Devastating non-trends in US Climate

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.

@ur momisugly 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.