Devastating non-trends in US Climate

This is interesting material and while I appreciate it responds to a US related quote. Can you provide similar trends (or rather lack of them) on a global scale?

So droughts were predicted to be up and stay that way in the Southwest US and it has been wet instead. Snow was ending in the northeast and we set records,
Thanks for news stories showing reality is the opposite of the warmists claims.

“Corn likes it cool…” — GW Advocate Timothy Telleen-Lawton.
Right. Must be why nobody in Meso-America grows corn.
/sarc

J.I.McKemey (06:07:11) : The Tropical Cyclone plot is global. With regard to global drought, this paper may be of interest:
http://water.washington.edu/research/Articles/2008.global.continental.drought.pdf
Which indicates that the worst droughts on record are mostly clustered in the earlier half of the last fifty or sixty years.
In terms of other variables I have not seen a whole lot but generally trends toward worse weather/climate are not evident.

Timothy Tellene-Lawton’s quote about corn liking cool weather is way off. According to my brother-in-law who farms over 2000 acres, about 1/2 in corn, says he wants warm to hot weather for corn growth. This year Indiana had an average of 180+ bushels of corn per acre. My brother-in-law had over 200 bushels of corn per acres. Over thirty years ago they were glad to get 100 bushels per acre.

I knew we were in trouble when I got to this quote:
“The White House task force tells us the truth.”

Who says nothing is happening!!! Climate change has had a HUGE pervasive and significant upward trending affect on internet blogs. Well, one, anyway.

We’ve had some snow (and rain) in the UK last winter. Does that count?

J.I.McKemey (06:07:11) :
Hmmm, maybe you could help us with that?

Hmmm…it looks like armageddon is near (of course, not necessarily a climate one)

This is also very good read – GLOBAL drought myths debunked.
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2010/02/24/update-on-global-drought-patterns-ipcc-take-note/

I know it’s Friday afternoon. I know I am just an engineer. BUT, can I see a slope rate pretty much consistent all the way through on those peaks & troughs. I have only eye-balled the slopes with a scale rule against the screen to get a best fit curve/equal area line, but I would say the rate of increases & decreases look fairly consistent to me (we structural engineers don’t worry too much about minor differences, it’s close enough!). This I would suggest indicates some form of pattern? Perhaps it’s me!

J.I.McK: I second the desire for corresponding global data. Notice, however, that the Hurricane data IS global. It might not be easy to come by global equivalents for all of the above, considering the tendency of those so well-funded to study climate are not highly disposed to compiling or publishing data at odds with the picture they’re trying to paint. There’s a certain level of honesty one expects from U.S. institutions, even alarmist ones, that is unlikely to be matched by international groups like Pauchari’s IPCC that seem to believe they answer only to themselves.

Given that 90% of all tornadoes in the world occur in North America, I’m not sure what additional data you will get from looking at tornado activity worldwide…

Henry chance (06:13:07) :

So droughts were predicted to be up and stay that way in the Southwest US and it has been wet instead. Snow was ending in the northeast and we set records,
Thanks for news stories showing reality is the opposite of the warmists claims.

Sorry mate, you’ve not been following the plot.
Everything is consistent with the claims! 😉
DaveE.

Oh I wish I didn’t just read this in my coffee breaks and had the time to get you guys organised to get this out to the press in a ready digestible form. It is prime beef rotting on the shelf cause no one has thought to cook it!

Pamela Gray (06:51:15) :
“Who says nothing is happening!!! Climate change has had a HUGE pervasive and significant upward trending affect on internet blogs. Well, one, anyway.”
It is also having a devastating impact in my productivity at work … oh oh … coworker … back to coding … for( i =

Just one word added,( missed by the stenographer when taking notes):
Political climate change is already having “pervasive, wide-ranging” effects on “nearly every aspect of our society,” a task force representing more than 20 federal agencies reported Tuesday.
“These impacts will influence how and where we live and work as well as our cultures, health and environment,” the report states. “It is therefore imperative to take action now to adapt to a changing political climate.”

