Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Climate Change

By John Hargreaves - 4 September 2014 99

island-stock-020914

Just to open the batting… did anyone notice the Canberra Times article page 7 entitled “Aid for island nations hit by warming a moral duty”?

It contains a picture of an island under water. Yeah right. This is a picture of a swimming pool in an island resort, the Sheraton Fiji (I think) has one such swimming pool. There is a snack bar at a level where you swim up to it to get snacks and drinks. Don’t let a fact get in the way! Sprung CT!

The article however, does raise some concerns. This is a really big issue for the islanders.

I went to Kiribati in 1998 as part of a Commonwealth Parliamentary Association gig. I was a newly minted MLA. The conference taught me heaps about parliamentary procedure and purity but enough of that some other time.

Talking to the locals, I found that they had three big concerns.

The first was power – they ran their power off diesel generators and they had to have the diesel delivered by sea. Always a bit precarious.

The second was water. Although surrounded by sea water, rainfall was not all that plentiful and they had often to rely on imported water.

But the biggest concern they had was rising sea water. The Island of Tarawa was only a metre and a half or so above sea level and a decent tsunami or king tide would wash clean over the island.

However, they were really concerned that the rising of sea levels would eventually see their island submerged.

The conference discussed what next. One issue was… what could be done to save the island. Answer – nothing. A climate sceptic from New Zealand thought it was just a natural evolutionary thing and nothing to do with global warming exacerbated by mankind. I disagreed.

Another issue was … who was responsible and what should they do to help. This caused the cats to scatter!

Most blamed the industrialized nations of China and the US. Others blamed the whole world saying that the UN should co-ordinate a rescue package and that the member countries should chip in to pay for it. Yeah right again. The US is always behind in its payments to the UN anyway!

The same thoughts were shared with me when I visited Vanuatu with my grandsons’ footy team, New Caledonia when I went there for a holiday. And these are only some of the islands I have visited and talked to the locals about stuff.

Any thoughts?

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments
99 Responses to
Climate Change
1
dungfungus 9:07 am
04 Sep 14
#

You were in Kiribati 16 years ago then.
If all the crazy predictions from climate change alarmists were true then that group of islands would be submerged by now.
Last time I checked, nothing had changed.
I am glad the USA is always behind in its “payments” to the UN. That organisation is spending a disproportionate amount of resources in trying to keep the non- problem of climate change alive. The following is an example of the sort of rubbish they are getting involved in now:
“The United Nations is looking for a young woman to, as BBC put it, be the ‘Malala’ of the climate change movement, serving as a voice that will energize this September’s climate change conference.
The organization has put out a call for a woman under 30 to speak at the opening session of the 2014 Climate Summit, which is being held on September 23 in New York City. The woman has to be from a developing country and must have a background that includes advocacy on climate change or work on implementing climate mitigation or adaptation solutions. So far, the call for applicants has drawn 544 women, who emailed short videos of themselves persuading world leaders to act on climate change to the Secretary-General’s office.
Organizers hope to find someone who can capture the hearts and minds of people around the world as much as Malala Yousafzai, a Pakastani schoolgirl who was shot in the head by the Taliban and has since become an advocate for women’s rights to education, did when she addressed the UN in July 2013. But as the BBC notes, the choice to include only women in the candidate pool could create some controversy. Susan Alzner, who works at the UN Non-Governmental Liaison Service and is the main person in charge of the search, told the BBC that the decision stems from the fact that women are often the ones who suffer the most from climate change impacts.”

Report this comment

2
watto23 9:55 am
04 Sep 14
#

Sea levels are changing. http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/ is just one such piece of evidence.
The thing is that change doesn’t happen very fast, but it also can’t be reversed very quickly either. This is why there are so many skeptics out there. The ozone layer holw has only just stabilised in size and isn’t expected to close til 2070. It was what 20-30 yrs ago they banned the main cause of the ozone layer layer hole. There were skeptics back then too. Problem is when visual proof takes so long to develop people just tend to read the things that suit their skepticism, much like those who will only vote for a political party and refuse to believe any facts that conflict what they want to believe.

