In the Great Pagan Tradition of neolithic fortune telling, modern climate witchdoctors predict everything right after it starts
Last year it was droughts and bushfires. This year its floods. If only the climate models worked, they could have warned the people of Europe, China and India that there would be rampant flooding before it happened.
Imagine a world where climate models worked and they could give people three months notice?
Dr Jess Neumann, a hydrologist at the University of Reading, said: “Flooding from intense summer rainfall is going happen more frequently. No city, town or village is immune to flooding and we all need to take hard action right now if we are to prevent impacts from getting worse in the future.”
As usual, to stop floods, the first recommendation is cutting greenhouse gas emissions. If only the UK had put in more windfarms, they might have avoided this flash flood in London!
They don’t mention how climate models have no skill in predicting rainfall, or low solar activity is associated with central European floods, and that Asian rainfall has been linked to solar activity for last 6000 years, or that 178 years of Australian rain has nothing to do with CO2.
Imagine if they wrote that in every flash flood story…
Heavy floods in London, UK 🇬🇧 👇👇
This is the climate crisis unravelling. No place is “safe” any more. pic.twitter.com/tB7VCGLgWV
— Daniel Moser (@_dmoser) July 25, 2021
Sympathies to people in London, India, Russia and Myanmar.
My understanding of the water cycle is that precipitation is the result of a cooling process. Therefore if we are having “more and worsening rain events” we must also be moving a whole lot of heat from the surface to the atmosphere where it must be dissipated.
241
Yes but that precipitation produces cooling which releases co2 from the oceans, this extra co2 produces more warming and increased clouds which produce precipitation and more cooling again which is obviously caused by warming. Understand it better now?
103
No Klem Cooling a solution of H2O will actually increase it’s ability to absorb CO2. You might have made that up or found it on Skeptical sceance.
Or is it possible that Klem is a shill for one of the other trolls here?
150
I’m thinking that Klem was being sarcastic. Hard to tell, though. Seen worse that wasn’t meant to be.
100
I’m sure he was. Ridicule, sarcasm and satire needs to be part of the response to the greenies’ misinformation.
Not a bad attempt by Klem really. We need more of it.
30
And then they read your mind:
https://youtu.be/0OTPQ_Lzn9s
10
Actually there is more CO2 and O2 in colder waters, this has been well documented by those who study fish and fish behaviour .
70
Henrys Law apparently Rising Temperature lower C02 in solution.
The opposite of most other solutions, which are not gases.
10
Cool oceans are CO2 sinks.
10
For an engineer you made that hard to get the head around.
Do you think we are that thick we don’t understand a solution is not a gas?
If the gas CO2 is in solution (H2O at 1 atmosphere) is it still a gas as the boiling point of CO2 is -70.
10
Hilarious! Thanks for the laugh Klem.
50
But we are not having more and worsening rain events. Flooding is the most frequent occurrence in my thousand year of UK records.
Many flood events in the past were not of course recorded as with a tiny population no one was around to witness them, let alone write it down for posterity. Nevertheless flood records abound.
As should surely be obvious if you have tens of millions of people all busily concreting over fields and who insist on living on flood plains, because when they are not flooding they are nice places to live, then you are going to get floods.
Fail to enlarge drains or allow them to become narrowed due to fat bergs and the problem is made worse. Fail to dredge rivers as with the Somerset levels then flooding will become endemic every time there is slightly higher than normal rainfall
430
Tonyb, I don’t claim “more and more flooding” that is for warmists to claim. I use “IF”.
I wonder how they can have warming (causing water cycle cooling) and then also have continued warming. It is a refrigeration cycle related to undeniable physics but yet it always adds up to warming.
Probably not possible in real physics.
30
“I wonder how they can have warming (causing water cycle cooling) and then also have continued warming. ”
Does advection play a role?
03
No. Advection could only be nearly neutral by definition. However, whatever the effect, it is probably not included in climate models.
30
Not only is the historical data regarding floods, droughts, temperatures, rainfall etc sparce and of more than questionable quality the very idea that ‘trend’ lines are the ‘go to’ parameter of such naturally oscillating/fluctuating data is so laughable it beggars belief.
The planet we are on rotates about its own axis and has an orbiting moon the pair then orbiting our start, the Sun. In addition there are a set of other planets also orbiting the start and which have a measureable if varying gravitational effect on this planet. Then we have the planet surrounded by a fluid atmosphere and some 70% covered by a interconnected set of liquid oceans both of which are subject to the dynamics of the coriolis effect as well as tidal effects and thermal driven movement.
So where is the rational, Fourier like analysis of all this such as used for tidal analysis, vibration and sound analysis etc? Where is the explanation that given varying frequency components, ‘peak’ & ‘trough’ events are to be expected from time to time just like high, low, spring, neam and ‘king’ tides etc. For example, a recent mass bleaching of the GBR was explained by Peter Ridd as being due to an extreme low tide being concurrent with both an El Nino high water temperature even and the low tide being in the middle of a hot sunny day.
This whole farce is just like the apparent behaviour at Crown Casinos, AMP, the big banks et back to the causes of the GFC i.e. follow the money and the self interest, i.e. whose cash flow is enhanced by mass publication of sexed up drivel?
Further to a comment above, imagine a group of hunter gatherers travelling cross country to arrive at the coast for the first time in their history and seeing a wide open beach stretching hundreds of metres or more to the sea. They race out onto the sand and start gathering shell fish and seaweed etc out of curiosity and some venture out to the water’s edge iteself. Then the tide turns and the water starts to rise. Some get caught by the rate of rise and the distance to flee and drown… Imagine the opportunity for the shamans of the group to spin all manner of utter crap as to the why and wherefore and thus put themselves frimly in the go to influencer position. Thats how ignorance and reality interact in a knowledge vacuum.
40
“with a tiny population no one was around to witness them”
There were also fewer cities, towns and villages to be affected and fewer places to actually report the flood to
10
The other factor is that the original, or surviving, settlers built above their known flood level, or moved up if they were caught..
Such caution has been thrown to the wind as those small settlements just kept expanding, in all directions.
I don’t know if the tsunami warning stones around Fukushima were inundated in their tsunami? They are, or were uphill of much of the destruction.
Cheers
Dave B
20
“with a tiny population no one was around to witness them”
I call it Anthropogenic History.
It must be stopped.
10
I think the issue is that alarmists argue that warm air holds more water. As it is not a linear relation between temperature and concentration of water when saturated, a 10°C drop in water when the saturated air is 1°C warmer will lead to a few percent more rain, but there is no reason to think that weather patterns will change so that such events occur more often. If anything, global warming should be more warming of minimum temperatures at higher altitudes and latitudes, in other words, you would expect temperature drops to be lower and less rain.
Either argument is pretty useless considering the complexity, but so are the computer models. It just highlights that a claim of a few percent more rain, that is a percent or two higher floods, is all you can, dubiously, claim.
30
G’day R.B.,
I think this usage is part of the problem:
“…argue that warm air holds more water. ”
The word “holds” is incorrect in my view. The use of “can hold” is more accurate and would add to precision in any following argument.
For example, the hot winds which fanned those bad bushfires here came across the deserts of our centre and were hot and dry.
The term “relative humidity” doesn’t seem to nave reached their vocabulary.
Cheers
Dave B
50
The Sun has many cycles. One such example has a period of about 11.5 years. Our “weather” is governed by those cycles. In Australia’s south east we can expect another drought in three years with a 90% certainty, then some big bush fires, followed by a few Cat 3-5 cyclones.
Has any government commenced building large dams or diverted water in times of good rainfall (now year 2 of 3 years) to groundwater?
ANY government?
Is any government lowering the fuel load for those bush fires?
Are we ready for a Cat 5 cyclone hitting Queensland?
Talking about it is NOT doing it.
130
Objection, the oceanic oscillations determine our weather and climate. Do you have any definite evidence that the solar cycle influences ENSO?
‘ … another drought in three years with a 90% certainty …’
Highly unlikely, its going to remain cool and wet with a La Nina background. No bushfires.
00
The planet is covered by more than 70% water, thus evaporation and precipitation are the normal ‘state of play’.
There is a Solar-induced Orbital Dry Cycle Hierarchy that reduces the water vapour in the upper atmosphere via the Steam/Metal Reaction caused by the collision of Solar emissions with the upper atmosphere,(X Factor).
Two of these Orbiting Dry Cycles are a Regional Cycle, (occurring every 6.75 (6 and 3/4 years) and a Minor Cycle, (occurring every 2.25 (2 and 1/4 years.)
These particular interrelated Cycle chains repeat every 81 years, (6 and 3/4 X 12 years). Note; the Solar System works on Base 12 Maths.
If volcanic activity is also taken into account, there is currently NO valid average temperature, or precipitation data provided by BoMs anywhere on the planet.
There are NO ‘decadal oscillations’ – El Nino,(ENSO) is debunked.
The oceans act as a ‘Carbon Sink’, when CO2 reaches a saturation point in the atmosphere,( Rankama and Sahama,1950.)
