Is more bad weather on the way?

cheap · 01-02-2013, 10:41 PM

The weeks before the recent Queensland floods our property experienced a massive run of ants. My neighbour also had ants, pointed to his mango tree having an extraordinary large number of fruit and his magnolia having flowered beyond belief. He's an old cane farmer and said it was a sign of significant rain coming. Sure enough it rained.

Today I noticed the ants back, but in numbers that surpass those from weeks ago.

Is there anything to these events or just coincidence?

XBROO · 02-02-2013, 12:17 AM

All I can say is nature knows.

jpblue1000 · 02-02-2013, 12:53 AM

Popular reference of the week...
On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn — both men and animals —and I will bring judgment on all the gods of Egypt. I am Nature

csv8 · 02-02-2013, 01:10 AM

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive...D0405B808CF1D3

Yes ants do

**MercurySilver** · 02-02-2013, 01:35 PM

yeah nature certainly knows

id get prepared just in case there is something 100% to it
whats the worst that can happen
u are ready and nothing happens or u are ready and crap happens

but lets hope the ants are wrong
i think QLD has had enough water over the last few years

mik · 02-02-2013, 01:51 PM

i`m a bit sceptical of the ants thing, maybe there was a sexy lady ant in a bikini up in the tree, maybe ants like mango`s, coincidence ?

NickyN · 02-02-2013, 03:34 PM

I've heard that about ants, too, here in the US. I'm hoping this time the ants are wrong though. Let us know!

TC200six · 02-02-2013, 06:38 PM

I had ants in my house before the recent bad weather, but I'm not noticing any ants right now.

I'll say ants can be a sign of bad weather but not always. I've seen ants in buildings many other times over the years and it didn't lead to any rain.

xtremerus · 02-02-2013, 06:57 PM

Ants do know when it is going to rain
.
The ants see the humans looking at them and saying "It must be going to rain ,with all these ants inside".
The ants then say " the humans are telling us it's going to rain. LETS ALL GO INSIDE THE HOUSE NOW, OUT OF THE RAIN".

2011G6E · 02-02-2013, 07:42 PM

Been plenty of ants in our place lately too.
And as with before the last lot of floods, there are a lot of black cockatoos suddenly hanging around town.

vanman_75 · 02-02-2013, 10:44 PM

Well I think all the damage is done , so now is fine if its going to be a double whammy...

TC200six · 03-02-2013, 01:00 AM

This reminds me of the Australian movie, Bait.

Before the tsunami wipes out the Gold Coast, a plague of birds is shown flying inland.

Humans should heed bizarre animal activity, especially if they are near the coast.

AGS302 · 03-02-2013, 05:18 AM

Maybe ants have more reliable weatherman than us humans.

NickyN · 05-02-2013, 11:36 PM

Probably bc humans tend to over-analyze and look for scientific proof while ants and other animals just rely on their instincts.

69XWGT · 06-02-2013, 01:06 AM

I do property maintenance for a living and about 2 weeks before the big wet in 2010 they were climbing higher than i have ever seen them.
Even in 2011 they were moving towards higher ground but not as high as the year before.

This year just before X tropical cyclone Oswald made its way down the coast they were climbing the buildings again.

When you live in the ground and a rain drop is bigger than you. You'd have to have some sort of an idea when it's going to start raining

**DJM83** · 06-02-2013, 02:36 PM

Our old place had heaps of ants. Our new place it 8mths old and 2 days after we moved in there was a few ant trails outside and on the neighbours house aswell. Never seen so many to be honest.

TC200six · 18-02-2013, 04:49 PM

Heard the weather warnings for QLD today? Maybe this is the next weather event.

rancidpunx · 19-02-2013, 07:55 AM

We have probably had 100mm since it started raining Sunday arvo. Fortunately I see the rain has moved out to sea this morning.
The ground is still sodden from the 500mm we got a few weeks ago. Full tanks of water though.

