Category: Climate change


Climate Facts, Denied?

believer bernard shawWas talking to a friend the other day, and she asked whether I believed in Climate Change. I responded with, “science is not about belief, but about facts”. Then she used the “Denier” term in respect to Climate Change facts. I promised to share some facts with her.

Here ya go Amy.

Fact 1

It is not actually possible to measure the earths temperature. Let alone compare current temperatures to past temperatures to get accurate global trends.  There is insufficient weather stations in some key locations, like Africa, the Arctic, the Antarctic, and oh yes, the oceans. The oceans are kinda catered for but the rest are typically “infilled” with data (guestimated?).  There has also been changes to the number of, and the locations of measuring stations as well as varying methods of recording.  Probably the best method we have to measure the earth’s temperature are the satellites. But these only cover the last 37 years, and have a few minor issues of there own.

Fact 2

Temperature data may not be what you think it is. Station siting in once rural areas and now in growing urban areas are affected by UHI. Homogenised data sets can be quite different from the raw data, creating different trends than were originally indicated.

Records in the US and Australia have had their past temperatures predominantly reduced, producing long term warming trends where there was little or none in the original records. I have seen direct evidence of this in the Adelaide record, and in NOAA data.

Fact 3

 

Every prediction/projection from Climate Scientists and promoters of CAGW has not been realised. The Arctic has not melted away. The Polar bears are increasing in population. The temperature has not risen as stated by the IPCC. The seas have not risen catastrophically. Storms have not gotten worse. There are no climate refugees.  Australia and Texas are no longer in “permanent drought”. Crop yields have increased around the world. The Antarctic has been growing in ice. Standard of living has increased in the vast majority of countries.  Children still know what snow is.

beliefs vs facts

Fact 4

Sea levels around the world vary in their rates of rise (or fall). Long term gauges average 1.5mm rise per year. Global sea levels starting rising 200 to 300 years ago, with yearly trends of 1.35mm and less than 1mm (dependant on which study).  The satellite record for sea level indicates about 3mm per year since 1993.  There is a disconnect between gauges and satellite results. Satellite data indicates a rate much higher than the average of tide gauges. All stated rates are far below what the IPCC has forecast.

Fact 5

Storms are not increasing in number or severity. No increase trend in accumulated cyclone energy.  There has been a decrease in overall cyclones. The number of US tornadoes are not increasing.  Cat 3 and above tornadoes have a decreasing trend.

Fact 6

Arctic ice has been reducing in area since 1979, however the satellite record prior to 1979 is never published on line by NASA, and shows ice area peaked in 1979 and had been much less in the years before. Not too dissimilar to the current levels.

Fact 7

Antarctic ice and Greenland snow and ice have been increasing over the satellite record.

Fact 8

The ice cores show that CO2 predominantly increases after the temperature. Mostly after 800 years. The science of ice core analysis is problematic and the CO2 concentrations in the ice core may not be representative of CO2 in the atmosphere, over the noted history.

cock sure stupid

Fact 9

The current CO2 data from Mauna Loa has been tacked onto CO2 data from the ice cores producing one long record, however, as stated above the ice core gasses may not be directly comparable to real world measurements. There is also a historical gap of 83 years which was erased to connect the two data sets, to form one continuous record. The Keeling curve.

Fact 10

Climate models predicted a “hot spot” in the atmosphere due to CO2 warming. This hot spot has never been observed.

Fact 11.

It is not possible to directly attribute any weather event or warming episode over short or long periods solely or even partially to CO2.  There are too many variables influencing weather and climate to make clear connections.

 

Fact 12.

The projected temperature rise per the IPCC model mean, is currently much higher and diverging from both satellite records.

Fact 13.

The reported rise in global temperature from NOAA since 1880 is about 0.8°C.  That is all.

Fact 14.

The reported rise in temperature from NOAA/NCDC from 1960 to 2017(blamed on AGW)  is within 0.1°C of being the same as the temperature rise from 1910 to 1941(apparently natural causes)

einstien consensus

Fact 15.

The yearly error bars on the NOAA/NCDC global temperature data set prior to 1952 is 0.4°C. Half of the reported total rise.

Fact 16.