Report this comment

3
John Moulis 10:07 am
04 Sep 14
#

The CT’s fabrications about so-called global warming have become so blatant that even ex-Labor politicians are now calling them out. As for their headline “Aid for island nations hit by warming a moral duty”, that isn’t surprising either. The paper has waged campaigns over many years urging governments to boost foreign aid. Whenever they published one of their editorials on the subject I would write to them with a contrary view but the letters were never published. As for “climate change”, the paper is growing up a bit. They had previously imposed a total ban on the publishing of any letters or articles criticising pro-climate change theory, but over the past few months I have been able to get two letters published giving the climate realist viewpoint.

Perhaps after one of the coldest winters in our history after the climate change believers assured us that it would never happen again, even the staunchest climate change advocates might be realising that they got things terribly wrong.

Report this comment

4
HenryBG 10:34 am
04 Sep 14
#

dungfungus said :

If all the crazy predictions from climate change alarmists were true then that group of islands would be submerged by now.

http://www.climate.gov.ki/category/effects/coastal-erosion/
“The Australian National Tidal Centre reports that sea levels in Kiribati have averaged a rise of 3.7 millimetres a year since 1992.”

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg2/index.php?idp=671
“Many small island nations are only a few meters above present sea level. These states may face serious threat of permanent inundation from sea-level rise. Among the most vulnerable of these island states are the Marshall Islands, Kiribati, Tuvalu, Tonga, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Cook Islands (in the Pacific Ocean); Antigua and Nevis (in the Caribbean Sea); and the Maldives (in the Indian Ocean). Small island states may face the following types of impacts from sea-level rise and climate change (Gaffin, 1997; Nurse et al., 1998):
Increased coastal erosion
Changes in aquifer volume and water quality with increased saline intrusion
Coral reef deterioration resulting from sea-level rise and thermal stress
Outmigration caused by permanent inundation
Social instability related to inter-island migration
Loss of income resulting from negative effects on tourist industry
Increased vulnerability of human settlement due to decrease in land area
Loss of agriculture and vegetation.
Gaffin (1997) concludes that without planned adaptation, the vulnerabilities of small island states are as follows:
An 80-cm sea-level rise could inundate two-thirds of the Marshall Islands and Kiribati.2
A 90-cm sea-level rise could cause 85% of Male, the capital of the Maldives, to be inundated (Pernetta, 1989).”

I see no “crazy predictions”, just careful and professional scientists recording reality. Perhaps you can backup your assertion with something?

dungfungus said :

Last time I checked, nothing had changed.

What did you check with? Tidal gauge data? Satellite altimetry?
Or…and going out on a limb here…you didn’t really “check”, did you?

Here’s what you find when you actually *do* check:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wea.396/pdf
“Table 1
Significant parameters for the sea-level situation in the Kiribati area.
Parameters Values Comments
Length of data 16 yrs Not long enough yet
Sea-level trend + 3.9mm/yr Very small change from the previous months
Sea-level rise ~ 6.14cm For the last 16 years
Vertical land movement ~+0.2mm/yr Not significant [slightly reducing sea level]”
“A study of sea-level changes in the Kiribati area for the last 16 years”, Than Aung, Awnesh Singh and Uma Prasad, Royal Meteorological Society, Weather, Vol 64 no9.

And that is the difference between people who source their opinions carefully, and those who rely instead on tabloids and dodgy blogs. Or their imaginations.

Report this comment

5
HenryBG 10:47 am
04 Sep 14
#

John Moulis said :

Perhaps after one of the coldest winters in our history after the climate change believers assured us that it would never happen again, even the staunchest climate change advocates might be realising that they got things terribly wrong.

Here is some data for Kiribati:
http://www.pacificclimatechangescience.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/11_PCCSP_Kiribati_8pp.pdf

As you can see, Kiribati is experiencing increased temperatures and sea level rise.

