Australia's on fire again


Recommended Posts

This is one of the scientist's you call a crank??

Joanne Simpson (born Joanne Gerould; March 23, 1923 – March 4, 2010) was the first woman to ever receive a Ph.D. in meteorology.[1][2] Simpson was a graduate of the University of Chicago. Simpson was a member of the National Academy of Engineering. Joanne taught and researched meteorology at numerous universities as well as the federal government. Simpson contributed to many areas of the atmospheric sciences, particularly in the field of tropical meteorology. She has researched hot towers, hurricanes, the trade winds, air-sea interactions, and helped develop the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission.

In 1958, Malkus collaborated with Herbert Riehl and calculated the average moist static energy and how it varied vertically throughout the atmosphere. They noted that at altitudes up to approximately 750 hPa the moist static energy decreased with height. Above 750 hPa, the moist static energy increased with height which had neither been observed or explained before. Riehl and Malkus realized that this must be due to moist convection that started near the surface that continued rising relatively adiabatically to near 50,000 feet (15,000 m). They called these clouds "undiluted chimneys" but they would later be commonly referred to as hot towers.[4] They estimated that it would take less than 5,000 of these towers daily throughout the tropics to result in the moist static energy profile they observed.

By 1966, she became the director of Project Stormfury while chief of the Experimental Meteorology Branch of the Environment Satellite Services Administration's Institute for Atmospheric Sciences.[5] She eventually became NASA's lead weather researcher and authored or co-authored over 190 articles.

Joanne received the Guggenheim Fellowship in 1954, the Melsinger Award from the American Meteorological Society in 1962, and was selected by the Los Angeles Times as Woman of the Year in Science during 1963.[3] In 1967, she won a Department of Commerce Silver Medal for her work with the Experimental Meteorology Branch.[6] Simpson was elected a fellow of the American Meteorological Society in 1968.[7] Joanne was a recipient of the American Meteorological Society's Carl-Gustaf Rossby Research Medal in 1983, its highest honor, for "outstanding contributions to man's understanding of the structure of the atmosphere."

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Same problem down here in Victoria, bazza (#2). The burn-offs are either restricted or the smokies are too frightened to do preventative burn-offs due to a few getting out of control and leaving the

Forest fires are a natural feature in Oz and have always happened, either caused by man or by dry lightning strikes..I recall country fire departments dreaded lightning storms during summer, so climat

These people are cranks?????? You have got to be joking surely?? A hint of what the upcoming report contains: “I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for

For every denier there are a hundred that claim it's true. If she's so smart - tell her to tell us why the planet is warming. It looks like she was a researcher decades ago anyway. Hardly relevant today.

BTW you keep banging on about PhDs. My daughter is a PhD researcher/student, but she doesn't know everything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The planet hasn't warmed since 1998, even the totally corrupted I.P.P.C. accepts this.

Climate change is a constantly occurring phenomena, the warm period during the last quarter of the 20th century was not unusual.

BTW, further to weather stations being sited in warm areas, ie cities, during the Soviet era, there were many weather stations in Central Asia (Siberia). Most of these are now closed, but their old results are used by the I.P.P.C.. The point is that Soviet regions received extra payments when the temperature dropped, and it is highly probable that regional officials reported false temperatures in order to get more funds from central government.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What wild life do we have that we haven't had before? Apart from those imported in fruit etc or released into the wild by "do gooders" and nutcases who got on the exotic pet bandwagon and then couldn't look after them! Have we got some evolution going on here.....Unless of course you're referring to the pondlife to be found in the more dubious areas of Britain!!!

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Different butterflies, killer bees, ash dieback disease etc. All brought on by the mythical climate change. Someone forgot to tell mother nature cuz she believes it.

Another pointer is the rain, When I was a kid, november and March meant drizzle. Very fine rain that wets you through and sits on your hair and clothes. We never get it now, we get the more continental flash floods. Drizzle is the stuff that a 'wet Sunday' is talking about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I believe in climate change 'yes' do I believe in man made global warming 'no' for several reasons.

(1) its all happened before and some of the advocates i.e. Al Gore are easily proven wrong. Remember when he was in the UK one of his mantras "the world is heating up at a faster rate than ever before in history". Load of rowlocks Mr Gore research Dansgaard-Oeschger events or Heinrich events or even Younger Dryas Stadial. 11,500 years ago during one such event the mean temperature of the world rose by 8' C in just 40 years.

(2) The IPCC told us back in 2007 that the Himalayan glaciers would be lose 1/5 of their mass x 2035 they now admit they were out by at least 300 years.

(3) Professor R Watson former chair of the IPCC has criticised the same IPCC for using non scientific sources and for making to many mistakes in their reports which are used to form the opinion of world leaders. In fact he called their way of dealing with mistakes they made as "totally and utterly atrocious".

(4) The latest admission by the IPCC is that they got their forecast on temperature rise wrong it won't be 7'C by the year 2100 it will be more like .5'C. Only 6.5 degrees out but what a percentage.

No the global warming Nazi's have a way to go yet before they convince me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

These ten "Myth and Facts" just about sum the situation up....

http://www.globalwarminghysteria.com/ten-myths-of-global-warming/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shhhhhh, the UN will set up death squads!!

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

97% of global warming scientists agree that global warming is a man-made phenomena. They believe this because there is no other explanation. All the warming/cooling events of the past have a reason that has been identified (Earth's wobble, volcanic activity, meteorite strike.) but today there are none of those. If you cannot provide evidence for what is causing the warming via natural process - they you are wrong. Simple as that. You believe in faith, not science. Belief without evidence is FAITH.

Link to post
Share on other sites

97%of global warming scientists eh ?
That in itself explains it.they are being paid to say this.

What a load of bollox you do come out with.

Do you believe in the tooth fary too. :loser:

Baz :ninja:

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The notion that global warming is a massive conspiracy theory is pretty dumb. The evidence is there. That's what science reports. The notion that you can pick and choose what science you believe is just plain dumb. If you believe without evidence - then you have a faith - and nothing more.

I guess NASA never made it to the moon either (they are ardent supporters of GW).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I say global warming Nazi's.

Their Credo.

If you don't agree with what I say I will denigrate you.

I have done no research myself but I believe what I am told therefore so must you.

If you argue with me and mine you are a dumb ass.

If I can't convince you with reasoned argument I will stamp my foot, call you names and generally make a bleedy nuisance of myself until you agree with me.

Try another bit of research Antarctic Isotope Maxima and Bi Polar Seesaw. But no its far easier to just stand there and believe what you are told.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you keep on about faith Bilboro lad ?Is that what actually drives you ?

I showed all of your comments to an aquaintance of mine.This person is a high ranking member of the NSW Rural fire service.He also has Australian Aboriginal heritage.

His comments went like this.

Quote."These bloody armchair experts and associated so called scientists need to pull their heads out of their bums.My people have been taking care of this land for 40,000 years.They can come back and tell us what we are doing wrong when they have that much experience.Until then they should just go away." Unquote.

Baz :ninja:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I say that it's faith because there is no research from 'real' scientists that say global warming is a hoax. You simply believe what you want to believe because you want to believe it. That's called faith. It's the trendy thing to do. 97% of 'real' scientists say that it is man made. We know that events in the past have a reason (Volcanos and such like) but there aren't any volcanoes active today. The last one was Mt St Helens and we had about 8 crap summers thereafter. Getting all huffy about it only makes you look silly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...