Thursday, June 28, 2007
Climate CO2 sensitivity
Luboš Motl is cooking up a storm on his blog. If you are the kind of person who loves the technical side of things, check out this link and the follow up link
LINKAGES BETWEEN SOLAR ACTIVITY, CLIMATE PREDICTABILITY AND WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
Abstract
This study is based on the numerical analysis of the properties of routinely observed hydrometeorological data which in South Africa alone is collected at a rate of more than half a million station days per year, with some records approaching 100 continuous years in length. The analysis of this data demonstrates an unequivocal synchronous linkage between these processes in South Africa and elsewhere, and solar activity. This confirms observations and reports by others in many countries during the past 150 years. It is also shown with a high degree of assurance that there is a synchronous linkage between the statistically significant, 21-year periodicity in these processes and the acceleration and deceleration of the sun as it moves through galactic space. Despite a diligent search, no evidence could be found of trends in the data that could be attributed to human activities. It is essential that this information be accommodated in water resource development and operation procedures in the years ahead.
Full details here
This study is based on the numerical analysis of the properties of routinely observed hydrometeorological data which in South Africa alone is collected at a rate of more than half a million station days per year, with some records approaching 100 continuous years in length. The analysis of this data demonstrates an unequivocal synchronous linkage between these processes in South Africa and elsewhere, and solar activity. This confirms observations and reports by others in many countries during the past 150 years. It is also shown with a high degree of assurance that there is a synchronous linkage between the statistically significant, 21-year periodicity in these processes and the acceleration and deceleration of the sun as it moves through galactic space. Despite a diligent search, no evidence could be found of trends in the data that could be attributed to human activities. It is essential that this information be accommodated in water resource development and operation procedures in the years ahead.
Full details here
Number of Tornadoes decreasing?
Surely not! Surely the National Climate Data Centre, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Global Climate Monitoring got it all wrong!
This graph below can't be true, can it?
This graph below can't be true, can it?
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Outback NSW
North West New South Wales comprises weather stations at Tibooburra Post Office, Wilcannia (Reid St), and Cobar, and each station has pretty good data with the exception of temperatures at Midnight which only goes back 5 years.
Maximum temperatures saw no significant increase in temperature, however minimum temperatures did (t = 3.75, p < 0.01). Surprisingly therefore, the only times where a significant increase was recorded were at 3pm, 6pm and 9pm. Temperatures at 3am, 6am, 9am and Noon saw no significant increase. However almost all graphs show an increase in temperature in the past 5 years.
Analysis of 3am,6am vs min temps show that between 1983 and 2000, minimum temperature anomalies were on average 0.25 degrees above overnight temperatures, however the last 5 years or so have not been.
Analysis between different times are different to previous areas as well. 9am temperature anomalies show no significant increase when compared to 6am, however Noon temperature anomalies are significantly higher than 9am and 3pm's are significantly higher than Noon's - something that would only occur if the sun is a major factor in global warming.
So what has happened these last 5 years? Seems to be that in most areas we have seen an increase in temperatures in the last 5 years or so, which may or may not be related to the fact that rainfall has been down in the last 5 years in this area.
Whilst purely hypothesising, this could be due to cloud cover, or lack of. Essentially keeping the temperature down overnight, and then when the sun rises an increasing temperature is found. I will look into the rainfall for previous areas as well to see if the last 5 years are correlated.
Maximum temperatures saw no significant increase in temperature, however minimum temperatures did (t = 3.75, p < 0.01). Surprisingly therefore, the only times where a significant increase was recorded were at 3pm, 6pm and 9pm. Temperatures at 3am, 6am, 9am and Noon saw no significant increase. However almost all graphs show an increase in temperature in the past 5 years.
Analysis of 3am,6am vs min temps show that between 1983 and 2000, minimum temperature anomalies were on average 0.25 degrees above overnight temperatures, however the last 5 years or so have not been.
Analysis between different times are different to previous areas as well. 9am temperature anomalies show no significant increase when compared to 6am, however Noon temperature anomalies are significantly higher than 9am and 3pm's are significantly higher than Noon's - something that would only occur if the sun is a major factor in global warming.
So what has happened these last 5 years? Seems to be that in most areas we have seen an increase in temperatures in the last 5 years or so, which may or may not be related to the fact that rainfall has been down in the last 5 years in this area.
Whilst purely hypothesising, this could be due to cloud cover, or lack of. Essentially keeping the temperature down overnight, and then when the sun rises an increasing temperature is found. I will look into the rainfall for previous areas as well to see if the last 5 years are correlated.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
The sun still the key in the sunshine state
And finally for the sunshine state it's off to south central Queensland where we look at a good range of data from Cunnamulla post office, Charleville airport and Bollon Mary Street.
