Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce is taking Prime Minister Tony Abbott for a run around the paddocks this weekend to convince him of the need for a drought assistance package.


But Mr Joyce is worried forecast rain up the east coast could drown out his message about farmers' urgent needs.

Mr Joyce, Mr Abbott and National Farmers Federation President Brent Finlay will tour drought-hit areas of Queensland and NSW this weekend, ahead of a cabinet consideration of a drought assistance package for struggling farmers.

More here

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2014/02/14/09/09/rain-could-dampen-pm-s-drought-tour

Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen?

Swagman wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:30am:

Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen?

What, rain?


In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect?

____ wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:39am:

Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? What, rain? In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect?

So anthropomorphic caused climate change will increase rainfall and reduce droughts and the need for drought assistance?

Excellent, here's me thinking it was bad thing

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:42am:

____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:39am: Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? What, rain? In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect? So anthropomorphic caused climate change will increase rainfall and reduce droughts and the need for drought assistance? Excellent, here's me thinking it was bad thing

Where did you hear that from … hard right shock jock?

____ wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:23am:

Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce is taking Prime Minister Tony Abbott for a run around the paddocks this weekend to convince him of the need for a drought assistance package. But Mr Joyce is worried forecast rain up the east coast could drown out his message about farmers' urgent needs. Mr Joyce, Mr Abbott and National Farmers Federation President Brent Finlay will tour drought-hit areas of Queensland and NSW this weekend, ahead of a cabinet consideration of a drought assistance package for struggling farmers. More here http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2014/02/14/09/09/rain-could-dampen-pm-s-drought-tour

Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!!

____ wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:48am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:39am: Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? What, rain? In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect? So anthropomorphic caused climate change will increase rainfall and reduce droughts and the need for drought assistance? Excellent, here's me thinking it was bad thing Where did you hear that from … hard right shock jock?

From you, ya dill, you said it  ;D

If the world is wetter, it will, by virtue of that wettness will be less droughty; you do realise that a wetter world means it is less dry and less droughty, don't you?


Or does wetter mean something else where you come from.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:53am:

____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:48am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:39am: Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? What, rain? In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect? So anthropomorphic caused climate change will increase rainfall and reduce droughts and the need for drought assistance? Excellent, here's me thinking it was bad thing Where did you hear that from … hard right shock jock? From you, ya dill, you said it  ;D If the world is wetter, it will, by virtue of that wettness will be less droughty; you do realise that a wetter world means it is less dry and less droughty, don't you? Or does wetter mean something else where you come from.

Greens_Lunatic definitely ain't the sharpest tool in the box, lol...

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:52am:

Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!!

No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that.

The rain isn’t up the east coast; it’s coming from a tropical low in WA, moving through SA, Vic, then up through central NSW and into QLD.

Most of the drought affected areas are well away from the east coast.

Great for the country to finally tap into the building wet up the top end.

It’s putting out bush fires and watering a vast amount of the country that had baked under the recent heat.

Great news for so many people!

Hysterical crap filled rubbish for others.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:58am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that.

Want to take that back before I prove you wrong?

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:58am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that.

Okay, don't say I didn't give you fair warning...


Interview with Professor Tim Flannery

Reporter: Sally Sara

First Published: 11/02/2007

SALLY SARA: Well, making good use of water is one of the subjects of this week's interview. Professor Tim Flannery has warned climate change will impact on Australia to the point where Sydney can expect to receive 60 per cent less rainfall than it does at present. If that's the case, what about the bush? What can Australian farmers expect as weather patterns alter? I spoke with Professor Tim Flannery about climate change, water and the intriguing subject of carbon trading. Professor Flannery, congratulations firstly on being named as Australian of the Year.

PROFESSOR TIM FLANNERY: Thank you very much.

SALLY SARA: What will it mean for Australian farmers if the predictions of climate change are correct and little is done to stop it? What will that mean for a farmer?

PROFESSOR TIM FLANNERY: We're already seeing the initial impacts and they include a decline in the winter rainfall zone across southern Australia, which is clearly an impact of climate change, but also a decrease in run-off. Although we're getting say a 20 per cent decrease in rainfall in some areas of Australia, that's translating to a 60 per cent decrease in the run-off into the dams and rivers. That's because the soil is warmer because of global warming and the plants are under more stress and therefore using more moisture. So even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and our river systems, and that's a real worry for the people in the bush. If that trend continues then I think we're going to have serious problems, particularly for irrigation.

From YOUR very own, "unbiased" ABC's Landline program: http://www.abc.net.au/landline/content/2006/s1844398.htm

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:03am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong?

Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:07am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:03am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong? Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool.

Yeah, you just got owned!  :D :D ;D ;D

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:07am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:03am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong? Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool.

You do realise that when someone does not use direct quotes, they are allowed to paraphrase what was said; so arguing the it was not a direct quote, when it was very obviously not one, is a bit (a lot) foolish, don't you think?


