close to signing) with Tesla – worlds largest manufacturer of electric vehicles.

    Recycle your aluminium batteries every few months (every byproduct reusable and recyclable – NO CO2 – NO pollution of any other kind). BYE BYE OPEC!!

    Thank you beautiful, innovative Israel.

    Cheers,

    31

    • #
      Popeye26

      I should have added:

      Innovation like the metal battery (or something similar) that has come along IS THE ONLY WAY OUT for the true believers.

      That way, they can/will always maintain that CO2 was the big BADDIE and now that there is something that produces power WITHOUT CO2 or other pollution – CO2 problem solved.

      Mad suckers they have ALWAYS been but something like this may save their veritable thin hides.

      Cheers,

      40

    • #
      David Maddison

      This is excellent battery technology but I gather the aluminium electrodes are gradually oxidised and have to be eventually recycled. Reducing aluminium oxides to metal is enormously energy intensive to the extent that aluminium is referred to as “congealed electricity”. I would like to know the net energy balance and cost with this battery technology if you include the cost of recycling the aluminium electrodes.

      40

      • #
        mobihci

        extracting aluminium is a very power hungry process -

        http://wordpress.mrreid.org/2011/07/15/electricity-consumption-in-the-production-of-aluminium/

        “According to Alcoa, the world’s largest producer of aluminium, the best smelters use about 13 kilowatt hours (46.8 megajoules) of electrical energy to produce one kilogram of aluminium; the worldwide average is closer to 15 kWh/kg (54 MJ/kg).

        Worldwide production of aluminium in 2010 was 41.4 million tonnes. Using the figures above this means that 621 billion kilowatt hours of electrical energy were used in the production of aluminium. To put that in perspective, the total world production of electrical energy was 20261 billion kilowatt hours, meaning that more than 3% of the world’s entire electrical supply went to extraction of aluminium.”

        so, yeah, sure it is a way of converting coal to transportable power, but I am sure there are the usual battery issues that tend to hinder mass/commercial production of them such as failing when too cold or hot, long charge times, short range (under normal conditions for cars) etc.

        40

        • #
          tom0mason

          mobihci

          Thankfully Aluminum is processed from the bauxite, and from that process Gallium is a by-product, and is extracted at about 100ppm, or 100 grammes per tonne of bauxite processed. Processing for Gallium is yet again more energy intensive as it is a chemical and electrolysis process. Just think without Aluminum and Zinc ore processing we would not have Gallium cheap enough to make all the exotic devices we require. The raw material which powers nearly all of our modern electronic products — computers, mobile phones, LEDs, RF transistors, some medical devices, even the latest dental fillings have Gallium in them, and atom bombs.
          Just under 500 tonnes of gallium a year is required by industry.
          From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallium and other sources.

          I always chuckle when people who are over-educated enough not to understand the real world come out with reports of zero merit, like this —


          The findings of the research commissioned by the Profession, Resource constraints: sharing a finite world. Implications of limits to growth, covers the consequences of Limits to Growth in the broadest context, its findings are relevant to the work of actuaries in every technical discipline.

          This evidence document sets out the findings of the research team in greater detail.

          The research team comprised: Dr Aled Jones, Irma Allen, Nick Silver, Catherine Cameron, Candice Howarth & Ben Caldecott.

          See here for why they are just very very wrong.

          20

        • #
          Popeye26

          mobihci

          Had you listened to the video more closely you would have heard that Phinergy is also looking at zinc as a suitable metal for these batteries as well.

          As Tomomason infers, I’m sure there are other benefits and by-products that may be useful in the whole process.

          I’m also very glad that this company has patented their process – they will NEVER give it up to any oil companies or in particular OPEC – figure it out.

          Cheers,

          30

  • #
    David Maddison

    Off topic: Media Watch on “their” ABC has just done a major segment mocking predictions of global cooling. What a disgrace. Of course, I am relieved that Dr Karl was shown saying it wouldn’t happen. I feel so much better now.

    110

  • #
    PeterPetrum

    I have just read that article in the SMH. I cannot believe that an editor would let that unsupported rubbish through. It takes a really twisted imagination, and a total lack of scientific understanding to create such a fairy story. I will finish my night-time malt and go to bed, hopefully not to dream of nightmare-ish heat and rising sea levels!

    50

  • #
    michael hart

    I think Professor Andy Pitman needs to get out more.

    60

    • #
      Bob Fernley-Jones

      Michael,

      Erh yes but I suspect his attitude could be based on how to obtain future funding so that he can serve us peasants.

      40

    • #
      Another Ian

      Michael

      Another example of why I think we need a new word

      “Empixellated”

      To describe those who spend most of their time looking at computer screens and very little using the real world for a reference

      50

  • #
    David Maddison

    OFF TOPIC. Their ABC’s Q&A tonight – not yet available online. Alan Jones mentioned that coal electricity was something like $79 per kWhr (obviously the unit is wrong, I think he meant MWhr and wind electricity was something like $1,509. Check the show when it comes online if you aren’t watching right now.

    30

  • #
    Dave in the states

    It is a good idea to get as many historical temps recorded on some media independent of Gov agencies. In a few years they may be homogenized into meaninglessness. The range of natural variation may be narrowed to the point that just about every weather event is “unprecedented”.

    50

  • #
    Leo Morgan

    Is there a standard formula for increasing temperature i.e., go two degrees of latitude toward the equator to see what a climate 2 degrees warmer will be like?
    Only with the numbers right?
    Obviously, it varies by how far you might be inland, etc.
    But the general principle.

    10

    • #
      tom0mason

      I think I see what you want but be aware on this real planet such simple mathematical devices and formula do not exist. We have a flattened spheroid planet, mostly covered in water and topographically irregular rock, spinning whilst tilted over at about 23° from the upright, and orbiting the sun in an elliptical manner, whilst its fluids of sea and air are dragged around in an approximately 30day cycle by the influence of the over-large moon circling the planet.

      In a modeled world simple mathematical methods for such radically reduced complexity abound.

      I believe your –
      “go two degrees of latitude toward the equator to see what a climate 2 degrees warmer will be like? Only with the numbers right?”
      relates to insolation and Wiki is not too bad here (though it does mix real and modeled complexity badly). If I’m wrong then there are plenty of links within that page to try.