A good range of data here going back to the mid 40's for time based temperatures with maximum and minimum temperatures going back to 1910.
Maximum temperatures for the area saw no significant increase (p = 0.056) although it is significant at the 10% level. The graph looks very random with exception to the last 5 years which have all seen a major increase in maximum temperatures. Minimum temperatures follow similar patterns to the max, but more amplified. Low temperatures in the 50's and since 1980 we have seen significant increases in temperature.
It is hard to come to any conclusions about midnight temperatures given their disjointed nature (missing years), however temperatures at 3am and 6am show no significant increase in temperature. Then as soon as the sun comes out we get major increases over time, with significant increases in temperature at 9am, Noon and 3pm. And then when the sun is losing it's power over temperature, no significant temperature changes were found at 6pm and 9pm.
Temperature differences between 3am,6am and the minimum have significantly increased, although interestingly have declined since 1990 despite still being around 0.25 degrees above the overnight temperatures. Thus once again indicating that minimum temperature is an inadequate gauge of overnight temperatures, and that minimum temperatures have been increasing at a larger rate as compared to overnight temperatures.
9am temperatures increased significantly (p = 0.01) over time as opposed to 6am temperatures (although the relationship is not as strong as previous places studied). And predictably, the same happened in the reverse; when the sun loses it's power temperature anomalies at 6pm have decreased over time when compared to 3pm.
Thus indicating once again, that the only reason why temperatures have increased in southern queensland over the last few years is due to the sun.
Ahh sunny Queensland. It's not called that for no reason. Onto New South Wales next.
A good range of data here going back to the mid 40's for time based temperatures with maximum and minimum temperatures going back to 1910.
Maximum temperatures for the area saw no significant increase (p = 0.056) although it is significant at the 10% level. The graph looks very random with exception to the last 5 years which have all seen a major increase in maximum temperatures. Minimum temperatures follow similar patterns to the max, but more amplified. Low temperatures in the 50's and since 1980 we have seen significant increases in temperature.
It is hard to come to any conclusions about midnight temperatures given their disjointed nature (missing years), however temperatures at 3am and 6am show no significant increase in temperature. Then as soon as the sun comes out we get major increases over time, with significant increases in temperature at 9am, Noon and 3pm. And then when the sun is losing it's power over temperature, no significant temperature changes were found at 6pm and 9pm.
Temperature differences between 3am,6am and the minimum have significantly increased, although interestingly have declined since 1990 despite still being around 0.25 degrees above the overnight temperatures. Thus once again indicating that minimum temperature is an inadequate gauge of overnight temperatures, and that minimum temperatures have been increasing at a larger rate as compared to overnight temperatures.
9am temperatures increased significantly (p = 0.01) over time as opposed to 6am temperatures (although the relationship is not as strong as previous places studied). And predictably, the same happened in the reverse; when the sun loses it's power temperature anomalies at 6pm have decreased over time when compared to 3pm.
Thus indicating once again, that the only reason why temperatures have increased in southern queensland over the last few years is due to the sun.
Ahh sunny Queensland. It's not called that for no reason. Onto New South Wales next.
Monday, June 18, 2007
South East Queensland Drought
So much has been talked about the drought of recent, and how it's all global warming that is the main cause. Queensland's water reserves are the worst hit and luckily this year we've seen a good increase in rain. But was global warming really the cause?
Shown below is the rainfall for south east Queensland. As one can clearly see, the amount of rainfall in the last 6 years has been well under par by as much as 40mm per month - ouch!
But if we ignore this recent downward trend, well, there seems to be no trend at all. Seems very random. Either something has happened only in the last 6 years so that the area has less rainfall, or this too, is somewhat random.
Either way, if global warming was the cause, it seems as though global warming has only been around this area in the last 6 years, and then thankfully this month is now non existent.
Shown below is the rainfall for south east Queensland. As one can clearly see, the amount of rainfall in the last 6 years has been well under par by as much as 40mm per month - ouch!
But if we ignore this recent downward trend, well, there seems to be no trend at all. Seems very random. Either something has happened only in the last 6 years so that the area has less rainfall, or this too, is somewhat random.
Either way, if global warming was the cause, it seems as though global warming has only been around this area in the last 6 years, and then thankfully this month is now non existent.
Flip Flop Flannery
As Tim Blair notes,
As predicted by sciencemagologist Tim Flannery, this month was supposed to see Sydney's dams run dry. Instead:
At last the rains have fallen in the right places and Sydney's dam catchment area has had its best drenching in years ...
Dam levels are predicted to rise by up to 5 per cent, pushing drinking water storage levels to 45 per cent, the highest in three years.