Henry chance (06:13:07) :
So droughts were predicted to be up and stay that way in the Southwest US and it has been wet instead. Snow was ending in the northeast and we set records,
You know-I keep reading about this snowy and cold winter we had on this site, But here in nothern VT, heating degree days are below normal for the season, winter started late by a month, and March, normally a winter month here, has had no snow (current high temp about 25F above normal). So with all the negative PDO talk, negative AO, volcanic activity, solar minumum, and oncoming ice age alarmism, where the hell is the cold weather? Where are the 20 and 30 F degree below nights in January that we had with regularity (over my previous 60 years) What happens when all those factors go the other way? Dont get me wrong, I’m all in favor of global cooling (being a skier) just aint seeing any. Just more of the same anemic winters that we have had for 15 years or so.

The OtherDan, check out the position of the jet stream and the AO. They work in tandem to provide the broad strokes of seasonal weather for larger areas. Add pressure gradients and cold/warm fronts coming from the Gulf and Atlantic to your geographical climate zone parameters, and you get local weather variations.

And then there’s all that snow everyone got this year…..
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/drought/2010-03-11-low-snow-pack_N.htm

I measured the sea level yesterday, at 10:00am. I measured it today at exactly 10:00am and it was 6 inches higher. At this rate, we’ll be under 100 feet of water by the end of the year!

Friends of the Earth have a letter writing campaign to get El Presidente to no issue a permit for some pipeline from Oil Tar sands or some such. It is here:
http://action.foe.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=2317&gclid=CNG3v_GWxaACFRmjagodUmgpbA
It allows you to add your own personalized touches to the letter, and purportedly, sends what you write to El Presidente.
Of course, you could change the message, if you know what I mean.

The stat that 80% of the US population now lives in cities is possibly one of the reasons for alarmism to get such a foothold. People who stay in touch with the land are a tad harder to convince that the weather is doing other than what it has always done – swung about a resonably steady mean for temp, rainfall, snowfall and wind.
Apropos UHI, I live in an ’80s housing development near Heathrow in London, UK. The development was the site of a Victorian brewery, complete with large stables for the large Shire horses, a dray yard and a feild for the horses to browse. In what was a semi-rural industrial site is now a large number of two-storied terraced houses, all centrally heated with gas-powered hot water supply, with asphalt roadways, footpaths, etc. Each household has only a small enclosed rear garden, which is the only grass/planted area in the development. Each household has at least one car, many have two, which are parked in front of the houses at night and in the weekends. Considering these changes, which are not uncommon around the Western world, how can Prof Jones maintain his assertion that UHI will not have increased over the past 100 years?

R Shearer (09:11:02) :
The OtherDan, just wait! Or, you could have moved to Florida.
Been waiting-Thats what I’m saying-that ‘s the mantra here-just wait till next year. Nothing happens. Just warm winters in Vt
I’ll pass on Florida. Opressively warm-even when “cold”.

We have proof now that AGW causes Environmentalists to issue extreme statements that are full of crap and come from the “we just make sh*t up” category of their fellow travelers in the journalistic and scientific professions.
The co-relation is almost perfect.

We are just lucky the current trend is flat or nearly. Any trend positive or negative will be seized upon by the liberal bureaucrats.
Their whole purpose is to MAKE the world a better place. They don’t want to Allow the world to be a better place, they use their own social filter and try to FORCE the world into their own world view.
Conservatives are much less likely to force a minority view on society or toss blood/paint/oil/etc on their opponents.
It’s about control and they aren’t making compromises.

James F. Evans (09:19:49) BTW computer models didn’t work in the recent Chilean quake and tsunami…still waiting in Hawaii for the tsunami and the telltale of the Nazca plate “subduction” under SA ended in the contrary, a “streching out” of more than 10 feet:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100308132043.htm
BTW that’s bad news for Al Gore, an island near the epicenter “grew up” 7 feet above sea level.

@Patrick Guinness (09:05:35) :
“The non trends prove AGW. Al Gore.”
Pat: check your spelling.
The man who used to be the next POTUS is spelled “AlGaW” .

Jim Clarke (06:21:26) :
“Can anyone name one negative impact they have personally suffered that can be attributed solely to climate change (natural or man made)?”
Loss of about 200 lives in bushfires last year after record heat waves (including family relations and friends), record temperatures following years of consistently higher temps each decade, and the longest recorded period of below average rainfall.
Major bushfires threatening my town in three of the past seven years – again unprecedented.
Multi-year water restrictions and locals having no water supply left for domestic use. Followed by unparalleled torrential rain and hail. Record floods covering huge areas of land.
That’s for starters – is it negative enough and personal enough? Or did you mean just those living in the USA?

