Have you looked at the North Pole lately?

[flylowgethigh]

You better look fast at the north pole before the Russians fence it off from tourists LOL. Until it completely flips polarity it will be on Russian territory.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/santas-new-home-north-pole-moving-russia

 

[Zeez]

No there not, fires and floods are a common here
the bush needs fire to regenerate

The poles aren't melting, its -50 c in the antarctic
sea levels aren't rising any faster than the last 5000 years
nothing wrong with the great barrier reef, its doing fine

Its all one big CON job

Sure. Keep believing. Education and factual information are your enemy.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/great-...ange-caused-decrease-in-new-coral-study-says/

 

[trichrider]

You have no idea what you are typing.

The poles are melting. Solar energy that used to be reflected back into space is now absorbed. Ocean temperatures are rising. Ocean levels are rising. Coral is dying. Oxygen producing Sea grass is dying. Fires are destroying huge tracts of land like never before (Australia).

And you think you have the answer with a totally disconnected wiki?

you used a wiki link to try to discredit, so what?
i know exactly what i type, you just can't interpret the connections even though you thought it would imply that i was in error.


poles melt, then they reform, in cycles.
ocean temps rise and fall, in cycles.
coral dies and new coral forms, in cycles.
fires rage and new vegetation grows, in cycles.

sea grass dying is a new one to me, perhaps provide a link (other than wiki)...and oxygen is ubiquitous to photosynthesis of all plants, as well as the deepness of space.

what is common to all your declarations? cyclical catastrophe.
i can't imagine how it feels to be a direst.

use this link ( https://www.windy.com/ )and click "CLOUDS" to discover that 80-90% of earths cloud cover is reflecting solar radiation back into space, and the incidence of angle the solar impact has on earth is minimized at the poles...so i can't help you with that argument.

step away from the punchbowl, it's been spiked.

 

[Zeez]

You make allot of big claims here with no proof. Instead you ask me for proof. If you want to be the big asshole contradicting people then back it up. Or else just shadddappp. This is typical of most every post I have seen from you. All based on ignorance. Good luck to you.

you used a wiki link to try to discredit, so what?
i know exactly what i type, you just can't interpret the connections even though you thought it would imply that i was in error.


poles melt, then they reform, in cycles.
ocean temps rise and fall, in cycles.
coral dies and new coral forms, in cycles.
fires rage and new vegetation grows, in cycles.

sea grass dying is a new one to me, perhaps provide a link (other than wiki)...and oxygen is ubiquitous to photosynthesis of all plants, as well as the deepness of space.

what is common to all your declarations? cyclical catastrophe.
i can't imagine how it feels to be a direst.

use this link ( https://www.windy.com/ )and click "CLOUDS" to discover that 80-90% of earths cloud cover is reflecting solar radiation back into space, and the incidence of angle the solar impact has on earth is minimized at the poles...so i can't help you with that argument.

step away from the punchbowl, it's been spiked.

 

[trichrider]

You better look fast at the north pole before the Russians fence it off from tourists LOL. Until it completely flips polarity it will be on Russian territory.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/santas-new-home-north-pole-moving-russia

Russia's New Floating Nuclear Power Plant Begins Delivering Electricity To The Arctic
by Tyler Durden
Tue, 12/24/2019 - 21:00

On September 14, we reported that the world's first ever floating nuclear power plant, the Akademik Lomonosov, reached the port city of Pevek in Russia’s Chukotka after covering a distance of more than 4,700km from Murmansk.

Russia’s first floating nuclear power plant has two KLT-40S reactor units that collectively generate 70 MW of energy.

A year ago we noted video of the beginning of the ships' voyage (from St.Petersburg to Murmansk)

A floating nuclear power plant made by Russia headed out for its first sea voyage on Saturday. The floating plant, the academic lomonosov will provide power for a port town and for oil rigs. pic.twitter.com/Eo0uBjVfht
— ANews (@anewscomtr) April 28, 2018​

And now, as The Barents Observer reports that at 11 am Moscow Times on December 19th, the “Akademik Lomonosov” delivered its first electricity to the grid in Pevek, Arctic Russia.

