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


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

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



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Books

Weekend Unthreaded

….

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.9/10 (17 votes cast)
Weekend Unthreaded, 8.9 out of 10 based on 17 ratings

254 comments to Weekend Unthreaded

  • #
    Mark D.

    First place!

    Enjoying a cold rainy day here in Minnesota….

    190

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      So that’s where our cold rainy days went. But wait, they can’t be ours. This is Southern California desert where we import water hundreds of miles just to be able to take a drink on a hot day. So that can’t be our rain. You’re safe in Minnesota. Your cold rain cant be repossessed by anyone.

      And now you know how hard it can be to think of something to say when you suddenly find yourself at the head of the line or maybe on the hot seat, whichever the case may be.

      Have a great cold rainy day. :-)

      131

      • #
        theRealUniverse

        Thunderbirds are go!
        https://www.iceagenow.info/almost-entire-sweden-with-subzero-temperatures/
        Wheeeeeee!
        Now when she gets home to Schweeden, getting a wee bit chilly..no?

        110

      • #
        Greg in NZ

        “The Bikini Downhill and Peak to Keg are on today!”
        Fine, sunny, calm; 32˚F max, 12 ft snow base.
        “Issued at: 11:01am Sunday 6 Oct 2019″

        https://www.metservice.com/skifields/turoa

        Fall v Spring: I know which hemisphere I’m happy to be in. Thinkin’ of ya’ll – have an ice day!

        80

        • #
          David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

          G’day Greg,
          I wonder if you already know about this map from the Oz BoM, one of its more useful. While it doesn’t show the whole of your islands it does show the south of the South Island and a large part of the Tasman Sea.
          Today’s shows an intense low forming during Tuesday and moving towards your south during Wednesday and Thursday. It might be useful.
          Cheers
          Dave B

          30

          • #
            David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

            Better give you the link. Sorry about that.

            http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/charts/4day_col.shtml

            Cheers
            Dave.

            21

            • #
              Greg in NZ

              Thanks David,
              no doubt to the horror of some here, your BoM is my opening ‘home page’ when I crank up the interwebs on my Mac. As 97% of our weather comes from the west, ie. from over your way toward us, I find the Bureau of Mullets’ maps and satellite imagery a good indicator of what we’re in for in a few days’ time. The other 3%, of course, is in summer when troppos drop down from the north, and we who surf get VERY excited at the prospect of waves on the east coast of the North Island (while climate cuckoos start pulling their hair out and wailing and gnashing their teeth in some weird ancient cult act of doomsday despair over a natural meteorological occurrence – strange folk they are).

              Yes, I’ve been watching this week’s prognosis, which by Saturday has three (3) low centres spinning in the Tassie Sea: can’t wait for the clickbait headline of Human CO₂ Causes Triple-Headed Monster Beast Storm – Unprecedented! el gordo is onto something with his ‘blocking high’ scenario, as these fast-deepening lows have been getting ‘stuck’ in the Tassie more and more, which is great for everyone as some get rain, some get surf, some snow, and some a cooling sea breeze, perfect!

              Also, as a tour guide & driver, I need to know what kind of day my guests are in for, not only at their destination (vineyards) but also on the ferry ride to get there (can get rough/bumpy on a good day, which I love, they don’t). And this coming weekend is looking decidedly wet, wild and windy – yeehaah! Then again, it may turn out completely different and be all sunshine & happiness – life’s like that. Chur!

              40

              • #
                David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

                Thought you’d already be a watcher, but also thought it was worth making sure. Glad Oz is of some use to NZ.
                Unfortunately our Great Dividing Range puts me in its rain shadow from any weather from those lows. So little rain for me.
                Cheers,
                Dave B

                10

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        And I’ll never understand why there’s always one red thumb that has no sense of humor. Go figure. ;-)

        00

    • #
      Sweet Old Bob

      Enjoy the rain …. before it turns to snow or ice !
      ;)

      50

    • #
      Dennis

      No point going white water rafting on the St.Louis River then Mark.

      50

  • #
    dinn, rob

    Some of us, like China, are growing too fast–which make China a cult obviously.
    10-4-2019 article 300 of the Chinese Criminal Law, which imposes jail penalties on those active in groups persecuted as xie jiao (“heterodox teachings,” sometimes translated as “cults”; in fact, the CCP lists as xie jiao any independent religious group that grows too fast or is regarded as hostile to the Party). https://bitterwinter.org/article-300-ccps-secret-weapon-of-religious-persecution/

    51

    • #
      • #
        el gordo

        Religious belief is akin to superstition and with memories of the Taiping Rebellion the authorities aren’t taking any chances. Millenarian madness is imported from the West.

        55

        • #
          Annie

          I’m just getting ready for church EG. How nice to know I’m superstitious!

          110

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            Don’t you believe it. You aren’t defined by what someone else thinks of you. What do you believe? That’s what counts.

            110

            • #
              el gordo

              I have more faith in Hindu gods, all this nonsense centred on the ‘singularity’ has caused no end of misery for humanity.

              57

              • #
                theRealUniverse

                Sitting at the singularity at the start of the universe waiting for a bang. Id prefer the restaurant at the end personally.

                60

              • #
                el gordo

                When galaxies collide there is a big bang, its called Brane Theory.

                45

              • #
                Ted O'Brien.

                People did that, not God.

                God made people. People made religion. And people, having made religion, bend and break the rules.

                40

              • #
                el gordo

                Intelligent design? Giving women the nagging gene was a mistake.

                Having more than one deity is better than the singularity, sectarian violence is common place because they argue over scriptures.

                Its entirely plausible that aliens visited this amazing planet and tinkered with a gracile ape, but there is no empirical evidence to support the proposition.

                42

            • #
              Lionell Griffith

              I totally agree that one must be self defined and must not allow oneself to be taken in by what others try to define what you are.

              Question: What if what you believe isn’t what is? In that case, you will have a problem caused by what you believe.

              51

              • #
                Another Ian

                Others trying to define you is known as “pigeonholing”. And it is a game two can play at.

                When one becomes aware that someone is trying it one can play along and even add to the emphasis.

                One can then also cause consternation by then not performing according to type assigned at suitable moments.

                60

              • #
                Kalm Keith

                Ian, I think that should be emphaasis.

                10

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘What if what you believe isn’t what is?’

                That happens a lot, its a steep learning curve.

                21

              • #
                Annie

                I did that years ago. We had a Volvo. I had a Pashley tricycle with two child seats on the back, used to cart one child to primary school in one direction and another to kindergarten the opposite direction from home. I wore Clothkits screen-printed cord fabric outfits. Apparently, all this meant being Liberal Democrat (in England). An assumption by everybody around. Ha ha.
                Came the day of the General Election…shock, horror among local acquaintances! I flew a blue ribbon from the handlebars of my trike!
                For US friends, blue means Conservative in the UK.

                40

              • #
                Annie

                That was meant to be a reply to Another Ian.

                30

  • #
    Kalm Keith

    It’s interesting what first place can trigger off at third.

    Why do I think 3M or was it MMM?

    KK

    30

  • #
    Another Ian

    ” Hillary’s “Reasons I Lost” file continues to grow
    Saturday, 05 October 2019

    Sounds like she’s running again.”

    https://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2019/10/hillarys-reasons-i-lost-file-continues-to-grow.html

    110

    • #
      Mark D.

      She’ll lose worse than last time. She has lost her inside track.

      The whole list of Dem candidates + Hillary make an abundance to overfill my Basket of Deplorables.

      90

    • #
      TdeF

      Hillary needs to consider that she lost despite having the uncritical support of the media, Hollywood, the music industry, all the big cities, bl*ck communities, illegal immigrants in their millions, everyone involved in trafficing people, Silicon valley, Google, Facebook, Youtube and the entire of the public service including Washington D.C. which voted 99.4% for Cr**ked Hillary. And the ballot shufflers, as was found in the Democrat recount. Still she lost massively across the states although slightly winning the head count thanks to the millions of aliens who were allowed to vote in the Democrat Sanctuary cities.

      And this time the bl*ck communities have woken up, that employment is at the highest level in fifty years. Similarly for Latinos. And both groups are desperate to end the drugs and gangs from mexico and vi*lence in their communities. And as the media minimized, one of the big celebrations of Trump’s win was in Florida. They want to be free of dr*gs and violence too.

      Meanwhile gun deaths are at a low, possibly because there are now an amazing 6 million hidden carry licences in the community.

      And the Democrat push to blame Trump for gun vi*lence is a fantasy after 16 years of Democratic Presidents who did nothing. About anything. As Kanye West said, eight years with a bl*ck President and bl*cks are no better off.

      Who wants another four years of Clinton? The US has had 12 years. The whole world has her emails, in plain English and posted on Yahoo by Huma Abaden so Hillary could print them out when she came home? Perhaps Donald Trump understood the chant “Lock her up?”. No one in the media could understand it, but a lot of the voters did.

      250

    • #

      With Clinton as with Gillard, Turnbull and Shorten…the intense support drops suddenly to very little support right at the outer surface of the Bubble. Despite massive resources shoveled constantly to their advantage.

      The quickest way to reduce population pressure is to make as many people as possible “former business associates” of the Clintons. Most of America knows it. The Bubble will not say it. This should lead to serious questions about the Bubble…but the Bubble will not tell on itself.

      Turn the Bubble off. Turn off the Bubble’s refuse media. Do tradition, family, property. Do conservation. Do coal.

      100

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    Don’t panic, they’re using paper straws …

    Air France will carbon offset emissions from all its domestic flights by 2020 -

    ” … (Air France) will invest ‘several million euros’ in projects such as planting trees to soak up CO2 emitted by about 500 daily flights.”

    https://preview.tinyurl.com/y3ztse36

    … but, but … but trees warm the planet …

    Combined climate and carbon-cycle effects of large-scale deforestation

    “We find that global-scale deforestation has a net cooling influence on Earth’s climate, because the warming carbon-cycle effects of deforestation are overwhelmed by the net cooling associated with changes in albedo and evapotranspiration.”

    https://www.pnas.org/content/104/16/6550

    Once upon a time you used to get a plastic straw in a paper sleeve.
    Now, you get a paper straw in a plastic sleeve.

    220

  • #
    Another Ian

    I have now made the acquaintance of the MyGov document upload system with learning as below.

    As I learned yesterday it doesn’t like Firefox (though it did a week or so ago) – mind you that took an ear-flattening dig via the phone as there is no warning of such. The only other browser on my computer is the one that comes with Avast anti-virus, so I gave that a go and it worked fine.

    This morning I needed to upload another one-pager and NEITHER WORK!

    But I’ve worked out the scenario.

    Being a public service system you’re supposed to have as many browsers as you can “hire” in the hope that when needed you find one that works.

    Sort of like their staffing methodology I guess.

    Now more on that.

    I gave it another try at lunch today. After two attempts Avast uploaded.

    So they have it so you have to deal with moods too?

    80

  • #
    Another Ian

    “Larry Ledwick says:
    4 October 2019 at 7:32 pm

    On Solar power and their real impact on total emissions due to requirements to produce make up power when the sun is not shining.

    https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/04/north-carolina-energy-company-finds-solar-power-actually-increases-pollution/

    Short title – physics trump policy”

    https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2019/10/01/w-o-o-d-1-october-2019/#comment-117769https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2019/10/01/w-o-o-d-1-october-2019/#comment-117769

    40

    • #
      beowulf

      The Duke Energy link embedded in your first link Ian is even more instructive. It gives actual recorded grid-scale figures of the impact of solar on baseload generation pollutants, not computer simulations of hypothetical scenarios.

      https://nsjonline.com/article/2019/08/duke-energy-application-points-finger-at-solar-for-increased-pollution/

      Some quotes, my bold:
      “ . . . Crawford provided information from a team of Duke subject matter experts confirming NOx emissions would be lower if there were no solar power on the electric grid.

      Without any solar power in the mix, “a typical combined cycle combustion turbine emits NOx at approximately 9-11 lb/hr, assuming 24 hours of ‘normal’ operation,” Crawford said. That is equivalent to 264 pounds of NOx emissions daily. When those same plants are operated to supplement solar power facilities, daily emissions more than double to 624 pounds a day, based on a table in Duke’s application.”

      “Renewable energy sounds good, but it performs terribly. If you want electricity available when you need it, you don’t want intermittent, unreliable, renewable energy,” Kish said. “It’s like a cancer on an efficient grid, with its ups-and-downs forcing other sources to pick up the slack in the most inefficient ways, which, in some cases, are more polluting.

      “It’s great for the Wall Street financiers, and those in it to make a fast buck while the sun shines, but it’s leaving us with an increasingly unstable grid and externalities such as more pollution,” Kish said. “The regulators have to remember that their job is to make sure that quick buck artists don’t pick the pockets of consumers and leave them with a weaker, less resilient grid.”

      What a novel concept — regulators favouring consumers rather than quick-buck artists. When will our governments, state and federal, get off their duffs and actually act upon that principle instead of mouthing platitudes about it and wringing their hands in mock impotence?

      70

  • #
    David Wojick

    Is Google News legally liable for bias against conservatives?

    My latest article.

    https://www.cfact.org/2019/10/05/is-google-news-legally-liable-for-bias-against-conservatives/

    Some excerpts:

    I recently wrote that Google News should be sued for bias against conservative sources, not regulated. Regulating Internet news aggregators is the last thing we want, but Google News is clearly doing something wrong, that needs to be corrected.

    To further this line of thought, here is a specific legal argument for the Courts to order Google News to stop discriminating. The Courts might even impose penalties for past discrimination. The Federal Trade Commission could bring such a suit, as could the users of Google News. Mind you I am not an expert on this stuff, hence the question mark in the title.

    We are looking for new law so should look at first principles. I posit a variation on the product liability principle called the implied warrant of merchantability. This says the product should work. It is a fundamental principle of product liability law.

    The possible parallel is that while Google News has no explicit contract with its users, because they do not pay anything, this may not be the end of the legal story. Google News users do not pay, but Google derives a monetary benefit from them, namely advertising revenues, which are based on usage. This creates an implicit financial relationship.

    No users, no income. Few users, a little income. In the case of Google news, there are a huge number of users, so Google gets a huge income from advertising. In fact Google News dominates the online news aggregation field, almost to the point of monopoly.

    Given this huge monetary benefit, Google therefore has a reciprocal obligation to return a benefit to its users, namely good news coverage. That is the implied product — good coverage.

    Politically biased coverage is not good coverage, especially given that roughly half of the users are conservatives. The users are not receiving the benefit that is owed them, in return for their usage. They are being deprived of vast swaths of news and opinion.

    By failing to provide good coverage, Google News is wrongfully damaging its users. The product does not work. This is a wrong the Courts can address.

    More in the article.

    120

    • #
      Mark D.

      I think you are on to something David! It is high time we regular people start using the courts. The Left and their special interest groups have been doing that for years.

      90

      • #
        TdeF

        In Australia the government does not dare rein in the ABC who have a charter of unbiased reporting, which they totally ignore.
        They dominate the media because they are exempt from the media ownership laws on the same basis of strictly unbiased factual reporting.

