US to rewrite its past national climate reports • Hacker News Board

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#201

Post by qcnguy » Sun, Aug 10, 2025, 8:19 PM UTC

ben_w wrote: post #200

qcnguy wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My claim is correct! A trend line calculated for any natural dataset will never be exactly zero. This doesn't mean humans need to speak in scientific notation as if we are robots. You are well aware of that, so please stop playing silly word games that don't advance the discussion. "Is it getting worse? No" is a perfectly reasonable way to describe storm data, which is why governments say the same thing: https://www.…

> My claim is correct! No, it is not. More precisely: it is not justified by the evidence you chose to provide. > A trend line calculated for any natural dataset will never be exactly zero. This doesn't mean humans need to speak in scientific notation as if we are robots. You are well aware of that, so please stop playing silly word games that don't advance the discussion. The phrase "No trend" is a perfectly reasona…

Now do from 1900-2025. Remember, if climate change makes storms worse, then storms should have got clearly worse over that period because CO2 emissions have been continuous. That's not compatible with the story told by the data and I think you do know that.

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#202

Post by ben_w » Sun, Aug 10, 2025, 8:47 PM UTC

qcnguy wrote: post #201

ben_w wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My claim is correct! No, it is not. More precisely: it is not justified by the evidence you chose to provide. > A trend line calculated for any natural dataset will never be exactly zero. This doesn't mean humans need to speak in scientific notation as if we are robots. You are well aware of that, so please stop playing silly word games that don't advance the discussion. The phrase "No trend" is a perfectly reasona…

Now do from 1900-2025. Remember, if climate change makes storms worse, then storms should have got clearly worse over that period because CO2 emissions have been continuous. That's not compatible with the story told by the data and I think you do know that.

1900-2025 has an average of 93.6.

So, between the values of the first and last 50 years. So it backs my point and still denies yours.

This time, do you want to cherry-pick a specific date range that actually fits the results you expect from your apparently pre-existing belief there's no trend, or are you going to accept that line go up?

Save you some time, here's the rolling averages with 10, 20, and 50 year horizons: https://pasteboard.co/rQ49kvY8YeBU.png

Average is forward from any given date on the chart and standard spreadsheet use of "average" function, which is why (if you look closely) you'll see the right side is spiky and they all line up perfectly when that's clearly silly.

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#203

Post by 1659447091 » Sun, Aug 10, 2025, 8:57 PM UTC

AlecSchueler wrote: post #185

1659447091 wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're evil. Malignant/Malicious/Malevolent yes -- absolutely; not evil -- not yet.

?? Why not, where are you drawing that line? You say "yet" as if you at least recognise they're headed that way but the definition issue is still a formality.

Looking closely, they are pushing and testing the bounds of the system*. Our system works slowly enough (a design feature) that we only hear the actions of the testing and boundaries and they make sure thats all we hear all the time (by design, they want people in fear and anger so they can harness that and use it to fuel their support in manipulative ways; +sleight of hand, grifting etc).

What we don't hear being shouted from the same people are the parts being reverted; for example, they say they can't and won't bring back people they illegally deported to a 3rd county prison. Yet people are being brought back; things are working/making their way through the system.

Thats the line. We still have a system and it is working as intended. Evil is getting rid of the system, complete shattering so that the institutions of our republic cease to exist -- not by cohesion [I meant coercion but cohesion/falling in line too] or party politics/domination, but complete cessation. Where there are no non-violent options to course correct by the people. We still have that. For now.

This is not the first time this country has gone through these types of challenges. It is the first in which so many people are aware of it and being used to fuel it and fuel fear at such a large scale (a method of control). They (current people causing the commotion) want the people who do not support them to be so angry and emotionally exhausted that they will stop resisting administrations efforts. As a lover of history [edit to help the unhinged llm bot that has blessed my comment: love of reading history], I still believe in this country and that we will get through it together. Like we have many, many times before.

*It's like a caricature of a teenager that harms small animals. Not all of them turn into serial killers, sometimes that's all it is. Right now they are the teenagers harming small animals phase.

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#204

Post by cindyllm » Sun, Aug 10, 2025, 9:16 PM UTC

1659447091 wrote: post #203

AlecSchueler wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

?? Why not, where are you drawing that line? You say "yet" as if you at least recognise they're headed that way but the definition issue is still a formality.

Looking closely, they are pushing and testing the bounds of the system*. Our system works slowly enough (a design feature) that we only hear the actions of the testing and boundaries and they make sure thats all we hear all the time (by design, they want people in fear and anger so they can harness that and use it to fuel their support in manipulative ways; +sleight of hand, grifting etc). What we don't hear being sh…

[dead]

Re: US to rewrite its past national climate reports

#205

Post by qcnguy » Sun, Aug 10, 2025, 9:18 PM UTC

ben_w wrote: post #202

qcnguy wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now do from 1900-2025. Remember, if climate change makes storms worse, then storms should have got clearly worse over that period because CO2 emissions have been continuous. That's not compatible with the story told by the data and I think you do know that.

1900-2025 has an average of 93.6. So, between the values of the first and last 50 years. So it backs my point and still denies yours. This time, do you want to cherry-pick a specific date range that actually fits the results you expect from your apparently pre-existing belief there's no trend, or are you going to accept that line go up ? Save you some time, here's the rolling averages with 10, 20, and 50 year horizon…

But you're not addressing my point, so you cannot be denying it.

You can obviously compute a trend line on this data set, as with any. That doesn't mean the trend matters or can be described in normal English as "storms getting worse", which is why even people like the British government who are fully on board with Net Zero don't try the argument you're trying here. They explicitly say the trend line isn't compelling, even.

So what point are you trying to make, exactly? That they're wrong and it is compelling? Or that on HN there's a rule against describing data in normal ways?

Let's boil this down to the only thing that matters: do you think people should be alarmed by this data? If so, why, when others who have studied it don't?