      30

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        A very experienced Modeller once said to me, “Anybody who thinks you can model events in nature, doesn’t understand modeling, or nature.”

        10

  • #
    Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7

    Good post. Another way to put in perspective the projected 0.5°C global temperature rise is to examine exactly how many formerly inhabited places have been abandoned in the past 100 years due to the estimated 0.9°C rise.

    I’m sure there are more, but I am aware of just a few. For example St. Kilda in the very outer Hebrides of Scotland was abandoned 1932; the few remaining residents were evacuated to the Scottish mainland.

    Other abandoned residence sites were only inhabited for a specific purpose and never supported a permnent population. For example South Georgia island’s various former whaling stations were abandoned between 1916 and 1964 after the whaling industry collapsed. A whole bunch of places were temporarily occupied during WWII and have since been abandoned. The mining industry is full of boom-and-bust cycles that cause new settlements to spring up very quickly and then often die out just as fast.

    Changing climate had nothing to do with any of these. Life on St. Kilda was always exceedingly hard; but in the 19th century the people there became aware there were other options and began leaving. I think fewer than 100 people remained by the final evacuation.

    Actually, I can think of one place which might be classified as abandoned as a result of climate change: Salton Sea. That sprang into being in 1905 as a result of an engineering mistake and it held promise for a while as a new resort environment, but the accidental flood which created the inland sea constituted “abnormal” climate and when “normal” climate conditions were restored the Salton Sea could not be maintained and has steadily shrunk.

    40

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘how many formerly inhabited places have been abandoned’

      These days humans can live just about anywhere and likely stay if economically viable, back in the day before central heating it was a different story.

      ‘It is known from direct reports of the time that western and north-western Siberia enjoyed exceptional warmth in the 1690s, the very same decade that marked the extreme for cold in western Europe. It also seems likely from the reports of lake levels and the level of the Caspian Sea that some of the arid regions of Asia were better watered by the same climate phase.’

      Hubert Lamb goes on to say the population decline was on a ‘nearly global scale’.

      ‘The population declines in the northern countries, particularly Iceland and Scotland, can be seen to have been due to the effects of cold climate (cold summers above all) and in southern Europe to crops ruined by rainy cool summers.’

      Closer to the equator it was drought caused by global cooling which slowed population growth and I draw your attention to the failure of the Indian monsoon.

      50

      • #
        tom0mason

        el gordo,

        This link gives a very interesting insight into climate changes, civilization changes, and population growth.

        20

  • #
    ren

    Long-term records of sunspot number and concentrations of cosmogenic radionuclides (10Be and 14C) on the
    Earth reveal the variation of the Sunʼs magnetic activity over hundreds and thousands of years. We identify several
    clear periods in sunspot, 10Be, and 14C data as 1000, 500, 350, 200, and 100 years. We found that the periods of
    the first five spherical harmonics of the slow magnetic Rossby mode in the presence of a steady toroidal magnetic
    field of 1200–1300 G in the lower tachocline are in perfect agreement with the timescales of observed variations.
    The steady toroidal magnetic field can be generated in the lower tachocline either due to the steady dynamo
    magnetic field for low magnetic diffusivity or due to the action of the latitudinal differential rotation on the weak
    poloidal primordial magnetic field, which penetrates from the radiative interior. The slow magnetic Rossby waves
    lead to variations of the steady toroidal magnetic field in the lower tachocline, which modulate the dynamo
    magnetic field and consequently the solar cycle strength. This result constitutes a key point for long-term prediction
    of the cycle strength. According to our model, the next deep minimum in solar activity is expected during the first
    half of this century.
    http://cc.oulu.fi/~usoskin/personal/2041-8205_805_2_L14.pdf

    40

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    The tall columns of text with gray background and one word lines ought to go outside and stand under a high sun.

    40

  • #
    A C

    Someone has probably already have said it but Im short for time -

    How many Europeans spend their money travelling to hotter places for their holidays? Southern Spain? The Bahamas? Are these a death cultists or a different type of “Warmist”
    Seems half the population of Aus is in Bali at the moment – not overly concerned with a two degree rise in temp.

    50

    • #
      el gordo

      I reported earlier that some friends came back from Bali after a long sojourn and said “it was too cold to swim, its because of global warming.”

      30

      • #
        ROM

        El gordo @ # 40.1

        A consequence of the Positive IOD [ Indian Ocean Dipole ] in full flight.

        Bad news for the farming community around here in eastern SA and western Vic as we rely on the moisture infeeds and cloud bands from the NW that are usually, we hope, generated from elevated SST’s around and south of Java for our critical to crop growth winter and spring rainfall.

        The Pos-IOD moves the great swing of westerly flowing equatorial tropical moisture bands from around Java out into the mid Indian Ocean from where when it peels of the equatorial flows, the moisture and cloud bands swing and turn south east and from the central indian ocean location go south of the Australian continent.
        Or as the current case, the mid Indian Ocean origin moisture bands during a low intensity Pos-IOD cross the WA coast well south of the usual Kimberley region coastal crossing point for the winter / spring IO moisture and cloud bands and and drop most of their precipitable water a long way west and NW of western Vic, over mid WA and into the desert areas of central Australia.

        That pos-IOD generated cold water off southern Indonesia at present and the consequent absence of vigorous evaporation in that region is the reason we have yet to see any decent falls of rain of some couple of tens of millimetres around here this winter so far

        The current WV map illustrates this above very well;

        http://tropic.ssec.wisc.edu/real-time/imagemain.php?&basin=austwest&prod=wv&sat=gms

        Two thousand kilometres further east and south of Java forthe origins of that southward orientated cloud band / water vapour flow and we would be laughing with copious winter rainfall here in west Vic instead of the trickles we are getting which are not enough to wet up subsoils which carry the crops through the spring warm months to the ripened stage.

        50

        • #
          el gordo

          Hot off the BoM press.

          ‘The Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD) is currently neutral. A positive IOD event remains possible, with three of the five international models suggesting a positive IOD is likely during late winter to spring. A positive IOD is typically associated with reduced winter and spring rainfall over parts of southern and central Australia.’