Describing yourself as a “climate realist” would make more sense, were you to in fact accomodate reality within your beliefs.

You could perhaps start by explaining what you mean by “coldest winters in our history”, and then explaining how a bit of cold weather negates the laws of physics, which laws show that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that increased greenhouse gases result in greater heat retention.

(Incidentally, a “theory”, in science, is an explanation of the facts against which nobody has found any contradicting data. In other words, a “theory” in science, is a description of reality. If you don’t like a theory, you’re going to need to provide something pretty compelling to convince anybody your opinion is worth anything.)

Here is BoM’s summary for June 2014:
“Above average temperatures, particularly in
eastern States
• Warmest January–June period on record for
Australia
• Warmest Australian-region sea surface
temperatures on record for June”
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/mwr/aus/mwr-aus-201406.pdf

July 2014:
• Warm days and cool nights over much of the
mainland
• Another warm month overall in the south
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/mwr/aus/mwr-aus-201407.pdf

And seeing as August isn’t out yet, for interest, May2014:
Record-breaking late-season warm spell
• Above average mean temperatures (3rd-warmest
May on record nationally)
• South Australia’s warmest May on record for both
mean and minimum temperatures.

Hmmm…but maybe April was cold:
Above average mean temperatures (7th-highest on
record nationally)
• Above average maximum and minimum
temperatures
• Queensland’s warmest April on record for
minimum temperatures

Nope. And March?
Above average maximum and minimum
temperatures

I have a suggestion for you John: Form an opinion *after* carefully analysing the facts. Because when you do the opposite by selectively quoting facts(if that’s what they are) to support an opinion, you don’t come across as somebody doing any sound thinking.

Report this comment

6
dungfungus 1:41 pm
04 Sep 14
#

HenryBG said :

John Moulis said :

Perhaps after one of the coldest winters in our history after the climate change believers assured us that it would never happen again, even the staunchest climate change advocates might be realising that they got things terribly wrong.

Here is some data for Kiribati:
http://www.pacificclimatechangescience.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/11_PCCSP_Kiribati_8pp.pdf

As you can see, Kiribati is experiencing increased temperatures and sea level rise.

Describing yourself as a “climate realist” would make more sense, were you to in fact accomodate reality within your beliefs.

You could perhaps start by explaining what you mean by “coldest winters in our history”, and then explaining how a bit of cold weather negates the laws of physics, which laws show that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that increased greenhouse gases result in greater heat retention.

(Incidentally, a “theory”, in science, is an explanation of the facts against which nobody has found any contradicting data. In other words, a “theory” in science, is a description of reality. If you don’t like a theory, you’re going to need to provide something pretty compelling to convince anybody your opinion is worth anything.)

Here is BoM’s summary for June 2014:
“Above average temperatures, particularly in
eastern States
• Warmest January–June period on record for
Australia
• Warmest Australian-region sea surface
temperatures on record for June”
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/mwr/aus/mwr-aus-201406.pdf

July 2014:
• Warm days and cool nights over much of the
mainland
• Another warm month overall in the south
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/mwr/aus/mwr-aus-201407.pdf

And seeing as August isn’t out yet, for interest, May2014:
Record-breaking late-season warm spell
• Above average mean temperatures (3rd-warmest
May on record nationally)
• South Australia’s warmest May on record for both
mean and minimum temperatures.

Hmmm…but maybe April was cold:
Above average mean temperatures (7th-highest on
record nationally)
• Above average maximum and minimum
temperatures
• Queensland’s warmest April on record for
minimum temperatures

Nope. And March?
Above average maximum and minimum
temperatures

I have a suggestion for you John: Form an opinion *after* carefully analysing the facts. Because when you do the opposite by selectively quoting facts(if that’s what they are) to support an opinion, you don’t come across as somebody doing any sound thinking.

