tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post4483249551322006271..comments2024-01-26T23:04:49.482+11:00Comments on Gust Of Hot Air: CSIRO's climate "change"Jonathan Lowehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13972477779077598483noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-15269280106541816062008-04-19T16:26:00.000+10:002008-04-19T16:26:00.000+10:00There are a couple of points I wish I could point ...There are a couple of points I wish I could point out.<BR/><BR/>In Melbourne's catchment areas rainfall has decreased by around 30 percent (almost <I>two standard deviations</I>) since 1997, even during La Nina years. There is already clear evidence that global warming has shifted the jet streams well south of southern Victoria, removing its winter rain. Evidence from crater lakes further west is that this dry spell is <I>completely unprecedented in the Holocene</I> and cannot be part of climate cycles. Yet, Brumby is still calling for more roads when what is needed is a plan to restore pre-industrial carbon dioxide levels via road demolition and investment in rail and bike paths.<BR/><BR/>In the Eucla and Goldfields of Western Australia, rainfall has increased by <I>forty to fifty percent</I> since 1967. Moreover, models suggest Asian aerosols should not increase rainfall in those regions at all. Ian Smith, for one, is willing to admit the likely culpability of AGW for these changes, showing that increased greenhouse gases have stopped the cooling of inland Australia that allows the southern depressions to advance into the continent and encourages upper-level flows into the Eucla and Goldfields in a way never seen before.jpbenneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02664829103165280260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-77927579053303267952007-12-03T15:05:00.000+11:002007-12-03T15:05:00.000+11:00how do the CSIRO claim that we will get less rainf...how do the CSIRO claim that we will get less rainfall when the science suggests that global warming will increase rainfall?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-69805015102413836302007-10-30T16:57:00.000+11:002007-10-30T16:57:00.000+11:00And yes Dave you can slag off BoM's forecasts but ...<I>And yes Dave you can slag off BoM's forecasts but that's not the point - what's your advice to a farmer who asks whether this is exceptional, is there any mechanistic evidence of some AGW involvement, and whether teh future will simply be a sub-set of the past.</I><BR/>My answer would be "how long is a piece of string"<BR/><BR/><I>Don't know is NOT helpful.</I><BR/>So you'd rather make up something that doesn't eventuate?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14254383958261794123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-49062029155090860612007-10-30T16:46:00.000+11:002007-10-30T16:46:00.000+11:00Simply looking at graphs and statistics won’t give...<I>Simply looking at graphs and statistics won’t give you a complete story</I><BR/>Isn't that how they identified global warming to begin with? Now the graphs and statistics aren't agreeing with "the story" anymore we suddenly need to look at the <I>meteorology and mechanisms</I>. Doesn't fill me with confidence as neither are well understood.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14254383958261794123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-923464275817097622007-10-28T22:31:00.000+11:002007-10-28T22:31:00.000+11:00Luke, you say deniers are dismissive but I find it...Luke, you say deniers are dismissive but I find it's the other way around. Anyone not following the fashion and declaring global warming is "settled" is dismissed as a crank. I've learnt to be sceptical about doomsaying in general because I've seen a hell of a lot of it and NONE of it has come true. So when I hear that doom is nigh I get a bit stubborn - especially when the doomsayers are trying to take control of large parts of our lives. <BR/>You say we don't accept modelling but also say that there's a lot of stuff we don't understand. Well, I'm sorry, but if we don't understand exactly what's going on then computers with models based on positive feedback mechanisms aren't likely to come close to being right. In fact, much of the debate....actually, there's only debate on one side.......much of the schism is simply a matter of whether you opt for negative or positive feedback as the most likely mechanism affecting the weather.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-60991965751487322562007-10-27T04:32:00.000+10:002007-10-27T04:32:00.000+10:00Keyser soze - I'm not sure of your point. I'll do ...Keyser soze - I'm not sure of your point. I'll do my best with what I think you're saying.