|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
chris_J2
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Location: From Brisbane, Au.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
chris_J2
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Location: From Brisbane, Au.
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:10 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
BRISBANE has recorded its hottest November in at least nine years as the city braces for more sweltering days next weekend.
Cape Moreton, off Brisbane, had a monthly average minimum of 21C, its highest for November in 95 years, while Bollon, on the western Darling Downs, had an average maximum of 37C, its highest for the month in 98 years.
Brisbane had its hottest November day in nine years, with 34.8C on Sunday and its average of 29C was 1C above the long-term normal.
With hot and hazy conditions around much of the state yesterday, the weather bureau issued fire warnings for large parts of Queensland.
National Climate Centre meteorologist Blair Trewin said Queensland's average spring temperature was 1.19C above normal, the seventh-highest on record. Australia wide, spring temperatures were the third-highest on record, reflecting heatwaves that hit southern states in August and last month.
"You don't have to go too far south of Queensland to get into widespread record-breaking conditions for November," Dr Trewin said.
Weather bureau forecaster Jeff Sabburg said that, on average, Queensland's spring was drier and hotter than normal, with exceptional dust storms in September.
Weatherzone meteorologist Matt Pearce said Brisbane picked up just 31mm of rainfall in November, a long way short of its average of 126mm.
"Rainfall at this time of year across Queensland can often be fairly hit and miss," he said. "Inland, much of the rain tends to come from showers and storms, which have been slow to get going this year. Along the coast, onshore winds, which typically bring showers, have also been less prevalent."
Sydney and Melbourne recorded their hottest November in 150 years and Tasmania and SA also broke records. |
Hardly 'evidence of cooling'. 
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26423124-5018248,00.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One hot November is hardly evidence of "warming" either.
Come on now...you're better than this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chris_J2
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Location: From Brisbane, Au.
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:48 pm Post subject: AGW |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Australia wide, spring temperatures were the third-highest on record, reflecting heatwaves that hit southern states in August and last month |
T.U.M., I'd be the first to discount isolated figures in just ONE city (or even State), but records are being smashed all around the country.
Agreed though, we need untainted, uncorrupted scientific research, free of political interference or money. CRU have done the scientific community a huge disservice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The house of cards is falling
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j_dt9Bjj5yVV7k1PAyDnVHKvKtgAD9CAM0VG0
UK climate scientist to temporarily step down
(AP) � 12 hours ago
LONDON � Britain's University of East Anglia says the director of its prestigious Climatic Research Unit is stepping down pending an investigation into allegations that he overstated the case for man-made climate change.
The university says Phil Jones will relinquish his position until the completion of an independent review into allegations that he worked to alter the way in which global temperature data was presented.
The allegations were made after more than a decade of correspondence between leading British and U.S. scientists were posted to the Web following the security breach last month.
The e-mails were seized upon by some skeptics of man-made climate change as proof that scientists are manipulating the data about its extent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| One hot November is hardly evidence of "warming" either.. |
Do you believe sattelite images of the arctic losing 30+% of its ice in recent decades are fraudulent? Just someone with photoshop? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Junior wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| One hot November is hardly evidence of "warming" either.. |
Do you believe sattelite images of the arctic losing 30+% of its ice in recent decades are fraudulent? Just someone with photoshop? |
AGW fraudsters certainly aren't above photoshopping images to prop up their lies. Al Gore has done it.
Anyway, satellite images taken in the middle of summer don't mean a thing. The ice comes back in the winter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chris_J2
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Location: From Brisbane, Au.
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:12 am Post subject: Fraud |
|
|
| visitorq is a fraud! And probably a clandestine employee of Exxon, to boot! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
The CSIRO is just another corrupt, government-run hack organization that received much of it's data from the CRU. It even still uses Micheal Mann's bogus hockey stick model. Many of the top Australian climate scientists tow the exact same line as the fraudsters in the US and UK (sharing the exact same data), and have deliberately covered up data by skeptics like John Daly:
| Quote: |
From: John Daly <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Climatic warming in Tasmania
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 20:04:00 +1100
Cc: Ed Cook <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], Mike Barbetti <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected]
Dear Neville,
You mentioned to me some time ago that in your view, the 11-year solar cycle
did not influence temperature. There have been numerous attempts by
academics to establish a correlation, but each has been shot down on some
ground or other. I remember Barrie Pittock was especially dismissive of
attempts to correlate solar cycle with temperature.