In fact, we're looking at the wettest June since 1964; excellent news following Australia's prolonged drought. It could be that, similar to the Goracle himself, the Flannacle possesses magical weather-altering powers. Speaking of the drought, Flannery had this to say a month or so back:
"Even a year ago this would have been unthinkable," Flannery told AFP. I think it&'s the most extreme and the most dangerous situation arising from climate change facing any country in the world right now."
And another May comment:
In a keynote address, Flannery provided an update on the acceleration of global warming, from the rapidly melting Greenland ice sheet to the unprecedented drought that has gripped Australia.
But following recent rain, Flannery has lately changed his tune:
"I believe the first thing Australians need to do is stop worrying about the drought - which is transient - and start talking about the new climate."
In May, the drought was the most extreme and the most dangerous situation arising from climate change facing any country in the world right now& a few weeks later, and we should stop worrying about a transient weather phenomenon. Flannery is in flat-out flip mode. Not that he's given up making ridiculous predictions:
Environmental researcher Tim Flannery has warned that Brisbane and Adelaide - home to a combined total of three million people - could run out of water by year’s end.
I'll take that bet. According to these figures, Adelaide has enough water to last until late January, 2008, even if not a further drop arrives before then. Brisbane has sufficient supplies to last until October next year. Flannery, however, will certainly run out of Australian of the Year glory points by 2007's end. Then he can commence building Geothermia
As predicted by sciencemagologist Tim Flannery, this month was supposed to see Sydney's dams run dry. Instead:
At last the rains have fallen in the right places and Sydney's dam catchment area has had its best drenching in years ...
Dam levels are predicted to rise by up to 5 per cent, pushing drinking water storage levels to 45 per cent, the highest in three years.
In fact, we're looking at the wettest June since 1964; excellent news following Australia's prolonged drought. It could be that, similar to the Goracle himself, the Flannacle possesses magical weather-altering powers. Speaking of the drought, Flannery had this to say a month or so back:
"Even a year ago this would have been unthinkable," Flannery told AFP. I think it&'s the most extreme and the most dangerous situation arising from climate change facing any country in the world right now."
And another May comment:
In a keynote address, Flannery provided an update on the acceleration of global warming, from the rapidly melting Greenland ice sheet to the unprecedented drought that has gripped Australia.
But following recent rain, Flannery has lately changed his tune:
"I believe the first thing Australians need to do is stop worrying about the drought - which is transient - and start talking about the new climate."
In May, the drought was the most extreme and the most dangerous situation arising from climate change facing any country in the world right now& a few weeks later, and we should stop worrying about a transient weather phenomenon. Flannery is in flat-out flip mode. Not that he's given up making ridiculous predictions:
Environmental researcher Tim Flannery has warned that Brisbane and Adelaide - home to a combined total of three million people - could run out of water by year’s end.
I'll take that bet. According to these figures, Adelaide has enough water to last until late January, 2008, even if not a further drop arrives before then. Brisbane has sufficient supplies to last until October next year. Flannery, however, will certainly run out of Australian of the Year glory points by 2007's end. Then he can commence building Geothermia
Climate change behind Darfur killing
Climate change has been blamed for the cause of the killings in Darfur.
According to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon,
"The Darfur conflict began as an ecological crisis, arising at least in part from climate change"
UN statistics showed that rainfall declined some 40 per cent over the past two decades, he said, as a rise in Indian Ocean temperatures disrupted monsoons.
"This suggests that the drying of sub-Saharan Africa derives, to some degree, from man-made global warming,'' the South Korean diplomat wrote.
"It is no accident that the violence in Darfur erupted during the drought"
However, recent research published in the Journal of Arid Environments, argues that contrary to the apocalyptic visions of an African dust bowl there is a strong "secular" trend for "...increasing vegetation greenness over the last two decades across the Sahel..." - a region that contains Sudan. In fact, according to this peer-reviewed paper, there is a "...vast belt of significantly increasing vegetation across the central Sudan." These scientists propose three possible suggestions for the causes of this agricultural boom:
According to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon,
"The Darfur conflict began as an ecological crisis, arising at least in part from climate change"
UN statistics showed that rainfall declined some 40 per cent over the past two decades, he said, as a rise in Indian Ocean temperatures disrupted monsoons.
"This suggests that the drying of sub-Saharan Africa derives, to some degree, from man-made global warming,'' the South Korean diplomat wrote.
"It is no accident that the violence in Darfur erupted during the drought"
However, recent research published in the Journal of Arid Environments, argues that contrary to the apocalyptic visions of an African dust bowl there is a strong "secular" trend for "...increasing vegetation greenness over the last two decades across the Sahel..." - a region that contains Sudan. In fact, according to this peer-reviewed paper, there is a "...vast belt of significantly increasing vegetation across the central Sudan." These scientists propose three possible suggestions for the causes of this agricultural boom:
- Increasing rainfall across most parts of the Sahel;
- Improved land management; and
- Land use change resulting from migration of displaced people.
