Let me get this right, Ken Reeves does not want to admit what is causing Global Warming. However, all of the following groups have issued statements and or studies clearly identify that it is due to Greenhouse Gases.

World Metrological Society (IPCC)
National Academy of Science
America Metrological Society
Royal Society
NASA
American Geophysical Union
Environmental Protection Agency
NOAA
NCAR
National Academy of Science for all G8 nations
and many more

Anyhow, his analogy of placing a band aid on ones wrist for a cut to the arm is good. The problem is that the likelihood of reducing carbon emission significantly is remote. There are really only broad solutions. Adaptation and mitigation.

Adaptation means basically just dealing with the what ever the changes are. This includes the warming, rising sea levels and extreme weather events. It is our de-facto response if nothing else is done. It may or may not be the most cost effective means. However, very careful studies are needed to quantify the cost and benefits of all the various mitigation strategies.

I will admit that I have never heard of either of the mitigation strategies described. They both seem technically reasonable.

Finally, about the ozone. The Ozone hole has not been plugged. It is still there in Antactica and it is very disturbing that China still has excuses for emitting ozone depleting chemicals. However, since Ozone is a greenhouse gas, it may be contributing to the cooling of the interious of the continent and may help stabilize the SH climate.

Global Warming is not just an ongoing internet debate.
In Australia, agriculture has virtually collapsed due to a 1000 year drought.
At some point in time, they will probably declare it a million year drought.

The situation is very dire. Even John Howard, a one time global warming critic has changed his tune and the country is sending envoys to China asking them to help reduce emissions.

Long term, the Australia will probably not be able to support the population that it currenty has. It should be about half of what it is now.
So, there will be refugees.

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSPEK15498020070427

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSSYD16447720070924

Since nothing has been proven causing "global warming", there is nothing to admit.

More hilarity on climateaudit today regarding AGW "peer-review" and Mann's hockey stick:

http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2105#more-2105

If this weren't so tragic-serious it would be hilarious.

Where do these nutcases come from?
Those solutions are Hillarious!
Sorta like taking all the Sky Hill snow machines up north and rebuilding the Polar ice pac.

Seriously though, the ultimate solution will is education. I suggest we take all the AGW promoters on an awareness excursion to the middle of Greenland. Since it has warmed so much there, they won't need jackets. We drop them off in the central glaciers and come back a couple of days later to pick them up and review their findings.
Problem solved.

Andrew,

Do you not know the difference between conjecture and fact? Facts are not "very highly likely", they are 100%. Consensus is a majority of opinion and peer review is bunk when compared to the scientific method.

Are you familiar with Piltdown Man, the second biggest scientific fraud of the 20th century?

All the "Scientific" organizations at the time backed this fraud for forty years even after a researcher correctly identified the skullcap as human and the jawbone as orangutan one year after discovery. You see the "establishment" thought that it was a big brain that started the separation of man from ape when it turns out that standing upright was the missing link.

The AGW establishment is blaming the effect and making it the cause just as the Royal College of Surgeons, the Royal Society, and the Geological Society of London's most prominent members did with Piltdown, although I do not think AGW is flat out fraud but rather extreme belief in conjecture and loose correlation. You want so badly for CO2 to be the cause many of you are blind to other real possibilities like the Sun.

The article on the Piltdown hoax goes into how and why the hoax succeeded, I see a few similarities between Piltdown and AGW regarding credentials, consensus, and scientific "authority".

Finally, about the ozone. The Ozone hole has not been plugged. It is still there in Antactica and it is very disturbing that China still has excuses for emitting ozone depleting chemicals. However, since Ozone is a greenhouse gas, it may be contributing to the cooling of the interious of the continent and may help stabilize the SH climate.

What might one use to "plug" the ozone hole? :) Ozone is a GHG, huh? How might it be contributing to the "cooling" of the interious (interior) and how might it help "stabilize" the SH?

You are sounding more like a writer for Star Trek than a Nuclear Engineer. The 60's Star Trek. Are you just making this crap up as you write?

A Hansen model the Anthropogenic Global Cooling crowd should get their hands on.

