Select to expand quote

psychomub said..

remery said..

psychomub said..


Those "low Pacific islands" are atolls that are sinking/ disintegrating as part of a natural process....and there's only a handful of them in strife.

On most Pacific islands sea level rise just isn't happening.

Increased exposure of coastal cities to sea-level rise due to internal climate variabilityM. Becker, M. Karpytchev & A. Hu Nature Climate Change[/i] volume 13, pages367-374 (2023)

Abstract
Adaptation to future sea-level rise is based on projections of continuously improving climate models. These projections are accompanied by inherent uncertainties, including those due to internal climate variability (ICV). The ICV arises from complex and unpredictable interactions within and between climate-system components, rendering its impact irreducible. Although neglecting this uncertainty can lead to an underestimation of future sea-level rise, its estimation and impacts have not been fully explored. Combining the Community Earth System Model version 1 Large Ensemble experiments with power-law statistics, we show that, by 2100, if the ICV uncertainty reaches its upper limit, new sea-level-rise hotspots would appear in Southeast Asian megacities (Chennai, Kolkata, Yangon, Bangkok, Ho Chi Minh City and Manila), in western tropical Pacific Islands and the Western Indian Ocean. The better the ICV uncertainty is taken into account and correctly estimated, the more effective adaptation strategies can be elaborated with confidence and actions to follow.

www.nature.com/articles/s41558-023-01603-w

Perhaps reverse climate change? The alarmists point out the few that are shrinking while ignoring the hundreds that are growing ..

Researchers have discovered that hundreds of islands appear to be growing in the Pacific Ocean, despite the threat of rising sea levels. Scientists from the University of Auckland found that some islands have grown as much as 8% in size over the last 70 years. They used satellite images and data gathered on site to discover the changes.

Research suggests some Pacific islands are getting bigger - BBC Newsround

www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/56114092

Interesting but not surprising. My initial thoughts would be tectonic/volcanic activity but going to do some reading. Growing up in NZ, the earth is always moving beneath your feet so you kind of get use to the land shrinking and growing.

Select to expand quote

Brent in Qld said..
Interesting but not surprising. My initial thoughts would be tectonic/volcanic activity but going to do some reading. Growing up in NZ, the earth is always moving beneath your feet so you kind of get use to the land shrinking and growing.

My quick read through suggests that they are talking about coral causing this. Therefore the islands are growing larger, but I am guessing this does not mean taller/higher unless there is also some tectonic activity.

Select to expand quote

Pcdefender said..
Canals with their man made locks lol.

Talk about scraping the barrel.

"Sea level is about 20 cm higher on the Pacific side than the Atlantic due to the water being less dense on the Pacific side, on average, and due to the prevailing weather and ocean conditions. Such sea level differences are common across many short sections of land dividing ocean basins. The 20 cm difference is determined by geodetic levelling from one side to the other. This levelling follows a 'level' surface which will be parallel to the geoid (see FAQ #1). The 20 cm difference at Panama is not unique. There are similar 'jumps' elsewhere e.g. Skagerrak, Indonesian straits. If the canal was open sea and did not contain locks, i.e. if somehow a deep open cutting had been made rather than the canal system over the mountains, then there would be a current flowing from the Pacific to the Atlantic. An analogy, though imperfect because there are many other factors, is a comparison between Panama and the Drake Passage off the south tip of Chile, which has a west-east flow. (The flow in the Drake Passage is primarily wind-driven, but Pacific-Atlantic density must play some role.)Locks are needed in the Panama Canal because the canal climbs over the hills and makes use of mountain lakes. Therefore, locks would be needed even if sea level was the same on the two sides. For example, there are also locks on canals here in England, which is much less mountainous than Panama. Note also that the tides have opposite phase on the two sides of Panama, so, if there was a sea level canal, there would be major tidal currents through it."

[About Us: Established in 1933, the Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSMSL) has been responsible for the collection, publication, analysis and interpretation of sea level data from the global network of tide gauges. It is based in Liverpool at the National Oceanography Centre (NOC).]

Select to expand quote

decrepit said..

psychomub said.. For most of the last 8000+ years, the average global temperatures were about 2? warmer than it is now...
And the world didn't end.

Nobody said the world would end, just that there's going to be a lot of inconvenience and heartache.

From "The Conversation"
Climate change threatens to cause 'synchronised harvest failures' across the globe, with implications for Australia's food security Douglas Bardsley, University of Adelaide Disturbing news about the potential for widespread crop failure as the climate changes should send shockwaves through governments around the world. Time to rethink global trade and food security.

