Article

2007-05-24 Africa Subsaharan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2007-05-24 00:00|| || Front Page|| [4 views ] Top

#1 Global warming in action.

Posted by Woozle Elmeter2970 2007-05-24 00:33|| 2007-05-24 00:33|| Front Page Top

#2 Um, isn't it winter in the southern hemisphere?

Posted by exJAG 2007-05-24 01:47|| 2007-05-24 01:47|| Front Page Top

#3 exJAG, yes, it's winter in Southern hemisphere.
However, one pesky detail escaped your attention and your sharp mind's eye:
34 new records were set on Monday and another 20 yesterday. Almost all records were for the lowest maximum and minimum daily temperatures in towns across the country.

Posted by twobyfour 2007-05-24 03:23|| 2007-05-24 03:23|| Front Page Top

#4 Okay, I think we se here a chain of misinterpretation.

#1 An obvious sacrasm.
#2 A snark targeting #1, after non-identification as sarcasm
3# A snark targetting #2, same misidentification as in #2.

Posted by twobyfour 2007-05-24 03:31|| 2007-05-24 03:31|| Front Page Top

#5 One thing about the Southern Hemisphere is our weather is much less variable and unpredictable than the Northern Hemisphere.

I can look at the Indian and Southern Ocean chart and get a pretty good idea what the weather will be like here in Perth 7 to 10 days ahead. It takes about 10 days for a weather system to get from SA to here. If we get record cold or even snow (never happened before) here in Perth I'll let you all know.

Posted by phil_b 2007-05-24 06:40|| 2007-05-24 06:40|| Front Page Top

#6 I really cringe when these articles get posted on the 'burg.

What is the purpose of posting articles on an otherwise interesting WOT site about the sodding weather? (The double shame and irony here being that the reproach is from an Englishman...)

Climate scientists claim predicted EXACTLY this type of behaviour, btw.

Please at least can you decide on a semi coherent position (in reverse order of preference, as far as I am concerned)

1) T'aint happnin, maw.

2) Its happening, but it's the sun / moon / Jupiter / earth wobble's fault. A favourite amongst the more rationally inclined Rantburgers. Not one that I, or the majority of the scientific community happen to share, but it is a free society we live in, after all and you are all entitled to your opinions. Please just dont claim them as incontravertable truths.

3) Its happening, but being exaggerated by leftist hippies / elitists who have a vested interest in west bashing and or obtaining grants to study Amazonian Eco-forestry, rather than working in an office like normal people.

4) It may well (or may not) be happening, it may well (or may not) be serious. However, it is a great opportunity to boycott Arab oil, support our Nuclear industry / hydrogen economy and start up a potentially massive eco-economic bubble, with sequestration plant construction leading to massive availability of CO2 which can be used to grow more foodstuffs / fuel in greenhouses (again - less petro consumption) and also used to extract adsorbed gas in old coalseams / oilwells / clathrate deposits, for massive subsidies, under the banner of "sequestration". We can also claim loads of carbon credits for millions of other things we have been doing for ages anyway.

Posted by Admiral Allan Ackbar 2007-05-24 10:15|| 2007-05-24 10:15|| Front Page Top

#7 Eh, I think the weather is a fair topic of conversation in any social gathering. Also our Enemies seem to be gathering under two banners - the black banner of Islam and the green banner of Gaia. It's entirely reasonable to examine both.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2007-05-24 10:34|| 2007-05-24 10:34|| Front Page Top

#8 Eh, I think the weather is a fair topic of conversation in any social gathering. Also our Enemies seem to be gathering under two banners - the black banner of Islam and the green banner of Gaia. It's entirely reasonable to examine both.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2007-05-24 10:34|| 2007-05-24 10:34|| Front Page Top

#9 But Sea - I agree entirely. Every civilised debate should begin with a brief discussion of the weather. However, as usual, you lot over the pond seem to require some instruction in the correct ettiquette. "Bit chilly today?" or "Getting colder, isnt it" generally suffices.

Jumping on reports of cold weather as proof of the moral fortitude of being the biggest CO2 emmiters in the world is considered a faux pas in certain circles.