Gee…why can’t nature just do what the AGW’s want and make it easy for them?
I have been thinking about generating a website called “The Great Global
Warming Scandal Revealed in Pictures”
I can post pix of my grapes in NW Ontario. Five years ago nice blue large ones, then smalled and greener, and last fall just little pellets the size of BB’s before extremely early October winter froze them again. No global warmalist can fool vegetation.
Saipan

The Task Farce is not speaking to the ordinary citizen. It is, rather, reapplying bags of propaganda to the fertile masses who have already fallen for the scam, with the intent of arousing their emotions.
Something wicked this way comes.

The MET office already had a detailed Map of Disaster, courtesy of Madam Kirsty Lewis:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/guide/effects/high-end.html

Enneagram (09:46:43) :
Thank you for the heads up.
Computer models are no better than the assumptions & data inputted into the model. In Science empirical observations & measurements are filtered through the theoretical models used in analysis & interpretation.
Conclusions are model-dependant filtering of observational data. That is to say, more often than not, conclusions are inferred based on the particular model applied to the observations & measurements.
Isn’t that exactly what we have from AGW proponents?
Enneagram (09:46:43) wrote: “BTW computer models didn’t work in the recent Chilean quake and tsunami…still waiting in Hawaii for the tsunami and the telltale of the Nazca plate ‘subduction’ under SA ended in the contrary, a ‘streching out’ of more than 10 feet:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100308132043.htm
BTW that’s bad news for Al Gore, an island near the epicenter ‘grew up’ 7 feet above sea level.”
The evidence you provided suggest a couple things: So-called “subduction” is a myth. Per the “subduction” hypothesis, the Pacific tectonic plate is pushing underneath the South American tectonic plate. Problem: This theoretically should push the South American plate EAST, if any direction, not West as was measured by as much as ten feet:
“ScienceDaily (Mar. 8, 2010) — The massive magnitude 8.8 earthquake that struck the west coast of Chile last month moved the entire city of Concepcion at least 10 feet to the west, and shifted other parts of South America as far apart as the Falkland Islands and Fortaleza, Brazil.”
And, Enneagram, pointed out that, “an island near the epicenter ‘grew up’ 7 feet above sea level.”
Filter the two observations & measurements through a different model and it is strong evidence that the Earth is growing.
Yes, I’m a heretic: The fundamental force of Electromagnetism is more powerful & decisive than gravity in many instances, the Earth is growing, and oil is abiotic.
But after careful research & analysis I subscribe to these theories because that’s where the observations & measurements lead me.

Mike McMillan (09:57:34) :
“Corn likes it cool … Hotter fields mean lower yields for corn ” Timothy Telleen-Lawton.
Where’s this guy from? New York City?
You get those really toasty days in Iowa, you can hear the corn growing.
Actually, he’s from San Francisco. Sorta’ figures don’t it.

Sean Peake (12:49:25) :Just don’t discuss any more. The Incas from Peru obtained more than a thousand varieties for evry weather you choose. You only know the variety used for feeding chicken. BTW one of these varieties is PURPLE in color and it is used for preparing a purple beverage and a purple dessert.
http://macapunch.com/maizmorado.htm

“Indeed, climate change has begun to affect the ability of government agencies to fulfill their missions, reports the White House Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force.”
Yeah, sure. The inability of government agencies to fulfill their missions has been caused by Climate Change, not by bureaucratic incompetence and unproductive goals.
True, the recent record snowstorms in D.C. did cause the government to shut down for a few days. I suspect the “taskforce” wouldn’t have accomplished anything of actual value though, even if it had been “working” for its pay:
http://www.mpnblog.com/2010/03/hartzler-comment-on-federal-government.html

Well when you look at that drought graph, it almost makes you think that warmer temperatures (say in the late 1970s/80s/90s (early)) lead to more evaporation.precipitation, which would certainly mean less droughts somewhere.
Unfortunately, since Trenberth’s energy budget cartoon shows an isothermal planet, there are no Temperature differences to cause air or water to move from one place to another; so who knows where droughts, or undroughts are going to occur.
Gaia knows where the temperature differences are; since she has a thermometer built into every single molecule/atom, so she really does good sampling.
Yes those climate models really have this problem whipped; well they are extremely good on predictions especially about the past.

You can go to the web site of the White House Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force. On the left side of the page there is a link to “Submit a Comment” to which you can add attachments. I suggest we send them some information!
http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ceq/initiatives/adaptation

There’s been a significant upward trend in hot air. Our government has even established a Deparment of Hot Air, headed by Penny Wrong … Wong, to sinophiles.

Enneagram and James F Evans:
Subduction isn’t necessarily a myth.
The Pacific plate cannot push the whole of S America east so, over time it compresses the western margin of S America until suddenly they slip past each other (ie the Pacific plate goes under S America) and S America springs back to its uncompressed position – 10 feet to the west (or whatever it was).

Here are some more failed predictions and forecasts
http://www.c3headlines.com/predictionsforecasts/

Corn gets many people confused – in Europe, corn generally means wheat or barley, but strictly is simply a cereal grain crop. Maize was the “corn” of early US European settlement and in the meaning of a cereal grain crop is still correct. The word corn has a similar etymology to grain. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/corn
However, maize is a hot climate crop, while wheat and barley are temperate climate crops.
Without defining which corn is being considered, the statement is pretty meaningless.

I’m late to the party today.
Last month, when the warmers were trying feverishly to convince the world that the east coast blizzards proved global warming, I blogged about another non-trend that doesn’t look good for the AGW’ers – precipitation. When the world gets warmer, it is supposed to cause more rain. Warmer = Wetter. Well, here is what the data shows according to the EPA.

Precipitation has generally increased over land north of 30°N from 1900-2005, but has mostly declined over the tropics since the 1970s. Globally there has been no statistically significant overall trend in precipitation over the past century, although trends have varied widely by region and over time.

Oops. That is a rather inconvenient truth.

@Bruce Cobb (13:22:29) :
I don’t know what country you live in, so will forgive your insensitivity and the repugnant tone of your comment. Australia (not Oz) has always had fires, drought and flood – but nothing like we’ve been seeing lately. Weather and natural disaster records keep being broken every year.
And most fires get put out, including those started by humans. The devastating fires throughout the State on Black Saturday last year were started from various causes (probably most not from arson), and were uncontrollable killers precisely because of the unprecedented conditions. I cannot even describe the conditions but if you can imagine several years of below average rainfall (AKA drought) making the vegetation tinder dry, a fortnight where it reached temperatures (up to 117F) never before reached in the region (AKA a most serious and long-lasting heat wave after a long and very hot summer during a decade-long drought), and after that fortnight fierce hot dry winds roaring across the state. 200 people may not mean much to you, but almost everyone in Victoria knew some who died, and many of us lost family members and friends.
We know the weather is changing. Records are still being broken. Even this year, in what feels like a mild summer (compared with last year) with almost ‘normal’ rainfall, for the first time in the 155 years of weather records, Melbourne has had more than 100 consecutive days of temps above 20C. The closest to this was in 2000-01 when it had 78 consecutive days above 20C. It also recently had record-breaking torrential rain and hail. All consistent with predicted climate change.
If your weather isn’t changing, you’re lucky. But don’t dismiss the fact that there is a big world out there and that climate change is already well and truly with some of us.
Have a look at the State of the Climate down here in Australia. Or keep your head in the sand – whatever suits you. Nature doesn’t care much whether people believe what she’s doing or not. But she’s prepared to change if we are.
I was asked a question and answered. Some people just don’t like the answers so they belittle them. Some people will live in places where the climate won’t change so much. Others like those who live in my part of the world, see it happening in our lifetime.

Who believes we can trust Warren Meyer to tell the unvarnished truth and always exercise due scientific diligence?
Not me.
Here is a post where his ‘Coyote’ blog reveals that ‘Nearly all the reported warming in the USHCN data base, which is used for nearly all global warming studies and models, is from human-added fudge factors, guesstimates, and corrections.’
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2007/07/an-interesting-.html
One small problem. The adjustments are in degrees Farenheit, the increase is in Celsius. Shall I repeat that? Ok. Warren Meyer has a web page up where he compares measurements in two incompatible units as if they were the same. The error has been pointed out in comments, yet the page remains up, misleading readers. Imagine for a moment the fuss if (say) Professor Phil Jones made such a schoolboy howler, and failed to retract it ….
Meyer is demonstrably not a reliable source. Warren remains on Anthony’s ‘blogroll’. Need we say more?

@Warrick
Heat units and corn for the interested. Yes corn likes it warm
http://www.farmwest.com/index.cfm?method=library.showPage&librarypageid=131
It’s and American report — you can get the full report where it says [here] at the bottom of the extract.
http://www.environmentamerica.org/news-releases/global-warming-solutions/global-warming-solutions/new-report-global-warming-will-cost-american-corn-growers-billions
It’s simpler just to provide the facts.
But I will say that Tim should get his facts straight or explain why his report flies in the face of current knowledge.
I have grown lots of corn (American / Canadian definition) — Corn Like it Hot!

An item from
http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=globalwarming&thread=1128&page=4#43726
” … a really good view of what this passing winter meant to the continental US go to the following link.
http://www.gasalberta.com/pricing-supply.htm
Scroll down to US Storage. They blew through record natural gas storage. Most analysts believed it would take two very cold winters to do that with the collapsed industrial demand and the prolific nature of the new shale gas discoveries when they first go into production.
It’s a differently structured site. You might want to just go to the following and go to ‘Pricing’, then ‘Gas Pricing’, and then ‘Supply and Demand’ in the menu on top and click around and look at stuff.
http://www.gasalberta.com/ ”
There does exist a measurement called “degree days”
which inversely relates temperature to gas usage …
Probably at least as good as tree rings.

@ Smokey (18:07:39)
I know that some people believe everything they read but just as with much in the media, that story is not at all as some would have you believe. In the heat of the moment no journalist bothered to check the facts, as told here:
http://uydec.org.au/dp/node/298
But Smokey’s linking to the above non-story is a rather ordinary example of an attempt to move discussion away from the issue, which was the question about who has been adversely affected by climate change. In this case it just threw the spotlight on more people who’ve been affected adversely by our changing climate. And it’s not just more frequent and larger and fiercer fires.
The thing is, a few people who live in cold climates think global warming would be great. Thankfully, most sensible people know that by taking no action and thereby warming their own cool climate, they are also making some hot places unbearably hot, which will have unintended consequences.
BTW, Smokey, good to see you’re still a fan 😀

Sou
I cannot even describe the conditions but if you can imagine several years of below average rainfall (AKA drought) making the vegetation tinder dry, a fortnight where it reached temperatures (up to 117F) never before reached in the region (AKA a most serious and long-lasting heat wave after a long and very hot summer during a decade-long drought), and after that fortnight fierce hot dry winds roaring across the state.
End
Knowing all that why were residents advised to stay or go?
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/victoria-bushfires-inquiry-recommends-overhaul-of-stay-or-go-policy/story-e6frg6n6-1225762875329
http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/dse/nrenfoe.nsf/childdocs/-D79E4FB0C437E1B6CA256DA60008B9EF?open

Jim Clarke (06:21:26) :
Loss of about 200 lives in bushfires last year…
err, no
I will provide a local Australian perspective:
There have been bigger and more devastating bushfires in Victorian history. 1939 was bigger.
The devastation of the Black Saturday bushfires last year in Victoria, Australia, was caused by higher population densities in bushfire prone area, and a failure to control burn forest undergrowth.
This failure to control burn scrub and undergrowth was due to the deep green policies of green state and local politicians. You voted for this, you got it.
Multi-year water restrictions and locals having no water supply left for domestic use. Followed by unparalleled torrential rain and hail. Record floods covering huge areas of land.
Floods and droughts are part of the Australian landscape. Always has been, always will be. What we have seen over the last 10 years in not unprecedented. BoM data will confirm this.
Water restrictions are again due to anti development green politicians who refuse to build dams to supply water to a growing population.

Sou (22:41:16) :
‘The weather records of the past several decades show exactly what is happening.’
I happen to live in a very mis-managed forest. Every other year we choke as the ‘let it burn’ policy allows fires to run out of control, and no salvage allowed due to greenie lawsuits, so it burns again and again.
Where exactly is YOUR raw data layout?
I have given mine at:
http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/WhatGlobalWarming.htm
It ain’t happening here.

Juraj V. (07:19:52) :
“This is also very good read – GLOBAL drought myths debunked.”
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2010/02/24/update-on-global-drought-patterns-ipcc-take-note/
Many thanks, that’s very useful. I was particularly interested in the graph for Africa, which shows no trend.
Several years ago I heard David Miliband on the BBC Today program. He was at the sight of an African drought where people were probably dying. He said something like (with reference to climate change):
“The debate is over. The evidence is all around me….”
Well, I have news for Miliband. There were droughts long before carbon dioxide was invented. Did he have scientific evidence that drought in that region had increased with global warming? I doubt it. There’s no trend for Africa overall. To be honest, I found his attempt to use the suffering of people to push his deranged beliefs in CAGW pretty sickening….
Chris

Sou (22:41:16) :
Obviously some people have an open mind and some people have already made up their mind. I know if anyone is reading this and wants to investigate further, they will do so. Others will continue to make comments that reinforce their personal view of the world, regardless of any evidence.
Yes, we can certainly agree on that. Unfortunately, the people who have made up their minds, who allow their own personal views of the world and for whom neither facts nor actual science will convince them that they are wrong perfectly describes you and your ilk. Obviously, you feel an emotional need to blame the bush fires, and the resulting deaths on something other than the actual facts. It is easier to just blame the boogeyman of manmade climate change instead of facing reality: that you happen to live in a part of the world with a harsher climate than others, and that often times the effects of that harsher climate can be made even more severe by the wrongheaded governmental policies.
But, go ahead, continue to blame C02, as you undoubtedly will.

@ Bruce, I blame last year’s fires on the catastrophic weather conditions. Record high temperatures reaching an unheard of 47C in Melbourne, and higher in other parts of the state. The temp where I live reached 45.6C, about 3.2C more than the previous high. We’d had more than a week of these record temperatures without the wind. Add wind and a spark to the mix and whoosh! The tinder dry vegetation and the hot, strong winds, with a predicted shift from northerlies to southerlies, which would shift the fire front and make it burn on the long front. The conditions were unprecedented in the region and the warnings were long loud and clear. The fire danger rating was off the charts. Any aware person would have known that a spark from any source would set off a conflagration that day. That was the reality and I assure you I was most definitely prepared.
However it is very likely that the record high temperatures, in line with the increasing mean, min and max temps each successive decade, plus the nine years of below average rainfall have been the result of a climate shift in our region, which is highly likely to be the result of the rising CO2, and is well in line with predictions made for our region some decades ago. It’s commonly called the greenhouse effect. You might like to look it up. It’s not that hard to grasp the basics, and all the evidence points to it having a real effect as most people know (unless they live in the USA perhaps where some polls suggest only about half the people know this?)
Time will tell if there is indeed a permanent shift to drier and hotter conditions in south eastern Australia. We’ve had a spell this summer, even though the temps are still above average we haven’t had too many days above 38C to 40C, thankfully. And we’ve had a lot of rain, even though much of it has fallen as torrents rather than more steady, soaking rain. It would be nice if we get at least a couple more years of decent rain so that the reservoirs and rivers can start to fill up again.
Nothing is black and white and the future is unknown. Much as it would be comforting to have certainty, we don’t. But I’m preparing for the change in any case, which seems the wise course to take, as it is most likely going to be the reality for the future. If our local climate changes back again, no harm no foul and I’ll still be better off.
I agree with you that wrongheaded government policies can make a harsh climate even more severe. We aren’t yet used to harsh climates like we have now in our temperate zone (or what used to be a temperate zone). (Other parts of the country are used to the sort of weather we’ve started to get.) Let’s hope that governments can put some decent policies in place so the future is less bleak.

As if the wildfires aren’t bad enough, the Aussies have other problems directly related to global warming! Here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3353693/Giant-spider-eating-a-bird-caught-on-camera.html

Sou (07:26:08) :
it is very likely that the record high temperatures, in line with the increasing mean, min and max temps each successive decade, plus the nine years of below average rainfall have been the result of a climate shift in our region, which is highly likely to be the result of the rising CO2, and is well in line with predictions made for our region some decades ago. It’s commonly called the greenhouse effect. You might like to look it up. It’s not that hard to grasp the basics, and all the evidence points to it having a real effect as most people know (unless they live in the USA perhaps where some polls suggest only about half the people know this?)
Sorry, bub, but the greenhouse effect has been vastly overrated, which you would know if you bothered to read beyond the narrow sphere of the CAGW/CC bilge you obviously imbibe. The evidence certainly might “suggest” C02 as the culprit, to either the hopelessly naive, the willfully ignorant, or the disingenuous.
Some of us prefer to actually delve into things a bit deeper, though, you know, for something closer to the truth, rather than the pablum the truth-challenged folks of the IPCC, and your heroes, Hansen, Mann, and Gore dish out. But, different strokes, I guess.

Hmmm, it looks as if a few people posting here are not very familiar with the known and established properties of CO2 and other greenhouse gases and would like me to explain it to them. They are asking me to give a basic science lesson on why rising concentrations of CO2 lead to an increase in global temperature, and why the reverse happens. This is not new science. I’d erroneously thought that, given the amount of space this site devotes to climate change, most people here would know about the properties of CO2 and other greenhouse gases and how they keep the earth warm and supporting life as we know it.
There is ample information elsewhere on the internet, from popular articles for the non-scientist to detailed scientific books and publications and excellent series of videos.
Do a search on greenhouse effect, or CO2 and climate or similar. A knowledge of high school physics will help, but isn’t essential if you’re prepared to put your mind to it. A lot of general science textbooks for schools will have a description. Be aware that there are a lot of popular sites on the internet that don’t explain things properly. Some are even set up to deliberately misinform. You will learn which sites are reliable if you read sufficient of the literature or seek out sites of proper scientific organisations rather than amateur blogs or political and policy websites.

Sou first says “And most fires get put out, including those started by humans.”
Later Sou says “Precautionary off-season burning has been happening as much as if not more than ever, so the increasing frequency and ferocity of fires can’t be blamed on lack of burning off by government agencies.”
Sou seems to think government control is the answer to all problems. But the “burning off by government agencies” or lack thereof is not the answer when the humans are interfering with “most fires”. That doesn’t include the local policies not allowing clearing and other insanities.
Then Sou says “BTW I also realise that lots of people don’t want to believe the facts, preferring to blame the ‘greenies’, or the ‘conservationists’ or the ‘government’ or anyone at all that they fear or loathe. Some of you have basically accused me of lying or being deluded.”
Red herrings. The facts don’t point to unprecedented drought. The 117 year low in river input (Murray-Darling Basin) is from cotton irrigation and other wasteful forms of agriculture. Otherwise you have some drought, but not unprecedented (something like sixth or seventh worst).

I understand it’s not unprecedented for some people to pick a single station and extrapolate it to a region or even the world, although it’s not normally done.
Sorry to repeat myself, but for those who have come late or missed the earlier references, I was referring to south eastern Australia as shown in the link below. Many parts of Australia have extremes of weather. For Australia overall the temperatures are rising. For south eastern Australia there was a drought of unprecedented duration during an unprecedented period of high temperatures – as far as the records trace back in the past 100+ years. Click on the various temperature and rainfall anomalies:
South eastern australia temperature trends with thirteen consecutive years of above average mean temperature, including two years of the highest mean annual temp on record, and the hottest decade on record.
Nine years below average rainfall, following one year of just above average, following three years of below average. This was a drought during a decade having the highest temperatures on record.
Here is what happened to Melbourne’s water supply:
Melbourne water storage as it dropped from 1997 to 2009. Melburnians managed to restrict their water usage or the storage would have dropped even lower. If the the length of the drought could have been anticipated, the severe water restrictions would have been introduced even earlier.
And here again is the Statement of the Climate report, which was released recently.
As for the rest, I appreciate the invitation, but no thank you.

“Here is what happened to Melbourne’s water supply:”
Like Sydney the population outgrew the dam capacity but Melbourne unlike Sydney which has no more damable rivers the greenies have prevent extending the capacity by building new dams.

Sou, you say:
“CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology use scientific modelling…”
IPCC 2001;
“In climate research and modeling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system. and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible”.

sou,
it’s not a simplistic situation concerning co2 – at least outside of oversimplified and incomplete general circulation models. Off hand, I doubt you have the understanding to deal with the level that some of the discussions here entail, including the nature of co2 and other so-called ghgs in the atmosphere.