This ridiculous video story below from ABC news cites über alarmist Richard Somerville of Scripps in San Diego, and is backed up with this print story.
Here’s what the print story headline said:
Raging Waters In Australia and Brazil Product of Global Warming
Quoting Somerville:
“Because the whole water cycle speeds up in a warming world, there’s more water in the atmosphere today than there was a few years ago on average, and you’re seeing a lot of that in the heavy rains and floods for example in Australia,” Sommervile [sic] said.
he adds:
“This is no longer something that’s theory or conjecture or something that comes out of computer models,” Sommerville [sic] said. “We’re observing the climate changing — it’s happening, it’s real, it’s a fact.”
Well perfessor, while a warmer atmosphere can hold more water vapor content, I call BS on your statement. The climate has always changed. The same argument is being used to hype increased hurricane threats, and as we’ve seen from Dr. Ryan Maue, the Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) says the linkage just isn’t there.
The headline of course is sensational, they really didn’t put any thought or research into the Brisbane, QLD flooding, they simply drew a conclusion and found somebody to support it with a soundbite. I’ve seen plenty of examples of this style of crappy TV news journalism in my career. Professor Somerville apparently couldn’t be bothered to do a little historical research before claiming the floods in Queensland were connected to “global warming”, neither could ABC News.
What did ABC news and professor miss? This graph from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) on Brisbane flooding history. When you add the 2010 flood levels to the graph (as Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. bothered to do, shown in red below) all of the sudden, the historical context for the flood being driven by global warming disappears:
And this is backed up from the BoM web page narrative.
Explain then perfesser, how the 1974 flood, which was worse, links to “global warming”. Or how about the biggest flood, in 1893? How does that figure with “global warming”, especially when it was cooler in 1974 and in 1893 there was no appreciable rise in CO2 globally?
Some people will say, “well that’s just Queensland”, so here is the Australian continent. The same questions apply:
The historical narrative for 1893 from BoM:
| 3/2/1893 | Lower part of Brisbane submerged, and water still on the rise; the “Elamang” and the gunboat “Paluma’ were carried by the flood into the Botanical Gardens, and the “Natone” on to the Eagle Farm flats. |
| 4/2/1893 | Disastrous floods in the Brisbane River; 8 feet of water in Edward Street at the Courier building. Numbers of houses at Ipswich and Brisbane washed down the rivers. Seven men drowned through the flooding of the Eclipse Colliery at North Ipswich. Telegraphic and railway communication in the north and west interrupted. |
| 5/2/1893 | The lndooroopilly railway bridge washed away by the flood. Heaviest floods known in Brisbane and suburbs. |
| 6/2/1893 | The lower part of South Brisbane completely submerged. The flood rose 23’9″ above the mean spring tides and 10 feet above flood mark of 1890; north end of the Victoria Bridge destroyed. |
| 7/2/1893 | Flood waters subsiding. Sydney mail train flood bound at Goodna, unable to either proceed or return. |
| 13/2/1893 | Second flood for the year in the Brisbane River. |
| 16/2/1893 | More rain in the south east districts; another rise in the Brisbane; further floods predicted. |
| 17/2/1893 | A third flood occurred in the Brisbane River for the year. |
| 18/2/1893 | The ‘Elamang” floated off from the Botanical Gardens. Business at a standstill in Brisbane. Ipswich and other towns. Several deaths by drowning reported. |
| 19/2/1893 | The gunboat “Paluma” safely floated off the Gardens, and the “Natone” off Eagle Farm flats. Another span of the lndooroopilly railway bridge carried away. The third flood reached its maximum height at 12 noon, viz. 10 inches below the first flood. |
In my opinion, professor Somerville is spouting nonsense about Australia.
As for Brazil, they don’t have as easily accessible climatology, but I did find this newspaper front page from the 1967 Brazil flood, on the website of my friend and fellow skeptic, Alexandre Aguilar in Brazil who works for the weather forecasting firm METSUL. This event which mainly hit Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo, with floods and landslides/mudslides, was the worst ever then. The headline cites 400 dead.