The statement was not a direct quote, don't carry on like a loon and pretend it was.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:52am:

____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:23am: Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce is taking Prime Minister Tony Abbott for a run around the paddocks this weekend to convince him of the need for a drought assistance package. But Mr Joyce is worried forecast rain up the east coast could drown out his message about farmers' urgent needs. Mr Joyce, Mr Abbott and National Farmers Federation President Brent Finlay will tour drought-hit areas of Queensland and NSW this weekend, ahead of a cabinet consideration of a drought assistance package for struggling farmers. More here http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2014/02/14/09/09/rain-could-dampen-pm-s-drought-tour Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!!

Probably, yet that doesn't end the major threat to the Australian economy from AGW.

Shame people hide behind an off the cuff remark by Flannery to hide their own fear of realising the science behind AGW and so act to protect Australia.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:53am:

____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:48am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:39am: Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? What, rain? In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect? So anthropomorphic caused climate change will increase rainfall and reduce droughts and the need for drought assistance? Excellent, here's me thinking it was bad thing Where did you hear that from … hard right shock jock? From you, ya dill, you said it  ;D If the world is wetter, it will, by virtue of that wettness will be less droughty; you do realise that a wetter world means it is less dry and less droughty, don't you? Or does wetter mean something else where you come from.

Unfortunately your trying to add one and one, you came to the wrong total.
Playing dumb really suits you and your posts.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:13am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:07am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:03am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong? Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool. You do realise that when someone does not use direct quotes, they are allowed to paraphrase what was said; so arguing the it was not a direct quote, when it was very obviously not one, is a bit (a lot) foolish, don't you think? The statement was not a direct quote, don't carry on like a loon and pretend it was.

Like all deniers, he paraphrased enough to take it completely out of context.

There is nothing wrong with Flannery's comment.  We see the inability for run-off to fill dams to sustain farming in most of the central region of Australia due to the climate in that region. Climate change is predicting some parts of our current farmland will become like that. (ie not enough run-off to fill dams).
The key thing is, its not now, its in the future.

How can he be "proved wrong" when his prediction date hasnt arrived yet ?

Denier logic is not logic at all. Its lies built on lies.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:18am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:13am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:07am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:03am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong? Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool. You do realise that when someone does not use direct quotes, they are allowed to paraphrase what was said; so arguing the it was not a direct quote, when it was very obviously not one, is a bit (a lot) foolish, don't you think? The statement was not a direct quote, don't carry on like a loon and pretend it was. Like all deniers, he paraphrased enough to take it completely out of context. There is nothing wrong with Flannery's comment.  We see the inability for run-off to fill dams to sustain farming in most of the central region of Australia due to the climate in that region. Climate change is predicting some parts of our current farmland will become like that. (ie not enough run-off to fill dams). The key thing is, its not now, its in the future. How can he be "proved wrong" when his prediction date hasnt arrived yet ? Denier logic is not logic at all. Its lies built on lies.

You're in denial!!!  ;D ;D ;D

____ wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:16am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:53am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:48am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:39am: Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? What, rain? In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect? So anthropomorphic caused climate change will increase rainfall and reduce droughts and the need for drought assistance? Excellent, here's me thinking it was bad thing Where did you hear that from … hard right shock jock? From you, ya dill, you said it  ;D If the world is wetter, it will, by virtue of that wettness will be less droughty; you do realise that a wetter world means it is less dry and less droughty, don't you? Or does wetter mean something else where you come from. Unfortunately your trying to add one and one, you came to the wrong total. Playing dumb really suits you and your posts.

Just admit you are a moron and we can all have a good laugh at your massive bugger up and move on.

Or are you going to just ignore what you posted and pretend you didn't actually write that little nugget of stupidity?  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D

When deniers use the flannery (mis)quote, all it proves is:
1) They have poor comprehension skills
2) They are desperate to prove their faith based beliefs
3) They hate logic.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:28am:

When deniers use the flannery (mis)quote, all it proves is: 1) They have poor comprehension skills 2) They are desperate to prove their faith based beliefs 3) They hate logic.

Gawd, you never give up even when proven to be 110% WRONG!  ::) There's no misquoting, no being taken out of context or anything. It's all there in crystal clear text:

SALLY SARA: What will it mean for Australian farmers if the predictions of climate change are correct and little is done to stop it? What will that mean for a farmer?

