Here is the same graph only this time the link is from your BOM website Sunfish.
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/silo/r...timeseries.cgi
The graph is the same one that I linked to (and the preamble in my link said it was from the Australian Bureau Of Met) and shows the same thing. It does NOT support your contention that
down here in Victoria we have had ten years of below average rainfall
The thing I like about that site I posted the link to is that he doesn't post his own unsupported opinion...he posts the data from scientific bodies all around the world...and then disects it.
Here is another link from the BOM website...it shows the same information as was shown on that video...an increase of less than 1 degree over 100 hrs.
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/silo/r...timeseries.cgi
The the scientists on that video were
NOT saying global warming is not a reality they were saying that CO2 put into the atmosphere by modern life is not the cause.
Here is an interesting link written by an oceanographer who has been at it for 60+ years.
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...les/ocean.html
Ice cores anyone?
http://mclean.ch/climate/Eye_opening.htm
And my favorite climate computer modelling. That is where all the GW doomsayer BS comes from...they feed what they believe is happening into a computer as the one true answer and then **** with the parameters, most of which are a mystery, and then wonder why it doesn't work that way in the real world.
http://mclean.ch/climate/models.htm
My favorite quote from that article
"On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but - which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we'd like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that we need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public's imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This 'double ethical bind' we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both." [my emphasis added]
NASA tells us now the hole in the Ozone layer is closing and will be gone in about 60 years...are we expected to believe that the miniscule population/square KM that exists in the southern hemisphere caused that
HUGE reversal in a mere
10 odd years by cutting back a bit on CFCs when the huge population in the northern hemisphere was not able to cause a similar hole at the north pole in the first place?
I don't.
