Greetings OZ..

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by GILow

Incidentally, this not my explanation. I am not a climate scientist. I am a university trained pure and applied mathematician who listens to peer reviewed climate scientists and interprets their explanations through the filter of my own training. I concede much is lost in the journey

What climate scientists are saying the IOD and SAM are the result of climate change?

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Burns, yes. Burns cataclysmically, no.

Perhaps because the northern areas west of the range aren't heavily forested

Maybe CC will make these areas wetter in winter and real trees will grow

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Perhaps because the northern areas west of the range aren't heavily forested

Maybe CC will make these areas wetter in winter and real trees will grow

Looked out my window towards the mountains just now. They look heavily enough forested to me.

[GILow]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

What climate scientists are saying the IOD and SAM are the result of climate change?

None are saying that. And that is not what I am saying, with all due respect, please read what I wrote more carefully and do not put words into my mouth.

I said the MAGNITUDE of each, and this is the nature of the theories I am hearing put forward. And not just limited to those ocean systems.

Chaos theory, vastly simplified, states that an infinitesimally small change in the initial condition of a system can result in massive changes to the outcome.

This theory is captured in the the “butterfly flapping its wings in one part of the world causing a cyclone in another” description or variations on that theme.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Looked out my window towards the mountains just now. They look heavily enough forested to me.

I wasn't aware there were forested mountains west of the range in north Australia. I must have missed them on my travels.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Wotname

I wasn't aware there were forested mountains west of the range in north Australia. I must have missed them on my travels.

Got Google Earth? Heard of the "Great Dividing Range"?


Based on your theories, why's Gippsland in fire?

[RaymondR]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Sadly true. In the past, decisions were being made by people who lived and understood the country they lived in. Sometime towards the end of last century, decision making was hijacked by inner city latte sippers.

Sadly true.

If one casts ones mind back a few years it was the present government in Victoria, which is one of the states most suffering at the moment, which tried to put the largely country based volunteer bush fire fighters under the command and control of the full time urban fire fighting authorities.

With it's plethora of state authorities, which have generated thousands of pages of rules and regulations, and dozens of buildings full of taxpayer funded bureaucrats, we appear to be unable to keep hundreds of city high rise residential buildings from being clad with highly flammable cladding materials, which incidentally there are vociferous demands for tax payer funded remediation. What hope do we have of preventing natural disasters in a bush fire prone country if we put it's management wholly into the hands of these same people.

[Mr B]

West of the great dividing range, Its pretty Arid,

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by Wotname

I wasn't aware there were forested mountains west of the range in north Australia. I must have missed them on my travels.

There, fixed it for ya.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by GILow

Incidentally, this not my explanation. I am not a climate scientist. I am a university trained pure and applied mathematician who listens to peer reviewed climate scientists and interprets their explanations through the filter of my own training. I concede much is lost in the journey

Originally Posted by GILow

The degree of change required to allow the tropical north to burn is of such a magnitude that we’d all be dead and gone before that were likely.

However, the change required to tip the delicate balance down south is relatively tiny.

That’s the problem really. We are dealing with a mathematically chaotic model where very small changes in initial conditions have huge consequences. Getting lost in simple measures like hottest days on record misses the point of the numerous small changes that combine to create the current catastrophic conditions.

So we have minor surface temperature changes in oceans causing shifts in pressure fronts which prevent moist air from moving inland. This leads to reduced rainfall over extended periods leading to extremely low surface moisture earlier in the year which, down south, leads to perfect fire conditions.

Chaos theory makes you realise just how little change is needed but sadly it is difficult for many to grasp in our scientifically and mathematically semi-illiterate nation.

It sure read like it was your explanation.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Got Google Earth? Heard of the "Great Dividing Range"?


Based on your theories, why's Gippsland in fire?

Originally Posted by Wotname

Perhaps because the northern areas west of the range aren't heavily forested

Maybe CC will make these areas wetter in winter and real trees will grow

Hmm... it seems I was aware of the GDR after all and thus mentioned it previously - perhaps you missed it

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Mr B

West of the great dividing range, Its pretty Arid,

Originally Posted by Uncle Bob

There, fixed it for ya.

Thanks for taking the time to fully read my posts - I don't expect others to agree with them but I do expect the post to read as written.

[GILow]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

It sure read like it was your explanation.

I am sorry, but I feel you are reading what I have written in a somewhat polarised and combative frame of mind.

I am responding best I can to your questions but you are moving the goal posts a bit fast for me.

I respect your apparent belief that none of this related to climate change. You are entitled to that view and I’m not out to change your mind.

I have shared my view of the situation and that’s all I felt I needed to do. I attempted to offer an explanation for how the lack of burning forests up north does not necessarily invalidate the theory of climate change. Whether you embrace my logic or anyone else’s is your prerogative.

I think we can leave it amiably enough at that.

[GILow]

As an aside, I was a friend and neighbour of South Australia’s previous country fire service chief and he surprised me by explaining he cut his rural fire fighting teeth near Darwin.

I thought nothing could burn up there, but it turns out I was way wrong.

[Mr B]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Thanks for taking the time to fully read my posts - I don't expect others to agree with them but I do expect the post to read as written.

I lived in the Isa, Its pretty arid out there, 45 C every day, Its also hot out there,
I flew out to chillago, Its pretty arid out there,

Have driven by car, Townsville to 3 ways down to the Alice and back up to Darwin, Then across to Cunnunara down to Halls Creek and across to Broome, Its still pretty arid out there,
Around Darwin there are lots of trees, Below Katherine, Its pretty arid out there,