the rain in Adelaide

[skyliner]

Just got off the BOM site, Ad Now and eyewitness photos of the storms - like whitewater rivers of rain.- stuff you'd run from. Adelaide running water everywhere. I've never seen the like there. Normally a 21inch annual rainfall - nearly 3 in one day! (70mm) Highest EVER recorded. Makes you question global warming. (SA supposed to be drier).

There is a classic pic up at Burrra and Pt Pirie as well. Take a look in the Ad now pics sent in. Stockport, about 73 km north had over 120mm - real QLD weather - and it's all coming here. We've already got floods everywhere.Will do the Murray good - less salinity.

SA - STATE ON THE MOVE

[Aidan]

Just got off the BOM site, Ad Now and eyewitness photos of the storms - like whitewater rivers of rain.- stuff you'd run from. Adelaide running water everywhere. I've never seen the like there. Normally a 21inch annual rainfall - nearly 3 in one day! (70mm) Highest EVER recorded. Makes you question global warming. (SA supposed to be drier).

Not if you understand global warming. It's predicted to make SA drier by diverting more low pressure cells away from SA - often so far south that we're even out of range of the cold fronts associated with them. This already happens most of the summer, and higher temperatures mean that's likely to happen more in the winter as well.

However, when a low pressure cell drifts right over Adelaide, it's entirely consistent with global warming that it will dump more water on us, because higher temperatures are likely to result in higher absolute humidity.

[rev]

We might have got a crap load of rain, BUT, the key thing to remember is that these events in Adelaide/SA are rare.
We actually had a near normal winter I believe as apparently we have gone from El Nino to La Nina.
El Nino being the thing that caused the long drought, La Nina the thing that's bringing us this rain.

Global Warming is a con-job.

[ac83]

Global Warming is a con-job.

Love it! I'm all with you on that! In fact I might just add you as a friend!

[Will]

It is interesting that in all the scientific journals there is a 100% acceptance of global warming, yet in the popular medi the breakdown is 50/50.

I don't know about you, but I'd rather base my opinions on people who actually know what they are talking about and have evidence supported by rigorous scientific experimentation as oppossed to some trashy newspaper or current affair program, who make up or sentationalise stories.

[rev]

Might as well believe in the tooth fairy then.

In all seriousness, they still haven't even explored our oceans properly, among other things. Therefore they don't fully understand how the planet works.
So how can they sit there and tell us in a couple hundred years us humans have managed to alter the planets climate?

I agree, pollution etc aren't good, for our health or the planets health. And I also will agree that we should be doing more to recycle and preserve the environment and ecosystems and wall that sort of stuff.
But when we still don't have a complete understanding of our planet, I think it's ludicrous that anyone would argue we are to blame for changes in weather.


For example, and this is why I cited the drought and recent rains. They've been going on for the last few years at least about global warming, how weather patterns and climates out of whack and what not.
Our drought was caused by El Nino. This winter though, the drought was broken, in what they were calling a regular winter. We are now in an El Nina pattern or whatever the technical term is.

If we have stuffed the planets climate up, why did we have a regular winter?

Have we not had prolonged droughts before?
Have we not had flooding before?
Have we not had other severe weather events before?

Are cyclones, hurricanes, flooding, drought something that started happening in the last decade or two?
Were there no major natural disasters in the past? 100 years ago and before that?

They used to go on about the hole in the Ozone layer, and how it was getting bigger and how we would all die from the suns rays.
Now they are saying it's getting smaller.


It's like saying there is no intelligent life in the universe besides us here on planet Earth. You can't make such claims when you don't have all the facts. And we don't have all the facts, not about our own planet to say we are the cause of eratic weather, and not about the universe.

Solar flares for example. They affect the earth. The sun is known for actually being in a period of releasing intense solar flares.

[Wayno]

Don't stress lads. Four Australian States can't agree on the murray darling basin, so there's naff all chance of global action ever catching on (even if the science is right). Game over.

Qatar has the right approach, and FIFA agrees. The Qatar climate is too hot for soccer, so they will simply air-condition the stadiums - lol. That's the way of the future.

I'm off to have a few beers.