          40

  • #
    ianl8888

    The discussions and comments above concerning Siberia are a pleasure to see for their accuracy – only those who’ve been there could know the detail

    Two additional comments (I think TdeF’s earlier comments are apposite):

    1) yes indeed, the Siberian ladies are very stylish in their furs (bluntly, this is noticed by every man who has been there). I am of the view that we are observing here the current outcome of natural selection, in that life in Siberia is genuinely hard and only the most suited are chosen, ie. child-bearing. Lest people characterise this as “sexist”, I would add that the actual sexism is reflected in the older women, who have borne the struggle to raise children and keep a family alive while the men fight and drink (an exaggeration, but not much of a one)

    2) and yes, hot water is the key to survival in winter. All the buildings are fitted with hot water pipes as heaters in most of the rooms – in fact, all the towns are built on this principle. So where does the hot water supply come from ? Mostly, the towns are built near enough to a lignite (brown coal, peat) deposit which is mined as the energy input to industrial boilers which heat the water and run steam turbines for power. It is not unknown for this system to stop for any of a number of reasons, and if prolonged such stoppages are lethal. Of interest is the historical fact that the Soviets attempted to populate Siberia by force-designating graduating geologists into Siberian exploration for these peat deposits (and valuable deposits of any kind); whenever a deposit of sufficient size was found, the Soviets built a small town there (many of which failed in the medium term)

    Adding to this, the then KGB seized the exploration data (drillhole logs, lab analyses, geological reports etc) and physically split them into their offices from Moscow to Vladivostok. The idea was that no-one apart from the State should have access to all the information. Since most of these offices are now gone and all of those people are now dead, much exploration data is completely lost … not perhaps the best of recording systems

    50

    • #

      ianl8888 mentions this:

      2) and yes, hot water is the key to survival in winter. All the buildings are fitted with hot water pipes as heaters in most of the rooms – in fact, all the towns are built on this principle. So where does the hot water supply come from?

      That’s where the old tech CHP (Combined Heat and Power) was used to best effect, with all those hot water heaters, and how often do you recall seeing someone hitting those old heaters in old movies and TV Series.

      The coal was burned to boil water to steam, and the superheated steam was then utilised to drive the turbine which then drove the generator. The steam, (instead of being sent to the pond under the cooling tower, as is now most often the case) was then further used to be sent to these heaters in all those old high rise buildings.

      Most famously remembered is an image of James Dean, where he is walking down a wintry Manhattan street and you can see the steam rising from the pavements around him.

      The same for that famous image of Marilyn Monroe and that billowing white dress. She’s standing over a sidewalk grate where the warm steam is being vented, only this image was taken in Summer.

      Manhattan used CHP as early as the 1880′s and in New York still utileses CHP to generate more than 6000MW of power for the city from around 400 sites, and the steam is still used for heating purposes.

      It’s fallen out of favour, but is making a comeback with Cogeneration and Trigeneration which uses the steam in heat transfer applications, not just for heating, but for cooling applications as well, driving aircon units.

      Tony.

      100

  • #
    pat

    didn’t watch ABC Media Watch, but read some accounts of it. add Paul Barry to the never-ending list of ABC staff considered capable of analysing the climate data!!!

    didn’t hear this either, but it gets more prominence on Breakfast than the China live cattle deal:

    21 July: ABC Breakfast: Federal Government reviews tax deductible donation status of environmental groups
    The Federal Government is inquiring into the tax deductibility of donations to environmental groups, with a committee today holding hearings in Hobart…
    Green groups say the Government is trying to silence them, but the Government says all tax deductible charities should be subject to high requirements of transparency.
    Giving evidence today will be former Greens leader Bob Brown, who now runs his own environmental charity.
    Mr Brown joins Fran Kelly on RN Breakfast.
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/federal-government-reviews-tax-deductibility-of-donations/6635522

    20

  • #
    pat

    21 July: ABC: Inquiry quizzes former Greens leader Bob Brown over eponymous foundation’s tax-free status
    Mr Brown, who is head of the Bob Brown Foundation which campaigns for environmental conservation, today fronted the federal Standing Committee on the Environment at hearings in Hobart…
    Mr Brown had initially refused to appear before the committee and opened his appearance by claiming the inquiry was a poorly disguised attack on conservationists.
    “The inquiry is a Liberal Party vendetta against environment groups,” he said.
    Committee chairman, Liberal MP Alex Hawke, denied the accusation and wanted to know what “on the ground work” the Bob Brown Foundation carried out, asking whether it did work comparable to land care groups.
    Mr Brown said his foundation did much more than advocacy including travel and research, and cited a front page newspaper story to defend the success of his lobbying work.
    He also denied his organisation was closely involved in bankrolling political campaigns, but told the committee “everything is politics”…
    He said the corporate sector received government subsidies and tax breaks that other organisations were not entitled to…
    When asked whether his organisation participated in illegal activities Mr Brown said he had “enormous respect” for the law.
    Environment Tasmania’s Andrew Perry was the inquiry’s second witness.
    Victorian Nationals MP wanted to know how Environment Tasmania justified spending two thirds of its income from donors on administration and wages.
    Mr Perry said wages were essential to his group’s work.
    The inquiry is continuing.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-21/bob-brown-fronts-inquiry-on-tax-free-status-environmental-groups/6635802

    20

  • #
    pat

    LinkedIn: Andrew Perry: CAMPAIGNER & ADVISER
    Current: Environment Tasmania Inc
    Previous: Department of Premier and Cabinet (Tas),
    Sea Shepherd Conservation Society,
    University of Tasmania.
    Summary: “Act as if what you do makes a difference. It does” (William James).
    What I do involves, campaigning, politics, strategy, public relations, communications, sociotechnical systems, action research, policy analysis, and riding sideways. I’m an ISTP (Myers-Briggs) and Flexible Individualist (CDSM Values Modes)…
    Leader of the Tasmanian Greens and Australia’s first Greens Minister…
    https://au.linkedin.com/in/cybersomatic

    20

  • #
    Snickersnee

    Sydney’s average maximum for July is a cool 16.3

    Brisbane’s average maximum for July is more civilised 21.9

    That is a whopping 4.6 degrees of danger! I don’t know how Queenslanders can stand to spend so much time outside.

