-8 overnight!

Holden Caulfield said :

Gungahlin Al said :

You were in Page school too before Scullin opened? We must have lived very close. Parer Place here.

Chewings Street, but I went to the dirty micks’ school.

I have vague memories as kids getting up to mischief that seemed to annoy the penguins there…

Gungahlin Al said :

You were in Page school too before Scullin opened? We must have lived very close. Parer Place here.

Chewings Street, but I went to the dirty micks’ school.

It’s a bit of a myth the no trees in Gungahlin thing, they will come in due course, my street tree from a sapling 10 years ago is now about 40 foot high and quite healthy. They lost a lot of young ones in the drought and water restrictions but they are replated now.

It’s not that long ago that my mates and I used to joke about Isabella plains being aboriginal for treeless plain where the wind never stops. Nice area now.

Then again maybe it was a long time ago……

I hope yellowsnow doesn’t think Gungahlin is the only residential area in Canberra, or anywhere for that matter, that wasn’t a “brick, concrete and bitumen ecological desert” a few years after it was built.

Points are valid, otherwise.

Watson said :

yellowsnow said :

re Gungahlin Al’s miracle house — I lived in Gungahlin, and yes the houses are marginally warmer in winter, but in general far far hotter in summer (Al’s house is perhaps the exception which proves the rule). Which is why every house up there seems to have aircon buzzing away all through summer, while the streetscapes are parched, treeless, grassless, offering little shade or cool respite except for those people cocooned in their densely packed airconditioned houses or SUVs.

People often talk about the sustainability of new houses and new suburbs — don’t believe it! The carbon footprint of cutting down woodland/grassland/pine plantation to make way for brick, concrete and bitumen ecological deserts is immense. Constructing contemporary houses is v energy intensive (just wait and see how much costs go up under a carbon tax, which doesn’t even consider land use change/land clearing). And that’s before you take into account aircon costs, and the vast amounts of energy expended commuting to work, or even trips to the local shops. Not that i’m passing judgement of these houses or lifestyles. Free choice is king. What I’m suggesting is that people shouldn’t pretend they’re ‘sustainable’.

If it’s sustainability you crave, and you really want to show off your credentials, much better to live in an apartment or to retrofit an existing, centrally located house with enough space to grow vegetables. Alternatively, get a rural block, plant lots of trees, grow your own food and use a horse or bike for transport. I’m actually surprised more Greens politicians don’t choose the latter option, but I guess pollies are by nature hypocrites, and Bob’s mob is no exception.

That makes very little sense unless you are suggesting to replace all houses in Inner Canberra with high rise apartment blocks. And – unless you are also suggesting that we cram all the office buildings in Canberra into the Inner North area – lots of the people living in those centrally located apartment blocks would still have to drive to work.

You have a point about removing trees. I was lucky enough to buy in a Gungahlin development where they intend to keep most of the significant trees and have designed the streets with street trees in mind. Not much space for backyard trees though, but if we would allow for bigger blocks there, the urban sprawl would extend even further.

I also don’t buy your argument about the hosues that are warmer in winter being hotter in summer. It makes no sense. Isolation is isolation and it will keep the cold as well as the heat out. As long as you shade your Western facing windows, which is easy to do.

Our house is toasty warm in winter (after a weekend away mid winter our inside temp got down to 13 degrees, and 20 mins of ducted gas heating had it back to a warm 21), but during summer we generally only have a couple fo weeks where we actually need aircon.

yellowsnow said :

re Gungahlin Al’s miracle house — I lived in Gungahlin, and yes the houses are marginally warmer in winter, but in general far far hotter in summer (Al’s house is perhaps the exception which proves the rule). Which is why every house up there seems to have aircon buzzing away all through summer, while the streetscapes are parched, treeless, grassless, offering little shade or cool respite except for those people cocooned in their densely packed airconditioned houses or SUVs.

