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

Earth had hottest 3-months on record; unprecedented sea temps & extreme weather

public.wmo.int

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 591 posts

Re: Earth had hottest 3-months on record; unprecedented sea temps & extreme weather

#11

Post by janosdebugs »

echelon wrote: post #4

We're technically still in an ice age [1]. How far does this need to go to reach the end of that ice age [2]? The Cretaceous period was over ten degrees warmer than our current period [3,4,5]. It supported a lot (though much different) biodiversity. How long would it take us to push into these temperature ranges? And how long to exceed them? How much species diversity will we lose at each half degree increment from t…

Even if that is the case, the agriculture needed to feed the amount of people on the planet doesn't seem like it will survive and be efficient if this keeps on going. It doesn't matter if it's human-made or not, if we don't get it under control, a whole lot of people will die and the current amount of refugees will seem quaint in comparison.

The planet will probably be fine in a few hundred thousand years, it's just us humans that are not going to be here.

Re: Earth had hottest 3-months on record; unprecedented sea temps & extreme weather

#12

Post by ForestCritter »

NotYourLawyer wrote: post #5

>If the C3S dataset only currently starts in 1979, how can you then provide temperatures relating to the pre-industrial era? >In order to relate global mean temperature derived from the C3S dataset (ERA5) to the pre-industrial era, we use the estimate that the 1981-2010 reference period is approximately 0.69°C and that the 1991-2020 reference period is approximately 0.88°C warmer than the period 1850-1900, the time p…

I can't back it up because it was a televised congressional committee hearing and I don't remember the name of the scientist but he said that his data he had been studying and working with that was published in the 1940's was different from the data that is now published for that same time period. He made no accusations he just said his data showed no signs of global warming. So, I guess as a skeptic, yes this does make me think they are making it all up.

Re: Earth had hottest 3-months on record; unprecedented sea temps & extreme weather

#13

Post by myshpa »

rtpg wrote: post #9

The conspiracy-minded part of me really wants to link this year to the sulfur reductions in ship emissions kicking in this year. The fact that there's basically only one person really trumpeting this in a way kind of indistinguishable from things I know are false is hard though. Hank Green pointing out that we could just spray water into the air to get the same effect (and avoid the whole "sulfur" thing in general) g…

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/30/radical-...

Dismissing SRM technology, Prof Joeri Rogelj of Imperial College, London, called it “irresponsible, dangerous and a threat to the manageability” of our survival, saying: “It is not a solution but an extremely dangerous band-aid that covers up the global warming problem without healing it, creating a false and unwarranted sense of climate safety while the core of the problem continues to fester.”

https://phys.org/news/2023-08-viewpoint-guardrails-geoengine...

While theoretically capable of cooling the planet, solar radiation management could have drastic side effects by shifting patterns of global atmospheric circulation that can lead to more extreme weather events. It also does nothing to reduce harms of excess greenhouse gases, including ocean acidification.

Re: Earth had hottest 3-months on record; unprecedented sea temps & extreme weather

#15

Post by flooow »

NotYourLawyer wrote: post #5

>If the C3S dataset only currently starts in 1979, how can you then provide temperatures relating to the pre-industrial era? >In order to relate global mean temperature derived from the C3S dataset (ERA5) to the pre-industrial era, we use the estimate that the 1981-2010 reference period is approximately 0.69°C and that the 1991-2020 reference period is approximately 0.88°C warmer than the period 1850-1900, the time p…

Obviously clearer is better, but do you think a scientific body should be expected to go out of its way to convey information in a way that would be difficult for bad-faith actors to willfully misinterpret? Because I don't.

Re: Earth had hottest 3-months on record; unprecedented sea temps & extreme weather

#16

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

NotYourLawyer wrote: post #5

>If the C3S dataset only currently starts in 1979, how can you then provide temperatures relating to the pre-industrial era? >In order to relate global mean temperature derived from the C3S dataset (ERA5) to the pre-industrial era, we use the estimate that the 1981-2010 reference period is approximately 0.69°C and that the 1991-2020 reference period is approximately 0.88°C warmer than the period 1850-1900, the time p…

Honestly, at this point I'm beyond caring much what stuff sounds like "to a skeptic". The past 15 or so years have proven to me that "skeptics" can believe whatever TF they want, all logic and and reason be damned, as long as there is a snazzy YouTube video pointing out how it's all a CoNSp1RacY by the Secret Global Elite.

I'm done with trying to convince people who have made it extremely adamant that they aren't willing to be convinced.

Re: Earth had hottest 3-months on record; unprecedented sea temps & extreme weather

#17

Post by willcipriano »

janosdebugs wrote: post #11
echelon wrote: post #4

We're technically still in an ice age [1]. How far does this need to go to reach the end of that ice age [2]? The Cretaceous period was over ten degrees warmer than our current period [3,4,5]. It supported a lot (though much different) biodiversity. How long would it take us to push into these temperature ranges? And how long to exceed them? How much species diversity will we lose at each half degree increment from t…

Even if that is the case, the agriculture needed to feed the amount of people on the planet doesn't seem like it will survive and be efficient if this keeps on going. It doesn't matter if it's human-made or not, if we don't get it under control, a whole lot of people will die and the current amount of refugees will seem quaint in comparison. The planet will probably be fine in a few hundred thousand years, it's just…

> agriculture needed to feed the amount of people doesn't seem like it will survive and be efficient if this keeps on going

The earth is getting greener, rapidly. The maximum human carrying capacity is probably higher than ever and populations are shrinking at the same time.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fer...

Re: Earth had hottest 3-months on record; unprecedented sea temps & extreme weather

#18

Post by mindcandy »

echelon wrote: post #4

We're technically still in an ice age [1]. How far does this need to go to reach the end of that ice age [2]? The Cretaceous period was over ten degrees warmer than our current period [3,4,5]. It supported a lot (though much different) biodiversity. How long would it take us to push into these temperature ranges? And how long to exceed them? How much species diversity will we lose at each half degree increment from t…

Climate change deniers tell each other we are coming out of The Little Ice Age that started in 1200AD. Which is technically correct.

What they don’t tell each other is that “Little” is an understatement and we shot way past the prior “Medieval Warm Period” long ago and are only accelerating.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age#/media/File%3...

Re: Earth had hottest 3-months on record; unprecedented sea temps & extreme weather

#20

Post by jncfhnb »

willcipriano wrote: post #17
janosdebugs wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if that is the case, the agriculture needed to feed the amount of people on the planet doesn't seem like it will survive and be efficient if this keeps on going. It doesn't matter if it's human-made or not, if we don't get it under control, a whole lot of people will die and the current amount of refugees will seem quaint in comparison. The planet will probably be fine in a few hundred thousand years, it's just…

> agriculture needed to feed the amount of people doesn't seem like it will survive and be efficient if this keeps on going The earth is getting greener, rapidly. The maximum human carrying capacity is probably higher than ever and populations are shrinking at the same time. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fer...

That is irrelevant to the quote you cited.
Post reply on HN