    60

  • #
    pat

    hottest year ever:

    20 July: The Local Denmark: Denmark’s weather ‘won’t get much better’
    Monday’s chilly and grey conditions may set the tone for the remainder of July, as meteorology institute DMI says that summer warmth is nowhere in sight.
    In Denmark, 2015 certainly feels like the year that summer forgot…
    So what does one do if this weather doesn’t suit their fancy? (meteorologist Steen) Rasmussen had some clear, if not entirely practical, advice.
    “Central Europe and the Mediterranean Sea area are right now experiencing high temperatures above 30 degrees. So if that is what you want, you should go to France or somewhere around there,” he told BT…
    http://www.thelocal.dk/20150720/denmarks-weather-wont-get-much-better

    1 July: The Post, Denmark: Danish summer the coldest for 24 years so far
    July is finally here with some sun, but this past June was the coldest since 1991
    If you thought June was particularly cold, grey and dismal this year, you are not mistaken – not since 1991 have we experienced a June as cold as this one.
    With an average temperature of only 12.3 degrees, Denmark was a whole 2 degrees below normal for the first summer month of the year, according to DMI…
    DMI only recorded one day that could qualify as ‘summer weather’, and that occurred in Abed in Lolland on June 13, where temperatures reached 26 degrees…
    http://cphpost.dk/news/danish-summer-more-like-the-coldest-for-24-years-so-far.html

    20

  • #
    pat

    hottest year ever!

    great pics:

    Dr. Eddy Graham’s Hebridean Weather Blog:
    20 July: More funnel clouds spotted over Lewis
    Further funnel clouds were spotted over the island on 12th July during yet another miserable period of ‘non-summer’ weather this year in the Hebrides…
    30 June: True awfulness of Stornoway May+June Weather Confirmed
    It is official, May and June 2015 together will go down in the met history books as two of the most awful months (of their namesakes) ever recorded in Stornoway.
    Overall, the May+June 2015 period was the 2nd wettest on record since 1873 in Stornoway, the 4th dullest (lack of sunshine) and 10th coolest since 1900. Put altogether, these are by far the worst weather statistics for May & June combined since records began in Stornoway in the mid 1850s…
    Temperature: But for a milder final five days of June, it would have been the 4th coldest June on record. Instead, it works out to be the coldest since 1987, and the 10th coolest May-June on record in Stornoway…
    Sunshine-wise: Need I say anymore: There’s an horrendous vitamin-D deficiency for all concerned (4th dullest on record)…
    http://uhi-mahara.co.uk/user/view.php?id=111

    15 July: Michigan Live: Brr? Grand Rapids cracks Top 3 coldest summers ever
    Grand Rapids currently is in third place for the coldest summer on record at 66.3 degrees, according to data compiled through Friday, July 10, by the National Weather Service.
    The Top 2 coolest summers were 65.5 degrees in 1992 and 65.9 degrees in 1915. Records date back to 1892 — a 123-year span.
    And at this rate, the summer of 2015 will be the coolest in the past 10 years by an impressive 1.5 degrees…
    “The chances (of warming up) are very low,” meteorologist Jared Maples said…
    http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2015/07/grand_rapids_cracks_top_3_of_c.html

    40

  • #
    pat

    the full AAP piece minus the middle para explaining Brown is answering a question from committee chairman and Liberal MP Alex Hawke:

    21 July: 9News: AAP: Tax deductibility probe in Hobart
    Conservation groups that break the law while protesting shouldn’t necessarily lose their tax deductible status, Bob Brown has told a parliamentary hearing…
    “Greenpeace, which is trying to protect for example the Great Barrier Reef against six mega coal ports … to take coal out of the Galilee Basin … they certainly ought to be getting the tax deductibility,” Dr Brown said on Tuesday in Hobart.
    http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/07/21/10/18/tax-deductibility-probe-in-hobart

    50

  • #
    pat

    21 July: Hobart Mercury: Paul Carter: Former Greens leader Bob Brown says Liberals out ‘to get’ green groups
    “It’s an assault on the rights and freedoms of Australians to defend their environment and for people to support environment groups, which are upholding the tenant(sic) of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act at a time when governments are failing to do that.
    “I’m a proud Australian, proud of our environment, but I’m ashamed in this day and age we have so many species going to extinction, so many ecosystems under threat…
    “…[this inquiry] appears to be a Liberal party vendetta to get environment groups.”
    More to come
    http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/former-greens-leader-bob-brown-says-liberals-out-to-get-green-groups/story-fnj4f7k1-1227450553713

    30

  • #
    Dan Pangburn

    If CO2 was a forcing, its effects would be cumulative. But nothing has ‘accumulated’ in 542 million years.

    CO2 levels for the entire Phanerozoic eon (about 542 million years) (Berner, 2001, shown with average global temperature at http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html ) prove that CO2 levels up to at least 6 times the present have had no significant effect on average global temperature.

    Search “agwunveiled” to discover what does produce better than 97% match with 5-year running average global temperatures since before 1900.

    140

  • #
    Sunray

    Thank you Jo, I wonder if warmists ever become embarrassed, when they are confronted by facts like these?

    70

  • #
    tom0mason

    No matter what the IPCC say the question asked back in 1999 by Robert Cess et al has never been properly answered –

    5. Conclusions
    This investigation augments the conclusions made in the two prior ARESE studies [Valero et al., 1997b; Zender et al., 1997]. Specifically, it suggests that the rather large 500 nm column absorptance for clear skies (October 11, Figure 1) is caused by some temporally variable absorber, most likely aerosols. Likewise, aerosols are most plausibly the cause of the comparable 500 nm absorptances when clouds are present (Figure 1). Next, we have extended the prior investigation of sampling errors [Valero et al., 1997b] by employing the procedure of Marshak et al. [1997] to minimize sampling errors through use of the 500 nm measurements, and we conclude the enhanced cloud absorption is not likely an artifact of such errors, nor can it logically be explained by instrument calibration errors. We have empirically determined that at least some of the enhanced cloud absorption (_<20%) occurs at wavelengths <680 nm, but the cause of this absorption, both at wavelengths <680 nm and in the near infrared, remains unknown; we find no evidence for its existence at 500 nm.

    What is the mechanism that causes this absorbtion at 680nm?
    So was funding ever made available to investigate this observed anomaly? If not why not, for without knowing the earth’s energy balance can’t be correctly assessed.

    60

  • #
    Campbell

    Seems to me that population increase is a far greater problem than temperature!

    22

    • #
      el gordo

      They go together, a good example is the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) when populations increased, while the following Little Ice Age (LIA) saw a natural decline in Europe.

