Everton F.C new stadium.
On the banks of the Mersey River.
Fingers crossed their theory of sea level rise is just that.
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
For the last 2 months it seems Perth has been freezing.
Any takers?
Any concerns?
..but not as freezing as Neptune.
Which is also experiencing significant atmospheric change and temperature fluctuations.
www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2023/hubble-neptunes-disappearing-clouds-linked-to-the-solar-cycle
solarsystem.nasa.gov/news/2219/new-study-finds-unexpected-temperature-changes-on-neptune/
But it is still the windiest planet in the solar system.
Chong said that due to the location of the planned stadium at Bramley-Moore dock, it has had to be designed to factor in climate change and the possibility of future floods.
So what exactly is it - sea level rise or floods?
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
Chong said that due to the location of the planned stadium at Bramley-Moore dock, it has had to be designed to factor in climate change and the possibility of future floods.
So what exactly is it - sea level rise or floods?
www.bom.gov.au/australia/flood/knowledge-centre/understanding.shtml#:~:text=A%20flood%20is%20an%20overflow,a%20reservoir%2C%20canal%20or%20dam.
link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjp/s13360-023-04386-3
This in response to Alimonti's claims (in a letter) about AGW concensus.
"Alimonti is correct about one point:
verification of a scientific hypothesis
is based on empirical confirmation,
not consensus. However, the general
public use expert opinion as a heu-
ristic to guide their views on compli-
cated scientific matters. As there is a
large gap between perceived scientif-
ic agreement and the 97% reality, this
necessitates communication of the
overwhelming consensus."
And a Media Watch summary:
www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/episodes/climate/14066146
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
Chong said that due to the location of the planned stadium at Bramley-Moore dock, it has had to be designed to factor in climate change and the possibility of future floods.
So what exactly is it - sea level rise or floods?
Cos it can't be both?
A saving of nearly 2K for a 'climate ticket' on the proviso you get a permanent tattoo.
Austria is offering free rail travel for a year - if you get a tattoo.But it's not just any inked design. Anyone brave enough will need to get a tattoo of the rail card name, Klimaticket, etched onto their skin - and in return they'll get a saving of more than ?1,000 (?850).
This country is offering free rail travel for a year - if you get a tattoo (msn.com)
I thought Pcdefender might like to know that August 2023, at 20.4 degrees, was 1.6 degrees warmer than the climate average. The same average maximum as for next month.
Over 1,600 Scientists Sign 'No Climate Emergency' Declaration | The Epoch Times
International scientists have jointly signed a declaration dismissing the existence of a climate crisis and insisting that carbon dioxide is beneficial to Earth.
"There is no climate emergency," the Global Climate Intelligence Group (CLINTEL) said in its World Climate Declaration (pdf), made public in August.
"Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.
"A total of 1,609 scientists and professionals from around the world have signed the declaration, including 321 from the United States.
The coalition pointed out that Earth's climate has varied as long as it has existed, with the planet experiencing several cold and warm phases
. The Little Ice Age only ended as recently as 1850, they said.
"Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming," the declaration said. Warming is happening "far slower" than predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
"Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools," the coalition said, adding that these models "exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases" and "ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.
" For instance, even though climate alarmists characterize CO2 as environmentally-damaging, the coalition pointed out that the gas is "not a pollutant."Carbon dioxide is "essential" to all life on earth and is "favorable" for nature. Extra CO2 results in the growth of global plant biomass while also boosting the yields of crops worldwide.
CLINTEL also dismissed the narrative of global warming being linked to increased natural disasters like hurricanes, floods, and droughts, stressing that there is "no statistical evidence" to support these claims.
"There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050.
Go for adaptation instead of mitigation; adaptation works whatever the causes are," it said."To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. This is precisely the problem of today's climate discussion to which climate models are central.
Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. Should not we free ourselves from the naive belief in immature climate models?
"Climate Models and Sunlight Reflection Among the CLINTEL signatories are two Nobel laureates-physicists John Francis Clauser from the United States and Ivan Giaever, a Norwegian-American. Mr. Clauser has made a significant addition to climate models to dismiss the narrative of global warming: the visible light reflected by cumulus clouds which, on average, cover half of the earth.
All over the news this morning is warnings of blackouts over the next decade.
Energy Minister's response was to get angry about the truth being discussed.
These warnings are despite abundant coal and gas and uranium and the highest uptake of roof top solar in the world in a country that gets plenty of sunny days. We are literally going to be sitting in the dark FFS.
All the climate change alarmists can rest easy knowing that the most vunerable people in the community will suffer the most when cheap and reliable energy is no longer available.
But there is a solution
Sounds like we need EV vehicles and Wind farms to solve the problem. Better get more mines happening, maybe 10 fold more, maybe 20 fold, we are going to need more copper and more lithium and more rare earth minerals to build those batteries and wind farms. Great environmental outcome hey, lets dig up the world and sell it as sustainable solutions.
I work in the electrical industry, at a conference this week with all the big players touting the latest sustainable tech. EV chargers and EV distribution boards were the flavour of the day. Everyone agreed that there is no way EV vehicles can work for the majority of people, the infrastructure upgrades required to the electrical grid are massive but who cares we will just keep selling the dream so we can feel good about saving the world from climate change, cause its not about hitting sales budgets.
Select to expand quoteremery said..
... was 1.6 degrees warmer than the climate average...
Is that a 'thing' now - THE climate average.
Is the science of the average 'in' ?
..its a single fixed value accurate to one decimal place of Celsius degree ?
I guess you could make anything greater or lesser than 'the average' simply depending on what value you chose to average.
Last year I was 1.5 years older than my average age of the previous two years.
Yet this year I am 5.5 years older than my average age of the last ten years.
That means I have aged in the last year at a rate that is 3.7 times greater than the rate I aged in the previous year.
- whoa a 367% increase I tells ya.
I blame the vax though, not climate change.
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
Over 1,600 Scientists Sign 'No Climate Emergency' Declaration | The Epoch Times
International scientists have jointly signed a declaration dismissing the existence of a climate crisis and insisting that carbon dioxide is beneficial to Earth.
I just went and had a look at the signatories clintel.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/WCD-version-081423.pdf The vast majority of signatories have no training in meteorology. Rather, it appears to be a list of people who have a tertiary education and an opinion, but very few of them actually are researchers in climate science.
It reminds of when Linus Pauling (Nobel Laureate Chemistry and seriously smart dude) spruiked Vitamin C despite not having any training or high level understanding of human physiology. Sometimes not swimming in your own lane(scientifically) just leads to a pool full of muddled water.I did read a epistemology paper once (a looong time ago admittedly) that argued that with any scientific debate, it should follow Pareto's rule ( the 80/20 one). That is, for any theory, 20% of scientists should have dissenting views. Any less than 20% means the theory may not have been adequately assessed. Dissenting views are a necessity to ensure we have looked at the evidence from all points of view and not fallen for the traps of hueristics, bias and a lack of academic vigour. My suspicion is that a sizable chunk of the signatories on that list have fallen into the trap, blinded by the intellectual arrogance that sometimes comes with a tertiary education. A wise man knows what he does not know. There are very few true wise men, but quite a few with an intellectual ego that makes a lot of noise.
Just in case anyone missed it, Twiggy (Andrew Forrest) has said in a bull**** seminar or similar that climate change is a big problem, or words to that effect, not because of the temperature increase, because of the humidity increase, "humans can't survive humidity"
Der yep, guess that's why I died everytime I went to Thailand.
Select to expand quotepsychojoe said..
Just in case anyone missed it, Twiggy (Andrew Forrest) has said in a bull**** seminar or similar that climate change is a big problem, or words to that effect, not because of the temperature increase, because of the humidity increase, "humans can't survive humidity"
Der yep, guess that's why I died everytime I went to Thailand.
Twiggy probably read the recent news article about scientific research on heat index as a measure of heat stress with climate change.
Select to expand quotepsychojoe said..
Just in case anyone missed it, Twiggy (Andrew Forrest) has said in a bull**** seminar or similar that climate change is a big problem, or words to that effect, not because of the temperature increase, because of the humidity increase, "humans can't survive humidity"
Der yep, guess that's why I died everytime I went to Thailand.
You do understand how humidity affects your body's ability to maintain a stable internal temperature?
You can survive in 37+degrees as long as you can cool yourself via evaporative cooling.
As humidity approaches 100% the evaporation rate decreases.
At 37? and 100% humidity you're gonna struggle to prevent your internal temperature rising, you'll get heat stress then heat stroke and eventually organ failure and death.
If you're working in 40+ degrees, the humidity can be substantially lower for the same effect.
"It is not clear what Dr Brown's motives are for making such false allegations, but his claims are now fuelling media-led propaganda to mislead the public about the risks of climate change."
www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/news/newspapers-are-using-climate-researchers-false-claims-about-journal-bias-to-mislead-readers/
rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/the-narrative-rules
no motive there are just rules to get published .
Select to expand quoteRango said..
rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/the-narrative-rules
no motive there are just rules to get published .
The Nature reviewer reports are there for all to see.
"The second aspect that is a concern is the use of wildfire growth as the key variable. As the authors acknowledge there are numerous factors that play a confounding role in wildfire growth that are not directly accounted for in this study (L37-51). Vegetation type (fuel), ignitions (lightning and people), fire management activities ( direct and indirect suppression, prescribed fire, policies such as fire bans and forest closures) and fire load."
www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06444-3#MOESM2
The authors chose not to follow this, and other peer reviewer recommendations. Why do you suppose that was?
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1696910491786858571.html
Select to expand quoteremery said..Rango said..
rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/the-narrative-rules
no motive there are just rules to get published .
The Nature reviewer reports are there for all to see.
"The second aspect that is a concern is the use of wildfire growth as the key variable. As the authors acknowledge there are numerous factors that play a confounding role in wildfire growth that are not directly accounted for in this study (L37-51). Vegetation type (fuel), ignitions (lightning and people), fire management activities ( direct and indirect suppression, prescribed fire, policies such as fire bans and forest closures) and fire load."
www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06444-3#MOESM2
The authors chose not to follow this, and other peer reviewer recommendations. Why do you suppose that was?
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1696910491786858571.html
He covered all this in his editorial.
The publisher liked what they saw and ran with it, reviewers recommendations were already considered before submission.
How do we know the elite journal would have rejected the paper if it included the additional detail? It's just the author's assertion.
Update: September 2023 mean maximum was 22.3 degrees. That is 2 degrees warmer than the climate mean maximum for Perth.