Have you tried this approach?
Load "Mathematica" into your PC and run the following set of instructions -
data = ReadList[ "c:\sydney.txt", Number]
dataElements = Length[data]
X = ListPlot[ data, PlotJoined-> True];
fourierTrans = Fourier[data];
ListPlot[Abs[fourierTrans], PlotJoined -> True];
fitfun1 = Fit[data,{1,x,x^2,x^3,Sin[11 2 Pi x/dataElements],
Cos[11 2 Pi x/dataElements]},x];
fittable = Table[N[fitfun1], {x, dataElements}];
Y = ListPlot[fittable, PlotJoined -> True];
Show[X, Y]
The reference to "c:\sydney.txt" is a suggested pathname for the following
set of data - which is Sydney's annual mean temperature.
16.8 16.5 16.8 17 17 16.7 17.1 17.4 17.9 17.4 17.2 17.1 16.9 17 17.2 17.2 17.4
17.6 17.6 17.6 16.7 17.1 16.8 17.4 16.8 17.3 17.8 17.5 17.1 17.2 17.6 17.3 17.1
16.9 16.9 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.6 17.5 17.4 17.2 17.1 17.3 17.2 17.2 16.9 17.5 17.4
17.2 17 17.5 17.4 17.5 17.7 18.3 17.8 17.4 17.2 17.4 18.3 17.3 18 18.1 18 17.5
17.3 18 17 18.2 17.4 17.6 17.5 17.4 17.1 17.4 17.3 17.5 17.7 18 17.8 18 17.4
17.8 16.8 17.5 17.4 17.6 17.6 17.2 17.4 17.9 17.9 17.6 17.7 17.8 17.7 17.6 17.8
18.3 18 17.6 17.8 17.8 17.8 18.1 17.9 17.5 17.8 18.3 18 17.7 17.3 17.5 18.5 17.4
17.8 17.7 17.8 17.7 18 18.5 18.2 17.8 18.1 17.5 17.8 17.8 18 18.6 18.1 18.1
18.6
So Far so good.
"Mathematica" first plots out the data itself (see Atachment 1)
The first part of the instruction set lets "mathematica" do a Fourier Transform
on the data, ie. searching out the periodicities, if there are any. The result is
shown on Attachment 2.
The transform result shows a sharp spike at the 11 year point (I wonder
what is significant about 11 years?). The second part of the instructions
now acts upon this observed spike (the Cos 11 bit), to extract it's
waveform from the rest of the noise. The result is shown as a waveform
in attachment 3, the waves having an 11-year period, with the long-term
Sydney warming easily evident.
Attachment 4 shows the original Sydney data overlaid against the 11-year
periodicity.
It would appear that the solar cycle does indeed affect temperature.
(I tried the same run on the CRU global temperature set. Even though CRU
must be highly smoothed by the time all the averages are worked out, the
11-year pulse is still there, albeit about half the size of Sydneys).
Stay cool. |
| Quote: |
From: "Michael E. Mann" <mann@xxxx>
To: "Jim Salinger" <j.salinger@xxxx>, Phil Jones <p.jones@xxxx>, Barrie.Pittock@xxxx, m.hulme@xxxx, "Neville Nicholls" <n.nicholls@xxxx>
Subject: RE: Recent climate sceptic research and the journal Climate Research
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 09:05:47 -0400
Cc: n.nicholls@xxxx, Peter.Whetton@xxxx, Roger.Francey@xxxx, David.Etheridge@xxxx, Ian.Smith@xxxx, Simon.Torok@xxxx, Willem.Bouma@xxxx, pachauri@xxxx, Greg.Ayers@xxxx, Rick.Bailey@xxxx, Graeme.Pearman@xxxx, mmaccrac@xxxx, tcrowley@xxxx, rbradley@xxxx,
Dear Jim,
Thanks for your continued interest and help w/ all this. It's nice to know that our friends
down under are doing their best to fight the misinformation. It is true that the skeptics
twist the truth clockwise rather than counterclockwise in the Southern Hemisphere?
