A very simple and easy to understand explanation of why climate change is REAL.

I do not wish to start reporting you. Are you not aware of forum rules here?

 

i plan to study Australia and its history of heat waves. So when you report, I plan to be up to speed on your country.

 

The fact that man is ****ing up the planet

 

No problems our BOM has some great resources

 

Sydney had recent heat. But the hottest day of record was in 1939. So if the earth is getting hotter, why won't Sydney accept that and get hotter than in 1939?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/07/asia/australia-sydney-hottest-day/index.html

 

Ever heard of the word "average"?

 

https://mashable.com/2018/04/13/australia-heat-records-bom/#8Rqpb_Am8iqJ

This shows that the heat spells are fairly localized and move east and south and allow the rest of the country to not have such heat records. Talk about local conditions.

 

This term should be banned from climate discussions.

 

This confused me at first because I just read “hotter than in 1939.” I assumed you were talking about a year at least. Then I saw the word “day” and it all made sense.

 

One link to a source not even Australian about ONE event

I am talking trended data

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/index.shtml#tabs=Tracker&tracker=trend-maps

 

It is not this thread, it is found at the improved curry corner. You have far less to look for there. And you will find a lot more valuable scientific material there than here.

 

Why? Because it is inconvenient?

 

I handed you genuine data. Same thing I did about Death Valley, CA. Death Valley is also a very large area.

 

Dr. Lindzen and I discussed this and he agrees. He uses the term mean. Still when you reject actual figures from 1913 and act as if that accurate figure does not matter, why quibble that I object to average.

 

Not compared to the rest of the freaking planet

The whole of the USA is only around 2% of the planets surface area

 

Ok happy to use mean as it is not too different

 

Gee and I have so little going on in my life that I have time to search every post of yours on every thread

I will consider it not supplied until it is posted on this thread

 

Not long ago someone was telling me that a century of global data is a millisecond in the Earth’s long history. Now you come in and post about a hot day in Sydney. Apparently the only meaningful climate data is over either 1 million years or 24 hours. Nothing in between.

Which is perfect, because that conveniently avoids the time scale most appropriate for measuring anthropogenic climate change.

For the record, 1939 was not even a particularly hot year for Australia.

 

That hasn't been proven.

 

I dunno, on your side you guys post a days of data and say ... see there. I show data and you then deny it. The day I picked in 1939 was supposed to be the record hottest period in Australia. Same thing I did with Death Valley, Ca.

 

Y o sure nuff has

IPCC

 

I certainly did not do that I linked you to the trended data from the BOM Aus. Even if you cannot find my link it is easy to google as BUreau of Meteorology Aus should bring you right to it with masses of collected data free for anyone to do an independent analysis

 

Average?

Why...it's the POINT of the discussion

 

Try reading this. This is what I believe speaks of the extreme problems using satellites.
https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/12...-earth-atmosphere-plants-ocean-climate-change

 

No sorry.