UAH: global temperature down in August by .181°C, SH sees biggest drop of 0.4°C

We need Mann to “process” the El Nino spike down to 0.2 or so. Everybody knows he can do it because he is a statistical Wizard.

Is this a forewarning of what lies in store for NH winter?
Last year, no sooner did the Arctic Sun set in Alaska than the temp in Fairbanks plunged severely, and stayed down there for a long time.
People in the Yukon take note, and be prepared.
You too, Alaska.

Perhaps El Nino has abated?

I do not believe anybody knows the global temperature to a ten-thousandth of a degree.
I don’t even believe anybody knows it to a full degree, but we might debate that.
Did everybody skip 7th-grade arithmetic?

While it’s nice to have the ‘charted’ data, I’ve got my own yardstick: my power bill about 20% less than last year and I actually was able to open the windows overnight [towards the end of the month].
The hard numbers are welcome though.
PS—The Farmer’s Almanac sez: Bitter Winter for most the US.

Still looks like part of a 60 – 70 year sine wave with lots of noise on it to me!
That’s because it is. And the 60 year sine is noise on the 200 year cycle, which is itself noise on the 2,000 year cycle, which is noise on the 1,000,000 year cycle.
Oh, and it’s the CO2. Yeah. That.

After cruising along the zero anomaly line from 1979 the temperature deviation seems to be ‘reset’ upward to +0.3 by the 1998 El Nino and moves forward without a rise/fall trend.

Update from 10,000′ in the Central Rocky Mountains: Autumn is in full swing. The yellowing of the Aspen leaves commenced a couple of weeks ago, and peak colors should appear in maybe two weeks. We had a cold rainstorm roll through today, and the peaks above 12,000 got snow. This early Autumn comes on the heels of a short, cooler than average summer.

Previous WxMark
“Just wait until Hansen HOMOGENIZES it!”
and evanmjones
“If only he didn’t pasteurize it.”
I thought ‘pasteurize’ was about Al Gore’s sea level prediction?

Hi Anthony, where is James hansen lately? NASA has been using “maundeer minimum” type of cooling recently, plus this drop in August temp anomaly. Is he being eased out by fellow NASA officials? Or he’s on an intimate rendezvouz with Al Gore, in preparation for Copenhagen this December? thanks.

CPT. Charles (20:30:44) : PS—The Farmer’s Almanac sez: Bitter Winter for most the US.
They are usually right.

Based on AGW theory, July temperature spike should have initiate higher evaporation, which would have caused increased GH effect, which should have warmed oceans and led to more CO2 released, which should have caused temperature increase, which should have increased humidity, which should have… but temperature just fell back.

“Frank Mosher (19:26:46) :
Flanagan. What happened?”
Hahaha!! Yes Flanagan where are you? Earlier this year he promised me a super El Nino and we agreed to review temperature data in September 2009…

Oops, typo. On line 1, “scaling between” should read “scaling difference between”.

OT: Kaufmann graphics that speaks for them selves:
http://www.klimadebat.dk/forum/vedhaeftninger/kaufmannf.gif
http://www.klimadebat.dk/forum/vedhaeftninger/kaufmann1.gif
http://www.klimadebat.dk/forum/vedhaeftninger/kaufmannd.gif
Kaufman added a graph with today 0,6K higher than 1940. GISS said that 1940 was at the same level as today:
http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Arctic1880-2004_1.gif
Why this difference? Does it seem objective for Kaufmann to apply the 0,6K-graph?

Sea temperatures where cold this august and september in the SH.

Anyone else caught this? Concessions in a recent report that solar activity and ENSO conditions are major climate drivers. This is nothing new of course and the report still panders to the usual AGW BS. Noteworthy though is the evidence based reference to these and other natural drivers of climate and indeed the website itself posting this report as showing a willingness to be a little more open minded. Worth a look. Follow link here. http://www.spaceweather.com/

Bryn:
http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/ml/ocean/sst/anomaly.html
SH is mostly water, and there’s lots of cold water.