PROFESSOR TIM FLANNERY: We're already seeing the initial impacts and they include a decline in the winter rainfall zone across southern Australia, which is clearly an impact of climate change, but also a decrease in run-off. Although we're getting say a 20 per cent decrease in rainfall in some areas of Australia, that's translating to a 60 per cent decrease in the run-off into the dams and rivers. That's because the soil is warmer because of global warming and the plants are under more stress and therefore using more moisture. So even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and our river systems, and that's a real worry for the people in the bush. If that trend continues then I think we're going to have serious problems, particularly for irrigation.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:18am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:13am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:07am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:03am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong? Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool. You do realise that when someone does not use direct quotes, they are allowed to paraphrase what was said; so arguing the it was not a direct quote, when it was very obviously not one, is a bit (a lot) foolish, don't you think? The statement was not a direct quote, don't carry on like a loon and pretend it was. Like all deniers, he paraphrased enough to take it completely out of context. There is nothing wrong with Flannery's comment.  We see the inability for run-off to fill dams to sustain farming in most of the central region of Australia due to the climate in that region. Climate change is predicting some parts of our current farmland will become like that. (ie not enough run-off to fill dams). The key thing is, its not now, its in the future. How can he be "proved wrong" when his prediction date hasnt arrived yet ? Denier logic is not logic at all. Its lies built on lies.

Dams in the central region of Australia!!!

What are the names of these dams in the central regions of Australia?

As for the climate “in that region” (desert) you may have missed it but the flooding rains a few years back, filled Lake Eyre, a few times.

And it’s raining there now, inches and inches of rain.

8-)

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:24am:

____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:16am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:53am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:48am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:39am: Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? What, rain? In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect? So anthropomorphic caused climate change will increase rainfall and reduce droughts and the need for drought assistance? Excellent, here's me thinking it was bad thing Where did you hear that from … hard right shock jock? From you, ya dill, you said it  ;D If the world is wetter, it will, by virtue of that wettness will be less droughty; you do realise that a wetter world means it is less dry and less droughty, don't you? Or does wetter mean something else where you come from. Unfortunately your trying to add one and one, you came to the wrong total. Playing dumb really suits you and your posts. Just admit you are a moron and we can all have a good laugh at your massive bugger up and move on. Or are you going to just ignore what you posted and pretend you didn't actually write that little nugget of stupidity?  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D

As has been said many times, a hotter and wetter world will increase the extremes at both ends. I understand your ignorance considering your refutal of the science behind AGW.

I understand that by trying to trivalize this major threat is the only tool the denialists have and this is done for political reasons … to avoid logical discussion … since the denialists are void of logical points on topic. And a rational debate on how Australia should prepare for AGW effects is the fear of the deniars since this would include the reduction in the use of fossil fuels.

And we all know the biggest backers of AGW denialism is the fossil fuel sector.


I hope you are being paid well  … or are you one of the mugs the fossil fuel sector are using?

Swagman wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:30am:

Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen?

About the fraudulent global warming industry.

How do this vermin explain the terrible icy conditions in the US at present?

Some scientists are more afraid of the return of the ice age which wold be far more deadly.

Seems some people, especially sham scientists have little to do but open their mouths.

____ wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:40am:

I understand that by trying to trivalize this major threat

Your OP trivializes it more than anything else written here.... ::)

olde.sault wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:41am:

Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? About the fraudulent global warming industry. How do this vermin explain the terrible icy conditions in the US at present? Some scientists are more afraid of the return of the ice age which wold be far more deadly. Seems some people, especially sham scientists have little to do but open their mouths.

... and wallets in the hopes of getting grants from gullible left-wing governments.

FriYAY wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:35am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:18am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:13am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:07am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:03am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong? Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool. You do realise that when someone does not use direct quotes, they are allowed to paraphrase what was said; so arguing the it was not a direct quote, when it was very obviously not one, is a bit (a lot) foolish, don't you think? The statement was not a direct quote, don't carry on like a loon and pretend it was. Like all deniers, he paraphrased enough to take it completely out of context. There is nothing wrong with Flannery's comment.  We see the inability for run-off to fill dams to sustain farming in most of the central region of Australia due to the climate in that region. Climate change is predicting some parts of our current farmland will become like that. (ie not enough run-off to fill dams). The key thing is, its not now, its in the future. How can he be "proved wrong" when his prediction date hasnt arrived yet ? Denier logic is not logic at all. Its lies built on lies. Dams in the central region of Australia!!! What are the names of these dams in the central regions of Australia? As for the climate “in that region” (desert) you may have missed it but the flooding rains a few years back, filled Lake Eyre, a few times. And it’s raining there now, inches and inches of rain. 8-)

Am I dealing with a moron here ?

Is farming sustainable in central Australia ?

Heard of the Goyder's line ?

olde.sault wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:41am:

Seems some people, especially sham scientists have little to do but open their mouths.

Couldnt agree more. Those denier scientists, usually at the end of a ordinary career in science, cashing in on oil dollars. 