The final death toll was 437 people.
METSUL writes on their blog: (more photos there)
The disaster in the mountainous region of Rio de Janeiro in Brazil is the largest since the disaster Caraguatatuba in 1967 (photos). On March 18 of that year, a flood came down the hills like a tsunami of water, mud and rocks, causing a landslide. Hundreds of homes were submerged and rivers have won strong currents, trailing not only houses, but trees, bridges and other structures. The exact number of dead is unknown until today, having been speculation over 500, but officially are considered 300 fatalities. The rain gauge installed at São Sebastão in March 1967 indicated a [monthly?] precipitation of 851.0 mm, with 115.0 mm and on day 17 and 420 mm the next day. The accumulated [rainfall total] may have been higher due to saturation of the rain gauge.
Again, how did this massive flood happen without the help of CO2 back then?
The Australian rains are being driven by La Nina says NASA in this press release
“Although exacerbated by precipitation from a tropical cyclone, rainfalls of historic proportion in eastern Queensland, Australia have led to levels of flooding usually only seen once in a century,” said David Adamec, Oceanographer at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. “The copious rainfall is a direct result of La Niña’s effect on the Pacific trade winds and has made tropical Australia particularly rainy this year.”
UPDATE: Here’s yet another expert with a similar opinion, from CNN, where they quote a Columbia (where NASA GISS is located) lead forecaster:
The catastrophic weather events taking place across the globe – from Brazil’s and Australia’s flooding to the Eastern United States’ heavy snowfall – have two likely explanations.
Tony Barnston, lead forecaster at Columbia University’s International Research Institute for Climate and Society, said two phenomena – La Niña and the North Atlantic Oscillation – are likely responsible for the patterns we’re seeing.
UPDATE2: T Gough in comments points out this discussion on the Met Office website:
For the Australian state of Queensland, there is strong evidence to suggest that La Niña is the main reason for the ongoing widespread flooding. The current floods are also the worst since 1974 – which coincided with the strongest La Niña on record.
They offer this chart:
And this Q&A discussion which is a transcript of a video interview (PDF)
La Nina and severe weather around the world
Adam Scaife – Senior Climate Scientist
What is La Nina?
La Nina is part of a natural climate oscillation in the tropical Pacific. It oscillates between the warm El Nino phase, El Nino is Spanish for ‘the boy’, and the cold La Nina phase. So La Nina is like the cold little sister phase of this oscillation and it’s a purely natural event, occurs every few years as part of this natural oscillation.
Is the flooding in Australia linked to La Nina?
So during La Nina the rainfall that normally falls out over the Pacific shifts west over Indonesia and indeed northern and eastern parts of Australia. So the fact that there’s been lots of flooding in Queensland recently is very consistent with the occurrence of near record La Nina this year.
Is the flooding in Sri Lanka and Brazil linked to La Nina?
So La Nina affects weather patterns throughout the globe but of course the further away you are from the La Nina the more difficult it is to pinpoint the affects, it’s a bit like waving a long stick, the uncertainty grows the further away you are from the source. And so when we look at remoter regions, like Brazil or Sri Lanka, it’s more difficult to attribute the recent flooding events to La Nina. If we take the Brazil case, then when we look in historical records and in our climate models, then southern parts of Brazil are actually dry during La Nina so it would be difficult to attribute the recent flooding near Rio to the La Nina that is going on at the moment. If you go to Sri Lanka that is a little bit more complicated, a little bit less clear because it’s right on the edge of the wet influence from La Nina, but again historically it looks like La Nina tends to drive drier conditions in Sri Lanka so the previous biggest event, or the biggest on record in fact in 1974, Sri Lanka was actually dry.
Is La Nina linked to climate change?