<BR/><BR/>It's not possible to really know whether AGW has caused this drought. It's also silly to assume absolutely not influence either.<BR/><BR/>I suspect looking at a range of evidence there's a bit of both and some complex interactions.<BR/><BR/>And suspend your disbelief for a moment - if AGW did exist and was having an influence would natural variability suddenly disappear?? THINK HARD HERE BEFORE CONTINUING.<BR/><BR/>The argument against - have had bad droughts before such as the Federation drought.<BR/>(but a deep analysis will show this is much worse in parts e.g. Murray River inflows).<BR/><BR/>Coral cores show 20 year droughts (but the Burdekin outflow is not south-east Australia)<BR/><BR/>Long climate models runs can show multi-year droughts runs. (but you guys don’t believe models so…)<BR/><BR/>On the other hand:<BR/><BR/>We have had more El Ninos since 1976 and the Southern Oscillation has changed significantly. We have had very few big wet coast-crossing tropical cyclones in Queensland. Argument against – Pacific Decadal influences and paleo-record<BR/><BR/>Indian Ocean has warmed. Tasman Sea has really warmed.<BR/><BR/>Southern Annular Mode around Antarctica has changed significantly. Can be drawn back to greenhouse/stratospheric ozone interaction. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/296/5569/895<BR/><BR/>The evaporative demand in this drought sequence is much worse than the Federation (Nicholls) – temperatures are up.<BR/><BR/>So the modelling can relate a fair bit of influence back onto this drought sequence.<BR/><BR/>My opinion – I think there’s an AGW “influence” on balance.<BR/><BR/>Can it be proved – come back in 30 years.<BR/><BR/>Does this help – well unlike us real people in the real world need to make BIG decisions. – NOW !! To sell the farm or stay, invest or retreat, to move elsewhere like the Ord River area. Bankers need to decide whether to loan. Federal Treasury are very nervous about billions and billions in drought aid going out the door. Hasn’t stopped since 1991.<BR/>http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/26/2071385.htm<BR/><BR/>So when you spread all the facts, maps, graphs, science papers out on the kitchen table it’s a worrying story. Even if AGW has no influence we need to know how often this sort of sequence can happen. Simply ruinous to the nation potentially.<BR/><BR/>What would expect to see if AGW was having an influence – warming oceaning, changing circulation patterns. Would you have trouble initially seeing a climate change signal emerging from a background of climate variability. Yep !<BR/><BR/>As a senior climatologist said to me the other day – you’d think the denialists would at least be a bit more curious and not so simply dismissive. You need to have insight and understand as well as observe. Simply looking at graphs and statistics won’t give you a complete story – you need to look at the meteorology and mechanisms as well. Otherwise you have a totally impoverished science view with no understanding of processes at work.<BR/><BR/>See slide 5 here http://www.greenhouse2007.com/downloads/keynotes/071002_Mummery.pdf<BR/><BR/>Then see Cai’s presentation in general (page 14 for the pundits !!)<BR/>http://www.greenhouse2007.com/downloads/keynotes/071004_Cai.pdf <BR/><BR/>And do you feel lucky with these numbers?<BR/><BR/>http://www.mdbc.gov.au/__data/page/1366/RMSystem_Drought_Update10_October07.pdfLukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12550521898554483507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-25596121156995644822007-10-26T15:54:00.000+10:002007-10-26T15:54:00.000+10:00I wonder if Luke can patiently expain to us proles...I wonder if Luke can patiently expain to us proles how his flurry of assertions about "spatial trends" and "regression stats" invalidates Jonathan's refutation of the myth that Australia's current drought is the result of man-made global warming. Yeah, rainfall may have increased since 1950 but that's just taking national averages, man! It doesn't mean a thing because there are regional variations.......gasp!!!!!<BR/><BR/>Or is Luke just trying to blind us with regression coefficients?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-91278175234633863092007-10-25T15:24:00.000+10:002007-10-25T15:24:00.000+10:00You don't have strict times for a start - dayligh...You don't have strict times for a start - daylight saving? Are you sure.<BR/><BR/>Your sample size is limited and unrepresentative IMO.