Lol "immense" river 150m wide. Ok guardian readers, that may be an immense and scary river in the UK but canadians reserve words like immense for far larger things. At 15km this river may well be the largest thing ever seen by a brit, but canada has something like 50 rivers over 350 miles long. This is a glacial stream by the standards of The North, a part of canada bigger than all western europe. My local dog beach has a river 150m wide.
Receding glacier causes Canadian river to vanish in four days
11–20 of 102 posts
Re: Receding glacier causes Canadian river to vanish in four days
#12"The calculations put chance of the piracy having occured due to natural variability at 0.5%. “So it’s 99.5% that it occurred due to warming over the industrial era,” said Best." We need to train children in school to understand what statistical confidence means, so that we stop saying wrong things like this.
Why is it wrong? If you reject the null hypothesis with a 99.5% chance it is not a type 1 error.
You can't say it's 99.5% due to global warming alone though. You can say 0.5% occurring by random chance but you can't just ascribe everything to one causal factor. Could be multi-factorial.
Re: Receding glacier causes Canadian river to vanish in four days
#13Lol "immense" river 150m wide. Ok guardian readers, that may be an immense and scary river in the UK but canadians reserve words like immense for far larger things. At 15km this river may well be the largest thing ever seen by a brit, but canada has something like 50 rivers over 350 miles long. This is a glacial stream by the standards of The North, a part of canada bigger than all western europe. My local dog beach…
>At 15km this river may well be the largest thing ever seen by a brit
The Thames is 346 km long, so probably not.
Re: Receding glacier causes Canadian river to vanish in four days
#14Booo it's the ghost of global warming! Always threatening, never happening.
And here I thought this was a prime example of it 'happening'.
Re: Receding glacier causes Canadian river to vanish in four days
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is it wrong? If you reject the null hypothesis with a 99.5% chance it is not a type 1 error.
You can't say it's 99.5% due to global warming alone though. You can say 0.5% occurring by random chance but you can't just ascribe everything to one causal factor. Could be multi-factorial.
While the exact language in the quote is perhaps implying something, it only directly says the that the cause is warming during the industrial era. It doesn't provide any direct information about causal factors.
Re: Receding glacier causes Canadian river to vanish in four days
#16Lol "immense" river 150m wide. Ok guardian readers, that may be an immense and scary river in the UK but canadians reserve words like immense for far larger things. At 15km this river may well be the largest thing ever seen by a brit, but canada has something like 50 rivers over 350 miles long. This is a glacial stream by the standards of The North, a part of canada bigger than all western europe. My local dog beach…
One writer describes 15km as immense and suddenly all Guardian readers are idiots?
For reference, the Thames is 350km long.
Re: Receding glacier causes Canadian river to vanish in four days
#17Booo it's the ghost of global warming! Always threatening, never happening.
That's how a lot of historical events happen. They loom, they threaten, they simmer, and then they happen.
Sure, the writing on the wall is just words, but sometimes it's still worth a read.
Re: Receding glacier causes Canadian river to vanish in four days
#18This kind of thing has happened several times in China in recorded history with the Yellow River, to the point where sometimes the river has flowed into the ocean north of the Shandong peninsula and sometimes south of it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_River#History
Rivers re-route themselves frequently, the difference is cause (sediment for the Yellow River, melting glacier for the Slims).
Re: Receding glacier causes Canadian river to vanish in four days
#19"The calculations put chance of the piracy having occured due to natural variability at 0.5%. “So it’s 99.5% that it occurred due to warming over the industrial era,” said Best." We need to train children in school to understand what statistical confidence means, so that we stop saying wrong things like this.
Why is it wrong? If you reject the null hypothesis with a 99.5% chance it is not a type 1 error.
> Why is it wrong?
If you look at 200 rivers, it would not be surprising to find something that naturally occurs 0.5% of the time. It is not correct to say that there is a 99.5% chance that this is due to non-natural causes.
Re: Receding glacier causes Canadian river to vanish in four days
#20Lol "immense" river 150m wide. Ok guardian readers, that may be an immense and scary river in the UK but canadians reserve words like immense for far larger things. At 15km this river may well be the largest thing ever seen by a brit, but canada has something like 50 rivers over 350 miles long. This is a glacial stream by the standards of The North, a part of canada bigger than all western europe. My local dog beach…
One writer describes 15km as immense and suddenly all Guardian readers are idiots? For reference, the Thames is 350km long.
Idiots no, but given how UK publications so often describe geographical features one is left with the impression that the UK is sized like legoland. This is not a large river and, given the climate change aspect to the story, to desribe it as such is dishonest.