Total fire ban across NSW and many other states – where I live in historical ‘rainforest region’ it’s driest “spring” I can ever recall with trees plants dying etc. despite heavy rains floods down south australia areas in late winter early spring many places are tinder dry – yet again.
(3) Copies and pastes large blocks of text to exhaust the readers of a topic thread, thus driving away legitimate posters of sincere comments. These blocks of text are often recycled and appeared on a variety of threads.”
(7) Keeps an argument going a lot longer than a normal person would, to the point where people will start asking a moderator to turn off comments or block the troll. However, sometimes trolls will do this just because they can’t tolerate contrary opinions and are angry at seeing them posted to a thread they enjoyed reading. The mark of a troll is to keep hammering away at a point in an obsessive manner.”
Thomas @245,
Your ‘playing field change’ (which I would call simply AGW) moves at a certain rate. You might find the recently published Zhou et al (2016) (Abstract) of interest. It suggests a “decadal cloud feedback” is in operation in the ENSO region since the 1980s impacting the rate of your ‘playing field change.’ Carbonbrief have a post on the paper.
Steve Fishsays
Thomas has outdone himself with six consecutive rambling posts totaling more than two thousand words (no I don’t count words. I have a computer!). I read them and didn’t learn anything new about science, but I did learn a lot about Thomas. Steve
second day in a row with increase number over 4 ppm. Very noisy number, so can’t make too much of it, but if this keeps up, we will see the weekly averages creep up as well. All this in a time period in which I am watching and waiting to see a reduction in the increase due to the waning of the El Nino.
Daily CO2
November 4, 2016: 403.76 ppm
November 4, 2015: 399.21 ppm
increase of 4.55 ppm
read’m and weep, friends
Mike
Nemesissays
@Chuck Hughes, #234
No, no, please don’t take the content of my comment as pointed to you personally! It’s not that I was disapointed by your comments specifically, it’s just that I am frustrated with the discussion about climate change and it’s politicisation, like in the US election right now, in general. I consider the scientific exploration and discussion of climate change as highly important and educational, I’ve learned a lot from it. But imagine this:
Someone is lying on the floor and others strangling and maltreating the one on the floor. Now a doctor comes to the scene, examining the one being strangled, saying: ” A well, pulse is getting faster, eyes pop out of the head, I can hear some ruckling ect ect ect…” The one lying on the floor and being mistreated, is the global eco-system and those, who are strangling, are economy and politics. So, the doctor (resp. climate science) plays the role of a sheer scientific OBSERVER, but not really as an actor, like economy and politics are real actors. All the doctor can do, is observing and taking data, until the patient is dead, the doctor got almost no influence towards the perpetrators. That’s a real dilemma, isn’t it? Science can obviously only observe the desaster, but got almost no influence on the causes. That’s the reason, why I am so frustrated.
About “America saved the world in WWII”:
Did you know, the US economy did great business (oil business ect ect) with the german nazis almost during the entire WWII? And, btw:
In 1938 (5 years! after Hitler’s takeover), Time Magazine had Adolf Hitler on the front cover, in 1939 it was Josef Stalin.
One thing absolutely for sure:
If real Honesty and Compassion gets lost along the way of human history, we will all be lost as a species rather sooner than later. The “elite” of economy and politics will learn that soon, the hard way, if they like it or not. No one can win against reality and the Laws of Nature. I like that, because the Laws of Nature are my final premise.
Thomassays
Very good summary for the ‘lay person’ about the causes and responses to the warming that caused this years GBR bleaching event, and what the future may be like across all coral reefs globally.
11 October 2016 By ABC TV Catalyst science program
“This summer, large parts of the Great Barrier Reef saw the hottest sea temperatures and the most severe coral bleaching ever recorded – so before the next impact hits, scientists are racing against time to understand the demise of reefs and the prospects for their recovery. Catalyst explores the lethal threat of bleaching to the Great Barrier Reef, and the challenges we all face to protect this global treasure.” http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/4553792.htm
with extended interviews of scientists for the more science savvy.
RSS has posted for October at +0.350ºC which is a sizable drop on recent months, down from +0.576ºC in September. (This drop is not evident in UAH TLTv6.0beta.) This is the 5th warmest October on record and the 60th warmest monthly anomaly on record.
The first 8 months of 2016 average +0.624ºC. For RSS TLT to have 2016 as warmest calendar year (currently that is still 1998 averaging +0.550ºC), the remainder of 2016 would have to average above +0.09ºC, an average for the last 2 months of a year which was easily exceeded over the last 4 autumns.
It should be noted that five months of 2015 had an anomaly below +0.350ºC so this drop is perhaps a return to pre-El Nino levels.