        So no need for a court to intervene. Our government creates and our government can dismiss. After all the ABC/SBS/CSIRO/BOM just initiate an inquiry into themselves with their own people and invariably exonerate themselves. This has to stop. I guess that’s why we have Royal Commissions.

        The problem is that politicans need votes and do not want any bad press, which is exactly why we have media laws.

        So sell them all. Like the Banks, Telstra, Australia Post, the Railways, TAA, the power stations and more. Government runs and has run weather bureaux, scientists, electricity administration (the grid) and the RET, railways, airports, banks, telphones (NBN), the internet (NBN).

        The mandarins of Canberra and Washington and Brussells always want more money and more control and rail against capitalists. That’s why we have a Federal ‘grid’ and a Federal NBN and Federal funding through a back door of the Constitution of schools and hospitals and universities which are not their responsiblity.

        Hated Capitalists at least have to provide a desirable service or goods to make money and are answerable to governments. Where communist Councils, State governments and Federal governments see the public as milch cows and deplorables, nothing more. And socialist governments are far greedier than any capitalists.

        This fashion of setting the courts against the Government as in Brexit is itself deplorable as in Australia and Britain, judge are not elected. So you have judge made law overriding democratic laws, or interpreting them wilfully as with BREXIT. Tony Blair’s Supreme Court is a disgrace, their day in the sun overturning the decision of a Prime Minister and deciding that, according to them, he has broken the law. The one they just made up. That’s not a democracy, that’s a conspiracy.

        80

        • #
          yarpos

          Dominate the media? ya think? for the average Australian? I dont think most people know whats on the ABC from one week to the next. We know because we focus on it and they talk such BS, but the average suburban Aussie?

          20

    • #
      ivan

      Give DuckDuckGo a try, it is amazing how much extra it finds compared to google, in fact I only use google for such things that are not political i.e. computer service manuals and such like.

      110

  • #
    David Maddison

    No surprise here for those that follow the real science objectively and only use non-falsified data.

    A highly qualified and experienced climate modeler with impeccable credentials has rejected the unscientific bases of the doom-mongering over a purported climate crisis. His work has not yet been picked up in this country, but that is about to change. Writing at the Australian site Quadrant, Tony Thomas introduces the English-speaking world to the truth-telling of Dr. Mototaka Nakamura (hat tip: Andrew Bolt, John McMahon).

    See link for rest.

    https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/09/toplevel_climate_modeler_goes_rogue_criticizes_nonsense_of_global_warming_crisis.html#.XYoUiwHxORc.facebook

    110

    • #
      Peter Fitzroy

      The modelling he refers to was in 1994, and crucially he was taking about the lack of data, particularly for oceans, until satellites filled in the gaps.

      /straws and the grasping thereof

      125

      • #
        AndyG55

        Poor PF…. sucking on a straw from an empty cup, yet again !

        These models completely lack some critically important climate processes and feedbacks, and represent some other critically important climate processes and feedbacks in grossly distorted manners to the extent that makes these models totally useless for any meaningful climate prediction.

        181

      • #
        David Maddison

        PF, where does it say he is referring to 1994 models?

        100

        • #
          Peter Fitzroy

          David I went to the original Quadrant article, and then on to a search for his publication history. There I found that he was criticising ocean models in 1994, and that his speciality was fluid dynamics. Fluid Dynamics is a poorly modelled (in the mathematical sense) discipline which uses lots of data. Form around 2000 he was doing atmospheric work, again using fluid dynamics. I took his criticisms, therefore, to be on the paucity and quality of the data available to him in his research. That would be an obvious truth, as all scientists, and particular fluid dynamists would always want more and better.

          In general, the AR4 report, in one of its summaries, highlighted the same problem, both in terms of the modelling and in terms of the data.

          116

          • #
            David Maddison

            He is publishing this now in 2019 so it is reasonable to expect he is referring to all models up until today.

            Not even today’s best so-called models have any forecasting or even hindcasting ability even though the result is known.

            92

            • #
              Peter Fitzroy

              David, he is translating his original 1994 publication. And in relation to the forecasting, and hind casting, a reference, peer reviewed if possible would be informative

              116

              • #
                AndyG55

                A reference to empirical data showing that increased atmospheric CO2 causes warming would be appreciated

                EMPTY still, PF !!

                How many models hindcast the NH warming of the 1930s & 40s , which had a similar temperature to now, PF.

                Can you find one???????

                It will be hilarious watching you squirm and worm your way around in manic avoidance. ;-)

                101

              • #
                Peter Fitzroy

                So here is one paper which has all you ask https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2007/2007_Hansen_ha09210n.pdf

                /but you won’t read it

                115

              • #
                AndyG55

                Coupled ocean-land model does not show the NH peak in 1930s, 40s

                FAILED !!!

                And its the GISS model that has proven over the years to be one of the most INACCURATE of the whole bunch

                It is a model “ADJUSTED” to emulate GISS fabricated temperatures.

                It shows massive modelled warming from CO2 as its main function.

                So it is manifestly WRONG !!!

                Building a model to match your own temperature data fabrication and building in massive CO2 warming, proves absolutely NOTHING

                It is in fact the ANTITHESIS of respectable science.

                LAUGHABLE !!!

                141

              • #
                Peter Fitzroy

                Did you read it, or are you just going on some smear published in WUWT. Try to act with at least a modicum of integrity, and stop dressing up old discredited arguments as your own.

                112

              • #
                tom0mason

                Peter Fitzroy,

                And also from the same year as Hansen’s paper came …
                As one of the top climate scientists in the world, Kevin Trenberth said in journal Nature (“Predictions of Climate”) about climate models in 2007:

                None of the models used by the IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate. In particular, the state of the oceans, sea ice and soil moisture has no relationship to the obsered state at any recent time in any of the IPCC models. There is neither an El Nino sequence nor any Pacific Decadal Oscillation that replicates the recent past; yet these are critical modes of variability that affect Pacific rim countries and beyond. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, that may depend on the thermohaline circulation and thus oceanic currents in the Atlantic, is not set up to match today’s state, but it is a critical component of the Atlantic hurricanes and it undoubtedly affects forest for the next decade from Brazil to Europe. Moreover, the starting climate state in serveral of the models may depart significantly from the real climate owing to model errors. I postulate that regional climate change is impossible to deal with properly unless the models are initialized.
                ¯

                ¯
                Therefore the problem of overcoming this shortcoming, and facing up to initializing climate models means not only obtaining sufficiently reliable observations of all aspects of the climate system, but also overcoming model biases. So this is a major challenge.

                Tremberth’s comment is still as true today as it was back in 2007, not so much Hansen’s paper.

                110

              • #
                AndyG55

                Poor PF, it is obvious that YOU didn’t read it and do not comprehend what was done and just how bad the level of science in that paper really is.

                Its ACTIVIST science, nothing more, and very much LESS.

                You have ZERO integrity.

                STOP posting links to DISCREDITED anti-science papers. !!

                50

              • #
                tom0mason

                Just a quick scan through hansens paper and I some strange assuptions …

                The model has sensitivity 2.7°C for doubled CO2 when coupled to the Q-flux ocean (Efficacy 2005), but 2.9°C when coupled to the Russell et al. (1995) dynamical ocean.

                The 2.9°C sensitivity corresponds to ~0.7°C per W/m^2 .

                IPCC TAR paper says …

                If the amount of carbon dioxide were doubled instantaneously, with everything else remaining the same, the outgoing infrared radiation would be reduced by about 4 Wm^2. In other words, the radiative forcing corresponding to a doubling of the CO2 concentration would be 4 Wm^2. To counteract this imbalance, the temperature of the surface-troposphere system would have to increase by 1.2°C (with an accuracy of ±10%), in the absence of other changes.”

                As well as another from the skepticalscience.com blog:

                If there were no feedbacks in the Earth’s climate system, physics tells us climate sensitivity would be 1.2°C for a doubling of CO2.”

                However these papers find doubling of CO2 sensitivity VERY much lower ..
                Smirnov, 2018 (2X CO2 = 0.4ºC) (2X AnthroCO2 = 0.02ºC) (http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6463/aabac6/meta)
                Florides and Christodoulides, 2009 (2X CO2 = ~0.02°C) (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412008001232 )
                Khilyuk and Chilingar, 2003 (2XCO2 = <0.01°C) (http://www.ask-force.org/web/Global-Warming/Khilyuk-Global-Warming-Confusing-2003.pdf )
                Newell and Dopplick, 1979 (2X CO2 = ~0.25°C ) (http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/1520-0450%281979%29018%3C0822%3AQCTPIO%3E2.0.CO%3B2)
                Kauppinen and Malmi, 2019 (2X CO2 = ~0.24°C, human contribution 0.01°C/century) (https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.00165 )
                Idso, 1998 (2X CO2 = ~0.4°C) (http://www.int-res.com/articles/cr/10//c010p069.pdf )
                Chylek et al., 2007 (2X CO2 = 0.39°C) (http://iacweb.ethz.ch/doc/publications/Chylek-et-al-JGR2007-climate-sens.pdf )
                Holmes, 2018 (2XCO2 = -0.03°C) (http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.earth.20170606.18.pdf )

                I have access to 50+ more peer-reviewed and published papers that all tell a very similar story, i.e. Hansen's figure is just a made-up assumption of little worth.

                SOLAR

                3.3.3 Solar irradiance
                The variations of total solar irradiance in our transient climate simulations submitted to IPCC, shown by the solid curve in Fig. 4, are based on Lean (2000). The irradiance changes are largest at ultraviolet wavelengths. The resulting change of climate forcing for 1880–2003 (1880–2000) is Fa = 0.24 W/m 2 (0.30 W/m 2 ), and Fe = 0.22 W/m 2 (0.28 W/m 2 ) based on the linear trend, as the efficacy of the solar forcing is Ea ~92% (Efficacy 2005). We do not include indirect effects of solar irradiance changes on O3 (Haigh 1994; Hansen et al. 1997b; Shindell et al. 1999; Tourpali et al. 2005), which may enhance the direct solar

                Lean et al. (2002) call into question the long-term solar irradiance changes, such as those of Lean (2000), which have been used in many climate model studies including our present simulations.

                Lean et al. 2002, effectively validated his assuptions of solar irradiation against climate models! And that appears to be why Hansen dislikes it.

                However the IPCC in ‘Climate Change 2007: Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis’
                says

                The relationship between forcing and response based on a long time horizon can be studied using palaeoclimatic reconstructions of temperature and radiative forcing, particularly volcanism and solar forcing, for the last millennium. However, both forcing and temperature reconstructions are subject to large uncertainties (Chapter 6). To account for the uncertainty in reconstructions, Hegerl et al. (2006a) use several proxy data reconstructions of NH extratropical temperature for the past millennium (Briffa et al., 2001; Esper et al., 2002; Mann and Jones, 2003; Hegerl et al., 2007) to constrain ECS estimates for the pre-industrial period up to 1850. This study used a large ensemble of simulations of the last millennium performed with an energy balance model forced with reconstructions of volcanic (Crowley, 2000, updated), solar (Lean et al., 2002) and greenhouse gas forcing (see Section 9.3.3 for results on the detection of these external influences). …

                So you Peter Fitzroy are happy to pick Hansen paper all though it explicetly goes against what the IPCC says happens with their cherry-picked version of ‘physical science’.

                30

              • #
                Peter Fitzroy

                Tom – all of which was mentioned in my citation. Remember it is a model, and is being revised constantly.
                this is their latest effort
                https://cmip6workshop19.sciencesconf.org/data/CMIP6_CMIP6AnalysisWorkshop_Barcelona_190325_FINAL.pdf

                /everyone has moved on – but not here

                19

              • #
                AndyG55

                Thanks for showing everyone, and ADMITTING, that the climate models basically WORTHLESS.

                Nowhere near workable or realistic.

                Still working on a foundation of garbage.

                They SAY that they AIM to move on to something workable, but are still NOWHERE near it.

                And they won’t get there with their current quicksand foundations.

                You are making an ass of yourself again, PF

                Showing your continued lack of understanding, and your wilful defence of ever facing reality.

                40

              • #
                tom0mason

                Oh dear, after an hour,

                “Your comment is awaiting moderation.”

                Too many links eh?

                10

              • #
                tom0mason

                Peter Fitzroy,

                Tom – all of which was mentioned in my citation. Remember it is a model, and is being revised constantly.

                And as I keep reminding you, the work on the models is not complete or anywhere near! When so many factors are parameterized then tuned for best effect. These models are NOT and NEVER have been a fair or complete.
                This means that they can not do the job — they do NOT accurately show what the climate is doing now, or what it may do in the future.
                The paradigm is just wrong.

                Relentlessly statistically averaging figures within a multi-factored chaotic system that has many interlinked and loosely coupled feedback systems is just the wrong way round for approaching the problem.
                Without a basic understanding of the chaos in the system — the number loci locations, and extents of the quasi-cyclic components with a good assessment of how the quasi-stable state run (timescales) — there can be NO systematic method of assessing correctly the probable trends. And just because a model can ‘hindcast’ does not mean that it can forecast — to think it can, again (within a chaotic systems) is to misunderstands the problem.
                On top of that the basic global grid system that these models use, is too coarse to ACCURATELY capture what is happening.

                But Peter Fitzroy you keep believing, there’s a good AGW advocate, keep believing for that is all you have!

                20

              • #
                tom0mason

                One out of moderation (thank you mods) but the next one in moderation…

                Oh-humm comment 9.1.2.1.11 is

                Your comment is awaiting moderation.

                20

            • #
              Another Ian

              Has someone reinvented the “control KN” of Wordstar which changed the aspect from horizontal to vertical?

              10

            • #
              Peter Fitzroy

              Tom, a mountain of facts, well done. But… I disagree with with conclusion I don’t see the discrepancy, as the dates for the papers you quote don’t match up. There can be disagreements on size of effects, which is what you see. I’m happy that you at least, are able to come back with some good links

              11

              • #
                AndyG55

                “are able to come back with some good links”

                Something you have NEVER been able to do

                I put your incompetence down to, well.. just dumb INCOMPETENCE. !!

                Still waiting for that empirical evidence, your poor EMPTY sad-sap.

                00

          • #
            toorightmate

            Dear DRONGO.
            Climate models are as useful as tits on a bull.
            And so are you.

            82

            • #
              Peter Fitzroy

              The model of gravity? the models of heat transfer? the models of friction? the models of momentum?

              /all comments are stupid is the same as all models are stupid.

              214

              • #
                AndyG55

                WOW, you again show you have zero comprehension of the difference between models that have been CONTINUOUSLY VERIFIED, and models that have NEVER been verified, and in fact have been shown to be monumentally WRONG.

                Big question is.. have you reached PEAK STUPID yet, PF ?

                I thought you had, but you just keep climbing further and further up the ladder of stupidity and ignorance.

                131

              • #
                theRealUniverse

                Oh, not you again PF, who the hell would read anything published by Hansen.

                101

              • #
                Lance

                Fitz, you’ve obviously never taken fluid dynamics, compressible fluid flow, direct heat / mass transfer, heat transfer, or thermodynamics courses.

                What you refer to as models are very specific equations in closed form of static and dynamic energy flows in 1 to 3 dimensions and are comprised of less than 10 variables regardless of their application, yet they do exceedingly well in predicting actual reality.