<BR/><BR/>And I'm not playing guessing games with 100 incremental posts to work out "guess what's next".<BR/><BR/>You have the regression stats I don't.<BR/><BR/>Oh well I suppose I'll have to do an analysis myself.Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12550521898554483507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-23712035986827547502007-10-25T12:03:00.000+10:002007-10-25T12:03:00.000+10:00"Your whole thesis goes against stacks of previous..."Your whole thesis goes against stacks of previous work"<BR/><BR/>Name one. You can't because no one has analysed temperature differences at strict times. My analysis o minimum and maximum temperatures (which is the only variables that previous research has looked at) is in agreement with previous work.<BR/><BR/>Once again you assume that because 3am temps are correlated with min temps the same trends should appear. Bad logic I'm afraid.<BR/><BR/>and frosts? as I said, based on min temp only. Bad analysis. Bad data.Jonathan Lowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13972477779077598483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-31664535335625052892007-10-25T11:19:00.000+10:002007-10-25T11:19:00.000+10:00Jonathon - as you have said - don't put words into...Jonathon - as you have said - don't put words into my mouth - you're making the running here. Pulling a discourse out of you is tedious. You could easily put all this to bed and stop being evasive. Your whole thesis goes against stacks of previous work.<BR/><BR/>One datum point in Central Qld too - jeez !! I have seen lots of CQ data sets with minima increasing.<BR/><BR/>And so given your correlations with 3am etc you would suggest I would see nothing in 3am series?? Bizarre !<BR/><BR/><BR/>And given frost trends which even farmers have noticed of course the winters are getting milder on average. I mean REALLY !!<BR/><BR/>But you know better so good luck with it.Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12550521898554483507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-51650495210226022792007-10-24T15:58:00.000+10:002007-10-24T15:58:00.000+10:00Luke I knew you were going to come to such illogic...Luke I knew you were going to come to such illogical conclusions. You suggest that:<BR/><BR/>"minimums are increasing, minimums are correlated with 3am and 6am temps, so 3am and 6am temps are increasing too"<BR/><BR/>Unfort. for you, this is incorrect logic.Jonathan Lowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13972477779077598483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-25079505203499039602007-10-24T15:50:00.000+10:002007-10-24T15:50:00.000+10:00So the minima are increasing and you have good cor...So the minima are increasing and you have good correlations 3am and they are not increasing too ???? WOW !Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12550521898554483507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-8709155758442620232007-10-24T15:02:00.000+10:002007-10-24T15:02:00.000+10:00Luke I never said that minima was not increasing. ...Luke I never said that minima was not increasing. Please do not attempt to misquote me.Jonathan Lowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13972477779077598483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-81104109249423807722007-10-24T13:24:00.000+10:002007-10-24T13:24:00.000+10:00So we have really good correlations of 3am and 6am...So we have really good correlations of 3am and 6am with the min as we'd expect. And so all those articles I've seen with increasing minima are "wrong". I have to say I'm astounded. Pick one - try Gayndah !<BR/><BR/>On Warwick Hughes - funnily enough I figured you would say that. Have to say I find Warwick very hard to believe on many issues. His site was down and I could not check the Perth water article which I has previously skimmed.Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12550521898554483507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-91041393137508049682007-10-24T10:32:00.000+10:002007-10-24T10:32:00.000+10:00yep make sure you put in the html format for posti...yep make sure you put in the html format for posting links. eg:<BR/><BR/>[a href="http://www.crap.com]crap webpage[/a]<BR/><BR/>but replace the [ and ] with < and >Jonathan Lowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13972477779077598483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-10245454708438342622007-10-24T10:01:00.000+10:002007-10-24T10:01:00.000+10:00D@@@ Blogger crap. The link needs a /thinning at t...D@@@ Blogger crap. The link needs a /thinning at the end.