People often talk about the sustainability of new houses and new suburbs — don’t believe it! The carbon footprint of cutting down woodland/grassland/pine plantation to make way for brick, concrete and bitumen ecological deserts is immense. Constructing contemporary houses is v energy intensive (just wait and see how much costs go up under a carbon tax, which doesn’t even consider land use change/land clearing). And that’s before you take into account aircon costs, and the vast amounts of energy expended commuting to work, or even trips to the local shops. Not that i’m passing judgement of these houses or lifestyles. Free choice is king. What I’m suggesting is that people shouldn’t pretend they’re ‘sustainable’.

If it’s sustainability you crave, and you really want to show off your credentials, much better to live in an apartment or to retrofit an existing, centrally located house with enough space to grow vegetables. Alternatively, get a rural block, plant lots of trees, grow your own food and use a horse or bike for transport. I’m actually surprised more Greens politicians don’t choose the latter option, but I guess pollies are by nature hypocrites, and Bob’s mob is no exception.

That makes very little sense unless you are suggesting to replace all houses in Inner Canberra with high rise apartment blocks. And – unless you are also suggesting that we cram all the office buildings in Canberra into the Inner North area – lots of the people living in those centrally located apartment blocks would still have to drive to work.

You have a point about removing trees. I was lucky enough to buy in a Gungahlin development where they intend to keep most of the significant trees and have designed the streets with street trees in mind. Not much space for backyard trees though, but if we would allow for bigger blocks there, the urban sprawl would extend even further.

I also don’t buy your argument about the hosues that are warmer in winter being hotter in summer. It makes no sense. Isolation is isolation and it will keep the cold as well as the heat out. As long as you shade your Western facing windows, which is easy to do.

Have to admit I see similarities between Captain RAAF and Ralph…

Ralph Wiggum??

re Gungahlin Al’s miracle house — I lived in Gungahlin, and yes the houses are marginally warmer in winter, but in general far far hotter in summer (Al’s house is perhaps the exception which proves the rule). Which is why every house up there seems to have aircon buzzing away all through summer, while the streetscapes are parched, treeless, grassless, offering little shade or cool respite except for those people cocooned in their densely packed airconditioned houses or SUVs.

People often talk about the sustainability of new houses and new suburbs — don’t believe it! The carbon footprint of cutting down woodland/grassland/pine plantation to make way for brick, concrete and bitumen ecological deserts is immense. Constructing contemporary houses is v energy intensive (just wait and see how much costs go up under a carbon tax, which doesn’t even consider land use change/land clearing). And that’s before you take into account aircon costs, and the vast amounts of energy expended commuting to work, or even trips to the local shops. Not that i’m passing judgement of these houses or lifestyles. Free choice is king. What I’m suggesting is that people shouldn’t pretend they’re ‘sustainable’.

If it’s sustainability you crave, and you really want to show off your credentials, much better to live in an apartment or to retrofit an existing, centrally located house with enough space to grow vegetables. Alternatively, get a rural block, plant lots of trees, grow your own food and use a horse or bike for transport. I’m actually surprised more Greens politicians don’t choose the latter option, but I guess pollies are by nature hypocrites, and Bob’s mob is no exception.

pfft sustainable housing. Couple of bits of 15 inch red box and it was 27 degrees all over my house.

wow -8? you must be new.

Growling Ferret said :

Mr Gillespie = Big Al = Ralph

I miss Ralph. He was far wittier.

Have to admit I see similarities between Captain RAAF and Ralph…

Gungahlin Al said :

If I had any point it was that people in such situations should either fix their place or find a better one.

Spoken by someone who has – and probably always has had – the financial luxury to have a choice!

But I was pretty poor in my European country of birth and rented a sh!tty old house with a hole in the kitchen window and a leaky roof. Yet, I cannot remember ever being as cold as I am in my rental here in the mornings.

Weatherzone has now been able to show that the average minimum this month is -0.2, exactly on the long-term average. Likewise, the average maximum temperature for July was 12.2, again exactly on average (http://www.weatherzone.com.au/act/act/canberra).

It’s ok, I’ll feel much warmth and fuzziness once I start paying the carbon tax and flood levy. We won’t even need to turn on a heater

Mr Gillespie = Big Al = Ralph

I miss Ralph. He was far wittier.

Holden Caulfield said :

So it’s not just me.