                What you are trying to espouse is the view that a system comprised of thousands of variables can be reduced to a single variable and yet retain meaningful accuracy over hundred year timeframes.

                If your climate models are so grand, then explain this:

                Britain Braces for Coldest Winter in 30 Years
                https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/10/05/global-warming-britain-braces-for-coldest-winter-in-30-years/

                120 Years of Climate Scares
                https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/08/120_years_of_climate_scares.html

                Admit it.

                Climate Alarmists have YET to be correct in any prediction ever made.

                The Climate is vastly more complex than a simple “CO2 Control Knob”.

                Flogging the dead horse of “CO2 Causes Warming” does NOT mean it Controls World Climate.

                Try a little more Science than the Hansen/Mann/Gore Church of Minimal Understanding.

                Dress warmly. It’s going to get really cold.

                140

              • #
                tom0mason

                As Ned Nikolov, Ph.D. (@NikolovScience) says on his twitter feed –

                No climate model driven by #CO2 has been able to even remotely reproduce observed Polar Amplifications either during the icy Pleistocene or the hot early Eocene. Our model assuming pressure changes as a driver of Global Climate on geological time scales does this SUPERBLY well.

                https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EF95E-TVAAAtPn3.png

                Ned is no slouch He has a Ph.D. Physical Scientist with a broad range of interests in various fields of science, i.e. climate, cosmology, astrophysics, nutrition, archaeology etc.
                He says science should be data driven, not models driven pseudoscience.

                130

              • #
                theRealUniverse

                @Lance, you can add the un-solvability of Navier-Stokes equations (fluid dynamics) for large meshes. (which the models cant do).

                60

              • #
                TdeF

                These are laws, not models. A model is a proposed solution for a complex situation. How you measure whether it is correct is how well it fits the past data and predicts the future. After 31 years of data, the Climate Models are all wrong, which is not unexpected. Consider they are only predicting one number and cannot get that right.

                However the modelling of temperature mathematically by Prof. Weiss is near perfect. Whatever the actual mechanism, the end result correlates almost perfectly with only two well known cycles, the De Vries solar cycle of 250 years and the induced PDO of around 60 years. Who needs any more? We have the predictor and it fits the past for 2500 years and even predicts the warming at the end of the 20th century.

                Professor Weiss’ model also demonstrates implicitly that CO2 is irrelevant. Apart from the fact that the CO2 increase is perfectly natural and a consequence of warming, it is not a factor in the planetary surface temperature. No surprise there, apart from Hansen who has made it his life’s work, like Michael Mann. The evidence is in. They are both wrong, Mann culpably so by tacit admission in court in Canada.

                Expect the world to cool quickly in the 2020s. That should be an end to this. It has already started.

                110

              • #
                Greg in NZ

                It has already started… https://www.snow-forecast.com/overviews/tips_full

                “SNOW NEWS UPDATED 1 OCTOBER [it takes a while for wind-powered interwebs to bring news to our shores]

                “We’re in to October and more Northern Hemisphere ski areas are opening for an early start to winter 2019-20… Austria is dominating the number of ski areas open at present… It’s still a choice of Saas Fee or Zermatt for snow-sports in Switzerland [while] three more Swiss glaciers are expected to open through October [and Italy's] Val Senales is entering its second month of its 2019-20 season”. Skiing through summer? But… the heat and melting, no?

                “There’s a second ski area opening in Scandinavia on Friday as Finland’s Ruka begins its long season on October 4th… It’s been looking a lot more like winter in Western Canada through the weekend. Panorama, in BC, reported heavy snow top-to-bottom… There was much excitement in US media”. Snafu?

                Australia’s season “is lasting up to two weeks longer than planned with Perisher (225/225cm), which also started the season two weeks early back at the end of June, saying that this winter is their ‘longest season in memory’”. NZ’s North Island ski areas received over “50cm of fresh snow in the middle of last week and these areas now have the deepest reported bases south of the Equator“, 3 metres or 10-12 feet – woohoo! – take that, Warmies, and eat it.

                50

          • #
            AndyG55

            “highlighted the same problem”

            And the models STILL have those problems, they are built on a foundation of quicksand and garbage.

            They have NO MEANING and bear LITTLE RESEMBLANCE to the physical world

            111

      • #
        tom0mason

        Peter Fitzroy,

        The oceanic currents are STILL very poorly models, that is why they are parameterized!

        50

        • #
          Peter Fitzroy

          Everything is parameterised which is what models use.

          110

          • #
            AndyG55

            So you ADMIT that the models are VERY BAD, and that are driven purely by made up parameters

            Thanks PF

            You really need to find a brain and engage it before posting.

            You are making a monumental ass of yourself.

            60

            • #
              Peter Fitzroy

              Go and get a dictionary, read it

              27

              • #
                AndyG55

                I’m sure you know what “monumental ass” means,

                but if you feel you need to look it up, by all means go for it.

                20

              • #
                AndyG55

                Dictionary

                A fudge factor is an ad hoc quantity or element introduced into a calculation, formula or model in order to make it fit observations or expectations

                In climate models, “fudge factors” and “parameters” mean essentially the same thing.

                Now, off you trot and look up “monumental ass”

                40

              • #
                el gordo

                This from that earlier link that Fitz put up.

                ‘Choices of surface temperature data deserve scrutiny, because surface temperature provides the usual measure of long-term ‘global warming’ as well as a test of climate response to large volcanic eruptions. A number of researchers (e.g., Harvey and Kaufmann 2002) have noted that large volcanoes often do not produce the cooling predicted by models.’

                This is interesting, it may depend on where the volcano is situated on the planet. Or it might just be an academic fiddle.

                30

          • #
            tom0mason

            Peter Fitzroy

            Everything is parameterised which is what models use.

            NO! NO! and thrice NO! You are wrong!

            With real scientific models you do NOT parameterize in the way it is done in these models. In real scientific models you assess the component’s dependencies and formulate a mathematical expression that can fairly (withing known errors) represent the real world components of the model. And the modeled components, just like real scientific models, are verified against reality. Climate models and it’s many components are NOT verified against reality.

            By parameterizing the components you are effectively saying that we neither know how many components actually work and probably do not know what dependencies they have. AKA we’re ignorant of the basic science of the climate, so we’ll guess. Which is precisely where ‘climate science’ is at.

            But you keep believing for that is all you have.

            50

          • #
            Kalm Keith

            I normally wouldn’t respond , but this is so funny:

            Parameterised!! Ha ha.

            Parameterised!! Ha ha.

            Parameterised!! Ha ha.

            Parameterised!! Ha ha.

            :-) :-) :-)

            Love it, for totally exposing the ridiculosity.

            KK

            30

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      Then he sends to the UN (United Nitwit) Association of political ‘has beens’.
      I dont see it getting anywhere no matter how accurate it is.

      20

  • #
    • #
      David Maddison

      See additional comments at:

      https://culturalanalysis.net/2019/01/14/the-zeller-nikolov-climate-controversy/

      And Holmes’ comments at bottom.

      90

      • #
        Peter C

        See also the comments at the bottom by Leigh Yaxley.

        My initial enthusiasm for the Gravitational Atmospheric Temperature theory was tempered by observing the results of the BOM balloon flights, over time and spatially from Cocos Is in the north to Mawson base (coastal Antarctica) in the south.

        http://www.bom.gov.au/aviation/observations/aerological-diagrams/

        The atmospheric temperature profile is not adiabatic eg Melbourne. Furthermore the winter temp traces at Mawson strongly suggest that without solar input the profile would be isothermal, ie same temperature from top to bottom.

        That is not to say that the gas laws do not apply, they do but the theory needs to be modified. Energy is input at the surface (by the sun) and energy is lost at the top of the atmosphere.

        The effect of clouds is probably very important, for energy loss at the top.
        Water vapour and change of state of water likely sets the environmental lapse rate in the tropics, which follows the SALR (saturated adiabatic lapse rate) very closely, up to the tropopause.

        40

        • #
          Peter Fitzroy

          Mawson! what is the angle of incidence there? What does the phrase well mixed gas mean?

          017

        • #
          theRealUniverse

          ‘Mawson strongly suggest that without solar input the profile would be isothermal, ie same temperature from top to bottom.’
          Odd remark,
          1. There cant be ‘no solar input’
          2. There cant be ‘same temperature from top to bottom’ G = -dP/dz.
          ‘That is not to say that the gas laws do not apply,’

          So how do you mean the gas laws dont apply? Of course they apply.

          70

          • #
            Peter C

            Check the Mawson temp trace for yourself. The atmosphere is isothermal from 30,000ft up to 55,000ft (top of the trace).
            Below 30,000ft the temp gradient -dp/dz is a lot less than G (-9.8C/km).

            So how do you mean the gas laws dont apply? Of course they apply.

            Note the double negative in my full quote.

            20

    • #
    • #
      Ross

      David

      Someone else on here linked the work of the Connolly’s a week or so ago and they use the same molar density “approach” to looking at weather balloon data and come up with really interesting results. They did their work in 2013/14 and have “self published” the results.

      https://globalwarmingsolved.com/

      The second and third papers cover theories they have developed and worked on related to the initial results which they think could help explain various weather events etc.

      I saw a video of an interview with Lord Monckton in recent days –he was raving about the work saying that because it is empirical that it is better than the work his group has done from a mathematical / theoretical approach but coming to the same conclusion.

      70

  • #
  • #
    Sambar

    Does Prime Minister Scot Morrison have what it takes to be a long term Prime Minister that actually cares about Australia first? He has stirred me to the point where some little hope has been restored in ” our future”. Comments about the role of the U.N. involvement in our lives, and how they should be rrestriced are most encouraging.
    I hope he contiunes to look after Australia as priority one.
    I thought the response by the opposition leader, that Australia accepted and abided by U.N. dictates voluntarily most telling. None of these binding agreements where EVER put to the people for a vote. The governments of either persuasion simply signed us up to all sorts of commitments once they were in power for our own good. Never ask the plebs, they might have a different opinion.
    Keep going Mr Morrison, now start withdrawing / cancelling some of these arrangements and you will my vote.

    120

    • #
      PeterS

      Keep going Mr Morrison, now start withdrawing / cancelling some of these arrangements and you will my vote.

      Not going to happen sad to say. There is no doubt that the LNP is a better alternative to the ALP+Greens for now but in the end the result will be very similar. I’m not so sure Morrison is really serious about preventing us from descending into an economic ruin due to our high reliance on renewables. Sometimes governments have to step in and alter the situation to make the coal option more attractive to power companies. At the moment there is really no incentive to build new coal fired power stations yet most of us know we need them in order to survive as a viable nation. Same goes with other large infrastructure projects, such as dams. We keep pumping in more migrants at record numbers yet we are not expanding on major infrastructure items to match the population growth. Unless the LNP wake up perhaps having ALP+Greens in power would be a better option down the track to promote the building of such large infrastructure items. Their support for renewables might then fall apart once they realise it can’t cope. The irony too is more and more ALP supporters I know also believe we should build nuclear power stations. The time for talk is well and truly over and the time for action is now, PM Morrison.

      70

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    Greta Thunberg drives a Tesla to Iowa to join in student-led climate strike -

    “We teenagers and children shouldn’t have to take the responsibility.” the teenage [global warming] activists said.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/10/04/greta-thunberg-drives-tesla-iowa-join-climate-strike/3869884002/

    >> When your smug doomsday global warming alarmists pull up in their ‘electric’ cars, show them this:

    “Demand for electric vehicles is fueling a rise in child labor in cobalt mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo, experts said this week, urging companies to take action as the industry expands.

    Cobalt is a key component in batteries for electric cars, phones and laptops, and Congo provides more than half of global supply.

    Tens of thousands of children as young as six dig for the toxic substance in artisanal mines in the country’s southeast, without protective clothing, rights groups say.”

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-congo-mining-rights/electric-car-demand-fueling-rise-in-child-labor-in-dr-congo-campaigners-idUSKCN1N71SQ

    70

    • #
      toorightmate

      Gracious Greta might lead a children’s strike in the Congo.

      70

    • #
      Ross

      Another irony Travis is that while George Soros is funding the Thunberg circus, the school kids climate strikes and various other climate related activities via the many NGOs he funds, he has for a number of years been trying to become the Oil & Gas oligarch of the Ukraine. This guy really is a piece of work.

      https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/10/exclusive-obamas-state-and-justice-departments-assisted-billionaire-and-democrat-donor-george-soros-in-attempt-to-control-ukraines-oil-and-gas-industry/

      100

    • #
      PeterS

      Facts get in the way of the alarmists so the facts are totally ignored. That’s how fake science works. More to the point Shiva Ayyadurai on Outsiders today explained succinctly how the so called “climate scientists” have “prostituted” themselves and are now making bucket loads of money, all in the name of fake science, which has been feeding into fake news. If we are not careful we will soon be drowned in a cesspool of fake policies by our own government. One sure way to short circuit all this is to follow Trump and get out of the Paris Agreement. Morrison now admits the problems of “negative globalism”. Next he has to prove he means it by starting proceedings to get out of the Paris Agreement. Until he does so he will be painted as a hypocrite.

      40

    • #
      PeterS

      Facts get in the way of the alarmists so the facts are totally ignored. That’s how fake science works. More to the point Shiva Ayyadurai on Outsiders today explained succinctly how the so called “climate scientists” have in effect turned to the oldest profession (ie, pr0stituti0n) and are now making bucket loads of money, all in the name of fake science, which has been feeding into fake news. If we are not careful we will soon be drowned in a cesspool of fake policies by our own government. One sure way to short circuit all this is to follow Trump and get out of the Paris Agreement. Morrison now admits the problems of “negative globalism”. Next he has to prove he means it by starting proceedings to get out of the Paris Agreement. Until he does so he will be painted as a hypocrite.

      20

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      And of course that Thunderbergs Tesla is charged from a coal fired power station, or even a nuke one!

      30

      • #
        tom0mason

        theRealUniverse,

        And any Tesla is a testament to fossil fuels. All of them are manufactured from materials that can only be made from energy intensive (i.e. coal, gas, nuclear powered electricity generation).
        Yep all those machined aluminum alloys and specialized steel components, glass and/or carbon fiber, glass windows, all those electronic devices, and the miles of copper wiring. They all are there because of fossil fuels and oil/coal chemical industry.

        In a truly Green world you’d have to forge, hammer, and knit your own components as well as weave your own brake-pads. :-)

        40

    • #
      Another Ian

      She wasn’t reading this then

      “Why You Are Seeing All Those Videos of Teslas Wandering Dangerously Through Parking Lots”

      http://coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2019/10/why-you-are-seeing-all-those-videos-of-teslas-wandering-dangerously-through-parking-lots.html

      40

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    Not drowning: waving!

    Al Gore takes a planet-destroying fossil-fuelled trip to Japan, Says Japan’s Coal Embrace Risks Letting Down World

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-03/al-gore-says-japan-s-coal-embrace-risks-letting-down-the-world

    >> Gore should continue the pointless carbon (sic) burning tour onto China …

    China plans 226 GW of new coal power projects: environmental groups

    “China’s total planned coal-fired power projects now stand at 226.2 gigawatts (GW), the highest in the world and more than twice the amount of new capacity on the books in India, according to data published by environmental groups on Thursday.”

