Eastern Antarctica sees record temperatures 70 degrees above normal

Post by herpderperator » Sat, Mar 19, 2022, 6:46 PM UTC

neonate wrote: post #4

https://archive.is/WHpV1

  This site can't provide a secure connection
  archive.is uses an unsupported protocol.
  ERR_SSL_VERSION_OR_CIPHER_MISMATCH

  root@thinkpad:~# openssl s_client -showcerts -connect archive.is:443
  CONNECTED(00000003)
  140330990556480:error:14094410:SSL routines:ssl3_read_bytes:sslv3 alert handshake failure:../ssl/record/rec_layer_s3.c:1543:SSL alert number 40
  ---
  no peer certificate available
  ---
  No client certificate CA names sent
  ---
  SSL handshake has read 7 bytes and written 302 bytes
  Verification: OK
  ---
  New, (NONE), Cipher is (NONE)
  Secure Renegotiation IS NOT supported
  Compression: NONE
  Expansion: NONE
  No ALPN negotiated
  Early data was not sent
  Verify return code: 0 (ok)
  ---

Post by joecool1029 » Sat, Mar 19, 2022, 6:50 PM UTC

herpderperator wrote: post #62

neonate wrote: post #4

https://archive.is/WHpV1

This site can't provide a secure connection archive.is uses an unsupported protocol. ERR_SSL_VERSION_OR_CIPHER_MISMATCH root@thinkpad:~# openssl s_client -showcerts -connect archive.is:443 CONNECTED(00000003) 140330990556480:error:14094410:SSL routines:ssl3_read_bytes:sslv3 alert handshake failure:../ssl/record/rec_layer_s3.c:1543:SSL alert number 40 --- no peer certificate available --- No client certificate CA name…

Post by lanstin » Sat, Mar 19, 2022, 6:52 PM UTC

WinterMount223 wrote: post #37

FabHK wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The probability that an observation is beyond 5 standard deviations is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chebyshev's_inequality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy_distribution

If the observed variable is “the mean temperature in a given day”, 4% can be expected to occur relatively frequently. Anyway until we know the probability distribution, and my intuition says that it’s definitely not Normal for wide periods of time, we can’t say if it’s significant or not.

Post by lanstin » Sat, Mar 19, 2022, 7:05 PM UTC

kadoban wrote: post #30

pil0u wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is wrong on many levels. Such nihilist position does not help the millions of people leading concrete actions on different scales. You are wrong, it's not too late to change how we behave regarding climate and such way of thinking is unlikely to induce the required actions.

It's too late for what's happening now, that's for sure. Stopping the "surprises" that are going to happen in a few decades are still likely physically possible. We'll see if humanity is up to it.

Post by earleybird » Sat, Mar 19, 2022, 7:35 PM UTC

b112 wrote: post #34

mattcwilson wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s absolutely right. But as the article itself says, we don’t know if this is the start of some trend or if this is a never previously observed fluke. Climate change is about regression to a mean that is itself higher than the previous mean. But with or without human contribution, weather events are still going to regress to a mean.

We at least have day-to-day written history for thousands of years, in human population zones. We have oral beyond that. We barely have 30 or 40 for a place like antartica. We can detect gross climate, and not any real weather in fossils. For example, no fossil record would capture a chinook, a common occurance in Alberta. https://cwf.ca/research/publications/five-facts-about-chinoo... In 1962, Pincher Creek saw reco…