Regards,

Steve

Andrew:
Global Warming is not just an ongoing internet debate.
In Australia, agriculture has virtually collapsed due to a 1000 year drought.

A thousand year Drought? They had droughts like this before the CO2 levels rose? Amazing! That would make the last drought happen around the same time as when the Vikings were up in Greenland living the high life. Wait that means CO2 did not cause the last drought. Sounds like something other than CO2 was responsible 1000 years ago and dare I say there is a high probability that it is repeating itself again!
Let’s get this straight: “We are here! We observe! It must be our fault!" Ahh the old “Guilt by Observation Theory” raises it’s brilliantly self absorbed head again.
CO2, farting moose, termites, and burping bogs…perfect together.
LOL
Come on this farce gets more ludicrous everyday. How about some real science being used?

Natural GW Steve:
Thanks for the article on the computer model Hansen developed when he was predicting the new Ice Age in the 70’s. Now there's a conversion…..I guess he was tired of wearing sweaters and switched to the use of sunscreen.

As soon as this became a political basketball, you lost 50% of your audience. Is seems conservatives think this is fraud, while liberals think this is important enough to do something about.
As a conservative I say this is real and I am doing something about it. Not only is there record drought in Australia, but also in California, the whole Southwest US for that matter. Three years ago we broke a 100+ year old
for most rain ever in a season. Last year we broke the all-time record for the least rain.

This no fraud when it affects you directly. Many other areas are breaking all-time records with too much rain (Northeast US, Texas area, Northern Europe, Southeact Asia, India, ect..)

It may be part of a cycle, but I believe man has an affect and we should do more, but without living in the stone age. Just be smarter with resources.

If we get two more seasons like this in California, the migration will begin out of the state and the current housing slump will be a drop in the bucket. Voluntary rationing has already begun. Mandatory is not far behind. We are already running on reserves. Farming rationing will follow (in the largest AG state!).

Hey Andrew, the drought isn't that bad down here. I don't think I (or my farmer mates) will be heading for the refugee ships for quite some time...

This graph pretty much illustrates the norm here:

http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/silo/reg/cli_chg/timeseries.cgi?variable=rain®ion=aus&season=0112

On April 20, 2007, The Guardian described it as a 100 year drought.
worst drought in 100 years
http://www.guardian.co.uk/australia/story/0,,2061761,00.html

Five months months later the Guardian upgraded it to a 1000 year drought.
worst drought in 1,000 years
http://www.guardian.co.uk/australia/story/0,,1941942,00.html

Last week we discussed the Guardian's hysteria about methane "tipping points" (despite the fact that methane is decreasing.)

It must be fun being an AGW journalist. There is no need or expectation to check facts or details, or be consistent. What's an order of magnitude among fellow travelers?

There are a few places in Australia that are suffering severe drought. Maybe 5% of the country?
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/silo/rain_maps.cgi

Around the year 2000 Colorado was having a nasty drought which lasted three or four years. Everyone was sure it was the end of the world. Now we have plenty of rain.

Newsweek had a cover story in the 1980s about how drought had turned California into "hell on earth."

And we think we are more sophisticated than ancient peoples? Not a chance.

The cgi link on my last post didn't do what I expected. Go to:
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/silo/rain_maps.cgi

Click on Rainfall->drought and Period->12 months

Brett,

What kind of pollution creates the whole in the ozone anyway? I find that much more important than C02.

Reply: Chloroflurocarbons. Freon (a refrigerant coolant) is one of those.

Well, I think those two ideas were nifty. If nothing else, it might be worthwhile to buy a tiny bit of stock because if the AGWers get their way, both of them will boom and at least I'll get some extra income to cover all the taxes and inflation caused by silly season spending.

Andrew leads the charge of the clueless AGW swarms since Ken Reeves did not immediately launch into a sermon on AGW. I say clueless since they totally miss the point that even if they are 100% completely and absolutely correct, what are the best responses? I suggest that Andrew go back to the day when Al Gore spoke to Congress on AGW and read what the AGWer who followed Al had to say.