According to the Chronology of the Dry Cycle Hierarchy, the entire planet is currently in a Wet/Normal Phase. The next Dry Cycle will be a Minor Dry Cycle, starting over 170 degrees East Longitude,(New Zealand) in early May 2022 – and reaching Australia in early June 2022, (15 degrees/month from West to East.) The terrestrial footprint of this Cycle lasts 8 months.
The recently updated version, (including a Dry Cycle Chronology to 2065) of Alex S. Gaddes’ ‘Tomorrow’s Weather’ (1990) is available as a free pdf from dongaddes93@gmail.com
10
Sorry Gordo, The Dry Cycles travel from East to West.
00
Warmists talk about a system where the oceans store massive amounts of CO2 (true) and that warming will lower the solubility of gases in water (true) and that the released CO2 will cause warming (contentious) which would of course start a catastrophic positive feedback system resulting in unrestrained warming.
If that were true, then for aeons the climate must have been balanced on a razor edge where the slightest tilt one way or other would plunge us into either an ice age or unendurable warming (highly unlikely).
There is obviously extra regulatory systems at work to stabilize the climate.
20
Blaming weather events for failure in their climate predictions…
Shame on you for carrying this hoax for many decades politicians and government paid ‘scientists’.
160
At the risk of stating “the bleeding obvious”…
Records will always be broken… whether they be 100 metre sprint, 4 minute mile, highest temperature, lowest temperature, longest drought etc.etc.
Considering how old the earth is, our record keeping period is just a blip on the time scale.
90
Well, the Guardian has made it plain over a year ago that they will be pushing “crisis ” continually. Love the hydrologist saying that their models haven’t been updated since 2013 so you can jolly well send some more money our way.
00
My cat is busy developing a new climate model, using its (the cat’s) own version of COBOL (Cat’s Observed Bollocks Overly Limitless). Should be complete any day now. It (the cat) promises that the new model will revolutionize the “science”.
00
“Even the rains which fall will no longer fill our rivers and dams”…
10
Every extra degree of temperature adds 7% more water vapour to the air.
Modern climate models are essentially identical to those used for weather forecasting so there is considerable skill there. The models are however run at lower resolutions so aren’t useful for individual event prediction.
346
Because weather is chaotic weather models have no skill beyond a week or so, sometimes more but often less. So to the extent that climate models are long term weather models they have no skill whatever.
Nor do climate models handle well the longer term forces that weather models can ignore, such as ocean circulation changes. In fact all of the significant forcings in the CMIP models that the IPCC uses are anthro. They do not recognize natural climate change. That is less than no skill. It is false bias.
421
Climate is the average of weather and therefore predictable. Forecasting individual chaotic events is not the purpose of a climate model.
343
The averages of chaotic systems are themselves chaotic. It is called strange statistics. The averages oscillate over time, never converging. They are therefore as unpredictable as the individual events.
Pick a place and you will find average rainfall constantly changing. Every interval gives a different value.
411
“Pick a place and you will find average rainfall constantly changing. Every interval gives a different value.”
In Simon’s description of climate there is no mention of timeframe, so does he mean 1 week, or 1 month or 1 year or longer. Without a timeframe, Simon’s definition of climate is meaningless
For example, Townsville, Australia has an average monthly rainfall of about 94mm. According to Simon that could be the rainfall component of Townsville’s climate, and any variation from that would be climate change. However, in the real world, the average monthly rainfall for Townsville during the period December to March is about 223mm (sometimes floods) and for the period April to November, the average is about 30mm (sometimes drought). That’s the rainfall component of Townsville’s weather.
81
Nevertheless there were warnings n Germany, up to 4 days in advance, but nobody cared about.
And no, climate models and weather models have nearly nothing in common, you heard about synoptics ?
Certainelys not. Vb low pressure sytems ? Certainely not. Relief rainfall ? Certainely not. Do you know something ? Certainely not.
The floods in Germany had a lot of geological and geographical reasons, beside some meteorological aspects in addition.
So stop to spread waht you spread, Simple Simon.
210
Climate models aren’t for preedictions but for scenarios. You know the difference ?
Certaibnely not.
150
“and therefore predictable.”
Demonstrably WRONG
We cannot forecast weather more than a few days out.. therefore averaging and pretending it is climate, is totally pointless and meaningless
250
‘Climate is the average of weather …’
That makes sense. Thirty years is marked down as a climate cycle, do you know why?
20
My understanding was that timing of climate was all over the shop, every country seemed to have its own timing. About 1950 the climate people got together and agreed on a 30 year cycle which started in 1951 to 1980 then 1981 was the start of the new cycle. Now anything outside of the 30 year cycle is an anomaly .
10
Not quite, they advance the cycle, we are now on the 1991 – 2021 cycle. Everything outside of that is an anomaly, so now that global cooling has begun, its time for fishing.
10
There is nothing like an ensemble to appeal to the average. Surely the bane of climate models is with the volatility of boundary conditions
00
What a load of bilge, David. To write that displays a phenomenal ignorance of climate models. Are you just regurgitating something form Fox News?
240
I’m surprised you made that pass moderation, Peter the useless/ predictable/ climate model acolyte.
But you also do not offer any support for the claim of “bilge”.
Please do so.
250
Sorry PF but David is technically correct. It’s not him who is writing the bilge.
190
Peter, You constantly display an abject ignorance about basically everything.
And you refuse to try and learn.
Your comment contains zero content or worth.
100
Seems to lack any knowledge of real world earth systems. No worries. One wonders why the so-called experts fail to engage in debate and when they have they lose big time.
30
It should be added that everything David said about climate models is provably correct.
40
I am repeatedly surprised by the intensity with which ecologists appeal to physics. Suppose it means that the appeal to reductionism gives legitimacy to the ecology. Holism isn’t what it used to be
00
Can I recommend that Peter and Simon test out their beliefs at the local casino with their life savings?
10
David W, I have not fully checked the maths but if forecasters predict that the weather will be the same tomorrow as today they will be correct at least 60% of the time. Weather occurs periodically but the periods shift. Successful longer term forecaster comes from looking at patterns of data such as SOI, IPO, IOD etc. Models based on wrong assumptions such as including CO2 (which is not a greenhouse gas as definied by the IPCC but is necessary for plant growth) can never have predictive skill.
20
Your 7% rule sounds like an abstraction. I doubt reality is that simple, what with weather and all.
Also each 7% is more water than the one before, which seems odd. I would think that as the amount of water in the air increases it gets harder to get more up there.
270
Agree David and it would be nice if Simon would dare to link some science to that claim. As we all know statistics (like 7%) are for damned liars.
By his math we would be swimming or need gills at about 14 degrees of warming.
120
“Every extra degree of temperature adds 7% more water vapour to the air.”
Which leads to 14% more vegetation growth, which consumes 8.3% more CO2, which produces 0.3C cooling.
Making up factoids is fun.
% and dot numbers make it more sciency.
(69.6% of my assertions are supported by actual observational data.)
330
John Smith:
But to be believed you need to be making up your factoids with a supercomputer while on government grants.
190
I will have you know sir, that I am sitting on my supercomputer at this very moment.
It is producing other oids that I shouldn’t mention.
The grant thing I haven’t quite worked out yet.
60
Of course you have. The “paper work” is all that need be done.
20
John says “ 69.6% of my assertions are supported by actual observational data.)
which means that 30.4 percent of your assertions are off 97 percent of the time except for the 13 percent of the time they happen anyways, which means you are correct 82.6 percent of the time except for the 8 percent of the time observation misleads.
10
If it can hold an extra 7% more water vapor, that means it will rain less.
Climate models have basically zero skill when it comes to rainfall
Weather models are only good for 3-4 days out.
140
“hold an extra 7% more water vapor”
Which explains why deserts are so dry. 😉
You regurgitate what someone has told you to say…. without the vaguest understanding of any of it.
140
Simon
In theory yes. In practice the worst storms and the heaviest amounts of rain occurred during the little ice age or at times when temperatures were not remarkable
130
Simple Simon, one statement is right, climate is a 30 year statistic of weather. That’s all.
That doesn’t include low pressure systems, high pressure systems, foehn weather, MPH etc.
80
“That doesn’t include low pressure systems, high pressure systems.”
Yet these are what controls all weather on Earth !
The transfer of energy by bulk air movement is many magnitudes more than any possible theoretical feeble warming by a tiny increase in atmospheric plant food.
140
I was interested to see, near Healesville, Vic, flooding where I photographed a similar amount about 30 years ago. Must fish out the old photos. I don’t recall it looking like that again until now.
20
You are getting caught up in the minutia Simon. Very easy to cry ‘flood’ and walk away blaming climate change. Hey if the explanation works and demonstrates the evils of humans then go for it! Green power to the masses.
Unfortunately, you can not draw the same type of closed box around above-sea-level urban flooding that you can get away with in coastal regions. You need to address the buildup of urban structure, of expansion into the flood plain and the lag in drainage infrastructure. You need to worry about daming from ice flows, log jams and landslides. These are serious issues that require big money, unpopular enforcement and tend to get neglected until flooding forces them to the forefront.
