JoNova
A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets To report "lost" comments or defamatory and offensive remarks, email the moderators at: support.jonova AT proton.me
Statistics
15% of AU was burnt in 1974.
“At the peak of the global cooling scare in 1974, Australian fires burned eleven times as much acreage as this year’s [2019/20] fires.”
Per Tony Heller:
https://realclimatescience.com/2020/01/1974-fires-burned-15-of-australia/
110
Great link Lance, bookmarked, that was a cooler atmosphere combined with a strong La Nina.
This combo has always been more destructive and stormy IMO, it increases the thermal, pressure and humidity gradients both vertically, and equator to pole. How can that situation not lead to greater extremes. Cyclone Tracy was extreme because the slope of its pressure gradient was so extreme, and supposedly the second smallest Cat-4 observed globally.
Brisbane and surrounds also got hit by tornadoes in thunderstorms in 1973 and 1974, and the great Brisbane flood, driven by a decaying cyclone.
20
The climate change issue has polarised communities throughout the Western World. The scientific complexities surrounding it are clearly still a long way from resolution. For many people it is not even clear what the term “climate change” means other than, that things are getting a bit warmer but not drastically so.
These people are not particularly concerned and are largely ambivalent about the whole thing. I call them, with respect, “The Happy Wanderers” who take no strong stand one way or the other. Some can be swayed by the preponderance of propaganda while others are turned off by the absurd hyperbolas put out by the Alarmists, but in general, none of them are prepared to devote much time or thought to the issue. In particular any discussion on the science, immediately induces a kind of torpor and the mere reference to a decimal point is enough to end a discussion fairly quickly.
Given that the scientific uncertainties are likely to continue for years, what happens next will be decided not by science but by the Happy Wanderers at the ballot box.
The internet is populated by blogs devoted to pushing one side or the other. These blogs are read by their supporters and trolled by those with opposing views but I suggest rarely visited by a Happy Wanderer, they just don’t care all that much. They are the kind of people who can’t get passionate about something that they don’t understand and which in any case doesn’t affect them very much if at all.
With all this in mind I have established my own blog which is intended to appeal to these people by discussing a broad range of subjects and avoids banging away endlessly on one particular drum. It will contain a sprinkling of climate change posts in which I intend to highlight the absurdities, hypocrisies etc. and juxtapose them with calm but non-scientific counterpoints.
I have the utmost respect and admiration for the work that Jo and others do, however I just feel there is this gap that needs addressing and would like to do something about it.
Finally and hopefully it is not unethical, my blog is http://www.dinosaurdiary.com.au if you like what you see and share it on Facebook we may make a bit of a difference.
110
Nicely nontechnical.
70
I look forward to checking it out.
I said this in another thread somewhere – it’s really difficult to find somewhere that discusses both sides in manner that can let the reader make up their own mind. It’s super easy to find an echo chamber though 🙂
50
Curry’s blog is good for both sides, but only discusses very technical science. Also, since she quit GaTech the posts have become infrequent so the active voices are way down. It used to be great now just good.
20
Except for the infinity of ‘policy’ blah-blah false narratives, the corruption of institutions, especially of education and teaching, in all its forms, the politicization of everything, and the ever growing taxation costs, red-tape suppression of behavior and the enjoyment of life, overflowing offices of petty dictatorial bureaucrats ‘saving’ us by fining and harming us, and the resulting failure to address real problems which actually do matter, while the children are endlessly filled with guilt, and fall into chronic depression about even being alive and such a problem, while ‘youth-suicide’ rises (let’s just blame it on ‘social-media’ instead of a lack of honesty, truth and love).
Your wanderers are affected by climate-change, they just haven’t woken up to how damaging it is, even as the weather remains relatively mild and ‘safe’ with respect to historical norms, and is being very human-friendly and quite agreeable.
Oh yeah, and the planet is 15% greener, and there’s more life giving rain everywhere, and we have never lived so long, or ate so well and so regularly all the beautiful things the Earth provides with a little natural human technological tweaking.
What monsters!
30
Hi
I have created some graphics explaining why the Larsen ice sheet calving is due to tectonic plate forces.
Feel free to share.
Regards
Brian
160
Thanks Brian,
I will remember that if any one brings up Antartica loosing Ice!
40
Very clearly explained.
Thank you.
