Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Average Global Temperatures since 1850

kyso.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 125 posts

Re: Average Global Temperatures since 1850

#51

Post by helenakyso »

tomtomtom777 wrote: post #23
helenakyso wrote: post #17

Any ideas of What, WE, the individuals can do to make politician and countries change?

Stop buying stuff without thought. I know that a lot of people feel helpless because it's the big corporations that are emitting, but companies only emit CO2 if consumers pay them to do so. Buying everything consciously, whether its food, appliances, housing, or a ticket to some performance, will make the world better.

The problem is that the current society and economic system are "forcing" us to buy/have more and more thing on cheaper prices at any environmental costs.

Re: Average Global Temperatures since 1850

#53

Post by anodari »

tomohawk wrote: post #25

Only going back to 1850 is exactly the kind of thing someone would do if they wanted to cherry pick their data to suit a case. You have to go back much further. It is known that at that time we were coming out of a period of much cooler temperatures. See for example the year without a summer (1816). There are periods of human history where it was warmer than it is now. For example, during the Viking expansion, and du…

It is ridiculous to say that in other times it was warmer. Nowadays we have many resources to measure, compare and identify the cause of the temperature rise and so far the best correlation is the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. You're saying "Average temperature increases, it's not because of this theory, it's something else that no one knows." Denialists need to come up with a better theory instead of saying "natural causes not understood."

Re: Average Global Temperatures since 1850

#54

Post by trymas »

tomohawk wrote: post #25

Only going back to 1850 is exactly the kind of thing someone would do if they wanted to cherry pick their data to suit a case. You have to go back much further. It is known that at that time we were coming out of a period of much cooler temperatures. See for example the year without a summer (1816). There are periods of human history where it was warmer than it is now. For example, during the Viking expansion, and du…

> thing someone would do if they wanted to cherry pick their data to suit a case. See for example the year without a summer (1816).

_comes and cherry picks a single year to "prove" something_

> There are periods of human history where it was warmer than it is now.

Yes, but you are talking about geologic time scale and extremely gradual changes compared to what we see now, which is just dozens of years.

I recommend to watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yze1YAz_LYM

Re: Average Global Temperatures since 1850

#55

Post by disordinary »

arethuza wrote: post #48
disordinary wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, depending on where you are you can also vote for the local green party. If you're in a proportional election system then that the bigger the green voting block is the better. If you're in a country with a first-past-the-post electoral system like the US, UK, or Australia then things are much tougher and you should also be campaigning for electoral reform to make your country more democratic.

The UK had a referendum on introducing a different voting system and there was no change as the general view seemed to be that "first past the post" gave strong governments.

Yeah, I wouldn't call the current British government strong but I would call the past six NZ governments strong. Each of those governments have been made up of at least three parties working together.

The Australian electoral system is first past the post too and is similarly as chaotic as the UK.

Re: Average Global Temperatures since 1850

#56

Post by serpix »

southern_cross wrote: post #37

"The data are a mix of the CRUTEM4 land-surface air temperature dataset and the HadSST3 sea-surface temperature (SST) dataset. The HadCRUT4 data are neither interpolated nor variance adjusted." This is your typical half-truth (lie of omission). Even if the HadCRUT4 folks themselves don't make these kinds of adjustments, the folks who provide the data sets which HadCRUT4 is based on most certainly do.

so are you implying someone is methodically rigging up the data to show an anomaly for shits and giggles?

Re: Average Global Temperatures since 1850

#57

Post by stinos »

fnordsensei wrote: post #47
stinos wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See for example the year without a summer (1816). As far as cherry-picking goes to suit a case, this also sounds like a pristine example. Even worse then what you are countering, since it is only one single year. There are periods of human history where it was warmer than it is now. Well, yes, but what does that prove? The buildings were made with logs from trees that do not exist there today because it is cooler now…

I'm guessing it's some variation of "we know of climate change in the past that was not caused by humans, therefore no climate change is caused by humans". For the record, we do know of at least one instance of positive climate change in the past caused by humans. Genghis Khan famously went on a huge murderous rampage (some estimate that he directly and indirectly caused the death of ~10% of the world population), ca…

Thanks, first time I hear about this. Interesting!

Re: Average Global Temperatures since 1850

#58

Post by shusson »

stinos wrote: post #38
tomohawk wrote: post #25

Only going back to 1850 is exactly the kind of thing someone would do if they wanted to cherry pick their data to suit a case. You have to go back much further. It is known that at that time we were coming out of a period of much cooler temperatures. See for example the year without a summer (1816). There are periods of human history where it was warmer than it is now. For example, during the Viking expansion, and du…

See for example the year without a summer (1816). As far as cherry-picking goes to suit a case, this also sounds like a pristine example. Even worse then what you are countering, since it is only one single year. There are periods of human history where it was warmer than it is now. Well, yes, but what does that prove? The buildings were made with logs from trees that do not exist there today because it is cooler now…

Regardless of his counter-example, I think the chosen time period is too short to mean anything significant. I'm not saying global warming isn't a concern, but that graphs like these are not useful in reference to global warming. I mean imagine if in a decade global temperatures drop for a decade, are we going to assume global warming isn't an issue anymore?

Re: Average Global Temperatures since 1850

#59

Post by southern_cross »

lostlogin wrote: post #39
tomohawk wrote: post #25

Only going back to 1850 is exactly the kind of thing someone would do if they wanted to cherry pick their data to suit a case. You have to go back much further. It is known that at that time we were coming out of a period of much cooler temperatures. See for example the year without a summer (1816). There are periods of human history where it was warmer than it is now. For example, during the Viking expansion, and du…

What data would convince you that anthropogenic climate change was real?

What lack of data would convince you that apocalyptic ACC concerns were largely overblown, or at least unjustified? Because that's what you're dealing with here - a remarkable lack of quality, unadulterated data. Most people don't have a clue about this, though; they just trust what they're being told.

Re: Average Global Temperatures since 1850

#60

Post by alecmg »

agent008t wrote: post #43
lostlogin wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What data would convince you that anthropogenic climate change was real?

What is your own estimate of probability that anthropogenic climate change is real? That is, anthropogenic factors are the most significant contributor to climate change and mitigating them will allow to significantly affect the rate of climate change (to the point where it would make a significant difference to humans).

Thank you for wording that. This should be the first question in any climate change discussion.
Post reply on HN