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

Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

nrk.no

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 213 posts

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#71

Post by xkemp »

reaperducer wrote: post #41
dghughes wrote: post #37

I'm certainly on the climate change team (if that's what you call it). But are articles like this good or bad? When confronting climate change deniers the standard response is "weather is not climate". Saying it's hot today or cold today isn't an indication of climate change. It's what occurs over hundreds of years but especially the last 150 years. It seems we are sending mixed signals saying that one day or a decad…

It also doesn't help when TV weathercasters† show graphics that list what the "normal" temperature is supposed to be for that day. There is no such animal. There is an average temperature for a particular date, but there isn't a single "normal" number. † In America, few TV weathercasters are actual meteorologists anymore. Some stations will claim they are, but often they are not. One way to tell is to look for the AM…

We know the historic average, but also variability, and I'm pretty sure that data just so happens to be a standard example of what is specifically called the "normal distribution".

So I don't see what the problem is with charting, say, the 98% confidence interval, calling it normal, and stating that values outside that range are 1-in-50 year events.

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#73

Post by floren »

andrewla wrote: post #51
Swizec wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People react to stories, not data. Anecdotes bring global warming home in a way people can relate. People don’t change their minds if you throw a bunch of data at them. People change their minds if you make them feel.

People are also generally not that easily tricked. If you play up the "bring global warming home with anecdotes" game, then you're equally vulnerable to "hey, sure is cold today, what now, Al Gore?" Nobody will be convinced of anything by this sort of nonsense. Weather is not climate. Even when it supports climate change.

> Weather is not climate. Even when it supports climate change.

It's certainly been quite a shift to watch. 10 years ago, you'd hear "Sure is cold today, so much for global warming eh?" followed by cries that weather is not climate. Today, it seems that a hot summer day, or a cool summer day, or a warm winter day, or a particularly cold winter day, is just more proof of climate change.

I say this as someone who thinks climate change is real, by the way--but I am amused at how this all looks.

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#74

Post by mirekrusin »

smabie wrote: post #19
KineticLensman wrote: post #11

I find it really depressing that as I write this comment, the other top-most comments are complaining about the article's UX. Meanwhile we are radically altering the natural environment. As the TFA spells out, so superbly.

It’s not an article, it’s a slideshow with pictures. Who actually wants to consume information like this?

It's created by people who like to take pictures, what else would you expect, man page format?

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#75

Post by wwweston »

dghughes wrote: post #37

I'm certainly on the climate change team (if that's what you call it). But are articles like this good or bad? When confronting climate change deniers the standard response is "weather is not climate". Saying it's hot today or cold today isn't an indication of climate change. It's what occurs over hundreds of years but especially the last 150 years. It seems we are sending mixed signals saying that one day or a decad…

> one day or a decade

For one thing, a day and a decade are pretty different.

But more important, while a decade is really short on geological timescales, and probably isn't long enough to see natural/geo driven or many astronomically-driven changes... a decade is long enough for humans to get a real idea of trends in human-driven changes, or crossing of certain boundary conditions for long-horizon changes.

Is that a double standard, or is that a more finely articulated view?

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#76

Post by AlephGarden »

legitster wrote: post #25

I'm disappointed by the typical Hacker News folks complaining about the presentation format. This isn't the target demographic, and I applaud trying different approaches to convey the seriousness of these issues. The kinds of people who just want a spreadsheet and a PDF report are already bought in on the ideas. While I find the format a bit cinematic for my taste, I can't help but respect their efforts to drive home…

I get that, but I'm not even viewing the website because it nearly crashed my computer.

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#77

Post by groby_b »

Jesus fuck. I was in Svalbard 25 years ago. The change is absolutely mindblowing.

I really thought I was somewhat informed about the effects, but what happened there is way beyond anything you get from reading papers.

But sure, HN, go ahead, discuss if it's the right format/UX to deliver the message that we're fucked. Heaven forbid we talk about the message itself.

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#79

Post by s1artibartfast »

xkemp wrote: post #71
reaperducer wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also doesn't help when TV weathercasters† show graphics that list what the "normal" temperature is supposed to be for that day. There is no such animal. There is an average temperature for a particular date, but there isn't a single "normal" number. † In America, few TV weathercasters are actual meteorologists anymore. Some stations will claim they are, but often they are not. One way to tell is to look for the AM…

We know the historic average, but also variability, and I'm pretty sure that data just so happens to be a standard example of what is specifically called the "normal distribution". So I don't see what the problem is with charting, say, the 98% confidence interval, calling it normal, and stating that values outside that range are 1-in-50 year events.

The problem is is that the average is presented without the range and called normal or typical. you may live your life and never experience an average day.

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#80

Post by lopmotr »

legitster wrote: post #25

I'm disappointed by the typical Hacker News folks complaining about the presentation format. This isn't the target demographic, and I applaud trying different approaches to convey the seriousness of these issues. The kinds of people who just want a spreadsheet and a PDF report are already bought in on the ideas. While I find the format a bit cinematic for my taste, I can't help but respect their efforts to drive home…

But what is the seriousness of these issues?

We're inundated with articles pointing out small unimportant changes and unquantified waffle about serious future changes. But never any actual predictions of global disaster. What's the expected cost in money or lives? Nobody has a clue beyond "catastrophe", whatever that means. I saw one estimate for the economic cost to Canada but it was so low that the citizens could actually just pay it as an additional tax and carry on with life hardly affected at all. Alarmists were actually critical of that data being published because they were afraid it might support people's belief that it's not very serious. Maybe because it's not?

So if you're going to say global warming is serious, can you also quantify what you mean? Otherwise you're only conveying your personal subjective feeling.

Post reply on HN