Tony Abbott's Climate Speech.
Some love it...  other's hate him :D :D :D :D :D
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1508223430/0#13

The whole world laughs at him!

The whole Internet knows this fool gave the super economy from the antipodes copper Internet in the Asian century it built!

They know he hates kids.....  ;)

Grendel wrote on Oct 17^th, 2017 at 6:46pm:

Tony Abbott's Climate Speech. Some love it...  other's hate him :D :D :D :D :D

Except that Abbott's claims don't stand up to any scrutiny.
Tony Abbott revealed his aversion to science when his government became the first in over 80 years not to have a science minister.
To have such a scientific illiterate giving such a flawed speech on climate science was actually quite bizarre.

The_Barnacle wrote on Oct 19^th, 2017 at 8:25pm:

Grendel wrote on Oct 17th, 2017 at 6:46pm: Tony Abbott's Climate Speech. Some love it...  other's hate him :D :D :D :D :D Except that Abbott's claims don't stand up to any scrutiny. Tony Abbott revealed his aversion to science when his government became the first in over 80 years not to have a science minister. To have such a scientific illiterate giving such a flawed speech on climate science was actually quite bizarre.

Feel free to post and explain them here since you failed to do so in politics.

why start another thread in environment?  ::) ::)

John Smith wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 8:03pm:

why start another thread in environment?  ::) ::)

he got spread eagled and poked in the anus on the other one ?

Dnarever wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 8:31pm:

he got spread eagled and poked in the anus on the other one ?

have you checked out the tide gauge data for Fort Denison yet? Can you show us this acceleration is Sea level Rise?

lee wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 8:56pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 20th, 2017 at 8:31pm: he got spread eagled and poked in the anus on the other one ? have you checked out the tide gauge data for Fort Denison yet? Can you show us this acceleration is Sea level Rise?

Oh, we've all plumbed Fort Grendel, Lee.

She's the easiest rise on the board.

Yeah. but Dna is the one ducking the science. ;)

Grendel wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 7:47pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Oct 19th, 2017 at 8:25pm: Grendel wrote on Oct 17th, 2017 at 6:46pm: Tony Abbott's Climate Speech. Some love it...  other's hate him :D :D :D :D :D Except that Abbott's claims don't stand up to any scrutiny. Tony Abbott revealed his aversion to science when his government became the first in over 80 years not to have a science minister. To have such a scientific illiterate giving such a flawed speech on climate science was actually quite bizarre. Feel free to post and explain them here since you failed to do so in politics.

Even Whatsupwiththat accepts that sea levels are rising.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/06/sea-level-graphs-from-uc-and-some-perspectives/

It makes Tony Abbott look like a complete fool when his claims are even contradicted by denialist blogs like whatsupwiththat

lee wrote on Oct 20^th, 2017 at 10:26pm:

Yeah. but Dna is the one ducking the science. ;)

Dna is the one ducking the science

Or taking the dog for a walk and having an early night just seen the comment at 11:30 to emulate Grendel.

The fort Denison charts show a clear average increase from 1950.

1980’s Av around 6930 mm
1910’s av around 6970 mm (early peak period)
1920 – 1950 – av around 6940 mm
1950 - 1970 av around 6990 mm
1970 to 1990 av around 7020 mm

Early period peak:
1910 – 7020mm (one only before 1950)
Peak from 1970 – 7040mm x 3

We seem to have gone from averages of 6930 mm to 7020 mm.

You can see that rise against Nana's boots in Tony's Manly pictures if you look closely.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 10:31am:

The fort Denison charts show a clear average increase from 1950.

Oh. Averages. :D :D :D :D

Don't you know you look at the top of the range to do sea level rise? Sea levels don't do anything on average.

"Maximum recorded level of 2.400 metres at 1300 hours 25/05/1974
Minimum recorded level of -0.190 metres at 1700 hours 19/08/1982"

http://www.bom.gov.au/ntc/IDO70000/IDO70000_60370_SLD.shtml#stats

So the highest recorded was in 1974. So much for Rising and Accelerated Rising of sea levels.

In actual fact they do refer to Mean Sea Level Rise.
According to the data the highest mean was April 2006 at 1.148 metres.

Oh dear no sea level rise for 10 years. Just think of all that Arctic melt that hasn't changed sea levels in 10 years.

