I think you have something to look forward to. bomnot . We cant have rain heat drought and fires all at the same time. While you wait for these different cenerios to take place, The situation can only get worse. Our best adviser to the govt; says we haven,t seen nothin yet.
Instead of deny everything, lets just suppose there could be something in it. Co2 is a well proven fact, at causing a greenhouse affect.

Atman, you and many naysayers think the IPCC is 'alarmist'.

This part of AR4 relates to Australia:

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch11.html

Could you show us where the IPCC claimed:

>> Global Warming would bring about an endless drought in Australia <<

or, for Europe:

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch12.html

>> winters were supposed to be very mild from now on. <<

The 'shoot/ask questions later dam policy' is a (conservative) political response - not a scientific one. Have you seen the response to this knee-jerk 'policy-on-the-run' by water experts?

The AWA is a good place to start;

http://tinyurl.com/AWA-position

Ian Plimer can thump his Heaven & Earth bible to his congregation all he likes but he is not the messiah of an undiscovered truth.

Please show/link/quote where Plimer was roundly criticised for saying that a warmer climate did indeed hold more water and was likely to result in greater not lesser rainfall. If you are able to do this, then it will demonstrate you are not just blowing smoke.

a597: Not sure I follow:

>> We cant have rain heat drought and fires all at the same time. <<

Yes we can. Rain in Qld, drought in NSW, fires in WA - on a regional basis. Just look what's been happening globally.

The enhanced greenhouse effect is well understood by studies of radiative properties:

http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/papers/PhysTodayRT2011.pdf

An interesting observation:-

'The scientific literature has shown again and again that the observed warming can not be explained by ENSO or PDO or other internal climate modes, because they simply move heat around in the system. Trenberth et al. (2002, JGR) showed that +0.06 C of the +0.4 C warming (about 15%) observed between 1950 and 1998 was attributable to trends in ENSO.These internal climate modes are internal drivers which can act to mute or enhance the underlying warming trend from higher CO2, they cannot and do not explain the fact that the planet is in a net positive energy imbalance (Murphy et al. 2009).'

Mark Lawson here

Bonmot - while I have tried not to be negative with your comments in other posts, this time around I'll have to put you up sharply. In fact, CSIRO and others have been telling us for years that severe droughts had the "fingerprints" of global warming all over it. They never said anything about the PDO or the cycle bringing more rain although, as other posters have noted, this is what you would expect from a warmer atmosphere.

Now that its obvious soemthing else is happening they will have changed their tune - that is, until the next drought, which they will blame on global warming.

One of the scientists I spoke to said that none of the forecasting systems of which he was aware used climate cycles like PDO. Now go and look at the NASA release which I mention. NASA did say something about wetter times ahead (from memory), so why didn't the CSIRO or the office of climate change or any other part of our vast, active climate science establishment say something?

The answer is that they are not there to investigate climate as such but to give credibility to climate scare stories. You can't get a good scare story out of the PDO, so they don't mention it.

Yes, Atman and if the warmists told the truth they would gain support, but then, of course, they wouuld no longer be warmists.

From Tim Flannery, bonmot, to whom you should have no trouble relating, sharing a similar view of (un)reality, this gem:

“One of them is just simply the shifting weather patterns as the planet warms up, so the tropics are expanding southwards and the winter rainfall zone is sort of dropping off the southern edge of the continent”

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200506/s1389858.htm

If you understand cause and effect, bonmot, you will see that the spin and misinformation of the bodies you name, IPCC and its accomplices, has the effect of distorting what they are saying, particularly in their unsupportable implication that human emissions have any measurable effect on climate.

You follow the same model. When you are not incomprehensible, you are pushing misinformation. What does this gobbledegook mean:” We can expect regional hot, dry and and wet spots.”

This is a nice piece of misinformation from your post:” Nevertheless, the upward trend will prevail.”. Did you not notice that the upward trend finished in 1998? Like all warmists, Flannery, Garnaut, Hamilton, Karoly, Quiggin et al, you prefer to ignore facts.