Andrew Bolt of the Herald Sun digs up another issue with non peer reviewed World Wildlife Fund reports in the IPCC AR4. It turns out a new paper in GRL handily disputes the cause of the drought.
He writes:
Melbourne University alarmist David Karoly once claimed a rise in the Murray Darling Basin’s temperatures was “likely due to the increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere from human acitivity” and:
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd grabbed the scare and exploited it:
BRENDAN Nelson was yesterday accused of being “blissfully immune” to the effects of climate change after he said the crisis in the Murray-Darling Basin was not linked to global warming…
In parliament yesterday, Kevin Rudd attacked Dr Nelson, accusing him of ignoring scientific facts.
“You need to get with the science on this,” the Prime Minister said. “Look at the technical report put together by the CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology.”
But the latest evidence shows that Rudd and Karoly were wrong. In fact, there’s no evidence in the Murray Darling drought of man-made warming, says a new study in Geophysical Research Letters, this new study:
Previous studies of the recent drought in the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB) have noted that low rainfall totals have been accompanied by anomalously high air temperatures. Subsequent studies have interpreted an identified trend in the residual timeseries of non-rainfall related temperature variability as a signal of anthropogenic change, further speculating that increased air temperature has exacerbated the drought through increasing evapotranspiration rates. In this study, we explore an alternative explanation of the recent increases in air temperature. This study demonstrates that significant misunderstanding of known processes of land surface – atmosphere interactions has led to the incorrect attribution of the causes of the anomalous temperatures, as well as significant misunderstanding of their impact on evaporation within the Murray-Darling Basin…
However, to accept the correlation [between temperature and rainfall] as the sole basis for the attribution of cause to human emissions is to implicitly assume that the correlation represents an entirely correct model of the sole driver of maximum air temperature. This is clearly not the case.
What’s causing the evaporation and temperatures is not (man-made) warming. It’s kind of the other way around: more sunshine, through lack of cloud cover, and lack of rain and therefore evaporation is causing higher temperatures.
And guess which scandal-ridden and alarmist IPCC report relied on Karoly’s claims? Reader Baa Humbug:
Karoly was cited very extensively in the AR4 WG1 paper.e.g. Chapter 9 9.4.2.3 Studies Based on Indices of Temperature Change and Temperature-Precipitation Relationships.”Studies based on indices of temperature change support the robust detection of human influence on continental-scale land areas. Observed trends in indices of North American continental scale temperature change, (including the regional mean, the mean land-ocean temperature contrast and the annual cycle) were found by Karoly et al. (2003) to be generally consistent with simulated trends under historical forcing from greenhouse gases and sulphate aerosols during the second half of the 20th century. In contrast, they find only a small likelihood of agreement with trends driven by natural forcing only during this period.
In fact check BOM rainfal data- there’s no long term decrease in rainfall in Murray-Darling- in fact it’s slightly wetter than 110 years ago!
Liar, liar.
Can anyone find anything, just something that may be even close to the truth in the IPCC reports !
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/timeseries.cgi?graph=rain&area=mdb&season=0112&ave_yr=T
In truth the trend of rainfall in the Murray Draling Basin over 110 years up…according to the BOM that is.
But then thats using real live data measurements rather than models tricked up by Karoly and Krew
At first I thought that the problem with the CO2=CAGW hypothesis was that all the studies were based on the fraudulent temperature numbers from GISS, HADCRU and GHCN, However it is becoming clearer and clearer that these studies don’t have to rely on those fraudulent databases since each scientific study relies on “in house” fraud.
twawki
“Can anyone find anything, just something that may be even close to the truth in the IPCC reports !”
IF the reports have a date of issue, the date could be OK ???
how many wheels are left on this AR4 wagon left. every day something new is wrong. I am waiting for everything to be discounted but the word Lie. And even then they would say its still a valid report.
Ro-busted again.
Not sure if the Australian “sure wild camels emit GHG’s but only killing domesticated animals counts as a reduction so we won’t cull them” story has been posted.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/feral-camels-clear-in-penny-wongs-carbon-count/story-e6frg6nf-1225827641354
“But the latest evidence that Rudd and Karoly were wrong.”