The survey purporting to the 97% consensus has been found to be flawed statistically, and in methodology.

Fact 17.

The earth is getting greener.

Fact 18.

Cold kills far more people than heat.

Fact 19.

The IPCC is a UN body chartered with the task of gathering evidence to support the theory of AGW, and to recommend policy to governing bodies around the world. It is not chartered to gather any evidence that does not support the theory of AGW.

Fact 20.

CO2 is not listed as a pollutant on the Australian or US government pollutants list. It is however, plant food.

einstein

In closing.

This list of facts that bring into question the authenticity of the CAGW theory is by no means complete.  There is much more.  And more in this video.

But given just this information above, it is difficult to imagine that the science of AGW, CAGW, Climate Change, or Climate Disruption, is so settled.  Science by definition is never “settled”, and it is never agreed on by “consensus”. Even if CO2 does have a net warming effect on the earth, it appears that it is not as much as stated by the IPCC, and it appears not to be catastrophic.  Any additional warmth appears to have had far more benefits than any of the projected negatives.

There also appears to be some heavy bias in the “climate” community towards the AGW theory.  Ommition, mirepresentation, and alteration of information and data which would bring into question the AGW theory is common.  Funding and research is popular for any AGW supported area, while any other climate research not supporting AGW is either not funded, or obfuscated, or outright rejected in peer review.

So

Should I believe in Climate Change?

If I did, I might be denying much more than just a scientific theory.

Facts are pesky little buggers, arn’t they.

RGB

I love crisesRemember when SA had a water crisis? The drought was never going to end. Global Warming had dried up all of the water. The dams were nearly empty. Even the mighty Murray river was looking a little worse for wear. Supposed learned people like Tim Flannery were sprouting “gloom and doom” re our water resources.  “never going to rain again” I think he said.

Water restrictions were put in place, but that was never going to be enough for such a “serious and permanent crisis”.  That’s what we were told.

A desalination plant was the only answer for “water security”.  WA had one. Queensland and NSW were building them, and Victoria was about to start one as well. (the Taswegians were too busy playing with their hydro power to worry about such things. Our leaders love a crisis to “fix”. So in grand style they decided to spend all of our money to fix it.  Not to worry about the fact that droughts have always happened, and they also happen to always end too.  So how much did all this cost? Not that much.

So, how much drought is there in SA, or Australia for that matter?

Here is the state of drought in Australia for the 12 months ending March 2017.

Drought Australia 12 mths to March2017

The last 12 months has seen the end of drought in the entire continent of Australia. So much for those “never going to rain again” predictions. Tim Flannery has a lot to answer for. Should send him the bill for the current ongoing cost of the Desal plant.

Now, apparently we have another crisis in SA in which we need,

                                      “Energy Security” .

I kid you not. This time however our leaders have created the crisis themselves, by subsidising unreliable solar and wind, and at the same time helping to make reliable (and cheap) energy production less viable.

Would you trust this government to fix a problem they created?

Would you trust this government to fix the energy crisis in a similar way to the water crisis?

Because effectively, this is exactly what they are proposing to do. Implementing a fix based on green propaganda, unproven technology and unproven scientific theory.

$550 million is the initial cost for another power station and a “big battery”. The cost of which will no doubt be passed on to us via electricity price hikes or taxes, or even council rates.  Guess who will also pay for the ongoing costs too! Soon we will all be in financial crisis!

Here is just one more example of the ludicrous nature of the system we have been given. Just the other day our wonderful wind turbines were producing so much “free” electricity, that Aemo instructed one of the gas fired generators to stay on line for “grid stability”.  So we get cheap electricity from the wind mills, but still have to pay for the gas fired generator!!!!! What is the point of having the wind mills if we still have to run the other generators??????  Tom Koutsantonis must have been proud that he helped avoid another crisis”!

Call or write your SA representative now to voice your opposition to this pointless and expensive initiative. Help save SA from energy poverty. We need an economically viable and pragmatic fix to our energy needs. Not another “green fantasy” crisis fix.

