http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,21587236-952,00.html

Australian Prime Minister John Howard's decision yesterday to cancel all irrigation in the Murray Darling Basin if it failed to rain within six weeks could trigger major price rises across a range of commodities in supermarkets.

Foods including stone and citrus fruits, vegetables and wines will take the biggest hit.

A sombre Mr Howard highlighted the extent of the crisis by suggesting Australians get on their knees and turn to God for help.

He said the parched Murray Darling system was only weeks away from reaching a crisis point in which it would not be able to meet "critical human needs" or irrigate crops.

"You are simply not going to have enough water," Mr Howard said.

Much as I dislike this guy, he's absolutely right on this one. Australia is on the verge of running out of water. Apart from the tropical north, it just doesn't rain here any more.

Paul, it must take on a totally different aspect when it's actually happening to you, terrifying really. What can be done?

One necessity is political courage.

Australia currently has a conservative federal government, but all state governments are Australian Labor Party (read Labour if you're British, Democrat if you're American - a loose comparison). The petty bickering and lack of real action this produces are extreme. And we are in a Federal Election year, and the Howard administration is in deep doo-doo, which doesn't help.

The Darling River rises in Queensland and crosses New South Wales to join the Murray, which is the NSW-Victoria border. Thence the combined river flows through South Australia to the sea, although the term "flow" can only be used loosely nowadays. For years, the system has been systematically plundered and over-used, and the chickens are now coming home to roost. South Australia (the end of the chain) has been suffering for years, and now I think the eastern (up-river) states are beginning to understand that. Nevertheless they are still reluctant to agree on any course of action that doesn't give short-term benefit to their own state, and of course there is no such course of action possible. Meanwhile Howard postures about the national interest, but offers very little practical alternative, although he has got this particular one right.

Leaving aside the rivers issue, South East Queensland, where I live, is running out of water. Despite being sub-tropical we have not had a significant rain event (2" or more in 24 hours) for nearly two years. Our water storage is at under 20% capacity. We are on level 5 water restrictions, which pretty much means no outdoor use, among other things. There is a 6 month wait for water tank installation. The state government is building new dams (seen by many as futile, given the lack of rain), a major desalination plant, pipelines to move what water there is around, and water recycling plants. But the odds are still that we'll run out of water by the end of 2008, before most of these projects come online.

Don't tell me there's no such thing as climate change!

Some will get drought, others will get floods.


Before we acknowledge global warming, we first have to acknowledge climate change.

I think that's starting to happen now, acknowledging the climate changing part. If not just give it another year of drought and firestorms, floods and water born disease etc. And more people will get the hint.

I acknowledge climate change. I do not acknowledge that is caused by humans. I believe it a earthy cycle, from the 1100's to the 1300 it has been said the earth was warmer than it is now and it is acknowledged the earth then started to cool down. It is highly possible that the earth now is in a warming cycle. it is known that the Sun is burning hotter than it has before.

Count me in that camp also.

MSU

Just buy a few "carbon credits" and it will be all better. What a scam!

Johnny


Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space,”
Obama: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

We have to buy carbon credits, so AL Gore can make a living as he is invested in a company that sells them now that is an "Inconvenient Truth" In the Old West Gore would have been a Snake oil salesman

One possible benefit of 'Climate Change' is that residents in the northern part of the United States will discontinue migrating and moving to the south or cycling to Florda, Texas and Arizona for the winter. The will be able to stay at home where they are wanted, needed, and appreciated.

Many of us have wasted far to much time answering crackpot ideas denying Global Warming and human responsibility for it. Your using the Medieval Warm Period as a foolish argument to support what you want to believe, is nonsense. We know what caused it, and we know it was very localized, not worldwide. Trying to compare it with what we are seeing today is intellectually dishonest

Here is a site that has collected and answered all the uninformed, misinformed, and silly arguments against warming and the projections of what will result.

http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics

Please work your way through them one at a time until you have no arguments left. Then you can think about what we can do to fix the problem, instead of denying it exists. It is a waste of everyones time to discuss reality with someone who does not understand the issue or who would deceive themselves with wishful thinking.

Events in the future will occur with sudden and frightening results if we fail to recognize the warnings we have today. Once the ocean currents stop flowing due to reduced salinity, the Earth will be a very different place perhaps forever. I will be dead by the time it becomes irrevocable, but my children and their children, and yours, will not be, and they will suffer for our stupidity.