La Nina, El Nino cycles have been going on for a very long time, they’re natural cycles, they’re part of a natural oscillation in the Pacific and indeed when we run our climate models into the future with increasing levels of greenhouse gases then there are no consistent changes in the El Nino, La Nina cycle.
Here’s the video:
While the Met Office may have trouble forecasting winter, they are right about this basic understandign of La Nina. It seem’s there’s a consensus forming that contradicts Somerville’s view of the world.
UPDATE3: My Oz friend Dr. Jennifer Marohasy has this discussion of Eastern Australian rainfall from 2008 and offers this graph, not the 1974 peak. When this graph is updated with the latest rainfall data, it may show a spike similar to 1974.
What the graph demonstrates is that heavy rainfall spikes have occurred in the past, and they are not exclusive to our present with m ore CO2. h/t to reader Crosspatch for this link.
UPDATE4: Crosspatch also points out that BoM now has the most recent rainfall totals online, here is the rainfall for QLD:
Weather history apparently can repeat itself, and the precedent was set before CO2 became a worry.
UPDATE5: See this report about Brazil –
Is the Brazilian flooding catastrophe evidence of another global warming era extreme ?
I think Dr. Richard Somerville needs a swift kick in the butt style reality-check, or perhaps he needs a course in weather history, or both.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
@jtom
AGW predicted stratospheric cooling. It this did not happen, AGW would be refuted. It happened. Likewise with winters warming more than summers and nights more than days. Satellites have measured the radiative imbalance. If there wasn’t one, AGW would be falsified. The ocean cycle theory is falsified by these same tests.
What would cause you to stop believing the theory that we can dump all the CO2 we want into the atmosphere and not seriously affect climate? After all it is only a theory, right?
ABC, September 2003
Drought Vortex
… Climatologists are desperately trying to explain the mystery of where southern Australia’s winter rainfall is going. They’ve known the rain is being pulled south by an unexplained force. Now they’ve devised a revolutionary new theory to explain why. It appears that the circulation of the entire Southern Hemisphere is changing to suck our rain away. The reason is the Antarctic Vortex – a natural tornado of 30km high, super-cold, super-fast winds spiraling around Antarctica. The vortex is not new; it’s one of the engines that drive climate in the Southern Hemisphere. But now it appears the vortex is shifting gear, and is spinning faster and faster, and getting tighter. As it does it’s pulling the climate bands further south dragging rain away from the continent out into the southern ocean. Most disturbing of all we might be responsible for shifting the speed of the vortex. Scientists at the US Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research believe the speeding up of the vortex is caused by the combined effect of global warming and the depletion of the ozone layer over Antarctica. If their theory is true it will have devastating consequences for our southern cities – the drought may not go away. It takes just a slight shift in rainfall patterns for our capital cities to start running out of water – and the reservoirs in Perth, Adelaide, and Melbourne are all dangerously low right now.
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s948858.htm
===
April 2007
Bribie best for desal plant
… THE world’s biggest desalination plant should be built north of Brisbane to drought-proof southeast Queensland
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/features/bribie-best-for-desal-plant/story-e6freoyo-1111113319771
===
October 2007 –
… “The pattern that we’re seeing now in the weather in Australia is very much the pattern was predicted by computer models as much as a decade ago. We will have to get by with less water. The CSIRO’s telling us that. We’re seeing it now, in the evidence before our eyes in our rivers and creeks, and of course the computer models in the global models have been predicting just this now for some years. I think all evidence says that this is our new climate and we have to get by with less water than we’ve ever had before.” – Tim Flannery
http://old.globalpublicmedia.com/transcripts/2833
===
November 2007
La Nina behind Australia’s drought
… “The drought that’s going on in Australia right now is a very serious drought and it is one of the atypical situations associated with this particular La Niña event,” says WMO climate specialist Dr Leslie Malone.
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/2007/2078345.htm
===
October 2010
Desalination plants lose $1m a week
… RESIDENTS are losing at least $1 million a week operating desalination and water recycling plants in Queensland’s flooded southeast.
