Perhaps we're also measuring temps more than ever with greater data collection.
Why is this observation relevant?
Northern summer was hottest on record by a significant margin
21–30 of 108 posts
Re: Northern summer was hottest on record by a significant margin
#22> Burgess said the summer had been one of tumbling records and it would only get worse if the world continues to burn planet-heating fossil fuels. It would get worse even if we stopped burning fossil fuels immediately. Because of lag effects, tipping points, and masking.
The argument to immediately stop burning fossil fuels is a radical position which few take seriously. But you seem to be arguing that it'd be pointless in the same way that pressing the break in the immediate moment before a car accident is futile. Sure it might not help a lot, but I'd argue it's still the right call and will rarely make the situation worse.
They clarified they mean the opposite: to illustrate how dire the situation is.
Re: Northern summer was hottest on record by a significant margin
#23Oh, yes, its not linear, its exponential the moment..
Yeah, they have a graph of temperatures from 1940 onwards with a linear trend line— but just by looking at the data points, it seems that an exponential curve would fit the data better. Maybe someone more skilled than me has analyzed that already? Because just eyeballing it, is really making me nervous about the exponential future projection of that graph of the next 20 years
It's supposed to be quadratic, IIRC. Total GHG is linear, then integrate over time. Of course this is a crude approach, but it's suggestive.
Re: Northern summer was hottest on record by a significant margin
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was discussed in the latest episode of The Ezra Klein Show[1]. Apparently aerosols artificially held down temperatures roughly 1940–1980, after which they started to be reduced (from my memory of what they discussed). So it might be that the contribution of the greenhouse effect is masked in that period of the temperature graph. 1: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/05/opinion/ezra-klein-podcas...
Were the aerosols from above-ground nuclear bomb detonations? I remember seeing a graph years and years ago that showed the temperatures really starting to rise was above-ground nuclear bomb testing was banned. Crazy spur-of-the-moment idea - should we pursue dumping some sort of aerosol into the upper atmosphere to reduce the amount of heat Earth receives from the sun? Obviously this shouldn't be pursued in lieu of…
YC backed: https://makesunsets.com/
Re: Northern summer was hottest on record by a significant margin
#25> Burgess said the summer had been one of tumbling records and it would only get worse if the world continues to burn planet-heating fossil fuels. It would get worse even if we stopped burning fossil fuels immediately. Because of lag effects, tipping points, and masking.
So the solution would be to continue emitting greenhouse gases and ensure it will also get worse in 30 or 50 years? > The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago, the second best time is now. Said to be a Chinese proverb, but I haven't extensively verified. The only viable solution right now to combat global warming is to immediately stop emitting greenhouse gases, even if there is a lag effect.
> Said to be a Chinese proverb
Unlikely, cf. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2021/12/29/plant-tree/
There's an old Chinese proverb for this, it goes "most of the time it's not a Chinese proverb". Ah, words of sages, the wisdom of ages.
Re: Northern summer was hottest on record by a significant margin
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was discussed in the latest episode of The Ezra Klein Show[1]. Apparently aerosols artificially held down temperatures roughly 1940–1980, after which they started to be reduced (from my memory of what they discussed). So it might be that the contribution of the greenhouse effect is masked in that period of the temperature graph. 1: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/05/opinion/ezra-klein-podcas...
Were the aerosols from above-ground nuclear bomb detonations? I remember seeing a graph years and years ago that showed the temperatures really starting to rise was above-ground nuclear bomb testing was banned. Crazy spur-of-the-moment idea - should we pursue dumping some sort of aerosol into the upper atmosphere to reduce the amount of heat Earth receives from the sun? Obviously this shouldn't be pursued in lieu of…
Aerosols were probably sulfuric acid. Unfortunately this has negative side-effects. Aerosol can also be produced by monoterpenes, e.g. pinene, but there is disagreement about whether this can be helpful.
Re: Northern summer was hottest on record by a significant margin
#27> Burgess said the summer had been one of tumbling records and it would only get worse if the world continues to burn planet-heating fossil fuels. It would get worse even if we stopped burning fossil fuels immediately. Because of lag effects, tipping points, and masking.
The argument to immediately stop burning fossil fuels is a radical position which few take seriously. But you seem to be arguing that it'd be pointless in the same way that pressing the break in the immediate moment before a car accident is futile. Sure it might not help a lot, but I'd argue it's still the right call and will rarely make the situation worse.
I'm not arguing a position for or against action, I'm pointing out that things are worse than the quote claims, and I'm pointing it out because there is a long history of downplaying the severity of the situation when it comes to this issue.
Whether it's pointless or not is up for debate. Your brake pressing analogy could be slightly off. Rather than being in the moment before the car accident, we could be in the moment just after driving off of a cliff. In that case, brake pressing is indeed futile. But I think the system we're in is too complex to know for sure, and I'm all for people wanting to say that they are interested in doing anything they can. I'm also all for people actually taking action rather than just saying they are on board with the idea. Also...just do nothing if that's your preference.
Re: Northern summer was hottest on record by a significant margin
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was discussed in the latest episode of The Ezra Klein Show[1]. Apparently aerosols artificially held down temperatures roughly 1940–1980, after which they started to be reduced (from my memory of what they discussed). So it might be that the contribution of the greenhouse effect is masked in that period of the temperature graph. 1: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/05/opinion/ezra-klein-podcas...
Were the aerosols from above-ground nuclear bomb detonations? I remember seeing a graph years and years ago that showed the temperatures really starting to rise was above-ground nuclear bomb testing was banned. Crazy spur-of-the-moment idea - should we pursue dumping some sort of aerosol into the upper atmosphere to reduce the amount of heat Earth receives from the sun? Obviously this shouldn't be pursued in lieu of…
Sulphur oxides have been proven to reduce global warming - when the ocean freighters cleaned up their emissions in a bid to stop pollution we saw increases in temperature. I hear people suggesting that we dump a ton of that in the upper atmosphere, but adding more crap to the air to try and stop the previous crap reminds me of how the old lady who swallowed the fly ended up with horse-sized problems.
Re: Northern summer was hottest on record by a significant margin
#29Oh, yes, its not linear, its exponential the moment..
Population growth was exponential too, until it stopped being exponential. Real world doesn't always follow our well-behaved mathematical functions.
Re: Northern summer was hottest on record by a significant margin
#30> Burgess said the summer had been one of tumbling records and it would only get worse if the world continues to burn planet-heating fossil fuels. It would get worse even if we stopped burning fossil fuels immediately. Because of lag effects, tipping points, and masking.
So the solution would be to continue emitting greenhouse gases and ensure it will also get worse in 30 or 50 years? > The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago, the second best time is now. Said to be a Chinese proverb, but I haven't extensively verified. The only viable solution right now to combat global warming is to immediately stop emitting greenhouse gases, even if there is a lag effect.
Immediately stopping all greenhouse gas emissions would kill a lot of people quickly by breaking supply and production chains for pretty much everything. So that is not an option.