There was indeed a lot of activity last week. Hans Von Storch's resignation as chief editor
of CR, which I think took a lot of guts, couldn't have come at a better time. It was on the
night before before the notorious "James Inhofe", Chair of the Senate "Environment and
Public Works Committee" attempted to provide a public stage for Willie Soon and David
Legates to peddle their garbage (the Soon & Baliunas junk of course, but also the usual
myths about the satellite record, 1940s-1970s cooling, "co2 is good for us" and "but water
vapor is the primary greenhouse gas!").
Fortunately, these two are clowns, neither remotely as sharp as Lindzen or as slick as
Michaels, and it wasn't too difficult to deal with them. Suffice it to say, the event did
*not* go the way Inhofe and the republicans had hoped. The democrats, conveniently, had
received word of Hans' resignation, but the republicans and Soon/Legates had not. So when,
quite fittingly, Jim Jeffords (you may remember--he's the U.S. senator who was in the news
a couple years ago for tilting the balance of power back to the democrats when he left the
republican party in protest) hit them with this news at the hearing, they were caught
completely off guard. The "Wall Street Journal" article you cited was icing on the cake.
Inhofe, who rails against the liberal media, will have a difficult time doing so against
the WSJ!
Also of interest to you (attached) might be the op-ed that Ray Bradley, Phil, and I have
written and submitted to the "Seattle News Tribune" in response to an op-ed by Baliunas
(also attached) that some industry group has been sending around to various papers over the
last week. Only two (Providence Journal and Seattle NT) have thusfar bitten...
There is a rumour that Harvard may have had enough w/ their name being dragged through the
mud by the activities of Baliunas and Soon, and that "something is up". Baliunas and Soon,
as alluded to in the WSJ article, are now no longer talking to the media. Will keep you
posted on that...
mike |
Neville Nicholls (Bureau of Meteorology in Australia) is in many of the emails, colluding directly with Phil Jones and Michael Mann. CSIRO scientist, Dr. Roger J. Francey also received the emails. He won the "Victoria Prize" for his climate research, despite covering up data...
| chris_J2 wrote: |
| visitorq is a fraud! And probably a clandestine employee of Exxon, to boot! |
At least I'm not mentally ill like you... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 3:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Why is it that you only ever quote bunk sources? NASA's credibility is shot. The only thing those pictures show conclusively is that the ice cover area is the same now as it was then.
| Quote: |
Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) had their attorneys file three Notices of Intent to File Suit against NASA. Chris Horner, representing CEI, said NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies failed to comply with the Freedom of Information Act for the past three years. Some Goddard employees were mentioned in the CRU hacked account now known as Climategate. In it, thousands of documents revealed a clear attempt by scientists to manipulate scientific data to make it look like the planet has been getting warmer. There were also discussions of blocking peer reviewed papers showing contrarian proof that the planet has actually been cooling. Britain�s Climate Research Unit, University of East Anglia has been the primary source of information for the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), the group along with Al Gore that won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for scaring the world into thinking that the planet is warmer than ever due to human activity. This has been disputed by many scientists but most media outlets have ignored contrarian views under the assumption that the science is in and the debate is over. Think again. Numerous links are posted throughout this story. Also check out some of the slide shows at the bottom of this page.
NASA's reports have been questioned here by both my reports and my predecessor. This began last year, when a report on Sea Ice itself showed that melting has stopped and the ice expanded. The scientists, baffled, tried to come up with an excuse. These questionable tactics were highlighted to much scrutiny. Then last winter, a report of faulty NASA sensors revealed that ice the size of California in the arctic had been shown as missing, but was there the whole time. However the reports on Arctic ice never reflected the return of the missing section, making it look like less is present. |
http://www.examiner.com/x-11224-Baltimore-Weather-Examiner~y2009m11d25-Climategate-CEI-to-sue-NASA-Goddard-for-Climate-Change-fraud
Better luck next time!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 3:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
For those that were worried about there being no crabs or other shellfish.