      50

    • #
      tom0mason

      Campbell

      And the problem is?

      30

      • #
        el gordo

        Campbell might be a closet green who believes humans are a disgrace and the less of them the better.

        40

        • #
          tom0mason

          el gordo,

          I suspect so, for if you can not rationalize the problem, you can neither judge it properly, nor take action to solve, or ameliorate it.

          The global population is not a problem — opinionated antihuman green elitists are a major problem.

          Understanding that just because the rich get richer does not make the poor poorer — is a major problem.
          Decarbonizing is a problem.
          Leftwing and communist activist are a problem.
          Vested interests in any government is a problem.
          Lazy thinking from left-leaning politicians is a major problem.
          Leftwing politics rule by making all but the elites at or below average in all things — is a problem.
          The UN and all it stands for is a huge problem for all humanity.

          60

  • #
    pat

    sanity rules:

    21 July: Hindustan Times: Increased coal production helps meet PM’s power promise
    by Suveen Sinha & Aman Malik
    It is only now, says Anil Swarup, that he fully understands what Prime Minister Narendra Modi told him when he first took charge as coal secretary. “Fix coal, fix the economy,” Modi had said. So Swarup, in the nine months since then, has gone about fixing coal and seen the fillip it is giving to power production and in turn to all kinds of economic activity, reducing imports and creating jobs.
    Power plants now have 20 to 45 days’ stock of coal…
    Not surprisingly, India, which produces 60% of its electricity from coal, lost 0.4% of its gross domestic product due to power shortages, according to Ficci. Last year, Modi became Prime Minister with a promise of 24×7 electricity to all.
    The transformation has been made possible by an unprecedented surge in Coal India’s output. The state-owned miner produced 494 million tonnes in 2014-15, an increase of 32 million tonnes over the previous year…
    The target for this financial year is 550 million tonnes.
    The government targets producing 1.5 billion tonnes of coal by 2019-20, the anticipated demand at that time, assuming 8 to 9% growth in the GDP. Of that, 1 billion tonnes is to come from Coal India…
    The rest is to come from private companies that have won blocks in the recent auctions that brought much needed transparency to this sector…
    Swarup is not much worried about the blocks operated by private companies. “Of the 2019-20 target, 500 million tonnes have to come from private companies. We are allotting enough blocks for 800 to 900 million tonnes. They have to pay the government, so they will do it.”…ETC
    http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/ht-special-increased-coal-production-helps-meet-pm-s-power-promise/article1-1371448.aspx

    40

  • #

    Professor Andy Pitman, director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science at UNSW thinks that we won’t be able to go outside after 2050!!.
    I went outside when it was 45 degrees C in Sydney, and survived the trip! Perhaps he thinks that by 2050, we will all be too fat to get through the door!
    I don’t think that we will even notice a degree C or less at all.

    90

  • #
    • #
      Just-A-Guy

      el gordo,

      Except for all the record lows being set the world over, it will be the hottest year evaahh!

      Abe

      60

  • #
    marakai

    Some history for Marble Bar , http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/32950587 , http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/95052631 . Plenty more there for the curious who don’t like being spoonfed the Adjustment Bureau line of reasoning.
    And a Marble Bar photo gallery. http://www.tripmondo.com/australia/western-australia/marble-bar/picture-gallery-of-marble-bar/

    It never ceases to amaze me! The blindness that a majority of “educated” people in my country who accept what they are told by the talking heads on telly and radio day in day out in a Goebbels manner. The sheer audacity of those who promulgate the AGW meme to the detriment of not only our country but the many hundreds of millions who are currently reliant upon a third world doctrine of living in the dark and raping the local ecosystem in order to provide a day to day existence for themselves and their family’s.

    Thankyou Jo for shining a light on some of the grubs and dark shadows that promote themselves as icons of environmentalism while being nothing of the sort. Highlighting the FACT that nearly all the increase in temperature attributed to Humans is as a result of ADJUSTED records. And being a brave voice of reason in an issue that is sorely lacking any sort of rational thought.

    Kind regards
    Marakai

    80

    • #
      Len

      Often is the case that those with degrees will believe the charlatans. These charlatans also possess degrees (Mostly arts degrees). They are believed because the other folk outside of Climate Alarmism know how much work they put into their acquiring their degrees. The truth would devalue the status of all the various degrees including their own.

      90

    • #
      Bill

      Likewise, mystified and disgusted by those fools taken in. Case in point (pun intended), a fool named Chilla Bulbeck from Curtin’s Case is presently spamming the world with the tired and disproven nonsense that allegedly disproves skeptic thought.

      “Please checkout this url which explains why I find the climate science deniers puzzling, although I realise that we face such a hard future that we are driven to either action or denial.

      http://mashable.com/2014/06/25/climate-change-myths/#:eyJzIjoiZiIsImkiOiJfcHp3amd0OHBkbjB2ZnoyMCJ9
      I commend you for caring about this issue,
      chilla bulbeck,
      Curtin’s CASE “

      60

    • #

      Thanks Marakai! I’ll add in the link and try a photo. – -Jo

      00

  • #
    pat

    and so it continues:

    21 July: AP NewsBreak: Nicole Winfield: Mayors at Vatican seek ‘bold climate agreement’
    VATICAN CITY (AP) – Dozens of environmentally friendly mayors from around the world will be signing a Vatican declaration Tuesday urging their national leaders to approve a “bold climate agreement” that keeps global warming at a safe limit for humanity, The Associated Press has learned.
    Some 60 mayors are attending a two-day climate conference at the Vatican featuring an audience with Pope Francis…
    The final declaration, a copy of which was seen by the AP, states that “human-induced climate change is a scientific reality and its effective control is a moral imperative for humanity.”
    The document calls for financial incentives to transition to low-carbon and renewable energy and to shift public financing away from the military to “urgent investments” in sustainable development, with wealthy countries helping poorer ones.
    And it says political leaders have a “special responsibility” at the Paris talks to approve a “bold climate agreement that confines global warming to a limit safe for humanity, while protecting the poor and the vulnerable from ongoing climate change that gravely endangers their lives.”
    In one of the opening speeches, California Gov. Jerry Brown denounced ***global warming deniers who he said are “bamboozling” the public and politicians with false information to persuade them that the world isn’t getting warmer.
    Brown, a former Jesuit seminarian, urged the mayors to not be complacent in opposing ***climate deniers…
    “We have a very powerful opposition that, at least in my country, spends billions on trying to keep from office people such as yourselves and elect troglodytes and other deniers of the obvious science,” he said to applause.
    Other mayors attending hail from Boston; Boulder, Colorado; New York City; Oslo, Norway; San Francisco and Vancouver. Many belong to the new Carbon Neutral Cities Alliance, whose members have committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80 percent by 2050 or sooner.
    Other mayors hail from the developing world, including Libreville, Gabon; Siquirres, Costa Rica; and Kochi, India…
    http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/29592951/apnewsbreak-mayors-at-vatican-seek-bold-climate-agreement

