91–100 of 187 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except it has happened about every 12 years throughout history The ancients even created a name for it: La Nina.
Except this is our third La Nina year in a row, the first time that's ever happened: https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/wmo-forecasts-f...
We had a triple dip in 1998, and before that 1976.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except this is our third La Nina year in a row, the first time that's ever happened: https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/wmo-forecasts-f...
That article only says it’s the first this century.
I'd love to see nature write an article about why a certain part of the world has had such unusually moderate temperature and precipitation of late. Also, if you want to search the whole globe for something extreme happening, you're guaranteed to find it in spades.
The extent of the flood is massive: https://static.dw.com/image/62963931_7.png (source: https://www.dw.com/en/pakistanis-outraged-by-inept-governmen... )
I'd love to see nature write an article about why a certain part of the world has had such unusually moderate temperature and precipitation of late. Also, if you want to search the whole globe for something extreme happening, you're guaranteed to find it in spades.
What does this even mean? Are you denying that climate change is a thing? Now? In 2022?
I'd love to see nature write an article about why a certain part of the world has had such unusually moderate temperature and precipitation of late. Also, if you want to search the whole globe for something extreme happening, you're guaranteed to find it in spades.
I think it's worth pointing out that the impacts of climate change are often presented as singular effects: rising sea level, warmer summers, increased drought, etc. But as we can see here there is also a very strong interaction effect between all of these (and it tends to magnify the issues rather than having them cancel out). This is also why many major climate reports tend to inherently be on the conservative side…
Pretty disheartening to see the downvotes in a forum like hn which are supposed to be informed about these things. If people that are supposed to be able to critically assess data and have access to as much information they need to verify any claims come to the conclusion that you are full of shit, what hope is there to educate grandpa screaming at the wokes on the street.
And yes, I'm aware that's essentially a paraphrase of the Dunning-Kruger concept. We're all probably making similar assumptions about domains of knowledge we don't know much about, because that's what the brain does. Just like human vision appears solid and complete but is actually a stitched together amalgamation of the small, receptor-dense fovea in the center darting around constantly, and the rest being filled in by the brain instead of direct perception, so is our impression of the world, and we won't know things for sure unless we take time to study them up close.
I'd love to see nature write an article about why a certain part of the world has had such unusually moderate temperature and precipitation of late. Also, if you want to search the whole globe for something extreme happening, you're guaranteed to find it in spades.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah just imagine if a billion people completely changed their way of life.
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. Climate change is going to require changes of at least that scale, whether we reduce emissions or not.
In the next 20-30 years I suspect we’ll just moderate total solar irradiance as-needed by injecting moon dust into L1.
The only issue is if there are powerful countries that are actually benefiting from the warming and don’t want to cool it down bit.