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

The polar vortex is hitting the brakes

climate.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 349 posts

Re: The polar vortex is hitting the brakes

#91

Post by reaperducer »

techright75 wrote: post #65
msy wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re briefing Elon Musk on China war plans, I don’t think the current leadership will care much where they source weather data as long as it aligns with the current ideological purity purge.

There's no proof he was part of any briefing, and pretty much everyone has denied this has happened. You need to diversify your news sources beyond the ones that confirm your beliefs, truthful or not.

There's no proof he was part of any briefing

I guess you missed the video of him going into the Pentagon, and then coming out saying he had a great meeting.

It was all over the "legacy" media that the current legacy president doesn't watch or obsess over.

Re: The polar vortex is hitting the brakes

#93

Post by tremon »

throwaway657656 wrote: post #80
nukem222 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fahrenheit was designed with humans in mind If there was a design, it's not clear what the intent was. It seems about twice as precise as it needs to be (i certainly can't perceive 1F°—for all intents and purposes, 70 feels about the same as 69 and 71) and doesn't seem to correlate to any scale that is immediately based off the needs of humans. At least compared to celcius.

Farenheit set 100F to be his wife's internal temperature. 0F was the freezing point of brine and humans are mostly brine. F is human centric.[0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit

So basically, Fahrenheit chose 100°F to be the temperate when he gets hard and 0°F to be the temperature when his wife gets hard?

Re: The polar vortex is hitting the brakes

#94

Post by technothrasher »

throwaway657656 wrote: post #80
nukem222 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fahrenheit was designed with humans in mind If there was a design, it's not clear what the intent was. It seems about twice as precise as it needs to be (i certainly can't perceive 1F°—for all intents and purposes, 70 feels about the same as 69 and 71) and doesn't seem to correlate to any scale that is immediately based off the needs of humans. At least compared to celcius.

Farenheit set 100F to be his wife's internal temperature. 0F was the freezing point of brine and humans are mostly brine. F is human centric.[0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit

He says in his original paper that the top point of his reference scale is 96, not 100 for the point where "Alcohol expands up to this point when it is held in the mouth or under the armpit of a living man in good health". He originally based his scale on 12, and then got more precise by increasing each division by two several times, ending up with 96.

Re: The polar vortex is hitting the brakes

#95

Post by jMyles »

zeagle wrote: post #6

Interesting article. We are past the usual -20 or lower six weeks where I am so feels like a typical year. If I choose a random northern place like Rankin Inlet NU it is still cold up there with a low of -33 tonight. It is a sign of the times when I think huh, climate.gov… is that a reputable source?

.gov sources being disreputable is not new. My generation grew up with the food pyramid.

The silver lining is that understanding of this disrepute is nearing universality.

Re: The polar vortex is hitting the brakes

#96

Post by dragonwriter »

hallway_monitor wrote: post #67
stevenbedrick wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m here to say that the cuts to the NSF, NIH, DoE (both energy and education) and IRS are not overhyped at all; if anything they are badly underhyped. What is overhyped is the actual “savings” that they are producing with all of this.

What would you cut? I don’t know what I would, but I do know that the United States is heading for a financial apocalypse unless drastic measures are taken now. I know there’s a lot of hysteria around this, but I’m still at the place where I can be optimistic that the US will come out ahead. At least they’re doing something besides spending more money and acting like everything‘s OK. From a long-term financial stabil…

> What would you cut?

Were I concerned about fiscal balance, I wouldn't view cutting as the best way to solve the problem, I would raise high-end taxes.

> I do know that the United States is heading for a financial apocalypse unless drastic measures are taken now.

Insofar as that’s true, it is a direct result of the actions taking thus far this administration, not something they are correcting—and not through fiscal imbalance causing wider problems but by a broad economic collapse directly (which, because the broad economy drives revenue, has fiscal balance problems as a second order impact.)

Re: The polar vortex is hitting the brakes

#97

Post by atkailash »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #90
comrade1234 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Minus 33 (the temp the parent referenced) is about the same in Celsius and Fahrenheit. I’m an American that lives in Europe but travels to MN/WI for family and noticed that convergence.

-40 is the actual convergence point.

I believe that’s why it was qualified with “almost”

Re: The polar vortex is hitting the brakes

#98

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

OKRainbowKid wrote: post #63
kulahan wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly figured it’d be one of the first. That being said, France, UK, and USA are all moving towards more nuclear power. It might be at the point where it’s no longer possible to pretend we care about solar/wind, and can no longer realistically ignore climate change. I’ve been saying for years that we’d know when governments were finally getting scared of climate change because we’d see real, very fast moves to i…

I don't understand why acknowledgment of climate change would lead to nuclear over solar/wind.

There are no "unsolved problems" for nuclear (because the safe storage of fissile waste for 10k years isn't a problem we need to solve, apparently). By contrast, getting solar+wind fully up and running requires totally solving the storage problem. Plus the libs love it. Hence ... nuclear.

Re: The polar vortex is hitting the brakes

#100

Post by matthewdgreen »

OKRainbowKid wrote: post #63
kulahan wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly figured it’d be one of the first. That being said, France, UK, and USA are all moving towards more nuclear power. It might be at the point where it’s no longer possible to pretend we care about solar/wind, and can no longer realistically ignore climate change. I’ve been saying for years that we’d know when governments were finally getting scared of climate change because we’d see real, very fast moves to i…

I don't understand why acknowledgment of climate change would lead to nuclear over solar/wind.

There seems to be a delusional part of the Internet that is convinced that nuclear is the only future, and solar and wind aren’t. To settle this, you basically need to look at what China is doing —- which is to build a lot of nuclear and then exponentially more solar and wind. We’re a huge percentage of the way down the slide to a mostly renewable world with storage, and some nuclear at the edges.

But it isn’t a competition. I’d be just as happy if things were going the other way. Having a clear mental model of the world is just useful. https://cleantechnica.com/2024/01/12/nuclear-continues-to-la...

Post reply on HN