People have been improving drainage and flood control for centuries. People have built dams and dykes which have also failed long before global warming. Flooding and landslides of urban centers along rivers and vallies have always been a problem. Not your worry huh. Serves civilization right for settling in urban centers
Understandably there is no need for a green progressive to worry about wasting money on drainage and flood control. All the better to spend nothing, say nothing and let it rip to opportunistically blame swamp drainers, dam builders, road pavers , stream buryiers, resevoir flooders and all those evil engineering projects that seek to tame the hydraulics
220
They are not only not usefull for single events, they are not usefull at all.
Computergames for high aged children, GIGO.
181
Computer games for high aged Malthusian children, GIGO.
FIFY
41
Simon, climate models are based on assumptions, and those assumptions are affected by any bias or leaning as to the result required by the assumed.
Thus we see the Climate models delivering wildly optimistic outcomes in the desired direction, leading to catastrophic prognostications that invariably fail to materialise.
And that is the complete history of climate modeling.
151
Hey, climate models are computer programs and those usually are tested. So they will be corrected if their output isn’t according to the specification.
00
Can you demonstrate this via the Clausius Chlamydia equation?
10
Scissor, perhaps you mean the Clausius-Clapeyron equation. Chlamydia is a STD.
https://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/topicreview/bp/ch14/clausius.php
40
Same thing.
30
“Skill” my butt, there’s no way to test a climate model, given the natural rate of significant change is much longer than a human life, and longer than the period of with computers have existed. And that know ocean and atmosphere weather cyclic warming and cooling are also longer in duration!
Plus that the anthropocentric climate model trends have almost entirely proven to be wildly pessimistic, and more-or-less thoroughly wrong.
In weather forecast modelling, “Skill” is a measure of the predictive forecasting accuracy compared to observed real weather results. But in the case of climate ‘forecasting’ models, there’s currently approximately ZERO demonstrated predictive “skill”, and no way to compare the predictions with observations, any time before your great, great, great grand-children all die of old age.
Don’t bring this odious a-scientific climate model “skill” claptrap in here again Simon.
61
The 7% more water vapour for every 1 degree “fact” seems to come from the IPCC (see page 129), and in typical IPCC fashion, they are not specific, so, it could be interpreted that the entire atmosphere would have to heat up by 1 degree to hold 7% more water, or it could mean something else… that’s “elite science” for you…
As meteorology textbooks say, very roughly, the water holding capacity of a parcel of air at “sea level” will double for every 10 degree (Celsius) increase in temperature. it of course does not mean that there is water around to fill that capacity… and when you change the pressure, it adds a bit more complexity.
Aerological diagrams are a good way to understand this relationship between pressure, temperature, and water holding capacity.
30
” Considerable skill there”.
LOL, oh my god.
20
I notice how alarmists don’t carry on about prolonged la Nina events, a biased opinion is just as bad as a flawed model.
130
In fact a flawed model is itself a biased opinion. Here is the IPCC list of the drivers of climate change. All are anthro except the last, solar variability, and it is trivial,
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/summary-for-policymakers/figspm-05/
To assume all the drivers are anthro then conclude that the warming is anthro is circular reasoning. Your conclusion is your assumption!
212
Read the text David. “Volcanic forcing is not included as its episodic nature makes is difficult to compare to other forcing mechanisms.”
228
Yet volcanic forcing has far more effect on weather, hence long term climate, than CO2 could ever have.
You still have yet to produce that actual scientific evidence that CO2 causes any warming whatsoever.
A political summary, containing propaganda but zero science, really doesn’t cut it.
We are waiting.
190
Their assertion that it’s simple physics stupid and then can’t explain the so-called greenhouse effect (energy budget short wave in ; long wave out and the dreaded CARBON!!! ) but can’t factor in convection and advection and then say the oceans are turning to acid baths – or boiling.
10
I know the text Simon, having written a lot about it. Lots of other forms of natural variability are also ignored, for one reason or another. My point remains — the models assume all significant forcings are anthro. So claiming that humans are causing climate change is just asserting the assumption. It is not a scientific finding. Presenting it as a finding, which the IPCC does in the very next figure, figure 6 of the SPM, is circular reasoning.
320
Pretty poo science to not include a significant historically observable anomaly just because it “isn’t predictable”.
I’m surprised (not really) you didn’t realize your error.
30
“Poo science” — boy you said it.
20
I must say, I’ve never seen a “Pretty poo”
10
Perhaps they could just average, then homogenise the ‘volcanic forcing’ contribution to the ‘climate emergency’. That’s how their models usually operate isn’t it?
10
Please see: Eruption of Mount Tambora, August 1815. It changed world wide weather for years, induced famines and likely plauges.
https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/73585/15-facts-about-year-without-summer
The eruption ejected so much dust and gas into the atmosphere, that it induced a worldwide cold event wherein 15 cm of snow fell in the United States on June 6, 1815, the middle of summer.
And yet, you say “Volcanic forcing is not included as its episodic nature makes is difficult to compare to other forcing mechanisms.”. That seems quite derelict. Unpredictable, yes, but to not include it at all given that History clearly explains how influential and devastating such events are known to be, seems irresponsible/convenient/clandestine/ignorant/opportunistic.
40
ie too hard to model so let’s guess/ignore (take your pick)
It’s the same with cloud cover.
30
David
The worst extreme rain events seem to happen when there is a very wavy and broken jet stream , which I believe is related to the suns activity. The jet stream over Germany for instance was very wavy during the recent flooding
100
Think of La Niña events as periods where the Pacific Ocean absorbs heat and El Niño as the opposite. There have been some papers suggesting that El Niño events will dominate as the climate warms but the jury is still out on that one. There are decadal patterns to ENSO which are not yet well understood.
519
Yes, we have had a series of El Nino, brought about by strong solar activity over the last half of last century.
Those El Nino events have been the cause of all of the atmospheric warming in the last 50 or so years since the cold period around the late 1970s.
We are now heading into a series of La Nina because the Sun is going through a quiet period.
The AMO is the other “influencer”, causing the cycles in the upper northern hemisphere.
It also heading into its cooler period.
Climate models look really “sick” even now. You wait for another 10-15 years, they will be totally laughable. ! 🙂
CO2 has absolutely nothing to do with global temperature changes.
And you cannot produce any measured scientific evidence to the contrary.
191
The models won’t be ‘laughable’ the temp data and the model history will be edited so that we have always been at war with (insert whichever enemy here).
50
But science is settled ??? 😀
You realise the BS you write ?
The so called climate science, represented f.e. by Schellnhuber and PIK in Potsdam predicted in 2019 a coming El Niño for end 2020 and were very proud, their sophisicated model based also on observation was the only one showing indices for the El Niño, not the others.
You what happend, El Niño and as it seems, the next is ante portas.
Thats “climate science” !! 😀
111
Of course it was and will be La Niña, sorry for typo,
60
When El Nino is dominant the planet warms and when La Nina conditions are prevalent the earth cools, our current situation.
Australia is set for another big flood and sea level fall, we can handle this.
80
And that will be a good thing. The Artesian basin will be recharged and Lake Eyre will bring the Inland back to life.
And then the drought will come ….. followed by the fires ….
20
Timing is the thing, ENSO remains an enigma and predicting its behaviour is tricky.
The way things are going, the next five years should be relatively cool and wet in south east Australia.
00
Yes Simon, that jury that is still out, has been out for thirty years and will be out for eternity as any definition fails to come forth.
The two main drivers of our Climate/Weather are not even on this Planet, they are the Sun and it’s variable output, and the Moon with its variable orbit.
110
Its all up to the sun, moon and gas giants, totally agree, but we still have to prove it.
20
The only ones that have to prove it are politicians. The rest can simply marvel and live. Maybe sit back and watch it unfold.
20
Its our responsibility to alter the scientific paradigm, in the sense that we can explain what is coming. Correctly forecasting years in advance is not hard to do, yet BoM cannot even get their seasonal forecasts right.
00
I dare say there are many, many aspects of the climate system which are not well understood – a bit like Donald Rumsfeld,s famous, oft-repeated observation. Would seem to render any climate models unfit for predictive purposes.
30
You choose your words carefully
00
‘There have been some papers suggesting that El Niño events will dominate as the climate warms …’
The hypothesis isn’t sound, but I’ll take a closer look.
El Nino events make the world warmer, in the same way that La Nina cools the planet. The decade ahead should see an increase in La Nina events and a fall in world temperatures.
‘There are decadal patterns to ENSO which are not yet well understood.’
That is correct.
00
‘ … but the jury is still out on that one.’
Found this paper …
‘Since the 1970s, El Niño has changed its origination from the eastern Pacific to the western Pacific, along with increased strong El Niño events due to a background warming in the western Pacific warm pool. This suggests the controlling factors that may lead to increased extreme El Niño events in the future.’
(Bin Wang et al 2019)
00
CSIRO: Climate change in Australia
Information about Australia’s past, current and future climate helps industries, governments and communities plan for and adapt to a variable and changing climate.
“Our scientists use results from climate models that are based on established laws of physics. ”
https://www.csiro.au/en/research/environmental-impacts/climate-change/climate-change-information
Wait. What?
“established laws of physics.“?