[skyliner]

I thought I might have started something with global warming - nearly didn't mention it. Even with all the evidence, the El nino and La nina fixed that up with the S.O.I., ocean currents etc. Just not convinced given the variances over history without man's contribution at all.

Anyway, anyone got any flood photos - love to show them over here. Whats the story from now on? Still getting severe storms here.

SA - STATE ON THE MOVE

[Wayno]

I thought I might have started something with global warming - nearly didn't mention it. Even with all the evidence, the El nino and La nina fixed that up with the S.O.I., ocean currents etc. Just not convinced given the variances over history without man's contribution at all.

Anyway, anyone got any flood photos - love to show them over here. Whats the story from now on? Still getting severe storms here.

Yep this thread took a U turn, with myself a contributor. It's difficult to just talk about localised weather patterns nowadays

[Aidan]

Might as well believe in the tooth fairy then.

In all seriousness, they still haven't even explored our oceans properly, among other things. Therefore they don't fully understand how the planet works.
So how can they sit there and tell us in a couple hundred years us humans have managed to alter the planets climate?

Because of what we do know.

We know there's a greenhouse effect. We know humans have increased the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. We know that there has been a significant warming trend in the temperature of the atmosphere, and a weakening of the link between weather and solar activity has been observed.

There's probably nothing that we fully understand. Not even gravity - but to to exploit its effects we don't need to know whether or not it's produced by Higgs Bosons!

I agree, pollution etc aren't good, for our health or the planets health. And I also will agree that we should be doing more to recycle and preserve the environment and ecosystems and wall that sort of stuff.
But when we still don't have a complete understanding of our planet, I think it's ludicrous that anyone would argue we are to blame for changes in weather.

Do you understand the difference between climate and weather? I don't recall hearing anyone who understands the issue claiming there's human induced weather change.

For example, and this is why I cited the drought and recent rains. They've been going on for the last few years at least about global warming, how weather patterns and climates out of whack and what not.
Our drought was caused by El Nino. This winter though, the drought was broken, in what they were calling a regular winter. We are now in an El Nina pattern or whatever the technical term is.

We know the effects of global warming will include an increase in the frequency of El Niño events and a decrease in the frequency of La Nina conditions. No scientist predicted we'd go straight to constant El Niño.

If we have stuffed the planets climate up, why did we have a regular winter?

There is a huge difference between climate and weather.

Have we not had prolonged droughts before?

It's a bit difficult to say, as reliable records don't go very far back. We've certainly had severe droughts before, but AFAIK the one that ended this year was unprecedented.

Have we not had flooding before?

We have certainly had flooding before.

Have we not had other severe weather events before?

We've had some, but the 48°C conditions in Victoria on Black Saturday are unprecedented.

Are cyclones, hurricanes, flooding, drought something that started happening in the last decade or two?

Not in Australia - but in Brazil it's a different story!

Were there no major natural disasters in the past? 100 years ago and before that?

Of course there were natural disasters. The point is they're increasing in both frequency and geographical range.

They used to go on about the hole in the Ozone layer, and how it was getting bigger and how we would all die from the suns rays.
Now they are saying it's getting smaller.

The hole in the Ozone layer was mainly caused by chlorine monoxide which was produced by the interaction of chlorofluorocarbons, ultraviolet light and oxygen in a low pressure environment. People decided the problem was serious enough to do something about, so chlorofluorocarbons were banned.

It's like saying there is no intelligent life in the universe besides us here on planet Earth. You can't make such claims when you don't have all the facts. And we don't have all the facts, not about our own planet to say we are the cause of eratic weather, and not about the universe.

Denying climate change is what's like saying there's no intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. Considering all the trillions of star systems out there, the statistical case against the claim is overwhelming, yet some people continue to demand absolute proof.

Solar flares for example. They affect the earth. The sun is known for actually being in a period of releasing intense solar flares.

And I'd be surprised if they didn't influence the weather. Just because the link's weakening as CO2 levels rise doesn't mean it's insignificant.

[rev]

Do you understand that the climate and weather are related? Changes to the climate, equate to changes to our weather and weather patterns?
Yes? No? Will it affect your planned subway?

You know, tropical climate = hot/wet/humid weather...and so on.