Global warming is happening. CO2 atmospheric concentrations are increasing. If you want to attribute that to solar variance, based on what is happening in some other part of the solar system, I am happy for you. However, denial of these facts on the basis of a cold snap causes me to cringe with shame at being a regular reader of this site.

Posted by Admiral Allan Ackbar 2007-05-24 11:47|| 2007-05-24 11:47|| Front Page Top

#10 Guess the CO2 explains why at some glaciers in Alaska have been melting for at least a thousand years.

As recently as 1750 a single glacier thousands of feet thick filled what is now a 65-mile long fjord. But with the invention of the SUV in the 1700s things changed... A video 2006 tour here

Posted by Icerigger 2007-05-24 11:58|| 2007-05-24 11:58|| Front Page Top

#11 Mr. Ackbar agrees we can debate the topic, but thinks that its wrong to use record low temperatures as contrary evidence.

Tough.

Posted by DoDo 2007-05-24 12:13|| 2007-05-24 12:13|| Front Page Top

#12 My problem is the classic fallacy of arguing from the particular to the general. Glaciers have always retreated AND advanced. What we have seen in recent years is an increase in the overall number / amount retreating.

Are you really saying that the IPCC data are completely wrong? Or that these two small events (glacier / SA winter) disprove their findings of overall temperature increase?

Posted by Admiral Allan Ackbar 2007-05-24 12:38|| 2007-05-24 12:38|| Front Page Top

#13 It's happening Admiral and I don't give a damn.

Posted by Shipman 2007-05-24 12:45|| 2007-05-24 12:45|| Front Page Top

#14 DoDo - Mr Ackbar says you are entitled to your opinion. Mr Ackbar also said the theories and predictions stemming from the observed facts are up for debate. He absolutely did not suggest any intention to debate facts.

If you wish to debate scientifically observable facts, you will find some like minded people over in the other S.A. (magic kingdom) where a certain book tells them that the sun sets in a muddy puddle.

Posted by Admiral Allan Ackbar 2007-05-24 12:46|| 2007-05-24 12:46|| Front Page Top

#15 Shipman - lol
Thats the kind of position I can expect and respect from the 'burg. Logically coherent, but no warm and fuzzy afterglow...

Posted by Admiral Allan Ackbar 2007-05-24 12:51|| 2007-05-24 12:51|| Front Page Top

#16 Not one that I, or the majority of the scientific community happen to share...

Are you a scientist? I am. And frankly I'm none too sure that the "majority of the scientific community" is convinced that global warming is anthropogenic. For one thing, with so little actual data, predictions of warming disaster are based on computer models. And I've run enough computer models in my day to view them warily (although they're fine for getting that paper published!).

And yet, shamefully, many scientists are lending their backing to a subject they know nothing about. A couple years ago, our professional society issued a policy statement on global warming. The thing is, the vast majority of our members have no business opining on global warming, because they're incompetent to judge the scientific validity of the data and models. We're not climatologists, and -- with a few exceptions -- our areas of expertise are quite remote (ahem) from that subject.

Unfortunately, people who don't feel competent to judge tend to keep their mouths shut, but those with an agenda -- though equally incompetent -- will speak right up. The result is scientific consensus (and no, these are not dirty words) by decibels.

Furthermore, I can (just) remember the time when we were slipping into a new Ice Age, though I don't remember there being a manmade component to that one.

But the reason this comes up on Rantburg so often is that many of the people who promote anthropogenic global warming do so less out of a concern for the environment than out of a hatred of modern (which is to say, Western) civilization. The enemies of Western civilization, whoever they are, are within Rantburg's purview.

Climate scientists claim predicted EXACTLY this type of behaviour, btw.

You have a cite handy, right? One that notes that winters in southern Africa specifically will become more severe? Here's one that says otherwise. The IPCC states that southern Africa will become drier, though it doesn't specifically mention winters. This one does, though.

What was that EXACTLY thing again?

Posted by Angie Schultz 2007-05-24 12:52|| 2007-05-24 12:52|| Front Page Top

#17 However, as usual, you lot over the pond seem to require some instruction in the correct ettiquette.