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-china-coal-idUSKBN1W40HS

    >> Then, Gore could continue his carbon (sic) spewing tour onto Vietnam …

    Coal remains main source of energy in Southeast Asia

    “By 2040, the power generated from coal will have risen from the current 35 percent to 40 percent.”

    Coal remains main source of energy in Southeast Asia

    https://en.vietnamplus.vn/coal-remains-main-source-of-energy-in-southeast-asia/161605.vnp

    >> Emissions are never going down. Ever.

    80

    • #
      AndyG55

      GREAT NEWS. !!

      LOTS of luvly LIFE-GIVING CO2 for the world’s biosphere. :-)

      40

    • #
      Greg in NZ

      Waving? No! Drowning in it…

      https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/mediawatch/audio/2018715724/the-fire-this-time-reporting-climate-now

      “Thunberg said she always had at least one, and usually more, climate scientist read her speeches to make sure everything thing she says is based on the best scientific evidence”. Everything thing (?). MediaWatch, meet your own medicine: peer sceptic review.

      IPCC PR (panic report) co-author, Massey University professor Bruce Glavovic, told RNZ: “And the fact of the matter is that changes that have been underway in these systems imperial the health and wellbeing of humanity and life on Earth”. MediaWatch, where’s your scientific proofreader now – hellooo? – I’m feeling very imperialled.

      “An ITV report by Rachel Younger… hammered home the point… Solomon Islanders told Younger their islands had literally disappeared under the sea”. Literally? Or ill-literally: if their islands came up out of the sea, guess they can go back down again.

      “But it took an estimated 150,000 Kiwis taking to the streets to force climate change to the top of the news agenda”. 1/32 of NZ’s 4,800,000 population (3.125% according to my Maculator – please check my math and advise if my decimal point has gone a wandering) sure don’t sound like an overwhelming majority nor consensus – more a tiny insignificant irrelevant misled minority. Discuss – no, not you Fitzroy.

      Oh yeah, and, “climate scientist James Renwick declared himself a ‘Greta fanboy’”. Oh my codfish, ha!

      90

      • #
        Greg in NZ

        Somehow I forgot the penultimate sentence from the above jabberwocky (hey I was drowning, gimme a break):

        “the Guardian set the ‘gold standard’ with its coverage” of ©©©rap covering climate now nonsense.

        P.S. Graeme No.3 – Fitzero gets my vote ✓

        50

    • #

      Back at the start of 2008, when I started doing all this, I received incredulous looks and disbelieving comments when I said, and wrote that China was constructing new tech coal fired power plants, and opening new ones at the rate of one large scale plant every seven to ten days or so.

      Here we are now, almost 12 years later, and they are still doing it. At the time back then in 2008, I mentioned that they would be doing it for decades to come.

      That total of 226GW still to be constructed is just the Baseline, because I suspect it will be more than that.

      Just in the most recent year, 2018, China brought on line 41190MW in Nameplate of new coal fired plants, and for some perspective, the total Nameplate for coal fired power here in Australia is 23000MW. So, they’ve slowed down a little since I first mentioned it in 2008, from ten days to around one new large scale plant (2000MW) every seventeen days. At that rate, there is still at least six to ten more years of construction left, but they’ll just keep on going. Even if it is just ten years, and with a 50 year life span, that takes China’s coal fired power emissions out to 2080 ….. if they never construct another coal fired plant after that ten years.

      Incidentally, the coal burned per KWH total for those plants in China came down again, as it has every year since I started watching, and it’s now down to 308 grams/KWH. Compare that to the total here in Australia, (and the U.S. and the rest of the developed World) where it is over 500 grams/KWH, and in some of those Countries, way higher than that. Imagine if we converted all our existing coal fired plants here in Australia to these USC ones, and there would be that huge saving in CO2 emissions, up to 40%. Who would have thought.

      Also, and specifically looking at power availability for the Residential sector, you know, having electricity connected to the home you’re living in that we here in Australia take so absolutely for granted. The already developed World has an availability for power in the Residential Sector ranging between 30% and up to 38% in the U.S.

      In China, that residential sector only gets 14% of all the generated power, and back in 2008, it was just 8%. So, the construction of all that new power in China means more homes are being connected, and still there are hundreds of millions of people who have no power connected to where they are living. The last time the U.S. had the Residential sector with only 14% of power was, well, we don’t know really, because records only go back to 1949. and back then 26% of power went to the residential sector, now at 37% of all power being consumed in the Residential sector.

      Now, some may also believe that China is a World leader in wind power. Well the total generated power from wind power in China is 5.2% of the total, while here in Australia it is 7.8%, and in the U.S. 6.6%, so they’re not really as committed to it as we are here in Australia.

      China has a long way to go yet when it comes to construction of coal fired power, a very long way.

      Tony.

      130

      • #
        Peter Fitzroy

        Love the lying with statistics. eg “Well the total generated power from wind power in China is 5.2% of the total” but you never mention the total, so I could be 5.2% in gigawatts is more than anywhere else, you don’t mention solar, and you don’t mention decommissioned plant.

        But still keep up the preaching, the converted here like to be reassured.

        016

        • #
          Dennis

          Peter you really are a pest.

          70

        • #
          Bill in Oz

          Peter
          “Lying with statistics”
          So you think that China has not done this since 2008 and is not doing this still ?
          Now that really shows you up as plain Daft !
          Go back to bed Fitz
          You are clearly not awake & thinking yet..
          Need to rest a lot I suggest !

          60

        • #

          Peter Fitzroy,

          thanks for those kind words. And hey, don’t knock yourself out here. It was pretty much a common misconception at the time. Even though they were spelled differently, they were pronounced the same, but they really were two different guitarists.

          When Paul left The Beatles, he brought out his first album, and it was self titled, and while a moderate seller, it was pretty average really. His second album Ram, was better accepted, critically acclaimed and sold pretty well, so Paul now considered that he could actually make it on his own. He ‘teased’ Denny Laine away from the Moody Blues, and with a core of four now a band he called Wings, they brought out Wildlife, which was pretty average really.

          Then during the sessions for Give Ireland Back To The Irish, (and as well, Mary Had A Little Lamb) he asked the Irish guitarist Henry McCullough to join the band, and do the lead Guitar work. He was also on the Red Rose Speedway album, which was also well received all round. After that album, he had some differences with Paul and left the band, as did Denny Siewell, Paul’s drummer who had been with him since the start. They did the Bond Theme Live And Let Die during those Red Rose sessions and Henry played on that as well.

          Now just Paul, Linda, and Denny Laine, Paul went to Lagos in Nigeria and all did the main work for Band On The Run, which could be called by some to be perhaps his best work. Back in the UK, album released and selling huge, he needed a full band to tour the album, and to that end he was joined by the Scottish guitarist, the young Jimmy McCulloch to do lead guitar work in the lead up up to and during and after Venus And Mars,

          Both surnames were differently spelled, but people thought it was the original guitarist, as the names were pronounced the same. (sort of like merculluck)

          Because it was relatively close together between them, a year, 18 Months, the assumption persisted.

          So, you’re not alone in thinking that.

          Also, good to see you concede that wind power will never replace coal fired power.

          Tony.

          Link To China Power Data, and hey Pete knock yourself out, and then come back with an apology, eh. I’ve been using that site for years now. Fancy you calling ME a liar.

          131

          • #
            Another Ian

            Tony

            Reads like the blog clogger with his best Lord Haw Haw impersonation

            20

          • #

            Eight and a half hours and nothing from Fitzroy.

            He has a major problem. All that HE has is his green higher ups, those who tell him what to say, and how to fall back on personal invective and insult and that I (we all) tell lie$, and then disappear, because if he doesn’t see the response, then HIS assertions stand. (well, in his mind anyway) So there’s no need for him to actually do anything at all except scuttle off and hide, and come back later to resume his, well, whatever it is that he thinks he’s doing here.

            So, WHY would I tell a lie he has accused me of, if I can’t back it up, as that would be a pretty critical mistake for me eh!

            So, as to my original comment above at 14.3, which drew his last resort of calling me a liar.

            I have the data, you know actual physical figures for power generation for all I said.

            Australian data from the AEMO, and NEM for:

            1. Total generated power from all sources.
            2. Total generated power from wind power….. This then gives me the percentage of the overall supplied by wind power.
            3. Total generated power and total supplied to the Residential sector.

            EIA (Energy Information Administration) from the U.S. for:

            1. Total generated power from all sources.
            2. Total Generated power from wind power….. This then gives me the percentage of the Overall supplied by wind power.
            3. Total generated power and total supplied to the Residential Sector.
            4. Historical Graphs detailing total power breakdown by sector back to start of recording in 1949, so percentage of total power to that Residential sector.
            5. Total coal fired power generation this last year 2018.
            6. Total Coal burned in the electricity generation sector for coal fired power last year….. This gives me coal burned per KWH for the U.S.

            And lastly, that same electrical power generation data from China, a site I have accessed constantly for the last ten years and more. I gave Fitzroy the Chinese original, but made it infinitely easier for him by the hints left at that site, and hey, he has told us numerous times that he knows EVERYTHING there is to know about everything, and how we all know nothing about our own specialist subjects, so for someone of that expertise in him, it would have been simple to find it all out. Just read the top where it says TRANSLATION, and then clicking on the Translate button at the top right there. Then because the data is the most recent, it’s then the consolidated Annual Data second text block there, and the top one for 2018. As the Meerkat says ….. simples! It’s all at this link

            That gives me the following:

            1. Total Generated power all sources (that very top figure) – 69940
            2. Total generated power from wind power – 3660 (so, umm, as I stated, no lie at all Fitzroy, 5.2%)
            3. Total new coal Nameplate this year – (under Thermal in New power generation installed capacity) 41190MW. (so from that I can work out at the current rate how long is left for plant construction, based on historical data)
            4. Coal burned per KWH – (Standard coal consumption further down again) 308grams/KWH
            5. Whole society electricity consumption – 68449
            6. Urban and rural residents’ electricity consumption – 9685….. (So, 14% of power to that Residential sector)

            So, there you have it, a whole comment loaded with actual figures from those data sites at three Countries, and NOT ONE SINGLE LIE at all there Fitzroy.

            And not one single model, just real true data.

            Apology forthcoming ….. well, you know, I doubt it. There might have been a spelling mistake I made somewhere, or I forgot Bill Johnston’s bowling average for the 1948 Invincibles tour.

            Why should he apologise when he was so comprehensively shredded.

            Tony.

            20

        • #
          AndyG55

          “Love the lying with statistics.”

          Yes we have noted your propensity for climate propaganda. !!

          GISS etal, BEaST, … the MSM.. All LYING WITH STATISTICS.

          50

          • #

            Peter’s in big trouble at that site.

            In his eyes, it’s all a complete lie, the whole site, because it’s actual physical data, and not one of his leftie ….. models.

            Tony.

            110

            • #

              Not that he would go to a site we link to. On principle you know!.

              But, hey, that’s his style, He’ll call us liars, and then, never apologising, just ignore it and go somewhere else to call someone else a liar.

              Tony.

              90

  • #
    Dennis

    Out of 100

    Board 99
    Fitz zero

    101

  • #
    pat

    this program was broadcast this morning:

    4 Oct: ABC: Australia is not prepared to fight the bushfires of the future, experts warn
    Background Briefing An investigation by Background Briefing, ABC Regional and Landline
    The bushfires of the future are already here. They burn earlier in the season, and more ferociously, and can interact with extreme weather events to create fires we don’t know how to fight.
    This year, the bushfire season began with the worst September in recorded history, with 55 homes destroyed.
    The Australian winter was only just in the rear-view mirror when 130 bushfires ripped through southern Queensland and northern NSW in one day.
    Australia’s former chief scientist, Ian Chubb, said it was clear the climate was changing.
    “It’s not just some passing phase that it didn’t rain this decade,” he said. “The implications of that for fire are pretty obvious.”

    Former New South Wales fire and rescue commissioner and Climate Council member Greg Mullins said unprecedented conditions could give rise to so-called Black Swan fire events.
    “We’re going to have fires that I can’t comprehend, and I’ve been in the game for nearly half a century,” he said.
    A Black Swan is something without precedent and thought to be impossible, until it happens.
    When it comes to bushfires, these Black Swans happen as our environment changes, creating conditions firefighters have never seen before.

    Emergency experts and senior scientists have told a joint ABC investigation that a comprehensive national plan is needed to tackle the fires of the future, and they are concerned about the lack of financial commitment from the Federal Government for resources and research.
    “This is a national issue that all people in Australia, regardless of whether they are left or right, have a right to expect that we will face up to challenges that are ahead,” Professor Chubb said…

    ‘Asleep at the wheel’
    Black Swans like the Sir Ivan firestorm (NSW 2017) are only going to become more frequent as our climate warms, according to Dr Karl Braganza, head of Climate Monitoring at the Bureau of Meteorology.
    “We’re also seeing not just the change in the frequency of those events, we’re seeing a change in the severity, so the worst fire danger days are getting worse,” he said…

    Background Briefing has obtained documents that show the proportion of federal funding for NAFC (National Aerial Firefighting Centre) has more than halved since 2003.
    Minister for Natural Disaster and Emergency Management David Littleproud said he would raise the business case at the next Ministerial Council meeting…
    The cost of natural disasters is projected to reach an average of $39 billion by 2050…

    “The Federal Government is missing in action,” said Mr Mullins. “What I’ve heard from a number of sectors is that this Government fundamentally doesn’t believe in climate change, doesn’t think that anything needs to be done.”
    Mr Mullins is one of 23 emergency services experts from every state and territory who have written to the Government, asking for strategic national firefighting resources to cope with climate change.
    They have not received a response…

    Mr Littleproud said the Government did acknowledge the role climate change had played in escalating fire risks.
    “I haven’t seen this in my life before and I don’t know where it’s going to end,” he said. “I think it would be remiss of anybody not to suggest that it is not climate change that has caused a lot of this.”
    When asked on September 9 if he believed climate change caused by human activities contributed to worsening fire conditions, Mr Littleproud told Hamish Macdonald on RN Breakfast: “We’re adapting to it as the climate continues to change and we’ll continue to equip our service workers, whether it’s man-made or not is irrelevant.”
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-04/the-bushfires-of-the-future-are-here-black-swan/11559930

    full of exaggerations; from what I can tell, not a mention of the multiple arson incidents:

    AUDIO: 53min41sec: 6 Oct: ABC Background Briefing: Prepare to burn
    Presenter: Alice Brennan
    It’s been the most devastating September for bushfires in this country on record.
    Experts are warning of more unprecedented weather events than ever before, and they’re calling for urgent national leadership.
    In this special collaboration with ABC Regional and Landline, Background Briefing asks if we’re prepared to fight the fires of the future.
    Reporters: Meghna Bali / Liz Keen / Kathleen Ferguson / Meredith Griffiths / Ben Deacon
    https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/australian-bushfires-future/11572014

    paraphrasing: 43min05ec Greg Mullins, Climate Council. formed group called Emergency Leaders for Climate Action – 23 signed a statement calling on national Govt to take more action on climate change…and to have a parliamentary inquiry into the worsening extreme weather that’s driving floods, major storms, bushfires and heatwaves, but we’ve basically been ignored. from what I’ve heard from a number of sectors, this Govt fundamentally doesn’t believe in climate change, doesn’t think that anything needs to be done, and they don’t want to speak to anybody who might have a different view…Govt MIA.