Saturday, June 16, 2007
Global Warming Communism
Czech president Vaclav Klaus write this piece on global warming science, but not to be outdone is the fantastic article by Lubos Motl about global warming and capitalism:
The real risk of this posting is that those who are imposing the environmentalist consensus will learn something from their predecessors who were much more experienced back in 1977 than most environmentalists are today...
Those readers who haven't lived in a totalitarian system may have problems to understand why the rest of us finds the structure of the environmentalist propaganda almost identical to the structure of the communist propaganda. To fix this problem, let me translate the official response to Charter 77, the pro-freedom statement penned by Václav Havel. You can compare it e.g. with DeSmogBlog's new defamatory pages against 61 of the "climate change deniers".
Rudé právo (The Red Law)
the official daily of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, January 12th, 1977: source in Czech
In their gnarly struggle against the progress, the international reaction is trying to create the illusion of a certain broad anti-communist front into which they try to drag not only open traitors but also fluctuating and disoriented individuals or groups, often covering themselves under the mask of the "Left" or "communists". They frequently try to achieve the impossible: to revive the political dead bodies, starting from those among the emigrants from socialist countries to those within the remainder of the class enemies in these countries, renegades, to various criminal and asocial elements. One of the forms of the "impressive" collaboration is the fabrication of diverse pamphlets, letters, protests, and other generic slanders that are presented as the voice of certain "opposition" individuals or tiny groups. With fanfare and in a co-ordinated fashion, these texts are being distributed throughout the capitalist world.Let me now try to identify some basic common features of the propagandistic algorithms of both ideologies; it won't be too hard:
This description also applies to the newest pamphlet, the so-called Charter 77, that was composed by a miniscule group of bankrupted Czechoslovak reactionary burgeoisie as well as bankrupted organizers of the counter-revolution in 1968. Their work has been ordered by the world's anti-communist and Zionist headquarters and it was delivered to certain Western agencies.
This document is an anti-state, anti-socialist, anti-people, and demagogic invective that rudely and untruthfully slanders the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic and the revolutionary achievements of the people. Its authors accuse our society of organizing the life differently than according to their burgeois and elitist visions. These usurpers who scorn the people, its interests, and its elected representative organs try to assume the right to stand in for our people and they demand a "dialogue with the political and state authority" and they even want to play the role of a certain "mediator during potential conflicting situations". The existence of socialism in our country is only taken into account in one particular case - when they write down the name of our republic. The document is written from a cosmopolitan vantage point of the defeated reactionary burgeoisie, and it rejects socialism as a social system.
The authors of the pamphlet, seemingly living outside space and time, demagogically refer to such "important civilization values that many progressive forces in the history wanted to achieve", values such as freedoms and human rights. Yes, our socialist country has declared, in international documents as well as national laws codified, and obeys the widest selection of human rights and freedoms - for the working people, the landlords of this country. However, the inspirators of this pamphlet mean something entirely different by their words - they rave about the rights and freedoms for the remainders of the defeated burgeois reaction. What they care about are such "rights and freedoms" that would allow them to freely organize anti-state and anti-party activities, to preach anti-Sovietism, and once again, to attempt to destroy the socialist government's power.
Yesterday in the afternoon, around 70 resolutions denouncing the anti-socialist and anti-people slander called the "Charter 77" were received by the Metropolitan Committee of the Communist Party in Prague during a few hours. Many more letters keep on arriving. The workers of Prague's companies that are active in construction, machine industry, and other fields; physicians; the employees of municipal executive councils; teachers; associations of artists, and many more sharply reject the lies filling up the pamphlet.
Right after the morning workshift, the workers of dozens of companies have gathered for short meetings during which they have written down their clear attitude to the Charter. They have sent their work to the Central Committee as well as the Prague Metropolitan Committee of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia.
- They try to convey the message that the opposition doesn't exist
- If the opposition exists, it is composed of unsuccessful or dead bodies who have been defeated decades ago
- The members of the opposition are being controlled by others, usually by demonized sources of power, with hints of corruption
- Opposition gets badges that are meant to be derogatory - capitalist, Zionist, deniers, renegades, contrarians, reactionary, burgeoisie, oil-funded etc.