2017, Dr Andrew Watkins the manager of climate prediction services at the bureau:
“But he said “basic physics” governed that
climate changeglobal warming would increase the intensity of cyclones in the future.It does not, however, explain this season’s anomaly.”
https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/cyclone-blanche-is-latest-to-cross-land-in-second-consecutive-quiet-season-in-australian-history/news-story/220bd07cbd24d1db32cfd2175d3ec2ac
How are those computer models going?
Who remembers the unpredicted floods of 2019?
Up to 500,000 drought-stressed cattle killed in Queensland floods
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/11/up-to-500000-drought-stressed-cattle-killed-in-queensland-floods
130
BoM severe weather seasonal outlook October 2018-April 2019
0.10: Although severe weather can occur anytime of year, this period is a peak time for bushfires, heatwaves, flooding, tropical cyclones and severe thunderstorms.
In the months ahead, Australia can expect an:
. increased risk of heatwaves
. elevated bushfire potential, particularly in the south east
. below average tropical cyclone season likely
. widespread flooding less likely
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Srzp5BGGchs&list=PLbKuJrA7Vp7naJL31deES8QAV5E0q6U_H&t=34s
100
I seem to remember the MET continually getting the temps wrong as well for the coming season. Year after year predicting ‘above average’ but then again you look at the ‘odds’ they give for these events and it ends up more a each-way bet with no certainty. Above average temp was often predicted at 40%, this is what they would predict the coming season to be so would say the MET predicts the coming summer to have above average temperatures where in reality they are only 40% certain of that and 60% certain that this result will NOT happen and nearly always they got this right with the 60% despite what their headlines say. The issue comes up at they would have above normal 40%, normal 30% and below normal 30% chance and this means they were normally 70% wrong or at best 60% wrong. they could never get a passing mark by their own prediction system!
50
Edward N. Lorenz wrote the foundations of numerically modeling weather or climate.
Practically speaking, the solutions are only possible for about 10 days. Long term predictions are not possible.
The solutions are either periodic, non periodic, deterministic or non deterministic, stable or unstable or quasi stable or any combination of these conditions.
To understand his work, which is the basis of all of the climate models, one might wish to refer to the original paper
https://math.bu.edu/people/mabeck/Fall14/Lorenz63.pdf
or here https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/20/2/1520-0469_1963_020_0130_dnf_2_0_co_2.xml
and one or more interpretations of them
https://ysuatmsymp.github.io/papers/SNU/SNU_21.pdf
in order to appreciate the concepts.
Lorenz said that long term prediction of weather was not possible. He was criticized for not including system feedbacks, which he addressed in a later paper. Bottom line is that if feedbacks were positive, then the earth would have burned up or frozen a long time ago. The feedbacks must be negative and the system quasi stable and quasi periodic; kind of a nearly chaotic system with some elements of periodicity, however unpredictable overall at large time scales.
91
There are those who believe that El Nino/ La Nina are the product of geothermal activity .
20
I’m interested, can you supply a link?
00
If you think that they’re good at predicting floods they’re record on droughts is outstanding. Flannery’s prediction of permanent drought near single handed caused ten years of above average rainfall that filled dams.
180
F.e. Germany was told in Jan. or Feb. this year will be the 4. year of drought.
The rain we had in Germany this year is presented here
100
And the good Professor Flannery was made Australian of the Year for that outstanding work.
Dr Tim obviously was absent the day they did Dorothea Mackellar at Primary School.
100
I personally think Jo has nailed the Witch Doctor theme/meme. Little is science and much is outside of science.
40
Yes, it’s accurate to say that politics is outside the realm of science
20
Since these klimate klowns are obviously trying to take advantage of the German floods..
https://notrickszone.com/2021/07/25/new-study-on-heavy-rainfall-general-long-term-trend-for-whole-germany-consistently-not-evident/
There is zero evidence of any long term trend in German rainfall.
And of course there is evidence of far larger floods all throughout German history
101
So these are not just summer weather events augmented by poor drainage? How do they know this is not the weather? And are all weather events now Climate Change?
And I love the Guardian ‘expert’, hydrologist. Really? Knowing about water does not mean you have any idea of predicting the weather let alone long term climates. One of the main proponents of Climate Change was Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia, also an hydrologist. His emails with ‘hide the decline’ and ‘Mick’s trick’ referencing Michael Mann caused a major scandal in 2009 exposing a very profitable conspiracy.
(man made) Climate Change is still the big ticket for fame and fortune. It sure beats physics and hydrology as Mann and Jones are well aware. Experts, all.
120
And as Jo points out, the only thing missing from their 20/20 hindsight, these experts, is that no one predicted these summer rains. Or the flooding which would result.
And they missed their chance in 2002 to blame (man made) Climate Change for the massive floods across Europe. Prague, Dredsen, Poland, Elbe, Inverness, Glasgow, Russia. Property damage 15 Billion Euro. In those halcyon days the explanation was more logical “Flooding resulted from the passage of two Genoa low pressure systems (named Hanne and Ilse by the Free University of Berlin) which brought warm moist air from the Mediterranean northwards”
So what was the summer weather 19 years ago is now someone’s fault?
81
Except the models did predict these events, according to a NASA summary in 2019.
Despite its claims to be science based this blog refuses to understand the difference between climate and weather, as this post demonstrates.
428
You are the second one today here believing unscientifically climate models are predicting something, may be even relevant.
No, they don’t. There are only wrong scenarios, not one was correct, beside the russian one.
Und just because this blog understands the difference between weather and climate, what you don’t, your post is as wrong as these of Simple Simon.
150
NASA are quite good at predicting things after they happen.
A comment that comes to mind, from an Icelandic meteorologist, was “I hope NASA doesn’t make 1904 any colder or my 4 grandparents will freeze to death before they meet”,
190
The old NASA was pretty good at predicting things so that they would happen. Today there is a smell of Jim Hansen.
Search his name and behold the stench of bias.
30
Rather like Nostradamus.. twist the prediction afterhand, to match what actually happened
Read into it whatever you want to read into it.
Pick one line from one climate model that just happened to be remotely correct..
…. by pure chance.
If you make your predictions wide enough and vague enough , you can cover basically everything
Their problem is, they didn’t cover the cooling that is the most likely medium term future..
31
Confusing weather with climate change yet again PF.
50
Wrong again. They don’t predict anything of the sort.
They make vague, unscientific guesses about future climate, that cover the whole gamut from dryer to wetter somewhere on the planet.
They are totally meaningless.
The German floods were nothing unprecedented.
Have happened before, will happen again.
They were normal climate variability.
There is no trend in German rainfall
https://notrickszone.com/2021/07/25/new-study-on-heavy-rainfall-general-long-term-trend-for-whole-germany-consistently-not-evident/
Maybe one day you will learn to base your comments on supportable science, but first you have to learn what “science” actually is.
51
Well, a lot of these places were flooded in 1999, 2003 and 2012/13(?) so they might have been unaware of the chance of floods with their short attention span (it only lasts from one prediction of coming disaster to the next). Cue Tim Flannery predicts! comments.
00
Something they haven’t predicted either:
In Germany coal energy saw a renaissance. Comparing the first half of 2021 against the first 6 months of 2020
Brown coal [lignite] power plants produced 45.8 terawatt-hours of the net power – That’s an increase of 37.6% compared to 2020, when only 33.6 terawatt-hours were produced.
The net production by black coal power plants also increased, by 38.9% to 20.4 terawatt-hours after 14.4 terawatt-hours in 2020.”
In total, that means total coal power rose from 48 terawatt-hours to 66.2 terawatt hours, a whopping 38% increase!
The reason for the steep drop was due to unfavorable weather conditions. “This year, especially in the first quarter, the wind was particularly still and the sun output was low.”
https://notrickszone.com/2021/07/27/german-wind-power-consumption-plummets-20-in-first-half-2021-coal-power-consumption-jumps-38/
120
Remember the terrible Pakistani floods of 2010? They were a double-event with the great Moscow heat wave of 2010. Both caused by jet stream blocking – the heatwave on the north side and the floods on the south side of the stuck Rossby wave.
That jet stream blocking event was at the very bottom of the last solar minimum. Low solar activity is linked to increases in jet stream blocking events, as Mike Lockwood pointed out in 2010, and Jo has too several times.
So we’re back at the very bottom of the next solar minimum and what is happening? Lots of loopy jet streams and blocking events, like the Oregon heatwave and floods in Germany and China. The weather patterns in the UK have been hot-cold-hot-cold as successive big Rossby loops bring hot air from the south or cold air from the north.
When the climateers can explain how CO2 can cause pulses of such events every 11 years I might think about listening to what they have to say.
200
Thanks Bruce, you have nailed it perfectly.
10
Virtually nothing is ever done by the weather that it hasn’t done before. It shouldn’t take journalists too long to work that out – but they won’t do that because they would then lose their scary headlines.
1931, anyone in China remember? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1931_China_floods
1342, anyone in Germany remember? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Mary_Magdalene%27s_flood
Noah, where are you, we have a TV interview lined up for you.