Sort by Last Name Sort by Party Sort by House Sort by Electorate
 Hon Michael Atkinson ALP HA Croydon
 Ms Frances Bedford IND HA Florey
 Mr Troy Bell LIB HA Mount Gambier
 Hon Zoe Bettison ALP HA Ramsay
 Hon Leon Bignell ALP HA Mawson
 Hon Geoff Brock IND HA Frome
 Hon Paul Caica ALP HA Colton
 Ms Vickie Chapman LIB HA Bragg
 Hon Susan Close ALP HA Port Adelaide
 Ms Nat Cook ALP HA Fisher
 Mrs Annabel Digance ALP HA Elder
 Mr Sam Duluk LIB HA Davenport
 Mr John Gardner LIB HA Morialta
 Mr Jon Gee ALP HA Napier
 Mr Mark Goldsworthy LIB HA Kavel
 Mr Steven Griffiths LIB HA Goyder
 Hon Martin Hamilton-Smith IND HA Waite
 Ms Katrine Hildyard ALP HA Reynell
 Mr Eddie Hughes ALP HA Giles
 Hon Tom Kenyon ALP HA Newland
 Hon Steph Key ALP HA Ashford
 Mr Stephan Knoll LIB HA Schubert
 Hon Tom Koutsantonis ALP HA West Torrens
 Mr Steven Marshall LIB HA Dunstan
 Dr Duncan McFetridge LIB HA Morphett
 Hon Stephen Mullighan ALP HA Lee
 Mr Lee Odenwalder ALP HA Little Para
 Mr Adrian Pederick LIB HA Hammond
 Mr Michael Pengilly LIB HA Finniss
 Hon Tony Piccolo ALP HA Light
 Mr Chris Picton ALP HA Kaurna
 Mr David Pisoni LIB HA Unley
 Hon Jennifer Rankine ALP HA Wright
 Hon John Rau ALP HA Enfield
 Ms Isobel Redmond LIB HA Heysen
 Ms Rachel Sanderson LIB HA Adelaide
 Hon Jack Snelling ALP HA Playford
 Mr David Speirs LIB HA Bright
 Mr Vincent Tarzia LIB HA Hartley
 Mr Peter Treloar LIB HA Flinders
 Mr Dan van Holst Pellekaan LIB HA Stuart
 Hon Leesa Vlahos ALP HA Taylor
 Hon Jay Weatherill ALP HA Cheltenham
 Mr Tim Whetstone LIB HA Chaffey
 Mr Mitch Williams LIB HA MacKillop
 Mr Corey Wingard LIB HA Mitchell
 Ms Dana Wortley ALP HA Torrens

RGB

Dr Patrick Moore speaks

Former Greenpeace founder speaks about his journey through life and the corruption of the environmental movement and climate change. He explains why C02 is good for the earth and good for us.

RGB

I have so many better things to do than concern myself with people and politicians that want to increase my taxes, increase my energy costs, and make me feel guilty so I will want to pay for “the sins of humanity”  Just read the following and hopefully understand it is just madness what is being proposed by those that supposedly “know better”.

We have been conned, and some of us are still being conned. The more people that speak up, the sooner we can actually start concerning ourselves with real issues. Not unicorns and rainbows. (No offence intended toward unicorns and rainbows. They are wonderful and I hope to see more of them).

Here is the evidence.

https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2017/01/17/climate-science-on-trial-the-smoking-gun-files/

WUWT takes a look at SA’s energy madness.

$14,000 per MWh – the price South Australia Pays for Renewables Madness

Our situation will only change when enough South Aussies make enough noise about this. Make some noise people.

For some background info to our energy market, see  https://eyesonbrowne.wordpress.com/2014/02/17/time-to-make-electricity-cheaper/

RGB

 

Kiribati – Sinking Yet?

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, the seas around Kiribati are rising at 3.1mm per year and they expect this will continue until the end of the century. Making the total rise from 2003, to be over half a metre. Really?  The info they used is from the IPCC 2007 report which used data from 1993 to 2003 to get this projection (and it is a global projection btw). Cherry picking anyone?  Tide gauge data for Kiribati is available all the way back to 1949, and clearly contradicts the information on display from the UoCS.

Kiribati sea level 2016The combined tide gauges sea level rate around Kiribati (raw data is publically available) is 1mm per year (my calculation 1949 to 2016).

Here is what the UoCS are suggesting is going to happen, compared to the reality of the data.