You should insert a “shows” there.
Reply: done. ~ ctm
“Queenslander! (00:20:36) :
In fact check BOM rainfal data- there’s no long term decrease in rainfall in Murray-Darling- in fact it’s slightly wetter than 110 years ago!
Liar, liar.”
It is interesting isn’t it that 110 years, or even as little as 50 years, ago there weren’t ~50,000 farmers drawing water along the basin. But who controls water rights? Why State Govn’t of course.
“generally consistent with simulated trends”. No science done here. Just use the models which show no natural forcing. GIGO.
The real truth is that the RUDD government has BET huge amounts of Australians money, assets on the CARBON CREDIT FRAUD, if he can’t find a hole in nature to PROVE AGW then he will invent one!. When he fails and the BIG BET is called in we will calling Australia , 我们性交.
This is a new paper, so we need time to elapse to see whether critical scrutiny reveals any shortcomings. This is true in general of all papers disapproved of by Global Warmmongers but not, of course, of any paper that meets with their warm approval, since all such papers are, necessarily, science-settling.
For our non-Aussie readers, Dr Nelson is the former opposition leader in Oz politics.
The gist of the paper (Natalie Lockart et al 2009) is that a 2degC increase in temps caused evapotranspiration of 0.076mm per day but increased sunshine hours (SSH) (average extra 1.5hrs per day) caused 0.32mm evapotranspiration per day. here is an extract from the paper.
5. Relative Influence of Temperature and SSH
on Actual Evapotranspiration
[21] The relative roles of air temperature and SSH on
evapotranspiration rates can be approximated through simple
calculations. The 2002 drought had an extra 1.5 hours of
bright sunshine per day than the 1952–2008 average. Using
the PBL model under wet land surface conditions and forced
with typical sunny conditions, the average actual evapotranspiration
was simulated. On average, an extra 1.5 hours of
bright sunshine, instead of the alternative cloudy conditions,
provides approximately 0.32mm of additional evapotranspiration.
In contrast, an increase in air temperature of 2degC
causes only an additional 0.076 mm of evapotranspiration
over the entire day.
[22] It is therefore apparent that the increased occurrence
of direct solar insolation by 1.5 hours per day is more hydrologically
significant than the additional evapotranspiration
loss given an increase in temperature of 2degC. It is therefore
clear that increased air temperatures play a relatively minor
role in driving evapotranspiration.
Turnbull is crossing the floor tomorrow but I think Rudd might wish he didn’t and just let this TAX fade away. If Rudd goes to the electorate with an ETS he will struggle. The tide of opinion has turned against an ETS in Australia.
Interesting that you mention David Karoly, he is the reason I started to look deeper into the science behind AGW. After I saw him on a pseudo debate after the great global warming swindle on the ABC in Australia a few years ago I thought he conducted himself in a terrible way. In comparison Bob Carter came across as a genuine scientist who made clear and concise points arguing against AGW.
So thanks Mr Karoly you made me see the holes in the AGW science through your clearly agenda driven, biased, ranting and immature attitude.
Indeed, the pattern for rainfall over the whole of Australia shows the last decade as the second wettest since 1900.
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii14/sherro_2008/Rainfallto2010.jpg?t=1265620723
Sure, there are pockets of drought somewhere most years and some can be quite heartbreaking. But to blame them on global warming …..?
That was a wonderful catch-all, to say that global warming will cause an increased incidence of severe events. Unfortunately, the GCM resolution/projection is not good enough for the scale mentioned above.
The good Prof David would have a brain able to occupy a week long conference on psychiatry, to use the “Fawlty Towers” comment. It’s quite spooky to see the missionary zeal in his eyes when he gets the fever. Another one of these youngsters, a child of flower power, who grew up tooo fast for the real science.
The Express seems to have taken the view that man-made global warming is a fraud. Meanwhile, on the political front, the global warming machine keeps running, with British MPs calling on the Government to consider a carbon tax of £100+ a ton to “force down greenhouse gases”.