20
Not buying it Brian, the rate of gravity-driven deformation of basal lubricated glacier ice is 3 to 4 orders of magnitude faster than the rate of crustal deformation. The driver of the rate of berg carving carving is due to the long term rate of snow input, and the gravity-driven flow downslope from the mountains to the west.
Other than isostatic replacement of that mountain rage due to glacial erosion of them, and possible basal hydro-thermal activity to lubricate, I’d say geotectonics has almost but not quite nothing to do with the rate of berg carving.
30
🙂 🙂
20
The sun behaving as it is can cause a great deal of tectonic and volcanic activity as per history, so I would say that Brian the Engineer may be right on the money.
11
A supposition doe not trump geodetic measurement.
30
Hi Wayne, plate tectonics may be a factor but there’s no getting away from the major mechanism of vertical pressure on the ice pack.
Unrestrained edges of the ice field will move horizontally under pressure from the overburden.
The more snow/rain/ice that accumulates the greater the force at the base.
Ice Will “flow” out and when it goes over the supporting land it will crack off.
The mechanism proposed will be irregular and over longer timeframe.
Still?
KK
20
The Larsen Ice Shelf is floating. It is not a basal lubricated glacier.
Therefore I think geotectonic stress could cause cracking and caving off large pieces.
00
I don’t.
Ice deformation flow is on the order of 10,000 times faster than tectonism, but you still think tectonism is an input to carving? That’s 1 meter of lateral land movement for every 10,000 m (10 km) of ice movement. I’m being conservative here, it can be much faster than that.
There is actually direct friction with massive crystalline country-rock on higher terrain, and on the low land, and also while grounded over the littoral for a long distance seawards, before it finally begins to floats. That requires gravity flow (and there’s not enough cohesion in ice to drag it as it’s much to brittle).
Do you discount that deep ice and strong currents measured in m/s are a force that induces dynamic stress and compression in the ice margins? Plus twice daily vertical tides measured in meters, adding and subtracting flex stress? Plus sea waves measured in tens of meters and thousands of tons coming at the ice from different directions. Which can also cause impact stresses with the bottom near the grounded portion? Plus collisions with floating bergs that smash into it and fracture it like an earthquake? Plus high winds from all directions within Low pressure storms.
Are these not viable mechanisms to carve floating glacial ice?
When ice deforms it does so as rocks do (a-seismic creep deformation), the water recrystallizes into fresh ice crystals so any slow secular plastic-deformation stress just leads to re-crystallization back into solid ice. So what is needed to break ice is a rate of stress or compression deformations which significantly exceed the rate of re-crystallization, or plastic-deformation flow.
Tectonism is well below that threshold for ice and is not the force driving carving, it’s much too slow. The fast observed deformation mechanisms are gravity-flow for grounded glaciers, plus the added dynamics of water and air upon the floating ice. Flex fast enough something which is cold and brittle and it ceases to deform, it snaps. As soon as the ice’s internal stress exceeds the available deformation rate (mediated by re-crystallization) it must micro fracture. Where the fractures accumulate faster than they can heal via recrystallizing, is where the carving more readily occurs.
It’s the gravity flow off the mountains which thrusts the ice seawards under the weight of the ice at altitudes above the grounding level, the more the snow is dropped on there the greater the potential energy to overcome the grounded friction and push it out over the water further.
30
Great outline.
Ice Will flow, distort, if given time to adjust.
The concept of tidal flexing is so obvious but something I hadn’t been aware of.
KK
20
Hi WXcycles
I appreciate your critique.
As already noted by Peter C the Larsen ice shelf is a area of ocean protected by the surrounding landmass and has therefore frozen.
It is not connected to the seafloor.
If it was the seafloor would provide resistance to the calving.
It also isn’t fed by glaciers.
It is connected to the surrounding ice cap over the land.
This ice cap is fused to the land mass under and tectonic stresses therefore flow into the ice shelf.
There are other mechanisms at work too that are additive to the stresses that cause calving.
I will update the graphic with this information.
Regards
Brian
10
Hi Brian,
The thing about ice is that like lead and gold it exhibits plastic flow under load (from ice stacked above).
When it is pushed over the land edge it is no longer fully supported by the sea water and cracks off.
The rate of calving would be proportional to the rate of snow/ice accumulation above.
KK
10
Cheers Brian.
