As I understand it, global warming is defined by a measured increase in average temperatures over time. According to my memory and perceptions, there seems to be a greater number of extreme weather events being reported since the climate change debate became mainstream somewhere in the 1990's.

I'm talking about record breaking temperature extremes, droughts, floods, hurricanes, bushfires and even earthquakes. I'm not an expert on the climate change debate, so I'm wondering to what extent these events are considered by the majority of the scientific community, to be a result of actual climate change or an over reporting of those events, due to the increased public interest in the subject.

I have been under the impression that noticable anthropogenic climate change would take place over a much longer time period than a human life. Much too gradually to be actually noticed without using sensitive equipment and recording data over a significant time frame, in order to differentiate from natural fluctuations. Unless of course there are specific periods in which those shifts reach tipping points which are within a human lifetime to observe and that we just happen to be experiencing one at this point in time.

No more than 20 years ago, I recall there being an awareness of the possibility of human influenced climate change, with the depletion of the ozone layer being a popular topic of discussion. But I had a clear impression that if humans were affecting the climate, that it would take a significant period of time and manifest in subtle ways, like species extinction and crop failure, rather than dramatic global weather events.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 1^st, 2014 at 3:39am:


Posting drunk at 3.30 am will make you write garbage like this.

miketrees wrote on Apr 1^st, 2014 at 1:40pm:


Being old is a poor excuse.

You last legacy to the people who will come after you is to do your best to right the wrongs of your generation.

Dont waste your remaining years.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 4:47am:


Are you saying that Coca Cola uses groundwater, rather than tap water to make soft drinks?

Are you saying that Coca Cola uses groundwater, rather than tap water to make soft drinks?

This is known as City Slicker Syndrome.

The disconnect between city people and reality.

You may remember it from other classic statements like, we don't need farmers, we get our food from the shops.

While on one level shops will still get food, but wherever they get it by definition it will still be a farmer producing it.

miketrees wrote on Apr 1^st, 2014 at 1:40pm:

It's a regulation versus big business lobbyist problem: the simpleton consumer slash voter can't work out that they are the ones being lobbied against by the sheep clothed planet accountants due to Hollywood and MTV making them accept pulp fiction like pavlovs conditioned subjects!

Money s getting funnier and funnier: all this tap and go stuff is spreading to the gay as metrosexual mobile phone with no end in sight!

Synergistic systems don't decay, they collapse... So I have heard!

Yes, Mike, you must keep helping to warn us all cos we've only got one mudball 

miketrees wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 4:08pm:

I'm no curse, mate: I give a hoot!

Winston Smith wrote on Apr 1^st, 2014 at 1:03am:


NASA has a good doco on that!

http://youtu.be/6X5DqKdi8A4    Future Earth" [2014 Documentary] - YouTube