Slashdot Mirror

"that instead becomes rain in Australia"

Nope, someone stole ours as well.

Therefore, the statement in AR4 that "It is more likely than not (>50%) that there has been some human contribution to the increases in hurricane intensity." is likely an exaggeration, not supported by the actual research.

Months ago, I was careful to say that hurricane intensity can't be linked to climate change, and that a quick look at the IPCC guidance note on uncertainty indicates that this statement is essentially the weakest statement they could make without being utterly silent. (See table 4.) In fact, I later corrected another poster who was under the impression that a clear correlation between hurricanes and climate change was in the data.

If the IPCC report had used any other qualifier from table 4, you might have a more convincing point. Furthermore, another paper in Science says "Results show that the increasing trend in number of category 4 and 5 hurricanes for the period 1970-2004 is directly linked to the trend in SST [sea surface temperature]." Dr. Landsea is a legitimate scientist, but he's not the only one studying hurricanes, and I fail to see how his claims automatically rule out those of other scientists-- especially when they're making such an weak claim given the observed trends.

And, yes, those "natural forcings" include variations in solar output, which can be measured by satellites at L1 so there's no need to search for weak correlations in sunspot data.

Please be specific. "Solar output" can mean many things.

I was quoting Meehl 2004 in that sentence, which itself quotes Meehl 2003 to show that variations in solar luminosity affect the climate. Of course, Meehl 2004 shows that this effect isn't responsible for the warming in the latter half od the century, which is shown to be due to anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

Previously, you cited luminosity data when I had clearly stated that the correlation was with period length, not luminosity.

That's because, as you now seem to agree, other correlations have been disproven by later research. I was just trying to steer you back towards the only correlation that's well-established in the peer-reviewed literature.

But the main problem with this sort of approach is that some kind of mechanism other than variations in luminosity would be needed to support your thesis. For example, in this post you claim "The sunspot activity tends to blow away the solar winds, allowing more radiation to get through to Earth's surface."

This is indeed a claim made in a real journal. But it's far more controversial than you're implying. The maximum impact of this mechanism has been estimated to be responsible for no more than 23% of the 11-year cyclical variation of cloud cover. Furthermore, there's no long term trend in Svensmark's data, which would be necessary to explain the long-term warming trend that's been observed. For more information, see chapter 7.10 of

"that at least some climate activity isn't and can't be affected by humans"

Been reading Andrew Bolt's fact free opinion columns have we? Nobody who has read the IPCC reports could possibly belive that scientists dispute the existance of natural variations but plenty of politically motivated, anti-science trolls have claimed EVERYTHING can be explained by natural variation. Not the least amoung these lying hypocrites is the coal industry's pet senator Barnaby Joyce.

Here is what the BOM says about our climate and the permenant drought.

The fact that Melbourne's dams are at their lowest level ever (for how many winter's in a row now?), or the fact that most of our major cities are on severe water rationing and scrambling to build giant de-sal plants, or the fact that our grain harvest has been cut in half for all but 2 of the last 10 yrs, may not bother you, but it certainly bothers farmers and most Aussies with more than a single brain cell.

"that at least some climate activity isn't and can't be affected by humans"

Been reading Andrew Bolt's fact free opinion columns have we? Nobody who has read the IPCC reports could possibly belive that scientists dispute the existance of natural variations but plenty of politically motivated, anti-science trolls have claimed EVERYTHING can be explained by natural variation. Not the least amoung these lying hypocrites is the coal industry's pet senator Barnaby Joyce.

Here is what the BOM says about our climate and the permenant drought.

The fact that Melbourne's dams are at their lowest level ever (for how many winter's in a row now?), or the fact that most of our major cities are on severe water rationing and scrambling to build giant de-sal plants, or the fact that our grain harvest has been cut in half for all but 2 of the last 10 yrs, may not bother you, but it certainly bothers farmers and most Aussies with more than a single brain cell.

That makes it clearer, thanks. I'll download the charge controller data for the next 12 months and come up with a figure of my own. Hopefully I'll be able to extract some historical weather data from http://www.bom.gov.au/ and use that refine my own observations. It'll be interesting to see what my equivalent "average full-sun hours-per-panel output" will be?

"Fires like this are normal."

This is incorrect, fire is normal but this one was not (regardless of the death and destruction). There is a metric called the Fire Danger Index that is used to issue warnings and declare total fire ban days, it is calibrated on the 1939 fires having an index of 100, IIRC the ash wednesday fires that I also witnessed had an index of 70-120. The abnormal conditions for this fire saw the index in the unheard of range of 150-200.

Heres one good reason.

We just let the weather do the defending.

Being an American in Australia, I was blown away to see that the highest resolution radar available for sydney is this:

http://mirror.bom.gov.au/products/IDR033.loop.shtml

At that resolution, the best way to see if you're going to get rain is pretty much to look out the window. A new radar tower is supposedly in the works, I hope they hurry up!

>>Let's all take a break from our computers now and step outside for some fresh air.

can't. cold outside.
http://www.bom.gov.au/products/IDQ10095.shtml

(degrees C not F)

your link went to a directory, where I found a pdf from a newer and more accurate sea level monitoring station at Tuvalu,
http://www.bom.gov.au/fwo/IDO60033/IDO60033.2004.p df Which puts the trend at +5.9mm/yr since 2003.

Zonk always has problems with factual matters pertaining to AGW.

