Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 
Send Topic Print
Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain (Read 36664 times)
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #195 - Feb 28th, 2011 at 6:06pm
 
Soren wrote on Feb 28th, 2011 at 2:30pm:
Or of Dorothea Mackellar"


Core of my heart, my country!
Her pitiless blue sky,
When sick at heart, around us,
We see the cattle die -
But then the grey clouds gather,
And we can bless again
The drumming of an army,
The steady, soaking rain.

Core of my heart, my country!
Land of the Rainbow Gold,
For flood and fire and famine,
She pays us back threefold -
Over the thirsty paddocks,
Watch, after many days,
The filmy veil of greenness
That thickens as we gaze.



Nice poem
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Moderator
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 122490
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #196 - Mar 1st, 2011 at 11:31pm
 
I would say that it is highly likely that humans have cause the climate to change.
I don't see any point in us paying a tax on our own to try & stop it
when the big emitters: USA, China & India will do nothing.
Our tax won't make any measurable difference.
Julia Gillard is a misguided idiot.

The future of mankind is doomed but we'll still have a resonable life
for the next 100 to 400 years.
That is not good but it's a fact that human greed & government incompetence
for cheap energy is too great to stop global emissions.
Just enjoy your time on our planet & be selfish like most other people.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #197 - Mar 3rd, 2011 at 1:38pm
 
gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 28th, 2011 at 2:22pm:
Thanks...

I'll read through it tonight, and give my response tomorrow...



Having difficulties with your reading, Gizmo?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #198 - Mar 3rd, 2011 at 1:44pm
 
perceptions_now wrote on Mar 3rd, 2011 at 1:38pm:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 28th, 2011 at 2:22pm:
Thanks...

I'll read through it tonight, and give my response tomorrow...



Having difficulties with your reading, Gizmo?


LOL no, with my time management....
Back to top
 

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #199 - Mar 3rd, 2011 at 3:29pm
 
I have problems with that too. (my time management that is)
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #200 - Mar 3rd, 2011 at 3:39pm
 
I meant to ,and mean to read it....just haven't found time yet..
Back to top
 

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #201 - Mar 3rd, 2011 at 6:36pm
 
gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 3rd, 2011 at 1:44pm:
perceptions_now wrote on Mar 3rd, 2011 at 1:38pm:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 28th, 2011 at 2:22pm:
Thanks...

I'll read through it tonight, and give my response tomorrow...


http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Templates/Forum/brown/cheesy.gif
Having difficulties with your reading, Gizmo?


LOL no, with my time management....


That's good to hear, Gizmo!

I was beginning to think you may have caught something nasty, like perhaps, the virulent Human Climaticus Virus?

A very dangerous bug, which I'm led to believe can be contracted by contact with Climate scientists or those who have been associating with Climate scientists?

Symptoms include erratic acceptance of logical scientific theories, which are backed by a great deal of scientific research and approved by the majority of Climate scientists, who of course, got the bug first and are now passing it on, to everyone else they come in contact with?

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #202 - Mar 4th, 2011 at 7:11am
 
Ok muso, I've read that link:

http://therealglobalwarmingstory.com/GW10.pdf

It still seems to me that water vapour is a far larger 'culprit' in heating than Co2.

Co2 seems to absorb heat mainly in the 15 micron wave length, but water vapour absorbs over far more wave lengths.....

So I still don't see how it is a problem, it still looks like an effect more than a cause...
Back to top
 

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #203 - Mar 4th, 2011 at 8:39am
 
gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 4th, 2011 at 7:11am:
Ok muso, I've read that link:

http://therealglobalwarmingstory.com/GW10.pdf

It still seems to me that water vapour is a far larger 'culprit' in heating than Co2.

1. Co2 seems to absorb heat mainly in the 15 micron wave length, but water vapour absorbs over far more wave lengths.....