We, all of us, are the product of the hopes and dreams of 20,000 generations that preceded us. We have a debt to them, as well as our progeny to preserve the future of the human race. In the final analysis, it is our only reason for existing.

Shelly

You may know what is causing climate change; many others may choose to think differently. I respect your right for you to have your opinions on the matter.
I for think differently, I believe we are in a earthly cycle. Man will have to adjust just as he has in the past. If mankind does not survive that is mother nature and or God at work if you are spiritual.
Only the strong survive that I think is one of Darwin’s ideas.

You're avoiding the issue, we all know that the climate changes in cycles but what the majority of scientists are saying is that recent human actions are making the changes happen at a much faster and more dangerous rate than before.

Yes, the strong usually survive, that is why I'm still here. Conversely the stupid tend to perish. Obviously, you were too enamoured of your uninformed opinion to bother going to the link I provided to inform you. I will not waste any more of your time. Please don't waste any more of mine.

Shelly

Dam, you take no prisoners! Shot him right in the heart! Don’t you think one shot across the bow would have sufficed?

That was across the bow, and I was never ordered to take prisoners, another reason I'm still around.

Shelly

Shelly I read your link it did not move me you have your right to your opinion. I have my right to my opinion. Since when did "GOD" die and put you in charge of who is correct or not correct!!! I have been around a few years. I learned I was not always right, it is obvious that you have not learned this lesson. Maybe someday you will learn the lesson and be a better person for it.

I respect you for your knowledge on computers, however this does not make you correct concerning mother nature and her earthly cycles

Name the last year when there was no 'drought, firestorms, floods and water born diseases'. In addition, no hurricanes, typhoons, tornados, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and etc, you name the weather phenomena.

You seem to revel in your ignorance.

Climate Change Research: Issues for the Atmospheric and Related Sciences

(Adopted by AMS Council on 9 February 2003)
Bull. Amer. Met. Soc., 84, 508—515

Executive Summary

There is now clear evidence that the mean annual temperature at the Earth's surface, averaged over the entire globe, has been increasing in the past 200 years. There is also clear evidence that the abundance of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has increased over the same period. In the past decade, significant progress has been made toward a better understanding of the climate system and toward improved projections of long-term climate change. Several national and international studies published in 2001 have provided reviews and assessments of the science of climate change. A National Research Council report concluded that "reenhouse gases are accumulating in the Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise. . . . The changes observed over the last several decades are likely mostly due to human activities, but we cannot rule out that some significant part of these changes is also a reflection of natural variability" (National Research Council 2001a). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported that recent regional climate changes, particularly temperature increases, have already affected many physical and biological systems (McCarthy et al. 2001), and a national assessment on climate change impacts on the United States concluded that "natural ecosystems, which are our life support system in many ways, appear to be the most vulnerable to the harmful effects of climate change," but, "highly managed ecosystems appear more robust"
http://www.ametsoc.org/POLICY/climatechangeresearch_2003.html



Federal Climate Change Science Program, 2006

On May 2, 2006, the Federal Climate Change Science Program commissioned by the Bush administration in 2002 released the first of 21 assessments that concluded that there is clear evidence of human influences on the climate system (due to changes in greenhouse gases, aerosols, and stratospheric ozone) <17>. The study said that observed patterns of change over the past 50 years cannot be explained by natural processes alone.



American Association for the Advancement of Science: "The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society."



Global Climate Change
Contributors:
Mark Peters — Chair
Sally Benson, Thure Cerling, Judith Curry, Yehouda Enzel, Jim Finley, Alan Gillespie, Mickey Glantz, Lynn Soreghan

Adopted in October 2006

Position Statement
The Geological Society of America (GSA) supports the scientific conclusions that Earth’s climate is changing; the climate changes are due in part to human activities; and the probable consequences of the climate changes will be significant and blind to geopolitical boundaries. Furthermore, the potential implications of global climate change and the time scale over which such changes will likely occur require active, effective, long-term planning. GSA also supports statements on the global climate change issue made by the joint national academies of science (June 2005), American Geophysical Union (December, 2003), and American Chemical Society (2004). GSA strongly encourages that the following efforts be undertaken internationally: (1) adequately research climate change at all time scales, (2) develop thoughtful, science-based policy appropriate for the multifaceted issues of global climate change, (3) organize global planning to recognize, prepare for, and adapt to the causes and consequences of global climate change, and (4) organize and develop comprehensive, long-term strategies for sustainable energy, particularly focused on minimizing impacts on global climate.