- Opposition is presented as being against all the people - and all the people should agree and do agree with that; statements that everyone agrees and everyone keeps on supporting the official position are repeated all the time
- The opposition members are criticized for their very existence and for the tiniest deviations from the official ideology, to assure everyone else that one simply can't join them if he wants to survive
- Opposition is claimed to misinterpret words and facts even though it is pretty obvious that it is the official party who is doing that
- The opposing individuals are deconstructed one by one by carefully crafted ad hominem attacks
- The propaganda openly states that a debate or a dialogue itself is unacceptable and no details of the opponents' opinions are ever analyzed
- Whenever it's possible, the opponents must be fired or otherwise harassed
The real risk of this posting is that those who are imposing the environmentalist consensus will learn something from their predecessors who were much more experienced back in 1977 than most environmentalists are today...
Thursday, June 14, 2007
So much research, so little temperature analysis
Do you not think it strange, that so much research has gone into the effects of increased temperatures at night, when , on this blog, I have done greater analysis of temperatures at night then in any scientific literature?
For example, my own analysis renders this one useless. I would have expected a greater statistical analysis into temperature throughout the day and throughout the night before we start looking at the side effects.
It's such a pity that so much has been hypothesised, and yet, people still assume that the minimum temperature is a relfection of the temperature during the middle of the night - just like the maximum is during the middle of the day.
Such a poor, wrong assumption means that so much money is being wasted on illegitate research. I am still perplexed that we can spend tens of billions of dollars on the problem of global warming, and yet we still have not done the proper statistical analysis of the warming.
Given the lopsidedness of the research, I would think that this particular research on my blog would be worth at least a million, maybe 10 million, as it is, still to this date, the most comprehensive analysis of Australian temperature.
It's kinda sad really.
For example, my own analysis renders this one useless. I would have expected a greater statistical analysis into temperature throughout the day and throughout the night before we start looking at the side effects.
It's such a pity that so much has been hypothesised, and yet, people still assume that the minimum temperature is a relfection of the temperature during the middle of the night - just like the maximum is during the middle of the day.
Such a poor, wrong assumption means that so much money is being wasted on illegitate research. I am still perplexed that we can spend tens of billions of dollars on the problem of global warming, and yet we still have not done the proper statistical analysis of the warming.
Given the lopsidedness of the research, I would think that this particular research on my blog would be worth at least a million, maybe 10 million, as it is, still to this date, the most comprehensive analysis of Australian temperature.
It's kinda sad really.
The Sun is all that seems to matter
Initial results by combining a couple of stations in south east queensland were looking a little bizarre, so I decided to view both Amberley and Cape Morton separately. Firstly Amberley:
We have limited data at Midnight, but everything else goes back to the 50's with maximum and minimums going back 10 years more.
We find significant decreases in temperature both at 3am and 6am, and then as soon as the sun rises, a significant increase in temperature. Quite strange really, that such a sudden change can occur. Noon and 3pm both record significant increases as well, however temperatures at 6pm showed no difference, but a significant decrease in temperature at 9pm was found.
In other words, Amberley is getting colder over time at night, and warmer during the day. This might be good reason why maximum temperatures showed a significant increase, however minimum temperatures showed a significant decrease. This being probably the first time in our analysis that significant decreases in temperature have occurred over night.
No surprisingly then, we find that the rate of change of temperature at 9am was significantly higher than at 6am, and 6pm temperature anomalies were significantly lower than that at 3am. Seems like the only thing that is heating up Amberley is something that tends to be heating it up during the day - maybe the sun? And the influence of this has increased over the past 50 years.
Cape Moreton paints a different picture. Unfortunately only a handful of years of temperature data is recorded outside the times 9am and 3pm. 9am shows a significant increase in temperature since 1957 whilst 3pm does not. However, quite clearly from looking at the graph, from 1960 onwards an upward trend as occurred especially in the last 6 years.
The graph of maximum temperatures is extreme. No real changes in maximum temperature in the past 90 years and then a sudden 1 degree increase on average per day in the last 6 years. Incredible. Minimum temperatures also show a massive increase of late, but not as sudden despite being well defined.
As previously said, we only have good data for Capre moreton when the sun is out (max/min/9am/3pm), as all other times only go back to 1988. However, by analysing differences in anomalies between certain times we can get a lot of information out of the limited data.
Differences in temperature between 3am,6am and the minimum temperature is shown here. The difference is obvious and startling. The minimum temperature is on average 0.63 degrees higher than the overnight temperatures and this amount seems to be increasing over time (the increase is significant). Hence the minimum temperature is exaggerating the overnight temperature by as much as 1 degree per day (that is if one uses the minimum temperature as a good gage for overnight temperatures!)
This sudden change is highlighted when looking at time temperature anomolie differences. When looking at the difference in temperatures from 9am and 6am, we see a highly significant increase of up of 0.7 degrees per day. Hence for some reason (sun perhaps?) temperature anomolies at 9am are significantly higher than at 6am. No surprises that when the sun was not playing an effect (temp diffs between 6am and 3am) - there was no differences in the rate of change of temperature anomalies.