A comparison of recent RSS TLT anomalies with the 1997/98 El Nino years:-
……….1997/99 … 2015/16
Dec … +0.302ºC … +0.545ºC
Jan … +0.550ºC … +0.665ºC
Feb … +0.736ºC … +0.978ºC
Mar … +0.585ºC … +0.842ºC
Apr … +0.857ºC … +0.756ºC
May … +0.667ºC … +0.524ºC
Jun .… +0.567ºC … +0.467ºC
Jul ….. +0.605ºC … +0.469ºC
Aug … +0.572ºC… +0.458ºC
Sep … +0.494ºC… +0.576ºC
Oct … +0.461ºC… +0.350ºC
Nov … +0.195ºC
Dec … +0.311ºC
Jan … +0.181ºC
Feb … +0.317ºC
Mar … -0.013ºC
Apr … +0.182ºC
May … +0.112ºC
Jun … -0.083ºC
Terrible numbers. I am still waiting the see the flat monthly average comparison year on year that should happen as the recent EN event ends, but no sign of it yet.
Warm regards all
Mike
Thomassays
254 MA Rodger, thanks again for the info.
On CB, Sherwood said “The real significance of these results is that they make it much more likely that estimates of climate sensitivity based on historical warming have been biased low compared to reality.”
Ouch!
The ‘clouds’ also had a positive effect on the 2016 GBR bleaching event. See Catalyst program with AIMS scientists re the massive Fiji Cyclone moved to QLD as a rain depression for weeks at the critical time (by pure luck, happenstance). If not for that then 100% of the GBR would have been impacted by severe bleaching and coral death.
MA Rodger, a question re CO2, ppm data in 2016/el nino, and the oceans.
What is the basic science re ocean CO2 uptake/release and ocean temp fluctuations? eg does relatively higher ocean temps reduce the ability of ocean water to absorb CO2 … does it work similar to how cooler oceans absorb more O2 and can hold less O2 content when ocean temps rise.
If so, is this part of the reason why CO2ppm spike during el nino events? I’m not sure which is why I ask (every question). Thanks.
Thomassays
253 Chuck Hughes.
244 response to Barton Paul Levenson disinformation while ignoring accuracy and context.
245 reply to MA Rodger’s excellent contribution seeking clarification and appreciative dialogue/thanks.
246 response to Nemesis’ heartfelt comment.
247 general comment / opinion on the ‘state of play’ re elections & AGW/CC science action.
248 highlighting statements actions by Mike Mann and Jim Hansen (reknowned climate scientists) vs others with refs
249 climate science denial vs positive political realities around the world.
re point 3) that’s FALSE
re point 7) that’s also FALSE
I don’t argue. Feel free to Fact Check my comments and the Refs., including credible studies, academic research, and science based sources all you wish. I like to be corrected when I have something wrong.
Feel free to post something different and/or BETTER or more interesting.
Thomassays
255 Steve Fish.
Hi Steve, cherry-picking and building straw men is what climate science deniers do. There’s no good reason for a PhD scientist to go there as well.
If motivated enough you could tear that to pieces and submit a guest post to RC about it. Or share such insightful analysis with any number of pro-science websites and blogs around the world. Or even email a Letter to the Editor of every major newspaper in Australia pointing out how unscientific and ludicrous this new material is and the people who wrote it.
If you’re sincere about learning something new about science then you could attend this lecture via youtube and learn something useful about humanity and it’s default mode and barriers to understanding climate science and it’s dangers today, and subsequent political inaction and the potential solutions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuUnMCq-ARQ
This issues presented in that lecture impact and affect both climate scientists as much as they do Arkansas hillbillies.
Unless and until climate scientists, environmental/political activists understand and can practice this knowledge – where climate science and mitigation options are viewed in the same light neurologically and psychologically as the ‘restaurant’ is viewed in this example, then they will continue to fail to SELL their communication of the facts and the truth to politicians and the people with any degree of sustained success.
That is cutting edge science speaking, not me.
And be aware there is a huge gulf between understanding the ‘facts & knowledge’ of which the expert lecturer speaks about and being able to recognize it occurring in your own life and in your own communications in the moment [eg here on RC or at Uni] … and hopefully in time being able to consciously apply it to a successful conclusion – the whole world understands the critical importance of climate change and the environment above all other issues humanity and individuals face.
In the meantime mythical political beliefs, religious beliefs, nationalism and emotional BS & Lies will continue to rule the world.
The choice is yours to either learn something knew from this scientific knowledge and apply it in your individual life and work or ignore it.