US National Academy of Science: "In the judgment of most climate scientists, Earth’s warming in recent decades has been caused primarily by human activities that have increased the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Shelly

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

So how did humans cause the warming in the 1100's?

How does one account for the sun now burning hotter than in the recent past? I do not think humans can cause the sun to burn hotter. What is the gas that humans exhale and trees thrive on?

Also another item to point out Human beings turned out and survived the bump in temperature in the 1100's and the other spikes shown in the graph. The Earth also survived. However Earth will always survive and evolve it is just the populations and other species that may not survive.

I really hate to burst bubbles, but I don't get my science from Rush Limburger.

The Sun is a complex system but in the last 300 years we have learned much about it. The Suns energy output on average is very constant. In fact it is called the Solar Constant. The Solar Constant
describes the Solar Radiation that falls on an area above the atmosphere at a vertical angle: s = 1.37 kW / m². At the surface of the Earth this varies with the Suns angle at various times of day and season. Also with the condition of the atmosphere due to volcanic activity various gasses present and pollution.

There is also a periodic variation over an 11 year and 22 year cycle caused by sunspot activity. every 11 years the percentage of the solar surface covered by sunspots goes through a maximum and a minimum. Every other cycle the magnetic polarity of the sunspots reverses creating a 22 year full cycle. Usually every other 11 year peak is higher than the one preceding it, followed by a lower peak on the next cycle. As a member of the AAVSO (American Association of Variable Star Observers) I spent a good chunk of my younger days studying actual sunspot activity and reporting it.

The importance of all this in global warming is simple. The Sun gives off a higher level of radiation during sunspot maximum. In January of this year we hit sunspot minimum, and we are now once again headed for the next maximum which will occur in about 2014.

Going back to your earlier post, there was a period between 1645, and 1718, when there was very little sunspot activity for some unknown reason. This is known as the Maunder Minimum, and corresponds with what was known as the "Little Ice Age" recorded in Europe and North America.

The increase in the Earths temperature at the next sunspot maximum will be about 0.2 degrees C. A small part of the anticipated rise in temperature due to global warming. The following Graph tells more of the story.



This shows the modeled and actual rise in temperature of the Earth plotted against Greenhouse Gasses, Solar Radiation, Ozone, Volcanic Activity, and sulfite's in the atmosphere since 1900.

It does not take a scientist to see that the rise in temperature is almost entirely due to Greenhouse Gasses. And it does not even take great intelligence to know that the rise in Greenhouse Gasses during that period is almost entirely due to human activity. The link below contains some more information.

http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/SunspotCycle.shtml

If you wish more proof of Global Warming being caused by human activity we can continue, but I may have to start charging you tuition. Of course, there are many like Rush that will be happy to turn your brain to mush like theirs for free.

Shelly

Attachment #1, (png file)

I know you're probably going to roll your eyes at me but here goes. Let's assume the graph is accurate and the co2 increase is actually due to human activity. I find it very hard to get my shorts all bunched up over a half degree increase in the average temperature over a hundred year period. Also this carbon credit scheme is just that, a scheme. How the heck is someone who puts out a lot of carbon paying someone who doesn't going to solve anything? If two people are alloted let's say 100 tons each, that's 200 tons. If one puts out 150 tons and the other only puts out 50 tons that's still 200 tons. Now the one pays the other for the extra 50 tons he's not using and you still have 200 tons. All that's been accomplished is one is getting fleeced and the other is making out like a bandit.

MSU

Well, I can't and won't defend the Carbon Credit plan, because I mostly agree with you. Unfortunately like everything else it comes down to politics. The more technologically advanced countries never have enough energy, but usually have a lot of money. Less developed countries always need money, but don't use much energy. The theory is if it costs money to exceed their energy allotments, it will tend to encourage everybody to reduce energy use based upon carbon generation.

Allowing a loophole for advanced countries to generate more carbon emissions will allay fears on their part of lowering their living standards. The less advanced countries will join the plan because they can improve their living standard with the money they get for their unused carbon allowance. The whole carbon credit business is to get more signatories to the treaty, and to make it advantageous to advanced countries to develop new energy technologies that will reduce carbon generation to provide energy.