    Thornton has a bet both ways:

    10 Sept: ABC: More than climate change driving Queensland fires, explain climatologists
    By Ben Deacon and Penny Timms
    “The forests are in a state where even a small ignition source can cause major problems,” warned Richard Thornton from the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre…
    Climate change trends
    “Climate change is playing its role here, but it’s not the cause of these fires,” Dr Thornton said…

    The Bureau of Meteorology’s state of the climate report from last year showed the overall fire danger index had increased over the past 40 years over much of southern Australia.
    Dr Thornton expects this trend to continue.
    “What climate change will do is it will increase the frequency, or the return rate if you like, of really bad fire weather days,” he said.
    “So the days like where you had Ash Wednesday or black Saturday, the return period for those sorts of days, will come back and will become shorter.
    “So we really need to start thinking about how do we prepare properties better for that?
    “How do we make sure that communities stay safe?”
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-10/more-than-climate-change-driving-queensland-fires/11493950

    40

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      So how about instead of blaming fake climate scenarios, looking at what actually starts bushfires in the first place.
      Fires cant start due to 40 deg heat alone, they require ignition source. Are most started by humans? How many are natural as in lightning?
      Stop building so many housing estates in cosy bush reserves. Make plenty of breaks…

      50

  • #
    pat

    while RN was running the bushfires/CAGW stuff, ABC TV (and ABC news radio – where I heard a bit – were running much about drought/CAGW…plus, of course, distortions of the dems’ impeachment story). not up in full on Insiders’ page as yet, but plenty here:

    Twitter: Insiders ABC
    TOP TWEET (at time of posting) 3h ago
    Watch Editor @rabbitandcoffee’s new short, ‘Trump and the Giant ImPeach’
    Need we say any more LINK ABC: Huw Parkinson’s ‘Trump and the Giant ImPeach’
    (Huw Parkinson makes shenaniganery for @InsidersABC by blending politics, film & TV into a rainbow flavoured pulp)
    VIDEO 2min39sec

    TWEET: 51min ago
    Water Resources Minister @D_LittleproudMP says he “totally” accepts the science around climate change.
    VIDEO 2min08sec

    TWEET: 3h ago
    “For Christ’s sake, just respect your fellow Australian”
    Water Resources Minister @D_LittleproudMP says (climate) activists have to be called out when their actions impinge on the rights of others
    VIDEO 1min13sec

    (ONE ABC + ONE GUARDIAN + TWO SMH/AGE)
    TWEET: 3h ago
    Insiders is ready to go with host @frankelly08 and our panel: @CroweDM, @murpharoo and @markgkenny.
    https://twitter.com/InsidersABC

    the maker of the anti-Trump video:

    6 Aug: ABC: Insiders editor Huw Parkinson started making videos to entertain his friends, they’ve now been viewed by millions
    by Huw Parkinson
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/about/backstory/television/2019-08-04/how-huw-parkinson-makes-his-insiders-videos/11365092

    20

  • #
    pat

    how did these temp predictions play out?

    14 Sept: Guardian: Temperatures 10C above average forecast as 130 bushfires continue to burn
    Bureau of Meteorology says stubborn high pressure system will create hot and dry conditions over weekend and next week
    by Josh Taylor
    (Josh Taylor has previously worked for BuzzFeed News and Crikey)
    Climate change has made nights and winters warmer, increasing the possibility extreme bushfires would burn in different states simultaneously.
    Greg Mullins: “What’s becoming difficult is the whole paradigm of strategic firefighting in Australia – it was predicated on progressive fire seasons,” he says.
    “As we saw last year and now, we’re getting simultaneous fire seasons.
    “States are having to resource their own fires while other states are screaming out for help and there’ll be times when each state says, you’re on your own.”…

    Jonathan How, a forecaster at the Bureau of Meteorology, told Guardian Australia it would be a very warm weekend across north-east New South Wales and south-east Queensland, and those conditions would extend into next week…
    He said there would be clear skies and temperatures between 6C and 10C above average for this time of year on the weekend, and up to 12C above average next week…
    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/sep/14/temperatures-10-degrees-above-average-forecast-as-130-bushfires-continue-to-burn

    20

    • #
      Greg in NZ

      Welcome to October!

      http://www.bom.gov.au/nsw/forecasts/thredbo.shtml

      Tuesday 8 Oct: -1˚C max, “High (80%) chance of snow showers”
      Wednesday 9 Oct: -5˚C min, “Slight (20%) chance of a snow shower”
      Thursday 10 Oct: -3˚C min, “Medium (40%) chance of snow showers”
      Friday 11 Oct: 1˚C max, “High (70%) chance of snow showers”
      Saturday 12 Oct: -2˚C min, “Medium (40%) chance of snow showers”

      “states are screaming out for help” – where the forecast did the heat go! Skiing till Christmas? Jingle bells! All the way…

      60

  • #
    beowulf

    Wind “farms” score another victim. Weather warnings save lives — but only if turbines don’t get in the way.

    There has been an issue for some time with airport radar affected by turbines, resulting in a danger to pilots during take-offs and landings. The USAF has banned some wind farms in the vicinity of airfields for that reason. The effects include phantom radar images, distorted real images and corrupted “blind” wedges of data radiating out from the radar where a turbine cluster intervenes.

    Now weather forecasters reliant on Doppler systems are up in arms because turbines are wrecking weather radar images used to track and predict tornados and other catastrophic weather systems. Forecasters are left in the predicament of not knowing whether to believe their radar screens.

    https://stopthesethings.com/2019/10/04/off-radar-weathermen-wild-as-interference-from-wind-turbines-wrecks-their-radar-signals/

    60

  • #
    pat

    5 Oct: Breitbart: Global Warming: Britain Braces for ‘Coldest Winter in 30 Years’
    by Thomas D. Williams PH.D
    Researchers from University College London are forecasting an average temperature in the UK of just 3.9ºC (39ºF) for January to February in what is expected to be “the coldest weather in 30 years.”
    Yahoo News reported (LINK) Saturday that temperatures in Great Britain could reach as low as -14C with “snow event after snow event” expected to hit various parts of the territory.
    Forecasters expect the lasting cold spell to begin sometime this month and to continue at least through March…

    Current sea temperatures combined with a weather system over the north Atlantic suggest that “a freezing vortex of Arctic air could hit the country” later this month, Yahoo’s Victoria Bell reported. The system will presumably descend from the North Pole ushering in a swath of low pressure spanning from Greenland to the northwest coast of Ireland.
    In the estimation of some meteorologists, the 2019-2020 cold spell will rival the bitter winter of 1963, believed to have been the coldest in 200 years.

    Other weather-watchers are less confident that this winter will be a record-breaker. Mark Saunders, for example, Professor of Climate Prediction at UCL, claims that there is only a 57 percent probability that this winter will be colder than last year’s…

    No matter what the winter shapes up to be, there is a 100 percent probability that climate alarmists will find some way to attribute the weather to global warming and carbon dioxide emissions.
    https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/10/05/global-warming-britain-braces-for-coldest-winter-in-30-years/

    50

    • #
      Serp

      Professor of Climate Prediction! Seriously? This is the most bizarre example of postmodern academic pseudoscience yet.

      Surely UCL is an entirely privately funded institution, much like Australia’s community funded Climate Council, as it would be gross malfeasance for taxpayer money to prop it up.

      30

  • #
    • #
      Peter Fitzroy

      Well thanks, here are 10 reasons to be worried

      Glad to see that you agree about the maths in fluid dynamics, and I unlike you have included a link so that the uninitiated can see just how hard it is.

      Both fluid dynamics and climate have been extensively modelled, yet you believe on and not the other.

      /cognitive dissonance

      114

      • #
        AndyG55

        Yep you are displaying MASSIVE cognitive dissonance, PF

        You are showing that you are basically just a confused, scientific and mathematic illiterate.

        The one thing you have actually managed to prove. !!

        Quoting propaganda LIES and garbage from NASA only reinforces that FACT.

        You obviously have very little understanding of either fluid dynamics or climate..

        1. Global temperature rise.. Solar peaks will do that.

        2. Warming oceans.. so the SUN, definitely NOT CO2

        3. Shrinking Ice sheets.. not in the last 12 or more years.. 1979 was a time of EXTREME sea ice in Arctic, up there with the LIA, THANK GOODNESS for some respite for the people living up there. Antarctic is not declining, Greenland is only just down from peak area in 8000 years.

        4> Glacial retreat, uncovering tree stumps and human artefacts. Many of those glaciers didn’t exist before the LIA.

        5. Decreased snow cover: LOL…They have GOT to be joking. Massive snow cover in NH !!

        6. Sea level rise.. NO sign of any acceleration at tide gauges. Maldives islands expanding, and LOTS of money to build resorts etc coming in.

        7. Declining Arctic sea ice level for the last decade or more. down from an EXTREME HIGH extent in late 1970s, thank goodness.

        8. Extreme events.. NO INCREASE in hurricane or cyclone global intensity

        9. Ocean acidification.. a TOTAL FURPHY. !!!

        10. Coral reefs, doing very well, GBR is recovering well from the LOW WATER bleaching event caused by the 2015 El Nino. As we saw the other day from that temperature on a shed roof, there has been no warming in that region.

        So, NOAA, a pack of LIES and MIS-INFORMATION.. which you swallow like a gullible little child. !

        40

      • #
        tom0mason

        Peter Fitzroy,

        “Both fluid dynamics and climate have been extensively modelled, yet you believe on and not the other.”

        Again you are wrong.
        They’ve modelled something but it is not this planet’s climate nor is it any fluid dynamics components of our known climate.
        They’ve stay within their cozy virtual world and NOT stepped outside to validate it against reality.

        50

        • #
          AndyG55

          Yep, yet again PF is conflating KNOWN MEASURED VALIDATED physical concepts of fluid dynamics..

          .. against what is basically an empty un-validated mess.

          Quite bizarre to see such a blatant display of gross scientific ignorance.

          40

        • #
          Peter Fitzroy

          How can you say that – did you even glance at the model details, or, and this is more likely, did you just read something in WUWT which suits your bias?

          /truthiness unbound

          18

          • #
            AndyG55

            WRONG as always, PF.

            You are CLUELESS about how climate models work, that is patently obvious..

            Just as you clueless about nearly all maths and science.

            And you LIE about it, just to big note yourself.

            A sort of pathetic self-virtue seeking.

            /PF = immoral and dishonesty unbounded.

            40

          • #
            el gordo

            Variability normal and within average parameters.

            https://www.nature.com/articles/nature12310

            40

          • #
            tom0mason

            Peter Fitzroy,

            How can you say that – did you even glance at the model details

            Yes I have, and I have read some of the modeler’s blogs where they have discussed the difficulties in getting so many of the model to work (at all) without crashing or running off to a ridiculous outcome. They write about how to justify this or that adjustment when it is obvious the adjustment they make have NO reference to reality.

            40

          • #
            toorightmate

            OK DRONGO,
            Tell me of any other models where the raw data had to be changed SIGNIFICANTLY to make the models work.
            You idiot.

            10

  • #
    pat

    6 Oct: NZ Herald: Weather: Why NZ’s spring is about to get wet – but not warm
    By Jamie Morton, Science reporter
    Just as a rare and dramatic event high above Antarctica eases its icy influence on our weather, forecasters are warning another climate phenomenon is taking centre stage.
    What’s called the Indian Ocean Dipole, or IOD, could mean big bouts of rain in some parts of the country, in a lead-up to summer likely to lean on the cooler side…

    September came in at 0.1C below the 30-year average – breaking a streak of more than 30 months above average temperatures – with parts of the South Island like Nelson and Marlborough seeing the biggest shifts…
    Cooler trend
    Added to that was the fact New Zealand’s coastal sea temperatures were all sitting at below average – another departure from the past two years’ balmy trend…

    ***Overall, Niwa’s latest climate outlook predicted little chance of above-average temperatures anywhere between now and December…
    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12274006

    4 Oct: TheCountry: Temperatures were below average in September
    by Jen Lynds
    CARIBOU, Maine —Miriam Turner of Caribou resisted the urge to turn on her pellet stove all week long.
    But when she got up on Wednesday and felt that all too familiar chill in her house and saw that the temperature outside had still not risen over the 40-degree mark, she broke down and fired up her stove for the first time since she last turned it off in May.
    “When I say it like that, it doesn’t seem like my stove has been off all that long,” she said. “And I know it hasn’t. It sure hurts to turn it on because I know it is going to be a long winter and a long heating season now that September is over.”

    Temperatures for the month were slightly below the average maximum temperature of 64.8 degrees, according to the National Weather Service in Caribou. They ranged from 0.5 degrees to 1.5 degrees below average across the region as a whole…

    he cool temperatures resulted in an accelerated onset of fall deciduous tree colors across the region, according to the weather service.
    The lowest observed temperature was 31 degrees on Sept. 18…
    The highest temperature on record for the month was 92 degrees in September 2010, while the lowest was 23 degrees in September 1980…
    https://thecounty.me/2019/10/04/state-national-and-world-news/state/temperatures-were-below-average-in-september/

    5 Oct: 25News Illinois: Below Average Temperatures Stick Around
    Meteorologist: Grace Devine
    Below average temperatures remain with us for the extended forecast. Another cold front will move through Thursday and drop down temperatures even more come Friday.

    20 Sept: WaPo: NOAA’s fall outlook: Above-average temperatures everywhere
    Temperatures through December are forecast to be above average across the entire Lower 48 and Alaska
    By Matthew Cappucci
    Following one of the hottest summers on record, the fall looks to be exceptionally toasty, as well…
    Summer in the contiguous United States was the coolest in five years, but cool is relative — it was still anomalously hot, compared with long-term baselines, and summer ranked in the top third of such seasons historically, NOAA found…

    A chunk of average or slightly below average temperatures may become briefly nestled over New England, but otherwise, warmth is favored virtually everywhere.
    ***For those complaining about the toasty fall, be careful what you say. This is better than snow.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/09/20/noaas-fall-outlook-above-average-temperatures-everywhere/

    10

  • #
  • #
    pat

    6 Oct: Qld Govt: Statement: Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy
    The Honourable Dr Anthony Lynham
    Solar powers Queensland
    Queensland solar panels can now produce twice as much electricity as the state’s biggest power station.
    Energy Minister Dr Anthony Lynham said rooftops and solar farms together had just passed the 4000 megawatts milestone for generating capacity.
    That’s compared to the 1680 megawatts of capacity of the state’s biggest power station at Gladstone.
    “More than 560,000 Queensland rooves now sport solar systems and 30 solar farms are now generating across the state,” Dr Lynham said…

    “Under our solar and battery scheme that provides loans and grants, almost 2500 households and small businesses have installed a battery system with a further 1500 people with approval to do so before the program ends mid next year
    “Queenslanders are embracing solar energy because they know that solar reduces power bills and carbon emissions.”
    Dr Lynham said Queensland was on track to achieve its 50 per cent renewable energy target by 2030, and was forecast to hit 20 per cent next year…READ ON
    http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/2019/10/6/solar-powers-queensland?utm_source=miragenews&utm_medium=miragenews&utm_campaign=news

    5 Oct: ABC: Standalone solar replaces power lines in remote WA farming community
    ABC Esperance By Emma Field
    A deadly bushfire in a remote West Australian farming community has led to a renewable energy first in Australia.
    A government-owned electricity company is taking customers off the grid by giving them standalone solar units, so they can pull down ageing and costly power lines.
    In November 2015, bushfires swept through the Esperance region, 800 kilometres south-east of Perth…
    More than 300 power poles were also burnt, leaving about 450 locals without power for months…

    Some Horizon Power customers affected by the fire were offered solar panels as a trial, instead of rebuilding the lines.
    After the fire ripped through Scadden West farmer Peter Vermeersch’s properties, he had to use generators for electricity.
    “Probably two or three months sitting there with generators going. Yeah, it was a bit of chaos for a while,” he said…
    He was one of five Horizon Power customers who took up the offer of getting electricity from solar panels, batteries, and a backup generator instead of via poles and wires.

