• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Record high temperatures in Australia (1 Viewer)

Litebeam, I am genuinely interested to understand how you came to your scepticism of AGW.

Let me explain to you why I accept the premise of AGW. I have a basic science background (zoology degree), and while I am in no way a scientist, I do have a reasonable understanding of how science “works” as a process, and I have faith in this process. This isn’t blind faith of a religious nature: the computer I’m typing this on, the kettle I just used to boil water, and the supply of electricity that powers both are all derived from the scientific process, as is just about every other aspect of modern life. Put simply, I trust the collective body of scientists and scientific research to do their job. I trust them to put forward the most compelling explanations of the natural world, and I trust them to keep looking for alternative explanations, and to change their collective minds when these alternative explanations are a better fit for the data.

This is why I accept the premise of AGW, despite never having read a single paper on the subject. Frankly, there would be little point in me doing so, as I would not be able to understand the science. As far as I am aware, no scientist who works in climate science or related fields disputes that AGW is the best explanation of the available evidence. I am positive that any scientist who could provide a robust alternative explanation would do so in a heartbeat: it would give them tremendous personal and professional prestige, not to mention great wealth. The oil companies would write them a blank cheque.

Yes, there are a very few scientists who refute AGW, but as far as I am aware, none of them actually work in the field of climate science. They are effectively dentists diagnosing a heart condition. And yes, there are a very few scientists who falsify or deliberately misuse data, but they tend to get found out and ostracized. Neither group are representative of the collective body of scientists.

In today’s world it is always a good idea to distrust anything you read in the media – look at how even the much-self-praised BBC peddled fake news in the recent Native American v white teens fiasco - but to be honest there comes a point where healthy scepticism turns into blind refusal to accept reality.

So that’s my narrative: what’s yours? What facts do you have that make you able to dismiss the collective body of climate-change scientists, and therefore the scientific process?
 
..... I wonder what effect the large areas of land clearing and open cut mining, and widespread hydrological functioning disruption (capture of overland flows, degradation /destruction of wetlands, and the soil sponge, and intersection and draining of natural aquifers, etc) is having on the tendency of the country to store increasing heat) ........ ?? :cat:

This phenomenon is studied and understood in urban /suburban environments (Urban Heat Islands become Urban Heat Continents: https://www.news.com.au/technology/...t/news-story/0df25ff17daedbb5793b20da70968671 ), but if the broader landscape effect is studied in the scientific realms it is certainly not making it onto the mainstream media radar....

Hi Chosun,

..... I think we can all agree that the effects are unequivocally bad. Restoring natural habitats is one of the IPCC and UN recommendations, although whether national leaders have the foresight to put this into action remains to be seen. Personally, I'd love to see a big drive towards MAGA (Making America/Australia Green Again!) ;)
And on topic, you're probably interested in this as a starting point: https://www.skepticalscience.com/urban-heat-island-effect.htm

Indeed they are and I can send you some papers to start you off if you like? The fact that it doesn't make it into the mainstream media doesn't mean much, and is understandable given that the research is often very technical & detailed - and highlights plenty of inconvenient truths...

Cheers,
Joost
Hi Joost,

If you have any cutting edge research to pass on regarding these microclimate /landscape effects of vegetation clearing /hydrological cycle damage and resultant heat storage, and what part this plays in the overall pie - I'd be very interested :t:

(I did request some papers through Research gate around Natural Sequence Farming techniques and follow on landscape scale studies, but my request is not coming through despite the author having apparently received it - and thanks to a browser hijacking and system reboot courtesy of an uninvited Samsung - all my bookmarks disappeared, and I have no idea what the titles /authors of the papers were - most annoying! :)




Chosun :gh:
 
Last edited:
...... Put simply, I trust the collective body of scientists and scientific research to do their job. I trust them to put forward the most compelling explanations of the natural world, and I trust them to keep looking for alternative explanations, and to change their collective minds when these alternative explanations are a better fit for the data.