Oh yeah?
We had snow in the mountains outside Kabul into mid August (last year it was all gone in early June). Our temps have already plunged below 32°C almost a month early. In fact we didn’t break 32°C the last week and a half of August. Plus we got treated to two big gully washers last week (very unusual for August). Nights are already around 10°C.
The birds here are already starting their migrations too. The swallows moved out a week ago.
Yep, methinks we too are in for a VERY cold one.
On the plus side, the bad guys go to ground when the weather is bad. Here’s hoping they freeze their nibblets off in their caves!

“Harry Eagar (20:06:48) :
I do not believe anybody knows the global temperature to a ten-thousandth of a degree.
I don’t even believe anybody knows it to a full degree, but we might debate that.”
You are right, of course. But this time the fault lies with WUWT and their chosen title.
Please notice what they call it in the graph, and that the “UAH” at the beginning is almost like a disclaimer.
Part of looking at such numbers is wondering what they means.
(A very similar problem is that the IQ is called IQ)

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadsst2sh/from:1948/to:2010/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1948/to:2010/plot/hadsst2sh/from:1948/to:2010/trend/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1948/to:2010/trend
The hemispheric SST are not out yet , but if the global Southern Hemisphere temperature anomaly is down by 0.4 C, then the Southern Hemisphere SST will also be down the second month in a row . I have found that the Southern Hemisphere SST best correlates with global surface temperature anomaly [hadcrut3] and lead Northern hemisphere SST changes and global surface temperature changes by as much as 5-8 months . This can be clearly seen in the period 2006 to 2008 ,1963-1965 and 1900-1902. These were all periods that led to cooler subsequent global periods
If we see a steady decline in Southern Hemisphere SST, cooler global temperatures could begin to manifest 5-8 months later together with a strong La Nina . My best guess for this is 2010.[perhaps the latter part]

Gene Nemetz (00:35:19) :
CPT. Charles (20:30:44) : PS—The Farmer’s Almanac sez: Bitter Winter for most the US.
“They are usually right”.
Yes, last year Joseph D’Aleo (icecap.us) made their forecast which showed a perfect match with what happened in the real world.
Who did the job this year I don’t know.

Sorry
What natural, and whats not??????????
http://members.shaw.ca/sch25/FOS/HoloceneOptimumTemperature.jpg
What does a “climate change” signal look like??????????

tokyoboy: “Could a sea ice expert teach me please?”
Not necessarily an expert but the DMI graph is based on a 30% sea ice threshold while the other one is based on 15% I believe.

Stephen Wilde (06:10:12) :
“Extra energy from the oceans (often a huge amount) is disposed of in exactly the same way with no tipping point in sight but with air circulation shifts of hundreds of miles latitudinally. There mght be a latitudinal shift of less than a mile from anything that humans could achieve. Wholly insignificant against natural variability.”
Right you are.
The sun sends in a single hour the entire energy budget humans use in an entire year.
From the total CO2 budget human emissions only contribute 3%
That is 3% from 385 parts per million currently present in our atmosphere.
Wholly insignificant against natural variability indeed.

May be OT here,
but lots of birds did leave already,
black elderberries are great this year ,
did harvest them last weekend, about three weeks early,
local temperatures are below last solar minimum here,
– I do overlay daily temps from 1996/1997 with
current daily temperatures (currently compared to 1997),
we’re here currently about 1.2 °C below Aug./early Sep. 1997,
(using 14 days centered moving average).
My early guess-timating for winter 2009/2010, done in May/June
this year was a rather warm one, exception a pretty cold phase
between last week of January 2010 and 2nd week of February 2010.
(I was simply thinking SOI and later ENSO/ONI may point a medium El Nino,
not to a weak one). Now it looks like Dec/Jan/Feb could match and even
be colder than last year. At least my roses and my cameliaes do support my
opinion, up to now.
KlausB

Josh (22:04:05) :
Update from 10,000′ in the Central Rocky Mountains: Autumn is in full swing. The yellowing of the Aspen leaves commenced a couple of weeks ago, and peak colors should appear in maybe two weeks. We had a cold rainstorm roll through today, and the peaks above 12,000 got snow. This early Autumn comes on the heels of a short, cooler than average summer.
Pike’s Peak got snow the other day.
Mark

Pamela Gray (07:51:50)
Thanks Pamela.
Should be quite clear in a couple of years as to whether my theses are broadly correct or not.
The key combination of variable oceanic energy release and a subsequent shift in the air circulation systems seems to be my unique selling point.
No other climate driving force comes close on timescales of less than centuries and on longer timescales solar variability seems perfectly adequate.
The entire AGW proposition depends on increasing CO2, rising air temperatures and an assumed absence of an alternative climate driver. I’ve suggested one and for 18 months now no AGW supporter has been able to discount it.