Kiribati SL Actual vs Projected 2016

And they call themselves scientists.

For reference, here is the updated graph with all the individual tide gauges for Kiribati. Normalised to the Bom 1804 station.

Kiribati Spliced Sea Level 1949 to 2016

 

RGB

Renewables = Death?

In response to the recent climate action marches, it would appear some don’t share the same views as the marchers. Unintended consequences? Or just plain arrogance and ignorance.  See full article at WUWT.

 

fuel poverty stats

 

 

snnow flagstaff HillMy good friend Alison took this picture of snow at Flagstaff Hill in Adelaide where she was told some were making snowmen.   Elevation is about 200 mtrs above sea level.

I don’t recall it ever snowing in Adelaide at that elevation, EVER!

I know it doesn’t look like much, but even the rarest Adelaide snowfall is always well above 500 mtrs.

Al Gore is not here somewhere, is he?

JTF62

I made my very own climate hockey stick.

I am an aspiring climate scientist, and as such I thought I might learn from the most famous climate scientist in the world.  Michael Mann. Professor Mann’s methodology seemed pretty straight forward. Take tree ring data as a proxy for temperatures over thousands of years and add the measured temperatures on to the end. Simple!

It just so happens some very nice people here in Australia did a tree ring temperature reconstruction that I could use.  Awesome!

Some Huon Pine trees from Mount Read in Tasmania were used for the tree ring data. Mount Read also has a weather recording station so the data should match up pretty well.

So here it is, but it looks a little different from Professor Mann’s graph. Did I do something wrong?

 

 

Tasmanian Temperature Reconstruction

/Sarc off

 

Please note:  All data is real (except for the years 1992 to 1996. No data available, so just joined the “dots”). Months used were November to April. “The warm months”.

Tasmanian Temperature Reconstruction, 1600BC to 1991 AD.  Cook E.R., D’Arrigo R.D., Buckley B.M., and Peterson M.J.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s003820050006#page-2

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/treering/reconstructions/tasmania/tasmania_recon.txt

Temperature data Mount Read 1997 to 2011 – Bom

http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/av?p_nccObsCode=36&p_display_type=dataFile&p_startYear=&p_c=&p_stn_num=097085

JTF62

Kirbati is going to drown! Or maybe not.

Kiribati, just like many other small islands, is frequently used to illustrate the “devastation” that sea level rise is causing (or will cause) from climate change. The only problem is that the data doesn’t support the rhetoric.

I’ve  been tracking Kiribati sea level for a while now, but this time when updating my data, I thought I would check  all stations available from Bom and from PSMSL for Kiribati. I down loaded the mean sea level data from 5 separate stations with good overlap stretching back to 1949. Using the most consistent data, I have adjusted each data set for differing locations using 1804 station as my base, and using the average difference on the overlaps to recalculate a long record.

Here are the five original data sets from Kiribati

Kiribati Sea Level 5 stations 1949 to 2013

The trends of each tide gauge is interesting too. Some going up, some going down, and the longest two of the five, are as flat as the Hay Plain.

Kiribati Sea Level 5 stations 1949 to 2013 with trend

Once the other stations are normalised to the 1804 station, we get a better picture of what has happened over the entire record.  Although there are many variables in comparing different locations, this at least gives a decent indication of what is going on over a longer time frame.

Kiribati Sea Level 5 stations 1949 to 2013 normalised to 1804

So here it is. A composite reconstruction from the various tide gauges around the Kiribati Island group with the indicated trend.

Kiribati Sea Level 5 stations 1949 to 2013 final with trend

So we get a positive trend over this period, and yes, the ocean level has risen, but not by very much. Less than 1mm per year (0.8mm). This is a much reduced rate compared to what I calculated a year ago (1.52mm).  So the long term rate has reduced dramatically, and will continue to fall if the current 12 year negative trend continues. It will be interesting to watch as a possible El Nino develops this year.  They tend to produce very low sea levels around the west Pacific Islands.

kiribati sea level 2001 to 2014 10 mm neg trend v2

Of course no one really knows where it will head next, however one thing is for sure, there is absolutely no correlation to atmospheric carbon dioxide, and particularly the human contribution.

JTF62