Climate triva from down under:

Here in Australia we lost ~65% of our grain crop this year (we are the world's 4th largest producer), we have had some decent rain in the past couple of months but el-nino (that is known to bring rain to SW Aus) looks like it's starting to fizzle and our dams are still at rock bottom from what appears to be a "permenant" drought.

Recent Australian experience (last decade or so) has shown a 20% drop in rainfall over a catchment area reduces stream run-off into the dam by ~60%. Sure we have a harsh climate anyway, "a land of drought and flooding rains" as the poem know to every Aussie schoolkid goes, but we simply have not had enough flooding rain in the right areas for over a decade, with a long term trend streching back 50yrs.

In the 80's & 90's Tasmania built a large hydro-electric scheme and an undersea cable (Bass Link) in the expectation of selling cheap electricity to the mainland states. The 10-15yr old drought means the dams don't have enough water to turn the turbines and Tasmania has had to use the cable to import electricity from the mainland.

The drought has serverly effected our breadbasket and seen the Murry-Darling river system dry up to such an extent it stopped flowing alltogether and even after the rains it is still little more that a series of stagnant ponds.

Australia's average rainfall has remain reasonably stable over the last 50yrs or so because the shifting rainfall patterns over the same period have made for a much wetter NW, but it will be millenia before the NW desert has been flodded often enough to enable arable land and fertile valleys to form.

We had exceptionally persistent bushfires that arrived two months earlier than a normal fire season. It saw Melbourne in a blanket of smoke for most of December. On at least three occasions we had Antartic blasts that interrupt the heatwaves and dumped snow on the fires. Unfortunately the cold snaps were too brief to quell the fires for more than a few days and the associated unseasonal frost killed off much of this years fruit and vinyard crop.

I grew up in the 60's, as young kids we spent hours at a time under the garden hose/sprinkler during the summer. Over the last few years garden sprinklers have dissapeared from stores, people are installing water tanks everywhere to catch roof water. All of our major cities are experincing water rationing that makes it illeagal to wash your car or water your garden from the tap. It's also an offence to let your kids play under the garden hose on a hot day.

The Australian political tables turned against our government's anti-science propoganda last year, I belive the US is next (and last) in line. The bottom line of horror for politicians is refugees on a scale that upsets the way the world has been carved up into 3-400 nation states whose citizens do not have a right of "freedom of movement" between said states.

Zonk always has problems with factual matters pertaining to AGW.

Climate triva from down under:

Here in Australia we lost ~65% of our grain crop this year (we are the world's 4th largest producer), we have had some decent rain in the past couple of months but el-nino (that is known to bring rain to SW Aus) looks like it's starting to fizzle and our dams are still at rock bottom from what appears to be a "permenant" drought.

Recent Australian experience (last decade or so) has shown a 20% drop in rainfall over a catchment area reduces stream run-off into the dam by ~60%. Sure we have a harsh climate anyway, "a land of drought and flooding rains" as the poem know to every Aussie schoolkid goes, but we simply have not had enough flooding rain in the right areas for over a decade, with a long term trend streching back 50yrs.

In the 80's & 90's Tasmania built a large hydro-electric scheme and an undersea cable (Bass Link) in the expectation of selling cheap electricity to the mainland states. The 10-15yr old drought means the dams don't have enough water to turn the turbines and Tasmania has had to use the cable to import electricity from the mainland.

The drought has serverly effected our breadbasket and seen the Murry-Darling river system dry up to such an extent it stopped flowing alltogether and even after the rains it is still little more that a series of stagnant ponds.

Australia's average rainfall has remain reasonably stable over the last 50yrs or so because the shifting rainfall patterns over the same period have made for a much wetter NW, but it will be millenia before the NW desert has been flodded often enough to enable arable land and fertile valleys to form.

We had exceptionally persistent bushfires that arrived two months earlier than a normal fire season. It saw Melbourne in a blanket of smoke for most of December. On at least three occasions we had Antartic blasts that interrupt the heatwaves and dumped snow on the fires. Unfortunately the cold snaps were too brief to quell the fires for more than a few days and the associated unseasonal frost killed off much of this years fruit and vinyard crop.

I grew up in the 60's, as young kids we spent hours at a time under the garden hose/sprinkler during the summer. Over the last few years garden sprinklers have dissapeared from stores, people are installing water tanks everywhere to catch roof water. All of our major cities are experincing water rationing that makes it illeagal to wash your car or water your garden from the tap. It's also an offence to let your kids play under the garden hose on a hot day.

The Australian political tables turned against our government's anti-science propoganda last year, I belive the US is next (and last) in line. The bottom line of horror for politicians is refugees on a scale that upsets the way the world has been carved up into 3-400 nation states whose citizens do not have a right of "freedom of movement" between said states.

People essentially just sit down and tweak the models until they get the results they expect, then use them to generate best case and worst case analysis. That folks, is hardly science.

Here in New Zealand, we have just had a very cool summer, following on from a very cool winter. Where's some of that global warming stuff?

People essentially just sit down and tweak the models until they get the results they expect, then use them to generate best case and worst case analysis. That folks, is hardly science.

Here in New Zealand, we have just had a very cool summer, following on from a very cool winter. Where's some of that global warming stuff?

"He did point out that AccuWeather is the only one who provides forecasts > 10 days in advance"

He must have missed Australian seasonal outlooks.

