September was the most anomalously hot month ever • Hacker News Board

Re: September was the most anomalously hot month ever

#221

Post by nologic01 » Thu, Oct 05, 2023, 3:51 PM UTC

esarbe wrote: post #97

hotpotamus wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps those drifting into panic and depression are doing so because we are now clearly seeing undeniable effects and yet denial persists while CO2 emissions creep up seemingly inexorably?

No, I'm drifting into panic because I've seen that rational discourse just doesn't change anything. There's always a reason to not-do anything, to not-upset anything, because, you know, the GDP, the stock market, think of the all the people involved in oil, etc. Meanwhile we've shifted from ridicule to denial through downplaying and the outright delusional "this could actually be good". What is not happening are any…

To paraphrase, dont get panicky, get even. This is a long-term marathon that will change all societies and economies one way or another. The objective is to make sure its eventually a better place. This transormation is not going to be the result of panic thinking or action. GDP, stocks etc are not eternal constructs, they were invented and adopted in a certain context. Well that context is falling apart. But the new constructs are not born yet.

There might be some easy, immediate "quick-wins" in change of behaviors or new technology, but they are not that many, or particularly impactful. Take for example coal. In various places they thought that eliminating it is a no brainer. Its dirty, lots of CO2 emissions etc. Well guess what. Many poorer countries only have access to coal and they are not particularly keen to remain energy poor to make up for the historical excesses or others.

Re: September was the most anomalously hot month ever

#222

Post by ibejoeb » Thu, Oct 05, 2023, 3:51 PM UTC

1970-01-01 wrote: post #190

yakattak wrote: post #4

Can someone help me understand why when there’s a record cold month, there’s a convo like this > non-believer: “see global warming doesn’t exist” > believer: “you can’t measure this on a monthly scale, it’s too slow of a process” But often when the case is reversed, it’s used as evidence of global warming? I know global warming is real and I am a firm believer in it but this duality seems to cause a lot of issues whe…

Hit them with this fact: In June 2023, none of the Earth’s surface had record cold , year-to-date. Tangent: I have a very good source for this fact, however searching will not reveal it. The current state of search is horrible. I'm interested if anyone can find it. I'll link to it later this evening.

Questions:

1. "In June" or "As of June" really makes a difference. I wouldn't expect record breaking lows northern hemisphere summer, where 2/3rds of the land is.

2. Is it typical to have a record-breaking cold every year? Why is this even notable?

I didn't find your source, but NOAA's June '23 climate report says "No state experienced a top-10 coldest June on record for this six-month period," so that's something, but it's just for the US. But it also says it was a pretty mixed bag: "Above-average temperatures were observed across much of the eastern contiguous U.S. and in parts of the Northwest. Near- to below-average temperatures were observed from the northern Plains to the West Coast."

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/monthly-report/n...

Re: September was the most anomalously hot month ever

#223

Post by Filligree » Thu, Oct 05, 2023, 3:53 PM UTC

skepticATX wrote: post #15

yakattak wrote: post #4

Can someone help me understand why when there’s a record cold month, there’s a convo like this > non-believer: “see global warming doesn’t exist” > believer: “you can’t measure this on a monthly scale, it’s too slow of a process” But often when the case is reversed, it’s used as evidence of global warming? I know global warming is real and I am a firm believer in it but this duality seems to cause a lot of issues whe…

Have there actually be any global record cold months in the 21st century? Sure, we have months that are cooler than our (elevated) average, but I don't think we're breaking any records. On the other hand, "hottest month ever" is not uncommon to hear. That plus the fact that we are trending in the wrong direction might be cause for alarm.

No, the last one was in 1917.

Re: September was the most anomalously hot month ever

#224

Post by avgcorrection » Thu, Oct 05, 2023, 3:53 PM UTC

danShumway wrote: post #212

azinman2 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because communist countries don’t pollute?

There are issues with the quote, and Communist countries do pollute, but if the argument is (as avgcorrection stated): > Then it's the small task of changing the economic model of the entire developed (and less developed, and exploited) world. The model that all of the richest and most powerful people depend on. Then yes, you're talking specifically about Capitalism at this point; avgcorrection is saying that we can'…

It's got nothing to do with imagination or ideology and everything to do with the material reality that the the most powerful forces that the world has ever seen will crush you if you try to change the existing system.

Re: September was the most anomalously hot month ever

#225

Post by zirgs » Thu, Oct 05, 2023, 3:55 PM UTC

Yup - it felt like the summer has been shifted forward by one month.

Re: September was the most anomalously hot month ever

#226

Post by noknownsender » Thu, Oct 05, 2023, 3:55 PM UTC

nologic01 wrote: post #50

> Two main factors are at play in driving temperatures to such extremes: their inexorable increase from burning fossil fuels and an El Niño event that is shaping up to be a strong one. It would be quite educational to attribute in more detail the impact of these two factors. The degree of "El Nino" influence is presumably known, and if its strength is not related with global warming in complicated and unknown ways it…

If there is a potion of the population that is "sitting on the fence about climate change", it is highly unlikely that they "can be convinced by a clear and well founded explanation of what is happening"

Anybody capable of that, would either no longer be sitting on the fence, or are highly unlikely to be reading this article.