81
Journalists of today don’t care what happened in the past. All they care about is to make up fake stories to promote the leftist lie about CAGW. Leaders and much of the rest of the people forget the lessons of history, as history keeps repeating with the same mistakes. That’s why the left like to rewrite history – to make sure those who do remember can be made to look like fools to the others who have already being indoctrinated with the lies of the leftist MSM. The difference perhaps this time around is with modern communications and technology they just might achieve the perfect storm where we all lose our abilities to know truth from fiction, apart from a few who will never bend to their evil agenda even at the cost of their lives. It takes real courage to stand up to evil regimes. Not many have it sadly. Once the whole world is under some sort of evil dictatorship, it won’t be a pretty site that’s for sure. It’s up to the people of today to try and stop that from happening.
101
Sorry about the red thumb. Colour it green. Hard to click either accurately on a mobile.
50
Simple extrapolations always fail. I thought we already proved that with the CAGW lies. Cycles are the name of the game. We will have floods and we will have droughts, etc., etc..
30
Has there been any floods which weren’t in known flood zones?
I didn’t think so.
Why do people keep building in flood zones?
I have never bought a property without checking if it was in a flood zone or not.
How many people rebuilt their houses in the same place after the recent Brisbane floods? Almost all of them! Why should taxpayer money fund such stupidity?
90
Same reason why people build in earthquake prone areas. They foolishly believe it won’t happen again.
60
Fine example
Its a nice place for a tower. Perhaps fatalism more than foolishness
00
You can add bushfire zones and worse, refusing even to clear around the house and Green activist councils making it illegal. Notoriously even in Canberra before their big fire which destroyed a suburb, where the council was stopped from doing any clearance. And I know of one house on Mount Macedon which enclosed a huge gum tree. The local CFA officer could not advise them. The house could not be protected. Who wants to build at the bottom of a hill when the views are so good from the top?
90
Many of the houses that burnt down in Canberra had wood chips to mulch their gardens right up to the side of their houses. The same thing happened in the Roleystone fires in the Perth hills. Wood chips make great mulch in a dry summer climate but you take a huge risk fire wise of putting them up by your house.
60
We were offered the chips from our pine trees that had to be removed. We declined with thanks! There is enough flammable stuff around without adding to it!
70
In the Dandenongs, with so many trees falling in the last storm, I have been appalled at the number of people taking the woodchips from the many arborists desperate to unload them. I have two words for anyone spreading woodchip mulch around their house in this area – termites and bushfires.
10
If people want to live in a bushfire setting then that’s their business. If they are foolish enough the believe a raging bushfire can’t hurt them then it’s their problem. If I had a desire to live in a bushland setting, and I actually do to a certain extent, I would pick a place with minimal trees close by if any, build a fire-proof house as much as possible and a self-contained fireproof bunker for my family’s safety in case a fire does come “up the hill”. Of course all that costs money but I consider my life and my family’s life are far more important. If I don’t have enough money then I would not live there in the first place.
70
Because some people study the arts.
70
The Arts are good, opens the mind to endless possibilities.
02
Except for checking local flooding levels.
The ‘arts’ are profligately subsidized (to buy votes) because no one wants to pay for their products.
90
Depends on how far you want to open your mind and what the art in question is about. Some of what passes for art these days is complete rubbish, and in a few cases down right disgusting. It’s dragging down the whole art industry down to the gutter, much like what some so called scientists are doing to the whole science world. Both are being trashed beyond all recognition.
41
In the Engineering loos at uni, there was always one bit of graffiti that pointed to the loo paper saying :
“Arts degree, please take one”
Arts faculty seems to a fairly rich source of climate true believers….reminds me of Rick off The Young Ones….
41
Journalists and actors have all been duped on the issue of climate science, which is unfortunate.
11
Most old timers always claimed that the 1870 floods of the Murray Darling basin were higher than 1956.
Certainly there are markers on buildings if you know where to look. But then again this was well before all the locks and weirs were built, so it may not be a proper comparison.
And the 1970s MDB floods were very high as well.
But the highest rainfall ever recorded over the MDB was in 2010 and this rather stuffs up Flannery’s previous forecasts of more terrible droughts to come.
http://www.sahistorians.org.au/175/chronology/december/13-december-1870-murray-floods.shtml
81
97% Settled Science, update:
26 July, 2021: Can we fix climate models to better predict record-shattering weather?
Record-breaking climate events, such as Canada’s highest temperature on record being exceeded by almost 5°C last month, will be increasingly likely in the coming decades, suggests new research.
It comes as the ability of climate models to predict such extremes has been called into question following a string of intense weather events around the world.
The heatwave isn’t the only event that has rattled climate scientists of late.
Germany has been hit by fatal floods while Henan in China has seen its heaviest rainfall in a millennium, with people killed in flooded subways.
At a broad level, climate models have done a good job of predicting large-scale shifts from climate change, says Peter Stott at the UK’s Met Office.
However, older models weren’t capturing the intensity of some regional extremes like those seen in Canada, says Stott.”
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2285090-can-we-fix-climate-models-to-better-predict-record-shattering-weather/?utm_source=pocket_mylist
>> Aren’t all current global warming policies based on the failed “older models”?
And how much better are the new models if they predict the same global warming as the “older models (that) weren’t capturing the intensity of some regional extremes”?
60
That Canadian record was at Lytton, BC. The Lytton weather station opened in 1953. Of course the temperature was the highest on record – it’s a very short record, and it started after the very probably higher temperatures of the 1930s and 40s.
10
And very bad droughts can occur and very close to record rainfall events.
Here’s the BOM MDB rainfall anomaly graph since 1900 and shows record drought year in 2019 and record rainfall event in 2010.
Note that 2010 record is higher than 1950 and 1956, 1970s etc.
BUT the flooding impact of 2010 MDB record rainfall event was way below the disaster of 1956 and 1970s floods. Just saying.
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/timeseries.cgi?graph=rranom&area=mdb&season=0112&ave_yr=7
31
All this flooding (in known flood zones) is allegedly due to evil coal.
And yet since January the price of thermal coal is up by 90% because while stupid countries like Australia destroy themselves by building weather-dependent unreliable and expensive electricity, smart countries like India, China and others in Asia see their LONG TERM future with coal.
I am almost at the point of giving up caring. The Left have won with their evil.
https://www.morningstar.com.au/stocks/article/young-asian-power-plants-good-news-for-aussie/214113
80
Always this evergreen one from January, 2011:
Coal miners to blame for Queensland floods, says Australian Greens leader Bob Brown
GREENS leader Bob Brown says the coal mining industry should foot the bill for the floods because it helped cause them.
https://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/coal-miners-to-blame-for-queensland-floods-says-australian-greens-leader-bob-brown/news-story/cbfe12042fa9c4149ea3c10524f57344
60
Thus speaks the man who didn’t want climate-saving wind turbines in his backyard!
40
Climate Impact of Increasing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
J. Hansen1, D. Johnson1, A. Lacis1, S. Lebedeff1, P. Lee1, D. Rind1, G. Russell1
Science 28 Aug 1981
” It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980’s.
Potential effects on climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the fabled Northwest Passage.”
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/213/4511/957
via: New page @RealClimate for keeping track of comparisons btw climate model projections & observations.
Climate model projections compared to observations
https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/climate-model-projections-compared-to-observations/
50
Concrete and asphalt over everything and then they blame the flooding on coal and oil. When the big rains arrive as they always have, all that water has to go somewhere. China is finding that out the hard way by trying to hold the water back with hundreds of dams. Then building concrete,asphalt over documented 6000 years of flood plains, what could possibly go wrong.
80
China has built levees up and down the Yangtze and has settled and farmed the now exposed and very fertile flood plain. The Yangtze flows above the surrounding plain, when flooding occurs the levees break and the Yangtze flows back over its natural flood plain with of course the loss of food production, villages and loss of life . The three gorges dam has further exacerbated this because it is so heavy it causes earthquakes in the region .
50
And it is amazing that the Guardian Climate ‘experts’ are never meteorologists. Apparently because meteorologists are expert only in the weather and this is a completely different field. Which is surprising because I thought Climate was nothing more than the weather measured over time, but obviously its all about hydrology.
As Jo implies, the real test of science is the ability to predict accurately. So where were the Guardian experts last week, last month, last year?
The Guardian science of “I could have told you so” is an insult to everyone.
90
What would a hydrologist know?
I’m not joking. What physics says to expect flooding to happen more often then a little wetter when such weather patterns occur again? Even the latter is dodgy.
The simple argument that warmer air holds more water has some validity, but far from sufficient to claim a 1°C warmer world will lead to 5% more rain, and 5% more rain would lead to 1, maybe 2% higher floods. Surely you do not enforce energy poverty and stupidity within institutions to negate flood damage because of that.
50
Even if it was true, or if it isn’t true. Floods will occur regardless of how likely or unlikely. A change in likelihood makes zero difference, floods will happen.
Therefor the only real question remaining is what to do about it?
Do we, (1) spend millions/billions on windmills, solar panels and carbon sequestration?
Or do we (2) harden our infrastructure like they say should happen?