"But, climate change is still subject to legitimate scientific debate"

Agreed, and "higher resolution" observations and models are essential to that debate!

"we still don't really understand either the extent to which it's happening or its causes."

This is what is understood, it is 5-6yrs out of date and will be updated this year, anecdotely it appears that the 2001 IPCC underestimated the extent and rate of change in many areas but we will have to wait and see. The margin of error for cause and effect is "beyond doubt" in much the same way as germ theory is "beyond doubt".

"(1) the existence of germs is much better proven than humans causing significant climate change"

I call bullshit, re: link above.

"(2) the surgeon's error may cause somebody to die, but the weatherman's is harmless (except, perhaps, to somebody else's agenda)."

And raise you another bullshit, this year Australia's grain crop was down 62% (~17M tons), we are the world's 3rd largest producer. Frost and snow in the middle of a record heat wave killed of our fruit crops in much the same way as California's crops were recently damaged by frost after unseasonal warmth.

Yet it is still true nobody can prove any one of the myrid examples across the globe is caused by AGW anymore than a doctor can prove smoking caused a particular lung tumor. But if the recent back to back hurricane seasons in the US is not an example of extreme climate variability I don't know what is? To wait for unobtainable certainty is a dogmatic failure to adapt to our surroundings. A surefire path to extinction unless of course the basic premise of evolution is also "just a theory".

"Number one, I call bullshit on the "declining harvest" allegation.

Here is some data in the form of maps, on Australia's agricultural problems and their connection to shifting weather patterns. Here are the rainfall and temprature outlooks from monthly weather predictions for the same periods, judge for yourself how well they match. For the EU and US, I don't have the links bookmarked and haven't investigated in as much depth, I suggest you look for yourself, NOAA and the Britsh MET office are good places to start, CSIRO for more on Australia. 2006 was a bad year for agriculture world wide and 2007 is shaping up to be worse (not to say that some reginos did not benifit but they were much smaller than the losses). For something really "alarming" look into the collapse of fisheries, particularly in the Atlantic.

As can be seen from the archives in my link, Australia is getting wetter in the NW, and drier in the SE (a recently expotential trend that started in the 50's), but over the entire continent the average rainfall is fairly stable (which BTW, is a good match for what climate models predict). While the NW may "one day" be arable land, at the moment it's mainly desert and mangroves. OTOH: The Murry-Darling basin that covers much of the SE is our "breadbasket", this year the river stopped and more topsoil than normal blew away. As just one example of the crop damage, this year our grain harvest is down 62%. That equates to roughly 17M tons lost from the world's 3rd largest producer.

"Number two, global warming would open up vast new tracts of land in Siberia and Canada to farming. Look at any globe."

This demonstrates my point about westeners and their understanding of where a hamburger comes from. What do you suggest we eat while we wait for the mud to dry into arable land? The "real" problem is over population: AGW, peak oil, the sixth great extinction are mearly symptoms, why aggravate the symptoms and hasten our own extinction?

Prove it.

This is not the kind of thing that can be resolved by a slashdot post, you need to either STFU or spend time and look for yourself, politicians will tell you everything is either fine, or can be easily fixed if you vote them into power. Since a "one stop shops" for these kind of statistics dosen't exist outside of expensive think tank reports, all I can do is steer you to available evidence. As evidence I suggest you look at historical supply/demand ratios in the international grain, livestock, seafood and fruit markets, particularly the historical stocks/use ratio's as seen in the second graph in this disscussion on wheat, that ratio in particular is a measure of how long before the cupboard is empty of that particular comodity and there won't be anymore if we decided to eat our seed crop. (I chose wheat since it is often used as grain feed for livestock in overcrowded or winter padocks) Philosophically I can't "prove" anything about the "real world" and neither can you, in the interest of my own spare time (and because it's how science works), before I go digging for more sources I would like to see some contra evidence.

While on the subject of proof, I suggest you look at the philosophy of skeptisim and think of climate, fisheries and agriculture predictions/observations as the biosphere's medical diagnosis/symptoms, nobody can claim certainty but I reckon smokers are only fooling themselves.

"Number one, I call bullshit on the "declining harvest" allegation.

Here is some data in the form of maps, on Australia's agricultural problems and their connection to shifting weather patterns. Here are the rainfall and temprature outlooks from monthly weather predictions for the same periods, judge for yourself how well they match. For the EU and US, I don't have the links bookmarked and haven't investigated in as much depth, I suggest you look for yourself, NOAA and the Britsh MET office are good places to start, CSIRO for more on Australia. 2006 was a bad year for agriculture world wide and 2007 is shaping up to be worse (not to say that some reginos did not benifit but they were much smaller than the losses). For something really "alarming" look into the collapse of fisheries, particularly in the Atlantic.

As can be seen from the archives in my link, Australia is getting wetter in the NW, and drier in the SE (a recently expotential trend that started in the 50's), but over the entire continent the average rainfall is fairly stable (which BTW, is a good match for what climate models predict). While the NW may "one day" be arable land, at the moment it's mainly desert and mangroves. OTOH: The Murry-Darling basin that covers much of the SE is our "breadbasket", this year the river stopped and more topsoil than normal blew away. As just one example of the crop damage, this year our grain harvest is down 62%. That equates to roughly 17M tons lost from the world's 3rd largest producer.

"Number two, global warming would open up vast new tracts of land in Siberia and Canada to farming. Look at any globe."