    Initially, he was sceptical of the solar option.
    “The main issue was wondering if the power supply was going to be reliable,” he said.
    At first there was not enough battery capacity on the solar units, but Horizon quickly fixed this and the new system is now more reliable than being on the grid…

    Horizon Power is now installing 17 further solar units on farms east of Esperance, ***and will tear down about 60 kilometres of ageing power lines…
    Horizon Power chief executive Stephanie Unwin said it would save customers money.
    “You are not replacing poles and wires … we no longer have to send out our linesman to patrol the lines, so that’s great,” she said.
    “Maintenance is much lower, we will only have to send someone out once a year [to check the solar units].”…ETC
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-05/standalone-solar-replaces-power-lines/11572762

    10

    • #
      Another Ian

      ““You are not replacing poles and wires … we no longer have to send out our linesman to patrol the lines, so that’s great,””

      Likely until it isn’t

      20

  • #
    TdeF

    Given the ongoing story of CO2 driven Global Warming (aka Climate Change/Extreme events/Species Extinction) I am amazed each day at our latitude and temperate how much the air warms when the sun comes up, perhaps +20C each day. I am being told that +1C in the average is lethal, that is very suprising considering the summer/winter difference is also 20C. In Colorado, it was 80C!

    Then in the Northern hemisphere, all the deep snow and thick ice melts, from the US, Canada, Europe and across the vast areas of Siberia and even Japan and Korea. No city drowns. Melting sea ice in the Arctic counts for nothing as it does not add volume anyway. But I am to believe we will all drown from +1C in an average? Where would this make a difference? The North Pole reaches +13C anyway in peak summer.

    Most importantly, whatever part CO2 plays, it is a constant, day to day, season to season, at all latitudes. So the +20C is entirely the immediate effect of the sun shining on us even for a short time. Any variation in solar strength would hit us very hard. It we get an ice age, I would look to solar variation. Even 1% could be deadly.

    Plus obviously the combination of the sun and the clouds is everything. Even in the middle of winter, if the sky clears, the place warms very quickly because at our cool latitude of 37South, we still get more sunshine than Britain in mid summer. Still people actually think water is not a Green house gas? It is the only Greenhouse gas which matters. It is the weather. It defines how we live and where.

    But we are told weather is extremely sensitive to tiny, invisible CO2. That does not even make reasonable sense. Firstly CO2 misses the bulk of the visible spectrum which is obvious as we cannot see CO2 and most of the infrared, but more importantly is a total constant from summer to winter, day to day. The idea that increasing the thickness of this blind by 50% makes a dramatic difference is hard to understand. For CO2, every day is a cloudy day. And 1 1/2 blinds make little more difference than one, but we all have to live in fear of CO2 and dramatic warming? It does not even play a part, day to day. It’s all the sun and clouds.

    So significant CO2 driven warming is not science. It’s not even plausible. Keep sending those Trillions and keep installing those eco-crucifixes. Somewhere people are getting rich and that’s what Socialism is all about.

    130

    • #
      TdeF

      And warming of +1C a disaster? We have had that and where is the disaster? Why would the next twenty years be any different from the last 200?

      90

      • #
        el gordo

        Still appears chaotic, but if we go back 200 years the world was a little different. The Dalton Minimum had come to an end and the impact of a large volcanic eruption had passed. The Industrial Revolution began and the world grew warmer. Coincidence?

        ‘Somewhere people are getting rich and that’s what Socialism is all about.’

        Speaking on behalf of the Utopian Socialists, that is not our gig.

        60

        • #
          TdeF

          As is written on the old Berlin wall, socialism is what totalitarians call themselves. Like Maduro currently.

          It is a slippery slide once you take away people’s rights. If you can list the successful socialist governments, I can list the failed ones and the cost in human misery. Hitler’s socialists and Italy’s fascists against Stalin’s Communists.

          Of course it all attracts the amoral bankers and vested interests and traders, who are needed to fund every dictatorship and often both sides of any conflict. The sack of Christian Constantinople by the Christian Crusaders under the auspices of the Doge of Venice comes to mind.

          And the Communist Cubans and Chinese and even Russians who are infesting oil rich Venezuela currently, Cuba with 30,000 soldiers on the ground. Russia even flew in nuclear bombers but they went home. Socialism? No, vast quantities of black gold and the people are fleeing the country, especially the skilled people.

          100

          • #
            el gordo

            Marx gave socialism a bad name, the modern utopian socialist is aware that robotics will take away our reason for being. So we’ll have to plan for that eventually.

            Socialism with Australian characteristics is what we have now, its a mixed economy.

            20

            • #
              TdeF

              We still have the rule of law, real elections and no idea of common property. I would argue that it is a democratic not socialist society but we have some of the socialist dream with a free universal health care, free education, free social support like the dole, the single mothers supporting pension, the age pension and we have not had to sacrifice our freedom for that.

              Some of the taxation though is very unfair, such as land tax now being applied to every property except the family home. Payroll tax is anti business, unfair and destructive, a tax on actually employing people and some of the leave loadings such as triple time are ridiculous. It is a matter for business to attract people to work odd hours, not to punish employers massively for offering jobs. Restaurants and cafes in particular only have odd hours and to so massively penalize them for serving customers on weekends, nights and holiday is absurd.

              Many do not accept that taking less actually means business flourishes and everyone is better off. Council rates are out of control. Melbourne City Council just spend $15Million on new computers and software. The City of Port Phillip spends over 85% of all income (around $100Million a year) on themselves and their pet schemes, not the ratepayers. Average salary $110,000.
              The City of Yarra refuse to recognize Australia day except as ‘invasion day’ but take the day off on full pay anyway. It hardly matters, as with most councils.

              And the City of Canberra now is a massive recipient of millions of dollars from our electricity bills, at last viewing with $35 Million in the bank for owning windmills, bought at our great cost.

              There is a lot wrong with socialism because so many government and semi government bodies are simply unaccountable, uncontrollable and really a law unto themselves. Like the ABC/BOM/CSIRO.
              Just like Washington DC where an amazing 98.4% of all voters voted for Hillary. That’s the swamp at work, like Canberra, controlling our power by illegal legislation in the RET even though most of the power systems have been privatised. The NBN is a national disgrace while so many other big cities like Shanghai and Seoul have gone straight to 5G, bypassing cables.

              So I would not put our best parts down to ‘socialism’. More simple social responsibility and accountability by governments. Our only brake on run away socialism is in our elections. And perhaps our Governor General. Otherwise politicians think they own the place, as in Britain today.

              It is a tragedy in the UK that Tony Blair saw to it that governments have fixed terms, set up the Supreme Court to overrule governments and made sure the Queen could not dissolve parliament. So now we have the unelected opposition controlling the government and refusing to have an election because they would lose. That’s an affront to anyone and a shade away from totalitarian. Which is precisely what Jeremy Corbyn wants, except he wants the PM’s title too. I hope it works out. BREXIT has become a disaster through the meddling of Tony Blair who is still working away trying to keep Brussels in charge of Britain.

              50

            • #
              TdeF

              Also uncle Karl (my wife is related) in the 19th century did not envisage another way to free the people. Consumerism.

              After WWII life improved massively for everyone in the free West, but not in the socialist East. People had wages, holidays, cash and they could afford refrigerators, stoves, hot water services, cars, jet travel, cruises and medicine. These are now denied to the people in the socialist paradises of Cuba and Venezuela. Venezuela is importing petrol to pay their commitments and for their cars as their refineries do not work. The workers have fled the country.

              Amazingly the communist Chinese have invented Capitalist Communism. Russia never did. Most Socialist countries simply become kleptocracies where people start to starve and can afford nothing while the people at the top live in total luxury.

              The seductive side of socialism is the idea of fairness. Except that without real elections, it vanishes almost straight away. There is nothing wrong with a meritocracy, as long as people who have little have a place too. As in Australia today. Free education is the key, as in Russia but it alone does not distribute wealth which stays at the top. You need fair and free elections and no Presidents for life.

              40

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘Amazingly the communist Chinese have invented Capitalist Communism.’

                In fact its a new form of capitalism and Beijing is a fascist dictatorship under the guise of a benevolent dictatorship.

                On the ground we disparage our democracy for its shortcomings, but its still better than having no say. China’s mixed economy is little different to ours, for example they have both public and private health care, and in all the essentials they know the free enterprise model works best.

                The Belt and Road extravaganza will eventually lift millions out of poverty, whereas old world capitalism only enrich themselves at the expense of the Third World. Australia is pathetic in the way we tried to seize the oil from Timor, the poorest country in the world.

                Capitalism needs to find new markets or perish, this is Beijing’s new world order, and I make the observation that in the not too distant future China will be influenced by Australian democracy and adopt it.

                00

              • #
      • #
        TdeF

        My point is perhaps obscure. People talk about the ‘sensitivity’ of the temperature to CO2. I would talk about the sensitivity of the environment to +1C? I would suggest it is not even detectable.

        The only point is water. Melting ice. Expanding water, rising sea levels. However for the massive oceans to expand fully at over 1,000x the heat capacity of the thin area above, how is +1C going to change sea levels when it is +1/1,000 and that process alone will take tens of thousands of years? For a huge mountain of ice to melt would take more than a few hot summers at +1C. One American company made billions shipping big blocks of ice around the world, even to the tropics. The ratio of exposed surface area to volume drops with size, which is why in my childhood horse vans delivered blocks of ice to homes. It is also why Greenland and Antarctica will take forever to melt. It is on frozen land, not flowing, penetrating warmer water unlike sea ice in summer. There is no connection. Gigantic Antarctica in the peak of summer is -25C and at 3,700 metres or 11,000 feet. Why should it melt? Still they try to conflate Antarctica with the Arctic, as if they are similar.

        Then more evaporation means more water in the air, so more rain and more CO2. Both are essential and wonderful for more plants and more life and less lethal cold, but we are to be scared of +1C? I just cannot understand why.

        Where is the environment which is so sensitive? Plants and animals survive +20 to +80C each and every year. Why can’t they survive +1? Why would natural selection stop? What no adaption? And why would they even need to adapt when this is far less than the daily change in temperature form night to day?

        So where on the world in the last 100 years has the +1C made any difference at all? Where are the flooded cities? Where are the flooded lands? Where is the drought caused by Global Warming and not a natural variation? And why on earth should the next +1C, even +2C make any difference, even if it happens?

        70

        • #
          jack

          Also TdeF,
          the ice that makes up most of the Arctic is floating in the ocean.
          It floats because ice forms in crystals and between these crystals is air, ergo ice is less dense than water.
          The volume of water that ice displaces in order to float is the same as the actual volume of water that is in the ice. The net effect is that if ice melts that is floating in water it will have no effect on the level of the water.
          This is easily demonstrated in a glass of water with ice floating in it (make sure the ice is floating and not sitting on the bottom of the glass). Mark the water level with the ice in the water, the observe the level after the ice has melted.
          It took me a lot of Wild Turkey’s and ice to have this Archimedes moment!

          60

          • #
            TdeF

            Yes, ice floats. However it is not because of trapped air.

            The way it works is that the crystalline structure you mention is just less dense than the liquid, like a space frame takes up more space than its components.

            Then the increase in volume is 10% and thanks to Archimedes, as it does not weigh any more than it did as a liquid, the extra buoyancy lifts it out of the liquid water by 10%. When it turns back into liquid water, it occupies exactly the same volume under the water surface as it did when not frozen.

            80

            • #
              AndyG55

              Thanks tdeF.. Saved me correcting him :-)

              50

              • #
                jack

                AndyG55
                When it comes to correcting, just stick with Fitz.

                40

              • #
                Graeme No.3

                Are his ice cubes were quite clear and free of air?
                A cloudy ice cube could, and probably does, include some air. It wouldn’t affect the level when melted as the ‘extra’ weight of the air would be negligible.

                30

              • #
                AndyG55

                Below, you admit its mostly the space of the crystal lattice.

                It is good you have corrected yourself.

                You were not correct in your first statement.

                20

              • #
                AndyG55

                “When water freezes, water molecules form a crystalline structure maintained by hydrogen bonding. Solid water, or ice, is less dense than liquid water. Ice is less dense than water because the orientation of hydrogen bonds causes molecules to push farther apart, which lowers the density.”

                Correction needed by Jack !

                10

            • #
              jack

              Its is a bit of both.
              A perfect lattice of H2O may well be less dense than its free moving counterpart.
              Ice formed in nature is made up of a lot of small crystal structures, not just one monolithic crystal lattice.
              The gap between these individual crystals is massive on an atomic scale.
              There is air in most naturally occurring ice. They can even measure the C02, at only a few hundred ppm of atmospheric gas, in ice formed 800 thousand years ago.

              40

              • #
                TdeF

                All true. The ice however is solid, not powder, or individual crstals so the lattice is extensive. When the ice is perfectly clear there are no shear planes. Yes, the gentle snow which falls traps air and this turns with time and pressure turns into into ‘firn’, a semi solid material and much later with more time and pressure into ice. It is in the formation of firn that gas escapes. I believe that the gas escapes too between the layers, blurring the time resolution.

                My point here is that the argument is the 50% increase in CO2 is unprecendented in such a short time. Thus it must be due to cars/planes/electricity generation. There is no other logic used. However I believe it happens all the time and that CO2 tracks water surface temperature which tracks sunshine and that is perfectly correlated with temperature. CO2 is not, but firstly it follows surface temperature and also thanks to leaching between layers, the rapid changes are simply averaged away.

                30

              • #
                jack

                TdeF
                The point I was tring to make is that the melting of ice floating in the Arctic would have negligible affect on ocean levels.
                In regards to CO2, it my ‘belief’ that CO2 follows an increase in atmospheric temperature, not the other way around, and I would not deny that human activity has added to the to current CO2 levels.
                But due, to its relatively low concentrations and inefficiencies as an IR absorber/emitter, when compared with water vapor, atmospheric carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases have little if any effect on the climate. I would content that the water vapor is the big soggy elephant in the room, unaddressed by the warmists, which makes them the “deniers”.

                30

              • #
                TdeF

                Correct. The melting of sea ice contributes nothing to water levels, as with the ice cubes in a glass.

                CO2 however does not follow atmospheric temperatures but sea surface temperatures. Thus we get CO2 rising, sea surface temperatures rising but atmospheric temperatures stalled for the last 20 years, which is proof enough.

                The two facts missing are that 95% of all CO2 is already dissolved in the oceans, a liquid at depth and Henry’s law says that if the surface temperature goes up, CO2 comes out of solution. Just as in beer, champagne, soda water, lemonade.

                30

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘ … sea surface temperatures rising …’

                Does thermal expansion liberate more CO2 into the atmosphere?

                20

              • #
                TdeF

                No thermal expansion does not release more CO2 but a warmer surface water does. It at the water/air interface only (obviously) where CO2 can enter and leave. Higher temperatures and thus higher kinetic energy for CO2 molecules mean more leave than enter. It’s as simple as that.

                And the expansion is really tiny except that as the oceans average 3,400 metres deep (10,000′) even 0.1% is 3.4 metres, which is a problem. However as explained, the heat in the atmosphere is hardly significant compared to the oceans, 1/1000th of the amount. Don’t expect the oceans to warm quickly but the surface warms quickly and it determines CO2 outgassing.

                30

              • #
                jack

                Just as in beer, champagne, soda water, lemonade.
                Call me crazy, but I always thought that most of the CO2 in carbonated drinks were held in solution by that other factor, pressure.
                My beer would go flat, even if I left it in the fridge.
                And of course yes, dissolution of gases dissolved in a liquid will an increase of temperature, still remember my junior high school science.
                Its the 10 years of working in at a major nuclear research facility that I learned the good stuff.

                50

              • #
                TdeF

                Yes, but the CO2 levels in soda are much higher than in the ocean. It is a strong carbonic acid and the CO2 is not in equilibrium with air above. However the bubbles in a cold beer or champagne lasts much longer than a warm one, which is my point.

                Basically the air is the same pressure of one atmosphere but the sea has no lid. However if you can consider a beer 3.4km (2 miles) deep and 3/4 of the size of the planet, the amount of CO2 dissolved is 50x that in the air.

                The other point is that CO2 is highly compressible and at 3.4km deep, and at 1 atmosphere per 10 metres, the pressure at the bottom of the ocean is 340 atmospheres or about 5 ton per square inch. At those pressures CO2 is a liquid and sloshes around, though still in tiny concentrations. However it can still behave like a gas. The IPCC argue that deep CO2 cannot rise but the evidence is that it can, replacing missing CO2 above. They then effectively write off the biggest reservoir of free CO2 on the planet. And they are demonstrably wrong.

                Pretending the massive amounts of CO2 in the ocean are isolated for thousands of years is simply another ‘trick’ to enable man made Global Warming seem possible. Otherwise equilibrium means what we add to the air is tiny, irrelevant and quickly vanishes. Which is true.

                20

              • #
                jack

                TdeF
                I dips me hat to your knowledge on this subject.
                I think we do see eye to eye.

                30

              • #
                tom0mason

                And the strange effect of water happens at 4°C (maximum density point) — if it warms it expands taking up more volume, if it’s cooled (but not frozen) it expands taking up more volume.

                From http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_anomalies.html

                At 4 °C water expands on heating or cooling. This density maximum together with the low ice density results in (i) the necessity that all of a body of fresh water (not just its surface) is close to 4 °C before any freezing can occur, (ii) the freezing of rivers, lakes, and oceans is from the top down, so permitting survival of the bottom ecology, insulating the water from further freezing, reflecting back sunlight into space, and allowing rapid thawing, and (iii) density driven thermal convection causing seasonal mixing in deeper temperate waters carrying life-providing oxygen into the depths. The large heat capacity of the oceans and seas allows them to act as heat reservoirs such that sea temperatures vary only a third as much as land temperatures and so moderate our planet’s climate (for example, the Gulf stream carries tropical warmth to northwestern Europe). The compressibility of water reduces the sea level by about 40 m giving us 5% more land [65]. Water’s high surface tension plus its expansion on freezing encourages the erosion of rocks to provide soil for our agriculture.

                00

              • #
                tom0mason

                Looking at http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_anomalies.html there are many anomalies for water. Given how many strange anomalies there are with water (compared to all the other ‘normal’ liquids), make one wonder how many are incorporated into any models?

                00

  • #
    pat

    5 Oct: Bloomberg: Trump Kills a Tariff Loophole in Latest Blow to Renewable Energy
    By Brian Eckhouse, Chris Martin, and Ari Natter; With assistance by Joe Ryan
    The Trump administration dealt a fresh blow to renewable energy developers on Friday by stripping away an exemption the industry was counting on to weather the president’s tariffs on imported panels.
    The U.S. Trade Representative said Friday it was eliminating a loophole granted about four months ago for bifacial solar panels, which generate electricity on both sides. They’ll now be subject to the duties Trump announced on imported equipment in early 2018, currently at 25%. The change takes effect Oct. 28.

    The exclusion had been a reprieve for the solar industry, which lost thousands of jobs and put projects on ice as a result of the tariffs. Some panel manufacturers had already begun shifting supply chains to produce more bifacial panels. Stripping the exemption represents a setback to developers building big U.S. solar projects.

    American panel makers First Solar Inc. and SunPower Corp. will meanwhile regain an edge on foreign competitors…
    First Solar, the largest U.S. solar panel maker, and SunPower both gained in after-markets trading late Friday…

    While bifacial panels accounted for just 3% of the solar market last year, BloombergNEF had projected a swift ramp-up in production as manufacturers tried to insulate themselves from U.S. tariffs…
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-04/trump-yanks-exemption-that-solar-was-relying-on-to-duck-tariffs

    40

  • #
    mem

    The Australian Climate Council has issued a media release condemning Scott Morrison’s speech at the UN under the guise of checking the facts he presented. The climate Council’s report is dishonest as it ducks and weaves around Morrison’s statements without addressing the stated issues. I am not sure that they have done themselves any favors by labeling his speech as bullshit.It’s not the sort of language you use if you are a non-government organization criticizing a sitting PM. Times must be getting desperate for the comrades. Titled “Morrison’s colossal bullshit”https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/morrison-un-summit/

    70

    • #
      • #
        TdeF

        Also the response does not say anything Morrison says is actually wrong. It says the Paris is inadequate. The targets are inadequate. We should count the CO2 from exported coal as our CO2. Then the author has the temerity to call it ‘fact checking’. Morrison has his facts exactly right.

        It’s pretty bad to call Morrison’s carefully worded and totally correct statements b*llshit when that is a better description of the criticism.
        Typical Climate Council, trying to justify their own existence by openly insulting people, even the Prime Minister.
        Being righteous is not the same as being right and this will not endear the Climate Council to the government, so obviously
        they have given up on more government money.

        90

    • #
      AndyG55

      Looking at the members of the “Climate Council”…

      We can be pretty much 100% sure that all the BS is coming FROM them.”

      70

      • #
        Zane

        Who is funding the Climate Council? Follow the money, find the villain.

        40

        • #
          Dennis

          Journalist Piers Akerman wrote about Greens and funding and identified high wealth individuals who inherited their money, including businesses established by parents or grandparents, who have led privileged lives and are not in touch with the real world.

          A bit like the “doctor’s wives” from an election campaign media interview at an exclusive tennis club in Sydney, most admitted they would vote Green because they, the wives, wanted to look after the environment. They would be today the type who would buy carbon credits and believe sincerely that they were doing the right thing offsetting their own emissions contributions. It reminds me of another church group (much older than the High Church of Climate Change scientologists).

          Take a look at various foundations and funds that are Green, and check the membership list.

          60

        • #

          Prob’ly Mister George Soros, lol.

          40

          • #
            Greg in NZ

            ’tis amazing what and who you find on the wireless:

            https://nowhere.news/index.php/2019/05/11/extinction-rebellion-and-the-theory-and-practice-of-oligarchical-collectivism/

            “Farhana Yamin, who is described in XR’s blurb as ‘climate change lawyer and former lead author of the IPCC, coordinator of the Political Strategy Team and experienced UN negotiator’… Yamin is the founder and CEO of Track 0″. Track who?

            “Partners of Track 0 include GCCA (TckTckTck), CAN (Climate Action Network), Avaaz, ClimateWorks (The Climate Group, We Mean Business), The Rockefeller Foundation, E3G (founder of GCCA), The Prince of Wales Corporate Leaders Group, European Climate Foundation and Chatham House”. She’s also a “member of the Global Agenda Council on Climate Change at the World Economic Forum”. Oh, them.

            I didn’t see your Climate Council in there but it’s a big read with the usual suspects who are, purely by coincidence I’m sure, all friends financial backers of some 16-year-old Swedish actress with a serious attitude problem.

            00

          • #
            tom0mason

            beththeserf,

            And the ‘powers that be’ know that an ex-SS officer is the perfect person to influence young people.

            00

  • #
    jack

    Using acorn is just nuts.
    I got software working that extracts data from cdio and ACORN2 data, and correlates the two , with the date into a single list. It takes about 60 seconds to correlate 80 years, 29,200 pieces of data. I then subtract the cdio data from the ACORN2 data to give a difference between the two. This takes about 10 seconds.
    -
    I have done this for Darwin as since 1941, ACORN2 uses only one station DARWIN AIRPORT
    Bureau of Meteorology station number: 14015
    Station name: DARWIN AIRPORT
    Year site opened: 1941
    Year site closed:
    Latitude (decimal degrees, south negative): -12.42
    Longitude (decimal degrees, east positive): 130.89
    Height of station above mean sea level (metres): 30
    State: NT
    BoM INFO
    The airport site (14015) has been operating since February 1941. An automatic weather station was installed on 1 October 1990 and became the primary instrument on 1 November 1996. The site moved about 900 m east (along the southern edge of the airport) on 7 August 2001, with observations at the original site continuing under the station number 14040 until June 2007. No significant temperature changes were found between these two sites.
    -
    As over this period it use only one station, you would expect any modification of the past data would be consistent over this period.
    -Using Daily Maximum Temperatures.
    Form August 1995 until now cdio data equals ACORN2, as you would expect, otherwise it would demonstrate an uncountable discrepancy of their “automatic weather station”. There is 9 months of difference Aug95′ to Nov96′??
    -
    I thought I would check the differences(cdio-ACORN2) at the start of the recording period to the most recent set of data that show difference between cdio and ACORN2.
    So I grabbed 1000 samples of cdio/ACORN2 differences 2 FEB 1941 to 30 OCT 1943 and summed them.
    Them grabbed 1000 samples of cdio/ACORN2 differences 3 NOV 1992 to 31 JUL 1995 and summed them.
    This took about 3 seconds.
    All being correct you would expect these 2 summing’s to be fairly similar.
    -
    The RESULTS, remembering a negative means they have decrease the temperature in ACORN2, a positve result means the increase the temperature in ACORN2.
    -
    2 FEB 1941 to 30 OCT 1943 The sum of differences is -509.0
    3 NOV 1992 to 31 JUL 1995 The sum of differences is 121.5
    -
    Something smells fishy in Darwin, and it ain’t the mud crabs.

    120

    • #
      Peter C

      Thanks Jack.

      Very important.

      The RESULTS, remembering a negative means they have decrease the temperature in ACORN2, a positve result means the increase the temperature in ACORN2.
      -
      2 FEB 1941 to 30 OCT 1943 The sum of differences is -509.0
      3 NOV 1992 to 31 JUL 1995 The sum of differences is 121.5

      -

      Could you explain your conclusion. I think I know, but I am not quite sure what you mean by the sum of the differences?

      20

      • #
        jack

        Hi Peter C
        What I did …um
        I started with 2 lots of data for Max temp, the raw data, cdio and the ACORN2 data.
        I extracted the the data from these files into 2 simple lists of data.
        cdio- Date, Max Temp
        for 2 FEB 1941 to 3 OCT 2019, 29,200 lines of data
        Same for the ACORN2 data
        ACORN2 – Date, Max temp
        for 1 JAN 1910 to 3 OCT 2019
        -
        I then correlated these two lists int one.
        Correlated list- Date, cdioMaxTemp, ACORN2MaxTemp
        this went from 2 FEB 1941 to 3 OCT 2019
        -
        The next step was to create a list of difference between cdioMaxTemp and ACORN2MaxTemp
        Diff List- Date, (ACORN2MaxTemp – cdioMaxTemp)
        So it looked like this for each of the 29,200 lines
        2 FEB 1941, -0.4
        Which meant for the 2 FEB 1941 the modified ACORN2 was 0.4 degrees lower than the raw (observed)cdio data.
        -
        Now for the summing
        From this list I took the first 1000 lines(2 FEB 1941 to 30 OCT 1943) of data and added all the differences together.
        The result was a lot of negative numbers (mostly the lowering of temperatures) in this time frame adding up to
        minus 509.0 (Avg decrease of 0.51 degrees per day)
        -
        The next summing was for last 1000 lines, where there was a difference (Note the difference was zero from August 1995 until now), so the latest list of 1000 differences was from 3 NOV 1992 to 31 JUL 1995.
        The result for adding up all these differences was more positive numbers adding up to 121.5.(Avg increase of 0.12 per day)
        -
        The sample of 1000 of the early data had been show the the ACORN2 had been reduced in value, while the sample of 1000 of the latest years, where the data had been modified to be increased in value.
        Because of this,if you were to the apply a line of best fit to this data, it would show a greater rate of increase in the ACORN2 data than the original observed data.
        IT HAS BEEN SKEWED TO SHOW A GREATER INCREASE OF TEMPERATURE OVER THIS PERIOD.
        Being the same station over the last 80 years, it is hard to see a legitimate reason for this skewing.
        -
        Hope this is more clear.

        40

  • #
    Zane

    Giant wind turbine blades are being unloaded at the Port of Geelong. The con rolls on.

    50

    • #
      Dennis

      I would invest in Cobb & Co style Horse drawn Coaches if taxpayers subsidised my business and penalised internal combustion engine coaches.

      90

      • #
        Greg in NZ

        My great-grandfather did just that back in the 1870s (horse-drawn transport) except he subsidised himself by scraping some colour from the dirt around Ballarat and Bendigo before sailing to NZ to set up a coach business for the gold rush in Otago, then transport/hospitality at the hot springs in North Canterbury. The luck o’ the Irish eh! Whoah there Nelly, whoah!

        20

      • #
        Chad

        If you really want to do that, i know a man up by Mt Tambourine who owns and builds Cobb & Co coaches.
        He is currently building a replica of the C&C 96 seat, 3 deck, “Goliath” coach ,( to be drawn by a team of 19 ). from the original C&C drawings
        He was also the last person to drive a Cobb & Co coach and team over the Sydney Harbour Bridge !