**buggerlugs** · 04-03-2013, 06:55 PM

http://www.news.com.au/national-news...-1226590179398
Wasn't Mr Flannery the one who said our Dams would never be full again ?

cheap · 04-03-2013, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buggerlugs

http://www.news.com.au/national-news...-1226590179398
Wasn't Mr Flannery the one who said our Dams would never be full again ?

Flannery has made many claims and I'd be interested in knowing which if any of his claims have remotely come true. I read today he's babbling on about the "climate" being on steroids???

But getting back to the OP, the ants are still going as crazy as before, and Brisbane has received another bucketing of rain with a new low pressure system (cyclone) developing off Mackay. Maybe Flannery needs to study my ants, they seem more informed than he.

flappist · 04-03-2013, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buggerlugs

http://www.news.com.au/national-news...-1226590179398
Wasn't Mr Flannery the one who said our Dams would never be full again ?

Ah yes, Dr Flannery PhD. Doctorate in the history of kangaroos......

He is complaining we are not doing anything about his ever changing climate change theory that he pushes from his government appointment at the Australian Climate Commission.

I will be doing something about it on September 14......

cheap · 09-03-2013, 01:06 PM

TC Sanda officially named yesterday currently Cat2 and +1000km's from mainland. In a word she is HUGE, cloud cover would completely cover most of NSW and Vic. Considering much of the SEQ land is already saturated (there's a word which Flannery might want to look up) Sandra making landfall would be real real real bad...

Thornie · 09-03-2013, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheap

TC Sanda officially named yesterday currently Cat2 and +1000km's from mainland. In a word she is HUGE, cloud cover would completely cover most of NSW and Vic. Considering much of the SEQ land is already saturated (there's a word which Flannery might want to look up) Sandra making landfall would be real real real bad...

I'm pretty sure it's rained here every day since the start of febuary gladstone airports reported 1057mm to date but we've had a bit more than that out here i believe.

xxx000 · 09-03-2013, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buggerlugs

http://www.news.com.au/national-news...-1226590179398
Wasn't Mr Flannery the one who said our Dams would never be full again ?

no he didn't say that at all

but repetitive misquoting becomes 'fact' after a while it seems

One of the main Tim Flannery's haters, Alan Jones, did actually suggest on radio:

1 making major Australian rivers run inland instead of to the sea

2. making the Pacific Highway run one way North one day then one way South the next to reduce the road toll (head ons)

so little thought in both those sugestions but his audience, as usual, lapped it up

Batman105E · 09-03-2013, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aus880

no he didn't say that at all

but repetitive misquoting becomes 'fact' after a while it seems

One of the main Tim Flannery's haters, Alan Jones, did actually suggest on radio:

1 making major Australian rivers run inland instead of to the sea

2. making the Pacific Highway run one way North one day then one way South the next to reduce the road toll (head ons)

so little thought in both those sugestions but his audience, as usual, lapped it up

Here is what Flannery said...

"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"

Rewrite history any way you like but the quote says it all - the rain that falls isn't going to fill our dams and rivers.

Now spin it so that he didn't say it...

xxx000 · 09-03-2013, 05:32 PM

http://indifferencegivesyouafright.w...er-fill-again/

Quote:

Tim Flannery’s comments on water shortages in Perth have been supported in The Australian.

Due to his high profile, Climate Change Commissioner Tim Flannery is a favoured target of Climate Denialists. In this post I will compare comments made by Flannery against the intentionally distorted versions of his comments put forward by the denialist commentariat.

First, Flannery did not say that Australian dams will never fill again. Andrew Bolt, misrepresenting Flannery, draws attention to a Feb 2007 Landline interview with Flannery in which Flannery said:

even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems

Denialists like Bolt claim that Flannery meant by this that our dams will never fill again. However, what Flannery meant was that the rainfall and storage data at the time indicated a 60% fall in run-off going into dams due to hotter soils and greater rainfall take-up by drought-stressed vegetation in accordance with IPCC modelling. He did not say that the dams would never fill again. He was pointing to a long-term outcome of normalized water shortage based on current data and climate trends.