Doing the latter is what climate science deniers do about the reality of AGW/CC today. Why? The short answer is because of their ‘thinking’ which is 98% unconscious driven by frames, metaphor and beliefs.
The complex answer is is about neural darwinism, neural firing, embodiment (if the mind wasn’t embodied via neurons with the physical body then no one could think), gates, modulation, conceptual frames, metaphor, morality, and more such as ‘idealized family models’ where we all get our start in life and how that intersects with one’s ideological political beliefs, ethics and morality.
Knowing and having a certain skill level about such things also explains why the whole range of personal reactions and interactions occur on blog sites like they do. And of course during election time when people are having their deeply held life-long metaphorical buttons being pushed 24/7.
Feel free to do your own research – google scholar is as good as anywhere to start https://goo.gl/uNSafZ (if interested that is)
Thomassays
Citizens’ Climate Lobby live October 2016 Meeting with Dr. George Lakoff
Linguistics expert George Lakoff, author of “Don’t Think of an Elephant,” “The Political Mind,” and many more books examining the power of language, is our guest for the October national call.
He’ll share his recent work on the distinction between direct causation and systemic causation, which is the FRAME through which climate change can be better comprehended.
Lakoff is recently retired from the University of California at Berkeley, where he was Professor of Cognitive Science and Linguistics. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8DU2Hjz1Zk
Worth noting that the Paris Climate Agreement enters into force today.
MISC snippets
Observed Arctic sea-ice loss directly follows anthropogenic CO2 emission Dirk Notz1,*, Julienne Stroeve2,3
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2016/11/02/science.aag2345
Arctic Sea Ice Growth Slows to a Crawl
https://weather.com/en-GB/unitedkingdom/weather/news/arctic-ice-climate-change
Center-Right NSW State Govt new draft 2050 net zero carbon emission targets
“With NSW now joining Victoria, South Australia and the ACT, over half of national emissions are now covered by governments targeting net zero emissions by 2050.”
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/nsw-sets-netzero-carbon-emissions-goal-by-2050-as-australian-pollution-climbs-20161102-gsg7v4.html
Fire season kicks off with a bang early again (late spring) – Oz Does a Canada?
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/emergency-services-battle-fires-across-sydney-20161105-gsiqg0.html
Sydney weather: Sunniest spell in spring for 36 years as mercury climbs
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/sydney-weather-sunniest-spell-in-spring-for-36-years-as-mercury-climbs-20161104-gsi6ir.html
Australia experiencing more extreme fire weather, hotter days as climate changes
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/australia-experiencing-more-extreme-fire-weather-hotter-days-as-climate-changes-20161025-gsao24.html
Total fire ban across NSW and many other states – where I live in historical ‘rainforest region’ it’s driest “spring” I can ever recall with trees plants dying etc. despite heavy rains floods down south australia areas in late winter early spring many places are tinder dry – yet again.
Thomas says: >244 >245 >246 >247 >248 >249
http://pluperfecter.blogspot.com/2011/08/14-characteristics-of-classic-internet.html
(3) Copies and pastes large blocks of text to exhaust the readers of a topic thread, thus driving away legitimate posters of sincere comments. These blocks of text are often recycled and appeared on a variety of threads.”
(7) Keeps an argument going a lot longer than a normal person would, to the point where people will start asking a moderator to turn off comments or block the troll. However, sometimes trolls will do this just because they can’t tolerate contrary opinions and are angry at seeing them posted to a thread they enjoyed reading. The mark of a troll is to keep hammering away at a point in an obsessive manner.”
Thomas @245,
Your ‘playing field change’ (which I would call simply AGW) moves at a certain rate. You might find the recently published Zhou et al (2016) (Abstract) of interest. It suggests a “decadal cloud feedback” is in operation in the ENSO region since the 1980s impacting the rate of your ‘playing field change.’ Carbonbrief have a post on the paper.
Thomas has outdone himself with six consecutive rambling posts totaling more than two thousand words (no I don’t count words. I have a computer!). I read them and didn’t learn anything new about science, but I did learn a lot about Thomas. Steve
second day in a row with increase number over 4 ppm. Very noisy number, so can’t make too much of it, but if this keeps up, we will see the weekly averages creep up as well. All this in a time period in which I am watching and waiting to see a reduction in the increase due to the waning of the El Nino.