Here are some real facts. (some facts are more factual than other facts)
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2010/11/11/kiribati-was-half-submerged-in-wwii/
Also, can’t you recall lessons about tectonic plate convergences that were taught to us in primary school?

Report this comment

7
arescarti42 2:30 pm
04 Sep 14
#

dungfungus said :

Here are some real facts. (some facts are more factual than other facts)
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2010/11/11/kiribati-was-half-submerged-in-wwii/
Also, can’t you recall lessons about tectonic plate convergences that were taught to us in primary school?

Oh oh, some black and white pictures on a climate denialist blog.

Well that proves it, somebody body better call the IPCC and let them know that climate change is a scam.

Now if only people would wake up to the way the CIA is implementing mind control through the use of orange golf balls.

You know what I’m talking about dungfungus.

Report this comment

8
dungfungus 4:59 pm
04 Sep 14
#

HenryBG said :

dungfungus said :

If all the crazy predictions from climate change alarmists were true then that group of islands would be submerged by now.

http://www.climate.gov.ki/category/effects/coastal-erosion/
“The Australian National Tidal Centre reports that sea levels in Kiribati have averaged a rise of 3.7 millimetres a year since 1992.”

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg2/index.php?idp=671
“Many small island nations are only a few meters above present sea level. These states may face serious threat of permanent inundation from sea-level rise. Among the most vulnerable of these island states are the Marshall Islands, Kiribati, Tuvalu, Tonga, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Cook Islands (in the Pacific Ocean); Antigua and Nevis (in the Caribbean Sea); and the Maldives (in the Indian Ocean). Small island states may face the following types of impacts from sea-level rise and climate change (Gaffin, 1997; Nurse et al., 1998):
Increased coastal erosion
Changes in aquifer volume and water quality with increased saline intrusion
Coral reef deterioration resulting from sea-level rise and thermal stress
Outmigration caused by permanent inundation
Social instability related to inter-island migration
Loss of income resulting from negative effects on tourist industry
Increased vulnerability of human settlement due to decrease in land area
Loss of agriculture and vegetation.
Gaffin (1997) concludes that without planned adaptation, the vulnerabilities of small island states are as follows:
An 80-cm sea-level rise could inundate two-thirds of the Marshall Islands and Kiribati.2
A 90-cm sea-level rise could cause 85% of Male, the capital of the Maldives, to be inundated (Pernetta, 1989).”

I see no “crazy predictions”, just careful and professional scientists recording reality. Perhaps you can backup your assertion with something?

dungfungus said :

Last time I checked, nothing had changed.

What did you check with? Tidal gauge data? Satellite altimetry?
Or…and going out on a limb here…you didn’t really “check”, did you?

Here’s what you find when you actually *do* check:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wea.396/pdf
“Table 1
Significant parameters for the sea-level situation in the Kiribati area.
Parameters Values Comments
Length of data 16 yrs Not long enough yet
Sea-level trend + 3.9mm/yr Very small change from the previous months
Sea-level rise ~ 6.14cm For the last 16 years
Vertical land movement ~+0.2mm/yr Not significant [slightly reducing sea level]”
“A study of sea-level changes in the Kiribati area for the last 16 years”, Than Aung, Awnesh Singh and Uma Prasad, Royal Meteorological Society, Weather, Vol 64 no9.

And that is the difference between people who source their opinions carefully, and those who rely instead on tabloids and dodgy blogs. Or their imaginations.

All of us read fairy tales when we were young. Some of us still do, apparently.
As I said, if all those alarmist’s crazy predictions were true, all these islands would be submerged by now and they are not so why dredge up more data?

Report this comment

9
astrojax 5:28 pm
04 Sep 14
#

http://www.nanseninitiative.org/

i’d assume this is a hot topic of conversation – well, has been – in samoa at the moment as the un holds its decadal small island developing states conference. does australia, as a developed country, have a moral obligation to resettle [some of] these people? probably.

Report this comment

10
John Hargreaves Ex M 6:01 pm
04 Sep 14
#

Thanks to all posters. Good quality debate. I was in Switzerland a couple of years ago and went to a glacier near Mont Blanc. It had receded about a hundred metres in depth and about two kilometres in length (my memory is still a bit hazy but the effect of warming was obvious and I stopped being a sceptic about then.

The same is happening in the glaciers in New Zealand so for those who don’t want to rely on facts in print, go see for yourself and ask the locals.

They have seen the effects of warming over their lifespan.

Report this comment

11
ScienceRules 6:19 pm
04 Sep 14
#

I was going to comment, but HenryBG nailed it.

Every major peak scientific body has acknowledged that the climate is changing and that humans are largely the cause of this. It isn’t up for debate or argument. All we can discuss is how the situation can be managed so that there is the potential for the planet to support life sometime in the future.

Report this comment

12
HenryBG 6:19 pm
04 Sep 14
#

dungfungus said :

Here are some real facts. (some facts are more factual than other facts)
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2010/11/11/kiribati-was-half-submerged-in-wwii/

Those aren’t facts. That’s Steven Goddard.

Notice that I have pointed you to real facts published in the academic literature by genuine scientists who conduct actual science research, while you point me to a notoriously inaccurate and inexpert blogger who does no actual research and publishes no science?

dungfungus said :

Also, can’t you recall lessons about tectonic plate convergences that were taught to us in primary school?

I don’t recall any of my textbooks talking about “tectonic plate convergences”, however assuming you are in fact referring to convergent boundaries, I am puzzled by what you may mean. You may find it interesting to brush up on Kiribati’s situation slap bang in the middle of a tectonic basin.
You also may have missed the bit in the science that I quoted from which mentions that Kiribati’s net vertical movement is *positive*. That means *up*.
Perhaps recalling past science lessons isn’t one of my issues.

Report this comment

13
HenryBG 6:20 pm
04 Sep 14
#

dungfungus said :

All of us read fairy tales when we were young. Some of us still do, apparently.
As I said, if all those alarmist’s crazy predictions were true, all these islands would be submerged by now and they are not so why dredge up more data?

The predictions you are sharing with us are indeed alarming.

Any chance you could share your source for those alleged predictions?

I’ve already provided evidence that the IPCC says no such thing.

Report this comment

14
wildturkeycanoe 7:35 pm
04 Sep 14
#

Why should we be so alarmist about islands under threat of oceans rising, when there are other islands and indeed countries, who are under threat of another global crisis – shifting tectonic plates!!
If you look at events around the world that have occurred in the last several thousand years, there is non-disputable proof that volcanoes have wiped out entire cities and civilizations. Granted, the short term – just like global warming – evidence is not as convincing, but looking at the past we can see that tectonic movement of the Earth’s crust is destroying our world. Mt. Vesuvius, Krakatoa, Mt. St. Helens…these are examples that we know of that have caused great catastrophes and compared to global warming not exactly a small issue either. Should we also fund anyone within earshot of a “dormant” volcano to relocate to a safe place??
I only came up with this on a whim just then, but if you used the global warming style of argument to support global volcanosation, what difference is there in the scientific “evidence” and predictions of what is to come? Maybe mankind is to blame for all the earthquakes everywhere too, but we just haven’t figured out who to blame yet.

Report this comment

15
dungfungus 8:56 pm
04 Sep 14
#

John Hargreaves Ex MLA said :

Thanks to all posters. Good quality debate. I was in Switzerland a couple of years ago and went to a glacier near Mont Blanc. It had receded about a hundred metres in depth and about two kilometres in length (my memory is still a bit hazy but the effect of warming was obvious and I stopped being a sceptic about then.

The same is happening in the glaciers in New Zealand so for those who don’t want to rely on facts in print, go see for yourself and ask the locals.

They have seen the effects of warming over their lifespan.

Do a Google search on “Mt. Blanc Glaciers Refuse to Shrink” and you may become a sceptic again.

Report this comment

1 2 3 7

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2016 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.

Search across the site