You need to check what modelling he has based his findings on .The link in the article takes you to rcp8.5 models which are now widely regarded as implausible.Unfortunately most impact studies still use this model as it gets a more dramatic result.
www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00177-3

judithcurry.com/2023/03/28/uns-climate-panic-is-more-politics-than-science/

Select to expand quote

Rango said..

You need to check what modelling he has based his findings on .The link in the article takes you to rcp8.5 models which are now widely regarded as implausible.Unfortunately most impact studies still use this model as it gets a more dramatic result.
www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00177-3

judithcurry.com/2023/03/28/uns-climate-panic-is-more-politics-than-science/

"in a 2022 deposition Curry said that Climate Forecast Applications Network's clients included petroleum companies, electric utilities, and natural gas energy traders, and that she charged $400 an hour for her consulting services."

Select to expand quote

remery said..
climatefeedback.org/evaluation/sea-level-rise-those-non-disappearing-pacific-islands-bjorn-lomborg-wall-street-journal/

From your article:

The most famous of these studies, published in 2010 by Paul Kench and Arthur Webb of the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission in Fiji, showed that of 27 Pacific islands, 14% lost area. Yet 43% gained area, with the rest remaining stable."
Paul Kench, Professor, The University of Auckland:
This comment does provide a reasonable assessment of the message of our article: that the majority of islands have become larger or remained stable and that islands are locationally dynamic on their reef platforms..

Select to expand quote

psychomub said..

From your article:

The most famous of these studies, published in 2010 by Paul Kench and Arthur Webb of the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission in Fiji, showed that of 27 Pacific islands, 14% lost area. Yet 43% gained area, with the rest remaining stable."
Paul Kench, Professor, The University of Auckland:
This comment does provide a reasonable assessment of the message of our article: that the majority of islands have become larger or remained stable and that islands are locationally dynamic on their reef platforms..

..."We think these dynamic features do pose management challenges for island communities. However, all reports fail to reflect the nuances of our work."

"Dr Anne Hoggett AM explores the plight of our coral reefs and how we can help protect their future. Corals have been on Earth in some form for over 400 million years, evolving to play a critical role in supporting ocean biodiversity and providing a home to many species. However today, we are on the verge of losing these beautiful animals and fragile ecosystems. As Co-Director of the Australian Museum's Lizard Island Research Station (LIRS) on the Great Barrier Reef, Dr Anne Hoggett AM has spent the last four decades bearing witness to the impact of climate change on our reefs and marine ecosystems. Along with her husband, Dr Lyle Vail AM, Dr Hoggett has tracked the devastating effects of threats like coral bleaching, cyclones, pollution, and Crown-of-Thorns Starfish outbreaks. There is hope, but we must act now. In Australia, we hold a unique role as custodians of several reef systems including the largest on Earth, the Great Barrier Reef. We must work together to protect these amazing ecosystems and the incredible diversity they support. In this year's Talbot Oration, as part of the 50th anniversary celebrations of LIRS, Dr Hoggett will share her extensive knowledge about the importance of coral reefs, their complex biology, and the urgent need for action. Learn about the latest research and conservation efforts being made to protect these underwater wonders and what you can do to help. Following her address, Dr Hoggett will be joined by ichthyologist, Dr Joseph DiBattista, in a conversation with sustainability adviser and former President of the Australian Museum Trust, Sam Mostyn AO. Named in honour of former Australian Museum Director Professor Frank Talbot, this annual oration celebrates Talbot's commitment to, and achievements in, marine research and environmental studies in Australia and on the global stage. The Talbot Oration showcases advances in the field of climate change research and environmental conservation, enabling the public to better understand how responses to the climate challenge determine our future prospects, health, and the sustainability of our natural environment."

Select to expand quote

remery said..

Rango said..

You need to check what modelling he has based his findings on .The link in the article takes you to rcp8.5 models which are now widely regarded as implausible.Unfortunately most impact studies still use this model as it gets a more dramatic result.
www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00177-3

judithcurry.com/2023/03/28/uns-climate-panic-is-more-politics-than-science/

"in a 2022 deposition Curry said that Climate Forecast Applications Network's clients included petroleum companies, electric utilities, and natural gas energy traders, and that she charged $400 an hour for her consulting services."

Its a private company she works for all that require the service of how climate will impact their buisiness .Even helped out Bangladesh.
Is the nature paper working for fossil fuels to.I can give you more that say that rcp8.5 is bunk.Ipcc wg1 does'nt even use it anymore either.
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544217314597

Funding disclosure: Funding sources for my research have included NSF, NASA, NOAA, DOD and DOE. Recent government contracts for CFAN include a DOE contract to develop extended range regional wind power forecasts, a DOD contract to predict extreme events associated with climate variability/change having implications for regional stability, and a NOAA contract to improve sub seasonal forecasting. CFAN contracts with private sector and other non-governmental organizations include energy and power companies, reinsurance companies, financial companies, other weather service providers, NGOs, development banks and government agencies.
From her website.

