Of maps and coincidences: how floods are devastating the Southern Hemisphere

Let’s look at the “bigger picture”, as words fail to adequately convey the scale of what is taking place.

I’ve marked the current floods against NASA’s global temperature anomalies map released on January 14 2011.

This is what conveys the scale of the disaster unfolding across the Southern Hemisphere (click to enlarge):

 

 

You’ll note how much “red” appears around the globe. There are temperature anomalies measured against the global average for the 1880-2010 period.

We are drowning and burning.

Of course, to the climate “sceptics” nothing unusual there.

Just a co-incidence. 

About these ads

19 thoughts on “Of maps and coincidences: how floods are devastating the Southern Hemisphere

  1. Ray says:

    Tim you speak as one who does not know cold, winter kills. Look at the numbers.

    • Ray, you speak as one who does not know heat, summer kills. Look at the numbers.

      • Ray says:

        A Stanford study do ya?

        “The results imply that a 2.5deg. Celsius warming would lower deaths in the United States by about 40,000 per year.”

        Thats humans. I live amongst wildlife and, you know what! Winter kills.

        Half a story is worthless Tim, an honest appraisal is golden.

    • I also live and work around a lot of wildlife and I assure you, heat waves do their fare share of damage so (I’ve not criticised cold, but you’ve criticised heat).

      A simple test for you; crack an egg on any bare soil in the mid afternoon on the 2nd day over 40 degrees C and watch what happens. It’s referred to as denaturing protein. Without adequate prevention (in our case, water) this starts to occur in the body, reducing many enzyme processes.

      I know damn well that heat waves are a killer and as you say, half the story is worthless, so I wouldn’t be so quick to state, “Cold is the killer John not warm…”

  2. john byatt says:

    Yes Ray of course bush-fires have been started by lightning for thousands of years, Arsonists therefore do not exist , given the choice between trying to keep warm at minus ten degrees and keeping cool at forty degrees i choose to put on the thermal underwear i had living in Tas and spend the day working outside, what will you do, sit in the A/C all day

  3. Ray says:

    “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to control it”. H.L.Menchen.

    Its is indeed the hottest period, hottest decade in recorded history but what value is that in respect to earths history? Its unquestable been hotter in the past. Its like finding it remarkable a growing midget is the tallest he has ever been at age 21, he is still short.

    About the misery you keep harping about. The number of people involved does not matter in respect to whether this is or is not a weather or climate event. Mother nature, strict earth science nor technically the global warming debate gives a rats a@@ how many souls are involved.

    Makes great scare stories though, fine headlines.

    This weather/climate is well within the past earth history.

    Quit building houses in flood plains and enjoy the warm weather. Sure as hell better than an ice age.

    • Watching the Deniers says:

      Oh dear god “the weather has always changed”.

      Do you know what a climate forcing is?

      • Ray says:

        No I don’t know what drives climate, neither do you nor scientist apearently…thats a bit of a problem isn’t it.

        Hey but we know what makes great headlines!!

      • Sundance says:

        I sure do. Did you intend to make a point about forcings?

  4. Sundance says:

    Why is there so much more dark red in the GISS Arctic area image than there is in the Met Office Hadley Centre/Climatic Research Unit
    Arctic area image? If I were you I might want to investigate how many thermometers GISS has where they’re showing all that dark red warming. Here’s a hint: It’s less than the number of thermometers I have in my house.

    You might also want to investigate why GISS ignores Arctic SST data in their calculations. The GISS Arctic anamoly doesn’t jibe with satellites that are actually measuring Arctic temperatures over land and ocean. A good analogy would be the difference between how GISS and Satellites would measure your bath water. If the GISS was used to determine your bath water temperature they would take the temperature of your bathroom wall and apply their model to extropolate a calculated temperature of the water in your bathtub. The climate centers using satellites would point a self-calibrating infrared sensor accurate to 1/10 of one degree at your bath water and take readings.

    How did November 2010 temperature anamolies compare?
    GISS = .74C
    UAH = .38C
    RSS = .31C
    HadCRUT3v = .422C

    Here is the most recent decade of warming as indicated by HadCRUT3v data = red/green and HADSST2 (oceans only) = blue/purple

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2001/to:2011/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2001/to:2011/trend/plot/hadsst2gl/from:2001/to:2011/plot/hadsst2gl/from:2001/to:2011/trend

    • Watching the Deniers says:

      Oh dear… you don’t get that these are different temperature sets that are in broad agreement.

