The Ouranos group has published a study on the impacts of global warming climate and the adaptations necessary for Quebec.
The study is here: Adapting to climate change
Without commenting here this study to several places, it tells us about heat waves more frequent and intense . This is presented as a fact, an undeniable truth:
In particular, higher temperatures associated with high humidity and heat waves more frequent and intense represent significant risks for human health. You tell me all: yes, it is warmer than before, obviously ...
Well, far from sure of that, I did a little exercise to verify this assertion.
Here are my assumptions:
- If we are in the midst of global warming. So there should be more than higher temperatures, more heat waves, we should be able to see it now and not in a hypothetical future.
- Impacts global warming can only be local. This means that whatever the overall figure for the average temperature of the planet, what matters to measure impact at a location is the temperature of the place.
I took place as the Montreal airport. Why this one? For 3 reasons:
- This measure represents well the temperature of Montreal. Although at the center of town, it is certainly a warmer (and warmer and warmer over the years because of city blocks), it is nevertheless a good indicator of temperature.
- This weather station is class A. Ie it is considered by Environment Canada as being very reliable.
- This station statistics since 1942, providing a time period interesting.
data are available on Environment Canada (in a format difficult to swallow).
The first graph would answer the question: what is more hot?
It to say he is trying to demonstrate what we hear regularly: the temperatures are more extreme.
The graph therefore shows the highest temperature of each summer from 1942 to now (for Montreal):
Can we talk about rising extreme temperatures?
Certainly not ....
Notice here the maximum of all time for Montreal (time being defined here as having as early 1942 ... obviously): 37.6 C in August 1975.
The other chart is more suggestive. What he tries to answer is: is there more heat waves? The concept of a heat wave is suggestive. But just to take an example that everyone can understand without talking about standard deviation, I set a very hot day as a day above 30C Celsius.
Why 30? Because it is the psychological threshold here in Montreal where they are considered hot. There are on average 10 days per year above 30C in Montreal, but the standard deviation (Since we talk about it) is very large (This mean for example that years ago with no days above 30 and some with more than 20 days ...)
So, in Montreal, we have more days of extreme heat?
Again, no!
And note that the summer of 1955, for those who were there is a maximum hard to beat ...
This allows us to contradict Uranus (and all other activist groups.). No, Montreal, there is no heat waves more frequent and more intense!
So all the consequences that you list in your report, based on this assumption is false and totally hypothetical.
Any computer model that you put forward to justify your claims must also explain why no increase is visible now but will be eventually. Otherwise, this model has no more credibility than the daily horoscope ...
What is most distressing in all this is to see how this pseudo-science climate is crap. Any individual is capable, in a few hours to show that what these people say is based on false premises. Yet this kind of report is used to build the future of our society.
What kind of world do you build for the future if it is not based on fact?
Utopia ?....
Francois.
0 comments:
Post a Comment