    20

    • #
      marakai

      Sigh! And all this in a world in which I am still searching for just a single credible scientific paper that empirically links human produced CO2 with any effect on the climate of the planet at all.
      Billions upon billions of dollars spent on the Trojan Horse of control while overseeing and neglecting real harm to the environment in developing country’s.
      The evidence is quite clear that the more affluent the society the greater the ability to set aside and protect large areas of at risk nature and all that it contains, yet here we are a good thirty years after the rise of the imminent risk of global warming, the hokey schtick, no more snow, 50 million climate refugee’s and where are we all ?
      Still witnessing the rape of pristine areas for cooking fuel and warmth, the continued slaughter of native animals for bush meat as food and the apparent planned abject poverty of millions due to the failure of successive world bank and UN programs that achieved S.F.A.
      To think that just 10% of all that has been spent on the fear of the flying spaghetti monster of CAGW could of done so,so, so much more for those in developing country’s and the global environment than has been achieved by these [snip] rent seekers makes me sick to my gut.

      10

  • #
    pat

    lol.

    21 July: NYT: Michael M. Grynbaum: De Blasio, After Diverted Flight, Joins Climate Conference at Vatican
    VATICAN CITY — Leaders from around the globe, some stifling yawns, settled in their seats as a Vatican official approached the lectern…
    One participant, however, was missing: the mayor of New York.
    Scheduled to arrive in Rome on Tuesday morning for a two-day conference on climate change, Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York instead found himself in Milan, thanks to fog that forced a brief diversion of his overnight flight from Kennedy Airport.
    The mayor arrived at the Vatican about 80 minutes after his scheduled speaking slot. When he finally did speak there, he was unfazed, delivering an impassioned charge to his fellow mayors to resist “powerful corporate interests” and to aggressively battle climate change.
    “Is it not the definition of insanity to propagate corporate policies and consumer habits that hasten the destruction of the earth?” Mr. de Blasio said.
    He pledged that his administration would work to reduce the city’s carbon emissions by 40 percent by 2030…
    Mr. de Blasio, who is expected to be in Rome for less than 48 hours, opted for an overnight flight that was scheduled to arrive about two hours before he was due at the Vatican. (Aides to Mr. de Blasio, aware of criticism about his frequent travels, had emphasized last week that his Vatican visit — his fourth European excursion in a year — would be kept short.)…
    But his plans were foiled by Roman fog, according to an American Airlines spokesman, who said the pilot of the mayor’s flight “elected to divert to Milan as a precaution.” The flight continued on to Rome after about an hour’s delay, once the fog was “burned off by the increasingly warm sun,” the spokesman, Ian Bradley, said.
    Mr. de Blasio was not the only person to miss a scheduled slot for speaking. Mayor Eduardo Paes of Rio de Janeiro sent an aide in his stead, citing unrest in his home country…
    In his remarks, Mr. de Blasio said the encyclical “burns with urgency,” and he praised the pope, saying he had “awakened people across the globe to the dangers we face as a planet.”
    “The encyclical is not a call to arms,” Mr. de Blasio said. “It is a call to sanity.”…
    The mayor is expected to leave for New York on Wednesday afternoon — weather permitting.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/22/nyregion/de-blasio-after-a-diverted-flight-joins-climate-change-conference-at-the-vatican.html?_r=0

    20

  • #
    Ross Stacey

    I have just watched an interesting show on ABC, produced by the BBC called The Wonders of Life with Brian Cox. The emphasis was on the diversity of life and how species specialise based on the specific environment where they live. I found it extremely ironical that these two goliaths of communication can understand how species adapt but are adamant that life on earth is in Peril with 2c change in temperature.

    70

    • #
      marakai

      I also watch this series and quite enjoy it for the educational content. Brian Cox has a past life also as a band member of D:Ream https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgMl9qBTBq0.

      That aside I think he may be a contender as a replacement for the renowned Attenborough when the inevitable time comes as he is quite a good and easy to understand conveyor of science. I may not agree with his stance on climate related topics but he does do a great job of promoting science in an educational way.

      Kids need to be engaged and this guy is engaging, he does do a good job of explaining complex issues in an easy to understand way and to my mind the dearth of science in the mainstream media is appalling so even a Warmer with caveats is better than nothing.

      “But surely it isn’t a bad thing to challenge a scientific theory or prediction? Isn’t the reason for the success of science the fundamental axiom, if you like, that all theories or predictions MUST be falsifiable, and are NEVER to be assumed to be absolutely correct? And doesn’t the very requirement of the falsifiability of any theory or prediction demand that someone should try to falsify them? Yes, to all of the above.

      BUT, there is statement that I believe to be correct, and can be made with certainty. It is this: The consensus scientific view is the best we can do at any given time, given the available data and our understanding of it…the scientific consensus position is the best we have. This is a definite statement, with no caveats. There is no way to predict the likely range of global average temperatures in 2100 other than by modeling the climate, using climate science. The only logical way to make a decision is to base it on the best science available at the time because there is no other way. So read the most recent IPCC document for policy makers, which is the best summary of the science we have at the present time. Make decisions based on that.” (Brian Cox) http://www.fromquarkstoquasars.com/brian-cox-scientists-give-false-sense-of-debate-on-climate-change/

      00

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    O/T but within the unsettled science department.

    NOAA’s new DSCOVR satellite will provide a new set of measurements of Earth’s albedo and OLR.
    http://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/DSCOVR/spacecraft.html

    Yes climate science is so settled that they still need to deploy new multi million dollar satellites to measure something as vital as Earth’s albedo.

    Note in the NISTAR spec sheet it says this about the new radiometer:

    Radiometric accuracy of 0.1–1.5% (varies with band) is expected, which is up to a 10-fold improvement in accuracy over current Earth-orbiting satellite data.

    Right, so OLR could vary by 3% and current satellites might not pick it up. Yet NOAA are happy reporting OLR increased by 0.8% between 1980 and 2010. Wonder if that will come up in the Paris talks?

    If Earth’s albedo decreased by just 1.56% of its normal value between its 1870-1889 average and its 1976-1995 average then that could account for about 2/3rds of the 20th century warming trend.
    But the radiation budget was balanced and “the science was settled” using satellite sensors with errors of between 1% and 15%, an error possibly ten times larger than the medium term signal we’re trying to find.

    It just gets worse the more you dig, doesn’t it.

    111

    • #
      Harry Twinotter

      Andrew McRae.

      DSCOVR is the old Triana spacecraft first proposed by Al Gore – in other words it is Goresat!

      It has been sitting in mothballs for years until NOAA decided to use it to replace another spacecraft.

      The “climate science is settled” is another hoax started by global warming dissenters.

      08

      • #
        Alicia

        More twotter tales?

        10

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        The “climate science is settled” is another hoax started by global warming dissenters.

        Do you have a definitive reference to that statement, Harry? Or is that your personal opinion?

        There is a television interview, in which Gore himself, uses a similar phrase, with the same intent, in relation to science. I will see if we have a copy or transcription in our archive.

        Ah, but you don’t have to wait …

        There is also a Wall Street Journal Report of the interview itself, in which ‘… he was challenged by Mr [Bjorn] Lomborg, the Danish skeptical environmentalist who thinks the world would be better off spending more money on health and education issues than curbing carbon emissions, [who said] “I don’t mean to corner you, or maybe I do mean to corner you, but would you be willing to have a debate with me on that point?”‘ … ‘”I want to be polite to you,” Mr. Gore responded. “But no. The scientific community has gone through this chapter and verse. We have long since passed the time when we should pretend this is a ‘on the one hand, on the other hand’ issue. It is not a matter of theory or conjecture, for goodness sake”, he added.

        You can find it at: blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/03/05/a-heated-exchange-al-gore-confronts-his-critics/

        10

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        H2O,

        It doesn’t require a person to use the specific word “settled” to qualify as describing climate change science as settled. Any synonym in context will do.

        New Zealand Greenpeace Climate Change campaigner, Vanessa Atkinson, said in 2006:

        It is a well known strategy by vested interests to cast doubt on the climate science. But the debate is over. The scientific majority agrees – climate change is happening and it is caused by human activities.

        This carries the same meaning as “the science is settled” [on the cause of recent climate change].

        SkepticalScience in 2009 said that the statement “The science isn’t settled” is a myth.
        They quibble about what that precisely means, but they generally say the science underpinning global warming danger is settled.

        More recently, the AR5 WG1 Ch8 opened with the statement:

        It is unequivocal that anthropogenic increases in the well-mixed greenhouse gases (WMGHGs) have substantially enhanced the greenhouse effect, and the resulting forcing continues to increase.

        This carries the same meaning as “the science is settled” though there is again ample room to exploit the ambiguity of the original statement as to which climate hypotheses have been settled by science.

        The treatment by the media of AR5 coverage was studied by some social scientists, who analysed articles and broadcasts to determine what overall angle each communique had, in other words how it framed the issue.
        http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v5/n4/fig_tab/nclimate2535_F1.html
        From their diagram it is fairly clear that the WG1 reports (first column of charts) were described as Settled Science on TV just as often as they were described as Unsettled Science. In print media the story was Settled Science about 20% less often than Unsettled in the UK, but Settled 200% more often then Unsettled in the USA.

        In March 2014 the Royal Society responded to a question about settled climate science in this way:

        Science is not simply a matter of beliefs and opinions. So “settled science” means there are basic facts (well accepted observational and empirical evidence), and well-tested theory (as opposed to opinions) that should be recognized in spite of the many other issues or uncertainties.

        Here the Royal Society essentially defined “settled science” as shorthand for the same description frequently given by others for the origin of the confidence in the IPCC attribution statement.

        This is enough to establish that the claim that the science is settled on the principal cause of 20th century global warming is a claim that has been made and continues to be made by influential organisations, not just lone quirky individuals.

        00

  • #
  • #
    Svend Ferdinandsen

    This sentence is the essence of it all: that we won’t necessarily notice that extra warmth.
    I expect it takes several climatologist to notice the devastating warmth.
    Is’nt their any jokes about how many climatolgists it takes to read a thermometer?

    50

  • #
    pat

    stop poor people moving into Cities; make them return to being poor in rural areas instead?

    21 July: Guardian: Pope laments ‘meaningless lives’ in tying human trafficking to climate change
    Pontiff follows encyclical on fossil fuels with environmental summit of mayors and links climate change to migration, slavery and ‘uncurtailed growth of cities’
    by Stephanie Kirchgaessner in Vatican City and staff
    He spoke of the “uncurtailed growth of cities”, a global phenomenon that was giving rise to “shanty towns and slums” on the periphery of big cities because there was not enough economic opportunity to sustain poor people in rural areas. “This needs to be denounced,” Francis said…
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/21/pope-links-climate-change-with-human-trafficking-and-urges-un-to-take-lead

    10

  • #
    pat

    ABC – no opposing voices allowed when it comes to CAGW!

    22 July: ABC Breakfast: Vatican summit addresses climate change and human trafficking
    Addressing the summit in Rome, the Pontiff said tackling climate change and human trafficking are the new moral imperative of our time.
    So, how are the two issues related?
    Dr Anne Gallagher is a United Nations Adviser on Human Trafficking and Migration Issues, and was invited in 2013 to address a workshop at the Vatican on the issue.
    Dr Gallagher joins Fran Kelly on RN Breakfast.
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/vatican-summit-addresses-climate-change-and-human-trafficking/6638802

    22 July: ABC Breakfast: Mark Butler on Labor’s 50% renewable energy target
    Federal Labor is moving to seize the initiative over climate change policy.
    Opposition Leader Bill Shorten will use this week’s ALP National Conference to unveil a 50 per cent renewable energy target by 2030.
    The ambitious goal means the clean energy sector – mainly wind and solar – will have to double in size over the next 15 years.
    Shadow Environment Minister Mark Butler joins Fran Kelly on RN Breakfast.
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/mark-butler-on-labors-50-renewable-energy-target/6638676

    earlier ABC aired BBC Business Report which included a CAGW item described on their website as:

    “And Mike Johnson reports on how precious areas of forest could be under threat from the growing global appetite for biomass.”

    this was about shutting down Drax & they only allowed a person they described simply as a “campaigner” to comment.