===
R. Gates says: January 15, 2011 at 9:12 pm
““Unprecedented” flooding continuing in Australia:”
There have been around 40 notable floods in Australia in the last 200 years:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floods_in_Australia
In light of land use changes, population growth, encroachment on flood zones, poor urban planning, etc. I haven’t seen anything about the recent floods that seems unprecedented from a climatic perspective.
Stop handwaving about short term weather events and come back to the Willis’ thread so you can explain to us how effective Global Climate Models are at forecasting climatic conditions many decades into the future…
“unprecedented” in the context of the dam upstream. There is a link in the article that goes to a video in that video I believe you can find the source of the use of “unprecedented” . “Largest outflow in the dam’s history”, is I believe what is unprecedented here and that dam didn’t exist during the earlier flooding.
La Nina and El Nino are becoming the catch all names along with global warming for anything we don’t understand about the weather. Last time I checked, La Nina’s act up in cold water, 40 to 60F degrees and El Ninos act up around 70F degrees of cold water.
Hurricanes need 82F degrees of water 100 feet deep.
La Ninas stir up food for the ocean food chain and during the colder 1970s La Ninas were happening yearly rather than after an EL Nino; bi- annually..
It’s time to pull back and before we throw out catch phrases, have some web sites to back up what we are saying.
@ur momisugly jtom, January 15, 2011 at 7:02 pm
Just a quick, simple question to Sou, lazyteenage, gates, et al, who are convinced of AGW:
Just what evidence would lead you to believe that the global climate models are wrong? If there is none, if there is absolutely no way to falsify A COMPUTER MODEL with real life data, then you are no longer practicing science.
Sorry, jtom, you’re asking the wrong person about computer models. I have no expertise in the design or interpretation of computer models developed to help analyse climate, so it’s meaningless for me to speculate on the efficacy of any of the myriad climate models. Those who design the models would have developed test parameters and protocols. (And I’m not a practising scientist, I’m just another concerned member of the human species.)
In my case, I don’t need to rely on climate models. Where I live we have been seeing the climate change markedly over the last few years. My 90 year old mother, not known for hyperbole, said to me this week that she’s never seen a summer like this one and I agreed. I am well aware that memories are fallible, so I checked the rainfall and temperature data for our local region. We have this summer the most precipitation ever recorded in a single day, the biggest floods ever recorded simultaneously – all while a strong La Nina, which is supposed to bring cooler weather, is not causing temperatures here to drop below even the latest the 30 year average. We’ve had a longer, hotter drought and more major fires this decade (mostly by lightning strikes) than in the previous 70 years at least, combined, despite a much better fire response capability.
One locality isn’t sufficient to illustrate global climate, so I look at the world as a whole. The number of extreme events is reportedly increasing. The number of heat extremes is far outweighing the number of cold extremes. Each decade is hotter than the one before, though if not for the huge rise in greenhouse gases, the earth would be cooling slightly.
I understand the basic physics of how greenhouse gases keep the earth from freezing, having first learnt it during science lectures more than 30 years ago. The CSIRO models were basic then, computers were primitive compared to those used today, yet what the CSIRO scientists suggested then could happen to Australia’s weather as a result of global warming, is taking place already, before our eyes. I expect the scientists then thought it would take longer before becoming so evident and that we’d have done more to address the problem by now. They underestimated human failings.
I’ve referred to the BOM site in a previous post and been told that regular posters here are familiar with it so I won’t repeat the links. I expect readers here are also familiar with the global climate statements produced by US government agencies.
Wivenhoe has a huge capacity — about 1, 165, 000 ML for water storage, plus an additional 1, 165, 000 ML (and a bit) for flood mitigation.
http://www.seqwater.com.au/public/dam-levels
Thank you , Gates and Sou, for your replies.