Shelly

It's not a half degree change in reality. It is a half degree in the total planets heat budget, but that change is not equally distributed. It is mostly in the higher latitudes thus affecting the temperate and polar regions more. The resultant loss of ice pack and tundra hugely increases the heating trend. It gets much worse at an ever accelerating pace. That is why we have a brief window to change trends that will soon become unstoppable. The curve on that graph is now exponential, at some point in the relatively near future it becomes runaway and uncontrollable.

Shelly

It was still warmer in the 1100's what ever the reason and human civilazation did not collapse, the seas did not rise 80 feet because ice melting I bet even the polar bears enjoyed the climate. I not sure but even the glaciers in Greenland were farther back than they are now.

Are you saying global warming is crap? I don't mean that in a "you're full of crap way", I'm just wondering, because I'm neutral on the subject.

Visit the Basement

Personally, I think "climate change" is a better expression than "global warming".

And I'm sure that climate change is real. It's partly a natural occurrence and partly due to human influence. And it's very important that we minimise the human influence part.

GLOBAL WARMING FIGHT: CHERYL CROW PROPOSES LIMITS ON TOILET PAPER

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/21/AR2007042101385_pf.html


Crow (4/19, Springfield, Tenn.): I have spent the better part of this tour trying to come up with easy ways for us all to become a part of the solution to global warming. Although my ideas are in the earliest stages of development, they are, in my mind, worth investigating. One of my favorites is in the area of forest conservation which we heavily rely on for oxygen. I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting. Now, I don't want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required.

Crow (4/19): I also like the idea of not using paper napkins, which happen to be made from virgin wood and represent the height of wastefulness. I have designed a clothing line that has what's called a "dining sleeve." The sleeve is detachable and can be replaced with another "dining sleeve," after usage. The design will offer the "diner" the convenience of wiping his mouth on his sleeve rather than throwing out yet another barely used paper product. I think this idea could also translate quite well to those suffering with an annoying head cold.

A valuable contribution to the discussion.

Shelly

Deleted

More Sheryl Crow actions to 'Save the planet'. Check the bottom of page 4 for her carbon footprint: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/backstagetour/scrow/scrow1.html

And your point is?

None, as usual.

Shelly

She's a hypocrite( 1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
) like all the 'Manmade Global Warming' celebrities.

She's a premier touring concert musician and her "entourage" are the dozens of people she employs -- musicians, equipment managers, sound and lighting engineers, security, etc. -- that she requires to function in that capacity. The trucks haul the gear and the buses the people. Perhaps they should travel from city to city via ox-drawn cart, but then you would probably find reason to complain about the trail of manure and methane gas these "Hollywood" liberals left in their wake. Also, these people, and the scores of people who visit backstage, although leftist are still human and so have to eat and drink -- so food and beverages are specified.

That said, she may well be a hypocrite, but you haven't produced any evidence of it here.

And what any of this irrelevant nonsense has to do with the subject of global warming or climate change...?

Speaking of trail of manure:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NGQ3Nzk3MDMxMGQ1OWZlZTNhNWMwMTUzMGViNGI5ZWI

Yet according to some the Polar bear populatiion has increased.

If you go to this site and click on ACIA Graphics near the bottom of the page you'll find a pdf download of many explanatory charts. http://www.amap.no/acia/index.html

The way every one is doing “chicken little song the sky is falling� it is hard to believe that the Inuit and polar bears survived the 200-year warming trend in the 1100's. Yes Man can help. I do not believe climate change is going to destroy earth, (Earth will survive with or without mankind) mankind may have to adjust to survive.

Have you looked at the charts?

The funny thing about charts and statistics we can make them say anything we want them to stay. You know the saying there are lies than there are damn lies then there is statistics.

If I hire a company to provide me with info telling them this what I think is going on I am sure they could or would come up with charts and graphs supporting my point of view.

Politicians to reinforce their points of view do this all the time. Yes politicians even use government offices to do this as they may control the purse string to that office. It is definitely done in the corporate world to sell product.

So what evidence would you believe from either point of view?

Evidence: something that furnishes proof.
Which chart, study, scientist, politician, or the source of your choice has provided evidence?