How sad for you. ;D ;D ;D ;D

The_Barnacle wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 10:05am:

Even Whatsupwiththat accepts that sea levels are rising. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/06/sea-level-graphs-from-uc-and-some-perspec...

You did notice they were using the satellite data? And that he didn't explicitly say they were good?

Remember NASA comments on Jason?
The new Jason 3 updated from Jason2 which had an accuracy of 4-5cm

"The primary instrument on Jason-3 is a radar altimeter. The altimeter will measure sea-level variations over the global ocean with very high accuracy (as 1.3 inches or 3.3 centimeters,"

https://sealevel.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/jason3/

So as Pauline famously said "Please Explain". Please explain how satellites with a "very high accuracy" of 3.3CM (33MM) can detect Sea Level Rise of 3.4MM. That is an order of magnitude above the postulated rise. It is down in the noise, somewhere. ;)

lee wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 1:12pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21st, 2017 at 10:31am: The fort Denison charts show a clear average increase from 1950. Oh. Averages. :D :D :D :D Don't you know you look at the top of the range to do sea level rise? Sea levels don't do anything on average. "Maximum recorded level of 2.400 metres at 1300 hours 25/05/1974 Minimum recorded level of -0.190 metres at 1700 hours 19/08/1982" http://www.bom.gov.au/ntc/IDO70000/IDO70000_60370_SLD.shtml#stats So the highest recorded was in 1974. So much for Rising and Accelerated Rising of sea levels. In actual fact they do refer to Mean Sea Level Rise. According to the data the highest mean was April 2006 at 1.148 metres. Oh dear no sea level rise for 10 years. Just think of all that Arctic melt that hasn't changed sea levels in 10 years. How sad for you. ;D ;D ;D ;D

You notice that the overall average was 0.934 but the last 20 readings average is 1.038 ?

Of the last 20 readings only 3 were under 1.  That is 17 above 1 and 3 under 1

Of the first 20 readings only 4 were over 1.    That is 4 above 1 and 16 under 1

So the highest recorded was in 1974. So much for Rising and Accelerated Rising of sea levels.

Congratulations - you managed to measure a few of the largest storms in our history that occurred in 1974. Pointing out the impact of one off weather events is meaningless, yet the averages just keep increasing.

The worst thing you guys can do is to provide data that you don't understand.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 2:10pm:

Congratulations - you managed to measure a few of the largest storms in our history that occurred in 1974. Pointing out the impact of one off weather events is meaningless, yet the averages just keep increasing.

So the Collaroy storm and wash out of the beach was not a large one? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Wasn't it supposed to the worst in more than 40 years? It should have been up here in lights. But MSL for June 2016 was 1.21 metres,

"Residents of Sydney's northern beaches are cleaning up after the area was hit by the worst storms in more than 40 years on the weekend leaving homes and businesses severely damaged."

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/06/06/northern-beaches-homes-coastline-washed-away-worst-storms-40-years


Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 2:10pm:

The worst thing you guys can do is to provide data that you don't understand.

So you have shown.

BTW - The storms in 1974 were in May - June. Not April. Makes you an April Fool.

"Twenty five years ago severe ocean storms  in May-June 1974 ravaged the south-east coast  of  the  Australian  mainland  (Foster  et  al.  1975)."

http://new.mhl.nsw.gov.au/data/realtime/wave/docs/The%201974%20Storms%20Revisited.pdf

lee wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 2:56pm:

BTW - The storms in 1974 were in May - June. Not April. Makes you an April Fool. "Twenty five years ago severe ocean storms  in May-June 1974 ravaged the south-east coast  of  the  Australian  mainland  (Foster  et  al.  1975)." http://new.mhl.nsw.gov.au/data/realtime/wave/docs/The%201974%20Storms%20Revisited.pdf

Quote:

BTW - The storms in 1974 were in May - June. Not April. Makes you an April Fool.

Here is when you said the highest was ? May not April, In fact it was the day following the first storm.


Quote:

"Maximum recorded level of 2.400 metres at 1300 hours 25/05/1974

Between May 24 and June 16, 1974, the Sydney coastline was lashed by three storms that caused enormous damage to the coastline and altered the built landscape forever.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/northern-beaches/one-of-the-storms-that-hit-us-in-1974-was-among-the-three-worst-since-white-settlement/news-story/0cd5ca874d6b37206762d8485e4eb442

lee wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 2:49pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21st, 2017 at 2:10pm: Congratulations - you managed to measure a few of the largest storms in our history that occurred in 1974. Pointing out the impact of one off weather events is meaningless, yet the averages just keep increasing. So the Collaroy storm and wash out of the beach was not a large one? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Wasn't it supposed to the worst in more than 40 years? It should have been up here in lights. But MSL for June 2016 was 1.21 metres, "Residents of Sydney's northern beaches are cleaning up after the area was hit by the worst storms in more than 40 years on the weekend leaving homes and businesses severely damaged." http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/06/06/northern-beaches-homes-coastline-washed-away-worst-storms-40-years Dnarever wrote on Oct 21st, 2017 at 2:10pm: The worst thing you guys can do is to provide data that you don't understand. So you have shown.

It should have been up here in lights. But MSL for June 2016 was 1.21 metres,

The same number for 1974 was 1.055 and the high peak for June 2016 was 2.199 which is high.


So the 1974 figure you quoted the high for on average was not impressive why would you quote the lower mean number for 2016 when it is consistent with 1974.

You had the option to compare apples with apples but chose not to.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 3:21pm:

Here is when you said the highest was ? May not April, In fact it was the day following the first storm. Quote: "Maximum recorded level of 2.400 metres at 1300 hours 25/05/1974

You do realise that is a quote direct from BoM? It is also the HIGH tide figure, NOT the Mean figure. Capiche?

Once again Sea Level is measured at the MEAN.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 3:37pm:

The same number for 1974 was 1.055 and the high peak for June 2016 was 2.199 which is high.

So you quote the MEAN from April 1974 and the HIGH from June 2016 and that is comparing "apples with apples"?

And of course 2.199 is not as high as 2.4metres, which was not a storm affected tide that I can see.

lee wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 4:05pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21st, 2017 at 3:21pm: Here is when you said the highest was ? May not April, In fact it was the day following the first storm. Quote: "Maximum recorded level of 2.400 metres at 1300 hours 25/05/1974 You do realise that is a quote direct from BoM? It is also the HIGH tide figure, NOT the Mean figure. Capiche? Once again Sea Level is measured at the MEAN.

Yes I know what it is. Only commented on it because you used the figure (high - 1974) even though it has little relevance. Using the word Maximum rather gives it away as not being the mean - no ?


My following use of the same term was only in order to compare apples with apples when you had compared the 1974 event in terms of Highest measure and then wanted to compare it with the 2016 event as a monthly mean value.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 4:18pm:

Yes I know what it is. Only commented on it because you used the figure (high - 1974) even though it has little relevance. Using the word Maximum rather gives it away as not being the mean - no ?

Well I AM glad you finally caught up.


Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 4:18pm:

My following use of the same term was only in order to compare apples with apples when you had compared the 1974 event in terms of Highest measure and then wanted to compare it with the 2016 event as a monthly mean value.

Really? Where did I do that?

I even gave you the link so you could compare "apples with apples".


lee wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 1:12pm:

So the highest recorded was in 1974. So much for Rising and Accelerated Rising of sea levels.

Now it doesn't seem like it was storm induced, so even HIGH tide figures don't agree with you. And you would think high tide figures would need to rise to give a greater mean, although low tide could do it in an uncertain world.

But you would think if it was related to ice melt both low and high tides would have led the accelerating sea level rise. ;)

lee wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 4:12pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21st, 2017 at 3:37pm: The same number for 1974 was 1.055 and the high peak for June 2016 was 2.199 which is high. So you quote the MEAN from April 1974 and the HIGH from June 2016 and that is comparing "apples with apples"? And of course 2.199 is not as high as 2.4metres, which was not a storm affected tide that I can see.

I did the exact opposite of what you had already done putting all the numbers on the table.

When you brought up 74 you used the figure as 2.4 peak and then when you brought up 2016 you used the number 1.21 mean

My contribution gave us

1974: 2.4 peak       1.055 Mean.

2006:  2.199 peak   1.21 mean

I put all the numbers on the table is all.

2.4metres, which was not a storm affected tide that I can see.

Well it did occur in the immediate period of a 100 year storm.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 4:49pm:

When you brought up 74 you used the figure as 2.4 peak and then when you brought up 2016 you used the number 1.21 mean

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 4:49pm:

When you brought up 74 you used the figure as 2.4 peak and then when you brought up 2016 you used the number 1.21 mean

In two completely separate posts. Whar made you think they were linked?


Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 4:49pm:

My contribution gave us 1974: 2.4 peak       1.055 Mean. 2006:  2.199 peak   1.21 mean I put all the numbers on the table is all.

Nope. That's what you didn't do, ;)

So you've gone from April 1974 was a storm surge event; it seems not; to now furiously back peddling.

And you can't even do that gracefully.


Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 4:49pm:

Well it did occur in the immediate period of a 100 year storm.

Yep. It knew a storm was coming and went out in sympathy. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 5:08pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21st, 2017 at 4:49pm: When you brought up 74 you used the figure as 2.4 peak and then when you brought up 2016 you used the number 1.21 mean Dnarever wrote on Oct 21st, 2017 at 4:49pm: When you brought up 74 you used the figure as 2.4 peak and then when you brought up 2016 you used the number 1.21 mean In two completely separate posts. Whar made you think they were linked? Dnarever wrote on Oct 21st, 2017 at 4:49pm: My contribution gave us 1974: 2.4 peak       1.055 Mean. 2006:  2.199 peak   1.21 mean I put all the numbers on the table is all. Nope. That's what you didn't do, ;) So you've gone from April 1974 was a storm surge event; it seems not; to now furiously back peddling. And you can't even do that gracefully. Dnarever wrote on Oct 21st, 2017 at 4:49pm: Well it did occur in the immediate period of a 100 year storm. Yep. It knew a storm was coming and went out in sympathy. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Yep. It knew a storm was coming and went out in sympathy

Your still persisting with your error I see. The storm started the day before the record sea level.

Not going one step backwards as my explanation clearly shows.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 6:25pm:

The storm started the day before the record sea level.

"Beach Erosion, May-June, 1974, Central and South Coast, NSW

Abstract
Between May 24th and June 18th 1974, three periods of erosive wave conditions dramatically changed the character of many beaches along the central and southern New South Wales Coast. This paper documents and evaluates regional variations in the responses of beaches to these erosional events for selected portions of this coast (Figure 1)."

ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1066&context=scipapers

25 days before?

Or if a different storm perhaps you can provide a link.

lee wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 7:00pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21st, 2017 at 6:25pm: The storm started the day before the record sea level. "Beach Erosion, May-June, 1974, Central and South Coast, NSW Abstract Between May 24th and June 18th 1974, three periods of erosive wave conditions dramatically changed the character of many beaches along the central and southern New South Wales Coast. This paper documents and evaluates regional variations in the responses of beaches to these erosional events for selected portions of this coast (Figure 1)." ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1066&context=scipapers 25 days before? Or if a different storm perhaps you can provide a link.

OK Below is what you posted as the Maximum record:


Quote:

"Maximum recorded level of 2.400 metres at 1300 hours 25/05/1974

Now below is the dates of the storms:


Quote:

Between May 24th and June 18th 1974

Now the conclusion we have is:

a) Huge storm commencing on 24/5

AND

b) Record high sea level 25/5.

not a coincidence.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 7:19pm:

not a coincidence.

Thank you. I apologise. So the extremely high tide in 1974 was due to storm surge. Similarly 2016 seems to have been affected by storm surge.

Makes pinpointing any Mean Sea Level Rise problematic.  ;)

lee wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 7:58pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21st, 2017 at 7:19pm: not a coincidence. Thank you. I apologise. So the extremely high tide in 1974 was due to storm surge. Similarly 2016 seems to have been affected by storm surge. Makes pinpointing any Mean Sea Level Rise problematic.  ;)

Neither event seems to have influenced the mean result by much if at all and I would assume that there were other storms going back in history having a balancing effect overall.

We may be talking about 10 readings out or 125 years X 365 days. (45,625) You probably noticed that the 2016 storms seemed to have no real perceivable impact. This is likely because it depends on a number of other factors I would think.

To have a measurable impact I suspect you need a high high-tide scheduled due to the correct moon phase and distances coupled with the storm and sea swell amount of water in the system and the tide times etc.

I remember the 74 tide - the water was up to my grandmothers door at high tide. I caught a fish in the front yard from the porch. 

Dnarever wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 8:19pm:

this is likely because it depends on a number of other factors I would think.

Oh definitely. El Nino, La Nina, King tides, neap tides, Wave height, Swell.

So basically there is too much uncertainty to determine sea level or accelerating sea level change.