On the positive side, I remember going to primary school in Page in the mid 70s (I lived over the road in Scullin) and playing with the ice which had formed on the footpaths and so on.

I think we’ve had more fair dinkum frosts this year than we’ve had for the last few years. But that’s just going by my failing memory.

Alright already. I wasn’t referring to just my place but any newer house with better than 5 star design. You won’t hear any of those owners complaining about frozen pipes or things actually freezing *inside* their homes. If I had any point it was that people in such situations should either fix their place or find a better one. Being cold in Canberra is really just a state of a) housing and b) clothing. In my opinion.

You were in Page school too before Scullin opened? We must have lived very close. Parer Place here.

Meanwhile inside our place didn’t drop below 16 overnight, and was quickly back to 20 once the sun came out – 23 now. Really says something about the quality of the old housing stock…

Gee Al, is it actually possible for you to post without telling us how awesomely f***ing great your place in Gungahlin is?

As much as I admire your commitment to sustainable housing it does get seriously tiresome.

So it’s not just me.

On the positive side, I remember going to primary school in Page in the mid 70s (I lived over the road in Scullin) and playing with the ice which had formed on the footpaths and so on.

I think we’ve had more fair dinkum frosts this year than we’ve had for the last few years. But that’s just going by my failing memory.

Thoroughly Smashed said :

johnboy said :

Mr Gillespie said :

Johnboy and Damian Haas, are you Juliar Gillard supporters?

Can’t accept the FACT this is disproving her theory on climate change??

It’s not what you’re saying that makes me think you’re retarded, it’s the way you choose to say it.

I’d have thought what was more than sufficient myself.

Is Mr. Gillespie actually Christopher Monckton? Has anyone ever seen them in the same room together?

Easy enough to find out – just use Erin Molan as bait; that’ll draw Mr Gillespie out of the woodwork.

I remember the day in 1994 when it was -8. I was living in Tuggeranong with my sister while looking for a place to live, and the pipes froze. I got the job of going outside with her hairdryer on a long extension lead in order to warm up the pipes.

It was just one of those mornings I don’t think I’ll ever forget.

johnboy said :

Mr Gillespie said :

Johnboy and Damian Haas, are you Juliar Gillard supporters?

Can’t accept the FACT this is disproving her theory on climate change??

It’s not what you’re saying that makes me think you’re retarded, it’s the way you choose to say it.

I’d have thought what was more than sufficient myself.

Is Mr. Gillespie actually Christopher Monckton? Has anyone ever seen them in the same room together?

I’m getting sick of Juliar and Mr Rabbit, and other terms of abuse that get thrown around. Vilification doesn’t help anyone understand your point of view, and suggests you might not understand it yourself.

Mr Gillespie said :

Johnboy and Damian Haas, are you Juliar Gillard supporters?

Can’t accept the FACT this is disproving her theory on climate change??

More and more I come to the conclusion that Mr G is merely another creation of those trolls who created the RA identity formerly known as Big Al…

nobody said :

We simply must do everything we can in our power to slow down global warming before it is too late. The science is clear. The global warming debate is over. – Arnold Schwarzenegger 2006

I blame Arnie for half the warming that the planet is allegedly suffering – from all the illicit humping he’s been doing over the past 20+ years!

I love these crisp, clear Canberra mornings: it makes you feel alive.

Although, I do wonder what anyone sleeping rough would think of it.

Mr Gillespie said :

Johnboy and Damian Haas, are you Juliar Gillard supporters?

Can’t accept the FACT this is disproving her theory on climate change??

I know it’s a cliche, but it is pretty scary that people like this get to vote. Makes a total mockery of democracy really.

Though I’m sure Julia would be flattered having the climate change theory attributed to her. Then again, apparently my 6yo daughter could’ve come up with it after a hot summer’s day.

Mr Gillespie said :

Johnboy and Damian Haas, are you Juliar Gillard supporters?

Can’t accept the FACT this is disproving her theory on climate change??

It’s not what you’re saying that makes me think you’re retarded, it’s the way you choose to say it.

Johnboy and Damian Haas, are you Juliar Gillard supporters?