I do not believe anything a politician says they are all snake oil salesmen. In fact Used car salesmen rate higher than politicians. The politician would rather tell you a lie because it normally sounds better than the truth.

Climate change is real, however the causes stated for it may not be. 30 years ago these same alarmists said we were going into an ice age.

In the 70s I remember the oil problem and most of the so called experts claimed we were going to run out of oil. So much for the experts.

Why are you wasting your time.

Shelly

You're right Shelly, BTW those charts are worth looking at if you haven't already.

Somethings going on for sure!!! Big loss in bees here in Ontario, Canada. Now if we lose the bees we're in big trouble.

Dave101

"The only goddamn thing you know about the law is how to break it." Chief Lafleche

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

Are there any parts of Australia that have a water surplus or is the situation potentially bad everywhere?

The tropical north has plenty, but there's no way the infrastructure to move it south can be put in place in time. Long-term something may happen in that regard. But Australia's a big place with a lot of desolate empty space between population centres.

I once saw a map that showed the population distibution for Australia. You folks seem to be clustered around a few areas, mostly around the coastal areas, if I remember correctly. With vast areas of nothing (desert mostly) in between.

MSU

Were you thinking of this one from the Earth at Night?

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

No, I've seen that before but the one Paul posted below is more what I was thinking of.

MSU

Here's a map and some information on population distribution. MSU's got it pretty right.

http://www.environment.gov.au/soe/2001/settlements/settlements01.html

Hotel places Gore's global warming book in night stand instead of Bible...

Gore now has replaced GOD in California only "on the left coast"

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20670001&refer=us&sid=afIESX3LdgnQ

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,21592458-952,00.html

AUSTRALIA could be forced to rely on overseas farmers to feed itself as the nation's food bowl dries up.
Prime Minister John Howard yesterday warned of a national food shortage amid gloomy predictions of a 500 per cent blowout in fruit and vegie prices.

Despite unprecedented national prosperity and wealth, the unrelenting drought is bringing one of the world's largest food producers to its knees.

Paul, the drought situation in Australia was shown on BBC TV news tonight, it looks awful. It should be a wake-up call for us all as it could happen to us too.

I had no idea that the Murray-Darling river basin was so large and was so important.

Australia may not have a rice crop at all this season if it gets no irrigation allocations, Laurie Arthur, president of the Ricegrowers Association, told Reuters news agency.

Rice and cotton are major causes of our water problems. They are water-intensive crops, and are not suited to Australian climate, except in the tropical north, but our river systems have been plundered for years to provide water to grow them in temperate areas. It is a bloody madness for which we are now paying the price.

Much of the blame for the water problems is aimed at Queensland irrigators, in particular the giant cotton growing operation at Cubbie station.

Cubbie takes water out of the Condamine-Balonne river system in the Darling basin north of the border to create giant storage dams, which hold as much water as Sydney harbour. The water helps irrigate 14,000 hectares or 35,000 acres of cotton.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/06/27/1088274624705.html

So, is it the farmers fault or global warming? I think I took a wrong turn somewhere in this thread!

Johnny


Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space,”
Obama: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

All of the above. Unsustainable agricultural practices and weak and greedy (or just plain ignorant) politicians started the rot. Climate change is the final straw.

This is part of an email I've just received from a friend a little inland from the mid west coast of Australia.

We basically missed last Winter and got no Spring rain. We've had a very long and dry Summer and now here we are in Autumn and still haven't had any rain. They had good falls finally in Perth last weekend and South of Perth; but up here; nothing. I've been hand feeding the sheep for months. Thankfully they are drawing compliments so I must be doing something right

The lawns and gardens have suffered dreadfully. I've got to the stage now where I pull out anything that dies and just turn over the soil. No point in replanting until we get some rain as it's just more to water.

We are not on scheme water here so rely on rainfall for drinking/showering and clothes washing. We have a bore which pumps water into a tank for the gardens etc. Our tanks are at their lowest ever. If we don't get some rain soon we will need to start getting water in by truck.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

I would like to respond and inject some helpful tips for the subject of this string, but I decided a long time ago, I would not comment on things I know nothing about.

I have lived in Las Vegas for 30 years and this has been some of the strangest weather ever. We have had numerous changes of 20 degrees from week to week. 67 Yesterday and looking at 92 this Sunday.