Unloved? Backed up? Toey as a Roman sandal? Find yourself staring wistfully at the lady in the Brand Power commercial?

Stuffed: This poor polar bear has been too busy reading the Garnaut Report to realise Paris Hilton is cracking onto it.

Believe it or not, it could be because of climate change. And not just because you will never pick up while driving a Prius - and even if you did, it’s the only car on the market which you can’t hear yourself having sex in.

Beyond the question of cars there’s an emerging, inconvenient truth that the subliminated angst we’re all feeling about the warming of the planet is undermining our preparedness to commit, or even engage with the opposite sex.

OK so if you’ve made the arduous journey all the way to this fourth paragraph there’s probably a chance that you believed there would be some vaguely credible link between global warming and sexual behaviour, when it is of course, utter crap.

But as the dust settles on yesterday’s dust storm - when so many non-scientist pundits summoned their inner Al Gore in trying to explain the not entirely inexplicable - it’s worth asking whether the Boy Who Cried Climate Change phenomenon risks compromising the plausibility of what is unarguably the most important scientific challenge of our times.

I am not a scientist and as such I am prepared to be swayed by the majority scientific opinion that the planet is indeed warming up and that if we don’t all agree to do something we could quite literally end up in hot water.

But just as hairy-chested climate change sceptics give me the pip, so too do those who blindly (and even tastelessly) attribute any apparent blip in the weather to climate change, and use it as a device to bully or hector anyone who dares to disagree.

The most perverse example of this, of course, was while the Victorian bushfires were still actually burning, and the likes of Bob Brown almost fell over in their rush to get to the fax machine and declare that there would be more fires, and worse fires, if we didn’t act now to save the planet.

That was tasteless but much of what we heard yesterday was just stupid.
 
The first point I’d make about the dust storm - coming as I do from Adelaide where they happen a few times a year - is to borrow from that eminent scientist Chopper Read and suggest simply that Sydney should harden the f… up.

A mate sent me an interesting link to a weather site recounting “the great “dust-up” of 1902. It stated: “The year 1902 was one of appalling drought in eastern Australia. Whenever strong winds blew, dessicated soil was whipped into great dust clouds. On the worst day, Wednesday 12 November, northwesterly gales caused exceptional dust-storms to sweep across three states.”

This, and other comparable storms since 1902, shows pretty convincingly that the word “unprecedented” was used a little too often yesterday.

One other factor that jars with the definitive climate change purists is the fact that much of the dust we breathed in yesterday was actually topsoil that had been washed down south by our rivers in what has been a wetter winter than we’ve recently experienced.

A lot of scientists said a lot of interesting things yesterday and to a man, and woman, had their comments turned into 30-second soundbites. In the spirit of letting you see one of the more interesting comments in full I’ll leave you with this unedited analysis from Dr Chris Strong. It’s neither a pro climate change or anti climate change bit of analysis. It just shows that there’s a number of issues at play here that should be considered before we descend into an orgy of dirt-coloured foaming at the mouth.

(Dr Strong has nothing to say on the sex question, but he is the northern coordinator of DustWatch based at Griffith University, Queensland. DustWatch is a community-based project set up to monitor the extent and severity of wind erosion across Australia.)
 

“What’s interesting about this event is that we’ve got a combination of factors which have been building for 10 months already. Floods, droughts and strong winds. Early on in the year a large flood transported sediment down the Diamantina River and deposited into Lake Eyre region.  Big floods bring fresh sediment which is deposited, eventually dries out, and then becomes available for wind erosion.

Combine this new source of available sediment with the passage of cold fronts (and their associated troughs), there is the mechanism for dust movement. Cold fronts commonly occur around this time of year and move across the country, passing over the Lake Eyre region and the Channel Country. Add to these factors the prevailing drought conditions that reduce the vegetation cover and the soil surface is at its most vulnerable to wind erosion.

Because of these circumstances this area is quite rich and quite ripe for wind erosion. Even last weekend there was an event in which the pre-frontal northerly winds picked up the sediment and transported it across the South Australian coastline across the ocean and off to New Zealand. This weekend we’ve had two very close events within 24 hours both picking sediment up from that region.  The approach of a cold front brings different winds directions.  Before the front actually hits an area, pre-frontal northerly winds prevail, so that’s usually associated with the hot, dry winds coming from the northerly direction.  This weekend dust from east of Lake Eyre was entrained and transported in a south easterly direction over Tibboburra and Canberra and off the coast. 

As the front moves in, winds change direction from a pre-frontal northerly to a westerly.  Now the westerly winds associated with this front were quite strong and vigorous and we actually produced a line of rolling dust storm, which are sometimes known as Bedouries or Haboob’s. Early on Tuesday morning this dust storm front was around 600 - 800km long.  So now we have a westerly wind which is picking up this dust material and moving it in a easterly direction. It is this material which has impacted Sydney.  The northern part of it is impacting western Queensland at the moment and will continue in an easterly direction.
 
Depending on how far north the dust front impacts there is the possibility of dust recirculation, in which once the dust is off shore it can sometimes be picked up on the south-east trade winds and then brought back across the northern coastline of Queensland. An event of this magnitude i would probably expect that we would see some sort of dust hazes along the eastern Queensland seaboard over the next couple of days.  Essentially that’s material that’s made it into the South Pacific ocean and then picked up and then moved up along the coastline again.
 
Wind erosion is common to the Australian continent; there is a fine mix between natural rates of wind erosion and accelerated erosion, and accelerated predominantly being removal of vegetation, whether that’s inappropriate land management or just bad luck land management with the prevailing wind conditions. In terms of the cycle of wind erosion, it does follow the el Nino/la Nina cycle.  So at the moment, this particular area is quite dry and exacerbated by the fact that we have a whole new load of new sediment down there ready for removal. So over the next couple of years, as this material has been deflated and removed, it will require more wind strength to remove what’s left.”

Don’t miss: Get The Punch in your inbox every day

27 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Old Clive says:

      03:43pm | 11/12/09

      What ARK cives did you dig this load of rubbish from, Malcolm has gone the planet has drifted aimlessly around the sun. and Rudd has caused more hot air polution by talking through his ***** AND FLYING AROUND THE GLOBE IN HIS 747, Wong has not yet worked out what she is, the Travesty Dam has been scrubbed, and Abbott has put the wind up Rudd and Combet has learnt how to subtract. Put this one to bed fellows. And I still haven’t learnt to spell.

    • lionel king says:

      06:45pm | 10/10/09

      CO2 is not a problem… see
      the web site
      nz climate science
      and the hundreds of links
      for example the USA senate minority report
      And why no balance in these talks
      This is bad for all that care for truthand or science
      Note: it is really stupid to blame all things on one sided
      debate by people with hidden agendas
      CO2 is not a problem… see
      the web site (and many others)
      nz climate science
      and the hundreds of links
      for example the USA senate minority report

    • Gerbil says:

      03:57pm | 28/09/09

      Lets play with the wikipedias account of Pascal’s Wager (or Pascal’s Gambit) “...is a suggestion posed by the French philosopher Blaise Pascal that even though the existence of AGW cannot be determined through reason, a person should wager as though AGW exists, because so living has everything to gain, and nothing to lose.”
      Nothing to lose… Hmmmm. That’s not quite right is it. The ETS is a punitive attack on our standard of living.
      While we are playing.. take a look at the various calamities attributed to Global Warming; http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm.

    • Gibbot says:

      08:14pm | 27/09/09

      @Penguin - fully agree. I might add that Pascal’s Wager hinged on defending a position for which there was (and remains) not one iota of proof.

      On one side of the climate change argument we have the bulk of scientific opinion and peer reviewed research. On the other we have industry mouthpieces, religious nutters and aging conservative op-ed columnists.

      I’m not a climate scientist, but I can read a form guide. I also know a lame horse when I see one. My money is on the science.

    • penguin says:

      06:40pm | 26/09/09

      Pallywood, there’s Pascal’s Wager and there’s The Precautionary Principle.
      But there’s also Risk Analysis, which every rational person does all the time.
      Do you have fire insurance on your house? I suspect you do. Do you expect your house to burn down in the coming year? I suspect you don’t.

      Mark B’s point (as analysed exhaustively by Stern and Garnaut) is that the cost of anthropogenic climate change, if it turns out to be true, far exceeds the cost of mitigation actions. So, like an insurance policy, the sensible thing is to take those actions, even if we are not certain that anthropogenic climate change is occurring.

    • Mark B says:

      01:01pm | 25/09/09

      That’s right Pallywood, we also used it to bomb tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians, which wasn’t quite what Pascal had in mind.

    • Pallywood says:

      12:43pm | 25/09/09

      “Either way, to do nothing is one hell of a big risk to take”

      Didn’t take long for someone to trot out Pascals Wager (AKA the Catch-All for theories that have no hard evidence in support).

    • Mark B says:

      12:19pm | 25/09/09

      The climate change sceptics may be right; the whole thing might be caused by solar flares or solar wind or something else we don’t even know exists. The planets systems may be self correcting and perfectly capable of managing the tons of pollutants we pour into the atmosphere and the oceans. The reduction in the size of the hole in the ozone layer may be coincidental to the global agreement to reduce the use of fluorocarbons. The melting of the Arctic ice cap and glaciers and ocean warming may have precedents, and may therefore be “natural”. Ocean life may be able to live with increased water acidity caused by CO2 absorption. But the climate sceptics may also be wrong, as it seems is conventional scientific wisdom. Either way, to do nothing is one hell of a big risk to take. If change is to occur, special interests will make their arguments for special consideration, and they will argue fiercely like my teenagers do; but in the end, we are going to need rules. There will be a bit of shouting and some tears, and life will go on.

    • Jugger says:

      10:46am | 25/09/09

      Wow, Margaret, you sound pretty jaded.  What could breed such hatred?

      For me it’s got nothing to do with delusion, or stupidity.  It comes down to one simple thing:  In this seemingly infinite universe, ours is the only planet we know of capable of supporting life, doesn’t it makes sense to look after something so rare?

    • Mark B says:

      05:05pm | 24/09/09

      Rooned and no bonking; we may as well end it now.

    • Margaret Gray says:

      04:49pm | 24/09/09

      “...ignorance has a certain dignity…”

      Unlike gullible stupidity, which stands proudly in a class all of its own.

      It starts with “global consensus” and “the science is settled” and works its way down from there.

      Happily the number of deluded individuals who believe the sky is falling is rapidly diminishing as the believers arguments weaken; witness the apocalyptic shrieking getting louder in the lead up to the LegoLand Conference and the “science” (read: hypothetical modelling) being usurped by pesky things like evidence.

    • Keith says:

      04:17pm | 24/09/09

      I’ve only got one word to say, we’ll all be rooned!  That said,  climate change sceptics, correct spelling, have a right to be ignorant. Knowledge only means complicity in guilt; ignorance has a certain dignity.

    • Mark B says:

      03:30pm | 24/09/09

      There are a few grumpy people commenting today. I suspect that’s because you have considered my students days as per above and you suspect, like me, that there’s a lot of bonking going on behind the climate change curtain. I suspect those students I hated are now the academics and politicians bonking around the world on the climate change gravy train. Every time I see Tim Flannery, Peter Garrett, Penny Wong, and Bob Brown I think “they’re not like me and David Penberthy, I wonder who they’re bonking tonight”. Us conservatives bottle these things up, worrying about fire, flood and tempest quietly, while they are out there shouting from the rooftops in New York, Washington, London and Copenhagen and, just like they were at Uni, partying. No wonder the climate change sceptics seem grumpy; no parties, no sex. I made a terrible mistake studying science.

    • Old Clive says:

      03:04pm | 24/09/09

      No it’s pathetic

    • COF says:

      12:54pm | 24/09/09

      Old Clive:“What’s going to happen next, a double dissolution and Malcolm as Prime Minister”
      Now that’s an unprecedented event. I assume yor’e referring to ‘75, Clive?

    • Mark B says:

      12:34pm | 24/09/09

      Once we had the Howard Haters, now we have Rudd Rage. Like the weather, it seems to be cyclical. I did graduate with a Science degree, and conducting lab experiments in the late 1970’s, I did often ponder what man was doing to the environment and why environmentalism wasn’t a conservative platform, rather than one expoused loudly and forcefully by the Arts students; the ones with long unkempt hair, the whiff of exotic tobacco about them, and surrounded by the best looking girls. Its seemed a paradox to me; the environmental issues and the girls. Those were the days when you could buy a bag of coal to burn in the open fire and Sydney was covered in black smog during the winter. The Sydney Harbour waters were black from the Harbour Bridge to Parramatta. We used to scuba dive at North Head, and if you didn’t wash the wet suit in Nappysan when you got home it would stink within two days. But Sydney never had bush fires for which Adelaide in particular was famous. The visible signs of pollution indicate we’ve progressed a great deal in Australia, but I still worry about the invisible, for which we have to rely on indicators such as arctic ice and glacial melting. I remain conservative, and I won’t be buying a beach front property any time soon.

    • lantana says:

      12:05pm | 24/09/09

      Of course climate change is responsible for a lack of sex.  It’s also responsible for us losing the Ashes, the performance (?) of the Wallabies and Kyle Sandilands.

      Some people believe that climate change also caused Al Gore, Bob Brown and the entire NSW government, but clearly they are just natural disasters.

      Anyway, the cure for global warming is very simple.  Give all the high priests and acolytes of anthropogenic climate change the power to control everything we do, plus the global budget they demand (doubling each year), and they will be happy.