Gates, you have three conditions: decline in water vapor; restoration of traditional levels of polar ice cover; and decline in decadal global average temperatures.
I tried to find a site reflecting the constant increase in water vapor over time, but with no luck. Perhaps you could point me to a link where they graph that. I did find numerous sites discussing an apparent decline in atmospheric water vapor, resulting in global warming not continuing as expected. Obviously, that’s not what the same data you are looking at. I would appreciate it if you could tell me what data you are watching viz-a-viz global water vapor. I would love to be able to track the water vapor levels, particularly at the moment, since the northern hemisphere seems to be running below average in temperature at the moment.
As far as the recovery of the Arctic ice cover, I believe you will see a start to that this summer, and continue in the future.
I also suspect the decadal global temperatures for 2005-2015 will be less than 1995-2005, but as you say, it will take time to reverse the impression of global warming.
If these predictions do not hold true, then I will swing to your side of the fence. I think all natural signs indicate significant cooling. If we get the opposite, even if not to the degree of the models, then I will feel that something UNnatural is impacting the climate.
Sou: You base your belief on the anecdotes of an elder plus your own understanding of a miniscule slice of science. Everything you see is the fault of global warming, whatever it is. Discussing this with you is about as enlightening as discussing the moon landing with someone who has convinced himself/herself that it was fake. There is no evidence that can be offered that it actually happened, since all evidence is, de facto, fake. There is no proof to you that GW is not happening, because all proof to you is , de facto, proof of GW. So I will not bother reading your posts in the future.
Step 1: assert fact.
Step 2: assert solidity of fact.
Step 3: offer no evidence whatsoever either a priori or a posteriori to back up fact.
Step 4: **** off.
Sou
I don’t know where you live but where I do, in NE NSW, the last two decades have been the some of the coolest since 1910 (max temp means). As far as max temps go, we have just had the coolest spring on record, the 3rd coldest December on record and 2010 was the 3rd coolest year on record.
Rainfall has been above average for the past 3 years.
Do you live in a city?
Fools point to the closest thing that will take the lights off them sitting in the corner on a tall stool with a tall pointy hat and a sign above saying VILLAGE IDIOT.
@ur momisugly Ian, like I said in my post above – local climate is not global climate. I expect you are aware that climates in Victoria and south west WA have changed rather a lot. Northern Australia less so. I hope you are safe from the floods. (The closest capital city is a few hours drive from here and it’s a fair drive to the nearest rural city – I’ve lived and worked in large cities before, but I was raised in the bush and that’s where I prefer to live.)
@ur momisugly jtom, no problem. I’ve been told my writing style puts some people off. That’s just me, I’m afraid. Anyway, if you read my post again you’ll read that I deliberately do NOT base my understanding on anecdotes or observed local climate change. It’s based on world-wide documented evidence and scientific knowledge.
I realise that but you posted about what’s happening in your area – I have pointed out that the opposite is happening in mine.
Since the little ice age, the Earth has been warming naturally. Of course it is still in its warming stage for at least another 2/3C if the Vostok ice core temperature history is to be believed. It will have colder and hotter times on its way but the trend will be upward regardless of CO2.
As far as more extreme weather events, I’m sure you will find them going back into history. As far as Australia is concerned, our worst cyclone was in 1899, our longest heatwave was in 1923/4 and out hottest day was 1960. Our worst bushfire was in Vic in 1851 and our worst floods were in the early 1890s.
If you check the ONI history you can see the drought and flood histories are closely aligned to the table.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears.shtml
Only SE West Aust has been dry during this wet period. This also happened in 1974 when less than 30mm of rain fell in 5 months from Nov 1973 until March 1974 compared to 45mm for Nov, Dec and Jan this time. Same weather conditions, same result.
Check
http://www.bom.gov.au/lam/climate/levelthree/c20thc/flood7.htm
for the climate report from 1974.