      Wood for the trees is a sad joke, a laughing stock amongst the scientific community.

      Love it, all the usual denier tactics:

      – focus on minutia
      – dismiss a tiny fact
      – apply that dismissal to all other information/facts
      – denir then feels better that “AGW is no longer real, surpresses contradictory information.

      Sad, scared old men.

      • Sundance says:

        You’re the denier as to the real cause of the floods mate. lol

        (Wood for the trees is a sad joke, a laughing stock amongst the scientific community.)
        The data is the HadCRUT3v data and HASSST2. It’s the same data scientists use.

        (you don’t get that these are different temperature sets that are in broad agreement.)
        Really? lol http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/2010temperatureanomalies.png

        It is clear that you know little about how climate centers gather temperature data and you are unable to provide a coherent retort to support your position and you retreat into another denier attscreed.

      • Sundance says:

        (Oh dear… you don’t get that these are different temperature sets that are in broad agreement.)

        WTD I DO uunderstand the difference in the data sets but your conclusion that they are in broad agreement is wrong. HadCRUT3v December 2010 data was just posted so I thought you would like to see how Hansen at GISS compares to the Met Office. Here is the trend since 1998 which I use becaues the Met Office released a “parameters of falsification” (see scientific method) paper for the climate models in 2009 and they used 1998 as there starting point. http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1998/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1998/trend/plot/gistemp/from:1998/plot/gistemp/from:1998/trend

        The HadCRUT slope indicates a .2C increase during this period. Hansen’s slope on the other hand shows warming of 1.9C degrees during this period for a roughly +950% difference. The Met’s conclusion was that zero or little temperature increase over a 15 year period would falsify the model at the 95% level. The link above is now for 13 years of data and 2011 will likely turn the HadCrut trend/slope negative. If one data set falsifies the model and the other doesn’t, then I think you can comprehend that it indicates broad disagreement between sets of data. The expert statisticians will be all over this data and it will be important as we move closer to the courts on these matters in the USA.

        BTW, FOIA papers were filed for Hansen/GISS data this week.

      • About a year ago, Lockwood published an excellent paper which, among other things, discussed discrepancies between the different data sets which, when discussed as you have here Sundance, really helps to promote an uncertainty and confliction that simply is not present within the scientific community.

        Although, I must commend you! You do know enough (or are an avid reader of the typical suspects) to continue to hurl graphs and papers that seem to illustrate the worst possible picture of climate science! Well done you for helping to assist the miseducation of your fellows and doing it so well a casual reader would be thoroughly confused!

        In the Lockwood paper linked above, he quotes Georg Christoph Lichtenberg, ‘the most dangerous untruths are truths slightly distorted.’

        You are a wonderful example of this!

  5. No.. Deniers will simply say, “this is weather and doesn’t prove AGW / ACC.”

    It doesn’t matter that climate controls weather and it’s certainly and persistently abnormal.. How many once-in-a.. storms before significant enough for the hard of understanding?

  6. john byatt says:

    And for those that do not know where Toowoomba is

    Toowoomba is situated at a latitude and longitude of 27°33′S 151°57′E. Toowoomba sits on the crest of the Great Dividing Range, around 700 metres (2,300 ft) above sea level. A few streets are on the eastern side of the edge of the range, but most of the city is west of the divide.

  7. john byatt says:

    the deniers believe that if they have not read the science then it does not exist.

    Climate change is likely to affect extreme rainfall in SE QLD, Abbs et al (2007}, projections indicate an increase in 2 hour,24 hour and 72 hour extreme rainfall events for large areas of SE QLD especially in the Mcpherson and great dividing range west of brisbane and the gold coast .Projections also indicate that the regions of east Australian cyclone genesis could shift southward by two degrees latitude (approximately 200 km) by 2050, Leslie et al (2007), while the average decay location could be up to 300 km south of the current location. Models estimate that the number of strong cyclones reaching the Australian coastline will increase, and ‘super cyclones’, with an intensity hitherto unrecorded on the Australian east coast, may develop over the next 50 years Leslie et al(2007).Therefore despite a projected long term decrease in rainfall across most of Queensland, the projected increase in rainfall intensity could result in more flooding events.
    BOM satement July 2010, “extreme rainfall events likely for the coming season in SE QLD due to La Nina “.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 771 other followers

%d bloggers like this: