Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
How are these experiments causing floods in Australia ?
No wounder Cook and his merry men clam up when weather modification is ask about
He's the spokes person for Queensland University regarding Climate Change so he should have access to all the test results But nowhere on his site is it discussed This link will fill in the gaps http://www.australianrain.com.au/assets/files/PDF/... Note the times Queensland University is referenced . Here you can cross reference the dates that flooding has occurred http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floods_in_Australia
Edit
NW Jack It's not about Modeling it's about MODIFYING what is naturally occurring .
Sage No dam burst or overflowed The main trouble was from the water that flowed into the Brisbane river from Toowoomba's catchment that flooded the Lockier Valley and took lives as well as wiping out entire towns. Knowing this water was coming day's in advance would be the only reason Anna Bligh would have closed the flood-gates which was already flooding low lying areas day's before .
Edit
NW Jack It's not about Modeling it's about MODIFYING what is naturally occurring .
Sage No dam burst or overflowed The main trouble was from the water that flowed into the Brisbane river from Toowoomba's catchment that flooded the Lockier Valley and took lives as well as wiping out entire towns. Knowing this water was coming day's in advance would be the only reason Anna Bligh would have closed the flood-gates which was already flooding low lying areas day's before .
8 Answers
- ?Lv 68 years agoFavorite Answer
I had hemorrhoids on those same dates. What I find funny is warmons preach the same kind of science use the same ambiguous evidence as proof but dismiss your theory.
- SagebrushLv 78 years ago
Well at least they are experimenting. In the US the Corp of Engineers have a scaled model of the Missouri and Mississippi rivers. They can accurately predict water levels and times exactly. A few years back, they predicted that they could hold back only so much water from the Winter thaw in the Rockies and had a controlled flood from Yankton, S. D. to Omaha, Nebraska. This minimized the damage, but did not prevent it all together.
It sure beats what happened in Australia a few years back, where some greenie in charge held back too much water and caused a dam to overflow and burst. They are learning, but they should use a model like we do in the US. 'Playing' with the real thing can result in disastrous consequences.
- Anonymous5 years ago
You raise a good point. Such counter-effects are indeed important in analyzing any complex system (not jsut environmentaal ones). The question is how important are these effects? With regard to global warming, in general, the effects you note ( with one exception) could serve to reduce the rate of global warming--but are unlikely to do so, at least for some time (read on). The exception is the possible increase of water vapor in the atmspere. That won't help global warming--it will make it worse. The reason is simple: water vapor is itself a greenhouse gas. But otherwise, there is a potential for increased vegitation to help--mainly by sequestering CO2. However, in order for tha tto happen, we need a LOT more vegitation. If we take advantage of regions where conditions are improved for plant life and plant trees, etc. then the cimate shifts in thsis case could be made to work to offset part of the global warming. However, at present, this is unlikely--for tere tobe any meaningful effect, you have to think in terms of decades--and you have to assume we stop the practice of cutting down trees and oterwise removing vegitation faster than nature can replace it--which is what humans as a whole are currently doing. Do keep in mind two things: first, in analyzing this, you have to take a large scale,long term view. ONe early spring isn't going to matter--and there are regions where climate change will reduce rainfalll and hence vegitation. So the point you make isn't a simple if--then relationship. The other is that such "coutervailing effects" as you suggest are more likely to simply offset part of the primary effect (global warming, in this case). The real value of your idea is that it points to how we might use these effects to help the situation--as in deliberately taking advantage of warmer conditions to increase the amount of vegitation.
- Anonymous6 years ago
Hemorrhoids are swollen and inflamed veins in the anal canal. They can be itchy, bleeding and/or painful protrusions just under the skin. To get rid of hemorrhoids you can use this natural method that already have thousands of positive reviews https://tr.im/cFhOh
There are two types internal and external. Internal are inside the anal canal in the lower rectum and external are at the anus. They result from increased pressure in the veins often due to straining during bowel movements and during pregnancy. Scratching in an attempt to relieve the itching symptoms further weakens the area and compounds the problem.
- 5 years ago
The most common causes of hemorrhoids are straining during bowel movements and obesity. Follow these essential hemorrhoid prevention tips and you may not even have to delve into any hemorrhoid treatments https://tr.im/8Szor
If you’re straining during bowel movements, there is no doubt that you are suffering from constipation, and obesity only heightens your chance of experiencing these digestive issues. The best solution for hemorrhoids is to not have them at all!
- NW JackLv 68 years ago
Humans have a great ability to take a bad situation and make it worse, especially when it serves their political interests. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag
This theory of yours is a nice one for how to cover the failed attempt to create a great disaster (that part succeeded) and blame it on global warming http://australianclimatemadness.com/2011/01/13/qld...
rather than political operatives (that part is not being so successful).
<<Last week’s most disturbing revelation, however, was the contribution to Brisbane’s flooding by the South East Queensland Water company’s massive release of water from its Wivenhoe dam upstream from the city (for details see “Brisbane’s Man-Made Flood Peak” on the Regionalstates blog). Instead of controlled releases through the previous week, the company allowed the level to rise to within a few inches of the top of the dam before releasing a vast volume of water, with devastating consequences for Brisbane 36 hours later.
<<Last spring, Queensland’s prime minister, the drought- and warming-obsessed Anna Bligh, ordered the water company not to allow any releases from the dam ...>> -- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/chri...
However, your link is only about MODELING what is already going on anyway without modifying the weather. Yes, there is plenty of evidence of a conspiracy, but modeling did not make the flood worse than it needed to be. Overfilling the dam did.
Edit @asker: <<not about Modeling it's about MODIFYING>>
I stand corrected. The ground based ionization technique Atlant, was used, and rain downwind of it was 15% greater than rain upwind.
However, according to Table 2, the last test was October 2008, long before the Brisbane floods. According to the map on page 6, the tests were conducted on the other end of Australia, and actually lasted until December 2008. This is still to early to have affected the floods. On page 5 the author admitted that Atlant did not work well enough to produce statistically significant results.
The Queenslands floods began in March 2010, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_2010_Queensland...
and thanks to the quick action of Warmist operatives, lasted until January 2011. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010%E2%80%932011_Que...
There is no science that connects those floods to global warming. http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/brisba...
The notion that I should allow for stupidity rather than conspriacy flies out the window when the stupidity becomes so nefarious as to provide examples like:
<< In March last year, as the Wivenhoe dam went from being just 16.7 per cent full to 80 per cent full, still local politicians told their communities to use water sparingly or else “risk a return to a ban on washing cars and other severe restrictions”.>> -- http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brendanoneill2/1...
That was right after the March 2011 floods! A smoking gun would be if the dam was filled dangerously over capacity, then the political operatives chose to release the water at the exact moment that flooding began. That would show maximum effort:
<< the Wivenhoe dam was running at 150 per cent to 180 per cent capacity, which means that the authorities had to start releasing water from the dam at the same time that the rain-caused flash floods were hitting Brisbane’s river system – effectively contributing to the deluge.>>
To really enhance the effect, the politicos altered the zoning laws to allow building in flood plains that were known to be a frequent problem without any flood control measures. It is not like people did not notice and were not pointing it out to the criminals who were doing it. Stupidity had nothing to do with this. http://www.smh.com.au/business/those-who-build-on-...