Can’t accept the FACT this is disproving her theory on climate change??

johnboy said :

Mr Gillespie said :

ABOUT BLOODY TIME.

The decade of fuelling climate change advocates is OVER!

Eat that, JULIAR!!!

Often I think there’s a village missing its idiot.

And then sometimes I wonder if we just aren’t the village.

GOLD!

It was -7 in tuggeranong this morning.

I remember that debate too – they were called the freezers and the fryers. I would say the fryers have won this round.

A score of 7-44-20 can’t really be used for proof for anything, other than as a measure of where the scientific global conciousness was at. There’s (at least) two messages in those numbers – (1) climate change hadn’t hit the political arm of R&D to the point where there was enough funding to drive publications, (2) any scientist looking for a grant will find a way of using the words ‘climate change’ or ‘warming’ (or whatever the term is at the time) in their grant application.

Sounds cynical? If you lived in a world where 50% of your income depends on external funding, you would make sure the issues of the day were mentioned in your application too. Although those years were more independent of external funding, scientists still had to make a case for their projects. It’s an interesting study in the politics of science.

Yellowsnow, I’m not aware of any Academy of Science “20-30 years ago” predicting global cooling. Perhaps you were misled?

Actually man I lived in those days and yes, there was a serious scientific worry about global cooling. Whether the Academy of Science had anything to do with it is mute.

Whatever your view on climate change today, rewriting history is simply wrong.

Aaaah don’t like to burst your bubble, but actually the consensus was simply that the world was due for another ice age, going by the previous pattern. It still is. Nothing has changed. A lot of people, who failed to read the entire story and just as today concentrated solely on the alarmist headlines, became convinced that the scientific community was warning that we were entering another ice age.

They weren’t. they were simply stating that we were due to see another ice age if previous patterns were to continue, and more importantly, they were unable to give any sort of certainty as to when or in what fashion the pattern would commence. My recollection is quite plain that they were erring on the side of it being up to two thousand years into the future if not longer.

Since then, the speed at which the continuous pumping of CO2 into the atmosphere has led to immediate observable heating of the planet. This has not changed the possibility that we will enter an ice age as we have in the past. But it is an observable event, it is happening, and it will continue to increase until steps are taken to reduce the pumping of CO2. The possibility that in a hundred years or two thousand or five thousand years from now the earth may commence the rather gradual transformation into an ice age is rather less pressing to our lifestyles. Nothing beats a bit of good old alarmist hyperbole though does it?

Good timing! over at Boing Boing, there’s a very recent article about the expected cooling. It draws on a paper published in 2008 in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.

‘The truth is, for a short period in the mid-1970s, the idea of global cooling was somewhat trendy–as measured in newspaper and magazine stories, but not scientific evidence.

In 1975, both Newsweek and Time ran articles about the coming Ice Age. The next year, National Geographic published a more detailed story about climate science, in general. It touched on global cooling as one of several possibilities for the future of climate.

But all of these stories were based on the same small handful of peer-reviewed papers. In fact, Peterson, Connolley, and Fleck found that, between 1965 and 1979, only 7 peer-reviewed papers were published supporting the idea of global cooling. (In contrast, during that same time period, 44 published peer-reviewed papers found that the Earth was getting warmer. And 20 were neutral on the subject.) …
.
.
.
In 1975, the same year that Newsweek and Time warned of a coming Ice Age, Peterson, Connolley, and Fleck found that The New York Times actually ran two climate science stories. The first was titled “Scientists Ask Why World Climate is Changing; Major Cooling May be Ahead.” The second: “Warming Trend Seen in Climate; Two Articles Counter View that Cold Period is Due.”

If you saw both Times stories, you’d have a pretty good idea that scientists weren’t totally in agreement on this issue. But not all journalists provided that kind of context. Every peer-reviewed climate science paper was like a part of a mountain range. The only way to make sense of the topography was to zoom out, and look at the whole thing. But, some journalists had a tendency to report on each new study that came out as though it were an isolated hill of fact in the middle of an empty plain.’
.
.

and so on. The fact that Michael Crichton used a cooling scenario in one of his novels probably has a lot to do with popular perceptions, too. So while the popular press was giving cooling a run, the scientists were already firmly in the warming camp.

You bunch of big girls blouses! I moved house at -15 once. Kept dropping the moving boxes because I lost feeling in my fingers. Now THAT’s cold 🙂

yellowsnow said :

Watson said :

Err… what is the difference with climate change sceptics using these same arguments, but in reverse?

Well of course there is no difference … I didn’t say there was. Both sides are guilty of blind faith.

I guess the problem with this debate is that majority current scientific opinion in science is viewed as immutable truth. In reality science is a constantly shifting battle of ideas, only as good as the latest evidence and methodologies, all of which evolve rapidly.

But ideology goes on forever and ever. That’s why when it comes to climate, I support Andrew Bolt, Piers Ackerman et al. Their view is fixed forever, unlike those educated in the sciences, so they must be right

redmelon said :

-8 in Canberra, and only 0 in Thredbo.

-2 Thredbo last night, -3.9 Perisher, -6.2 Braidwood and… -10.8 at Vladivostok, I mean Cooma Airport.

wildturkeycanoe said :

I recall a -7 degree back in around 2005 when I rode my motorbike home from a night shift at around 3:30 am. Didn’t freeze to death because I had a freshly printed CT newspaper slid down inside the front of my leathers but I did recall the temperature reading the next morning. Gotta love it when moving water freezes but I’m a bit concerned about how much antifreeze is in the car now. Something we should all consider because a frozen radiator does not do much good for the engine.

I have vague memories of my mother stuffing newspapers under our coats during severe European winters when the temperature didn’t rise above zero for weeks. We also wore socks over our shoes to walk to school, to get more grip on the icy roads. At least we got snow to make it worth our while.

But then, here we get sunny, warm days and bluer than blue skies. 🙂

nobody said :

yellowsnow said :

not to worry, according to climate change science, everything is either proof or the consequence of global warming.

A hot day, you bet, it’s definitely getting warmer; there won’t be any more snow in Australia soon. Drought, yep, we won’t be getting any more flooding rains; we’ll run out of water soon so let’s invest in desal plants. Flooding rains — oh wait, those were predicated by climate change models too. Unprecedented snow falls — oh of course that’s proof of climate change too, an obscure Russian scientist once wrote a paper about it and it happened the way he said it would. Coldest winter in decades — well, that’s caused by La Nina, which is more intense now because of overall global warming, which explains the colder temperatures as well as hotter ones. The GFC — well, the hotter than normal temperatures in the 2000s made US economists and investors act irrationally, which ultimately led to economic collapse

See? Climate change is kinda like a modern day bible for green/left leaning types — it can be twisted/quoted to explain everything, because it is ultimately based on a theory which has transcended the realm of scientific inquiry to become deeply-held faith

We simply must do everything we can in our power to slow down global warming before it is too late. The science is clear. The global warming debate is over. -Arnold Schwarzenegger 2006

I wish Arnie would help me out with the $968 electricity bill I got yesterday. I have spent $2,000 on insulation, bought a new fangled solar HWS and I never waste electricty. Nothing more I can do to cut back on the stuff except go to bed earlier and turn off the lecky blanket before I go to sleep. But Gillard says there will be a price on carbon as a incentive to use less electricity. Obviously she doesn’t pay the bills at the Lodge or she would realize there is only so far one can go and 99% of the population has already achieved this.

Noted. Sorry.

I recall a -7 degree back in around 2005 when I rode my motorbike home from a night shift at around 3:30 am. Didn’t freeze to death because I had a freshly printed CT newspaper slid down inside the front of my leathers but I did recall the temperature reading the next morning. Gotta love it when moving water freezes but I’m a bit concerned about how much antifreeze is in the car now. Something we should all consider because a frozen radiator does not do much good for the engine.

Cheap said :

Does anyone remember when it was -11?

I remember as a kid in Scullin (when it first opened up) having the electric blanket on 3 all night and a weight of blankets on top that was almost stifling.

Of course this came to mind when a friend FBed this morning that their shampoo froze. Inside their house… They bought a house in that same old Belconnen area.