Daily CO2
November 4, 2016: 403.76 ppm
November 4, 2015: 399.21 ppm
increase of 4.55 ppm
read’m and weep, friends
Mike
@Chuck Hughes, #234
No, no, please don’t take the content of my comment as pointed to you personally! It’s not that I was disapointed by your comments specifically, it’s just that I am frustrated with the discussion about climate change and it’s politicisation, like in the US election right now, in general. I consider the scientific exploration and discussion of climate change as highly important and educational, I’ve learned a lot from it. But imagine this:
Someone is lying on the floor and others strangling and maltreating the one on the floor. Now a doctor comes to the scene, examining the one being strangled, saying: ” A well, pulse is getting faster, eyes pop out of the head, I can hear some ruckling ect ect ect…” The one lying on the floor and being mistreated, is the global eco-system and those, who are strangling, are economy and politics. So, the doctor (resp. climate science) plays the role of a sheer scientific OBSERVER, but not really as an actor, like economy and politics are real actors. All the doctor can do, is observing and taking data, until the patient is dead, the doctor got almost no influence towards the perpetrators. That’s a real dilemma, isn’t it? Science can obviously only observe the desaster, but got almost no influence on the causes. That’s the reason, why I am so frustrated.
About “America saved the world in WWII”:
Did you know, the US economy did great business (oil business ect ect) with the german nazis almost during the entire WWII? And, btw:
In 1938 (5 years! after Hitler’s takeover), Time Magazine had Adolf Hitler on the front cover, in 1939 it was Josef Stalin.
One thing absolutely for sure:
If real Honesty and Compassion gets lost along the way of human history, we will all be lost as a species rather sooner than later. The “elite” of economy and politics will learn that soon, the hard way, if they like it or not. No one can win against reality and the Laws of Nature. I like that, because the Laws of Nature are my final premise.
Very good summary for the ‘lay person’ about the causes and responses to the warming that caused this years GBR bleaching event, and what the future may be like across all coral reefs globally.
11 October 2016 By ABC TV Catalyst science program
“This summer, large parts of the Great Barrier Reef saw the hottest sea temperatures and the most severe coral bleaching ever recorded – so before the next impact hits, scientists are racing against time to understand the demise of reefs and the prospects for their recovery. Catalyst explores the lethal threat of bleaching to the Great Barrier Reef, and the challenges we all face to protect this global treasure.”
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/4553792.htm
with extended interviews of scientists for the more science savvy.
a related snippet
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-11/coral-belches-algae-as-water-temperature-rises-bleaching/7917754
RSS has posted for October at +0.350ºC which is a sizable drop on recent months, down from +0.576ºC in September. (This drop is not evident in UAH TLTv6.0beta.) This is the 5th warmest October on record and the 60th warmest monthly anomaly on record.
The first 8 months of 2016 average +0.624ºC. For RSS TLT to have 2016 as warmest calendar year (currently that is still 1998 averaging +0.550ºC), the remainder of 2016 would have to average above +0.09ºC, an average for the last 2 months of a year which was easily exceeded over the last 4 autumns.
It should be noted that five months of 2015 had an anomaly below +0.350ºC so this drop is perhaps a return to pre-El Nino levels.
A comparison of recent RSS TLT anomalies with the 1997/98 El Nino years:-
……….1997/99 … 2015/16
Dec … +0.302ºC … +0.545ºC
Jan … +0.550ºC … +0.665ºC
Feb … +0.736ºC … +0.978ºC
Mar … +0.585ºC … +0.842ºC
Apr … +0.857ºC … +0.756ºC
May … +0.667ºC … +0.524ºC
Jun .… +0.567ºC … +0.467ºC
Jul ….. +0.605ºC … +0.469ºC
Aug … +0.572ºC… +0.458ºC
Sep … +0.494ºC… +0.576ºC
Oct … +0.461ºC… +0.350ºC
Nov … +0.195ºC
Dec … +0.311ºC
Jan … +0.181ºC
Feb … +0.317ºC
Mar … -0.013ºC
Apr … +0.182ºC
May … +0.112ºC
Jun … -0.083ºC
after two days of 4ppm increase, here is the most recent week’s numbers:
Last Week
Oct. 30 – Nov. 5, 2016 402.81 ppm
Oct. 30 – Nov. 5, 2015 398.94 ppm
3.87 ppm if I am not mistaken.
Terrible numbers. I am still waiting the see the flat monthly average comparison year on year that should happen as the recent EN event ends, but no sign of it yet.
Warm regards all
Mike
254 MA Rodger, thanks again for the info.
On CB, Sherwood said “The real significance of these results is that they make it much more likely that estimates of climate sensitivity based on historical warming have been biased low compared to reality.”
Ouch!
The ‘clouds’ also had a positive effect on the 2016 GBR bleaching event. See Catalyst program with AIMS scientists re the massive Fiji Cyclone moved to QLD as a rain depression for weeks at the critical time (by pure luck, happenstance). If not for that then 100% of the GBR would have been impacted by severe bleaching and coral death.