Interesting use of before/after photographs of the Brisbane flooding. Some of the old ‘loop’ river channels can be seen refilling.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/infographics/qld-floods/beforeafter.htm
I am a 70+ year old North Queenslander. The BoM knows, and every Australian should know that the highest rainfall in Australia is inland of the Tully/Innisfail/Babinda areas, and most of that water finds its way to the sea through the coastal town of Ingham down the Great Dividing range via the Herbert or Burdekin Rivers. The town of Ingham is therefore mostly flooded in ENSO years.
World Heritage Area legislation stops this problem being addressed as it should be.
Professor Jon Stevenson from JCU ( now retired) gave me a geology lesson many years ago. We stood on the top of the Blencoe Falls on the Herbert River some 50 kms. from the sea, and looked at the huge canyon below the falls that the Herbert River had carved through solid rock over many millions of years flowing to the sea.
The Brisbane story is possibly similar, if one looks closely at the steep Kangaroo Point rock cliffs near the city centre on the Brisbane River. The rainfall in the Brisbane inland area is a very small percentage of the rainfall above the Blencoe Falls on the Atherton Tablelands , but Ingham doesn’t have the political strength of the Queensland capital city, or population that Brisbane has at present..
I am convinced that mankind’s efforts to control carbon in the air will not change these rainfall patterns of the ENSO effect on what seems to be to me an approximate 40 to 60 year cycle. It is a great pity that in an apparent effort to get world peace, protect more wildlife habitat, improve air quality ,and cope with uncontrolled population growth worldwide that we allow, and some people promote, such public ignorance of the true reasons for this constant government promotion on “Climate Change” throughout the world.
Why are we debating weather? Isn’t global warming about the increase of CO2 due to fossil fuel usage which causes global temperature to rise then scorches the earth if we don’t stop the usage of oil?
Can we focus on CO2 and temperature relationship? Isn’t this the core of CAGW theory? If there is no correlation between CO2 and temperature, then the debate is over.
The skeptics win, the truth is out.
Taxpayers rejoice.
hahahahahahahahah “drywet” and “warmcold” hahahahahahah kudos!
Excellent web site, excellent information. All of this reminds on the French thinker Jean de la Bruyère (17th.Century) who said: `The EXACT opposite of what people are told is in fact the truth.´ Gerry Frederics
For those puzzled by Jimmy’s hilarity, it’s about James Sexton’s comment, above:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/14/bogus-claims-on-australia-and-brazilian-floods-from-abc-and-dr-richard-somerville/#comment-574811
Excerpt: “While all of the connections haven’t been made, yet, I think its fairly obvious to any casual observer that drywet is a product of warmcold.”
All of this will eventually force mankind to reappraise its model regarding food security. It needs to start from a household level, with local markets being fed the surplus produce. Local organic = sustainable. Large scale agriculture as we know it is in dire need of change, and the imminent collapse is going to be part of the trigger mechanism that will cause people to seek out the land.
Utter nonsense, Jacques. Bucolic rural phantasies are plain inanity. You want local production? Try vertical farming:
http://weburbanist.com/2008/03/30/5-urban-design-proposals-for-3d-city-farms-sustainable-ecological-and-agricultural-skyscrapers/
@ur momisugly Brian, it all depends on your perspective. I respect your views, and am a great fan of urban farming as an ultimate sustainable solution for city dwellers. However I am heading up a project on the KZN South Coast in South Africa where we are specifically working with rural subsistence farmers, and we’ve got a solid working model where people are actively growing organically and selling their surplus produce via a community based secondary co-operative we’ve helped set up and are supporting. You don’t get much more real than that.
Good for you. I’m sure they will benefit from cutting out artificial inputs and costs. But rural subsistence farmers are NOT a useful model for the rest of us. Despite the wishes of misanthropic ecology-worshipers.
@ur momisugly Brian, agreed that it is not a model for everyone, not by a long shot, but it does work pretty well, and is helping lots of rurfal people to have a better life.