Meanwhile inside our place didn’t drop below 16 overnight, and was quickly back to 20 once the sun came out – 23 now. Really says something about the quality of the old housing stock…

Mr Gillespie said :

ABOUT BLOODY TIME.

The decade of fuelling climate change advocates is OVER!

Eat that, JULIAR!!!

Troll. As usual. End of response.

johnboy said :

Mr Gillespie said :

ABOUT BLOODY TIME.

The decade of fuelling climate change advocates is OVER!

Eat that, JULIAR!!!

Often I think there’s a village missing its idiot.

And then sometimes I wonder if we just aren’t the village.

“It takes a village to raise an idiot” kinda thing, you mean?

Mr Gillespie said :

ABOUT BLOODY TIME.

The decade of fuelling climate change advocates is OVER!

Eat that, JULIAR!!!

Often I think there’s a village missing its idiot.

And then sometimes I wonder if we just aren’t the village.

ABOUT BLOODY TIME.

The decade of fuelling climate change advocates is OVER!

Eat that, JULIAR!!!

It’s Winter!
Winter means cold!
-8 is no miracle!
Get over it!
Gah!

Yellowsnow, I’m not aware of any Academy of Science “20-30 years ago” predicting global cooling. Perhaps you were misled?

http://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm

yellowsnow said :

Watson said :

Err… what is the difference with climate change sceptics using these same arguments, but in reverse?

Well of course there is no difference … I didn’t say there was. Both sides are guilty of blind faith.

I guess the problem with this debate is that majority current scientific opinion in science is viewed as immutable truth. In reality science is a constantly shifting battle of ideas, only as good as the latest evidence and methodologies, all of which evolve rapidly. Scientists aren’t gods, all speaking with a single voice; they’re fallible human beings in perpetual disagreement with one another, and as with all people they have their own worldviews which, like it or not, influence the work they do.

A few weeks back a scientist I spoke to explained how, only 20-30 years ago the Academy of Science endorsed the global cooling theory. Everyone back then was confident the world was cooling and jumping on that bandwagon, eager to secure grants to prove another ice age was imminent. Whatever happened to that theory?

“The earth is square”. Whatever happened to that theory?

Watson said :

Err… what is the difference with climate change sceptics using these same arguments, but in reverse?

Well of course there is no difference … I didn’t say there was. Both sides are guilty of blind faith.

I guess the problem with this debate is that majority current scientific opinion in science is viewed as immutable truth. In reality science is a constantly shifting battle of ideas, only as good as the latest evidence and methodologies, all of which evolve rapidly. Scientists aren’t gods, all speaking with a single voice; they’re fallible human beings in perpetual disagreement with one another, and as with all people they have their own worldviews which, like it or not, influence the work they do.

A few weeks back a scientist I spoke to explained how, only 20-30 years ago the Academy of Science endorsed the global cooling theory. Everyone back then was confident the world was cooling and jumping on that bandwagon, eager to secure grants to prove another ice age was imminent. Whatever happened to that theory?

johnboy said :

creating a pleasing layered ice effect?

Ummm…. yes.

troll-sniffer said :

Captain RAAF said :

Weather fluctuations have no bearing on or relation to climate

oh really

yellowsnow said :

not to worry, according to climate change science, everything is either proof or the consequence of global warming.

A hot day, you bet, it’s definitely getting warmer; there won’t be any more snow in Australia soon. Drought, yep, we won’t be getting any more flooding rains; we’ll run out of water soon so let’s invest in desal plants. Flooding rains — oh wait, those were predicated by climate change models too. Unprecedented snow falls — oh of course that’s proof of climate change too, an obscure Russian scientist once wrote a paper about it and it happened the way he said it would. Coldest winter in decades — well, that’s caused by La Nina, which is more intense now because of overall global warming, which explains the colder temperatures as well as hotter ones. The GFC — well, the hotter than normal temperatures in the 2000s made US economists and investors act irrationally, which ultimately led to economic collapse

See? Climate change is kinda like a modern day bible for green/left leaning types — it can be twisted/quoted to explain everything, because it is ultimately based on a theory which has transcended the realm of scientific inquiry to become deeply-held faith

Err… what is the difference with climate change sceptics using these same arguments, but in reverse?

johnboy said :

creating a pleasing layered ice effect?

Fortunately we don’t get frozen water pipes here. Where I lived until I my late 20s that was a common occurence every winter. I once flooded a student house because the pipes were frozen, but I didn’t believe it until I’d opened every tap in the house and got no water. And then I went home for the weekend… The pipes defrosted and the water was apparently running down the stairs. Good old days. Landlord never charged me for any damage.

yellowsnow said :

not to worry, according to climate change science, everything is either proof or the consequence of global warming.

A hot day, you bet, it’s definitely getting warmer; there won’t be any more snow in Australia soon. Drought, yep, we won’t be getting any more flooding rains; we’ll run out of water soon so let’s invest in desal plants. Flooding rains — oh wait, those were predicated by climate change models too. Unprecedented snow falls — oh of course that’s proof of climate change too, an obscure Russian scientist once wrote a paper about it and it happened the way he said it would. Coldest winter in decades — well, that’s caused by La Nina, which is more intense now because of overall global warming, which explains the colder temperatures as well as hotter ones. The GFC — well, the hotter than normal temperatures in the 2000s made US economists and investors act irrationally, which ultimately led to economic collapse

See? Climate change is kinda like a modern day bible for green/left leaning types — it can be twisted/quoted to explain everything, because it is ultimately based on a theory which has transcended the realm of scientific inquiry to become deeply-held faith

We simply must do everything we can in our power to slow down global warming before it is too late. The science is clear. The global warming debate is over. -Arnold Schwarzenegger 2006

Cheap said :

Does anyone remember when it was -11?

I was pretty sure there was a -11 early in the season in 2006. It was just before I went on a trip to Europe. My hosts were telling me to rug up because it’s colder than Australia, and I wanted to show them that it gets cold here too. I guess not.

not to worry, according to climate change science, everything is either proof or the consequence of global warming.

A hot day, you bet, it’s definitely getting warmer; there won’t be any more snow in Australia soon. Drought, yep, we won’t be getting any more flooding rains; we’ll run out of water soon so let’s invest in desal plants. Flooding rains — oh wait, those were predicated by climate change models too. Unprecedented snow falls — oh of course that’s proof of climate change too, an obscure Russian scientist once wrote a paper about it and it happened the way he said it would. Coldest winter in decades — well, that’s caused by La Nina, which is more intense now because of overall global warming, which explains the colder temperatures as well as hotter ones. The GFC — well, the hotter than normal temperatures in the 2000s made US economists and investors act irrationally, which ultimately led to economic collapse

See? Climate change is kinda like a modern day bible for green/left leaning types — it can be twisted/quoted to explain everything, because it is ultimately based on a theory which has transcended the realm of scientific inquiry to become deeply-held faith

creating a pleasing layered ice effect?

Ice-covered water on winter mornings used to be quite common here in the 70’s and 80’s – now it happens relatively infrequently (for whatever reason) and is noteworthy when it does happen.

I remember (Grampa Simpson story alert) living in Yarralumla in the late 70’s. One winter morning in 1978 was so cold the water in the toilet bowl was covered in ice so thick the toilet could not be used. But of course I only discovered that after I had used it.

Does anyone remember when it was -11?

Captain RAAF said :

Global warming at work……….hang on?

Weather fluctuations have no bearing on or relation to climate. Climate simple shifts their severity and overall trends one way or another. It’s perfectly possible to have record cold spells in a warming climate.

Captain RAAF said :

Global warming at work……….hang on?

Woohoo! A few frosty nights have proven that global warming is BS! Rejoice! Someone should let Julia know. There’s no way I’m going to pay that $10 carbon tax a week now, because it was -8 this morning!

Global warming at work……….hang on?

Yup, the Super Roubaix was working hard this morning 🙂

-8 in Canberra, and only 0 in Thredbo.

I love winter! Crisp, cool days.

It was a great morning for a walk across the bridge into the city 🙂

Elders can only muster up a -7.7°C at 7:30am -> http://www.eldersweather.com.au/obshist.jsp?lt=site&lc=70351

Pretty bloody fresh either way!