KlausB (12:27:23)
I thought trees changed their leaf colour primarily in response to a change in light intensity.
Usually cloudy skies reduce light intenslity as well as accompanying cooler temperatures so it isn’t cooler temperatures in themselves that cause the colour change.
Cold and drought damages leaves too but via different processes which do not always involve colour changes over time.
So the question is whether the timing of colour changes in leaves is sensitive to tiny changes in solar radiation separately from such changes induced simply by increased cloudiness or gradual seasonal changes. I’ve no idea but it sounds plausible.

I find it interesting that oak trees around my house are already sprouting nearly full size acorns—seems a month or so too early, and this is in north Florida, where the cooling weather being felt in the north during this summer did not reach (though it seems that we had a fewer number of hot days after June).
So how do oak trees know that they have got to finish their reproductive cycle earlier? Could it be that their leaves are equipped with ultraviolet radiation sensors, and the sensors detected the diminished UV solar output of the current solar cycle (more marked than in the visible spectrum) which in turn triggered hormonal change that is speeding up their winter weather preparation?
A mechanism using a chemical that is sensitive to a prolonged decrease in UV input might be at work acting like a fuse that decides on when to trigger the hormonal change.

Frederick Michael (06:41:15) :
Mark (07:40:33) :
Thank you for your mentorship on my simple question:
tokyoboy (01:27:47) :
Way OT, but I am eager to know about the scaling between a Denmark organization and IRAC/JAXA in graphing the arctic ice extent.
Jetzt alles klar.

It might be worth collating Nature’s early autumn/fall bad winter signals. A few from Europe but most comments here from North America so far, with one from Kabul, Afghanistan.

August Downunder
Australia has just experienced an exceptionally warm August. Almost the entire country experienced above-average temperatures during the month, but the warmth was most extraordinary in the subtropics. Over most of the southern Northern Territory and the southern half of Queensland (away from the coast), maximum temperatures for August were more than 5°C above the long-term average. Maximum temperatures were the highest on record for August over 49% of Australia.
Averaged over Australia as a whole, maximum temperatures were 3.20°C above the long-term August average, and daily mean temperatures (day and night combined) were 2.47°C above average. Both values are the highest on record for August by close to a degree. In terms of how far the month was above normal, the maximum temperatures in August 2009 are also the highest on record for any month, breaking the record of +3.11°C set in April 2005; the daily mean temperatures rank second behind April 2005.
August was marked by some individual days which were exceptionally hot, especially in northern NSW and Queensland. State records were set for August in both states (37.8°C at Mungindi and 38.5°C at Bedourie respectively). Perhaps more exceptional were the margins by which some records were broken, and the number of days on which previous records were exceeded. Collarenebri broke its pre-2009 August record by 5.4°C, and numerous other locations, including Murwillumbah, Moree, Gatton, Miles and Taroom, broke August records by 4°C or more. Such margins are not unheard of at exposed coastal sites – where everything has to go right to achieve an extreme high temperature (not only having a very hot air mass, but having the wind in the right direction to prevent conditions being moderated by sea breezes) – but are virtually unknown at inland locations.
Many locations exceeded pre-2009 August records on five or more days. An especially striking example was Windorah in western Queensland, which prior to 2009 had never reached 35°C in August. In 2009 it happened seven times, and their August record was lifted six times, eventually peaking at 38.0°C on the 29th.
The extremely warm August combined with generally above-average (but not record-breaking) temperatures in June and July to give record or near-record winter temperatures in many areas. Australian daily mean temperatures for winter (1.33°C above average) fell just 0.01°C short of the 1996 record, and maximum temperatures surpassed the record set in 2002. NSW, Victoria and South Australia all had their warmest winters on record, which may come as a surprise to residents of the latter two states, in a season which was distinguished more by an almost complete absence of significant cold than by any major warm extremes.
In terms of weather systems, the month was marked by a persistent high-pressure ridge over the subtropics, preventing cooler air from penetrating from the south into central and northern Australia (until the last two days of the month, by which time it was too late to make much difference). Pressures were also well below normal south of Australia, resulting in very strong and persistent westerlies south of Australia (which made it an extremely wet month in Tasmania). An interesting comparison exists with October 1988, which had very similar pressure patterns, and was also dry over the mainland and very wet in Tasmania. In October 1988 Australian mean temperatures were 2.16°C above average, which was a record at the time (it now ranks fourth). The difference of 0.31°C between the two months is close to the size of the warming trend over Australia in that 21-year period, and suggests that the long-term background warming trend is playing a role in increasing the frequency of high temperature extremes of the type seen in August 2009.
Thanks to BOM