Flannery’s quote in context is:

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

Bolt knows, but pretends not to know, that Flannery was applying IPCC modelling and projections to (then) present circumstances in relation to reduced rainfall and that Flannery’s statement are in accordance with those. Bolt also knows that IPCC projections include intensified (i.e. more severe) but rarer flooding events, which of course would fill the dams.

Batman105E · 09-03-2013, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aus880

http://indifferencegivesyouafright.w...er-fill-again/

That crap was predictable and changes nothing - Flannery said that due to glowball worming, reduced rainfall would mean that rivers and dams would not fill.

He was wrong. End. Of. Story.

You just look as foolish as him for tryng to support his ridiculous scare campaigns..

xxx000 · 09-03-2013, 05:42 PM

I was originally 'on the fence' re climate change however from what I have heard and read since I take the advice of the experts with relevant qualifications over radio broadcasters, their pollie mates and the ongoing belittling comments they seem to spew.

Hence I'm now siding with the majority of scientists who support the climate change concept.

The deniers like Jones et al seem to have their own weird theories and ideas of how to fix problems: like the one way Pacific Highway

Plus any reasonable debate or discussion on climate change which does occur is dismissed with a wave of the hand by these people as a 'left wing conspiracy'

Batman105E · 09-03-2013, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aus880

I was originally 'on the fence' re climate change however from what I have heard and read since I take the advice of the experts with relevant qualifications over radio broadcasters, their pollie mates and the ongoing belittling comments they seem to spew.

Hence I'm now siding with the majority of scientists who support the climate change concept.

The deniers like Jones et al seem to have their own weird theories and ideas of how to fix problems: like the one way Pacific Highway

Plus any reasonable debate or discussion on climate change which does occur is dismissed with a wave of the hand by these people as a 'left wing conspiracy'

If you consider that Flannery is sufficiently qualified to spruke on climate change then there is no hope for you.

Perhaps you might wish have a look at Jo Nova's website for another view...

Jo Nova for another perspective

It is worthwhile remembering that science is not determined by consensus, but rather by emperical data and observation. Computer models that make predictions which aren't supported by emperical evidence and observation, but instead driven by political motive do not constitute science.

chamb0 · 09-03-2013, 06:18 PM

The missed bit of the quote continues:

"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."

Andrew Bolt initially put the spin on this to suggest he was saying that dams would never fill again. The original message was that the data at the time indicated that if the trend continued, then over the long term there would be a significant reduction in water reaching storages. This comment was based on his interpretation of the 3rd IPCC Assessment models and predictions at the time.

If you cast your mind back to the context you will remember there had been a long period of severe protracted drought, with an El Nino cycle beginning in 2002-03. The Murray-Darling Basin was hit hard.

Flannery is not a recognised expert in climate science (his role is in public policy), and because of this he cannot critique the finer nuances of the highly technical science like others in the field are able to do. We're not climate scientists either so our understanding on this important issue depends on what we read. So it really matters where we get our information from.

The best place is the scientific literature itself, in recognised journals, where all the battles for scientific understanding are fought, won or lost, not in the public domain.

Whatever you think about Flannery himself, I think what lies behind the targeting of him is the belief that if he can be discredited, then so can the science describing a changing climate. This approach means we can happily continue in our safe zone and ignore the collossal weight of evidence. Flannery did not produce the science himself, he was trying to communicate it, as flawed as he may be.

And, unfortunately, scientific phenomena cannot be voted away.

I'm sick of reading misrepresented material about this stuff, and loaded comments from the likes of Andrew Bolt being given undue credibility. He is not a scientist in the field either. In fact he is not a scientist at all. I love science because it is a rational, empirical process that is blessedly free of the hyped up emotion and paranoia that we see so much of all around us.