Deglaciation of northwestern Greenland during Marine Isotope Stage 11
ANDREW J. CHRIST etal
SCIENCE
20 Jul 2023
Vol 381, Issue 6655
pp. 330-335
DOI: 10.1126/science.ade4248

"Abstract
Past interglacial climates with smaller ice sheets offer analogs for ice sheet response to future warming and contributions to sea level rise; however, well-dated geologic records from formerly ice-free areas are rare. Here we report that subglacial sediment from the Camp Century ice core preserves direct evidence that northwestern Greenland was ice free during the Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 11 interglacial. Luminescence dating shows that sediment just beneath the ice sheet was deposited by flowing water in an ice-free environment 416 [plus or minus] 38 thousand years ago. Provenance analyses and cosmogenic nuclide data and calculations suggest the sediment was reworked from local materials and exposed at the surface [less than]16 thousand years before deposition. Ice sheet modeling indicates that ice-free conditions at Camp Century require at least 1.4 meters of sea level equivalent contribution from the Greenland Ice Sheet.

Editor's summary
Measurements made on subglacial sediment from the Camp Century ice core in northwestern Greenland show that the location was ice free during the interglacial that occurred around 400,000 years ago. Christ et al. used luminescence dating and cosmogenic nuclide data to show that the sediment was deposited under ice-free conditions after having been exposed at the surface to sunlight fewer than 16,000 years earlier. The absence of ice at that location means that the Greenland Ice Sheet must have contributed more than 1.4 meters of sea-level equivalent to the high sea-level stand, when the average global air temperature was similar to what we will soon experience because of human-caused climate warming. -H. Jesse Smith

www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.ade4248

In amongst all this discussion I'm surprised there's been no comment on the record temperatures being experienced overseas, America and Europe for example?

Select to expand quote

sgo said..
In amongst all this discussion I'm surprised there's been no comment on the record temperatures being experienced overseas, America and Europe for example?

Shhhh! Quiet, you!

Select to expand quote

sgo said..
In amongst all this discussion I'm surprised there's been no comment on the record temperatures being experienced overseas, America and Europe for example?

And Asia.

Yep, the obvious immediate hazard is more severe heat excursions and deaths from heat stress.

Select to expand quote

Pcdefender said..

decrepit said..


The trend towards dismissing science is another worry factor.

Incorrect for the umpteenth time.

You must be aware by now that countless scientists are having their opinion censored by the corporate media so i have no idea why you wrote the above.

Why not take one hour 18 minutes out of your preferred.TV schedule to watch The Great Global Warming Swindle?

Wiki on the Great Global Warming Swindle.
"Although the documentary was welcomed by climate change deniers, it was criticised by scientific organisations and individual scientists, including one of the scientists interviewed in the film and one whose research was used to support the film's claims.[6][7] The film's critics argued that it had misused and fabricated data, relied on out-of-date research, employed misleading arguments, and misrepresented the position of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.[7][9][10]"

Oh the irony of Peter Mac arguing on behalf of the oil barons and corporate overlords

This topic does appear to be specifically about Perth, WA though.

And remery's NASA map above does appear to show that June in Perth was about 2 deg. cooler than average

So maybe (like many other things) WA remains several decades behind the rest of the world in global warming ?

Perhaps PM33 just needs to get out more ?

Then again, I am not sure how in July 2023 the five hottest Junes have all occurred since 2019.

Unless THEY have already decided June 2024 will also be declared a record.

Or "since" 2019, includes 2019 I suppose.

Earlier this month, the 2022 Nobel Physics Laureate Dr. John Clauser slammed the 'climate emergency' narrative as a "dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world's economy and the well-being of billions of people". Inevitably, the punishments have begun.

A talk that Dr. Clauser was due to give to the International Monetary Fund on climate models has been abruptly cancelled, and the page announcing the event removed from the IMF site.

Dr. Clauser was due to speak to the IMF's Independent Evaluation Office this Thursday under the title: "Let's talk - How much can we trust IPCC climate predictions?" It would appear that "not a lot" isn't the politically correct answer. Clauser is a longstanding critic of climate models and criticised the award of the Physics Nobel in 2021 for work on them. He is not alone, since many feel that climate models are primarily based on mathematics, and a history of failed opinionated climate predictions leave them undeserving of recognition at the highest level of pure science.

Not that this opinion is shared by the green activist National Geographic magazine, which ran an article: "How climate models got so accurate they won a Nobel."Last week, Clauser observed that misguided climate science has "metastasised into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience". This pseudoscience, he continued, has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other related ills. It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies and environmentalists. "In my opinion, there is no real climate crisis," he added.

Clauser is the latest Nobel physics laureate to dismiss the notion of a climate crisis. Professor Ivar Giaever, a fellow laureate, is the lead signatory of the World Climate Declaration that states there is no climate emergency. It further argues that climate models are "not remotely plausible as global policy tools".

The 1998 winner Professor Robert Laughlin has expressed the view that the climate is "beyond our power to control" and humanity cannot and should not do anything to respond to climate change.

The Australian climate journalist Jo Nova was in fine form reporting on Clauser's recent comments. "The thing about sceptical Nobel Prize winners is that they make the name-calling 'climate denier' programme look as stupid as it can get," she observed. She noted the lack of any mainstream media interest in Clauser's recent comments, asking: "How much damage would it do to the cause if the audience finds out that one of the highest ranking scientists in the world disagrees with the mantra?" A question of course with an obvious answer. Quite a lot.The same team that tells us that we must 'listen to the experts' won't listen to any experts they don't like. They rave about 'UN Experts' that hide the decline, but run a mile to avoid the giants of science. They'll ask high-school dropouts about climate change on prime-time TV before they interview Nobel Prize winners. It's a lie by omission. It's active deception. And the whole climate movement is built on it.

The IMF is heavily involved in international money flows and one can only hope it shows a greater willingness to 'evaluate' this subject matter than it does the predictions of climate models. Dr. Clauser secured his Nobel Prize for groundbreaking work in the field of quantum mechanics - the study of matter and light at a sub-atomic and atomic level. In 2010 he was awarded the Wolf Prize in Physics, considered the second most prestigious physics award after the Nobel. In addition to this work, he has also made suggestions as to how to improve current climate models.Attempts to model the chaotic and non-linear atmosphere suffer on many fronts. They fail to predict future temperatures with mostly laughably degrees of inaccuracy, and in the process do little more than guess the effect of natural forces such as volcanoes and clouds

. In Clauser's view, climate models greatly underestimate the effect of the clouds that cover half the Earth and provide a powerful - and dominant - thermostatic control of global temperatures. More recently, Clauser also told the Korea Quantum Conference that he didn't believe there was a climate crisis, noting: "Key processes are exaggerated and misunderstood by approximately 200 times."The cynical might add that this degree of exaggerated inaccuracy might be fine in the land of economics, but more robust standards should be encouraged in the world of science.Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic's Environment Editor.

It is pleasing to see some degree of scientific dissent. Without it, there is no possible exploration of alternative theories that may ultimately provide better models. That being said, in this case, which model provides the best explanation seems to me to be almost a moot point. If I have a choice of living in clean air versus one polluted with the by-products of burnt fossil fuels, I know which one my asthmatic old lungs will choose.

Nobel Laureates' Statement to Climate Summit World Leaders: Keep Fossil Fuels in the Ground

As Nobel Laureates from peace, literature, medicine, physics, chemistry and economic sciences, and like so many people around the globe, we are seized by the great moral issue of our time: the climate crisis and commensurate destruction of nature. Climate change is threatening hundreds of millions of lives, livelihoods across every continent and is putting thousands of species at risk.

SIGNED BY:

fossilfueltreaty.org/nobel-letter

Select to expand quote

Pcdefender said..
Earlier this month, the 2022 Nobel Physics Laureate Dr. John Clauser slammed the 'climate emergency' narrative as a "dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world's economy and the well-being of billions of people". Inevitably, the punishments have begun.

A talk that Dr. Clauser was due to give to the International Monetary Fund on climate models has been abruptly cancelled, and the page announcing the event removed from the IMF site.

Dr. Clauser was due to speak to the IMF's Independent Evaluation Office this Thursday under the title: "Let's talk - How much can we trust IPCC climate predictions?" It would appear that "not a lot" isn't the politically correct answer. Clauser is a longstanding critic of climate models and criticised the award of the Physics Nobel in 2021 for work on them. He is not alone, since many feel that climate models are primarily based on mathematics, and a history of failed opinionated climate predictions leave them undeserving of recognition at the highest level of pure science.

Not that this opinion is shared by the green activist National Geographic magazine, which ran an article: "How climate models got so accurate they won a Nobel."Last week, Clauser observed that misguided climate science has "metastasised into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience". This pseudoscience, he continued, has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other related ills. It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies and environmentalists. "In my opinion, there is no real climate crisis," he added.