Frank and Alex:
Never did I predict a super el nino, you should go back on what I said. Which was “most models predict the emergence of an el nino”.
On top of that, I don’t care about the monthly temperature anomaly, only about the long trends. I did not pop up predicting the end of the world last month because of a very large positive one, so you won’t hear me on this one either.

Phil. (13:40:47)
So how do you get your suntan, Phil? You might also consider taking some Vitamin D supplement.

Richard (04:41:04)
Read again, slowly:
An interesting comparison exists with October 1988, which had very similar pressure patterns, and was also dry over the mainland and very wet in Tasmania. In October 1988 Australian mean temperatures were 2.16°C above average, which was a record at the time (it now ranks fourth). The difference of 0.31°C between the two months is close to the size of the warming trend over Australia in that 21-year period, and suggests that the long-term background warming trend is playing a role in increasing the frequency of high temperature extremes of the type seen in August 2009.
They are talking about comparisons between 2 months – your take on it is different.

Richard (various above)
I ‘took’ the figures from the Special Climate Statement #18 Exceptional winter heat over large parts of Australia released by the Australian Government’s Bureau of Meteorology.
You can find it here
I don’t know your background and I am certainly not an expert in multivariate time series analysis. Nevertheless, I doubt BOM is engaged in any conspiracy – they say it like it is, whether we like it or not.
I admire your tenacity and if I have paraphrased wrong, my apologies.
However, the fact remains – climate is changing (as it always has/will) – this time before our very eyes. There is serious debate within the scientific community with respect to climate sensitivity and attribution (contrary to popular belief), the outcomes of which will only be known through the rigours of the scientific process.
In the mean time, it would be prudent to tread very carefully – because if the politicians, captains of industry and their respective bean-counters get it wrong, we will be giving generations down the track a legacy that will make the dinosaur extinction (poetic license) look insignificant.

Richard, whoever “debunked” it would have saved a whole lot of people a whole lot of money and a whole lot of stress – they would have been lauded by everyone all over the world and given all the media attention and kudos they would rightly deserve … it hasn’t happened.
We are headed for another glaciation (in about 30k years, give or take) and there are going to be bumps and wiggles along the way. It is on the cards that we are having some influence over the next bump but hopefully, we can do something about it. No reasonable person is saying we have to live like neanderthals, and no reasonable person is saying we are in for catastrophic or runaway warming.
You ask 3 questions, I think they are based on a false premise (near term glaciation) but my answers are:
1. Short answer – No. We should not pander to the coal lobby. “Clean” coal is a misnomer and CC&S is way off (if at all). But, coal will be around for a while yet, we just have to wean ourselves off it.
2. Of course not, we have to utilize a range of technologies in the weaning-off stage (and be more efficient in our energy use).
3. See 2

Well done for mentioning the UAH data this month, I suppose it was too inconvenient to mention it last month.
can any of the sun worshippers explain how their beliefs in the power of the mighty sunspots is not working in actually cooling global temperatures? Surely there must be at least a flicker of cooling after such a prolonged spell of solar minimum, maybe you are not praying hard enough?