Also, the basic premise of your comment assumes that the effects on the monthly temperature can be cleanly broken down categorically into "fossil fuel related" and "El Nino related", which presupposes that a stronger and more frequent El Nino events are unrelated to the burning of fossil fuels.

The facts the human impact on climate change are overwhelming, both in their abundance and scope of impact. Pretending that they don't exist, or treating them as a tangential issue to be put aside so as to appeal to a skeptical and/or ignorant minority, serves no purpose other than to undercut the facts.

Re: September was the most anomalously hot month ever

#227

Post by danShumway » Thu, Oct 05, 2023, 3:57 PM UTC

nemo44x wrote: post #118

Workaccount2 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure the wealthy coastal elite, rolling in the cash mountains of globalization arbitrage and extolling the virtues of humanitarianism, will be bending over backwards to build refugee camps and in turn permanent housing in their towns to accommodate mass migrations of third world climate refugees.

The same people that as of today [1] waived 26 Federal laws so they can begin building a border wall after dismantling and selling for pennies on the dollar the previous one that was being built. It’s funny how something considered racist is now considered necessary now that the migrants are being dumped in their front yards. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/05/politics/biden-administration...

If you're trying to make an argument that mass climate refugees will be resettled humanely and won't be turned away to die, then saying "look, cruelty to migrants is a bipartisan problem" is not really doing you any favors.

Re: September was the most anomalously hot month ever

#228

Post by esarbe » Thu, Oct 05, 2023, 4:00 PM UTC

gottorf wrote: post #161

esarbe wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's an uneducated viewpoint that is supported by the deliberate misinformation of the oil and gas lobby. There are alternatives, there have always been alternatives. Better ones, cheaper ones.

I posit that any deliberate misinformation by the oil and gas lobby can and will be equally matched by deliberate misinformation by the wind and solar lobby. There's no reason to believe that the former is composed of evil people who mislead for the sake of profit, and the latter of good people who just want the best for everybody. If there are "better and cheaper" alternatives available right now, market forces will…

> I posit that any deliberate misinformation by the oil and gas lobby can and will be equally matched

The economic and political power of the oil and gas lobby is magnitudes larger than the economic and political power of the wind and solar lobby. We're talking about entrenched interests here.

Also, wind and solar didn't spent more than fifty years spreading misinformation and denialism about an existential threat to our global human civilization, framing and defaming credible scientists.

If there's ever an existential threat to our global human civilization through wind and solar and the wind and solar lobby is found to spread misinformation, framing and defaming credible scientists, I'm willing to revisit the topic.

Until then I'm not playing this game "both-sideism". There's a real and actual culprit here.

> If there are "better and cheaper" alternatives available right now, market forces will assure their dominance.

That's the "free market" fallacy. But we don't have a free market. We have have trillions of yearly subsidies for oil and gas[0], we've had it for decades. We spent trillions building up oil and gas infrastructure. To expect wind and solar to compete on such an uneven playing field where even the rules of the game are written by the fossil fuel lobby is ludicrous[1].

Oh, by the way. Power generation through wind and solar has been lower then all and any fossil fuels, for years[2]. So much for "the market will solve it".

[0] https://www.imf.org/en/Blogs/Articles/2023/08/24/fossil-fuel...

[1] https://www.americanprogress.org/article/oil-lobbyists-use-r...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_electricity

Re: September was the most anomalously hot month ever

#229

Post by cm2012 » Thu, Oct 05, 2023, 4:01 PM UTC

Filligree wrote: post #217

cm2012 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I'd happily bet that even with extra wet bulb events, death rate will be lower and life expectancy higher at the equator. And I would assign a .0001% chance of a single wet bulb event killing millions of people.

I’ll take that bet, at 1000:1 odds; that should still be profitable for you. How do you want to handle it?

Not worth my time at those odds to set it up

Re: September was the most anomalously hot month ever

#230

Post by Aunche » Thu, Oct 05, 2023, 4:03 PM UTC

flagrant_taco wrote: post #91

nologic01 wrote: post #50

> Two main factors are at play in driving temperatures to such extremes: their inexorable increase from burning fossil fuels and an El Niño event that is shaping up to be a strong one. It would be quite educational to attribute in more detail the impact of these two factors. The degree of "El Nino" influence is presumably known, and if its strength is not related with global warming in complicated and unknown ways it…

The debate over exact causes has always felt misguided to me. The planet is extremely complex, human impact on the planet is largely based on estimates and modeling, and at the end of the day an understanding of why it's getting hotter isn't itself a course correction. There are such obvious first steps we could take without a complete understanding of cause if we really cared. We could easily cut our use of fossil f…

> We could easily cut our use of fossil fuels if we weren't trying to balance that with an arbitrary GDP growth target

Believe it or not, only a handful of people genuinely care about "GDP growth targets" and they have very little influence on environmental policy. The reason why politicians oppose sweeping regulation to stop climate change is because they'd lose their jobs if they intentionally caused gas prices to rise or cause a recession.