My blog has moved! Redirecting...

You should be automatically redirected. If not, visit http://www.australianclimatemadness.com/ and update your bookmarks.

Australian Climate Madness

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Sydney Morning Herald - climate change to blame for increased bushfire risk

Of course it is, you denier you...
"We observed a large increase in fire-weather risk from about the year 2000. So part of this increase in risk has begun and has been observed," said Kevin Hennessey, who was attending the 9th International Conference on Southern Hemisphere Meteorology and Oceanography in Melbourne yesterday.

"The extreme dryness over the last 12 years may be due to natural variability but it may also be partly due to an increase in greenhouse gases; it's too early to tell."

It's not too early for the Herald though, who have had their minds made up and their eyes closed to any contrary evidence for years... Apologies for stating the obvious (yet again), but there has been no global warming since 2001:


(Image from www.drroyspencer.com)

A lead author with the United Nations scientific body, Kevin Trenberth, also attending the conference, said the drying of southern Australia was consistent with global warming. "One of the things with global warming is that you have this increase in greenhouse gases and they provide a blanketing effect so there is more heat available. The heat has to go somewhere. Some of the heat goes into evaporation, into the drying of the land. Where it's not raining, things dry out quicker, droughts set in a little quicker and become more intense."

But alternatively:
"A warmer atmosphere contains larger amounts of moisture which boosts the intensity of heavy downpours," said Dr Brian Soden, at the University of Miami.

Changes in heavy rainfall seem to keep pace with atmospheric moisture which rises by around 7 per cent for each ÂșC of warming. Based on computer models, this could mean an increase in the intensity of heavy rainfall of around 10 per cent by 2050.

However, the observed increase in extreme downpours appears to be larger than the increases predicted by current computer simulations, suggesting that predicted changes in rainfall due to global warming may be underestimated, either because of flawed measurements or because computer models lack some key understanding, for instance of the action of aerosol particles in the atmosphere. (source)

Gee, the science is really settled, ain't it?

Read it here.

2 Comments:

  • Good to see how many responses you have received for your post.

    It is quite simple really: Most of - if not all - of the non-petroleum sponsored evidence points towards a human induced rise in GHG which in turn is driving global warming. The risk of not taking action is far too great.

    Even if it turns out that we are wrong we have managed to use energy more efficiently and pollute less - what a terrible outcome!

    However, if you are wrong and we continue our love affair with burning fossil fuel and do nothing and we do trigger irreversible climate change - we may just find this planet uninhabitable.

    If those are the two choices only a fool would choose the latter!

    Nicholas Bernhardt
    nb@greenbizcheck.com

    By Blogger Greenbiz, At March 15, 2009 at 4:34 PM  

  • Just because people don't leave comments doesn't mean people aren't reading ...

    Sorry, but "petroleum sponsored" or not, CO2 does not drive global temperature. As for tipping points and catastrophes and "uninhabitable planets", there is no evidence whatsoever to support those kind of scares other than hopeless computer models that have singularly failed to predict the last 8 years of cooling.

    So, unless you are on the green money-making bandwagon (which, interestingly enough, I see you are), crippling the global economy with emissions reductions schemes that will do nothing to change the natural variation in climate that has gone on for millions of years is a huge price to pay just to reduce pollution. Maybe Kevin Rudd should put it to the voters at the next elections that he is planning to spend billions of dollars to simply reduce pollution rather than "stop catastrophic climate change" and see how far they get.

    By Blogger Simon from Sydney, At March 15, 2009 at 5:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Comments are moderated and may take some time to appear on the blog. Publication of a comment does not indicate endorsement or approval by Australian Climate Madness.

Please note that this blog is a humorous and satirical look at climate change propaganda in Australia and around the world. Please comment accordingly! Thanks.



Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home