“Flanagan (22:40:07) :
Remember 2007 is the warmest year.”
According to the MET (anomalies, global, mean):
1998 0.52
2005 0.47
2006 0.42
2007 0.40
2008 0.32

From Icecap.us
Sep 07, 2009
Excerpts from a scientific paper by Dr Martin Hertzberg
By Dr Martin Hertzberg
Martin Hertzberg 2009, “Earth’s radiative equilibrium in the solar irradiance”, Energy & Environment v.20 no.1&2, pp.85-96 (Special double-issue: Natural drivers of weather and climate, 278p.)
“Many interacting regions, both homogeneous and heterogeneous, are involved in the complex radiative balance. Unverified models do not realistically represent that balance, and it would be absurd to base public policy decisions on them.
“… the controlling factor in determining the average temperature of the Earth is its absorptivity to emissivity ratio.
Even for those portions of Earth that are not covered with clouds, the assumption that the ocean surface, land surfaces, or ice and snow cover would all have blackbody emissivities of unity, is unreasonable.
It is certainly true that in the absence of an atmosphere, temperatures would drop drastically at night as the darkened portions of Earth lost infrared energy by radiation to Space; however, with all the incoming solar radiation being concentrated on the daytime half of the surface, daytime temperatures would rise as drastically as the night time temperatures would fall.
If the near-surface air temperature is not representative, is it realistically possible to measure the average temperature of the entire mass of absorbing and emitting entities with sufficient accuracy to make a meaningful comparison between the data and the predictions?
How high in altitude should one go in the atmosphere to include it all?
Similarly, how deep in the liquid fluid of the oceans should one go in order to include the mass below the ocean surface that influences the heat and mass transport processes near the ocean surface and in the atmosphere above it?”
“… looking at the problem in depth, it may be more realistic to conclude that its resolution may be unattainable given our limited understanding of the complex processes involved, and the lack of data available for the current thermodynamic state of those entities.
The heat and mass transport from that enormous ocean reservoir to the atmosphere are the dominant factors in determining temperatures and weather conditions over the entire globe.
It is implausible to expect that small changes in the concentration of any minor atmospheric constituent such as carbon dioxide, can significantly influence that radiative equilibrium.
Further quotes by this accomplished research scientist:
“In 1994 I tried to get an analysis of the then prevalent state of climate science published in Nature and Science, but they weren’t interested. I even sent a copy of it with a long letter to Burt Bolin, who was then chair of the IPCC. He replied to the effect that who was I to challenge the decades of work of so many distinguished scientists. He also argued that I was being disrespectful by referring to the some of the theories of the global warming advocates as “catechisms”. After studying the issue more carefully and reading the well researched papers of the skeptics/realists, I now think that the AGW arguments do not deserve to be referred to as either “theories” or “catechisms”. In reality, they are elaborate hoaxes.”
“I tried explaining to [those] Senators that in order for them to accept the Gore-IPCC-Hansen theory as valid, they will first have to repeal the Second Law of Thermodynamics!”
Compiled by Hans Schreuder, 7 September 2009

Richard (10:59)
That statement wasn’t referring to the Nobel Committee.
It was referring to any recognized body or institution that agreed that AGW was, well … bunkum. And it will only take one very robust piece of work to do that. Personally, I think Roy Spencer might be onto to something. Unfortunately, I don’t think he is there yet – but good on him for persevering.
Your disdain for the Nobel Committee is noted and I do understand how science works, thanks.

Ron de Haan (15:29)
One has to explain why the ‘hoax’ and why by so many.
Consider this:
The UN understands there are real issues about ‘climate change’. Moreover, they also understand that humanity has embarked on a course of unfettered consumerism and growth – with all the stresses and strains that that puts on energy supply, food resources, national/international security, etc.
Is it possible that they are using ‘climate change’ (real or not) to urge humanity to grow and develop in a more sustainable way?
And don’t get me talking population growth when the power and control (thanks Roger) are vested in religious dogma to go forth and multiply for the glory of God (apologies to Roy, but hey).

Chris R
The bun fight in the UN (or UNFCCC) is about politico-socio-cultural ideology as you rightly observe. Notwithstanding, even the US (as a major major player) acknowledges the problems associated with global warming, or as the Bush Administration preferred, climate change.
It was you who opine “it has become little better than a venue for bashing the big, bad, evil United States of America.” I beg to differ, but that gets us nowhere, as the current Administration has let it be known.
As I have said above, there are extremists on both sides. Put another way, the so called “alarmists” have not got a monopoly on “issuing provocative statements” (your words). Indeed, the author of this current article has himself ‘pre-published’ a scientific paper on this very site without due process (which he is well versed in) … that in and of itself is very provocative, imho.
Your last para has been thrashed out time and time again so I presume no matter what I say will not make any difference to you. All I would suggest is for you to read my above comments again – and the contained links.
It is my qualified opinion that we are not about to head into “some kind of runaway reaction” and it is very disconcerting to think that a lot of people (here and elsewhere) have a propensity to misrepresent or distort what scientists say. There are some who do this deliberately, there are others who do this in ignorance. Either way, they most often do it based on their own preconceived ideological perspective (as you have so aptly demonstrated) and as has been said by others … science doesn’t work like that. Let me go further, there are some that are anti-science … and they can come from either the ‘left’ or the ‘right’, look it up on Wiki.
As far as my “throwaway comment” – lighten up.