I will say one thing that Mr. Reeves said that is very simple to test at home. Get a big container and fill it with water. Make it as salty as the oceans. Adjust the salinity. Tell us how much water circulation you get. Then heat one end up and cool the other one down and see how much circulation you get. Finally, do both and see what happens to the circulation. You will be testing the "conveyor belt" theory from AGW (although it would actually be ACC I think). Let us know how it goes. Oh, BTW, claiming size, complexity or any other such magnitude issue from the lab to the ocean makes my point that your "A" doesn't belong in AGW (or ACC).

OT. I think I've said this before, but isn't it so amusing and telling that after the indicators kept going from warming towards cooling how all of a sudden AGW became ACC (Anthropogenic Climate Change). So now it doesn't matter what the climate does, it is all our fault and we need to pay more taxes to bribe China and give little companies that want to make salty ice cubes in the Artic multibillion dollar contracts......

The 8 year drought in Australia has affected both city and rural populations pushing up prices of grains legumes meat and milk, but lowering the price of farmland, while all cities are planning to build enormous desalination plants the mining sector will follow suit so that at least minimal source fresh water can be secured in the future.
Some might say a lack of water is due to a population increase; however comparable severe droughts in the past have occurred before the huge reservoirs, weirs and man made lakes were constructed. These days both catchments and aquifers have run low or dry, even though storage capacity has been significantly improved over the years, which makes this drought far more severe than any other, hence the term 1000year drought which hammers the point home. The climate has changed throughout Australia where rainfalls have noticeably moved further south and have fallen outside catchments closer to coasts or directly into the sea.

The problem is made more severe over the years because industry and farming has been lulled into a false sense of water security over a 40 year period of exceptionally high rain falls. These industries are now well established, but over reliant on water allocations from what were once huge reserves that can no longer offer any level of supply. Some major rivers have dried out completely while others have become dangerously saline. Estuarine ecosystems have collapsed along with aquifers of freshwater leaving some communities boiling water to make sure its safe or relying on transported water.
Most cities have been under long term water restrictions for some time just as the continent comes out of a dry winter and looks forward to a very long hot summer.

So far no major industries other than farming have not been affected, and no restrictions have been applied to businesses at all although its only just a matter of time. Coca �cola have reported a drop aquifer levels which may lead to high salinity, shortages and a compromise in quality, while no one has dared to suggest beer supplies maybe at risk, but that is too a possibility.

The federal government has already come to the assistance of farmers and have launched a welfare package that is designed to assist all rural populations as the rural economy is in severe decline. There is talk of financial resettlement assistance to be made available to allow farming families to leave the land permanently. These farmers will become climate refugees, should they choose to take the hand out. State and federal revenues are expected to be hard hit this year, as exports of grain wine and meat may be reduced to 50% of previous seasons. Some of Australia�s six major cities depend on one of only two incomes for existence and without water neither mining nor farming can provide. This makes any welfare package presently available a short term band aid measure at best with no possibility of it being available for larger urban populations in the future. Desalination plants will not solve mining or farming problems in the short or long term which means there is nothing that can save Australia except a return to pre- drought pre-climate change rainfalls.

Australians will not be the first climate refuges because as our ship sinks the life rafts have already been cut adrift from Tuvalu. These islanders have have already joined populations evacuating from South Sea Islands in response to rising seas, these populations are the first climate refuges but we Australians have steadfastly refused to offer them any sanctuary.
Even though their populations are small and they are drowning on our door step.

I think the message is clear that climate changes addresses quicker than anyone can recognise that a change has occurred. Regardless of colour creed or wealth, we cannot adapt quick enough to the change.
I wonder how the world will react to the first English speaking-white-western-well educated-global warming aware refugees, who ignored the signs and just watched their land turn to dust, their forest and grassland burn to ashes, and their cities survive on emergency water as populations stood by wishing for rain.

I wonder if we will get sympathy as our investments lose value and our wealth is lost.. I wonder if the world will send aid or a ship to the rescue. Or will they have their own problems to deal with and a military stationed at the border to repel all invaders.

I hope people remember Australias policy with refugees and don�t make our own plight an exception, because when it was time to act we did nothing except invest our money in warships and submarines.

Dave D,

You: If we get two more seasons like this in California, the migration will begin out of the state and the current housing slump will be a drop in the bucket.

