Korean Job Discussion Forums

[sundubuman]

Record low temperatures across almost a third of Australia - 12 Jul 07 -
Found this 'buried' on the internet today from the Australian Government Bureau
of Meteorology. The biased media didn�t even report it.

"Record low daily maximum temperatures were widespread through the tropics.
The areas that were spared included the Cape York Peninsula, the Pilbara and the
Queensland coast north of Townsville. In total, more than 31 per cent of the land
area of Australia recorded lowest maximum temperatures for June.

"Maximum temperatures below 10�C were widespread on 20 June to an extent
never previously seen in tropical Austrailia."

Here�s how cold it was:

Since records began there have only been 12 instances where reporting stations in
tropical Australia failed to reach 10�C and never two on any single day.

On June 20th, 2007 Fourteen different stations failed to reach 10�C!! That statistic
was more than doubled in only one day!!!

Northernmost instance of a maximum under 10�� also occurred at Tennant Creek
(19�S) - 8�C (46�F)

To put this in perspective the southern Yucatan Peninsula is its northern hemisphere
latitudinal equivalent.

Here a few more records that were broken. Keep in mind that these are all-time records.

Boulia - New record: 9.0�C - Old record: 11.1�C

Tambo - New record: 7.3�C - Old record: 11.3�C

Barcaldine - New record: 7.8�C - Old record: 13.8�C
(Broke all-time coldest day by 9�F!!)

[khyber]

Oh well that's it.
Australia experienced a few single DAYS that were the coldest on record, therefore global warming world wide is not occurring.

Brilliant.
http://www.bom.gov.au/silo/products/cli_chg/

[sundubuman]

That's not the point. The point is that such record cold would normally be newsworthy.

Certainly if 1/3 of Australia was experiencing record heat, we'd all be hearing about it for it fits the global warming script.

News of growing glaciers and record cold don't quite fit the meta-narrative, therefore, they are not covered in the mainstream media.

[sundubuman]

From this article

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aeFSX.0e2ga8&refer=home


``Carbon may emerge as the largest commodity market in the world,'' said Imtiaz Ahmad, a senior carbon trader at Morgan Stanley in London. ``As an increasing number of banks enter the energy commodities market, trading carbon is a natural fit.''

Trading in greenhouse-gas allowances tripled last year to $30.1 billion, World Bank figures show.

Citigroup, the largest U.S. bank, said in April it would start European emissions trading in the second quarter. It plans to expand beyond the European market, said Paul Mead, a Citigroup managing director for commodities. The New York-based company expects to make loans and investments of $31 billion in alternative energy sources to combat global warming, bringing its overall target for so-called green projects in the next decade to $50 billion.

[khyber]

[pharflung]

Sundubuman is right, it is newsworthy. And it is not for the reporter or paper to put a spin on it one way or another whether it is another sign of global warming. It is the reporter's job to ask unbiased experts for their opinion, though.

In this case, ocean weather patterns may have been a culprit, although air currents could also be to blame. I don't know anything about weather patterns around Australia. But I do know that changes in ocean temperatures and salinity have the potential to produce major changes in global weather patterns. In some cases this will cause regions to become wetter or warmer than normal, in other cases colder or drier. Australia is surrounded by water, right? But these record temperatures could simply have been normal weather variations, statistically speaking.

The National Weather Service would constitute a source for unbiased experts, most would agree. Back when I was a reporter in Alaska and didn't have much else to do that day, I put a calculator to the 30-year monthly weather stats and found that 14 of the previous 15 years had been above average for temperature and precipitation. So I called the NWS in Anchorage and talked to one of the many friendly, helpful meteorologists there and asked him what was going on. He told me, on the record, that some people believed it was the product of global warming. To say I was flabbergasted to hear this coming from the NWS is almost an understatement. I asked who was saying this, and he gave me additional sources.

That was in 1989. So it had been warming significantly at least since 1974. It has continued to warm all across the state since then, with very serious consequences. That's at least 33 years, now.*

However, there have been some periods of record cold. The February not long before I wrote that story was the coldest on record for Anchorage, with temperatures hovering around minus 45 for about two weeks. At the time, nobody said to me, See, there's no global warming because it was so cold. Alaskans understand how erratic the weather can be.

Winter temperatures in Alaska are heavily dependent on the pattern of arctic airflow and barometric pressure centers. If you get a prolonged period of airflow from the north in the middle of the winter, it is going to get very cold.