However when looking at temperature differences from 6pm and 3pm, we find a significant decrease in temperature. The trend in the graph is obvious. And when the sun loses it's effect (9pm vs 6pm) - no differences at all.
The proof is strong, the results significant, and the conclusion obvious.
In south east queensland - just like almost all other places that we have studied - we have seen no significant increase in temperature overnight. And the rate of change of temperature anomalies increases when the sun rises and decreases when the sun sets. There can only be one explanation for this, that the sun is playing a major influence over the temperatures in this and other areas in Australia.
Can it be more obvious?
We have limited data at Midnight, but everything else goes back to the 50's with maximum and minimums going back 10 years more.
We find significant decreases in temperature both at 3am and 6am, and then as soon as the sun rises, a significant increase in temperature. Quite strange really, that such a sudden change can occur. Noon and 3pm both record significant increases as well, however temperatures at 6pm showed no difference, but a significant decrease in temperature at 9pm was found.
In other words, Amberley is getting colder over time at night, and warmer during the day. This might be good reason why maximum temperatures showed a significant increase, however minimum temperatures showed a significant decrease. This being probably the first time in our analysis that significant decreases in temperature have occurred over night.
No surprisingly then, we find that the rate of change of temperature at 9am was significantly higher than at 6am, and 6pm temperature anomalies were significantly lower than that at 3am. Seems like the only thing that is heating up Amberley is something that tends to be heating it up during the day - maybe the sun? And the influence of this has increased over the past 50 years.
Cape Moreton paints a different picture. Unfortunately only a handful of years of temperature data is recorded outside the times 9am and 3pm. 9am shows a significant increase in temperature since 1957 whilst 3pm does not. However, quite clearly from looking at the graph, from 1960 onwards an upward trend as occurred especially in the last 6 years.
The graph of maximum temperatures is extreme. No real changes in maximum temperature in the past 90 years and then a sudden 1 degree increase on average per day in the last 6 years. Incredible. Minimum temperatures also show a massive increase of late, but not as sudden despite being well defined.
As previously said, we only have good data for Capre moreton when the sun is out (max/min/9am/3pm), as all other times only go back to 1988. However, by analysing differences in anomalies between certain times we can get a lot of information out of the limited data.
Differences in temperature between 3am,6am and the minimum temperature is shown here. The difference is obvious and startling. The minimum temperature is on average 0.63 degrees higher than the overnight temperatures and this amount seems to be increasing over time (the increase is significant). Hence the minimum temperature is exaggerating the overnight temperature by as much as 1 degree per day (that is if one uses the minimum temperature as a good gage for overnight temperatures!)
This sudden change is highlighted when looking at time temperature anomolie differences. When looking at the difference in temperatures from 9am and 6am, we see a highly significant increase of up of 0.7 degrees per day. Hence for some reason (sun perhaps?) temperature anomolies at 9am are significantly higher than at 6am. No surprises that when the sun was not playing an effect (temp diffs between 6am and 3am) - there was no differences in the rate of change of temperature anomalies.
However when looking at temperature differences from 6pm and 3pm, we find a significant decrease in temperature. The trend in the graph is obvious. And when the sun loses it's effect (9pm vs 6pm) - no differences at all.
The proof is strong, the results significant, and the conclusion obvious.
In south east queensland - just like almost all other places that we have studied - we have seen no significant increase in temperature overnight. And the rate of change of temperature anomalies increases when the sun rises and decreases when the sun sets. There can only be one explanation for this, that the sun is playing a major influence over the temperatures in this and other areas in Australia.
Can it be more obvious?
Kilimanjaro melting snow not due to warming
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Brisbane goes green
Brisbane are spending big, 3/4 of a billion dollars on, amongst other things, Free public screenings of Al Gore's climate change film, An Inconvenient Truth.
Friday, June 08, 2007
Hurricane patterns are natural
The Times reports on a new Swedish study:
Hurricanes in the Atlantic are increasing because of natural weather patterns rather than global warming, a study has concluded.
Growing numbers of hurricanes battering the United States and the Caribbean have made their presence felt in the past decade and are forecast to worsen. Global warming has been cited as a possible cause but researchers looking at sediment and coral deposits have now identified natural variations in their frequency.
Hurricane Katrina, which devastated New Orleans in 2005, was “unexceptional” when historic patterns of such stormy weather are analysed, they suggested.