Clauser is the latest Nobel physics laureate to dismiss the notion of a climate crisis. Professor Ivar Giaever, a fellow laureate, is the lead signatory of the World Climate Declaration that states there is no climate emergency. It further argues that climate models are "not remotely plausible as global policy tools".

The 1998 winner Professor Robert Laughlin has expressed the view that the climate is "beyond our power to control" and humanity cannot and should not do anything to respond to climate change.

The Australian climate journalist Jo Nova was in fine form reporting on Clauser's recent comments. "The thing about sceptical Nobel Prize winners is that they make the name-calling 'climate denier' programme look as stupid as it can get," she observed. She noted the lack of any mainstream media interest in Clauser's recent comments, asking: "How much damage would it do to the cause if the audience finds out that one of the highest ranking scientists in the world disagrees with the mantra?" A question of course with an obvious answer. Quite a lot.The same team that tells us that we must 'listen to the experts' won't listen to any experts they don't like. They rave about 'UN Experts' that hide the decline, but run a mile to avoid the giants of science. They'll ask high-school dropouts about climate change on prime-time TV before they interview Nobel Prize winners. It's a lie by omission. It's active deception. And the whole climate movement is built on it.

The IMF is heavily involved in international money flows and one can only hope it shows a greater willingness to 'evaluate' this subject matter than it does the predictions of climate models. Dr. Clauser secured his Nobel Prize for groundbreaking work in the field of quantum mechanics - the study of matter and light at a sub-atomic and atomic level. In 2010 he was awarded the Wolf Prize in Physics, considered the second most prestigious physics award after the Nobel. In addition to this work, he has also made suggestions as to how to improve current climate models.Attempts to model the chaotic and non-linear atmosphere suffer on many fronts. They fail to predict future temperatures with mostly laughably degrees of inaccuracy, and in the process do little more than guess the effect of natural forces such as volcanoes and clouds

. In Clauser's view, climate models greatly underestimate the effect of the clouds that cover half the Earth and provide a powerful - and dominant - thermostatic control of global temperatures. More recently, Clauser also told the Korea Quantum Conference that he didn't believe there was a climate crisis, noting: "Key processes are exaggerated and misunderstood by approximately 200 times."The cynical might add that this degree of exaggerated inaccuracy might be fine in the land of economics, but more robust standards should be encouraged in the world of science.Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic's Environment Editor.

Pure Gold!!!!!!!

I thought my last comment was a joke, but here you go posting an article from the Gulf insider and Investing.com

Proof by your own hand that You ARE arguing on behalf of Oil barons and the corporate overlords.

May as well ask how are your shares in Pfizer and Monsanto going?

It is pure gold that after three and a half years of bare faced lies you still believe their theory of man made warming despite the monumental evidence against it.

I looked up bare faced lie.......seems to accurately describe the last three plus years.

Lies come in a variety of types. There are white lies and big lies, of course, but there are also the kinds of lies told without concern for their ethical implications, in full disregard of those who will be affected.



Worse still you will not confront the evidence against their preposterous theory.

You are indeed a super religious person.

Carbon dioxide

Gold star to their minion at the Tavistock Institute who came up with it.

USF/FIO's Keys Marine Laboratory to house thousands of corals to mitigate impact from historic ocean heat wave

JULY 24, 2023
RESEARCH AND INNOVATION
By Matthew Cimitile, University Communications and Marketing

As unprecedented heat waves and escalating water temperatures in South Florida create a massive coral bleaching event, the University of South Florida (USF) and Florida Institute of Oceanography's (FIO) Keys Marine Laboratory (KML) are quickly stepping in to house thousands of coral in an attempt to save them.

Researchers stand over coral tank
Currently, KML is housing more than 1,500 coral specimens that were harvested in the past week from offshore nurseries and parent colonies and relocated to KML by partner organizations during the crisis. With 60 tanks ranging from 40 to 1,000 gallons, the lab has the capacity to house thousands more as the coral bleaching event is expected to continue.

KML contains one of the largest temperature-controlled seawater systems in the Florida Keys, allowing for the study of corals and other marine organisms as well as offering a refuge for them to live, rehabilitate and grow. The laboratory is part of the state-wide Florida Institute of Oceanography, a consortium that supports all institutions in the State University System. Hosted by USF, FIO provides critical infrastructure like KML to support the state's need for science.

Keep toeing that right wing corporate diatribe Pete

Peter doesn't, he thinks it's a lamp.