On the other hand, you can get airflow from the south bringing in relatively balmy temperatures from the warm Pacific water. When it gets really warm in the middle of the winter, these are called "chinooks," and are often associated with hurricane force winds. On the other hand, southcentral Alaska can also get hurricane force winds when it is 20 below. Heck, I've seen 125-plus mph winds in the middle of winter in southeastern Alaska. But I digress.

That February saw the highest barometric pressure on record for Alaska, so high that jets were prohibited from landing for a while because their altimeters couldn't be calibrated for sea level.

If you have difficulty understanding the relationship between short-term weather extremes and long-term weather trends, try taking a course in statistics.

Statisticians sometimes ask their students to make a sort of dummy list of heads and tails for 30 flips of a coin and write it on the blackboard while they are out of the room. And then actually do 30 flips and write them down. They can always spot the dummy list because the actual results will usually include some prolonged, seemingly improbable, runs of heads or tails. In other words, it is not normal to always have: heads, tails, heads, heads, tails, heads, tails, tails, heads, etc. This is too even a distribution. But in the end, the distribution will approach 50-50.

The same applies to the weather, with two caveats. An outside factor could change the overall temperature distribution. And such a change could actually result in a more extreme distribution, with longer runs of heads or tails, so to speak.

But even with normal weather, where there is no long-term trend toward warmer temperatures, you are going to see random fluctuations due to temporary weather patterns that will produce record cold, warm, dry or wet, sometimes for prolonged periods. That's normal, statistically.

What is significant is the long-term trend.

I have seen the charts of global CO2 levels in the atmosphere and the global temperatures. The two charts correspond closely, and the trend, while not a straight line, has been consistently and significantly higher for both over about the past 150 years.

I cannot imagine any competent statistician in their right mind who actually LOOKS at the data denying that there is an extremely high probability of a correlation between CO2 levels and global warming.


* See these recent stories:

http://www.adn.com/front/story/9125441p-9041671c.html

http://newsminer.com/2007/07/12/7878

[Julius]

There are new records for strange weather broken every year now.

The long term outlook is serious!. we've scre*ed the earth and its climate.

[khyber]

I'm appreciative of your read phar and perhaps I'm reading a bit too much into it but I'm a bit confused:

[pharflung]

sundubuman

[pharflung]

Well, it turns out it is still cold in Australia. Here's a current article from Sydney:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/sydney-shivers-in-record-chill/2007/07/17/1184559742516.html

[Privateer]

[pharflung]

The interesting thing about glaciers in terms of the debate on global warming is that they are virtually oblivious to momentary weather records or even a year or two or ten of warm weather. Glaciers are the accumulation of hundreds of years of snow piled so high and packed so dense that the ice changes color to a sapphire blue and feels dry to the touch. They are nature's barometer of long-term weather trends.

And so when we see glaciers around the world on the retreat, it is reasonable to assume nature has a message for us. It can mean two things: There is less snow falling on the glacier, or it is warming up. Either way, this could mean trouble.

Here is an article in today's New York Times on the retreat of glaciers in and around India.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/science/earth/17glacier.html?pagewanted=all

[sundubuman]

My God Al Gore and the mainstream media has certainly done a good job indoctrinating you.




Here's a (partial) list of the
specific glaciers that are growing:

* NORWAY
�lfotbreen Glacier
Briksdalsbreen Glacier
Nigardsbreen Glacier
Hardangerj�kulen Glacier
Hansebreen Glacier
Jostefonn Glacier
Engabreen glacier (The Engabreen glacier
is the second largest glacier in Norway. It is a
part (a glacial tongue) of the Svartisen glacier,
which has steadily increased in mass since the
1960s when heavier winter precipitation set in.)

* Norway's glaciers growing at record pace. The face of the Briksdal glacier, an off-shoot of the largest glacier in Norway and mainland Europe, is growing by an average 7.2 inches (18 centimeters) per day. (From the Norwegian daily Bergens Tidende.) See http://www.sepp.org/controv/afp.html


Click here to see mass balance of Norwegian glaciers:
http://www.nve.no/

Choose "English" (at top of the page), choose "Water,"
then "Hydrology," then "Glaciers and Snow" from the menu.
You'll see a list of all significant glaciers in Norway.
(Thanks to Leif-K. Hansen for this info.)
* CANADA
Helm Glacier
Place Glacier

* ECUADOR
Antizana 15 Alpha Glacier

* SWITZERLAND
Silvretta Glacier

* KIRGHIZTAN
Abramov

* RUSSIA
Maali Glacier (This glacier is surging. See below)

* GREENLAND See Greenland Icecap Growing Thicker
Greenland glacier advancing 7.2 miles per year! The BBC recently ran a documentary, The Big Chill, saying that we could be on the verge of an ice age. Britain could be heading towards an Alaskan-type climate within a decade, say scientists, because the Gulf Stream is being gradually cut off. The Gulf Stream keeps temperatures unusually high for such a northerly latitude.