Tectonic movement would be insignificant as an input to the ice’s behavior over land, except during a major regional earthquake. Such quakes cause the entire planet to resonate, so if they were occurring we’d know about it as the wave arrivals would be measurable and relocatable via triangulation even by northern hemisphere seismometers.
Crack and fatigue desiccation of glacial ice and its ready ability to recrystallize to deform, and even to stack-up vertically in compression ridges, or as crevasse fractures when under stress, also means it’s a very poor medium (next to useless) for transmitting any secular long term tectonic stress on the timescales of tectonic movement. This isn’t happening so forget it, these are different processes on vastly different scales. Gravity flow is enormously larger, and tectonism would not even be a detectable influence. if it can’t be tested by measurement it’s not even a part of science.
The major crustal adjustment would be crustal isostatic adjustment downward under the weight of the glacial icesheet. But as it’s been there a long time you could safely presume that even that movement would be close to equilibrium with its relative buoyancy in the much more plastic asthenosphere below it.
So the ice flow on land will be gravity-driven with almost no other input, and helped or hindered (briefly) by the level of friction at its base. Once the compacted snow is deep enough the friction is overcome, and the ice deforms and flows like the friction is no obstacle. That’s how it takes apart mountain ranges, gravity flow pressure cracks the solid rock of the walls of the feeder valleys.
This is not the case. I don’t know where you got that idea but it could not be more wrong.
There are numerous large fringing glaciers feeding into the margins of the Larsen ice shelf, which shelf is mostly glacial ice. You may not see that but that is only because the ice tends to flatten out over time under its own weight, and refuses (recrystallizes), then fresher compacting snow layers fall on top of the floating portion, which flattens it out completely. But inside the ice shelf it’s almost completely glacial.
Look on the left side of this satellite image and you can clearly see glaciers within glacial valleys constantly feeding their ice into the Larsen Ice shelf as it carves, you can even see where they fan out as they get to the approximate position of the ‘coast line’. As the constriction of the valley goes away the ices fans-out and flattens and joins into a single sheet on land, then on water (while new snow flattens covers its real origins).
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/22/Larsen_B_Collapse.jpg
The named major glaciers gravity-feeding the iceshelf are clearly shown here:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/Larsen_B_collapse.jpg
It is not sheltered sea ice that formed this ice shelf, it’s what’s shown in this diagram of how the Larsen iceshelf grows, moves and carves under the influence of gravity flow, then the ocean and atmosphere effects once it is floating.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larsen_Ice_Shelf#/media/File:Antarctic_shelf_ice_hg.png
Tectonics has nothing to do with its carving.
10
Seriously? Three image links goes into moderation? That is nuts.
10
Yup, that was it, three links and it goes to moderation.
00
This is ridiculous mod.
00
Next week’s World Econ Forum in Davos should be a hoot. Climate “emergency” is being hyped as a major theme:
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/17/here-are-the-main-themes-at-world-economic-forum-2020.
Trump and Greta are both speaking. Will it tear itself apart like the Madrid COP? Let’s hope so.
120
Guardian into:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/19/warm-words-as-the-global-order-unravels-how-50-davos-gatherings-shaped-history
“populism is unravelling the global order as the climate emergency rages”
Thunberg et al prior statement:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/10/greta-thunberg-davos-tycoons-fossil-fuels-dismantle-climate-crisis
Pure green crap.
40
‘Hazard reduction bad’ – ‘cultural burning’ good.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jan/19/right-fire-for-right-future-how-cultural-burning-can-protect-australia-from-catastrophic-blazes
OMG – in The Guardian!
30
That tells you all you need to know.
If it’s in The Guardian[Australia] , it’s come straight from The Swamp.
21
We in Godzone have a similar highlighter of swamp filth on RadioNZ Neshool, each weekday morning at 5a.m., called FirstUp. That’s NewSpeak for the daily spin on world events, fresh from London.
We refer to it as First Crap.
30
Excuse my Kiwi , that should read RadioNZ Neshnool.
00
David Wojick –
your link is dead.
this is what is at your link now (see the url)
17 Jan: CNBC: ‘A new world disorder’: Global leaders head to Davos 2020 in search of stability
by Silvia Amaro
The main theme at Davos this year seems to be how to make businesses more climate friendly.