That, my dear Admiral Ackbar, is a classic example of Euro-snob rudeness. Not to mention a complete lack of appreciation for a culture different than your own. A pity -- I'd thought so well of you up till now. I can only hope it was a momentary aberration.

Oh, and while I am not a scientist myself, I grew up in a household of academic researchers, married another (although subsequently Mr. Wife turned to the dark side -- business), and my brother the perfesser has been involved on the computer side of weather prediction modelling. Dear Dr. Angie Schultz is spot on, I'm afraid. A pity you don't regularly read the newspapers on this side of the pond, too -- there've been easily half a dozen articles in my local rag in the past month about big name scientists, formerly outspoken advocates of the Global Warming Theory, who've changed their minds based on the data they themselves generated while attempting to determine the actual range and scope of global warming. Outlying points, even setting new records at an extreme, do not determine trend lines statistically speaking, nor even mark a significant change in variability. That was one of the things I learnt during my several few years developing new products for manufacture.

Posted by trailing wife 2007-05-24 13:22|| 2007-05-24 13:22|| Front Page Top

#18 A.S. - I am a scientologist, does that count?
I got my datas from "The day after tomorrow".

Actually, you have got me bang to rights on that one, I was thinking of the thermohaline whatnot & the gulf stream which we are told is going to go north & plunge Europe into an irreversable ice age, not SA., so my sincere apologies are offered.

Furthermore, I agree entirely that there is a great degree of alarmism around the subject (something that rantburgers could never be accused of ;-) and that many of the "scientists" are probably gender studies professors.

What I am talking about is overall warming of the planet. It is happening.

Posted by Admiral Allan Ackbar 2007-05-24 13:29|| 2007-05-24 13:29|| Front Page Top

#19 A.S. - I am a scientologist, does that count?

Sadly, no. (I was so disappointed when I discovered that.)

...I was thinking of the thermohaline whatnot...

Right, which only applies to Europe. Though the other day there was an article which threw skepticism on the idea that the predicted melt would be enough to disrupt the current. Can't remember where I saw it now.

I'll point out that, in the summer, any little local heat wave or hurricane infestation is often heralded in the press as global warming, come at last! And it is with this in mind that Rantburgers post counter-examples.

Posted by Angie Schultz 2007-05-24 14:05|| 2007-05-24 14:05|| Front Page Top

#20 I believe it's getting warmer, overall. I think Mars is, too. I read that the human contribution is either significant or trivial.

I think there is cause for concern. I do not think there is cause for alarm.

Ms.Wife - I recall now why I inquired about your status once - you one sharp cookie! Although I think Ms. Schultz has been keeping a low profile.... Lotta sharp cookies around here; I learn a little bit every day!

Posted by Bobby 2007-05-24 14:42|| 2007-05-24 14:42|| Front Page Top

#21 Admiral: the mods include these articles for the reasons noted by Seafarious: the green-left-progressive-anarchist-commies intend to use 'climate change' as a way to force the rest of us to bow to their will. We need to be aware of that, and we need to know the facts.

There's another reason, the same reason why we comment on Paris Hilton, etc -- this is what the MSM focuses on instead of the WoT. It's useful for us to know that and to see where their priorities are.

Posted by Steve White">Steve White 2007-05-24 16:36|| 2007-05-24 16:36|| Front Page Top

#22 Justice, I'm sure everybody here supports the retarded and would like to accomodate them, even the psychotic Muslim retarded, but there's a time and a place.
And, ss hard as it is, lay off banging the farm animals. I hear it only makes it worse...

Posted by tu3031 2007-05-24 16:55|| 2007-05-24 16:55|| Front Page Top

23:49 ryuge
22:56 Pearl Gretch4271
22:53 DMFD
22:49 Joe Dyton
22:40 WTF
22:10 RD
22:10 Glenmore
21:46 bruce
21:46 PlanetDan
21:17 Mike Kozlowski
21:15 Skunky Glins5285
21:15 Zenster
21:12 Pappy
21:09 Old Patriot
21:04 DMFD
21:03 Anguper Hupomosing9418
21:02 Natural Law
20:44 OldSpook
20:34 OldSpook
20:33 Shieldwolf
20:23 Deacon Blues
20:03 Barbara Skolaut
20:01 remoteman
19:55 Dar