Global warming may even have been responsible for unusually low levels of hurricanes in the 25 years before 1995 when the number began rising, according to the scientists, led by the Geological Survey of Sweden…
“The record indicates that the average frequency of major hurricanes decreased gradually from the 1760s until the early 1960s, reaching anomalously low values during the 1970s and 1980s,” they reported in the journal Nature. “Furthermore, the phase of enhanced hurricane activity since 1995 is not unusual compared to other periods of high hurricane activity and appears to represent a recovery to normal hurricane activity.”
The findings are at variance with the conclusions in February of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Nations organisation addressing global warming. The UN panel stopped short of blaming increased frequency of hurricanes on man-made temperature rises, but said it was “more likely than not” that greenhouse gas emissions had contributed to the greater intensity of cyclonic storms.
Hurricanes in the Atlantic are increasing because of natural weather patterns rather than global warming, a study has concluded.
Growing numbers of hurricanes battering the United States and the Caribbean have made their presence felt in the past decade and are forecast to worsen. Global warming has been cited as a possible cause but researchers looking at sediment and coral deposits have now identified natural variations in their frequency.
Hurricane Katrina, which devastated New Orleans in 2005, was “unexceptional” when historic patterns of such stormy weather are analysed, they suggested.
Global warming may even have been responsible for unusually low levels of hurricanes in the 25 years before 1995 when the number began rising, according to the scientists, led by the Geological Survey of Sweden…
“The record indicates that the average frequency of major hurricanes decreased gradually from the 1760s until the early 1960s, reaching anomalously low values during the 1970s and 1980s,” they reported in the journal Nature. “Furthermore, the phase of enhanced hurricane activity since 1995 is not unusual compared to other periods of high hurricane activity and appears to represent a recovery to normal hurricane activity.”
The findings are at variance with the conclusions in February of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Nations organisation addressing global warming. The UN panel stopped short of blaming increased frequency of hurricanes on man-made temperature rises, but said it was “more likely than not” that greenhouse gas emissions had contributed to the greater intensity of cyclonic storms.
Petrol up by 12c
The green party in Canada wants to charge an extra 12c per litre of petrol to combat climate change. Be sure that this type of thing will occur here too. Just like the massive electricity hikes soon to be expected.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Helmut Schmidt on global warming
As reported by the reference frame
It's the first time when the protection of the climate stands at the top of the G8 agenda. Is the situation as dramatic as the IPCC climate panel warns us?
This whole climate panel has invented itself and no one has asked for it. It is a severe exaggeration to call IPCC a council that should issue recommendations. The whole debate is hysterical and overheated, especially by the media. Climate change exists on this Earth simply because it does.
For hundreds of thousands of years we have seen ice ages and interglacials.
For example, people find tusks in Germany and prove that elephants once lived in this country during interglacials. Or in my garden in Hamburg's Langenhorn which is 15 meters above the sea level, I can find mussels that indicate that the ocean used to reach to Langenhorn and maybe even further.
Meanwhile, the reason behind these climate changes have been inadequately researched for the time being. And there is no reason to think that the climate change should suddenly stop. But if someone moreover adds the idea that people who gather in Heilligendamm will stop climate from changing, then what we see is pure hysteria, a stupidity.
It's the first time when the protection of the climate stands at the top of the G8 agenda. Is the situation as dramatic as the IPCC climate panel warns us?
This whole climate panel has invented itself and no one has asked for it. It is a severe exaggeration to call IPCC a council that should issue recommendations. The whole debate is hysterical and overheated, especially by the media. Climate change exists on this Earth simply because it does.
For hundreds of thousands of years we have seen ice ages and interglacials.
For example, people find tusks in Germany and prove that elephants once lived in this country during interglacials. Or in my garden in Hamburg's Langenhorn which is 15 meters above the sea level, I can find mussels that indicate that the ocean used to reach to Langenhorn and maybe even further.
Meanwhile, the reason behind these climate changes have been inadequately researched for the time being. And there is no reason to think that the climate change should suddenly stop. But if someone moreover adds the idea that people who gather in Heilligendamm will stop climate from changing, then what we see is pure hysteria, a stupidity.
No More Drought - no more GW?
We previously suggested that the south Australian drought is now over, with the past 4 months all having greater than normal rainfall than expected both in Victoria and south eastern Australia.
Now we can add May to the list:
Given below is the expected and actual rainfall in south eastern Australia
Expected Actual
Jan 45.0 41.6
Feb 40.8 41.4
Mar 38.3 37.3
Apr 39.9 52.0
May 54.9 64.0
Total 218.9 236.4
So we have a 8.0% increase in rainfall than the norm.
Also in Victoria:
Expected Actual
Jan 37.0 55.7
Feb 36.6 31.1
Mar 40.2 38.5
Apr 46.5 42.4
May 58.7 71.0
Total 219.0 238.7
A 9.0% increase in rainfall since the start of the year.
So once again all the signs are that the drought it over. Phew. I guess global warming isn't having an effect now....or is it?