Shame, denier scientists, shame.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:48am:

FriYAY wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:35am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:18am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:13am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:07am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:03am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong? Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool. You do realise that when someone does not use direct quotes, they are allowed to paraphrase what was said; so arguing the it was not a direct quote, when it was very obviously not one, is a bit (a lot) foolish, don't you think? The statement was not a direct quote, don't carry on like a loon and pretend it was. Like all deniers, he paraphrased enough to take it completely out of context. There is nothing wrong with Flannery's comment.  We see the inability for run-off to fill dams to sustain farming in most of the central region of Australia due to the climate in that region. Climate change is predicting some parts of our current farmland will become like that. (ie not enough run-off to fill dams). The key thing is, its not now, its in the future. How can he be "proved wrong" when his prediction date hasnt arrived yet ? Denier logic is not logic at all. Its lies built on lies. Dams in the central region of Australia!!! What are the names of these dams in the central regions of Australia? As for the climate “in that region” (desert) you may have missed it but the flooding rains a few years back, filled Lake Eyre, a few times. And it’s raining there now, inches and inches of rain. 8-) Am I dealing with a moron here ? Is farming sustainable in central Australia ? Heard of the Goyder's line ?

Go ask the Israeli's. They turned arid desert into very productive land - something the Palestinians failed to do for hundreds of years.

____ wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:40am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:24am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:16am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:53am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:48am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:39am: Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? What, rain? In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect? So anthropomorphic caused climate change will increase rainfall and reduce droughts and the need for drought assistance? Excellent, here's me thinking it was bad thing Where did you hear that from … hard right shock jock? From you, ya dill, you said it  ;D If the world is wetter, it will, by virtue of that wettness will be less droughty; you do realise that a wetter world means it is less dry and less droughty, don't you? Or does wetter mean something else where you come from. Unfortunately your trying to add one and one, you came to the wrong total. Playing dumb really suits you and your posts. Just admit you are a moron and we can all have a good laugh at your massive bugger up and move on. Or are you going to just ignore what you posted and pretend you didn't actually write that little nugget of stupidity?  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D As has been said many times, a hotter and wetter world will increase the extremes at both ends. I understand your ignorance considering your refutal of the science behind AGW. I understand that by trying to trivalize this major threat is the only tool the denialists have and this is done for political reasons … to avoid logical discussion … since the denialists are void of logical points on topic. And a rational debate on how Australia should prepare for AGW effects is the fear of the deniars since this would include the reduction in the use of fossil fuels. And we all know the biggest backers of AGW denialism is the fossil fuel sector. I hope you are being paid well  … or are you one of the mugs the fossil fuel sector are using?

I haven't denied anything, so you can retract that accusation if you want, because it is a smacking lie


I have however pointed out that a wetter world would be less droughty and that can only be a good thing. a tropical paradise if you will. Since I live in the tropics, I can tell you it is pretty good.


You fvked up (yet again), you only have to regurgiate what the greens party tells you to say, so try to 'keep on message' in future.  ;D


The message is droughts, so not wetter but dryer.

olde.sault wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:41am:

Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? About the fraudulent global warming industry. How do this vermin explain the terrible icy conditions in the US at present? Some scientists are more afraid of the return of the ice age which wold be far more deadly. Seems some people, especially sham scientists have little to do but open their mouths.

The warming at the north pole decreases the differenctial in air temps and so the cold air at the pole travels further south.

FriYAY wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:44am:

____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:40am: I understand that by trying to trivalize this major threat Your OP trivializes it more than anything else written here.... ::)

It trivalises conservatives who are reacting to the effects of AGW by trying to pretend the world hasn't changed because of AGW.

Rather than patch … areas of Australia that are/will not be suitable for agriculture in the next few decades should not be subsidised.


They should be redirected into activities that are better suited for the new conditions.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:51am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:48am: FriYAY wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:35am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:18am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:13am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:07am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:03am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong? Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool. You do realise that when someone does not use direct quotes, they are allowed to paraphrase what was said; so arguing the it was not a direct quote, when it was very obviously not one, is a bit (a lot) foolish, don't you think? The statement was not a direct quote, don't carry on like a loon and pretend it was. Like all deniers, he paraphrased enough to take it completely out of context. There is nothing wrong with Flannery's comment.  We see the inability for run-off to fill dams to sustain farming in most of the central region of Australia due to the climate in that region. Climate change is predicting some parts of our current farmland will become like that. (ie not enough run-off to fill dams). The key thing is, its not now, its in the future. How can he be "proved wrong" when his prediction date hasnt arrived yet ? Denier logic is not logic at all. Its lies built on lies. Dams in the central region of Australia!!! What are the names of these dams in the central regions of Australia? As for the climate “in that region” (desert) you may have missed it but the flooding rains a few years back, filled Lake Eyre, a few times. And it’s raining there now, inches and inches of rain. 8-) Am I dealing with a moron here ? Is farming sustainable in central Australia ? Heard of the Goyder's line ? Go ask the Israeli's. They turned arid desert into very productive land - something the Palestinians failed to do for hundreds of years.

JERUSALEM, February 13, 2014 (WAFA) – The Israeli human rights group, B’Tselem, said Wednesday that Israel does discriminate in water allocation between Palestinians and Israelis and that Palestinians get much less water than Israelis.

B’Tselem was responding to allegations by Israeli officials that there was no discrimination in water allocations as claimed by the president of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz, during a speech he made at the Israeli parliament, the Knesset.


Israelis interrupted Schulz and walked out of the building when he said Palestinians get much less water than Israelis.

http://english.wafa.ps/index.php?action=detail&id=24335

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:42am:

____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:39am: Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? What, rain? In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect? So anthropomorphic caused climate change will increase rainfall and reduce droughts and the need for drought assistance? Excellent, here's me thinking it was bad thing

anthropomorphic. PMSL. I think you mean anthropogenic?

On your question, what is likely to happen is more variability. You can deny or accept anthropogenic causes, but that's not important for my point. What is important is risk mitigation.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:52am:

Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!!

Citation needed.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:48am:

FriYAY wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:35am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:18am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:13am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:07am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:03am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong? Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool. You do realise that when someone does not use direct quotes, they are allowed to paraphrase what was said; so arguing the it was not a direct quote, when it was very obviously not one, is a bit (a lot) foolish, don't you think? The statement was not a direct quote, don't carry on like a loon and pretend it was. Like all deniers, he paraphrased enough to take it completely out of context. There is nothing wrong with Flannery's comment.  We see the inability for run-off to fill dams to sustain farming in most of the central region of Australia due to the climate in that region. Climate change is predicting some parts of our current farmland will become like that. (ie not enough run-off to fill dams). The key thing is, its not now, its in the future. How can he be "proved wrong" when his prediction date hasnt arrived yet ? Denier logic is not logic at all. Its lies built on lies. Dams in the central region of Australia!!! What are the names of these dams in the central regions of Australia? As for the climate “in that region” (desert) you may have missed it but the flooding rains a few years back, filled Lake Eyre, a few times. And it’s raining there now, inches and inches of rain. 8-) Am I dealing with a moron here ? Is farming sustainable in central Australia ? Heard of the Goyder's line ?

;D

Well your dealing with your self so I’d say yep.

Yes, yes we went through the Goyder line the other day.

You change tack so fast you should be skippering in the America’s Cup!!

::)

Bam wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 10:08am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! Citation needed.

Provided...

Bam wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 10:05am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:39am: Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? What, rain? In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect? So anthropomorphic caused climate change will increase rainfall and reduce droughts and the need for drought assistance? Excellent, here's me thinking it was bad thing anthropomorphic. PMSL. I think you mean anthropogenic? On your question, what is likely to happen is more variability. You can deny or accept anthropogenic causes, but that's not important for my point. What is important is risk mitigation.

My bad  :-[


And my question was retorical.


If anthropogenc climate change , now makes for a wetter Australia, according to greens, then no biggie, unless of course his statement is total horse sh1t. Im betting on the later.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:55am:

____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:40am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:24am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:16am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:53am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:48am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:39am: Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? What, rain? In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect? So anthropomorphic caused climate change will increase rainfall and reduce droughts and the need for drought assistance? Excellent, here's me thinking it was bad thing Where did you hear that from … hard right shock jock? From you, ya dill, you said it  ;D If the world is wetter, it will, by virtue of that wettness will be less droughty; you do realise that a wetter world means it is less dry and less droughty, don't you? Or does wetter mean something else where you come from. Unfortunately your trying to add one and one, you came to the wrong total. Playing dumb really suits you and your posts. Just admit you are a moron and we can all have a good laugh at your massive bugger up and move on. Or are you going to just ignore what you posted and pretend you didn't actually write that little nugget of stupidity?  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D As has been said many times, a hotter and wetter world will increase the extremes at both ends. I understand your ignorance considering your refutal of the science behind AGW. I understand that by trying to trivalize this major threat is the only tool the denialists have and this is done for political reasons … to avoid logical discussion … since the denialists are void of logical points on topic. And a rational debate on how Australia should prepare for AGW effects is the fear of the deniars since this would include the reduction in the use of fossil fuels. And we all know the biggest backers of AGW denialism is the fossil fuel sector. I hope you are being paid well  … or are you one of the mugs the fossil fuel sector are using? I haven't denied anything, so you can retract that accusation if you want, because it is a smacking lie I have however pointed out that a wetter world would be less droughty and that can only be a good thing. a tropical paradise if you will. Since I live in the tropics, I can tell you it is pretty good. You fvked up (yet again), you only have to regurgiate what the greens party tells you to say, so try to 'keep on message' in future.  ;D The message is droughts, so not wetter but dryer.

Quote:

From you, ya dill, you said it  Grin If the world is wetter, it will, by virtue of that wettness will be less droughty; you do realise that a wetter world means it is less dry and less droughty, don't you? Or does wetter mean something else where you come from.

Your previous quote on this thread … now you are contradicting yourself. You first said I said it … now you are telling the truth finally.

Also a hotter world … with every degree increase in global temps, the rain clouds rise apx 150 meters and so are /will decrease rainfall to higher regions in  Qld.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:09am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:07am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:03am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong? Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool. Yeah, you just got owned!  :D :D ;D ;D

We will wait and see if the forecast rain does indeed prove this example wrong. Until then, it's too early to say.

It doesn't invalidate the proposition that the average rainfall figures in some regions may be significantly lower in the future. Melbourne's average rainfall in the past 20 years (1994-2013) is 10% less than the long-term average for all years (580mm vs 649.4mm) and this includes 13 years in a row where the average rainfall was below the long-term average (1997-2009). Melbourne's dams were last full in about 1996.

You can grasp at straws to deny the possibility of climate change (from any cause) all you like, but a smart person would hedge against the risk. I wouldn't mind seeing some sort of water grid being implemented, where more dams were connected by a network of pipelines. This is still worth considering regardless of climate change because droughts and floods do occur. The answer isn't more dams, the answer is smarter dams.

____ wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 10:20am:

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:55am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:40am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:24am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:16am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:53am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:48am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:39am: Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? What, rain? In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect? So anthropomorphic caused climate change will increase rainfall and reduce droughts and the need for drought assistance? Excellent, here's me thinking it was bad thing Where did you hear that from … hard right shock jock? From you, ya dill, you said it  ;D If the world is wetter, it will, by virtue of that wettness will be less droughty; you do realise that a wetter world means it is less dry and less droughty, don't you? Or does wetter mean something else where you come from. Unfortunately your trying to add one and one, you came to the wrong total. Playing dumb really suits you and your posts. Just admit you are a moron and we can all have a good laugh at your massive bugger up and move on. Or are you going to just ignore what you posted and pretend you didn't actually write that little nugget of stupidity?  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D As has been said many times, a hotter and wetter world will increase the extremes at both ends. I understand your ignorance considering your refutal of the science behind AGW. I understand that by trying to trivalize this major threat is the only tool the denialists have and this is done for political reasons … to avoid logical discussion … since the denialists are void of logical points on topic. And a rational debate on how Australia should prepare for AGW effects is the fear of the deniars since this would include the reduction in the use of fossil fuels. And we all know the biggest backers of AGW denialism is the fossil fuel sector. I hope you are being paid well  … or are you one of the mugs the fossil fuel sector are using? I haven't denied anything, so you can retract that accusation if you want, because it is a smacking lie I have however pointed out that a wetter world would be less droughty and that can only be a good thing. a tropical paradise if you will. Since I live in the tropics, I can tell you it is pretty good. You fvked up (yet again), you only have to regurgiate what the greens party tells you to say, so try to 'keep on message' in future.  ;D The message is droughts, so not wetter but dryer. Quote: From you, ya dill, you said it  Grin If the world is wetter, it will, by virtue of that wettness will be less droughty; you do realise that a wetter world means it is less dry and less droughty, don't you? Or does wetter mean something else where you come from. Your previous quote on this thread … now you are contradicting yourself. You first said I said it … now you are telling the truth finally. Also a hotter world … with every degree increase in global temps, the rain clouds rise apx 150 meters and so are /will decrease rainfall to higher regions in  Qld.

You know your initial statement is still attached to this thread don't you?

The rest of your post is a little more deranged that usual so Im might just not even try to work out what the bugger you are trying to say.

FriYAY wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 10:10am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:48am: FriYAY wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:35am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:18am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:13am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:07am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:03am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong? Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool. You do realise that when someone does not use direct quotes, they are allowed to paraphrase what was said; so arguing the it was not a direct quote, when it was very obviously not one, is a bit (a lot) foolish, don't you think? The statement was not a direct quote, don't carry on like a loon and pretend it was. Like all deniers, he paraphrased enough to take it completely out of context. There is nothing wrong with Flannery's comment.  We see the inability for run-off to fill dams to sustain farming in most of the central region of Australia due to the climate in that region. Climate change is predicting some parts of our current farmland will become like that. (ie not enough run-off to fill dams). The key thing is, its not now, its in the future. How can he be "proved wrong" when his prediction date hasnt arrived yet ? Denier logic is not logic at all. Its lies built on lies. Dams in the central region of Australia!!! What are the names of these dams in the central regions of Australia? As for the climate “in that region” (desert) you may have missed it but the flooding rains a few years back, filled Lake Eyre, a few times. And it’s raining there now, inches and inches of rain. 8-) Am I dealing with a moron here ? Is farming sustainable in central Australia ? Heard of the Goyder's line ? ;D Well your dealing with your self so I’d say yep. Yes, yes we went through the Goyder line the other day. You change tack so fast you should be skippering in the America’s Cup!! ::)

providing evidence for my consistant viewpoint is not changing tack. 

But I can understand if you are getting overwhelmed with information. Most deniers are, and so revert to faith based beliefs.  Quite common I believe.

BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 10:49am:

____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 10:20am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:55am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:40am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:24am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:16am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:53am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:48am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:42am: ____ wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:39am: Swagman wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:30am: Well well positive climate change.....who would have thought that could happen? What, rain? In a hotter, wetter world due to human activity, what did you expect? So anthropomorphic caused climate change will increase rainfall and reduce droughts and the need for drought assistance? Excellent, here's me thinking it was bad thing Where did you hear that from … hard right shock jock? From you, ya dill, you said it  ;D If the world is wetter, it will, by virtue of that wettness will be less droughty; you do realise that a wetter world means it is less dry and less droughty, don't you? Or does wetter mean something else where you come from. Unfortunately your trying to add one and one, you came to the wrong total. Playing dumb really suits you and your posts. Just admit you are a moron and we can all have a good laugh at your massive bugger up and move on. Or are you going to just ignore what you posted and pretend you didn't actually write that little nugget of stupidity?  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D As has been said many times, a hotter and wetter world will increase the extremes at both ends. I understand your ignorance considering your refutal of the science behind AGW. I understand that by trying to trivalize this major threat is the only tool the denialists have and this is done for political reasons … to avoid logical discussion … since the denialists are void of logical points on topic. And a rational debate on how Australia should prepare for AGW effects is the fear of the deniars since this would include the reduction in the use of fossil fuels. And we all know the biggest backers of AGW denialism is the fossil fuel sector. I hope you are being paid well  … or are you one of the mugs the fossil fuel sector are using? I haven't denied anything, so you can retract that accusation if you want, because it is a smacking lie I have however pointed out that a wetter world would be less droughty and that can only be a good thing. a tropical paradise if you will. Since I live in the tropics, I can tell you it is pretty good. You fvked up (yet again), you only have to regurgiate what the greens party tells you to say, so try to 'keep on message' in future.  ;D The message is droughts, so not wetter but dryer. Quote: From you, ya dill, you said it  Grin If the world is wetter, it will, by virtue of that wettness will be less droughty; you do realise that a wetter world means it is less dry and less droughty, don't you? Or does wetter mean something else where you come from. Your previous quote on this thread … now you are contradicting yourself. You first said I said it … now you are telling the truth finally. Also a hotter world … with every degree increase in global temps, the rain clouds rise apx 150 meters and so are /will decrease rainfall to higher regions in  Qld. You know your initial statement is still attached to this thread don't you? The rest of your post is a little more deranged that usual so Im might just not even try to work out what the bugger you are trying to say.

I was/am pointing out your error via two conflicting posts of yours.

You proved yourself as illogical.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 11:02am:

providing evidence for my consistant viewpoint is not changing tack.

We see the inability for run-off to fill dams to sustain farming in most of the central region of Australia due to the climate in that region.

What dams?

The dams in the MDB contain, at the moment, about 11,000 billion liters, those dams?

The ones getting a nice top up now, due to the rain, those dams?

The ones that filled up about 3 years ago?

Those dams?

To Silly ol' bugger:

AGM will not create a wetter Australia.

It will increase the extremes: that means for flood prone areas there will be more floods, but for drought prone areas, there will be more droughts.

The net effect will almost certainly be a dryer Australia - since far more of the continent is drought prone.

bump

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:22am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:18am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:13am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:07am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:03am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong? Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool. You do realise that when someone does not use direct quotes, they are allowed to paraphrase what was said; so arguing the it was not a direct quote, when it was very obviously not one, is a bit (a lot) foolish, don't you think? The statement was not a direct quote, don't carry on like a loon and pretend it was. Like all deniers, he paraphrased enough to take it completely out of context. There is nothing wrong with Flannery's comment.  We see the inability for run-off to fill dams to sustain farming in most of the central region of Australia due to the climate in that region. Climate change is predicting some parts of our current farmland will become like that. (ie not enough run-off to fill dams). The key thing is, its not now, its in the future. How can he be "proved wrong" when his prediction date hasnt arrived yet ? Denier logic is not logic at all. Its lies built on lies. You're in denial!!!  ;D ;D ;D

Flannery is talking about future perdictions based on current trends , not todays rain ... Moron

To say he is wrong because last months rain filled the damsn shows just what a demented moron you are.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 11:29am:

To Silly ol' bugger: AGM will not create a wetter Australia. It will increase the extremes: that means for flood prone areas there will be more floods, but for drought prone areas, there will be more droughts. The net effect will almost certainly be a dryer Australia - since far more of the continent is drought prone.

You do realise many of these areas are one and the same....don't you?

I'm confused, Nth West Vic will have more droughts...but more floods?

Soooooo, what about the rains that cause the more floods?  Are they just going to fall in the catchment areas?

Tony Abbott gave South Australia 15mm of good rain yesterday, today we are receiving up to 50mm.

Thank god the adults are in charge!

In the next coming months South Australia will having a state election thank god. It is time we rid ourselves of the last 10 years of labor financial drought. 