This demonstrates my point about westeners and their understanding of where a hamburger comes from. What do you suggest we eat while we wait for the mud to dry into arable land? The "real" problem is over population: AGW, peak oil, the sixth great extinction are mearly symptoms, why aggravate the symptoms and hasten our own extinction?

Prove it.

This is not the kind of thing that can be resolved by a slashdot post, you need to either STFU or spend time and look for yourself, politicians will tell you everything is either fine, or can be easily fixed if you vote them into power. Since a "one stop shops" for these kind of statistics dosen't exist outside of expensive think tank reports, all I can do is steer you to available evidence. As evidence I suggest you look at historical supply/demand ratios in the international grain, livestock, seafood and fruit markets, particularly the historical stocks/use ratio's as seen in the second graph in this disscussion on wheat, that ratio in particular is a measure of how long before the cupboard is empty of that particular comodity and there won't be anymore if we decided to eat our seed crop. (I chose wheat since it is often used as grain feed for livestock in overcrowded or winter padocks) Philosophically I can't "prove" anything about the "real world" and neither can you, in the interest of my own spare time (and because it's how science works), before I go digging for more sources I would like to see some contra evidence.

While on the subject of proof, I suggest you look at the philosophy of skeptisim and think of climate, fisheries and agriculture predictions/observations as the biosphere's medical diagnosis/symptoms, nobody can claim certainty but I reckon smokers are only fooling themselves.

"Number one, I call bullshit on the "declining harvest" allegation.

Here is some data in the form of maps, on Australia's agricultural problems and their connection to shifting weather patterns. Here are the rainfall and temprature outlooks from monthly weather predictions for the same periods, judge for yourself how well they match. For the EU and US, I don't have the links bookmarked and haven't investigated in as much depth, I suggest you look for yourself, NOAA and the Britsh MET office are good places to start, CSIRO for more on Australia. 2006 was a bad year for agriculture world wide and 2007 is shaping up to be worse (not to say that some reginos did not benifit but they were much smaller than the losses). For something really "alarming" look into the collapse of fisheries, particularly in the Atlantic.

As can be seen from the archives in my link, Australia is getting wetter in the NW, and drier in the SE (a recently expotential trend that started in the 50's), but over the entire continent the average rainfall is fairly stable (which BTW, is a good match for what climate models predict). While the NW may "one day" be arable land, at the moment it's mainly desert and mangroves. OTOH: The Murry-Darling basin that covers much of the SE is our "breadbasket", this year the river stopped and more topsoil than normal blew away. As just one example of the crop damage, this year our grain harvest is down 62%. That equates to roughly 17M tons lost from the world's 3rd largest producer.

"Number two, global warming would open up vast new tracts of land in Siberia and Canada to farming. Look at any globe."

This demonstrates my point about westeners and their understanding of where a hamburger comes from. What do you suggest we eat while we wait for the mud to dry into arable land? The "real" problem is over population: AGW, peak oil, the sixth great extinction are mearly symptoms, why aggravate the symptoms and hasten our own extinction?

Prove it.

This is not the kind of thing that can be resolved by a slashdot post, you need to either STFU or spend time and look for yourself, politicians will tell you everything is either fine, or can be easily fixed if you vote them into power. Since a "one stop shops" for these kind of statistics dosen't exist outside of expensive think tank reports, all I can do is steer you to available evidence. As evidence I suggest you look at historical supply/demand ratios in the international grain, livestock, seafood and fruit markets, particularly the historical stocks/use ratio's as seen in the second graph in this disscussion on wheat, that ratio in particular is a measure of how long before the cupboard is empty of that particular comodity and there won't be anymore if we decided to eat our seed crop. (I chose wheat since it is often used as grain feed for livestock in overcrowded or winter padocks) Philosophically I can't "prove" anything about the "real world" and neither can you, in the interest of my own spare time (and because it's how science works), before I go digging for more sources I would like to see some contra evidence.

While on the subject of proof, I suggest you look at the philosophy of skeptisim and think of climate, fisheries and agriculture predictions/observations as the biosphere's medical diagnosis/symptoms, nobody can claim certainty but I reckon smokers are only fooling themselves.

"Number one, I call bullshit on the "declining harvest" allegation.

Here is some data in the form of maps, on Australia's agricultural problems and their connection to shifting weather patterns. Here are the rainfall and temprature outlooks from monthly weather predictions for the same periods, judge for yourself how well they match. For the EU and US, I don't have the links bookmarked and haven't investigated in as much depth, I suggest you look for yourself, NOAA and the Britsh MET office are good places to start, CSIRO for more on Australia. 2006 was a bad year for agriculture world wide and 2007 is shaping up to be worse (not to say that some reginos did not benifit but they were much smaller than the losses). For something really "alarming" look into the collapse of fisheries, particularly in the Atlantic.

As can be seen from the archives in my link, Australia is getting wetter in the NW, and drier in the SE (a recently expotential trend that started in the 50's), but over the entire continent the average rainfall is fairly stable (which BTW, is a good match for what climate models predict). While the NW may "one day" be arable land, at the moment it's mainly desert and mangroves. OTOH: The Murry-Darling basin that covers much of the SE is our "breadbasket", this year the river stopped and more topsoil than normal blew away. As just one example of the crop damage, this year our grain harvest is down 62%. That equates to roughly 17M tons lost from the world's 3rd largest producer.

"Number two, global warming would open up vast new tracts of land in Siberia and Canada to farming. Look at any globe."