As Thomas Nilsen reports, symbolically, given the season, the town’s Christmas tree was first to be lighted with electricity produced by the two reactors on board the plant that is moored in the port.
Additional to the town of Pevek, the grid includes the Chaun-Bilibino junction in the Chukotka Autonomous Okrug, Rosatom informs.

“Today a historic event occurred, the first connection of the “generators of “Akademik Lomonosov” floating nuclear heat- and electricity nuclear power plant were connected to the grid,” Rosenergoatom Director General Andrey Petrov said.

He said Pevek is now the new energy capital of the region, “a stronghold for the development of western Chukotka and a key link for the Northern Sea Route.

As we concluded previously, the launch of the first ever floating nuclear power plant has become an important engineering breakthrough that will impact the energy sphere on a global scale. This technology, which could potentially provide safe and clean energy to a large part of the planet, could also be provided at an attractive price.

"You Should Not Get Closer To Our Borders" - Russia Deploys Hypersonic Missile Fighters To Arctic
by Tyler Durden
Fri, 12/20/2019 - 01:00

Russia has deployed hypersonic missile fighters along the Arctic and Pacific coasts to protect its maritime borders, reported Izvestia.
Mikoyan MiG-31 supersonic interceptor jets have been outfitted with the Kh-47M2 Kinzhal ("Dagger"), a nuclear-capable air-launched ballistic missile, and deployed to the Kola Peninsula and Kamchatka regions of the country, a powerful move that will send shockwaves through Washington as Russia is now prepared to take control of the Arctic.

The air-launched hypersonic missile is one of the most advanced weapons in the world, even sophisticated air defense systems have difficulty defending against its Mach 10 to Mach 12 speed.

​

The range of the missile is about 1,200 miles and could extend Russia's air defense capabilities not just throughout the Arctic region, but also could challenge the US in the Pacific.

Russian ASF MiG-31 aircraft crew conducted combat training launch of a hypersonic missile of #Kinzhal high-precision aviation missile system in the assigned area. Launch was conducted normally. The missile hit the target at a training ground. pic.twitter.com/u8jkUw27O9
— Минобороны России (@mod_russia) March 10, 2018​

With the deployment of the hypersonic missile fighters, one fleet in the Arctic and another in the Pacific, Russia will be able to deploy a rapid response countermeasure or even defensive maneuver across the Arctic and the North Pacific.​

Test pilot Colonel Igor Malikov told Izvestia that "It must be clearly stated: you should not get closer to our borders and make aggressive plans...the MiG-31 with the "Dagger" is a defensive weapon. In the event of an attack on Russia, it can hit the airbases from which enemy planes take off in the direction of our territories, as well as ships and marine infrastructure."



As we've explained before, the Arctic is becoming a highly contested region for control between the US, Russia, and China. That's because more than $35 trillion worth of natural resources could be hiding underneath the ocean floor.



"Now, there are several points of intersection of the interests of a number of powers," Malikov told Izvestia. "There were questions - who will develop minerals on the ocean shelves. Moreover, not only the countries of the region, but also the USA participate in these discussions. And MiG regiments with Daggers are going to be placed at key points in the region."
The battle for the Arctic has already begun -- Russia could be in the lead to take control of the Arctic considering its latest deployment of military hardware to the region.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopoliti...uke-power-plant-begins-delivering-electricity

​

 

[Zeez]

 

[trichrider]

Ice Sheet Melting: Estimates Still Uncertain, Experts Warn
Published: 18th December 2019, 11:06am

Estimates used by climate scientists to predict the rate at which the world’s ice sheets will melt are still uncertain despite advancements in technology, new research shows.