De-registered User wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 11:40am:

Tony Abbott gave South Australia 15mm of good rain yesterday, today we are receiving up to 50mm. Thank god the adults are in charge! In the next coming months South Australia will having a state election thank god. It is time we rid ourselves of the last 10 years of labor financial drought.

;) ;)Tony has arranged for us to get around 10mm this afternoon.   ;) ;)

Hotter temperatures cause more evaporation which leads to greater percipitation.....Cause and affect gentlemen!!!

::) ::) ::)

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 11:44am:

Hotter temperatures cause more evaporation which leads to greater percipitation.....Cause and affect gentlemen!!! ::) ::) ::)

;) ;) Great more heat less drought!

Its not one or the other Friyay. You can have flooding in the middle of a drought - and not necessarily have the drought broken. The point is extreme weather events will increase - both droughts where droughts occur and major storm/cyclone events where major storm/cyclone events occur. What areas each of these effects obviously depends on where these extreme events occur.

What Flannery said was not that rain would lessen—he said warm soil and stressed plants would reduce run off. AGW will make the south drier and the north much wetter and that is happening, extreme events notwithstanding—like the 60mm rain here since yesterday morning. This summers record heat was due to AGW according to the BuMet.

The debate about AGW is over—it is real and it here now.

St George of the Garden wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 1:55pm:

What Flannery said was not that rain would lessen—he said warm soil and stressed plants would reduce run off.

Yes, and then it rained, and the run off was plentiful and the dams filled.

Dartmouth is still at a massive 91% or 3,400,000,000,000 Lts

Eildon is still at a massive 78% or 2,500,000,000,000 Lts

;)

And SA is drying up, todays and yesterdays rain notwithstanding. And Flannery was talking about some time in the future, as AGW continues.

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 11:44am:

Hotter temperatures cause more evaporation which leads to greater percipitation.....Cause and affect gentlemen!!! ::) ::) ::)

Not necessarily. Hotter temperatures in the eastern Pacific Ocean cause El Niño conditions (droughts in eastern Australia).

De-registered User wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 11:40am:

Tony Abbott gave South Australia 15mm of good rain yesterday, today we are receiving up to 50mm.

What have you been smoking?

FriYAY wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 11:37am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 11:29am: To Silly ol' bugger: AGM will not create a wetter Australia. It will increase the extremes: that means for flood prone areas there will be more floods, but for drought prone areas, there will be more droughts. The net effect will almost certainly be a dryer Australia - since far more of the continent is drought prone. You do realise many of these areas are one and the same....don't you?

I agree here.

Also, drought and floods are weather, not climate. Climate only predicts how often these extremes may occur.

John Smith wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 11:37am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:22am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:18am: BigOl64 wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:13am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:07am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 9:03am: Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:58am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 14th, 2014 at 8:52am: Didn't that fraud Flannery say it would never rain again enough to fill the dams? HAHAHAHA!!! No, Australian of the Year and eminent scientist Dr Flannery did not say that. Want to take that back before I prove you wrong? Flannery never said, it would "never rain again enough to fill dams" from this point on, you blithering fool. You do realise that when someone does not use direct quotes, they are allowed to paraphrase what was said; so arguing the it was not a direct quote, when it was very obviously not one, is a bit (a lot) foolish, don't you think? The statement was not a direct quote, don't carry on like a loon and pretend it was. Like all deniers, he paraphrased enough to take it completely out of context. There is nothing wrong with Flannery's comment.  We see the inability for run-off to fill dams to sustain farming in most of the central region of Australia due to the climate in that region. Climate change is predicting some parts of our current farmland will become like that. (ie not enough run-off to fill dams). The key thing is, its not now, its in the future. How can he be "proved wrong" when his prediction date hasnt arrived yet ? Denier logic is not logic at all. Its lies built on lies. You're in denial!!!  ;D ;D ;D Flannery is talking about future perdictions based on current trends , not todays rain ... Moron To say he is wrong because last months rain filled the damsn shows just what a demented moron you are.

Your comprehension skills are appalling, either that or you're just plain stupid. Again for the dummies...

PROFESSOR TIM FLANNERY: We're already seeing the initial impacts and they include a decline in the winter rainfall zone across southern Australia, which is clearly an impact of climate change, but also a decrease in run-off. Although we're getting say a 20 per cent decrease in rainfall in some areas of Australia, that's translating to a 60 per cent decrease in the run-off into the dams and rivers. That's because the soil is warmer because of global warming and the plants are under more stress and therefore using more moisture. So even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and our river systems, and that's a real worry for the people in the bush. If that trend continues then I think we're going to have serious problems, particularly for irrigation.

St George of the Garden wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 4:31pm:

And SA is drying up, todays and yesterdays rain notwithstanding. And Flannery was talking about some time in the future, as AGW continues.

What a crock of shyte. Dams are looking great even before this rain. SA has always been dry during the summer months.

f u t u r e