There IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998

[brenthutch 383]

5 hours ago, billvon said:

A wet winter makes more fuel.  (Rain makes brush grow.)  A hot summer provides perfect conditions for it to burn.  And hotter summers are the norm courtesy of climate change.  Welcome to the new normal.

I thought climate change resulted in drought.  Anyway California did not have a warmer than average summer or fall, so.....try again.  

[brenthutch 383]

12 hours ago, kallend said:

Australia this year experienced its driest spring and hottest year on record.  The ignition source is not particularly relevant to the severity of the fires, which are also the most dangerous since records have been kept.

The hottest EVER, (since 1939)

https://jennifermarohasy.com/2020/01/it-has-been-hotter-fires-have-burnt-larger-areas/

[airdvr 197]

12 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

As you note, the cause of the fires isn't all that important. 


 

That's like saying someone's cause of death isn't all that important.  They were going to die anyways.

So we know that some of the fires were set intentionally, some accidentally.  I'd be interested to know if the people who intentionally set their fires were working in concert.

[gowlerk 1,903]

2 hours ago, brenthutch said:

I thought climate change resulted in drought.

Think again. More heat means higher evaporation and more humidity. Climate change is a change in the average. Weather is complicated. Again, stick to skydiving, you seem to be able to understand that.

[DJL 232]

2 hours ago, brenthutch said:

The hottest EVER, (since 1939)

https://jennifermarohasy.com/2020/01/it-has-been-hotter-fires-have-burnt-larger-areas/

Your source uses temperatures from a single area (Victoria) over a three month period (not the whole year) to say that overall average temps were "probably" higher in 1939 for all of Australia.  Australia is almost the size of the US so that's like using temps in New England to prove a country-wide average. That wedge shaped section hanging in the Gulf of Mexico is Victoria, about half the size of New England.

The author of the piece is on the payroll of a climate denial foundation.  Her job is literally to deny climate change.

This links to the same source she used showing the yearlong averages in Australia for the last 100 years.  The countrywide average for 1939 was not the hottest on record.

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/#tabs=Tracker&%3Btracker=timeseries&%3BtQ=&area=aus&season=0112&ave_yr=10&tracker=timeseries&tQ=graph%3Dtmean%26area%3Daus%26season%3D0112%26ave_yr%3D0

 

Edit:  Ah yes, the rest of the article is gobbly gook about thermometers for which she provides no conclusion.

Edited January 9, 2020 by DJL

[airdvr 197]

10 minutes ago, DJL said:

The author of the piece is on the payroll of a climate denial foundation.  Her job is literally to deny climate change.

 

Just because it's her job doesn't mean she's wrong.

[DJL 232]

Just now, airdvr said:

Just because it's her job doesn't mean she's wrong.

But she IS also wrong.  As I just showed.  I wanted to let you all know she's a fishnet wearing street walker for an associating who publishes misleading information (like she just published) to confuse people regarding climate change.

[airdvr 197]

http://climatelab.com.au/publications/

So she would be the Jezebel of the United Church of AGW?

[DJL 232]

3 minutes ago, airdvr said:

http://climatelab.com.au/publications/

So she would be the Jezebel of the United Church of AGW?

Yup.  She does something with her husband to predict rainfall and "climate lab" is a climate change denial group they run. 

[billvon 2,381]

7 hours ago, airdvr said:

That's like saying someone's cause of death isn't all that important. 

If someone smokes heavily all their life, their cause of death will likely be listed as heart disease.  It would be silly to think that therefore smoking was not the primary cause.

[billvon 2,381]

7 hours ago, airdvr said:

Just because it's her job doesn't mean she's wrong.

Of course.  But being paid to say something is a powerful incentive to say it, whether it's true or not.  Indeed, one might be tempted to ignore data that would get one fired.  As Upton Sinclair once famously said, it is hard to get someone to understand something when their salary depends upon them not understanding it.

[brenthutch 383]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

Of course.  But being paid to say something is a powerful incentive to say it, whether it's true or not.  

10 out of 10 on the irony scale.

[turtlespeed 212]

2 hours ago, billvon said:

If someone smokes heavily all their life, their cause of death will likely be listed as heart disease.  It would be silly to think that therefore smoking was not the primary cause.

well, usually, yes, unless they were intentionally stopped from living, right?

I believe there is a whole investigation thing they do after that.