You're going to love this visitorq:
http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=7545&tid=282&cid=63809&ct=162
"In a striking finding that raises new questions about carbon dioxide�s (CO2) impact on marine life, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) scientists report that some shell-building creatures�such as crabs, shrimp and lobsters�unexpectedly build more shell when exposed to ocean acidification caused by elevated levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2).
..............."
mmmmmmmm I love crab |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 3:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.cphpost.dk/news/national/88-national/47643-denmark-rife-with-co2-fraud.html
"Authorities in several countries investigate VAT tax fraud stemming from the Danish CO2 quota register
Denmark is the centre of a comprehensive tax scam involving CO2 quotas, in which the cheats exploit a so-called �VAT carrousel�, reports Ekstra Bladet newspaper.
Police and authorities in several European countries are investigating scams worth billions of kroner, which all originate in the Danish quota register. The CO2 quotas are traded in other EU countries.
................"
I thought those of us on the sceptical side were supposed to be a greedy ones. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) had their attorneys file three Notices of Intent to File Suit against NASA. |
The "Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI)" was founded in 1984 to spread misinformation about Global warming and environmentalism to safeguard the fossil fuel industry.
It is Funded by:
Exxon Mobil
American Petroleum Institute
Dow Chemicals
General Motors
EBCO Corp
etc....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competitive_Enterprise_Institute
| Quote: |
| In May 2006, CEI's global warming policy activities gained fame as it embarked upon an ad campaign with two television commercials[2]. These ads promote carbon dioxide and argue that global warming is not a problem. One focuses on the message that CO2 is misrepresented as a pollutant, stating that "it�s essential to life. We breathe it out. Plants breathe it in... They call it pollution. We call it life."[7] The other states that the world's glaciers are "growing, not melting... getting thicker, not thinner."[7] It cites Science articles to support its claims. However, the editor for Science stated that the ad "misrepresents the conclusions of the two cited Science papers... by selective referencing". The author of the articles, Curt Davis, director of the Center for Geospatial Intelligence at the University of Missouri-Columbia, said CEI was misrepresenting his previous research to back their claims. "These television ads are a deliberate effort to confuse and mislead the public about the global warming debate," he said. |
In other words...you've quoted a bogus organisation dedicated to spreading lies....funded by Big Oil.
Better luck next time !! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Junior wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) had their attorneys file three Notices of Intent to File Suit against NASA. |
The "Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI)" was founded in 1984 to spread misinformation about Global warming and environmentalism to safeguard the fossil fuel industry.
It is Funded by:
Exxon Mobil
American Petroleum Institute
Dow Chemicals
General Motors
EBCO Corp
etc....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competitive_Enterprise_Institute
| Quote: |
| In May 2006, CEI's global warming policy activities gained fame as it embarked upon an ad campaign with two television commercials[2]. These ads promote carbon dioxide and argue that global warming is not a problem. One focuses on the message that CO2 is misrepresented as a pollutant, stating that "it�s essential to life. We breathe it out. Plants breathe it in... They call it pollution. We call it life."[7] The other states that the world's glaciers are "growing, not melting... getting thicker, not thinner."[7] It cites Science articles to support its claims. However, the editor for Science stated that the ad "misrepresents the conclusions of the two cited Science papers... by selective referencing". The author of the articles, Curt Davis, director of the Center for Geospatial Intelligence at the University of Missouri-Columbia, said CEI was misrepresenting his previous research to back their claims. "These television ads are a deliberate effort to confuse and mislead the public about the global warming debate," he said. |
In other words...you've quoted a bogus organisation dedicated to spreading lies....funded by Big Oil.
Better luck next time !! |
That's fine, since the source I quoted wasn't the CEI. The CEI happened to be mentioned, that's all. It's also funny to note that the source you quoted to "prove" the CEI is funded by big oil is... wikipedia.
Time to get a new hobby junior. You suck at being a troll. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