Richard
You’re niggling with words here.
Which recognized body or institution has accepted that AGW is bunkum? Just saying it is doesn’t make it so.
Wrongly, as are most of your other conclusions.
In your opinion.
Your blind unquestioning respect for authority seems to be the reason why you accept the AGW hypothesis with such unshakable faith.
Please don’t assume Richard, you don’t know anything about me. For what it’s worth, I don’t “accept the AGW hypothesis with such unshakable faith” … science is not a religion no matter how much you would like to tar me with that brush.
If you do then maybe you should examine the hypothesis critically.
I have, it’s my job.
Examine the contrary evidence to the hypothesis and see if the predictions of the AGW hypothesis hold good.
Repeat … I have, it’s my job.

@ DavidK (01:29:31)
August was marked by some individual days which were exceptionally hot, especially in northern NSW and Queensland. State records were set for August in both states (37.8°C at Mungindi and 38.5°C at Bedourie respectively). Perhaps more exceptional were the margins by which some records were broken, and the number of days on which previous records were exceeded.
Isn’t it great? The newsletter from our local fruit and veg delivery firm (run by Aussie farmers) tells us things are really good for them:
At present this weather has been very good to growers here and around the country however those rains are still needed. This time of year is also the time when many growing regions finish and other start producing.

Richard
Most people ‘don’t do science’. It’s not their vocation, their job, their life. These people (for most part) don’t have the ability, capacity or resources to do the science. For these people, they must “believe” or have “faith” in whom or what they see in the multimedia, because they can’t do the science themselves (nor should they be expected to). Therefore, because of this impediment (for want of a better word) their belief/unbelief or faith/non-faith (in AGW for example) is purely based on their ideological perspective.
Corollary: I have lost count the number of times people (accountants, carpenters, doctors, truckies, engineers, teachers, mechanics, etc, etc) tell me or my colleagues how to do our jobs. Beware I should tell my plumber or mechanical engineer that they don’t know what they’re talking about.
Let me put it this way: the ‘science’ of ‘climate change’ is not perfect, nor is it absolute – but it is very good. As I have said, we hope real sceptics (in the scientific sense) like Roy, or Dick Lindzen, are on to something (e.g. negative feedbacks). However, they are not there, yet – believe it or not 🙂

You cannot bend scientific evidence to justify some alleged moral end.

Now you accuse me of bending scientific evidence. Methinks you protest too much – have a nice day.

They do not have to rely on faith or base their opinions on ideology.
Correct, but they do.
Bye

Richard, your latest.
How would you have it? Suppression, censorship – I understand this has happened recently in NZ and Canada, as well as the US a few years back.
Anyway, it is still too early to be so definitive. I am waiting on more satellite data.
When you asserted;
“I just noticed the blighter is comparing October anomalies with August? Ridiculous. First thing you have got to do is compare like with like to try any meaningful analysis”
I knew you hadn’t a clue about multivariate analysis, even though you “know a bit of maths and science and can reason things out for (yourself)”
But when you say;
People can weigh the arguments and have informed debate and judgement even if (one) cannot “do” science. There is plenty of information thanks to the internet
It just demonstrates to me you are blowing smoke.
In fact, you are quite content to continue to distort and misrepresent. You only see what you want to see, Richard.
Take your blinkers off and read that link again.
Wait, let me help:

“But not all experts agree. Murray-Darling Basin Authority chief, Rob Freeman, told a water summit in Melbourne last week he believed the extreme climate patterns that have dried out south-east Australia would not prove to be permanent.

Some commentators say this is the new future. I think that is an extreme position and probably a position that’s not helpful to take,” he said, expressing confidence that wetter times would return.”

He does have to back this up though, Richard. Maybe you should point Freeman in the right direction.
My last.

DavidK (21:32:34) :
“Corollary: I have lost count the number of times people (accountants, carpenters, doctors, truckies, engineers, teachers, mechanics, etc, etc) tell me or my colleagues how to do our jobs. Beware I should tell my plumber or mechanical engineer that they don’t know what they’re talking about.”
I take exception to this paragraph… i may not tell an accountant or a plumber or a mechanic how to do their job… But ill keep a very sharp eye on what exactly they are doing, and billing me for. It would be an extremely naive person who would blindly trust strangers. Ive certainly caught mechanics trying to pull swifties on me. And have put then straight about it in quick order.
Most people may not have the time or resources to do science themselves. But many people have diverse interests that arnt necessarily related to their occupation. Im a farmer, but for a hobby i design and fabricate expanders/compressors. I like physics, it interests me greatly. And i wouldnt tell you how to do your jobs, but if you’re saying you’re expecting blind faith from the likes of myself, you will be sorely disappointed.

MikeE
I don’t “expect blind faith”, that is abhorrent. I was quite prepared to explain and answer questions here about ‘climate science’ in general and my sphere of work/expertise in particular – land/ocean/atmosphere systems: all things water. I would add, most farmers I meet are grateful for my help.
Nevertheless, it appears that the explanations/answers are not accepted if it disagrees with the wannabe scientist’s ‘point of view’. I can’t help these people, and there appears to be preponderance here. And yes, most say I’ve got it wrong and some want to tell me how to do my job.
Best wishes

DavidK (00:58:45) :
“Nevertheless, it appears that the explanations/answers are not accepted if it disagrees with the wannabe scientist’s ‘point of view’. I can’t help these people, and there appears to be preponderance here. And yes, most say I’ve got it wrong and some want to tell me how to do my job.”
i wouldnt assume that, i m sure there are many who come here like myself, who seldom post, but read. Some of the more enlightening “discussions” are heated ( you should see the solar guys go at it hammer and tongs) Ive found this thread interesting. There is nothing wrong with having counter points o view. And backing up youre arguments with observations/facts. There should be diverse views on something as complex as climate.
Well thank you David and others for an interesting thread.

The poem I quoted above ( Roger Carr (04:00:43)) was from a student to his professor, Will Alexander, a vitally concerned gentleman worth paying attention to. One story from the professor is quoted from and linked below:

How dare they…
“Let me make one point abundantly clear. Since the establishment of the IPCC in 1988 not a single person in South Africa has died as a result of provable climate change. But thousands have died from poverty-related starvation, malnutrition and disease. How dare those who call themselves scientists deliberately suppress this information? How dare they ignore the suffering of all these people? How dare they steadfastly refuse to participate in multidisciplinary studies where their alarmist theories can be demonstrated to be without foundation?
“Climate alarmism is like a runaway fire. It started quietly with a genuine concern. It was like lighting a match beneath a pile of flammable material. The environmentalists and politicians took over. The fact that the basic science is demonstrably false is no longer an issue.”

Climate alarmism is a runaway fire
By Professor Will Alexander
Via Email, 21 August 2009
An Honest Climate Debate

Richard (22:11:29) : “…that more primitive cultures…
There were, Richard? Phew! That’s a relief; though not heartening…

In RE: DavidK (16:48:48) : “Is it possible that they are using ‘climate change’ (real or not) to urge humanity to grow and develop in a more sustainable way?”
Ah, Al Gore’s excuse – it’s OK to lie as long as you’re lying to get people to do what you want them to do.
First, the claim that humanity is growing in unsustainable ways has been around as long as I’ve been alive and will remain long after I’m dead.
Second, the answer to unsustainable living is not to trap a large segment of the world’s population in unsustainable habits while retarding the progress of those closest to the goal of discovering and implementing sustainable practices.
Third, whether we are causing any measurable climate change or not, the answer isn’t to create a massive government entity who’s members spew carbon as they jet from one exotic location to another to talk about what we should do while we do exactly the opposite.
After all the meetings, all the propaganda, all the lies, all the accusations, has the IPCC or anyone gotten either India or China to commit to real contributions to “stopping climate change”, as if that were even possible?