This is from today’s paper:
GLOBAL WARMING TO BECOME GLOBAL COOLING, CLAIMS EXPERT
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/156811/Global-warming-to-become-global-cooling-claims-expert
February 8, 2010
[Extract]
Citing predictions by climatologists in the 1970s of a new Ice Age, economics Professor Beenstock from The Hebrew University of Jerusalem said: “I predict that climatologists will look equally foolish in the years to come. Indeed, it may be already happening.”
Professor Michael Beenstock said theories of climate change are wrong. He warned climatologists have misused statistics, leading them to the mistaken conclusion global warming is evidence of the greenhouse effect. He told London’s Cass Business School that the link between rising greenhouse gas emissions and rising temperatures is “spurious”, adding: “The greenhouse effect is an illusion.”
The professor said that just because greenhouse gases and temperatures have risen together does not mean they are linked. He claims that the real cause of rising temperatures is the sun, which he says is at its hottest for over 1,000 years but is “beginning to stabilise”. Professor Beenstock said: “If the sun’s heat continues to remain stable, and if carbon emissions continue to grow with the rate of growth of the world economy, global temperatures will fall by about 0.5ºC by 2050.”
Meanwhile, Professor Phil Jones from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit – the expert at the centre of the Climategate scandal – said he had considered suicide and had death threats over leaked emails which appeared to show scientists rigging the data. Prof Jones, 57, has stood down during a probe and accepts he should have worded some of his emails differently. But he added: “I stand 100 per cent behind the science. I did not manipulate or fabricate any data.”
I’m surprised that no-one challenged the alarmist CO2 warming claims based on history. Many major drought in the Murray Darling Basin area of New South Wales are common long man-made CO2 started to rise significantly.
1789-91 Drought in New South Wales (NSW).
1798-99 Drought in NSW that produced severe crop failures.
1803 Drought in NSW that produced severe crop failures.
1809 Beginning of an unusually severe drought in NSW that continued until 1811.
1813-15 Severe drought in NSW that prompted searches for new pastures.
1826-29 Severe drought in NSW – Lake George and Darling River dried up.
1850 Severe drought, with big losses of livestock across inland NSW.
1864 – 66 (and 1868) – severe drought NSW.
1888 New South Wales had the driest year since records began.
This has to be the last straw for the credibility of the IPCC and Rudd et al.
Sea Levels will truly rise due to the tears of the true believers when they realise that they have been conned by the IPCC and their elected representatives.
twawki, as has been pointed out, the page numbering seems accurate…
Funny how all these things are suddenly coming to light now! I’m sure people knew about these but were sitting on them. I wish “we” had had a clearinghouse of errors that “we” could have pointed people to summarizing all of this before.
Climategate: the gift that keeps on giving. There aren’t many more wheels left to fall off of that wagon…
Tossing in “robust” certainly adds authenticity.
But in Western Australia, it’s worse than we thought.
http://www.watoday.com.au/environment/climate-change/wa-drought-could-be-worst-for-750-years-20100205-niee.html
What caused the great drought at the beginning of th 20th century, then?
There wasn’t ‘man-made global warming’ then, was there??
If there is anything Aussie science should know about it’s drought.
The Murray Darling Basin has water issues because of water licenses, not drought.
A lot of people would leave the MDB and farm in the tropics if we opened them, with good water, but Kevin thicky Rudd thicky wont allow pastoral or intense ag development.
Look up the federation drought, if people need to see what a big drought is.
IN the areas I once worked, instead of bleating they developed first minimum till and then zero till to lock moisture into clay soils. It does not work that well on sandy loan country.
People have learnt in drought years to lock mositure profiles in from the heavy storm rains, might not get much of a winter crop but a bit of luck in commodity price and a reasonable year is made..
For a so called country boy Kevin Rudd talks out his arse hat.
It matters not…. the criminal MSM media here in Australia is covering for PM Rudd. Instead, the news media here is printing stories how PM Rudd is telling Australians that the conservative opposition’s climate policy is “fiscally reckless”.
There is no mention of this in the MSM media. Nor will there be. Criminals work together.