MA Rodger, a question re CO2, ppm data in 2016/el nino, and the oceans.
What is the basic science re ocean CO2 uptake/release and ocean temp fluctuations? eg does relatively higher ocean temps reduce the ability of ocean water to absorb CO2 … does it work similar to how cooler oceans absorb more O2 and can hold less O2 content when ocean temps rise.
If so, is this part of the reason why CO2ppm spike during el nino events? I’m not sure which is why I ask (every question). Thanks.
253 Chuck Hughes.
244 response to Barton Paul Levenson disinformation while ignoring accuracy and context.
245 reply to MA Rodger’s excellent contribution seeking clarification and appreciative dialogue/thanks.
246 response to Nemesis’ heartfelt comment.
247 general comment / opinion on the ‘state of play’ re elections & AGW/CC science action.
248 highlighting statements actions by Mike Mann and Jim Hansen (reknowned climate scientists) vs others with refs
249 climate science denial vs positive political realities around the world.
re point 3) that’s FALSE
re point 7) that’s also FALSE
I don’t argue. Feel free to Fact Check my comments and the Refs., including credible studies, academic research, and science based sources all you wish. I like to be corrected when I have something wrong.
Feel free to post something different and/or BETTER or more interesting.
255 Steve Fish.
Hi Steve, cherry-picking and building straw men is what climate science deniers do. There’s no good reason for a PhD scientist to go there as well.
Maybe a better use of your time and scientific talents could be used on this issue here:
https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/09/can-a-blanket-violate-the-second-law-of-thermodynamics/comment-page-5/#comment-662358
If motivated enough you could tear that to pieces and submit a guest post to RC about it. Or share such insightful analysis with any number of pro-science websites and blogs around the world. Or even email a Letter to the Editor of every major newspaper in Australia pointing out how unscientific and ludicrous this new material is and the people who wrote it.
If you’re sincere about learning something new about science then you could attend this lecture via youtube and learn something useful about humanity and it’s default mode and barriers to understanding climate science and it’s dangers today, and subsequent political inaction and the potential solutions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuUnMCq-ARQ
This issues presented in that lecture impact and affect both climate scientists as much as they do Arkansas hillbillies.
255 Steve Fish.
Ok then, one could delve deeper into this scientific knowledge
https://youtu.be/WuUnMCq-ARQ?t=15m44s [view for only 3 minutes]
Unless and until climate scientists, environmental/political activists understand and can practice this knowledge – where climate science and mitigation options are viewed in the same light neurologically and psychologically as the ‘restaurant’ is viewed in this example, then they will continue to fail to SELL their communication of the facts and the truth to politicians and the people with any degree of sustained success.
That is cutting edge science speaking, not me.
And be aware there is a huge gulf between understanding the ‘facts & knowledge’ of which the expert lecturer speaks about and being able to recognize it occurring in your own life and in your own communications in the moment [eg here on RC or at Uni] … and hopefully in time being able to consciously apply it to a successful conclusion – the whole world understands the critical importance of climate change and the environment above all other issues humanity and individuals face.
In the meantime mythical political beliefs, religious beliefs, nationalism and emotional BS & Lies will continue to rule the world.
The choice is yours to either learn something knew from this scientific knowledge and apply it in your individual life and work or ignore it.
Doing the latter is what climate science deniers do about the reality of AGW/CC today. Why? The short answer is because of their ‘thinking’ which is 98% unconscious driven by frames, metaphor and beliefs.
The complex answer is is about neural darwinism, neural firing, embodiment (if the mind wasn’t embodied via neurons with the physical body then no one could think), gates, modulation, conceptual frames, metaphor, morality, and more such as ‘idealized family models’ where we all get our start in life and how that intersects with one’s ideological political beliefs, ethics and morality.
Knowing and having a certain skill level about such things also explains why the whole range of personal reactions and interactions occur on blog sites like they do. And of course during election time when people are having their deeply held life-long metaphorical buttons being pushed 24/7.
Feel free to do your own research – google scholar is as good as anywhere to start https://goo.gl/uNSafZ (if interested that is)
Citizens’ Climate Lobby live October 2016 Meeting with Dr. George Lakoff
Linguistics expert George Lakoff, author of “Don’t Think of an Elephant,” “The Political Mind,” and many more books examining the power of language, is our guest for the October national call.
He’ll share his recent work on the distinction between direct causation and systemic causation, which is the FRAME through which climate change can be better comprehended.
Lakoff is recently retired from the University of California at Berkeley, where he was Professor of Cognitive Science and Linguistics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8DU2Hjz1Zk
What a co-incidence :-)