20
Greg, what I hear them say is that we need to pay more and suffer more. Heat in order to be warm is to be restricted. They have no real solution. Remove/restrict carbon fuel and a whole lot of people suffer a cold misery.
10
Good point. Whether you deal with a flood washing your house away every 20 years instead of 25 years is irrelevant.
00
Note that Australian droughts were much worse from about 1921 to 1948 or about 27 years in total.
And the entire period from 1900 to 1948 had much lower rainfall than the next 73 years, ALTHOUGH 2019 was also the driest year in the OZ record. Here’s the BOM anomaly graph for OZ from 1900.
We can say that 2021 will be well above average rainfall for Australia and a negative IOD ( more rainfall) to come and perhaps a neutral ENSO and even a chance of another la nina. Who knows.
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/timeseries.cgi?graph=rranom&area=aus&season=0112&ave_yr=7
21
“Imagine a world where climate models worked and they could give people three months notice?” That would be in Utopia not on Earth. Noah tried and he had it on good authority but no one took any notice – So off hand I would say that’s never going to happen. Climate modellers are fellow travellers with snake oil salesmen.
60
Well the filthy rich people who believe in the CAGW crap and who purchase ludicrously expensive shore front properties don’t think the models are predicting anything serious for at least a very long time. So, our take from their actions is that they are telling lies, pure and simple.
80
Obama spent nearly $15 million on a property that is 3 to 10 feet above sea level.
Climate change is complicated; sea level rise is not. We live on an Island – a glorified sandbar–and the sea is closing in on us. It is rising much faster than anticipated. In the last century sea level rose by about a foot. In this century, due to human-induced global warming, it is expected to rise at least five feet, according to a new report by the international Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program.
Yea, he believes it too. /NOT
https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2019/08/obama-ocean-mansion-3-10-feet-above-sea-level-daniel-greenfield/
20
Greg, I don’t know where you live but we do not live on a sand bar . Many pacific islands are just that – sand bars, and like all sand bars the ocean gives sand and the ocean takes sand away. This is not the sea rising. The Maldives have grown because the ocean has given them more sand, enough to build a bigger airport and more tourist accomodation.
20
The ultimate Stage will be achieved when the Climate Alarmist Prophets tell us in the one sentence that there will be both floods and droughts, hotter weather and colder weather, more and less snow and both higher and lower sea levels.
It will then be time to head for the hills.
60
They are already doing that now; some places are in flood and others in drought – it’s called weather not climate change. It happens all the time. I suppose the question we ought to keep asking is why do we need to reduce our emissions? It certainly has nothing to do with climate change. Apart from being simply stupid the only reason I can think of is it’s a massive scam, and people who perpetrate massive scams typically end up in prison. So, either our politicians are stupid, in which case they ought to resign or be forced out of government office, or they are deliberately perpetrating a massive crime, in which case they ought to be arrested and charged. It has to be one or the other. There is no other option.
60
The problem with trying to predict Leftist “peak stupidity” is that just when you think they can not possibly get any more stupid than your prediction, they come up with something from, err, “out of Left field”, that is beyond your worst imagination or nightmare.
80
Hmmmm, explains why it’s ‘left field’ and not right field.
40
I was made aware thanks to a comment on another forum about The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity, by Carlo M Cipolla.
Download a pdf and have a read. It’s rather funny and depressing at the same time.
20
Don’t forget that Willis checked all the global data about so called weather disasters and found no sign of worse droughts or flooding etc around the world.
In fact deaths from extreme weather events have fallen dramatically over the last 100 years although human population has risen by over 6 billion since 1920.
And droughts in the western USA have fallen over the last 500 years.
So where is the Biden donkey’s EXISTENTIAL THREAT?
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/04/25/wheres-the-emergency/
61
While I am in equally aparts amazed, offended, admiring of the iconoclasm and effrontery of South Park, they have their own superhero who could help with ‘Climate Science’ and flood predictions, Captain Hindsight.
60
Watched DW TV (briefly) about 5AM this morning and could not believe the climate hysteria drivel I heard coming out of their quasi-human script-reader. The avalanche of ignorance has fully metastasized into saturated mass-flow of pure unadulterated fear-mongering BS. Shouldn’t give them ideas, but a scowling Greta reading the news could hardly have been more laughable and idiotic.
80
1585 was the last time that perihelion occurred before the austral summer solstice. Since then, it has been gradually occurring later in the calendar; now in early January. It moves later in the calendar about 17 days per thousand years at the present time.
So since 1585, the Southern Hemisphere has had ToA sunlight trending down and northern hemisphere trending up. The tropical North Atlantic is now getting 1.2W/sq.m more in April than it was in 1850. However in October, the ToA insolation over London is down by 0.7W/sq.m now compared with 1850. That means more water in the atmosphere when it is increasing and lower temperature when it comes out.
This is the process of glaciation. The tropical North Atlantic will continue to warm during the boreal summer for the next 12k years and the peak in atmospheric water will get later in the year. Peak atmospheric water now occurs in May. Meanwhile the higher northern latitudes will get cooler winters leading to more precipitation/snow. Fundamentally the amount of water in the atmosphere over the tropical North Atlantic is increasing and reaching its peak later each year. Then that water drops out faster as the boreal winters become colder.
What is occurring around the North Atlantic now is the early stages of the next period of glaciation. It should become obvious this millennium. It is fair to say that the next cycle of glaciation actually began in 1585 but not much sign of it yet.
The Indian monsoon will be increasing in intensity as well due to increasing insolation in the northern tropics. This May, both the Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal were at the ocean surface temperature limit over most of their extent:
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2021/05/11/1200Z/ocean/surface/currents/overlay=sea_surface_temp/orthographic=-279.22,0.31,569/loc=71.572,11.337
Weather models are worse than useless trash when it comes to using them to predict climate. They are good for weather forecasts up to a week ahead.
The long term trend (next 12k years) for the northern hemisphere is for warmer summers and cooler winters. That will cause an increase in precipitation over land and eventually more ice accumulation. Southern Hemisphere is becoming cooler in the austral summer and a little warmer during the austral winter. Australia should expect less rainfall. Less surface water will lead to warmer land temperature despite the lower summer insolation.
The Earth never tracks the same path relative to the sun. The ONLY constant with climate is change. Building windmills to placate the climate goods in the hope of ever balmy weather is a fools errand.
100
I’m working on a theory that with enough windmills pointing in the right directions we can stop earthquakes!
20
You need to invent very specific windmills that are
guaranteedpromised to do that. Then you lobby the government for several billion dollars. Only billions of dollars can solve the problem.20
Even a new Chinese ( Zhu?) study has found cooling over Antarctica since 1979.
Although they claim some warming over the Ant peninsula,yet BAS Turner study found that the peninsula had cooled since about 1998.
So what will happen in the Arctic + NH when the AMO changes to cool phase. Probably upset their GLOBAL warming narrative or will that just be more climate change AGAIN?
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/07/27/new-study-finds-east-and-west-antarctica-have-profoundly-cooled-by-2-8c-and-1-68c-since-1979/
50
I reckon the Chinese and the Russians know exactly what’s happening and are planning for it. Maybe for their advantage do you think?
Cheers
Dave B
10
Leftists think the climate is unchanging but for fixed seasonal variation.
That’s what happens when they ignore past human or planetary history as they do.
60
But for Napoleon we’d still have their daft calendar, that of the guillotine crazed proto leftists of 1789; don’t be surprised what indecency is next to be foisted upon cowed populations by the moral descendants of those monsters.
50
The experts had clearly foreseen,
After every weather extreme,
To expect more of the same,
That CO2 was to blame,
Is poor science from high academe.
80
Translation from the Russian: … It’s the wolf! … It’s the wolf! … It’s the wolf! … Said the foolish Petya! But due to all his prior lies and false deceptions, everyone now ignored him. And the more Petya demanded their attention, the more the townsfolk considered him an insufferable pest, and just got on with life.
60
The analogy to the wolf is not accurate.
The real failure is that there is climate change and always will be but it has nothing to do with CO2. People are being taken down a path to nowhere worshipping windmills to annihilate the evil CO2.
Earth began the current cycle of glaciation in 1585. There is not much indication of that yet. But the tropical Atlantic is already getting 1.2W/sq.m more in May than it was in 1850. London is getting 0.7W/sq.m less than it was in October in 1850.
Think of eastern Canada with ice mountains 1km high. The process that leads to that condition is already underway. The glory days of the last 8,000 years is coming to an end. There are ways to mitigate the impact but reducing CO2 emissions will have ZERO impact.
By the end of this century, fossil fuels will likely be in short supply. CO2 will take care of itself. But climate change is ceaseless. Change is literally the only given. Mitigation and resilience are the ONLY option.
CO2 is falsely blamed for all the ills. It is a scapegoat for inaction or misdirected action. It is the new devil incarnate.
There are always weather extremes somewhere and those extremes will always set new records. If humans survive for the next million years, human could by then have good record of climate extremes. Humans may be able to prevent sea level falling by 140m during the current glaciation cycle but that condition existed just 20k years ago and will occur in the next 100kyr if not controlled by human intervention.
60
Disagree.
50
Back in the 1970’s when genuine climate scientists were accurately predicting global cooling, it was suggested that carbon black (soot) be distributed over developing ice sheets to at least forestall their progress. I wonder how well that would work?
20
This “flooding” has absolutely no scientific connection to atmospheric CO2 levels.
If CO2 was not a “greenhouse” near ground level and near outer space then some other gas or mechanism would step in and do the job of removing the PW IR from ground level to the deep freezer out there.
The reason I say this, again, is that we keep discussing things like this flooding which are claimed to be linked to CAGW and CO2.
Take away the unscientific CO2 is bad porn and we have “The Weather”.
Let’s confront the real issue and stop the circus.
And people wonder why we have doubts about the truthfulness of the Viral Vampage currently being waged against humanity.
Mental health has crashed.
Fix that!
60
We don’t need science anymore, just the belief in science, its the new religion.
We got new popes, bishops preaching to us none stop, take a knee.
Its amazing the way people flock to a distraction, crave it. Reality is hard to swallow, but you just have to chew it a bit longer.
So happy to see you and other concerned people on this site making a stand, for most it is all about the youth.
I think history will remember you fondly, I will.
20
‘Flash floods will be more common as climate crisis worsens.’
Not looking for a grant at all?
60
I had a flash flood. My toilet backed up. Does that mean I get some money? I mean, it was hot that day….
60
Wildly gyrating diurnal Climate-Variability™ is degrading rubber grommets everywhere, so you could understandably put a case at the UN General Assembly for restitution by the G20. Just use an iPhony to show the effects of the climate-crisis on the rubber seal between your throne’s pedestal and the down-pipe, leading to a catastrophic overflowing climate-model induced weirding and unmitigated global browning.
Prolly not try to flush any more nappies either.
50
Of course. A surgeon friend told me that when you read of amazing medical discoveries, it is the usual tactic when chasing grants.
And in the report of the big annual firestorms in California, the phrase used was that ‘experts have linked them to Climate Change’. Of course they have. However the ‘experts’ are always unnamed. ‘Some scientists say’ is the group I fear most.
100
I suppose our Flannel at least put his name to his ‘predictions’, thus proving for all to see that you don’t need a long neck to be a goose.
50
And a flight of geese is known as a skein. Flim Flannery’s Climate Council for example. Not one a meteorologist.
40
2004 Tim Flannery predicted that ‘Perth will be the 21st century’s first ghost metropolis (due to lack of water).
2005, Tim Flannery predicted Sydney’s dams could be dry in as little as two years because global warming was drying up the rains, leaving the city “facing extreme difficulties with water”.
2007 Tim Flannery hotter soils meant that “even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and river systems”.
2008, Tim Flannery said: “The water problem is so severe for Adelaide that it may run out of water by early 2009.”
Re the last I can assure readers that it isn’t happening.
http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2011/03/23/1226027/055980-rain.jpg
30
From Friends of Science
Don’t know if it helps with this topic of discussion but this is the paper:
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/12/7/1950/htm
40
If the floods we are seeing now are similar to the floods we have seen in recent years in Australia, the main cause has been the mismanagement of catchment areas and dams, E.g, the Brisbane floods where the dam managers were slow in releasing water accumulated from earlier rainfall and had to release more than the downstream waterways could handle. In other places the dam designs were poor in that the spillways were not large enough to handle the water flowing into the dams, and the dams were over-topped, resulting in more downstream flow than the streams could cope with. So these floods were caused by poor design and/or human mismanagement, not by natural events distorted by “climate change”.
50
Also the dramatic increase in hard areas causing runoff where there used to be absorption, such as house roofs, car parks, roads, large shopping centers etc
40
Faster run-off, higher peak run-off, more pollutant load.
10
The dam engineers were dam slow in releasing the dam water, probably because they were told by their betters to hold on to it, then when the dam rain kept dam falling and the dam began to dam well do what dams do and fill up, they were dam slow in releasing the dam water as they didn’t want to upset the dam residents downstream and when the dam inflow exceeded the dam outflow, the dam dam dam well overflowed.
30
The Floods can be caused by many things including changing the upstream surfaces causing quicker times to concentration.
Dams on Rivers requiring urgent spills to make the dam safe
Poor Master Planning in the Middle ages. LOL
A lot of these floods are disasters waiting to happen.
Actual engineering discussion regarding the flooding isn’t what they are aiming at.
30
You can learn a lot from engineers, where I used to work, there was an area that accumulated surface water and was equipped with two 4 inch pumps to remove it, so the time came for both pumps to be replaced as parts were no longer available from the maker, so old mate engineer who was still a bit wet behind the ears, queried why there were two 4 inch pumps there, he thought it was a bit of overkill so he took himself off to find out the last few years average rainfall and averaged that figure to a daily average then ordered a pump sized to the daily average, it turned out by his figures to only need a single 2 inch pump, imagine his surprise when it rained and rained for a week solid and his pump disappeared from sight under a lake.
Ever since then, I have never accepted any engineer or degreed ‘experts’ opinion or prediction on anything without checking it myself.
50
What is the issue with flash floods anyway?
1) They only happen in known flood zones.
2) Don’t build in known flood zones!
3) As a bushwalker I know it is standard practice to never set up camp on a dry creek bed or surrounding area. You know why? The possibility of flash floods!
People used to know all of the above until the Marxist take over of the education system….
Here is an example of a small flash flood in Australia.
https://youtu.be/KCwJZTG2lyQ
For all you dumb Lefties out there: You can see that is in an obvious creek bed. Don’t set up camp or build a house there. And if you do, don’t expect my taxes to help rescue or rebuild you!
50
Yes but it so much easier to claim ‘climate change’ as an excuse and to conveniently distract from stupid decision or negligent management.
10
2) Don’t build in known flood zones!
3) Don’t build in known cyclone/typhoon/hurricane zones.
4) Don’t build in bush fire zones.
5) Don’t build on the shore line where the soil/sand beneath you can be eroded by big waves and rising sea levels will flood you.
6) Don’t build on the side of a hill where mud slides can wipe you out.
7) Don’t build in the city, the air is foul and you can’t afford it anyway.
8) Don’t build in the satellite cities, the commute will break you and waste “family time”.
Did I miss any?
40
Yes,.
It is the triumph of human ingenuity and engineering to overcome the above mentioned obstacles and construct notwithstanding
20
The same ingenuity allows us to build on flood plains.
http://digitalcollections.qut.edu.au/400/
20
Another way ingenuity allows us to build on flood plains is by building dams with high walls and deep narrow spillways.
The problem with that is the city engineers raise the spillway and/or install radial gates so they can store more water, reducing the effectiveness at flood control. This is exactly why Townsville flooded a few years ago.
BTW we need ports and they are usually built on river mouths. Someone needs to live there don’t ya think?
30
The irony is that people are really good at adapting and overcoming the risk of natural disaster.. River valleys are beautiful places to live. Hillsides give spectactular vistas
People lose their homes occasionally. Be it war fire flood rot abandonment desertification. The list is endless. We like to think of houses as permanent.
Not even luxury condos are forever
Even in the mundane sense, look at how properties are torn down in Detroit. Severe pruning to staunch urban blight
20
I lived 40 years on a flood plain in the cyclone zone without ever suffering more damage than a cracked window.
The house was on stumps and built to the cyclone code. I remember once my brother and I were playing pinball under the house in a few inches of water. No damage suffered.
30
From the 1800’s up till the 60’s, QLD homes were built high up on stumps, but the Sydney/Melbourne disease came and folk were building lowsets on slabs, you only need something to block the street gutter drains and a foot of water will have it all through your lovely house, carpets and gyprock all trashed.
30
It’s not that simple. In those days the houses were built on timber stumps but you can no longer drive a few miles outa town and bring some home. That was how my father did it.
OK we now have reinforced concrete and steel stumps but WH&S means you can’t work more than a couple of Ms above the ground without scaffolding.
I built my two story timber framed house 20 years ago. Major builders wouldn’t quote on anything not slab on the ground but I found a small chippy who flew under the radar and built it without scaffolding. My insurance co would be shocked how much it would cost them to rebuild to original design today.
10
I’ve noticed in parts of the US and Canada that rainwater from house roofs is discharged onto the ground. It is then absorbed into the soil.
In Australia it is standard practice to discharge the water into stormwater drains which then go into various waterways. Could this practice contribute to flooding?
30
It’s also not uncommon for houses in the US not to have gutters. I a properly design houses gutters aren’t really necessary, in fact are a nuisance for obvious reasons. Here in Australia we are the nanny “state” so it’s a requirement. I truly believe we are one of the most over-governed over-regulated countries of the world, if not the worst.
70
Actually, its not a requirement.
You can use a gutterless system so long as you provide the correct ground drainage requirements to avoid moisture getting into your foundations.
40
That’s my point. It’s over-regulated. Common sense and best practices is the way to go, not government overreach. There are no government regulations to building far more complex things, such as space ships, yet they can are are being done successfully. The space shuttle disasters are a classic example of what happens when governments get involved too much and over-ride the concerns of the engineers.
50
Basements and icicles hanging from clogged easves
I hate damp flooding basements. Dumping in the sewer verus soaking the ground. Its a no win situation
10
In big storms, very little difference.