2. So I still don't see how it is a problem, it still looks like an effect more than a cause...


1.Good. Now approximately what proportion of the warming effect is due to water and what proportion is due to CO2?  That's the crux of the concept of climate sensitivity.

2. You're hung up on this cause and effect question. Sometimes CO2 is the cause of increased temperature and sometimes increased temperature (for whatever other reason) results in release of CO2 from the sinks. It's not a straightforward cause and effect. Think in terms of an equilibrium. At this moment in time, we are releasing CO2 into the atmosphere (1% of total inventory every year) from fossil fuels, so CO2 is the controlling factor.

Did you ever cover Le Chateliers principle?
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #204 - Mar 4th, 2011 at 1:40pm
 
muso wrote on Mar 4th, 2011 at 8:39am:
Well from looking at the graph, it seems 'most' of the warming effect is water...


Well if we use a climate sensitivity of 3 degrees for a doubling of CO2, that infers that about 67% of the effect is due to water.  

You understand that for a doubling of CO2, there is  a much greater effect caused by the extra water vapour that is released because of the initial warming effect.

Quote:
And of course I'm 'hung up' on cause and effect........it's the central issue...

If Co2 is the CAUSE of the warming....then Co2 reduction would help slow the warming..

But if Co2 is an EFFECT of the warming...then Co2 reduction will do absolutely nothing to slow the warming..

You see???

If you have a headache caused by a tumor, then aspirin will treat the symptom (effect) but not the tumor (cause)....


I see where you're coming from, but we already showed that CO2 absorbs Long Wave Infrared. The graph itself shows that. Remember the dandelion analogy?  Without the CO2 and other GHG's, the LWIR escapes to space. The effect of CO2 and other GHG's is to absorb and re-radiate that radiation in all directions. The net result is that less radiation escapes to space and the Earth warms.

Therefore if we add CO2 (methane, N2O etc), we increase the magnitude of the Greenhouse effect.

Now you're arguing that CO2 is released from the oceans because of the heat. That's true to some extent, but there is a delay of approximately 200 years. Ocean warming lags landmass warming.

The other problem is that of mechanism. What's the mechanism for the warming effect?
Back to top
« Last Edit: Mar 4th, 2011 at 3:05pm by muso »  

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat
 
IP Logged
 
progressiveslol
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17029
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #205 - Apr 6th, 2011 at 11:07pm
 
____ wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 5:29am:
In the first major paper of its kind, a new study in the February 17 Nature has found that heavy precipitation is at least partly due to the growing concentration of manmade greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere. A team of scientists from Canada and Scotland used powerful computers to analyze the causes behind the rise in storms and heavy snowfall over the past half century. They found that the likelihood of extreme precipitation on any given day rose by 7% between 1951 and 1999—the years covered by the study. That's outside the bounds of normal variability, and the increase only make sense if rising greenhouse gas emissions and climate change are taken into effect. "Human influence on the climate system has the effect of intensifying precipitation extremes," said Francis Zwiers, a climate researcher at Environment Canada in Toronto and the study's lead researcher.

That conclusion shouldn't be that surprising—climatologists have predicted an uptick in extreme weather events as greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere increase. Since warmer air can carry more water vapor, a warmer planet should see heavier rain and other precepitation—and that's what we've begun to see with actual weather. As an accompanying article to the Nature studies points out, for every 1 C in warming near the Earth's surface, scientists expect a 2-3% increase in total global precipitation.

But it's not global precipitation patterns that should really worry us—it's local rainfall, either too much or too little. We need scientists to be able to tell us whether a certain flood or a certain drought actually can be tied to global warming. And in another study published in Nature this week, that's exactly what a team of climatologists set out to do. With help from computer time donated by the public, the researchers analyzed the severe rains that flooded England and Wales in 2000, leading to some of the worst flooding in British history. They looked at the climate as it actually existed at the time, and then compared it to hypothetical climates as they would have been if human beings had never begun adding greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The researchers concluded that the chances of such a major flood happening at that time were roughly doubled by the rise in greenhouse gases. "Greenhouse gas emissions due to human activity have affected the odds of floods in England and Wales," said physicist Pardeep Pall of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH Zurich), who led the Nature research.