In a report, released earlier this week, the WEF said severe threats to the climate account for all of the top five long-term risks. The Forum’s organizers also chose sustainable investment as the overarching topic for the five-day event…
However, bridging the gap between profits and greener attitudes is a sensitive topic. U.S. President Donald Trump, for example, withdrew from the Paris Climate deal arguing the stricter climate policy targets were bad for U.S. businesses…
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/17/here-are-the-main-themes-at-world-economic-forum-2020.html
don’t know if this was originally what you were posting:
16 Jan: CNBC: Donald Trump vs. Greta Thunberg: Davos prepares for climate crisis showdown
by Sam Meredith
Thunberg has reportedly pledged to tell global leaders in attendance at Davos to “immediately and completely divest from fossil fuels.”…
She is scheduled to deliver the opening remarks of a panel session entitled “Averting a Climate Apocalypse” on Tuesday…
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/16/trump-vs-greta-thunberg-davos-prepares-for-climate-crisis-showdown.html
50
Willis Eschenbach in a guest post at WUWT talks of ’emergent phenomena’.
‘My question was, why is the climate so stable?
‘And my answer is, there are a host of what are called “emergent phenomena” that arise when local temperatures go above some local threshold. They include the timing and strength of the daily emergence of the cumulus cloud field in the tropics; the development of thunderstorms; the emergence of dust devils when temperatures get hot; the action of the El Nino/La Nina pump moving warm water to the poles; and various “oscillations” like the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.
‘These emergent phenomena arise out of nowhere, last for some length of time, and then disappear completely. And acting together, they all work to prevent both the overcooling and the overheating of the planet.’
110
Willis and emergent phenomena … I live on the western shore of the Coral Sea, and regularly witness the phenomena he describes. I even tried to be on top of Mount Low (not descriptive – named after the graziers) to be in the right place for sequential imaging. Trouble is, when it starts to crank up, it is too hot to hang around.
70
🙂
30
You need a drone. 😉
20
Chaos (nonlinear dynamics) is a powerful form of stability, called the Strange Attractor. The price is unpredictable oscillation. Weather and climate are chaotic.
For example, here in West Virginia USA the temperature will often vary by 30 degrees F in a day. But it will not vary by more than 150 degrees F in a thousand years. That is incredible stability, with rapid internal oscillations.
70
That is a relief, I thought it might be the Gaia theory revisited.
10
Mr. David, I don’t intend to split hairs about chaos and dynamic systems, but rather intend to clarify some elements.
But, then again, I’m a geek and somewhat OCD. Overall, I do agree that weather and climate are chaotic systems of complex nature.
Nonlinear systems exist when an output is not proportional to the change of the input.
Chaos, or chaotic systems, exist when the apparently-random states of disorder and irregularities of a dynamic system are governed by deterministic laws that are highly sensitive to initial conditions
Ie, “When the present conditions determine the future, but the approximate present conditions do not approximately determine the future.”
More clearly, nonlinear systems can, and often are, entirely predictable if they obey known physical laws, ie, are bounded by known limits and functionally known constraints.
Chaotic systems are so dependent upon initial conditions that their descriptions can only be defined in very finite terms of time or perturbation. Chaotic systems tend to be un-definable over long time periods or within unknown perturbation ranges. Ie, the model of the system determines the iterative solution. Change one element, one initial condition, one single aspect, and the result will be a bifurcation or a totally chaotic condition. Iterative solutions are required because no known closed form solution exists.
Suffice to say that although we live in a chaotic climatic system, the feedback mechanisms must be negative ( stabilizing ) because life still exists.
If the system were unbounded and chaotic with positive feedbacks, then life would not exist because the system would be uncontrollably chaotic in the extreme sense. Climate would range from absolute zero to evaporation of seas and atmospheres.
Thus the system must be bounded, whether chaotic or not. The fact that life still exists is good evidence of that.
If the system is bounded, the feedbacks within the system must be negative to achieve that.
In sum, we are lucky as crap to be able to adapt to a system that is relatively stable.
Politics, ideology, and taxation have nothing to do with it. 🙂
70
You are mostly right, Lance, although very simple systems can be chaotic. Chaos is a mathematical property fist discovered about 100 years ago. The first physical instance was identified in weather about 50 years ago and since then it has become a big branch of science. All it takes is a properly negative nonlinear feedback, as you suggest.
It is the struggle between the system wanting to go one way and the negative feedback the other way that causes the unpredictable oscillations. An ongoing wrestling match. In weather, hot versus cold and rain versus dry are two examples. This holds for weeks, months, decades and centuries. But the oscillations are bounded so the system is stable.
