Nov 1, 2012
Crikey readers weigh in on the biggest issues of the day.
By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions
Already a subscriber? Log in to keep reading
Your email has been successfully confirmed.
We’ve sent a confirmation to your email address — please open that email and click the “activate now” button. Then access is all yours!
If you can’t see the activation email in your inbox, check your junk mail folder. If you haven’t received an activation email within 30 minutes please contact [email protected] and we’ll help you out.
You must be logged in to post a comment.Not already subscribed? Get your free trial, access everything immediately
Further to Dave Lennon’s letter, the ABC has now arrived at a point where they show a picture gallery of Sandy damage on the news website but neglect to give any details of location.
The hapless information-seeker is supplied with numerous images which could have been taken almost anywhere on the planet. The only additional information comes in the form of a caption revealed only when the cursor is positioned in the right spot. These captions are breathtaking in their brevity eg: ‘flooded tunnel’, ‘beached boats’ etc. No location, nothing.
All part of the dumbing down process – now well-implemented and taking effect.
RE Hurricane Sandy: In Did Climate Change Cause Hurricane Sandy? (30Oct2012), Mark Fischetti, an editor at Scientific American, describes how on average the cold jet stream air flow from the arctic which increased the intensity of this storm is now more likely following higher levels of arctic sea ice melt from warming. It references a June 2012 Scientific American article with links to some Cornell work discussing “Arctic Wild Card in the Weather”.
It’s pretty funny that Matt Andrews (comments, yesterday) appeals to the high authority of skepticalscience . com in order to counter my point about the lack of warming for the past 16 years because the article Matt references actually admits that there has been no statistically significant warming for 15 years. It quotes the UK Met Office saying “the current period of reduced warming is not unprecedented and 15 year long periods are not unusual”.
Well, yes – but our record CO2 emissions are unusual. So if the current pause in warming looks like the previous pauses when our CO2 emissions were much lower, doesn’t this suggest the 0.8C of warming in the past 150 years is natural?
Tamas – the world is warmer than it was 15 years ago. There is no pause. What there is the fact that if you look at sufficiently little data then it’s more likely that any signal will be drowned out in noise. The people telling you that there’s no statistically significant warming in the last fifteen years always neglect to mention the fact that there was significantly significant warming in the last sixteen years – the extra year isn’t something magic, it’s just data outside your blinkers.