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12142769659043349472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-34650644116278032282007-10-24T09:58:00.000+10:002007-10-24T09:58:00.000+10:00Below is a link to an article on the subject. Note...Below is a link to an article on the subject. Note the large reduction in rainfall variability since 1970.<BR/><BR/>http://www.warwickhughes.com/water/thinning.html<BR/><BR/>Warwick Hughe's site has several articles on Perth rainfall and water inflows.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12142769659043349472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-50321505299616297702007-10-23T22:50:00.000+10:002007-10-23T22:50:00.000+10:00Midnight to min: 0.6953am to min 0.8546am to min 0...Midnight to min: 0.695<BR/>3am to min 0.854<BR/>6am to min 0.895<BR/><BR/>as one would expect. All significant, and stronger correlation as you get closer to min time.Jonathan Lowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13972477779077598483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-71709480289781493322007-10-23T22:31:00.000+10:002007-10-23T22:31:00.000+10:00And lastly if you look at Fig 6 here on page 12 ht...And lastly if you look at Fig 6 here on page 12 http://www.ioci.org.au/publications/pdf/IOCI_TechnicalReport02.pdf<BR/><BR/>Looks to that the region has undergone a step change relative to the majority of the 20th centuryLukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12550521898554483507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-1714285381245802522007-10-23T22:19:00.000+10:002007-10-23T22:19:00.000+10:00That's a remarkably small sample size for a climat...That's a remarkably small sample size for a climate network. Misses many of the intersting regional patterns.Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12550521898554483507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-16636358054256513812007-10-23T22:11:00.000+10:002007-10-23T22:11:00.000+10:00Phillip - record low rainfall in Murray headwaters...Phillip - record low rainfall in Murray headwaters and record low inflows into the system.<BR/><BR/>Do you have a reference or study on vegetation thickening in Perth catchments?<BR/><BR/>Jonathon - and correlation with minima is?Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12550521898554483507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-22772041258903110322007-10-23T21:45:00.000+10:002007-10-23T21:45:00.000+10:00I need to knock on of Luke's myths on the head. Ra...I need to knock on of Luke's myths on the head. Rainfall in the SW of WA did indeed decline around 1970. Although this was really just a return to the pre 1950 rainfall norm. Since then rainfall has been remarkably consistent - much more consistent than earlier years. We did have a couple of relatively dry years around 2000 (nothing compared to the dry years earlier in the century), but this year has been the wettest in a decade.<BR/><BR/>The problem is inflows into dams have declined very substantially (although not this year). This is due to elimination of brush cutting in the catchment areas and has very little to do with rainfall. Trees use a lot of water. More trees means less water in dams. Its that simple.<BR/><BR/>I can't speak about the Murray-Darling but you seem to confuse rainfall and stream inflows.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12142769659043349472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-75392065484024634702007-10-23T19:38:00.000+10:002007-10-23T19:38:00.000+10:00and time temperature anomaly correlations.Midnight...and time temperature anomaly correlations.<BR/>Midnight to 3am: 0.823<BR/>3am to 6am: 0.951<BR/>Midnight to 3am: 0.775<BR/><BR/>all obviously statistically significant (p<0.001)Jonathan Lowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13972477779077598483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-86491958863991070472007-10-23T19:36:00.000+10:002007-10-23T19:36:00.000+10:00link try again<A HREF="http://gustofhotair.blogspot.com/2007/09/australian-maximum-and-minimum.html" REL="nofollow">link try again</A>Jonathan Lowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13972477779077598483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36333052.post-82262534497243364912007-10-23T19:35:00.000+10:002007-10-23T19:35:00.000+10:00I m in th eprocess of negotiatin a Phd and publish...I m in th eprocess of negotiatin a Phd and publishing this research. <A HEF="http://gustofhotair.blogspot.com/2007/09/australian-maximum-and-minimum.html">Here is a brief outline of the data: </A>Jonathan Lowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13972477779077598483noreply@blogger.com