That a system can be deterministic yet unpredictable is a disruptive new concept for science. People still sell long term weather forecasts even though the math says they can’t possibly know what will happen.
My favorite chaos joke: the stranger asks the farmer “Think it will rain?” The farmer replies “It always has.” That is stability.
40
It seems Dr Edward Lorenz agrees with both of us, or we with him.
effectively, long term predictions of weather/climate are impossible by any known means unless the present conditions of all variables are known exactly and all variables are accounted for in the model.
Deterministic Non Periodic Flow
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/1520-0469%281963%29020%3C0130%3ADNF%3E2.0.CO%3B2
30
The fact there are identifiable quasi-stable repeating over-printing ‘cycles’ in weather, and also within climate, shows how bounded and stable the system really, is on all scales, even on the 100 million year time scale since the beginning of the Phanerozoic.
10
“Gavin’s Falsifiable Science”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/01/18/gavins-falsifiable-science/
GISS gets a serve first up
50
At some point in the interminable arguments I idly wonder if anyone if anyone has ever seen Nick Stokes and Peter Fitzroy
together?
(Just kidding, I actually hate myself for approaching ad-hominem stuff).
I also hate to bring up either elections or the polarizing Mr T here, but on an idle Sunday morning I am marveling
at his perhaps signature ability to cut to the essence of an issue in the way it impacts the common man (and woman, of course).
In a recent riff, he spoke of the idiocy of water limited showers, toilets, and dishwashers.
“you have to push the button ten times, and then, after all that, take the dishes out and wash them the old fashioned way”.
In a comedy act or political speech, the audience tells you when you have hit the mark.
You or I can probably write a clear, biting English sentence stating the problem:
“let’s take out modern culture based on reliable, cheap energy being available on demand to even the poorest household and help the poor by making
energy less reliable and more expensive”.
Sage heads here might nod in agreement at the folly of our leaders but that line will never get a laugh. I find myself asking, How would Trump say it?
If only for the joy of watching liberal heads explode.
We’ve talked a lot here about how to get our heretical idea through to people, who seem willing to be skeptical nature in spite of the torrent of warmist propaganda.
The answer might be, how would Trump say it?
50
Sweden, a land of contrasts https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/01/while_st_greta_harangues_the_world_back_home_in_sweden_poll_of_taxpayers_identifies_climate_spending_as_the_biggest_government_waste.html
50
There was an international poll recently on the degree of skepticism to climate alarmism and Sweden was ranked more skeptical than America. Greta is an outlier. So is Action Now! radicalism, so I take neither seriously.
80
As are louder loons in general.
10
Anyone else seen the push that’s on to reduce speed limits to 30 kph to supposedly help curb emissions?
30
If they bring it down to 4 kph then we can reintroduce the pedestrian flag bearer preceding the vehicle.
50
They will be forced to reduce that to 3, 2, 1 (?) kmh.
Otherwise it will discriminate against job opportunities for the obese
60
Yeah, but they have an efficiency advantage we slim ones don’t.
They don’t walk, they roll.
30
A man with a red flag will jog in front to clear pedestrians out of the path of the vehicle.
It was discovered in a history book.
50
Teslas will project a hologram of a man with a red flag in front of the vehicle. Customers may select a man, woman or any one of an infinit variety of LGBTQI and so on alternatives.
If you buy the premium woman/man/person/thing he/she/it can deliver a range of politically correct lectures, in 15 languages. Updates will be avaialable as the cause du jour changes.
100
If it can do Mizuho Lin singing with a little red flag, I’ll buy one.
https://i.pinimg.com/236x/c1/fc/03/c1fc03d01f58a00486cf8b7651fa420f–mizuho-lin-ladies-fashion.jpg?nii=t
20
that’s one way to make EV’s attractive I guess. 30kph is a bit uncomfortable in my car with the gearing. And on a hot day (40), even 50 kph is not enough to cool the AC exchange sufficiently to get cold air once heat soak has opportunity to do its thing
60
Doh! that was meant to be 8.2 not a 9. I fail 🙁
I’m all for slow speeds in high pedestrian areas. But anything that upsets the flow of traffic is not good for emissions, nor tempers :/
30
Experience in US found sfa difference in real life fuel mileage with the speed reduction from 70 to 55 mph
70
I doubt the same would be said reducing from 55mph/80kph to 40mph/60kph, let alone to 30mph/50kph.