These ice sheet estimates feed directly into projections of sea-level rise resulting from climate change. They are made by measuring how much material ice sheets are gaining or losing over time, known as mass balance, to assess their long-term health. Snowfall increases the mass of an ice sheet, while ice melting or breaking off causes it to lose mass, and the overall balance between these is crucial.

Although scientists now have a much better understanding of the melting behaviour of ice sheets than they did in previous decades, there are still significant uncertainties about their future melt rates, researchers found.

The new study, published in the scientific journal Earth Science Reviews, shows that despite recent advances in computer modelling of ice sheets in response to climate change, there are still key deficiencies in the models used to estimate the long-term health of ice sheets and related global sea-level predictions. Improving these estimates could prove vital to informing the scale of response needed to mitigate the potential impacts of climate change.

Edward Hanna, Professor of Climate Science and Meteorology at the University of Lincoln, UK, co-ordinated the research in co-operation with a leading international group of glaciologists.

Professor Hanna said: “The ice sheets are highly sensitive indicators of climate change, but despite significant recent improvements in data and knowledge, we still don’t understand enough about how rapidly they are likely to lose mass during and beyond the current century.

“Enhanced observations of ice sheets, mainly from satellite data fed into improved computer simulations, are vital to help refine predictions of future sea-level rise that will result from continued global warming. They are urgently needed to assist climate adaptation and impact planning across the world.”

In the last decade, the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets have overtaken thousands of smaller glaciers as the major contributors to rising sea levels – it is thought that combined, the sheets contain enough ice to raise global sea levels by as much as 65 metres. However, while some estimates project a contribution of as much as one and a half metres from Antarctica to global sea-level rise by 2100, others suggest only a few tens of centimetres contribution.

The researchers say there is a pressing need for further research that involves enhanced satellite and ground-based observations, together with more sophisticated, interactive computer models that combine ice masses, the atmosphere, ocean and solid Earth systems.

Their study involved analysis of recent estimates of ice sheet and glacier mass balance, as well as highlighting recent advances and limitations in computer-model simulations of ice sheet change as an important basis for future work. The World Climate Research Programme, the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research and the International Arctic Science Committee part-sponsored the research.
Professor Hanna also contributed to a recent pap
er in the scientific journal Nature analysing the Greenland Ice Sheet mass balance. That study, involving 96 polar scientists, showed that in the last decade, Greenland has lost ice seven times faster than in the 1990s. This tracks a high-end global warming scenario, with tens of millions more people being exposed to coastal flooding by 2100.


https://www.lincoln.ac.uk/news/2019/12/1582.asp

 

[kickarse]

Sure. Keep believing. Education and factual information are your enemy.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/great-...ange-caused-decrease-in-new-coral-study-says/

Yeah mainstream media will tell you the truth hey

how about some facts
https://www.thegwpf.com/peter-ridd-crying-wolf-over-the-great-barrier-reef/

 

[Zeez]

There ya go fool. You just pasted support for what I said while trying to prove me wrong. The only thing missing is that they don't say why we have climate change. Great attempt at trying to act intelligent. IT BACKFIRED. Piss off fool.

You have no idea what you are typing.

The poles are melting. Solar energy that used to be reflected back into space is now absorbed. Ocean temperatures are rising. Ocean levels are rising. Coral is dying. Oxygen producing Sea grass is dying. Fires are destroying huge tracts of land like never before (Australia).

And you think you have the answer with a totally disconnected wiki?

Ice Sheet Melting: Estimates Still Uncertain, Experts Warn
Published: 18th December 2019, 11:06am
View Image

Estimates used by climate scientists to predict the rate at which the world’s ice sheets will melt are still uncertain despite advancements in technology, new research shows.

These ice sheet estimates feed directly into projections of sea-level rise resulting from climate change. They are made by measuring how much material ice sheets are gaining or losing over time, known as mass balance, to assess their long-term health. Snowfall increases the mass of an ice sheet, while ice melting or breaking off causes it to lose mass, and the overall balance between these is crucial.