    10

    • #

      Note now how renewable power has become an entirely political football. (my bolding here)

      Federal Labor is moving to seize the initiative over climate change policy.
      Opposition Leader Bill Shorten will use this week’s ALP National Conference to unveil a 50 per cent renewable energy target by 2030.
      The ambitious goal means the clean energy sector – mainly wind and solar – will have to double in size over the next 15 years.

      The fact that it doesn’t work does not even enter into it.

      The statement that they want a 50% renewable target by 2030 just will not happen.

      They can close all those large scale coal fired plants they want to, and hey, good luck with that, but until they actually find a way to replace that 24/7/365 ABSOLUTE requirement, they’ve got nothing.

      Tony.

      30

  • #
    pat

    same BBC Business program aired on ABC had another item on the Staten Island power outage and Demand Response energy. said DR was coming everywhere in the world, with energy companies having the ability to shut off your appliances, while customers sometimes got a discount for agreeing to participate.

    you would be able to keep control of your heating in some cases, or contact the company to say you didn’t want to participate next week (how would you know in advance?):

    (later articles state 19,000 customers)
    20 July: Piix11: Midtown ordered to conserve energy, Staten Island loses power amid heat blast
    NEW YORK — Consolidated Edison says more than 10,000 customers on Staten Island are affected by a power outage. The company has also lowered voltage in midtown and warned customers there to conserve energy, both coming on one of the hottest days of the year…
    Thousands of customers from W. 30 Street to W. 43 Street from 7th Avenue to the Hudson are being told not to use appliances like washers, dryers, air conditioners…
    Con Ed is working to repair what is believed to be a failure of electrical cables — likely heat-related…
    Certain neighborhoods in Queens and Brooklyn are also being asked to conserve in order to prevent a similar outage.
    There also were scattered outages elsewhere in the city as temperatures hit the 90s in Central Park for a second humid day…
    The Associated Press contributed to this report.
    http://pix11.com/2015/07/20/thousands-lose-power-on-staten-island-amid-hot-weather-blast/

    Wikipedia: Demand response
    DR (Demand Response) includes all intentional modifications to consumption patterns of electricity of induce customers that are intended to alter the timing, level of instantaneous demand, or the total electricity consumption…
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand_response

    of course, Mayor de Blasio is at The Vatican spouting CAGW nonsense. something that applies to politicians & officials worldwide, who are spending billions each year on climate summits, etc., but who are not taking care of infrastructure business at home.

    10

  • #
    Dan Pangburn

    Part of understanding climate change comes from discovering what does NOT cause it.

    Atmospheric carbon dioxide has been higher than now (usually several times higher) for most of the existence of earth. It is required for life as we know it. If it had any effect on climate, we wouldn’t be here to discuss it.

    30

  • #
    Payne by name

    Ok, I confess I’m a little cynical about the whole global warming thing. The data is a little questionable and not as transparent as it should be, there are many vested interests both from fund seeking lobbyists and revenue seeking governments looking for another green tax and with so many previous media fuelled, government sanctioned panics – BSE, Millennium Bug, Bird Flu, Swine Flu etc – it’s understandable that scepticism would exist.

    Granted I can see the problems of pollution, dwindling resources and over population, however, when I hear so many campaigners dramatically bang on about how we must work now to save the planet for our children and our children’s children I can’t help but think, “well maybe they’ll just have to figure it out for themselves”.
    Maybe the few that come out of university with science and engineering based degrees rather than media studies or sports science will just have to get their thinking caps on and figure something out. Maybe as our generations have come up with vast civil engineering projects, taking us to the stars (ok, the nearby planets), miniaturising technology and vastly improving telecommunications, they will just have to concentrate on resolving our screw-ups.

    Necessity is a great motivator and when the problem is on your doorstep, humans will deal with it and find a way. Yes, prudence and future planning has its merits but I think at some point we will have to make some assumptions that future generations will be able or be forced to simply figure it out.

    The only finite certainty with the planet is that it will die in a couple of billion years when the sun expands and then cools. Until then human nature will prevail. It will adapt, it will evolve and it will deal with whatever problems face it. If the seas rise, then people will relocate, if resources run out, they will find alternatives. Man will not meekly accept its fate and just die out. We can’t bequeath future generations a lush utopia or a world without problems. Simply put, they are just going to have to find a way to deal with what happens.

    I think the point I’m making is that we can’t be certain what will happen in the future. Even if the climate change/global warming nightmare happens in its worst case scenario, its effects will not be immediate. Sea levels will not rise by 10 feet overnight, food will suddenly not just stop (though there’s an argument that warmer climates in certain areas could lead to increased food production) and temperatures will not rocket from one week to the next. Future generations will have time to adapt to the problems that present themselves.

    Look at Swine Flu. It was apparently going to decimate swathes of people, with individuals in the WHO claiming it could be as bad as the 1917 Influenza. To compensate Govts. around the world spent millions on vaccines, call centres etc. I’m not saying we should have totally ignored it but when the unchecked hysteria grips those right at the top of the ‘responsibility’ tree, there clearly do need to be times for a little focus and measure.

    As I said I’m not saying that we do nothing regarding the environment but if for instance we invest billions in preventing the seas from rising but the actual problem is the sea level falling or everywhere getting colder rather than hotter, we’ll have wasted that time and effort once again.

    Prudence, future planning and resource management are important but we need to remember that humans are great adapters and over-comers. Put a real problem in front of us and we can tackle it, overcome or find a solution. With this gaseous, uncertainty of what the actual problems will be, we should take a little comfort that when the problem manifests itself physically, we will deal with it.

    There is a danger that with the cynically emotive “it’s for the sake of the children” we all run around like headless chickens haemorrhaging money and wasting time and effort in never ending conferences and quangos trying to resolve problems whose effects/outcomes are uncertain.

    20