This demonstrates my point about westeners and their understanding of where a hamburger comes from. What do you suggest we eat while we wait for the mud to dry into arable land? The "real" problem is over population: AGW, peak oil, the sixth great extinction are mearly symptoms, why aggravate the symptoms and hasten our own extinction?

Prove it.

This is not the kind of thing that can be resolved by a slashdot post, you need to either STFU or spend time and look for yourself, politicians will tell you everything is either fine, or can be easily fixed if you vote them into power. Since a "one stop shops" for these kind of statistics dosen't exist outside of expensive think tank reports, all I can do is steer you to available evidence. As evidence I suggest you look at historical supply/demand ratios in the international grain, livestock, seafood and fruit markets, particularly the historical stocks/use ratio's as seen in the second graph in this disscussion on wheat, that ratio in particular is a measure of how long before the cupboard is empty of that particular comodity and there won't be anymore if we decided to eat our seed crop. (I chose wheat since it is often used as grain feed for livestock in overcrowded or winter padocks) Philosophically I can't "prove" anything about the "real world" and neither can you, in the interest of my own spare time (and because it's how science works), before I go digging for more sources I would like to see some contra evidence.

While on the subject of proof, I suggest you look at the philosophy of skeptisim and think of climate, fisheries and agriculture predictions/observations as the biosphere's medical diagnosis/symptoms, nobody can claim certainty but I reckon smokers are only fooling themselves.

"This is definitely the mildest summer I can remember."

We have had a few Antartic blasts, I had my first "white christmas" because there was an inch or so of hail on the ground early in the morning and the ski resorts had a layer of snow. Australia as a whole has had fairly average rainfall throught the drought becase the north has been much wetter than normal, our weather pattern is continuing to shift in the direction predicted by the CSIRO but anecdotally the whole thing seems to have sped up a notch or two over the last couple of years.

I don't for a second doubt what you say about Qld, the sea surface temprature (SST) on the east coast of Qld is 2-4C below the west coast SST. But for hard facts and stats I highly recommend exploring our own weather service. The service has archives going back to 2000 easily accessible via the web, the oldest entry in each archive sumarises the trends of the pre-2000 archives. For tempratue and rainfall maps look here you can also navigate to archived predictions (outlooks) and climate statements via the menu directly above the table. There is literally tons of this kind of thing availble on the site.

As an example, these maps show neither of us is "bullshiting". What they say is that NE & SE coast has seen colder than average minimum tempratures but only the tropics and the east coast have seen cooler maximums, other than those cold spots the rest of the country has been warmer at both ends. This is closely following the trend that the CSIRO has predicted, but observations support the notion that the prdictions are in fact somewhat conservative. On a brighter note the next three months have a 60-65% chance of being wet ones in the SE due to the building El Nino.

Incedently the current El Nino event is predicted to make 2007 the warmest year on record yet again, it is also said to be largely responsible for the "missing" US hurricanes. If the last two US hurricane seasons is not a demonstration of "extremes", I am not sure what is?

Disclaimer: I'm 47 and have closely followed the weather and the climate debate since I was a deck hand in Bass straight in the early 80's. If you have been in Bass straight in a 20m fishing trawler on a "choppy" day you will understand why I became interested in weather and climate prediction. Many people would label me with the currently trendy "alarmist" slur, as if somehow the prospect of rapidly changing weather patterns effecting our food & water supply is not "alarming".

/rant

"This is definitely the mildest summer I can remember."

We have had a few Antartic blasts, I had my first "white christmas" because there was an inch or so of hail on the ground early in the morning and the ski resorts had a layer of snow. Australia as a whole has had fairly average rainfall throught the drought becase the north has been much wetter than normal, our weather pattern is continuing to shift in the direction predicted by the CSIRO but anecdotally the whole thing seems to have sped up a notch or two over the last couple of years.

I don't for a second doubt what you say about Qld, the sea surface temprature (SST) on the east coast of Qld is 2-4C below the west coast SST. But for hard facts and stats I highly recommend exploring our own weather service. The service has archives going back to 2000 easily accessible via the web, the oldest entry in each archive sumarises the trends of the pre-2000 archives. For tempratue and rainfall maps look here you can also navigate to archived predictions (outlooks) and climate statements via the menu directly above the table. There is literally tons of this kind of thing availble on the site.

As an example, these maps show neither of us is "bullshiting". What they say is that NE & SE coast has seen colder than average minimum tempratures but only the tropics and the east coast have seen cooler maximums, other than those cold spots the rest of the country has been warmer at both ends. This is closely following the trend that the CSIRO has predicted, but observations support the notion that the prdictions are in fact somewhat conservative. On a brighter note the next three months have a 60-65% chance of being wet ones in the SE due to the building El Nino.

Incedently the current El Nino event is predicted to make 2007 the warmest year on record yet again, it is also said to be largely responsible for the "missing" US hurricanes. If the last two US hurricane seasons is not a demonstration of "extremes", I am not sure what is?

Disclaimer: I'm 47 and have closely followed the weather and the climate debate since I was a deck hand in Bass straight in the early 80's. If you have been in Bass straight in a 20m fishing trawler on a "choppy" day you will understand why I became interested in weather and climate prediction. Many people would label me with the currently trendy "alarmist" slur, as if somehow the prospect of rapidly changing weather patterns effecting our food & water supply is not "alarming".

/rant

"This is definitely the mildest summer I can remember."

We have had a few Antartic blasts, I had my first "white christmas" because there was an inch or so of hail on the ground early in the morning and the ski resorts had a layer of snow. Australia as a whole has had fairly average rainfall throught the drought becase the north has been much wetter than normal, our weather pattern is continuing to shift in the direction predicted by the CSIRO but anecdotally the whole thing seems to have sped up a notch or two over the last couple of years.

I don't for a second doubt what you say about Qld, the sea surface temprature (SST) on the east coast of Qld is 2-4C below the west coast SST. But for hard facts and stats I highly recommend exploring our own weather service. The service has archives going back to 2000 easily accessible via the web, the oldest entry in each archive sumarises the trends of the pre-2000 archives. For tempratue and rainfall maps look here you can also navigate to archived predictions (outlooks) and climate statements via the menu directly above the table. There is literally tons of this kind of thing availble on the site.

As an example, these maps show neither of us is "bullshiting". What they say is that NE & SE coast has seen colder than average minimum tempratures but only the tropics and the east coast have seen cooler maximums, other than those cold spots the rest of the country has been warmer at both ends. This is closely following the trend that the CSIRO has predicted, but observations support the notion that the prdictions are in fact somewhat conservative. On a brighter note the next three months have a 60-65% chance of being wet ones in the SE due to the building El Nino.

Incedently the current El Nino event is predicted to make 2007 the warmest year on record yet again, it is also said to be largely responsible for the "missing" US hurricanes. If the last two US hurricane seasons is not a demonstration of "extremes", I am not sure what is?

Disclaimer: I'm 47 and have closely followed the weather and the climate debate since I was a deck hand in Bass straight in the early 80's. If you have been in Bass straight in a 20m fishing trawler on a "choppy" day you will understand why I became interested in weather and climate prediction. Many people would label me with the currently trendy "alarmist" slur, as if somehow the prospect of rapidly changing weather patterns effecting our food & water supply is not "alarming".

/rant

"This is definitely the mildest summer I can remember."

We have had a few Antartic blasts, I had my first "white christmas" because there was an inch or so of hail on the ground early in the morning and the ski resorts had a layer of snow. Australia as a whole has had fairly average rainfall throught the drought becase the north has been much wetter than normal, our weather pattern is continuing to shift in the direction predicted by the CSIRO but anecdotally the whole thing seems to have sped up a notch or two over the last couple of years.

I don't for a second doubt what you say about Qld, the sea surface temprature (SST) on the east coast of Qld is 2-4C below the west coast SST. But for hard facts and stats I highly recommend exploring our own weather service. The service has archives going back to 2000 easily accessible via the web, the oldest entry in each archive sumarises the trends of the pre-2000 archives. For tempratue and rainfall maps look here you can also navigate to archived predictions (outlooks) and climate statements via the menu directly above the table. There is literally tons of this kind of thing availble on the site.

As an example, these maps show neither of us is "bullshiting". What they say is that NE & SE coast has seen colder than average minimum tempratures but only the tropics and the east coast have seen cooler maximums, other than those cold spots the rest of the country has been warmer at both ends. This is closely following the trend that the CSIRO has predicted, but observations support the notion that the prdictions are in fact somewhat conservative. On a brighter note the next three months have a 60-65% chance of being wet ones in the SE due to the building El Nino.

Incedently the current El Nino event is predicted to make 2007 the warmest year on record yet again, it is also said to be largely responsible for the "missing" US hurricanes. If the last two US hurricane seasons is not a demonstration of "extremes", I am not sure what is?

Disclaimer: I'm 47 and have closely followed the weather and the climate debate since I was a deck hand in Bass straight in the early 80's. If you have been in Bass straight in a 20m fishing trawler on a "choppy" day you will understand why I became interested in weather and climate prediction. Many people would label me with the currently trendy "alarmist" slur, as if somehow the prospect of rapidly changing weather patterns effecting our food & water supply is not "alarming".

/rant

"Why would there suddenly be an increase in volcanic activity in the last 50 years?"

Apparently melting glaciers have caused a slight increase in sismic activity. Some oddballs think increased sismic activity equates to increased vulcanisim and "disproves" AGW or at least absolves human's of any blame. Kinda like some poeple still insist on perverting science to support a literal interpretation of "The" bible, only they pervert science to support their version of "The" economy.

"The increase in CO2 over the last century would cause an increase in water temperature as well..."

Indeed it has and will continue to do so for another half century even if we stopped all emmissions today, the accompaning "thermal expansion" from the wamer water is a large part of the predicted sea level rises. However the lag between atmosphere warming and ocean warming (that incidently demonstrates cause/effect) means that we are only just now seeing the full effect of the CO2 released in the 50's. Even worse than wet feet is that as the ocean dissolves more CO2 it becomes acidic creating a hostile environment for things on the bottom of the food chain, like phytoplankton and coral. Coral reefs in particular are the "cannaries" of the ocean and 30% of them are now dead.

Mankind (including this little black duck), lacks the enlightenment to eliminate poverty and look after the garden with or without a religion although I suspect we have the ability to do so. The industrial revolution has become Frankenstien's monster turning on it's master first with sophisticated weapons and three-eyed fish, and finally a increasingly likely global famine. Yet I as much as any other would still like a technological fix so my showers can last more than three minutes (where I live the cities are on permenent and increasingly severe water rations). Preferably I would like to see it achived by getting economists "onboard" to suggest ways of "steering" the global economy in the "green" and "human rights" direction (eg: The Stern report) rather than the false greenie vs capitalist dichotomy that has been shoved down our throats since the 70's and has done nothing but squander time. /rant

While I generally agree bad land/water management has compounded the problem, and acknowledge storms stubbornly track around the catchments instead of over them, I would not want to mow down the Tassie forests to plant cash crops. OTOH: I wholeheartedly agree we need solid data to adapt. The article in the Australian is not bad but it downplays the severity as can bee seen by looking at the BOM's drought statement archives. The most interesting ones are the latest one and the one for the 2000 downpour you mention. As an aside this years grain crop forecast was cut in half (12M tons lost) around july-august, since then the drought has got worse.

The 1:1000 (or sometimes 1:500) figure I quoted was arrived at using the same techniques as insurance actuaries use for weather related events.

Sorry to answer twice, here is a sattelite picture of the downpour.

This could be really useful in the UK, we are getting frightening low on water during the summer months

The UK? Yeah, very serious drought there every summer...

They have nice weather in Australia right. http://www.bom.gov.au/products/IDE00902.loop.shtml
Oh still not too different then FL. Excuse me while I check Monster.com, G'Day

In 1975, just after cyclone Tracy obliterated Darwin in 1974 the Australian BOM decided to use a mix of male and female names for cyclones.

I think this naming convention was just a slightly sexist joke on the part of the people who do the naming. In this day and age I think it would be best if these weather systems were just given numbers. It is not like people are going to forget they are there, after all./p.

We have no hurricanes, this is true. No hurricane has ever even come close to the Australian mainland, not one.

We do, however, have cyclones, which are these large, spiral-shaped storms with high winds and... you've heard of them? Bloody hell.

They should also include the water vapour in their climate models and this is something else they have not done. They include the 5th most abundant gas at 370 ppm (CO2) and ignore the 3rd most abundant gas which is at an average in excess of 10,000 ppm (H2O). Nevertheles it is true that H2O is quite variable and ranges from close to zero to over 70,000 PPM mostly dependant on temperature and available liquid water. Nevertheless the H2O in the atmosphere is responsible for the planet being about 30 degrees warmer than it would be if it were not present. And it is NOT is the climate models used by the IPCC.

The importance of water vapour feedback was clearly demonstrated in early radiative convective model climate change experiments. For example, in the late 1960s Manabe and Wetherald (1967) showed that under assumptions of fixed relative humidity in models, water vapour changes roughly doubled the 1C warming caused by a doubling of CO2 alone. Indeed, so important is the water vapour feedback, that it is generally appreciated that without this feedback climate change would be relatively small for all credible emission scenarios.

Why are you so quick to denounce researchers investigating global warming? Why would they not have paleoclimatologists among their numbers?

I know I am being sucked in to answer to a troll, but what the heck, I'm on my lunch break.
I'm an Australian, and remember the tragedy you are refering to very well. What is confusing me is your reference to "Privatizing" the BOM, your cost estimates, and the number of boats that needed rescue! For those interested, you can read about it http://www.bom.gov.au/inside/services_policy/marin e/sydney_hobart/execsum.htmlhere.
First I hear of your information. Not even googling for this has not yielded anything.
What you don't seem to understand (or know) is that we have what is called Statutory Government Bodies in Australia. These are government agencies, publicly funded and operate for the public benefit, but are allowed to generate income through some means. The BOM is effectively one of them. They provide raw data (see http://www.bom.gov.au) and they also provide more detailed information to subscribers.
Anyway, back to your original example, although I don't agree that there should be a limit to the "raw" information provided by public weather services, Private Weather Forcasters might have been more assertive in their advice to the race organisers if only to protect their reputation and keep their profits.

For your information, here's the solar radiation chart for Australia: Here

Be warned though that the units are Mj.m^-1, so you need to divide the reading by the number of seconds in the day to get a reading of mean w.m^-1. There seems to be a lot of data missing right now, but you should get the idea ;).

• Melbourne International Airport
• Mentone (roughly on the coast of Port Phillip Bay, halfway to the peninsula.)
• Moorabbin Airport (about 5-10 km north of Mentone, a bit further inland)
• Kew (northern suburbs, about 15 km north-east-ish of the CBD)
• Essendon Airport (northern suburbs, about 10 km north of the CBD)
• Dandenong (south eastern suburbs, roughly 30-40 km south east of the CBD)
• Bundoora (north-eastern suburbs, about 20 km north-east of the CBD)

As a rough guide, our winters (in Melbourne) are similar to Canada's autumn (eg: Toronto, Vancouver) heat-wise; humidity is usually not a major problem. Wind chill can be a concern, but it's not a major one.

• Melbourne International Airport
• Mentone (roughly on the coast of Port Phillip Bay, halfway to the peninsula.)
• Moorabbin Airport (about 5-10 km north of Mentone, a bit further inland)
• Kew (northern suburbs, about 15 km north-east-ish of the CBD)
• Essendon Airport (northern suburbs, about 10 km north of the CBD)
• Dandenong (south eastern suburbs, roughly 30-40 km south east of the CBD)
• Bundoora (north-eastern suburbs, about 20 km north-east of the CBD)

As a rough guide, our winters (in Melbourne) are similar to Canada's autumn (eg: Toronto, Vancouver) heat-wise; humidity is usually not a major problem. Wind chill can be a concern, but it's not a major one.

• Melbourne International Airport
• Mentone (roughly on the coast of Port Phillip Bay, halfway to the peninsula.)
• Moorabbin Airport (about 5-10 km north of Mentone, a bit further inland)
• Kew (northern suburbs, about 15 km north-east-ish of the CBD)
• Essendon Airport (northern suburbs, about 10 km north of the CBD)
• Dandenong (south eastern suburbs, roughly 30-40 km south east of the CBD)
• Bundoora (north-eastern suburbs, about 20 km north-east of the CBD)

As a rough guide, our winters (in Melbourne) are similar to Canada's autumn (eg: Toronto, Vancouver) heat-wise; humidity is usually not a major problem. Wind chill can be a concern, but it's not a major one.

• Melbourne International Airport
• Mentone (roughly on the coast of Port Phillip Bay, halfway to the peninsula.)
• Moorabbin Airport (about 5-10 km north of Mentone, a bit further inland)
• Kew (northern suburbs, about 15 km north-east-ish of the CBD)
• Essendon Airport (northern suburbs, about 10 km north of the CBD)
• Dandenong (south eastern suburbs, roughly 30-40 km south east of the CBD)
• Bundoora (north-eastern suburbs, about 20 km north-east of the CBD)

As a rough guide, our winters (in Melbourne) are similar to Canada's autumn (eg: Toronto, Vancouver) heat-wise; humidity is usually not a major problem. Wind chill can be a concern, but it's not a major one.

• Melbourne International Airport
• Mentone (roughly on the coast of Port Phillip Bay, halfway to the peninsula.)
• Moorabbin Airport (about 5-10 km north of Mentone, a bit further inland)
• Kew (northern suburbs, about 15 km north-east-ish of the CBD)
• Essendon Airport (northern suburbs, about 10 km north of the CBD)
• Dandenong (south eastern suburbs, roughly 30-40 km south east of the CBD)
• Bundoora (north-eastern suburbs, about 20 km north-east of the CBD)

As a rough guide, our winters (in Melbourne) are similar to Canada's autumn (eg: Toronto, Vancouver) heat-wise; humidity is usually not a major problem. Wind chill can be a concern, but it's not a major one.

• Melbourne International Airport
• Mentone (roughly on the coast of Port Phillip Bay, halfway to the peninsula.)
• Moorabbin Airport (about 5-10 km north of Mentone, a bit further inland)
• Kew (northern suburbs, about 15 km north-east-ish of the CBD)
• Essendon Airport (northern suburbs, about 10 km north of the CBD)
• Dandenong (south eastern suburbs, roughly 30-40 km south east of the CBD)
• Bundoora (north-eastern suburbs, about 20 km north-east of the CBD)

As a rough guide, our winters (in Melbourne) are similar to Canada's autumn (eg: Toronto, Vancouver) heat-wise; humidity is usually not a major problem. Wind chill can be a concern, but it's not a major one.

• Melbourne International Airport
• Mentone (roughly on the coast of Port Phillip Bay, halfway to the peninsula.)
• Moorabbin Airport (about 5-10 km north of Mentone, a bit further inland)
• Kew (northern suburbs, about 15 km north-east-ish of the CBD)
• Essendon Airport (northern suburbs, about 10 km north of the CBD)
• Dandenong (south eastern suburbs, roughly 30-40 km south east of the CBD)
• Bundoora (north-eastern suburbs, about 20 km north-east of the CBD)

As a rough guide, our winters (in Melbourne) are similar to Canada's autumn (eg: Toronto, Vancouver) heat-wise; humidity is usually not a major problem. Wind chill can be a concern, but it's not a major one.

Go to http://www.bom.gov.au/reguser/by_prod/aviation/ and follow the instructions. Now I can't really read it, but I'd say you're after the Area Forecasts. They have information like:

WINDS CLOCKWISE 35 KNOTS WITHIN 60NM OF LOW BELOW 5000

I hate to kill your +4 "insightful" post, but we here in Australia have an excellent free government weather service, Bureau Of Meterology.

It has more info than you can poke a stick at and ohh look on the FRONT PAGE it even has a link to "Marine Weather"

Dead boaters hmmm?

Idiot.

I hate to kill your +4 "insightful" post, but we here in Australia have an excellent free government weather service, Bureau Of Meterology.

It has more info than you can poke a stick at and ohh look on the FRONT PAGE it even has a link to "Marine Weather"

Dead boaters hmmm?

Idiot.

You don't get aviation weather unless you are properly signed up and they have an account to charge to. And its not cheap either. You would think for the amount they charge, they would get it right a bit more often.

BOM subscriptions

Australia does this. The result is lots of dead pilots and boaters every year because they didn't pay the money to get the services they need. The result is that other people end up paying far more for everything since the gov't is being too cheap.

Perhaps they just didn't bother to read the weather report. Much of the data is provide free (see the BOM) and updated regularly.

Correct, but again, to dismiss clear evidence that we are experiencing the most rapid rise in global temperatures *and* CO2 levels ever seen is stupid. Furthermore, while i havn't verified your statement that US temperatures have remained stable, that certainly isnt the case for Australia where it is quite frankly hot enough already, on top of our worrying decrease in annual rainfall...

Wow. this is awesome! Yet another reason why Firefox rocks.

Now I wonder if we can use the local Australian weather site to get this information... Hmmm