It's a bit difficult to say, as reliable records don't go very far back. We've certainly had severe droughts before, but AFAIK the one that ended this year was unprecedented.

Uhuh, and a drought 50 years ago was probably unprecedented. Just like these following events were unprecedented in their time. Long before this myth of man being exclusively responsible for global warming, hundreds of thousands were dying from natural disasters all the time.

In 1887 in China, 900,000 to 2million people died in floods.
In 1931, 2.5 to 3.7 million died again in China, due to floods.
In 1991, 138,000 people died in a cyclone in Bangladesh.
4,000 people died in a blizzard in Iran in 1972.
In 1839, 300,00 died in a cyclone in India.
300,000 also died in a cyclone in India in 1737.

Just a sample. Get what I'm trying to say now?

We obviously have an impact on the planet. To argue otherwise is nuts, as nuts as arguing that it's our fault weather patterns are more erratic.

[Aidan]

Do you understand that the climate and weather are related?

Of course.

Changes to the climate, equate to changes to our weather and weather patterns?

That depends what you mean by equate to. Adelaide has a dry summer climate, yet we sometimes get torrential rain in the summer. It's rare, but it happens.

You know, tropical climate = hot/wet/humid weather...and so on.

Predominantly, but not exclusively.

It's a bit difficult to say, as reliable records don't go very far back. We've certainly had severe droughts before, but AFAIK the one that ended this year was unprecedented.

Uhuh, and a drought 50 years ago was probably unprecedented.

I doubt it would've been as bad as the one 95 years ago.

Just like these following events were unprecedented in their time.

As I said, reliable records don't go that far back.

Long before this myth of man being exclusively responsible for global warming, hundreds of thousands were dying from natural disasters all the time.

Of course.

In 1887 in China, 900,000 to 2million people died in floods.
In 1931, 2.5 to 3.7 million died again in China, due to floods.
In 1991, 138,000 people died in a cyclone in Bangladesh.
4,000 people died in a blizzard in Iran in 1972.
In 1839, 300,00 died in a cyclone in India.
300,000 also died in a cyclone in India in 1737.

What makes you think that those things were unprecedented?

Just a sample. Get what I'm trying to say now?

That you have an endless supply of red herrings?

We obviously have an impact on the planet. To argue otherwise is nuts, as nuts as arguing that it's our fault weather patterns are more erratic.

No, as nuts as arguing that it's just a coincidence that weather patterns are more erratic.

Human actions are altering the atmospheric composition in a way that's predicted to change the climate, the climate is changing in the way predicted, and there's no credible alternative explanation. What more evidence do you need?

[skyliner]

.....and to draw the focus back to Adelaide's.... weather...Here is an anecdotal story of a similar occasion which happened T think about 1985. King tide combined with storms (weather)where the esplanade and several houses were taken out overnight around Somerton area and south. Sea flooded in across to Brighton Rd.

Aiden - would climate be the sum total of the weather experienced in a locality over an extended time - being then an overall
expected 'weather' pattern that is typical of the area? (Loosely called 'Mediterranean' for Adelaide). And would weather be air pressure, winds, temperature, precipitation seen on a daily basis?

On this note, however, Adelaide seems to be getting wetter as is MG in the SE. (when looking at a 50 yr timeframe). MG has risen from 26'' a year to 30''. Interesting....and SA is supposed to be getting drier...

Anyway, come on with the photos guys.

SA - STATE ON THE MOVE

[rev]

So we should believe the experts Aidan?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/e ... 936328.ece

Hmmm..they seem like very trustworthy and honest people.
Why "lose" the original data, if the data was so compelling and proved the theory?

Skyliner, here are some photos from AdelaideNow.




Heres a link to over 100 more.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/gall ... 078?page=1

[Will]

Well rev, yes, we should believe the experts. Because, as the name suggests they are experts in their field. Unlike an article in the Advertiser or a story on a Current Affair, an article published in a scientific journal requires a thourough process to verify the accuracy of what is being reported. The data reported in scientific journals is based upon experimentations whereby something is only accepted as fact following statistical analysis. Furthermore, articles are peer reviewed prior to publication.

Hence, the fact remains that 100% of articles in scientific journals have accepted climate change as fact, aswell as accepting that climate change is being influenced by humans.