      We’ll all be poor, miserable and jobless, but it’s good to know that one sector will be enjoying full employment and prosperity.

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      11:16am | 24/09/09

      The CDC has a solution to global warming but they won’t release it….

    • Helen says:

      10:38am | 24/09/09

      David you were just using sex to sell your story weren’t you?

    • stephen says:

      10:32am | 24/09/09

      Scientists should stick to Mathematics : they’re use of common language - as Dr. Srongs comment is - does not justify cause and effect.

    • RT says:

      10:24am | 24/09/09

      Were you talking to me, Old Clive? I don’t know whether I am a better mathemetician than you (or why that’s even relevant) however I think I might be able to spell better.

    • TB says:

      10:23am | 24/09/09

      It’s true, climate change kills sex.  Since my wife read Tim Flannery’s book she says lovingly across the pillow that she wouldn’t bring a child into the world to face a climate change catastrophe - which I guess is more original than not tonight dear I have a headache.  The problem for me and our unborn progeny is that she really means it!

    • Margaret Gray says:

      09:49am | 24/09/09

      “...Is climate change ruining our sex lives?...”

      Crikey, the climate huddlers on a certain ‘pay-for-clicks’ gossip site would be hard-pressed to answer that question.

      So keane are they to believe we are all going to die they have enforced a requisite climate celibacy regime replete with cilice.

      I think the positive take away here is that the believers won’t breed.

      After all, isn’t population control one of the hushed and unspoken ‘solutions’ the proselytes are warming to to reverse the imminent destruction of the planet?

    • Old Clive says:

      09:32am | 24/09/09

      They might stop polution of the atmosphere, but they wont stop climate change or polution of polotics, RD, climate change is part of nature, look up magnetic north on your computer, if you can work out the algerbraic equation your a better mathematician than I am.

    • RT says:

      08:32am | 24/09/09

      Interesting to read how we continually assist the NZ farmers by topdressing their fields with our windblown sediment. Isn’t it time they sent some of it back? Or perhaps donated a portion of their produce for free? All we seem to get is their migrants who want to come here to learn how to stop torturing vowels.

      I hope climate change won’t kill our sense of humour. On the other hand, Old Clive, your effort had me scratching my head. Our TV networks do need more comedy scriptwriters, but I wouldn’t wait expectantly by the phone if I were you.

    • Joel B1 says:

      08:31am | 24/09/09

      I bet Paris Hilton doesn’t worry about Climate Change. And I bet she gets more sex than I do.

    • Old Clive says:

      07:36am | 24/09/09

      Oh My God!!,do you mean to say it’s not the end of the world, do you mean to say that this phenomenom was not caused by carbon build up in the atmosphere, when I went to school or should that be scule, I learnt that the seasons are caused by the earth rotating on it’s axis in an orbit around the sun,  when I bought a boat and had a look at a marine chart I learnt that there is a difference between true north and magnetic north, and this is caused by a magnetic drift which is a continual effect, which in effect means that our climate is also subject to change by other factors than polution. Kevin 747 is not exactly God but to a lot of people he is clever enough to stop this magnetic drift and perhaps the continental drift as well and then he might be able to stop the drift into poverty that Hawke was going to do and didn’t. Oh My God what is going to happen next, a double dissolution and Malcolm as Prime Minister, he couldn’t be any worse than this showman

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

RT @matthewbedwell: @antsharwood i just lost it at the'bitter dissapointments' story. Epic . If only we all lived in such a blissfull bubbleworld!

ToryShepherd

RT @antsharwood: Meanwhile, a case from the glass half full files. Andrew Bolt has attacked me in a much nicer way than usual today http://t.co/mQqX6rOc

Anthony Sharwood

Meanwhile, a case from the glass half full files. Andrew Bolt has attacked me in a much nicer way than usual today http://t.co/mQqX6rOc

Anthony Sharwood

Trust you've all read Greens senator @larissawaters excellent yarn about the threats to the Reef on The Punch today http://t.co/i6aatFIO

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Reports of Ron Paul’s death are greatly exaggerated

Reports of Ron Paul’s death are greatly exaggerated

Reports of Ron Paul’s political demise have been greatly exaggerated and his tactical genius is…

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not…

Our Budget blade didn’t cut aid, it’s being paid in spades

Our Budget blade didn’t cut aid, it’s being paid in spades

Ten million children vaccinated. 2.5 million people with access to safe drinking water. And 30 million…

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Real women like men who drink beer

Real women like men who drink beer

British comedian John Cleese calls them “beer fairies”.  It’s a euphemism for… Read more

198 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter