Hey Peter

WARMERLAND BLUES

It is shocking to see such stuff coming from a member of the Academy. So it goes in the crazy world of Warmerland.

You claim: "the increasingly weird weather WA is expereincing fits the general predictions by climate scientists."

Nothing could be further from the truth. There are no established laws of climate change, nor will there ever be such laws. It's irreducibly complex. There can, therefore, be no genuine predictions - merely guesstimates.

Once upon a time, folk attributed such phenomena to either (i) acts of God or (ii) the work of the Devil, depending on whether they were considered beneficial or malevolent events.

Fortunately, we have moved on from such primitive beliefs, where they projected their fears and anxieties about the future onto Nature. We have instead alarmist climate astrologers (with their obscenely expensive supercomputers) and moralising AGW evangelists, who attribute the cause of all our - present and future - woes to "climate change".

This expression has morphed from a descriptive word about what the climate has done ever since the Earth acquired an atmosphere - namely CHANGE - to alarmist code for something bad that is happening or about to happen - and that is invariably OUR FAULT.

Peter, if your still have an open mind on this issue, and can stand a tussle with what climatologist Judith Curry calls "the uncertainty monster", go to www.judithcurry.com and check out OVERCONFIDENCE IN IPCC'S DETECTION AND ATTRIBUTION: part III.

Alice (in Warmerland)

ALICE'S FIRST LAW: "Whenever scientists are funded from the public purse to study any phenomenon - but especially climate - it always increases in the worst possible direction."

OK for those who are genuinely interested:
Yes the models do include convection and ocean/atmosphere coupling. they model it accurately enough to reproduces the main climate driving structures in the oceans such as the South Pacific Convergence Zone (SPCZ), the InterTropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) as well as the basic Walker Circulation that conveys heat from tropics to poles. What they cannot do very well is handle areas smaller than a few square kilometres...more computer grunt for that.

They wouldn't be "modelling" the atmosphere if these basic features were not reproduced. These models also reproduce the ENSO (El Nino/La Nina) oscillations that occur pseudo-randomly (3-8 year cycles) as well as Indian Ocean Dipole, the Monsoon and several other important climate drivers.

Unlike economic "models", there is only known, proven mathematics that is based on physics...no dodgy non-physical relations are included. Of the 40 or so Climate models, most are assessed based on the 1850 - 1990 period and only if they model the past reasonably well are they used to "predict" the future. Of the future model runs, several related models are run several times with minor differences in initial conditions: Only effects that are consistently reproduced are said to be "predictions" of the model. All the uncertain, but possible extremes are discarded or put into the "pending" category.
Climate modelling is *Very* conservative! Especially compared to economic or social "modelling" which bears very, very little resemblance.

There was a quote in "Jurassic Park" along the lines of "Global Warming could bring on the next ice age"...via the shutting down of the "conveyer belt" currents that make Europe warm. I guess the concept that "warming" may drive the heat cycle faster, thus cooling areas adjacent to the poles, is just too complex for the basic Cost-Gain mindset! (but I hope some of you see that the world is not as simple as our lounge room heaters!)

Funny how any predictions are seen as "alarmist" yet when they come true they are "irrelevant". I can't wait for the wails of "they should have done something" when the really alarming stuff starts happening!

Akice writes

'Once upon a time, folk attributed such phenomena to either (i) acts of God or (ii) the work of the Devil, depending on whether they were considered beneficial or malevolent events'

In actual fact I am sure God is having a good laugh at the arrogance of man who continue to think they know what is going on despite their failed prophecies time and time again.

ozandy "I can't wait for the wails of "they should have done something" when the really alarming stuff starts happening!

I can't wait for the wails of the alarmists when we start putting them in jails for false prophesy over AGW when really they are just nasty people hating eco nuts, who, "despite an estimated spend of more than £64billion since 1990 looking for a human global temperature signal, assessed against geological reality, no compelling empirical evidence yet exists for a measurable, let alone worrisome, human impact on global average temperature."

but that's just me ..

ozandy "Funny how any predictions are seen as "alarmist" yet when they come true they are "irrelevant""

So tell us what cataclysms have been predicted that have come true, oh seer of the future?

Please don't come the raw climate astrologer and say you predicted .. "weather stuff", and lo, it happened .. come on, some big event please .. or STFU (Or like the UK Met, mild winter, and got the opposite is more like it)

Hey, ozandy, why not predict, right here on OLO, an event, say in the next year and we'll see if it happens? A biggie, attributable to nothing but AGW .. should be easy, with that future predicting climate modeling stuff .. put up, or admit you can't tell the future and it's got as much credibility as astrology .. vague at best, dangerous at worst.

I'm one of those wise people who state that "I know that I don't know"
when it comes to climate change etc.

There is no doubt that we've had a shocking year this year. We did
too, in 1914.

The explanations I've read by Wenju Cai, actually sound quite
plausible, given the little bit that I understand about weather
systems. So CSIRO might be onto something.

The most useful thing that CSIRO could do, is understand weather
systems enough, to give us some reasonably accurate forecasts of
what is going to happen, a few months in advance. They can't do that
yet. Agriculture etc, could adapt.

As to development in WA, the state is populated at a little over 2
people per square km, hardly overpopulation. It also produces 50%
of Australia's export wealth, so without developments here, the
rest of you would be back to grass skirts.

Lastly, even if every single West Australian went back to hunter
gathering tomorrow, it would not affect global climate. For the
problem remains the massive hoards of people in the Northern
hemisphere. Our few people here represent no more then 8 days of
humans breeding extra mouths. We are totally insignificant and
feelgood exercises are not going to change that.

The not-alarmed-ists have a wonderful refuge here in OLO. I'm starting to see their pattern of thinking. For example if eastern Australia is drought stricken and WA is OK then on average everything is fine. Perhaps we can all live in caravans and relocate from west to east or vice versa according to preference. That includes wheat farmers.

Sure it was -17C in Wales, UK last week. It was also an unprecedented 45C in Los Angeles, USA in September. The point is not only that the average temperature is inching up slowly but the extremes appear to be widening. How about explaining that to us without getting abusive.