36 ms·

Australia has plentiful fresh produce of superb quality and is a major food exporter. Climate change will be a challenge for this country but hyperbolic predict

by cdogl 3y ago

Australia has plentiful fresh produce of superb quality and is a major food exporter. Climate change will be a challenge for this country but hyperbolic predictions like OP don’t help anyone.

Guthur 3y ago
And yet after that drought we've had some of the wettest weather I've ever seen here, massive floods, ample rain. Actually have a cold weather warning for the next week here in Sydney. It's as if the weather is you know unpredictable. You free to believe whatever appeal to authority you want but climate wolf crying has been going on for decades. It's just another distraction while the real questions don't get asked let alone answered.
- medellin 3y ago
  What do you think the real questions are?
- defrost 3y ago
  The weather (short term changes) is 'unpredictable' (albeit less and less so). The climate (decadal long averages) is not - it's driven by energy in (sunlight, some geothermnal), energy absorbed, and energy reflected - these have been more or less constant for tens of thousands of years and have only recently "rapidly" changed in a century driven by changes to the insulation properties of the atmosphere caused by human released gases. Short term unpredicable tumbling, long term predictable trajectory is understood in the study of dynamics. An easy example is the Dzhanibekov effect | Tennis racket theorem where an object's orientation is chaotic but the long term path of its centre of gravity is smooth and predictable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_racket_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_racket_theorem Australia in recent years has been mostly affected by the 'usual' El Niño and La Niña long term patterns that have been slowly becoming more off kilter with changing swing lengths and extremes (compared to past records).
  - Guthur 3y ago
    You seem very certain that earth can never have rapid (decades length, centuries?) changes on earth before, or that it could ever happen, without human activities?
    - defrost 3y ago
      I said no such thing. I specifically said that ( earth's current ) climate has been more or less constant for tens of thousands of years and have only recently "rapidly" changed in a century driven by changes to the insulation properties of the atmosphere caused by human released gases Read that carefully. It does not say: * that earth can never have rapid (decades length, centuries?) changes on earth before [sic] or * that it could ever happen, without human activities How about you practice NOT badly paraphrasing and strawmanning other people's comments?
      - Guthur 3y ago
        Please read my post it's got a question mark, that universally means it was a query. You are free to clearly clarify. If we agree there are a multitude of reasons for climate to change and that it could therefore happen at any point in time I'm not sure what we're really discussing it for. Best to just make do and live our lives.
Fricken 3y ago
Are you sure he's being hyperbolic? We're just getting started with this shit, man. https://theconversation.com/climate-change-threatens-to-cause-synchronised-harvest-failures-across-the-globe-with-implications-for-australias-food-security-209250 https://theconversation.com/climate-change-threatens-to-caus...
- marcus_holmes 3y ago
  Isn't that the same prediction, though? The original article/talk predicted that the Australian wheat harvest would collapse because of climate change 13 years ago. It didn't, and has in fact increased since then. The Conversation article is referencing scientists making the same prediction now, presumably based on the same modelling work. I get that new understanding can lead to new insight, but I don't think it's "anti-science" or "denial" to treat this new round of predictions with some scepticism, given that they're basically an exact repeat of the predictions in 2010. Which turned out to be not only incorrect, but wildly incorrect, the opposite of what actually happened.

by cdogl 3y ago

Australia has plentiful fresh produce of superb quality and is a major food exporter. Climate change will be a challenge for this country but hyperbolic predictions like OP don’t help anyone.

Guthur 3y ago

And yet after that drought we've had some of the wettest weather I've ever seen here, massive floods, ample rain. Actually have a cold weather warning for the next week here in Sydney. It's as if the weather is you know unpredictable. You free to believe whatever appeal to authority you want but climate wolf crying has been going on for decades. It's just another distraction while the real questions don't get asked let alone answered.

medellin 3y ago
What do you think the real questions are?
defrost 3y ago
The weather (short term changes) is 'unpredictable' (albeit less and less so). The climate (decadal long averages) is not - it's driven by energy in (sunlight, some geothermnal), energy absorbed, and energy reflected - these have been more or less constant for tens of thousands of years and have only recently "rapidly" changed in a century driven by changes to the insulation properties of the atmosphere caused by human released gases. Short term unpredicable tumbling, long term predictable trajectory is understood in the study of dynamics. An easy example is the Dzhanibekov effect | Tennis racket theorem where an object's orientation is chaotic but the long term path of its centre of gravity is smooth and predictable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_racket_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_racket_theorem Australia in recent years has been mostly affected by the 'usual' El Niño and La Niña long term patterns that have been slowly becoming more off kilter with changing swing lengths and extremes (compared to past records).
- Guthur 3y ago
  You seem very certain that earth can never have rapid (decades length, centuries?) changes on earth before, or that it could ever happen, without human activities?
  - defrost 3y ago
    I said no such thing. I specifically said that ( earth's current ) climate has been more or less constant for tens of thousands of years and have only recently "rapidly" changed in a century driven by changes to the insulation properties of the atmosphere caused by human released gases Read that carefully. It does not say: * that earth can never have rapid (decades length, centuries?) changes on earth before [sic] or * that it could ever happen, without human activities How about you practice NOT badly paraphrasing and strawmanning other people's comments?
    - Guthur 3y ago
      Please read my post it's got a question mark, that universally means it was a query. You are free to clearly clarify. If we agree there are a multitude of reasons for climate to change and that it could therefore happen at any point in time I'm not sure what we're really discussing it for. Best to just make do and live our lives.

Fricken 3y ago

Are you sure he's being hyperbolic? We're just getting started with this shit, man. https://theconversation.com/climate-change-threatens-to-cause-synchronised-harvest-failures-across-the-globe-with-implications-for-australias-food-security-209250 https://theconversation.com/climate-change-threatens-to-caus...

marcus_holmes 3y ago
Isn't that the same prediction, though? The original article/talk predicted that the Australian wheat harvest would collapse because of climate change 13 years ago. It didn't, and has in fact increased since then. The Conversation article is referencing scientists making the same prediction now, presumably based on the same modelling work. I get that new understanding can lead to new insight, but I don't think it's "anti-science" or "denial" to treat this new round of predictions with some scepticism, given that they're basically an exact repeat of the predictions in 2010. Which turned out to be not only incorrect, but wildly incorrect, the opposite of what actually happened.