Reply: The migration began a years ago and it wasn't because of the climate. Your state has become a cess pool of socialism and govenment regulation. This leaves folks with common sense to conclude that they can have a better quality of life elsewhere.

That's why NH is the fastest growing state in the northeast, right Massachusettes? They keep migrating to MY state. Unfortunately, they are bringing their skewed politics with them. This is infiltrating our state legislature and turning it into Massachusettes JR or Vermont the II. Doen't anyone else see what is happening? We are seeing this now. Thanks for imposing a new VIEW TAX democrat governor Lynch! You sir, belong in VT.

We don't have a revenue problem, as increased revenue is generated from the increasing population. This increase helps to pay for the infrastructure. We have a SPENDING problem and it's getting worse. I have to streamline my budget to survive, why can't the state do the same? Kind of makes we want to migrate out of NH, like people migrating out of California.

Simon,

A nice history of droughts in Australia and an explanation of why they happen.
http://www.bom.gov.au/lam/climate/levelthree/c20thc/drought.htm

Australia is prone to drought because of its geography. Our continent sits more or less astride the latitudes of the subtropical high pressure belt, an area of sinking, dry, stable air and usually clear skies. The far north and south of the country come under the influence of reasonably regular rain-bearing disturbances for at least part of the year, and the east coast is watered reasonably well by moisture from the Tasman and Coral Seas. However over most of the country rainfall is not only low, but highly erratic.

Nice photos of gas flaring smoke - thanks.

Siberia leads the world in gas flaring and forest fires. Any surprise that the nearby ice is melting?

Most of Hansen's story is based on warming in and near Siberia. duh.....

Dave D,

Couple questions. When you say that this is real, what is real? I don't think many people are questioning that it is getting slightly warmer, I think most non-AGW'ers question CO2's role in this slight warming.

Remember that only 300 years ago there was a one degree drop in temperature. By any reasonable standard the one degree increase we see today cannot even be considered warming since we have simply returned to a similar climate that existed right before the LIA.

If one were to cut climate into 30 year increments as today's AGW climate gurus do, then you will always have "extreme" climate changes.

Is seems conservatives think this is fraud, while liberals think this is important enough to do something about. As a conservative I say this is real and I am doing something about it.

Strange comment. "Important enough to do something about." Sounds liberal to me. If the Climate is being driven Naturally, as it has for 4.5 billion years, then what exactly do you propose we do?

How about instead of invoking your political affiliation to "say" this is real, how about using the scientific method to PROVE that it is. If you read the Piltdown paper above, you can see why I think AGW is a fraud and how easily it can be accomplished when dealing with "Societies, Organizations, and Members Only Clubs".

Regards,

Steve

OK - I like fairy tales. Can someone please give me the direct cause-and-effect between anthropogenic emissions of CO2 and the drought in Australia?

Rich,

Please get your facts straight before you go on yet another political tirade. Here are population numbers for California along with growth rates:

1850 92,597
�
1860 379,994 310.4%
1870 560,247 47.4%
1880 864,694 54.3%
1890 1,213,398 40.3%
1900 1,485,053 22.4%
1910 2,377,549 60.1%
1920 3,426,861 44.1%
1930 5,677,251 65.7%
1940 6,907,387 21.7%
1950 10,586,223 53.3%
1960 15,717,204 48.5%
1970 19,953,134 27.0%
1980 23,667,902 18.6%
1990 29,760,021 25.7%
2000 33,871,648 13.8%
2007 37,700,000

As you can see. population continues to grow.

I just had a look at the GISS annual temperature trends for the last ten years 1997-2006. The only region of the earth showing red (greater than a 2 degree increase) is the oil fields of Siberia. The Canadian Arctic has cooled by as much as 8 degrees in that same time.
GHCN_GISS_250km_Trnd0112_1997_2006
Sorry - don't know how to make a sticky direct link to the map. This might work for a while.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/work/gistemp/NMAPS/tmp_GHCN_GISS_250km_Trnd0112_1997_2006/GHCN_GISS_250km_Trnd0112_1997_2006.gif

Most likely the Siberian temps are an anomaly, probably driven by filthy local industrial practices. NOAA satellites show substantial tropospheric cooling during the last ten years.