One of Greenland�s largest glaciers has already doubled its rate of advance, moving forward at the rate of 12 kilometers (7.2 miles) per year. To see a transcript of the documentary, go to http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/bigchilltrans.shtml

* NEW ZEALAND
All 48 glaciers in the Southern Alps have grown during the past year.
The growth is at the head of the glaciers, high in the mountains, where they
gained more ice than they lost. Noticeable growth should be seen at the
foot of the Fox and Franz Josef glaciers within two to three years.(27 May 2003)
Fox, Franz Josef glaciers defy trend - New Zealand's two best-known
glaciers are still on the march - 31 Jan 07 - See Franz Josef Glacier
.
.

* SOUTH AMERICA
- Argentina's Perito Moreno Glacier (the largest glacier in Patagonia)
is advancing at the rate of 7 feet per day. The 250 km� ice formation,
30 km long, is one of 48 glaciers fed by the Southern Patagonian Ice
Field. This ice field, located in the Andes system shared with Chile,
is the world's third largest reserve of fresh water.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perito_Moreno_Glacier

- Chile's Pio XI Glacier (the largest glacier in the southern hemisphere)
is also growing.

* UNITED STATES
- Colorado (scroll down to see AP article)
- Washington (Mount St. Helens, Mt. Rainier* and Mt. Shuckson)
(scroll down to see photo of Mt. Baker)
- California (Mount Shasta - scroll down for info)
- Montana (scroll down for info)
- Alaska (Mt. McKinley and Hubbard).
(scroll down to see article on Hubbard Glacier)

*

Mount St. Helens� Crater Glacier Advancing Three Feet Per Day
25 Jun 07 - See Crater Glacier
.
.
*

Mount St. Helens glacier (Crater Glacier) growing 50 feet per year September 20, 2004 - See Mount St. Helens

*

Glaciers growing on California's Mount Shasta!
12 Oct 03 - See Mount Shasta Glaciers Growing
*

Geologists Unexpectedly Find 100 Glaciers in Colorado
7 Oct 01 See Colorado Glaciers Growing
* Washington's Nisqually Glacier is Growing
See Nisqually Glacier
*

Glaciers in Montana's Glacier Park on the verge of growing
5 Oct 2002. See Glacier Park
* Antarctic Ice Sheet is growing thicker
See Antarctic Icecap Growing Thicker
See construction crane buried in the Antarctic Ice Sheet

* * *

[pharflung]

Are you a mindreader, sundubuman? Because if you are, you aren't a very good one. Heck, you aren't even a very good reader.

I could have sworn I had already addressed the point that some glaciers would grow as a consequence of global warming. But then maybe you were helping to make my point.

However, it is also possible for a glacier to advance for a year or two as part of a long-term retreat. To cherry pick such ephemeral data would be misleading. And I can't help wonder how a glacier can advance in Glacier National Park that already has melted - but then I am not an expert on Montana, aside from visiting the park.

I have never read any of Al Gore's books and have not seen his documentery. None of these had been produced, and Al Gore was not even vice president, when I wrote my article on glaciers; someone named J. Danforth Quayle was.

I did, however, vote for Al Gore for president, as did 50 percent of American voters plus about 500,000 more, minus five people on the U.S. Supreme Court. And I would do so again in a heartbeat.

[Julius]

Subhuman- I don't doubt that some glaciers in some localised areas are growing, due to increased snowfall.

However that means nothing when you look at the bigger picture.

With rising sea and air temperatures documented worldwide, you have increased evaporation and thus precipitation in places. Such as more snow falling on your aformentioned glaciers.The glaciers you site are all nevertheless in areas where the climate has warmed.

Nobody is pretending to fully understand the effects of climate change. Its effects are varied all over the globe, no one rule fits every scenario. But whats obvious is that an increasingly abnormal climate is being recorded worldwide. The fact your glaciers are advancing so rapidly is a cause for concern in itself.