PC398 Climate Panic Stories are a waste of time
Scare Stories are such a waste of time
You see a scare story. - It takes 10s to give a deceptive line and an hour to check it. There is always an explanation they don't bare close analysis.

- Wow you can sail over the north pole or get thro the NW passage for the first time ever ! ..correction the first time in the last 35 years cos before it has been done, but their were no satellites checking.

BBC a scare story everyday
BBC WS Outlook had a boat sailing through flood prone Bangladesh. So obviously the reporter was looking for Climate Change stories - says "you must have noticed lots of changing due to Global Warming ?"
villager "Oh yes, yes "Do people here know a lot about GW", "Yes we know it causes many things Tsunami and so on".

She asks a leading question, but the answer shows they obviously don't know what global warming is. (as it's certain Tsunamis are not caused by it )

It seems most environment environmental correspondents are passionate CC believers with little understanding for scientific procedure. It also seems , because most of the scientifically minded people have to say" I don't know" or "I'm not sure" they are not popular for soundbites.

Yesterday though I caught a scientist saying on his programme "of course Australia has real problems with water .. 7 years of drought the MD river is a trickle" thus banging the nail in one more time "global warming", "global warming", and giving a false impression to the millions that have never been there.

However 1. Gordon had just told me dams are at 88% full and 2. I went to this river last year and also this year before the recent heavy rains and know that river has been lower than normal, but was huge and full of water so it's never been a trickle along it's whole length, which is the impression given by the scientist. He told me in April he saw it a trickle. I explained, that upstream a few hundred Km it's level is controlled by weirs, and a lot of water is taken for irrigation so sections can appear low, particularly if that's the way the weir's are managed, you don't want a wide river as it would all evaporate.

see more pics on my Adelaide pages.

BBC WS Discovery Was all about China's emissions. They were pretty soft. They said that 1. yes China pollutes more, but look at it's population.
2 - And The pollution from China isn't really their pollution ! No, it's the West's cos China is busy making stuff for us. Bullshit
3- And China takes in some export garbage from the West to China for recycling, so it should get credit for this. Where is this woman from ? The Chinese propaganda Dept ? .. figures please and China companies trash the ecology in China and outside .. generalisation, but it's true.

1. I was totally surprised it seemed like a propaganda prog no one challenged China's figures
I say .. China's figures are surely not reliable. They make most of them up to please whatever line the party wants
2 - Even on the program one guy quietly pointed out that's China's balance is equal as it also imports so much raw material, that the CO2 used in it's extraction is the same as used in Export goods manufacture.
Seems to me most of the things manufactured in China are used in China, but most people haven't seen all the construction cranes and consumer spending.

Chinas's figures need challenging : I have a feeling they are way way underestimated, so much construction , so much manufacturing, so many people living in cold places and such a big tradition of faking figures. Someone would need independent evidence of energy consumption coal, oil, gas it s no use relying on government figures.

BBC WS - Science in Action

A real scare edition
The presenter was toeing a party line : "The greatest single threat to civilisation"
and using all the keywords etc
.. "the emphasis has shifted from ways of proving Climate Change exists to what the effects and concerns might be",

"It will destroy us", the Inuit speaker said "it will be you next !"

Then an interview with 2 people supporting the IPCC line Sir David King (The Government's chief scientist) said an altogether stronger thing
though most people might no recognize this

1" this is a human driven warming and impacts are going to be quite radical"

2 He said "Already ! the average temperature in Central Europe is the same as hottest in 20th century 7 years data" - cherry picked location and not a sufficient sample size of time

3 He predicted "by mid century every summer will be as warm as that awfully hot summer in 2003 that killed 35,000 people" - scary hyperbole

4 "in a few years time one third of Victoria's water will come from desalinateds plants" (yes his words) - rubbish ! see analysis below

5 .. We don't have a choice have to do both adapt and take action.
6 "we need to develop carbon trading" etc etc

7 he said, "emphasis has shifted from whether man causes climate change to what the effects are" - Well it will be a long time before anyone can prove any effects directlty due to man made CO2

(BTW the prog also covered the Yellowstone overdue giant volcano eruption , but didn't hype it up ... scientist said the activity was going up, but not in the pattern that shows imminent eruption.)

Let's waste an hour dissecting King's Words.

- There ought to be a law against the misuse of anecdotal evidence.

He's taken a fact and made 3 simple slips in the telling which amplify the story and super amplify it again. The impression created is quite drastic. 'Oh my God , the climate has changed so much that Victoria will have to get 1/3 of it's water from desalination in only a few years time. ! And it will be using energy it will contribute to Climate Change.'

Will Victoria get 1/3 of it's water from desalination in a few years time ? No, of course not it's preposterous as Victoria has plenty of water. The state premier has ordered against the advice of his own experts the building of a huge desalination plant, which will have the CAPABALITY to supply 1/3 of the CITY OF MELBOURNE'S consumption if it's SWITCHED ON. ( onstream 2011 Vic.gov.au desalination page )

Got that ? It's capability not normal production, it's not the state of Victoria it's the much smaller consumption of the City of Melbourne and it's not using much energy cos usually it switched on standby.

The idea is that in a reservoir they have to have a certain reserve level cos there's always the remote possibility it might not rain for 2 years. With this plant on standby they could let the reservoirs get lower than ever, cos they know they could crank up the plant and bingo you have a lot of water available. Odds on it would never get used, cos even after years of drought there would still be water in the reservoirs, when it started raining again.

It does provide an almost absolute guarantee that Melbourne will not run out of water. There are many cheaper alternatives : they could start recycling water, save storm water before it gets washed out to sea, cut consumption or build more reservoirs. (perhaps your mates own construction companies)

Even if they can get the machines onsite after the recent floods, even if they finish the plant, even if they have a long long drought, it will probably never supply much water.

Floods ? : Yes it seems to me in Australian "droughts" they get a lot of rain. Some of the newspaper headlines in Victoria 8 days before Sir David King's words ..

"The Lower South-East recorded its wettest start to November since records began "

"The rain, the most in a 24-hour period in the region in a century, forced the evacuation of many visitors from Cumberland River Holiday Park, west of Lorne."

"Many areas from the far northwest of SA to Victoria's east have recorded up to three times the November average rainfall in the first five days of the month."

"While the Bureau of Meteorology said as much as 150mm fell overnight in Gippsland, Mr White said he believed the flooding would be less severe than in June and July, when much of the area was inundated. "

Yes there were also floods in June, floods in January etc.. usually they "yes, but it always rains in the wrong area."

more stories ABC rainfall stories

Tuesday 13/11/2007 a Stew Green Opinion (actually spell checked, but the grammar is my own style !)

- NEXT I went on to see if the recent heavy rains now mean the drought is over ... more

- My Climate Change Blog
NEXT -->