Although scientists now have a much better understanding of the melting behaviour of ice sheets than they did in previous decades, there are still significant uncertainties about their future melt rates, researchers found.

The new study, published in the scientific journal Earth Science Reviews, shows that despite recent advances in computer modelling of ice sheets in response to climate change, there are still key deficiencies in the models used to estimate the long-term health of ice sheets and related global sea-level predictions. Improving these estimates could prove vital to informing the scale of response needed to mitigate the potential impacts of climate change.

Edward Hanna, Professor of Climate Science and Meteorology at the University of Lincoln, UK, co-ordinated the research in co-operation with a leading international group of glaciologists.

Professor Hanna said: “The ice sheets are highly sensitive indicators of climate change, but despite significant recent improvements in data and knowledge, we still don’t understand enough about how rapidly they are likely to lose mass during and beyond the current century.

“Enhanced observations of ice sheets, mainly from satellite data fed into improved computer simulations, are vital to help refine predictions of future sea-level rise that will result from continued global warming. They are urgently needed to assist climate adaptation and impact planning across the world.”

In the last decade, the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets have overtaken thousands of smaller glaciers as the major contributors to rising sea levels – it is thought that combined, the sheets contain enough ice to raise global sea levels by as much as 65 metres. However, while some estimates project a contribution of as much as one and a half metres from Antarctica to global sea-level rise by 2100, others suggest only a few tens of centimetres contribution.

The researchers say there is a pressing need for further research that involves enhanced satellite and ground-based observations, together with more sophisticated, interactive computer models that combine ice masses, the atmosphere, ocean and solid Earth systems.

Their study involved analysis of recent estimates of ice sheet and glacier mass balance, as well as highlighting recent advances and limitations in computer-model simulations of ice sheet change as an important basis for future work. The World Climate Research Programme, the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research and the International Arctic Science Committee part-sponsored the research.
Professor Hanna also contributed to a recent pap
er in the scientific journal Nature analysing the Greenland Ice Sheet mass balance. That study, involving 96 polar scientists, showed that in the last decade, Greenland has lost ice seven times faster than in the 1990s. This tracks a high-end global warming scenario, with tens of millions more people being exposed to coastal flooding by 2100.


https://www.lincoln.ac.uk/news/2019/12/1582.asp

 

[trichrider]

Research Article



Reactions of the Middle Atmosphere Circulation and Stationary Planetary Waves on the Solar Activity Effects in the Thermosphere

A.V. Koval
N.M. Gavrilov
A.I. Pogoreltsev
N.O. Shevchuk



First published: 15 December 2019
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JA027392

Read the full text


Abstract


Using numerical simulations of the general atmospheric circulation during boreal winter, statistically confident evidences are obtained for the first time, demonstrating that changes in the solar activity (SA) in the thermosphere at heights above 100 km can influence propagation and reflection conditions for stationary planetary waves (SPWs) and can modify the middle atmosphere circulation below 100 km. A numerical mechanistic model simulating atmospheric circulation and SPWs at heights 0–300 km is used. To achieve sufficient statistical confidence, 80 pairs of 15‐day intervals were extracted from an ensemble of 16 pairs of model runs corresponding to low and high SA. Results averaged over these intervals show that impacts of SA above 100 km change the mean zonal wind and temperature up to 10% at altitudes below 100 km. The statistically confident changes in SPW amplitudes due to SA impacts above 100 km reach up to 50% in the thermosphere and 10–15% in the middle atmosphere depending on zonal wavenumber. Changes in wave amplitudes correspond to variations of the Eliassen‐Palm flux and may alter dynamical and thermal SPW impacts on the mean wind and temperature. Thus, variable conditions of SPW propagation and reflection at thermospheric altitudes may influence the middle atmosphere circulation, thermal structure, and planetary waves.