The soil moisture fills up very quickly. Tanks fill very quickly
Local drainage systems in Australia are usually designed for 2 or 5 year ARI (Average recurrence interval) to avoid nuisance local flooding.
Larger systems are designed to 100 year ARI
River systems, are designed by someone/something else. 😉
50
Actually, ARI is the wrong terminology.
That was what was used in the old version of ARR (Australian Rainfall and Runoff)
Current ARR stipulated the use of AEP (Annual Exceedance Probability)
30
In our Melbourne suburb our properties were flooded a number of times (some internal to houses as well) over 10+ years by summer storms and only after a residents campaign the council finally admitted their original storm drain design for the area was too small.
After then digging up the easement path through a number of properties including ours and doubling the pipe diameter as well as making numerous surface entry points to the system it appears the problem has been solved.
Proven surface area versus volume of run off problem.
30
A lot of older city drainage designs would be too small.
Methods and knowledge of future land use and development would have been pot luck at best.
20
Agreed however our area was developed in 1990-1991 with planning immediately prior.
00
In Australia the cities want your drainwater. Drainage for conservation
In Canada cities want you to keep your own drainwater. Hold water to prevent storm surge
Such is the distinction betweeen arrid and wet. It’s the ying yang of water management
20
A flooded subway station is partially due to bad design of the station and its surroundings.
Seoul knows that it has torrential rains in the rainy season (July/August) and during typhones. So it has taken that into the design of all its subway stations. Before you go down the stairs into the station, you need to go up two or three steps. These two/three steps form a small barrier/dike and prevents water from flowing down into the station during heavy rain fall.
Here is an example of an entrance:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Seoul-metro-545-Achasan-station-entrance-3-20180914-110946.jpg
Also please note the verticle groove at the end of the yellow line. If the rainfall is extremely high, the station manager can put a board into the grooves (there is another on the opposite site) making the barrier to keep water out even higher.
10
You would think the Poms, who invented underground rail, would know enough to get it right, but it seems not, from What I remember of London tube entrances, all were street level and had no roof over the stairs.
10
Just a thought: don’t some of the “underground trains” run above ground ? – so therefore the water can also run down the track- ways ?I know there aretubes running at different levels in London – are they linked to each level?
20
Blaming the flooding on inland water courses on climate change really annoys me because it is a convenient deflection of very real problems of stupid cecisions and bad management. Don’t build in flood plains and improve hydrolic management infrastructure. This is a foundation of urban management. Real cheap and so outrageously convenient by appealling to climate change to walk away from responsibility to deal with the basics
More specifically and the purpose of this post …
If a person truly cares about climate change and carbonemissions, they are in it for the long game. Appealing to short term climate porn such as flooding and a rash of heat deaths is playing the short term sensationalist card. It is predominantly distiorting and misleading
If you really care about changing climate then you are adressing slow long range consequences. Appealing to the short range abrupt here and now is predominantly sensationalizing rubbish .. or rather the consequences of established variabiltyin the absebpnce of changing climate
Climate change is the long game. Quit making cheap shots by sensationalizing immediate hiccups. You are swapping contexts and no one is the wiser. Stop it!
30
And don’t put critical quarantine places in the very centre of cities of 5 million because it is cheaper or there is a profitable deal to to be done by the person at the top (Daniel Andrews). The cost to the community of mismanagement from the top is many lives and billions. Floods, bushfires, pandemics. All the same problem, politicians.
Politicians are the least qualified people in any community, especially Labor/Democrat politicians who have never had a job except climbing the greasy pole, like Biden, Albanese, Shorten,… It’s the new deal in politics, people who have never had a job pretending they know what they are doing. And if they get it all wrong, Climate Change, Xenophobia, BLM.
80
Yes
The law of unintended consequences cuts every which way.
20
Make a difference, make a stand. Stand in the park, every Sunday 10 till 11. https://astandinthepark.org/news/auevents/
The virus is the Government.
20
Indeed. However politicians that do have a job for experience doesn’t necessarily make them better – they can be worse. Turnbull is the classic example. He used to be managing director and then partner at Goldman Sachs, one of the most evil companies in the world.
30
01
Certainly won’t be having the jab at this rate.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-data-shows-vaccines-reduce-risk-of-hospitalisation-and-death-but-you-need-to-read-it-with-a-clear-head-12365728
20
Go on, its just a little prick. Full of virtue.
PS, I got to sign up to something, nope.
10
Am I supposed to laugh, or cry? Am I missing the sarcasm from these sigh and ’tists ? – “recommendation is cutting greenhouse gas emissions. If only the UK had put in more windfarms, they might have avoided this flash flood in London” Do they ever just momentarily, as I can do, look outside at the weather and check as an example, https://gridwatch.co.uk/wind and see that when there is very little wind, NO AMOUNT of £$mills can generate enough power aka reduce “greenhouse gases”.
I think the first “provable” means of reducing gas emissions is for those ( can’t call them scientists) to stay at home and keep quiet.
Looking at that website’s data one can surely easily see how windpower has fallen over the past year, and more dramatically obvious, over the PAST MONTH. All this despite so m any m ore power plants being erected. The more Plants you have, the greater the need for fertilising with CASH to keep them going and propagating! – Howzat for a remark from a farmer ( not of wind) ?
30
Laugh or cry, it doesn’t matter. The nation will be destroyed unless the current tide towards reducing emissions is reversed and we stop playing games pretending we no longer need coal fired power stations while countries like China are building them by the hundreds. As soon as we stop the lunacy here the better. Otherwise, forget it – this nation will crash and burn. Then we can cry as much as we like but it will be too late by then.
21
Here be the directions paper for Victoria’s Renewable Energy Zones https://www.energy.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/512422/DELWP_REZ-Development-Plan-Directions-Paper_Feb23-updated.pdf
Synchronous condensors, big batteries, the whole shooting match all to wipe clean our coal scarified psyches. Thank you Dan and thank you Lily.
20
The wake turbulence is beautiful
https://nautil.us/issue/15/turbulence/fish-school-us-on-wind-power
10
As a Londoner it astonishes me how quickly some people seem to forget the past. Some areas of London have always flooded in ‘the summer storms’ when the rain was torrential rather than heavy and slow moving. If a storm just happened to fall upon an area where roads (in particular) ran underneath railways and were already low spots without ways for the water to quickly escape, floods would quickly develop up to a few feet and sometimes much more. It happened in Victorian London too but to suggest that it is nothing new rather spoils the narrative and agenda of a generation that seems obsessed with record breaking.
London had plenty of rain last weekend; it was sometimes really torrential reminding me of my childhood memories of really torrential rain; the weather system was very slow moving; these days we have more concrete and ever less places for water to drain away. What would an intelligent being expect to happen in areas where there has always been a potential for flooding? Instead the woke brigade blame it on climate change … sigh.
60
Hard to beat the Germans though, howling about climate emergencies while obstinately ignoring the necessity to remediate the landscape.
30
not just howling, but wanting MORE! Their TV Channels are FU’ of the green rubbish propaganda. Like Covidiots, they are all still pumpng out the greenhouse gases in whatever the topic.
10
BBC News this now: “…. Wind COULD play ….. ” but what about water…blah blaah blah Orkney again again again.Don’t they Look at our local Gridwatch? beyond them, beyond me!
Just looking for more £$, ‘going forward‘ -you know it makes (non)sense because they’re all reading off the same hmn-sheets ( don’t want to disrespect the Church Hymns).
Whenever I hear talk of such phrases, I switch off before the Bull sees the rag. ‘move along now…..’ Grrr…! or is it Moo?
30
Harvest Mice…. report on bbcscotland this now too cold and wet in Scotland. sending them to Wilding area project in Ealing, Londinium. Last known there around 1979…. too cold and wet ? probably No, choose to blame it on Man’s activities again ( globule warming)
“Harv Mice are only british mammal with prehensile TAIL…” fair enough then, reason for propagation. wait until “Warmer” south breeds another Plague of them !
20
Maybe subject for a new thread, sorry for OT:
SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE 2
30
Anyone touring around the old cities of Europe, with their cobblestones, narrow streets and preserved buildings, will have seen the high level markings on walls – presuming they are bonafide – of where flood levels have reached over several hundred years. If they are factual, they make modern major floods look like child’s play. Citizens there would be thinking all the fuss about AGW and storms to be a load of rubbish.
40
“Sympathies to people in London, India, Russia and Myanmar.”
Don’t forget China…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hXEKQGmRlM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhgdgvyzk7A
…and Germany.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c_gHVimTjY
20
Germany actually had accurate forecasts of the eventual rainfall 3 days in advance. Their bureaucracy failed as it often does with realities which have immediate consequences which are hard to explain or handwave away. The practical Dutch have lived close to reality for centuries, evacuated and had no casualties, I believe.
Greens are all about performing in front of their mirrors for their own gratification.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/germanys-opposition-politicians-blame-government-for-ignoring-flood-warnings-11626694101
60
These floods have been occurring for Millenia. Nothing to do with a few extra CO2 molecules in the atmosphere.
10