The stats for my car bears out your comment. I’ve captured the fuel consumption for each fill up and noted the car computer average speed which I reset to zero each time I fill up. Ironically, perhaps, 100-110kmh is more efficient than 80-90kph for my car, but only slightly
Full list:
100-110kph avg spd yields 9.89-12.17 l/100km Av 11.12 l/100km Count=14
90-100kph avg spd yields 9.67-12.10 l/100km Av 11.27 l/100km Count=18
80-90kph avg spd yields 10.73-12.27 l/100km Av 11.67 l/100km Count=16
70-80kph avg spd yields 11.52-13.84 l/100km Av 12.53 l/100km Count=15
60-70kph avg spd yields 12.00-14.32 l/100km Av 12.89 l/100km Count=10
50-60kph avg spd yields 12.43-20.75 l/100km Av 13.93 l/100km Count=29
40-50kph avg spd yields 13.61-22.57 l/100km Av 15.26 l/100km Count=29
30-40kph avg spd yields 16.71-18.80 l/100km Av 17.45 l/100km Count=8
I drive a supercharged V8 so that may skew the figures towards the higher speeds, but I suspect the low speed inefficiency is common regardless of the actual numbers (ie, a small car might cut the number in half, but I think the larger numbers would still occur at the lower speeds). It looks to me as if my car would be roughly 25% less efficient at 30kph than 50kph.
60
I think that was because the 55 limit was widely ignored
10
Game Over! This Madness Has to End!
https://astroclimateconnection.blogspot.com/2020/01/game-over-this-madness-has-to-end.html
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-832aDzd9Di8/XiKG0wnVGUI/AAAAAAAACAI/B9GR_3zm-Yc4NzHU8ZSWuNZxlo7WC_DNwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/Heat_Content.jpg
40
Interesting. I do see that the bottom of the curve is higher now than 1960, so there does seem to be overall warming.
Would the cycle possibly be ocean churn (I’m spitballing with no education on the matter) whereby the warmer top layer is pulled down (somehow) leading to top 2km layer cooling over 20 years before it equalises and stops the churn, allowing the top layer to warm again.
30
disorganise,
Yes, the minima of both the d(OHC)/dt and d(T)/dt curves appear to be slowly rising with time over the 60 and 120 years, respectively. This is most likely the contribution due to CO2. As you can see, it is much smaller than the 60 to 65-year natural variation, however!
11
Hi Ian,
“most likely” says it all.
There’s no science behind that statement.
KK
20
Kalm Keith,
It was just speculation – even scientists are allowed to speculate sometimes.
00
Interesting and nicely set out blog.
The problem with this sort of “ocean temperature” based stuff is that nobody really knows for sure what they are doing.
“Scientists” quote figures for so many large effects and quantities that are of doubtful integrity that they are possibly just wishful thinking.
The term “forcing” probably says all that needs to be said about the science of Man Made Global Warming.
🙂 KK
40
Does anyone know of any papers, or blogs I guess, that have examined the implications of the Earth warming? There is much alarmism over the 2 Celsius warming, but why?
Questions that spring to my mind are;
At what warming does Antarctica thaw? What’s the negative and positive of that?
At what warming does Greenland thaw? Pros/cons
Does the North pole melt? Would the polar bears migrate or die off?
Will the deserts get bigger, or do they become green an habitable? At what warming?
Do weather patterns change and how?
If I became convinced that AGW is real, my next thought is; so what? Given a choice of returning to the pre-industrial age and tilling fields instead of typing into a blog, or having to move inland because the sea swallowed my town – I’m moving house 🙂
50
disorganise:
Antarctica and Greenland will take a long time to thaw. From palaeontology we know that about 2℃ warmer didn’t result in ice sheets at the poles, but that was in the late Jurassic and was after millions of years of a warmer climate.
Re arctic pack ice it seems that permanent ice was non-existent between about 6 – 3, 000 years ago when the global temperature was around 1℃ higher. There may still have been winter ice, although less and thinner if it was only that years lot. The polar bears didn’t die off, and seem to have coped quite well. They are variously thought to have originated about 280, or 450 or 800 thousand years ago, so have lived through previous inter-glacials at least 2.5℃ warmer than present and much ice melted (but Greenland’s ice lasted).
As for deserts, the Sahara was wetter 5-9,000 years ago (as savannah) and dried out. Milankovitch cycle is usually invoked as expanding the Hadley cell northward roviding the extra humidity and for the subsequent drying out as the Hadley cell moved south. Some have suggested that the sun went through a solar maximum and others blame the drying out on overgrazing by humans. There is no written eidence for the last hypothesis.
20
Antarctic sits over one of the most active tectonic areas on the planet.
Volcanic magma is up welling below the glaciers there.
Naturally the ice above melts.
And parts of Greenland ice sheet are also effected by the tectonic movements going on in the Earth
00
https://phzoe.wordpress.com/2019/12/30/what-global-warming/
Something posted in comments section at WUWT. Obviously not peer-reviewed and I’m not going to vouch for it without repeating the work (if I ever get around to it), but the final global temperature anomaly does look closer to the mid 70s version than more modern versions.
50
R.B.,
I very much do not like to be called “something”.
WordPress tells me where people visit from, and so I found this page.
You can call me by name.
102
Allow me . . .
“Something (that was) posted in comments section at WUWT.”.
You were just joking , right?
50
Hi Zoe,
Interesting way of looking at things, correcting for Latitude and altitude, and an interesting result. Maybe nearer reality than any of the fabrications from the AGW collaborators.
How would you go about correcting for the fact that a very significant proportion of the sites used would be affected by urban heat , some to a lesser, some to a greater degree.
Can’t remember who it was, but someone showed that UHI might be able to be estimated by population in the area.
51
Andy,
UHI?
I wouldn’t worry about it.
Once we correct for it, climate scammers will just put solar panels around the thermometer to really spike it up.
I also don’t correct for gravity anomaly. Very minor.
I also use an average lapse rate:
https://phzoe.wordpress.com/2020/01/04/air-temperatures-and-average-lapse-rate/
Turns out there can’t be such a thing because Specific Humidty varies by height, therefore Mean Molar Mass is not constant.
In other words, lapse rate is not linear.
Stevenson Screens protect from the sun, but they reduce sheer wind and vertical convection.
The “standard” is not what a human would feel anyway.
Don’t know. It would be interesting to know the population-to-UHI ratio. But I can’t dig it out from the data itself due to circular dependancy issue.
The emissivity of all the objects around the thermometer’s stevenson screen is also an issue.
Farmer,
English is not my first language. Don’t be an ass.
80
Just trying to help – no need to start that.
20
Interesting presentation you should watch.
Its tough because of the heavy Irish accents, Start near the 23 minute mark if you already know the basics.
10
And for those unable to concentrate for that long,
just look at the period from 52.41 to 53.00
10
You hit the nail on the head there, so many times I’ve looked at current obs data and thought, that does not feel right.
Humans also go up and down in temperature during both day and night, as does cloud cover, UHI effect, humidity, wind, or a lack of. Thus a representative objective ‘temperature’ seems to be something of a fantasy, so we pretend we have ‘one’. But if you were going to measure it you’d hope it was at least consistent, invariant in method, sensor, and the data was not edited for alleged “quality control”, adjusted ideologically, homogenized to nonsense, plus cherry-picked down to the millisecond, and measured within a ‘representative’ non-UHI affected setting.
As BOM has repeatedly shown, there’s no chance whatsoever of getting a representative objective national or local temperature record. So the figures remain a fantasy, and increasingly a political fantasy, and anti-‘historical’ fantasy, as well as increasingly unreliable.
As the current Willis WUWT link (I posted below) shows. How can anyone take the ‘measurers’ seriously, or any thing they subsequently remark or else claim about it. There is no objective consistency, the met agencies surface data has just constantly made the problem worse.
61
He wasn’t being an ass. I was referring to the article rather than yourself with “something”. Just a bit lazy.
10
He wasn’t being an ass. I was referring to the article rather than yourself with “something”. Just a bit lazy.
10
Zoe, you seem to have manufactured a reason to take offense.
Why
21
English is not my first language. Let it go.
50
Swedish perhaps?
11
Indonesian
00
You are doing a great job then, Zoe 🙂
60
I had 17 years of practice. I live in the US and had a successful career here. Still get confused sometimes.
I would’ve said:
Something posted … – link
Not,
Link. Something posted …
60
Thanks Zoe,
I will take a look at your web site.
40
Greta again …
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCbW6ydgPh4&feature=emb_title
30
That was funny, thanks for posting, it sounded like ‘The Squeeze’ were singing it. 🙂
20
A Surfeit Of Temperatures – Willis Eschenbach / 4 hours ago January 19, 2020
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/01/19/a-surfeit-of-temperatures/
You can even select your favorite surface temperatures!
50
Ah, but THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED.
The temperature has gone up between 0.52 and 0.84℃.
These variants are probably due to CLIMATECHANGE© or local concentrations of hot air.
40
Okay, so Loy Yang A Unit 2 in Victoria came back on line this morning, so now all ten coal fired Units in Victoria are fully operational. They are currently delivering 4580MW from a Nameplate of 4690MW, so, at a Capacity Factor of 97.6%. They don’t ramp up and down across the day like they do in the other two States with coal fired power, so that power delivery is a straight line of power delivery across the day. All this from those ten Units with an average age of 33 years.
The 17 wind plants in Victoria are having a good day (CF – 42% currently) and are delivering 900MW in total from a Nameplate of 2116MW.
So, all of those wind plants on a good are delivering as much power as any ….. TWO of those coal fired Units.
Of all of Victoria’s metered power currently being consumed, 5280MW, coal fired power is delivering 86.8%.
And school hasn’t gone back yet.
Tony.
50
Thanks Tony.
10
So BOM said a few mm on the forecast so I suppose a few mm of dust counts .
https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/rural-news/2020-01-20/bom-nsw-forecast-dust-storm-dubbo-parkes-nyngan-blackouts/11881602
20
As expected the humidity input over QLD and NT finally produces monsoonal Low activity in the Gulf on the 29th Jan, plus easterly tropical wave activity in northern Coral Sea. Should have a couple of cyclones or at least some deepening Lows by the 1st of Feb. This should wake up the wet-season (it started on about the 27th of Jan last year, i.e. also late).
https://i.ibb.co/y4XHWfX/29th-Jan-2020-forecast-Tropical-Lows-Screenshot-2020-01-20-Windy-as-forecasted.png
30
Looks like Godzone could get a bit of a top-up this weekend , and again at the end of the month.
https://www.metservice.com/maps-radar/satellite/australia-infrared
30
Climate Change Religion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp66t7UgaK4
20
😀
20
There is the basic question about the mentality of our politicians and councillors.
They chase votes and these days that means green votes because they are entirely responsible
for having the green left dominate our entire education system. That gives us 40years of
propagandised people from our education system that presumably believe this highly
‘opinionised’, one-sided view of the world that is totally incapable of assessing the
dangers from their own strongly held and actioned views. We see it everywhere. ‘Save the
trees!’ ‘Save the plants, insects and wild life!’ ‘Save the sharks!’ There is a total
absence about ‘SAVE THE PEOPLE!”Save the economy!’ ‘Save our society!’
There is a total incapacity to even consider the dangers of what they demand and do,despite
numerous examples from the past of disasters to people that such stupidities give rise to.
We get people governing us that are entirely besotted with this stuff to the point of irrationality,
even when they consider themselves the educated, rational, should-be decision makers of the nation.
When does this stop? The current devastation ‘they’ tell us has cost the lives of a billion wild
lives. That’s supreme disaster at the hands of so many Australians who vote for this stuff on the
grounds it will preserve and develop our wild life and environment – blow (to be polite) the people,
their lives and their property. On their own ‘Anthropogenic’ theory, how much CO2 have they managed
to push into the atmosphere. A tragedy for them but probably a big fertilizer help in the recovery.
A RC will only provide a protection for our politicians and greens. However, a PM with a bit of guts
and common sense would throw fully open the debate on AGW, fight the imbecility of the UN and the climate
activists by the enforced censorship against anyone with a legitimate argument against the enforced theory.
Eventually, this is the only way common sense will ever be restored to society. Its amazing that our Courts
are so biased in their judgements on climate because they are supposedly making decisions on available proof,
not opinion. Scientific proof is not ‘proof’ based on opinion when facts are absent.
30
Just heard the local ABC radio presenter try to get the CFA spokesman she was talking to admit that the current warnings in Victoriastan for fire , floods , wind and rain were unprecedented.
Thankfully he said no we’ve had them before at the same time especially after a big fire .
30
NW West Aust SSTA. It didn’t take much to pull the heat out of it again.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=sea_surface_temp_anomaly/orthographic=-239.70,-14.97,2274/loc=117.480,-16.121
20