Plain Language Summary

Atmospheric large‐scale disturbances, for instance planetary waves, play a valuable role in atmospheric general circulation, influencing its dynamical and thermal conditions. Solar activity might significantly change the mean temperature at heights above 100 km and alter conditions of wave propagation and reflection in the thermosphere. In the present study, we perform numerical simulations to obtain statistically confident results showing noticeable response of atmospheric circulation at altitudes below 100 km to impacts of solar activity above 100 km.


https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2019JA027392

 

[kickarse]

Aren't you blokes in the north freezing ya arse's off this time of year ?

be to cold to worry about "global warming" I would of thought

 

[trichrider]

There ya go fool. You just pasted support for what I said while trying to prove me wrong. The only thing missing is that they don't say why we have climate change. Great attempt at trying to act intelligent. IT BACKFIRED. Piss off fool.

what? did you just get here?



[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]better understanding of the melting behavior of ice sheets than they did in previous decades, there are still significant uncertainties about their future melt rates[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]shows that despite recent advances in computer modelling of ice sheets in response to climate change, there are still key deficiencies in the models
[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]despite significant recent improvements in data and knowledge, we still don’t understand enough about how rapidly they are likely to lose mass during and beyond the current century.[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]while some estimates project a contribution of as much as one and a half metres from Antarctica to global sea-level rise by 2100, others suggest only a few tens of centimetres contribution.[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]as well as highlighting recent advances and limitations in computer-model simulations of ice sheet change
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]all ignored in your retort. zeezle[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]you claim sea level rise, link it!
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]you know full well why they don't identify why the climate changes...
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]i suffer fools not lightly, and your appeal to authority is misplaced.[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

 

[armedoldhippy]

Aren't you blokes in the north freezing ya arse's off this time of year ?

be to cold to worry about "global warming" I would of thought

it's winter, supposed to be cold. how are you enjoying the heat wave down there? over 40 degrees C (108 F) yesterday it said on tv. or is that more "fake news"? it has not gotten below the 40s F here lately. should be in 20s at night, 30s max daytime...pretty damn warm for this time of year.

 

[trichrider]

The response of longwave radiation at the South Pole to electrical and magnetic variations: Links to meteorological generators and the solar wind

John E.Frederick
Brian A.Tinsley

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2018.08.003
Highlights

•South Polar downward longwave irradiance responds to the atmospheric electric field.
•The correlation is positive and significant only in polar darkness.
•There is a weak association between irradiance and the By magnetic field component.
•Longwave irradiance is negatively correlated with the Ap index.
•Results are consistent with electric charge effects on cloud microphysics.


Abstract

An increasing body of evidence supports the conclusion that electrical variations in the Polar Regions influence atmospheric radiative properties. These influences can be transmitted (1) by the global electric circuit from remote thunderstorms and electrified shower clouds; (2) from local electric fields associated with ionospheric currents that generate magnetic activity, and (3) from local penetration of the solar wind electric field. A regression-based analysis reveals a positive relationship between downwelling longwave radiation observed during the dark portion of the year at the South Pole and the vertical electric field measured at the Antarctic stations Vostok and Concordia from 1998 to 2011, component (1). An increase in the electric field of 22.4 Vm-1, equal to one standard deviation of the nighttime mean, is followed one day later by a longwave irradiance 2.78 ± 1.90% larger than would exist otherwise. In addition, a significant negative correlation with a lag of two days exists between longwave irradiance recorded from late 1993 to mid-2017 and the Ap index, which measures temporal variations in the surface magnetic field associated with electric fields of ionospheric origin, component (2). There is a weaker, less-definitive, positive correlation of longwave irradiance with the interplanetary magnetic field index By which is associated with the solar wind electric field, component (3). These results are consistent with previous work using visible radiation, and with the hypothesis that the ionosphere-earth current density influences the microphysics of polar clouds, with consequences for radiative processes and meteorological variables such as surface pressure.

 

[trichrider]

it's winter, supposed to be cold. how are you enjoying the heat wave down there? over 40 degrees C (108 F) yesterday it said on tv. or is that more "fake news"? it has not gotten below the 40s F here lately. should be in 20s at night, 30s max daytime...pretty damn warm for this time of year.

not in the midwest or northern states, we've had record cold and snow. corn harvest suffered, as well as soy and other in-ground crops.
it's a big country.

 

[hard rain]

No there not, fires and floods are a common here
the bush needs fire to regenerate

The poles aren't melting, its -50 c in the antarctic
sea levels aren't rising any faster than the last 5000 years
nothing wrong with the great barrier reef, its doing fine

Its all one big CON job

Yes we do get fires and floods. However both are becoming more extreme. The fire season is longer and drier.

No fire can be blamed on climate change alone, but Bowman says the rise in higher temperatures, extreme dryness, worsening fire seasons, extreme bursts of fire weather and behaviour and the spread of fire across the country all align with scenarios painted by climate change projections.
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...-factcheck-are-this-years-fires-unprecedented

As for the Great Barrier Reef being fine; wtf? Do you get your info from Pauline Hanson?
IMPACT ON THE REEF
Increased frequency of severe weather events
More intense cyclones can destroy and weaken the reef structure.
More extreme rainfall events will send more freshwater and sediment further out from the coast and on to the Reef.
Rising sea temperature
Greater risk of heat stress and mass coral bleaching.
Ocean acidification
Changes in the ocean's chemistry can decrease the capacity of corals to build skeletons, decreasing their capacity to create habitat for the Reef's marine life.
Since the late 18th century, the oceans have absorbed about 30% of the additional carbon dioxide that human activities have injected into the atmosphere. This extra CO2 in the oceans has changed their chemistry, a process known as ocean acidification, with the pH of oceans decreasing.
Rising sea levels
Higher seas can impact many areas including coastal erosion, the size of storm surges and the area available for shallow water marine organisms.
Small changes in sea levels will mean land inundation which will cause significant changes in tidal habitats such as mangroves and saltwater intruding into low-lying freshwater habitats.
Facing these and other natural and human-induced pressures, coral reefs will be more vulnerable to coral bleaching, disease, crown-of-thorns starfish and tropical cyclones.
https://www.barrierreef.org/the-reef/the-threats/climate-change

 

[kickarse]

Yes we do get fires and floods. However both are becoming more extreme. The fire season is longer and drier.

No fire can be blamed on climate change alone, but Bowman says the rise in higher temperatures, extreme dryness, worsening fire seasons, extreme bursts of fire weather and behaviour and the spread of fire across the country all align with scenarios painted by climate change projections.
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...-factcheck-are-this-years-fires-unprecedented

As for the Great Barrier Reef being fine; wtf? Do you get your info from Pauline Hanson?
IMPACT ON THE REEF
Increased frequency of severe weather events
More intense cyclones can destroy and weaken the reef structure.
More extreme rainfall events will send more freshwater and sediment further out from the coast and on to the Reef.
Rising sea temperature
Greater risk of heat stress and mass coral bleaching.
Ocean acidification
Changes in the ocean's chemistry can decrease the capacity of corals to build skeletons, decreasing their capacity to create habitat for the Reef's marine life.
Since the late 18th century, the oceans have absorbed about 30% of the additional carbon dioxide that human activities have injected into the atmosphere. This extra CO2 in the oceans has changed their chemistry, a process known as ocean acidification, with the pH of oceans decreasing.
Rising sea levels
Higher seas can impact many areas including coastal erosion, the size of storm surges and the area available for shallow water marine organisms.
Small changes in sea levels will mean land inundation which will cause significant changes in tidal habitats such as mangroves and saltwater intruding into low-lying freshwater habitats.
Facing these and other natural and human-induced pressures, coral reefs will be more vulnerable to coral bleaching, disease, crown-of-thorns starfish and tropical cyclones.
https://www.barrierreef.org/the-reef/the-threats/climate-change

FFS what a load of shit, really can't take ya seriously if your going to quote the fucking "gardian" newspaper or Turnballs mates at the barrierreef foundation

 

[kickarse]

it's winter, supposed to be cold. how are you enjoying the heat wave down there? over 40 degrees C (108 F) yesterday it said on tv. or is that more "fake news"? it has not gotten below the 40s F here lately. should be in 20s at night, 30s max daytime...pretty damn warm for this time of year.