        10

  • #
    Zane

    The head of the UN is an avowed socialist and must be given the Order of the Boot. The Small Island Developing States are pledging to be carbon neutral by 2030 – easy since they produce nothing except coconuts. They do act as a powerful concerted block vote in the UN, though, and want big handouts from the West. Give us the cash! They are shakedown artistes of the first order. Tell em to bug off.

    90

  • #
  • #
    AndyG55

    UN members suggest moving UN out of the USA

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/irans-rouhani-backs-moving-un-out-of-new-york

    I have no problems with that at all

    Move it to Iran, I’m sure everyone in the UN would be very happy.

    110

    • #
      TdeF

      Or somewhere less interesting. Like Reyjavik. Or the Azores, midway. Or even to busy Asia, say Djakarta or Bangkok.
      Or if they want someone to pay all the bills, what’s wrong with Riyadh? Then they could really be in the action.

      Or Belgrade. The list goes on.

      However we all know they will move to mega cities Paris or Rome. Parties are important.
      Or even Brussels, to join forces with the EU in their plan to dominate the world.
      Or Geneva, which is good if you like cheese and clocks and chocolate.

      91

    • #
      Hanrahan

      I have no problems with that at all

      New Yorkers would throw them a great send off party. Trump has said he likes the real estate too.

      70

    • #
      Peter C

      Iran would be a great host. They suggested the move.

      60

  • #
    pat

    while this is happening:

    2 Oct: Reuters: Amazon synod deepens faultlines between pope and conservatives
    by Philip Pullella
    The three-week synod opens on Sunday at a time when the region – made up of eight countries and the French territory of Guiana – is in the world spotlight because of recent devastating fires in Brazil.
    About 260 participants, mostly bishops from the Amazon, will discuss spreading the faith, protection of the environment, climate change, deforestation, indigenous people and their right to keep their land and traditions.
    The Church’s small but vociferous hardline conservative wing has drawn up battle lines…
    Many of the conservative hardliners are also skeptical about climate change science…
    The synod will be “a battle between good angels and demons”, one participant said…READ ON
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pope-synod/amazon-synod-deepens-faultlines-between-pope-and-conservatives-idUSKBN1WH1AW

    5 Oct: WaPo: Vatican gathering on the Amazon stirs backlash over debate on allowing married priests
    By Stefano Pitrelli
    The pressures of climate change and Amazon development — highlighted by recent fires ravaging the rainforest — add an urgency to the Vatican talks that cover the church’s struggles and efforts to safeguard one of the world’s most critical ecosystems…
    Some conservatives say the church is straying from its roots, acting more as a nongovernmental organization than a religion…

    this also took place, 3-4 October:

    5 Oct: Phys.org: AFP: Commonwealth targets climate change with regeneration projects
    by Robin Millard
    The 53-country bloc held a two-day brainstorming of indigenous groups, environmentalists, scientists and climate change experts at its headquarters in London.
    The Common Earth initiative will be a network of projects that can be copied and adapted to suit communities around the world…

    Nichie Abo, a farmer from the indigenous Kalinago territory in Dominica who grows mangos and avocados, said 95 percent of the homes in his community were destroyed by Hurricane Maria in September 2017…
    “We’re looking for funding,” Abo told AFP…

    “We’re in a time of crisis. Emergencies, historically, are a time of great innovation and often bring out the best in us,” said Stuart Cowan, regenerative development director at Capital Institute, a US-based finance think-tank.
    “We need to start from scratch. We need to design economies that allow people to flourish within the limits of a finite planet,” he told AFP.
    With a eye on funding, Secretary-General Scotland is to take forward the meeting’s initiatives to upcoming summits of Commonwealth trade and finance ministers.
    https://phys.org/news/2019-10-commonwealth-climate-regeneration.html

    I think the video is from a previous conference:

    The Commonwealth: Common Earth Conference
    World-renowned environmentalists, scientists, climate change experts and indigenous groups will meet on 3 October in London to create a roadmap for pioneering, country-led solutions to climate change.
    The event, convened by the Commonwealth and its implementation partner on regenerative development, the Cloudburst Foundation, will officially launch Common Earth – an international consortium aimed at collectively creating and harnessing strategies to restore the damage caused by climate change and achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
    VIDEO: 6min39sec includes Mary Robinson, Prince Charles, Paul Polman (8 million people dying prematurely because of climate change – we don’t want to see that); Thomas Goreau Global Coral Reef Alliance etc
    https://thecommonwealth.org/media/event/common-earth-conference

    5 Oct: AfricaFeeds: Commonwealth steps up battle on climate change
    by Staff Writer
    ◾the ‘Commonwealth Small State, Climate Change Blue-Green Trade Working Group’;
    ◾the ‘Gender and Climate Change Working Group’;
    ◾the ‘Indigenous Affairs Working Group’;
    ◾the ‘Waters Prosperity Working Group’;
    ◾the ‘Regenerative Finance Working Group’.

    TWEET: The Commonwealth
    The #Commonwealth’s work focuses on the intentional use of #sport as a tool in advancing sustainable development and strengthening governance, #genderequality and the protection of #humanrights
    Learn more about how sport contributes to the #SDGs
    VIDEO: 2min Oliver Dudfield, Head of Sport for Development & Peace, Commonwealth Secretariat
    4 Oct 2019
    https://twitter.com/commonwealthsec/status/1180053076591427584

    Commonwealth House: Oliver Dudfield, Head of Sport for Development and Peace, Commonwealth Secretariat
    Over his career Oliver has worked with multiple UN and intergovernmental agencies, national governments, NGOs and sporting organisations on policy design, strategy and partnership projects.
    Prior to joining the Commonwealth Secretariat, he was the General Manager at Vicsport, the leading body for sport and active recreation in Victoria, Australia and was previously the International Development Manager at UK Sport.
    He started his career as a basketball coach, working in the national systems in Australia and New Zealand…

    40

  • #
    Peter C

    I promised a response on Einstein’s photelectric theory.

    Cannot respond just yet, because I have not read his paper in full. Nor do I understand what I have read (yet).

    I am keeping this as a place keeper, for myself
    http://joannenova.com.au/2019/09/weekend-unthreaded-279/#comment-2196753

    Any comment welcome from those who want to refer back.

    20

    • #

      Nuthin’s easy, ‘n don’t you fergit it, Horatio.:-)

      40

    • #
      TdeF

      I don’t know what this has to do with the hothouse effect. Hot houses are stopping light reradiated from a hot surface as infra red. The photoelectric effect is about turning incident light into electricity by ejecting electrons. This only works with high energy, high frequency light. Blue and above.

      Anyway, the old electro magnetic theory was that light intensity was the measure of to energy. More light, more power and so more electrons. But that clearly was not true.

      Einstein proposed rather that it was frequency (and therefore colour) not intensity or amplitude which determined energy in a packetized ‘photon’, a bit like a particle but weightless. He even invented the word photon, a particle of light like an electron but without mass. Secondly he proposed that there was a critical minimum energy and therefore minimum frequency below which an electron would not be ejected from the surface. At this time we did not have the concept of quantization of electron energies which came from Max Planck’s invention to explain the light spectrum. Even Max Planck could not explain it, but it explained the bell curve of the visible spectrum.

      A minimum colour is also why solar panels ignore and waste nearly half the incident light because the (infra) red photons do not have enough energy to eject electrons, no matter how many of them there are.

      Personally it is a good reason why people should be using the old cheap black plastic waterfilled system for heating their swimming pools, not photo electric systems or the grid.
      They are wasting half the light at enormous public expense. Electricity should be for motors, not heating. Gas should be for heating, not electricity. Converting loses a lot of energy.

      40

      • #
        TdeF

        Where Einstein’s explanation was spectacularly different was that using the analogy of waves, they could explain reflection, refraction, lens operation, optics generally, fresnel lenses and just about everything. But they could not explain the photoelectric effect where light could not eject electrons if the frequency was not high enough, no matter how much you used. Amplitude had no effect, just frequency. Postulating that light was packetized as well as wave, was a completely different approach which worked. So both models are useful and light is neither and both. It is light but in the right circumstances, you pick the model which fits. It was the classic exhibition of the fact that we can explain what is going on by models from our world scale, but one model may not be enough.

        60

        • #
          Peter C

          Thanks TdeF,

          An excellent summary and a useful reminder.

          I am looking for induced emmission of photons, in particular, what happens when a photon interacts with a CO2 molecule, which is already excited from a previous interaction?

          Also, what is the distribution, about the normal, of radiation emitted from a plane surface?

          10

  • #
  • #
    Richard Ilfeld

    What should be the state of our power grid…ignoring the carbon idiocy.
    There is going to be a considerable market, I think, for electric vehicles.
    It will develop for the usual reason — cost.
    Here’s why I think this is true.
    Almost all golf cars are electric.
    They have a homebase, travel a known and limited route, and return home after very trip.
    They never have to work at night, so a slow charging time is available.
    Golf courses can choose between gas and electric. Golf courses must have golf cars — the real estate and
    course upkeep, plus taxes on land is some expensive that you can’t get enough golfers to pay the bills through if you let them walk.
    Electric golf cars have a significantly lower maintenance cycle that gas. The course greenkeepers vehicles, on the other hand are usually
    John Deere Gators or the equivalent. Different duty cycle and load requirements.

    In way electric cars are an engineer’s dream….until you get to battery life.

    But as we develop applications in life that resemble golf courses, such as autonomous vehicles in a city setting that transport seniors
    during the day and can sleep in slow charging stations at night…..rental cars for one day urban use and return….out and back delivery vehicles
    with known routes…..

    electric vehicles will probably find a niche. The mechanical life cycle cost is probably lower than gas. Battery life cycle cost works with lead-acid
    for golf cars, and may be OK for modern batteries. Natural gas vehicle have found niches, such as fork lifts and some urban delivery vehicles.

    As electrical demand increases (I think it will) completing the cycle with nuclear may well be cost effective; we’ll need to build new plants and replace old
    and, contrary to the scaremongers, we are managing a number of safe small new generation nuclear plants and gaining experience.
    Aircraft carriers. Submarines. Other military. Other countries.

    Even with the dumbest “environmental” policies least cost is a compelling argument in the real world. Today we have a lot of server farms near hydro
    facilities. Not green – cost effective. Hydro for energy when we need the power for civilization is a dead end … check the Hoover dam.

    And, it is obvious that different societies have different needs. Coal is probably optimum in the third world. Easy to build & maintain. Fuel flow can be
    sporadic & is easily stored on site. & impervious. Bomb an oil or gas facility — interruption. Bomb a coal pile … sweep it back up and you are still in business.

    Over the long run, I think mined assets like coal, gas, and oil will all have cost effective roles; but for most regions I think the dispatch power will
    tend towards nukes. While there may be a technology that can compensate for the lack of a spinning reserve in the grid, it may well not be cost effective.
    Solar and wind have had a long time and a lot of subsidies to show what they can do, and it is very hard to find any installations being planned or built that
    make any economic sense if political costs/subsidies are removed from the equation.

    A dispassionate observer would observe ( absent the idiot politics of the Green) 100 nukes MOL delivering 20% of US power with 50 year old technology and outstanding
    dispatch reliability.

    Why are we moving away from coal while China is building like mad? Because natural gas beats coal in our sophisticated marketplace while a China with a less sophisticated
    infrastructure ( our pipelines are a modern marvel) still finds it more effective to truck coal around; and for their most sophisticated sectors have apparntly wished to devote resources to military use as opposed to civilian nukes.

    It seems to me, long term and painfully so, that economics is trumping everything else. The greens, once they have to make personal choices, will fall in line. The great California grid failure may be a coming epochal tilting point.

    or not. Prediction is hard, especially the future. These are the thoughts I sometimes have after reading Tony’s numbers.

    20

    • #
      Chad

      Battery life cycle cost works with lead-acid
      for golf cars, and may be OK for modern batteries. Natural gas vehicle have found niches, such as fork lifts and some urban delivery vehicles.

      Richard, The above is a minomer.
      Lead Acid batteries have a very limited life (3-500 cycles). Of useful capacity.
      Modern Lithium cells are 2-10 times longer cycle life. But have a higher initial cost.
      However many new golf carts do now use lithium cells due to lower maintenance requirements and lack of needing replacement batteries every year or so
      We used to have our milk delivered to our doorstep from a battery powered electric delivery truck…..
      …..in the 1950’s. !

      00

  • #
    robert rosicka

    Fran Kelly ambushed David Littleproud yesterday and forced him to admit the drought was caused by climate change .
    What a pity she didn’t ask Craig Kelly he would have pointed out what Andy Pitman said on the ABC that there was no link between climate change and drought .

    40

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    Principally for comedy purposes, I point you all towards Alistair Williams’ latest video.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeDPvQf4SNc [24m22s]

    It’s difficult to parody a real event which would itself have been only imagined as parody a few years ago.

    10

  • #
  • #
    el gordo

    The power of propaganda .

    ‘When confronted with a menu of 27 worry factors, ranging all the way from money to love to human survival, only four qualified as a matter of immediate personal concern to the majority of respondents.

    ‘Climate change was the leading worry; 72 per cent of respondents said it would affect their lives.’

    ABC

    00

  • #
    Atmospheric Physics Researcher

    Copy of email to CEO of CSIRO

    Dear Mr Marshall

    I write as a scientist who has specialised in the study of atmospheric physics and made a world-first discovery in that field. I suggest you take seriously what I write to you.

    I now have compelling evidence as a result of Freedom of Information questions to the CSIRO that your organisation has failed to pay due diligence in checking what is in fact totally false physics purporting to prove that so-called “greenhouse” gases (water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane etc) supposedly raise the global mean surface temperatures of planets like Earth and Venus. They don’t.

    In all recommendations by CSIRO to government officials, politicians and others your organisation has merely assumed that the “science” propagated by the IPCC in what has become the greatest scientific fraud in history is correct. It is not.

    NASA and climatologists “explain” the mean surface temperatures by adding to the flux of solar radiation about twice as much from the cold atmosphere, the latter supposedly causing heat transfer from those cold regions into the already warmer surface. That is an outright violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics and it does not happen because the “back radiation” undergoes what we physicists call resonant or pseudo scattering.

    A simple experiment with multiple electric bar radiators easily demonstrates that radiative fluxes from different sources cannot be added like this and the sum used in Stefan-Boltzmann calculations. Those calculations are based on the integral of the flux from a single source of radiation and they never work for multiple sources of radiation. You do not feel heat radiated from the atmosphere at night.

    If climatologists were correct in their claim that radiation from greenhouse gases causes their “33 degrees” of surface warming, and that water vapor is responsible for most of this at average concentrations, then in wet regions where water vapor concentrations can be three times the average one should expect at least 50 degrees more warming. Obviously, this is not observed, so this single fact proves all the climatology “science” to be false. My study (for which a graphic is attached) showed wet regions to be cooler than dry ones, other things being equal, and that is what the correct physics in my 2013 paper indicates ought to be the case.

    With all the current disruption by climate activists, all the anxiety caused among children, all the uncertainty about energy supplies and all the money being wasted on useless research and subsidies, it is time for the CSIRO to get their physicists to look into what I am saying about the physics relating to temperatures and heat transfer mechanisms and to declare their errors in Australia and to the world.

    31

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>