This is why I accept the premise of AGW, despite never having read a single paper on the subject......
'Scientists' also collectively regularly trot out all sorts of stuff about 'Dark Matter' and 'Dark Energy' despite very few I suspect having any sort of grasp of it whatsoever. It's probably those less immersed who stand back, hitch up an eyebrow, and say - "hang on ....." , that represent our greatest hope ! I wouldn't be at all surprised if a 100 or so years from now, the whole thing is looked back upon with about as much credibility as "luminiferous aether" ! :eek!:

I trust the scientific process to get it right ----- eventually, but jeez, there'll be a heck of a lot of 'silly walks' in between .....
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wippooDL6WE

...... In today’s world it is always a good idea to distrust anything you read in the media ---- but to be honest there comes a point where healthy scepticism turns into blind refusal to accept reality.
This reminds me of an 'encounter' I had with my ex boss, who virtually implied that I was mad and was ripe for the funny farm, when I told him of an insight and position I held on some matter within our company. I will never forget his words and incredulity ..... "what! so you expect me to believe that 160 people including me are wrong, and you're the only one who's right?! That no-one else can see it, and every single one of them is wrong - and you're right?!? In hindsight my reply of "yep" only seemed to infuriate him more ........... funny thing was though, it turns out I was right, turns out I was the only one who was right, and 160 people got it completely wrong .............. o:)




Chosun :gh:
 
Last edited:
"I suspect"; "It's probably"; "I wouldn't be at all surprised"... yep, we can all make statements like that, but I would rather base my viewpoint on the thoughts of people who are actually studying a subject in a proper systematic way doing actual science with actual data sets, than people who aren't but who "suspect".

As for your I was right and everybody else was wrong story, sure, maybe. But how many thousands of "They were right and I was wrong" stories are there for every contrarian who was right? Basing an opinion on the lone voice of a person who has no grounding in a discipline seems a poor strategy compared to listening to the consensus opinion of those who do.

The whole point of the scientific process is that people who have contrarian views have a very real platform to present them, and if they can deliver the evidence then they become the accepted wisdom. As I said before, any climate scientist who can produce a convincing model and data set to demonstrate that it's volcanoes or sun-spots or farting cows that cause global warming is going to hit the jackpot.


'Scientists' also collectively regularly trot out all sorts of stuff about 'Dark Matter' and 'Dark Energy' despite very few I suspect having any sort of grasp of it whatsoever. It's probably those less immersed who stand back, hitch up an eyebrow, and say - "hang on ....." , that represent our greatest hope ! I wouldn't be at all surprised if a 100 or so years from now, the whole thing is looked back upon with about as much credibility as "lumeniforous aether" ! :eek!:

I trust the scientific process to get it right ----- eventually, but jeez, there'll be a heck of a lot of 'silly walks' in between .....
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wippooDL6WE


This reminds me of an 'encounter' I had with my ex boss, who virtually implied that I was mad and was ripe for the funny farm, when I told him of an insight and position I held on some matter within our company. I will never forget his words and incredulity ..... "what! so you expect me to believe that 160 people including me are wrong, and you're the only one who's right?! That no-one else can see it, and every single one of them is wrong - and you're right?!? In hindsight my reply of "yep" only seemed to infuriate him more ........... funny thing was though, it turns out I was right, turns out I was the only one who was right, and 160 people got it completely wrong .............. o:)




Chosun :gh:
 
Hi Chosun,

The IPCC has made land-climate interactions one of its priority areas following the 6th assessment in 2015 and there will be a special issue forthcoming this year. Should make for an interesting read! https://www.ipcc-wg3.ac.uk/news_5.html

In the meantime I'll look for some papers for you. I hate publisher paywalls - the work was publicly funded so it should be freely available to all!

Cheers,
Joost
 
"I suspect"; "It's probably"; "I wouldn't be at all surprised"... yep, we can all make statements like that, but I would rather base my viewpoint on the thoughts of people who are actually studying a subject in a proper systematic way doing actual science with actual data sets, than people who aren't but who "suspect".....

And this jewel right here might be the most ridiculous and ironic posting that I have ever read here.

Why?
Try finding just one climate change headline that isn't predicated with the obligatory helping verb or doublespeak: Scientists suspect... experts believe... climate sources wonder... temperatures could... water levels might... It's possible that...
I could go on ad nauseum and never cover all of the waffling verbiage that these these 'experts' use in presenting their 'facts.'

DMW, I have things to do, perhaps I'll comment on this further when I get the chance, but suffices to say that my skepticism starts with distrust in the scientists themselves. I learned at a young age to 'question authority," remember when people (especially liberals) actually believed that?
Now we have sheep posting NYT climate change articles like they are holy script carried down from Sinai. There is a complete absence of intellectual curiosity when it comes to questioning these publications; they are accepted carte blanche. :eat: Those of us that do question are regarded as the loons!


None of this is should take from the fact that we should all be good stewards of our planet and its resources; my thoughts on that are clear and numerous on this particular forum. Some think that 'skepticism' equates to allowed 'abuse'...not the case.
 
Last edited:
And this jewel right here might be the most ridiculous and ironic posting that I have ever read here.

Why?
Try finding just one climate change headline that isn't predicated with the obligatory helping verb or doublespeak: Scientists suspect... experts believe... climate sources wonder... temperatures could... water levels might... It's possible that...
I could go on ad nauseum and never cover all of the waffling verbiage that these these 'experts' use in presenting their 'facts.'

DMW, I have things to do, perhaps I'll comment on this further when I get the chance, but suffices to say that my skepticism starts with distrust in the scientists themselves. I learned at a young age to 'question authority," remember when people (especially liberals) actually believed that?
Now we have sheep posting NYT climate change articles like they are holy script carried down from Sinai. There is a complete absence of intellectual curiosity when it comes to questioning these publications; they are accepted carte blanche. :eat: Those of us that do question are regarded as the loons!


None of this is should take from the fact that we should all be good stewards of our planet and its resources; my thoughts on that are clear and numerous on this particular forum. Some think that 'skepticism' equates to allowed 'abuse'...not the case.

Actually, please don't bother. I was hoping to get an adult answer from you to understand why you hold the views you do, but from this response I'm really no longer interested in what you think or why.
 
Actually, please don't bother. I was hoping to get an adult answer from you to understand why you hold the views you do, but from this response I'm really no longer interested in what you think or why.

Shame isn't it? Much as I love Jonathan Pie's core message, I have yet to be convinced by any real-life experience that he is actually right about the anti-intellectualist crowd.
 

Attachments

  • cartoon-climate-change.jpg
    cartoon-climate-change.jpg
    31.3 KB · Views: 18
Actually, please don't bother. I was hoping to get an adult answer from you to understand why you hold the views you do, but from this response I'm really no longer interested in what you think or why.

Awww...reads like I hurt someone's feelings by pointing out the 'elephant in the room' irony. It couldn't be any more cogent.

My pleasure to move on. 3:)
 
Probably for the best. If you're unable to engage in a serious argument then what value are your contributions?

Definitely for the best and all too characteristic. The little rat habitually slinks back into the shadows when the going gets tough.
 
"I suspect"; "It's probably"; "I wouldn't be at all surprised"... yep, we can all make statements like that, but I would rather base my viewpoint on the thoughts of people who are actually studying a subject in a proper systematic way doing actual science with actual data sets, than people who aren't but who "suspect".

As for your I was right and everybody else was wrong story, sure, maybe. But how many thousands of "They were right and I was wrong" stories are there for every contrarian who was right? Basing an opinion on the lone voice of a person who has no grounding in a discipline seems a poor strategy compared to listening to the consensus opinion of those who do.

The whole point of the scientific process is that people who have contrarian views have a very real platform to present them, and if they can deliver the evidence then they become the accepted wisdom. As I said before, any climate scientist who can produce a convincing model and data set to demonstrate that it's volcanoes or sun-spots or farting cows that cause global warming is going to hit the jackpot.
Well Mr snarky pants! I don't disagree with what you've said - only the way that you've said it ...... ;)

It's too simplistic to label people this or that, or seek to put them in the "contrarian" box. One of the most fascinating and revelatory moments in science is when a scientist observes something unpredicted or looks at the data and says, "hmm - that's interesting .... "

Such moments may come from within a particular scientific clique, those tied to various employment, potential tenure, or funding dependencies, those subject to "groupthink", publishing opportunity pressures, or whatever, or they may come from those scientists outside such groups and compromises, the retired, the maverick, or those even outside of the field. Founder of Natural Sequence Farming and all-round landscape guru Peter Andrews OAM had insights and results which proved his case and yet was treated as a pariah by the scientific and establishment governing bodies for decades to the point of being threatened with prosecution ..... until science finally (mostly) caught up ~30 years later .......

You chose to selectively quote my words and left out my conclusion - <snip>"I trust the scientific process to get it right ----- eventually,"<snip>

Also consider that scientific knowledge as it exists is a mere subset of reality. There are individuals, groups, and cultures to whom the limitations of time and space do not apply - just because you won't see the "proof" for centuries or millenia doesn't make it any less 'real' ;) o:D



Chosun :gh:
 
Australia - land of droughts and flooding rains ....

and massive modern landscspe mismanagement too ....

One part of the country has seen some (but not all, such as highest temperature) temperature records broken, while other parts are in flood (again some record levels, or significant 1 in a 100, or 500 year events) ..... all of it tied to a late monsoon and blocking highs in the Tasmania Sea. Most of any fires experienced are invariably 'd*ckh**d' caused.

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/aust...to-come-scientists-warn/ar-BBT3aIi?li=AAgfIYZ
Several important points ate left out of this article:
* There is landscape scale mismanagement and destruction of natural ecology due to grazing/ agriculture, vegetation clearing, infrastructure, and suburban /urban development. Soil loss continues at greater than natural rates.
* Water resources, such as the Murray-Darling Basin are particularly mismanaged as revealed by the latest fish kills, and Royal commission report (see here: https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=3812985#post3812985 )
* Urban Heat Island effects on climate and temperature records are now coalescing to have landscape scale effects (the so called Urban Heat Continent)
* Sedimentation is a major factor in damage and bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef
* Federal Opposition leader, Bill Shorten, is a worm. (of the parasitic kind, as earthworms are lovely useful creatures)

Yearly rainfall comes down in a week .....
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...ds-man-missing-highway-cut-and-schools-closed





Chosun :gh:
 
Last edited:
..The little rat habitually slinks back into the shadows when the going gets tough.
No, actually I slink-ed down to the Caribbean to enjoy some much-needed Sun.
As everyone here in the U.S. knows, this country has been in the grips of some of the coldest air ever experienced in recorded history. The last thing on my mind was you lot, or global warming.
I expect that some of you will be along shortly to explain that Global Warming means that we'll experience 'colder colds.'

Rank stupidity.
 

Attachments

  • index.jpg
    index.jpg
    9.5 KB · Views: 8
No, actually I slink-ed down to the Caribbean to enjoy some much-needed Sun.
As everyone here in the U.S. knows, this country has been in the grips of some of the coldest air ever experienced in recorded history. The last thing on my mind was you lot, or global warming.
I expect that some of you will be along shortly to explain that Global Warming means that we'll experience 'colder colds.'

Rank stupidity.

Here you go amigo: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/c...old-temperatures-climate-change/#.XFiqM1X7Spo

Quote the final paragraph:
"Deep Freezes in a Warming World
Splits in the stratospheric polar vortex do happen naturally, but should we expect to see them more often thanks to climate change and rapid Arctic warming? It is possible that these cold intrusions could become a more regular winter story. This is a hot research topic and is by no means settled, but a handful of studies offer compelling evidence that the stratospheric polar vortex is changing, and that this trend can explain bouts of unusually cold winter weather.
Undoubtedly this new polar vortex attack will unleash fresh claims that global warming is a hoax. But this ridiculous notion can be quickly dispelled with a look at predicted temperature departures around the globe for early this week. The lobe of cold air over North America is far outweighed by areas elsewhere in the United States and worldwide that are warmer than normal.
Symptoms of a changing climate are not always obvious or easy to understand, but their causes and future behaviors are increasingly coming into focus. And it’s clear that at times, coping with global warming means arming ourselves with extra scarfs, mittens and long underwear."
 
Credit where it's due, you were spot on! Well done!
I hope it's all starting to make sense now?
 

Attachments

  • i-love-the-winter-weather.jpg
    i-love-the-winter-weather.jpg
    42.3 KB · Views: 7
Last edited:
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top