Despite all the good news, nothing to be worried about stuff - the Australian Bureau of Meteorology still paints an ugly picture.
Short Term Relief = almost half a year. And note that the drought was caused, in part, by El Niño - hmm..what else are they insinuating here?
Interesting that despite it admitting that Australia has seen higher than average rainfall over the past month, it continues to talk about every possible place that has severe deficiencies (bad news). More than likely, there would be more places that would have severe efficiencies (good news!), but none of these are mentioned.
Whilst they point you in the direction of the rainfall deficiencies (a good map that shows you when you look back on a longer period of time, that the rainfall problem is almost becoming non existant), a better example would be their one which shows the efficiencies as well like here.
Obviously in any given month or 3 months or whatever, there will be places with lower than normal rainfall. Just like there should be places with higher than normal rainfall. And if these are similar, and Australia has not been decreasing in rainfall (which it hasn't), then why all the global warming scare about droughts?
I guess now that the drought has gone in south eastern Australia (remember global warming only effected south eastern Australia), global warming is not having its effect - or maybe - it's just a little bit of natural variation.
Now we can add May to the list:
Given below is the expected and actual rainfall in south eastern Australia
Expected Actual
Jan 45.0 41.6
Feb 40.8 41.4
Mar 38.3 37.3
Apr 39.9 52.0
May 54.9 64.0
Total 218.9 236.4
So we have a 8.0% increase in rainfall than the norm.
Also in Victoria:
Expected Actual
Jan 37.0 55.7
Feb 36.6 31.1
Mar 40.2 38.5
Apr 46.5 42.4
May 58.7 71.0
Total 219.0 238.7
A 9.0% increase in rainfall since the start of the year.
So once again all the signs are that the drought it over. Phew. I guess global warming isn't having an effect now....or is it?
Despite all the good news, nothing to be worried about stuff - the Australian Bureau of Meteorology still paints an ugly picture.
Autumn rainfall was average to above average over much of inland NSW, northern and western Victoria, Tasmania and southern South Australia, thereby providing some short-term relief to many agricultural systems and an easing of the severe drought caused in part by the 2006/07 El Niño event.
Short Term Relief = almost half a year. And note that the drought was caused, in part, by El Niño - hmm..what else are they insinuating here?
Interesting that despite it admitting that Australia has seen higher than average rainfall over the past month, it continues to talk about every possible place that has severe deficiencies (bad news). More than likely, there would be more places that would have severe efficiencies (good news!), but none of these are mentioned.
Whilst they point you in the direction of the rainfall deficiencies (a good map that shows you when you look back on a longer period of time, that the rainfall problem is almost becoming non existant), a better example would be their one which shows the efficiencies as well like here.
Obviously in any given month or 3 months or whatever, there will be places with lower than normal rainfall. Just like there should be places with higher than normal rainfall. And if these are similar, and Australia has not been decreasing in rainfall (which it hasn't), then why all the global warming scare about droughts?
I guess now that the drought has gone in south eastern Australia (remember global warming only effected south eastern Australia), global warming is not having its effect - or maybe - it's just a little bit of natural variation.
Monday, June 04, 2007
Electricity Price Hike
Channel 7 news reported today that electricity prices for business and home use is expected to increase from 60 to 100% in the next 12 months. Not surprisingly, the didn't say why...
News in short
More statistical analysis to follow shortly however here's the latest news:
- Queensland bans electric hot water systems to save the planet, hence making Queensland less of a sunshine state.
- Consensus? Please can we for once not use this word again? It is used only by people who try to pursuade with faith rather than facts.
- Are the IPCC hiding something? Steve McIntyre suggests that they might.
- Australia's environment ministers gathered over the weekend to discuss carbon trading - in sunny hot Cairns, 1700 kilometres from the nearest capital city. They like the warmth.
- NASA suggests that global warming is not worth fighting
Nick Davies suggests that global warming has made huge profits for many, but very little carbon saved.
and finally, Labor wrongly lies about Liberal's supposed 11 years of doing nothing about climate change.
- Queensland bans electric hot water systems to save the planet, hence making Queensland less of a sunshine state.
- Consensus? Please can we for once not use this word again? It is used only by people who try to pursuade with faith rather than facts.
- Are the IPCC hiding something? Steve McIntyre suggests that they might.
- Australia's environment ministers gathered over the weekend to discuss carbon trading - in sunny hot Cairns, 1700 kilometres from the nearest capital city. They like the warmth.
- NASA suggests that global warming is not worth fighting
Nick Davies suggests that global warming has made huge profits for many, but very little carbon saved.
and finally, Labor wrongly lies about Liberal's supposed 11 years of doing nothing about climate change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)