For instance - Solemani was a smoker.  I'm willing to bet my entire year's salary that his cause of death wasn't listed as HeartDisease.

Edited January 9, 2020 by turtlespeed
Added content

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

An interesting story in the Guardian.

Twitter bots & trolls are exaggerating the level of arson.

Kind of like they want to pretend that the extra fires are all because of arson. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jan/08/twitter-bots-trolls-australian-bushfires-social-media-disinformation-campaign-false-claims?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR2y6seCeT-Jkxo4YMVH6o2vY-KCgkrwqFqcjxNv33AAiczvt8_KlZKxKCA#Echobox=1578442973

[brenthutch 383]

My prediction for 2020:  Atmospheric CO2 will continue to rise, and we will all still be here.(And by all, I mean humans, polar bears, koalas,snail darters and coral reefs. Who has a different view?

Edited January 10, 2020 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,294]

10 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

My prediction;  atmospheric CO2 will continue to rise in the next year, and we will all still be here.

My prediction: we will not be incinerated by the Sun next year.

[gowlerk 1,903]

8 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

My prediction for 2020:  Atmospheric CO2 will continue to rise, and we will all still be here.(And by all, I mean humans, polar bears, koalas,snail darters and coral reefs. Who has a different view?

You should still stick to what you know best.

[brenthutch 383]

2 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

You should still stick to what you know best.

I have laid out my predictions, what are yours?

[brenthutch 383]

4 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

My prediction: we will not be incinerated by the Sun next year.

So we are simpatico.

[JoeWeber 2,294]

16 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

So we are simpatico.

Yes. Today and tomorrow we're in sync. But you cannot stop accelerating AGW anymore than I can stop the Sun from aging. In the meantime I'll continue to be a hypocrite, burning fossil fuels and living large. 

[billvon 2,381]

4 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

well, usually, yes, unless they were intentionally stopped from living, right?

I believe there is a whole investigation thing they do after that.

For instance - Solemani was a smoker.  I'm willing to bet my entire year's salary that his cause of death wasn't listed as HeartDisease.

Right.  But saying "Solemni was NOT KILLED by smoking!  There's no consensus that smoking is dangerous.  All those doctors are lying to you!" would be misusing that bit of information.

[headoverheels 291]

My prediction for 2020:  Atmospheric CO2 will continue to rise, and 100 million people will die.

[brenthutch 383]

12 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

well, usually, yes, unless they were intentionally stopped from living, right?

I believe there is a whole investigation thing they do after that.

For instance - Solemani was a smoker.  I'm willing to bet my entire year's salary that his cause of death wasn't listed as HeartDisease.

I believe the cause of death was listed as “AGM-114 poisoning”

[BIGUN 1,049]

11 hours ago, brenthutch said:

I have laid out my predictions, what are yours?

My predictions are that your predictions are wrong. Brent, you continue to point at instances in time and places. This is the same as those who are Bull or Bears pointing at an uptick or dip in the stock market to prove their point and when the next tick or dip happens;shouting from the rooftops, See!!! See!! I was right!!! 
 

Quote

 

Our climate is changing and one of the most straightforward ways to understand these changes is by examining linear trends. In climate, to determine the linear trend we plot data values by when they occurred in the past and then determining a “best fit” line through that data. The slope of the line gives us the trend. Using this method we know that since 1895 the contiguous U.S. temperature has warmed at a rate of 1.45 °F per century. . . . Sometimes the trend for the entire period of record might be different than that of a shorter time period. That is the case when examining the February mean temperature trends.  The trends over the entire period of record shows warming over much of the contiguous U.S. with temperature warming at a rate of at least 2.0 °F per century over the northern third of the nation.  That pattern of warming is nearly non-existent when we examine just the most recent thirty years since 1987. A large chunk of the eastern U.S. has actually observed a cooling trend in temperatures with warming in New England and across much of the West.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/blogs/beyond-data/mapping-us-climate-trends

 

National trends for Mean Temperature, Maximum Temperature, Minimum Temperature, and Precipitation for each month and season

I know you won't give a shit about the data, but it may be helpful for others on the site.  

Edited January 10, 2020 by BIGUN
I wanted to

[airdvr 197]

19 hours ago, billvon said:

But being paid to say something is a powerful incentive to say it, whether it's true or not.

I wasn't aware that pro AGW climate scientists work for free.