Its very nice at the moment, 34c today, 39c tomorrow and then 19c on tuesday, rinse and repeat next week, except the 19 will be a 17

we are sitting right on the average temp for the month, nothing to see here at the moment, Jan and Feb are our hot months

might have to buy a air-con lol lol can't see why tho

 

[hard rain]

FFS what a load of shit, really can't take ya seriously if your going to quote the fucking "gardian" newspaper or Turnballs mates at the barrierreef foundation

My apologies if I don't get my information from some nutjob website funded by a coal company. The Guardian was quoting expert firefighters and scientists, you know those people that actually have experience of this or studied it extensively.
You probably won't accept the BBC either.
"The Bureau of Meteorology's State of the Climate 2018 report said climate change had led to an increase in extreme heat events and increased the severity of other natural disasters, such as drought.

In April, 23 former fire chiefs and emergency leaders issued a letter, warning the government about "increasingly catastrophic extreme weather events". It requested a meeting which was declined by the government."
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-50341210

 

[hard rain]

And on the shape of Australia's Great Barrier Reef. From Reuters;

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Australia’s Great Barrier Reef is in very poor condition because of climate change, over fishing and land clearing, a state agency said on Friday, as it downgraded the reef’s status to the lowest level, which could jeopardise its World Heritage status.

“This report draws attention to the fact that the outlook for the Great Barrier Reef, the long term outlook, is very poor- that’s largely driven by climate change,” GBRMPA’s Chief Scientists David Wachenfeld told reporters in Sydney.

“Despite that, with the right mix of local actions to improve the resilience of the system and global actions to tackle climate change in the strongest and fastest way possible, we can turn that around.”
The report, which is compiled every five years, painted a deteriorating picture of widespread coral bleaching, habitat loss and degradation caused by human-induced climate change, overfishing, poor water quality, and coastal land clearing for grazing.

The reef stretching for more than 2,300 km (1430 miles) is home to 400 types of coral, 1,500 species of fish and 4,000 types of molluscs.

Some parts of the reefs remained in good condition but many species including dolphins, dugongs, sharks, rays and turtles were being threatened.

UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee last year called for global action on climate change to protect five large coral reefs, including the Great Barrier Reef.

The committee is due to consider the reef’s heritage listing, considering its health and a possible “in danger” status.

“The Great Barrier Reef is one of the globe’s most famous World Heritage Areas yet the report finds that its integrity is challenged and deteriorating,” environmentalist group Australian Marine Conservation Society said in a statement.

“This is now the third Outlook Report. We’ve had ten years of warnings, ten years of rising greenhouse emissions and ten years watching the Reef heading for a catastrophe,” said the group’s director of strategy, Imogen Zethoven.

“This report will be a major input into UNESCO’s committee and here is a very strong case for the reef to be considered for the in danger list.”

The inclusion of the reef on the in danger list would be an embarrassment for the government and could damage the tourist industry.

UNESCO’s chief of the Asia and Pacific region, Feng Jing, said the organisation was following closely the state of the reef and progress made in protecting it and would consider its status in July next year.

“We would hope that the collective efforts undertaking by the State Party of Australia will bring the change that is needed to ensure the sustainable conservation of the Great Barrier Reef,” Jing said in an emailed statement.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...f-in-very-poor-condition-agency-idUSKCN1VK0LQ