Given the billions of dollars for climate adaptation at stake, it's vital for scientists to deliver more rapid and accurate analysis of extreme weather events—like climate change CSI. But we're not there yet—the Nature study of the 2000 floods took a decade of work and incredibly complex computer simulations. But we'll need better analysis not just to predict coming extreme weather events and prepare for them—something that could have averted much of the damage from the terrible floods in Pakistan last summer—but in assigning cause and blame. That will matter for the business world—insurance companies will want to know just what caused devastating floods or storms as they pay out their claims. But it will also impact international climate negotiations. If developing countries—already on the front lines of global warming—can prove that carbon emissions from rich countries are causing what we once referred to as natural catastrophes, they may well be justified in demanding the equivalent of carbon reparations.


http://ecocentric.blogs.time.com/2011/02/17/new-studies-show-that-climate-change...


So the science mounts ... when will the hard right embrace science and back Greens policies like a 40% cut in CO2 pollution. If they don't it's enough evidence to call the Liberals and the National Party's financially reckless.

What a crock. Go to these guys who have a way better understanding of weather, climate and even give predictions for possible future events from their models and have a far far better rate of success than AGW so called models.

What you are seeing is all natural and not even close to AGW garbage. Go to the site and they will explain why they predicted such events and it isnt climate change.

http://www.weatheraction.com/
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Foolosophy
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1171
Australia
Gender: female
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #206 - Apr 6th, 2011 at 11:38pm
 
progressiveslol wrote on Apr 6th, 2011 at 11:07pm:
____ wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 5:29am:
In the first major paper of its kind, a new study in the February 17 Nature has found that heavy precipitation is at least partly due to the growing concentration of manmade greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere. A team of scientists from Canada and Scotland used powerful computers to analyze the causes behind the rise in storms and heavy snowfall over the past half century. They found that the likelihood of extreme precipitation on any given day rose by 7% between 1951 and 1999—the years covered by the study. That's outside the bounds of normal variability, and the increase only make sense if rising greenhouse gas emissions and climate change are taken into effect. "Human influence on the climate system has the effect of intensifying precipitation extremes," said Francis Zwiers, a climate researcher at Environment Canada in Toronto and the study's lead researcher.

That conclusion shouldn't be that surprising—climatologists have predicted an uptick in extreme weather events as greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere increase. Since warmer air can carry more water vapor, a warmer planet should see heavier rain and other precepitation—and that's what we've begun to see with actual weather. As an accompanying article to the Nature studies points out, for every 1 C in warming near the Earth's surface, scientists expect a 2-3% increase in total global precipitation.

But it's not global precipitation patterns that should really worry us—it's local rainfall, either too much or too little. We need scientists to be able to tell us whether a certain flood or a certain drought actually can be tied to global warming. And in another study published in Nature this week, that's exactly what a team of climatologists set out to do. With help from computer time donated by the public, the researchers analyzed the severe rains that flooded England and Wales in 2000, leading to some of the worst flooding in British history. They looked at the climate as it actually existed at the time, and then compared it to hypothetical climates as they would have been if human beings had never begun adding greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The researchers concluded that the chances of such a major flood happening at that time were roughly doubled by the rise in greenhouse gases. "Greenhouse gas emissions due to human activity have affected the odds of floods in England and Wales," said physicist Pardeep Pall of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH Zurich), who led the Nature research.

Given the billions of dollars for climate adaptation at stake, it's vital for scientists to deliver more rapid and accurate analysis of extreme weather events—like climate change CSI. But we're not there yet—the Nature study of the 2000 floods took a decade of work and incredibly complex computer simulations. But we'll need better analysis not just to predict coming extreme weather events and prepare for them—something that could have averted much of the damage from the terrible floods in Pakistan last summer—but in assigning cause and blame. That will matter for the business world—insurance companies will want to know just what caused devastating floods or storms as they pay out their claims. But it will also impact international climate negotiations. If developing countries—already on the front lines of global warming—can prove that carbon emissions from rich countries are causing what we once referred to as natural catastrophes, they may well be justified in demanding the equivalent of carbon reparations.


http://ecocentric.blogs.time.com/2011/02/17/new-studies-show-that-climate-change...


So the science mounts ... when will the hard right embrace science and back Greens policies like a 40% cut in CO2 pollution. If they don't it's enough evidence to call the Liberals and the National Party's financially reckless.

What a crock. Go to these guys who have a way better understanding of weather, climate and even give predictions for possible future events from their models and have a far far better rate of success than AGW so called models.

What you are seeing is all natural and not even close to AGW garbage. Go to the site and they will explain why they predicted such events and it isnt climate change.

http://www.weatheraction.com/


rather strange that all these AGW DENIALIST crack pots can't or will not refer to the peer reviewed scientific literature.

It's always some retired Coal-Chemist or Lord from England or a WEB SITE

LOL

(first they claimed that the earth isnt even warming, then when the decades long warming period couldnt be denied whilst keeping a straight face. they resorted to this warming period being TOTALLY attributed to NATURAL CYCLES - Ask them to characterise the mechanism of these so called NATURAL CYCLES and their jaws drop and run away like pathetic right wing weasels - its actually funny to watch these sociopaths function in society let alone online)
Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 6th, 2011 at 11:54pm by Foolosophy »  
 
IP Logged
 
Foolosophy
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1171
Australia
Gender: female
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #207 - Apr 6th, 2011 at 11:46pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Mar 1st, 2011 at 11:31pm:
I would say that it is highly likely that humans have cause the climate to change.
I don't see any point in us paying a tax on our own to try & stop it
when the big emitters: USA, China & India will do nothing.
Our tax won't make any measurable difference.
Julia Gillard is a misguided idiot.

The future of mankind is doomed but we'll still have a resonable life
for the next 100 to 400 years.
That is not good but it's a fact that human greed & government incompetence
for cheap energy is too great to stop global emissions.
Just enjoy your time on our planet & be selfish like most other people.


remember that about 2/3 of the power grid is controlled by FOREIGN multinational corporations (a testamony to our innate Aussie short sightedness)

So when Abbott says he will be GIVING multi billion dollar cheques to the polluters (which are basically the coal power station owners) for them to VOLUNTARILY reduce emissions, 2/3 of this TAX PAYER MONEY will be going to fat corprorate cats in the USA and Europe.

Didnt you know that even OUR SO CALLED mining secotr is about 60% foreign owned as well.

So a carbon tax is actually a good way to extract some of the profit dollars that are flooding out fo this country and re-channel to householders.

If I had a choice betweent he two schemes I know which one I would choose.

In fact to adopt the insane Abbott scam would be Un-Australian wouldnt it?

Why would we line the pockets of the rich in NY etc with tax payers money?

And the same time give them even more benefits such as buildign ALL the infrastructure that they rarely contribute to?

You obviously havent thought this through properly have you?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
progressiveslol
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17029
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #208 - Apr 7th, 2011 at 5:39pm
 
Foolosophy wrote on Apr 6th, 2011 at 11:38pm:
progressiveslol wrote on Apr 6th, 2011 at 11:07pm:
____ wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 5:29am:
In the first major paper of its kind, a new study in the February 17 Nature has found that heavy precipitation is at least partly due to the growing concentration of manmade greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere. A team of scientists from Canada and Scotland used powerful computers to analyze the causes behind the rise in storms and heavy snowfall over the past half century. They found that the likelihood of extreme precipitation on any given day rose by 7% between 1951 and 1999—the years covered by the study. That's outside the bounds of normal variability, and the increase only make sense if rising greenhouse gas emissions and climate change are taken into effect. "Human influence on the climate system has the effect of intensifying precipitation extremes," said Francis Zwiers, a climate researcher at Environment Canada in Toronto and the study's lead researcher.

That conclusion shouldn't be that surprising—climatologists have predicted an uptick in extreme weather events as greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere increase. Since warmer air can carry more water vapor, a warmer planet should see heavier rain and other precepitation—and that's what we've begun to see with actual weather. As an accompanying article to the Nature studies points out, for every 1 C in warming near the Earth's surface, scientists expect a 2-3% increase in total global precipitation.

But it's not global precipitation patterns that should really worry us—it's local rainfall, either too much or too little. We need scientists to be able to tell us whether a certain flood or a certain drought actually can be tied to global warming. And in another study published in Nature this week, that's exactly what a team of climatologists set out to do. With help from computer time donated by the public, the researchers analyzed the severe rains that flooded England and Wales in 2000, leading to some of the worst flooding in British history. They looked at the climate as it actually existed at the time, and then compared it to hypothetical climates as they would have been if human beings had never begun adding greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The researchers concluded that the chances of such a major flood happening at that time were roughly doubled by the rise in greenhouse gases. "Greenhouse gas emissions due to human activity have affected the odds of floods in England and Wales," said physicist Pardeep Pall of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH Zurich), who led the Nature research.

Given the billions of dollars for climate adaptation at stake, it's vital for scientists to deliver more rapid and accurate analysis of extreme weather events—like climate change CSI. But we're not there yet—the Nature study of the 2000 floods took a decade of work and incredibly complex computer simulations. But we'll need better analysis not just to predict coming extreme weather events and prepare for them—something that could have averted much of the damage from the terrible floods in Pakistan last summer—but in assigning cause and blame. That will matter for the business world—insurance companies will want to know just what caused devastating floods or storms as they pay out their claims. But it will also impact international climate negotiations. If developing countries—already on the front lines of global warming—can prove that carbon emissions from rich countries are causing what we once referred to as natural catastrophes, they may well be justified in demanding the equivalent of carbon reparations.


http://ecocentric.blogs.time.com/2011/02/17/new-studies-show-that-climate-change...


So the science mounts ... when will the hard right embrace science and back Greens policies like a 40% cut in CO2 pollution. If they don't it's enough evidence to call the Liberals and the National Party's financially reckless.

What a crock. Go to these guys who have a way better understanding of weather, climate and even give predictions for possible future events from their models and have a far far better rate of success than AGW so called models.

What you are seeing is all natural and not even close to AGW garbage. Go to the site and they will explain why they predicted such events and it isnt climate change.

http://www.weatheraction.com/


rather strange that all these AGW DENIALIST crack pots can't or will not refer to the peer reviewed scientific literature.

It's always some retired Coal-Chemist or Lord from England or a WEB SITE

LOL

(first they claimed that the earth isnt even warming, then when the decades long warming period couldnt be denied whilst keeping a straight face. they resorted to this warming period being TOTALLY attributed to NATURAL CYCLES - Ask them to characterise the mechanism of these so called NATURAL CYCLES and their jaws drop and run away like pathetic right wing weasels - its actually funny to watch these sociopaths function in society let alone online)

We dont go to your AGW shonky peer reviews as your shonky peer review system has been found wanting on the scientific accepatble basis (cheats, maipulaters in other words).

The link I gave you predicts climate better than the AGW shonks.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Belgarion
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6177
Gender: male
Re: Climate Change Is the Culprit in Extreme Rain
Reply #209 - Apr 7th, 2011 at 5:53pm
 
Perhaps an e mail from the University of East Anglia should be the ultimate authority..... Grin
Back to top
 

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Voltaire.....(possibly)
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 
Send Topic Print