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

2025 was the third hottest year on record

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 249 posts

Re: 2025 was the third hottest year on record

#231

Post by ltbarcly3 »

Projectiboga wrote: post #62
ltbarcly3 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what we should do, it's very hard to determine what minimizes harm and maximizes benefits at a global scale. It's certainly not as simple as extremists would like to believe. Certainly it would be much (MUCH) less risky to slow warming as much as possible and maintain constant or slowly reducing CO2 levels. I think from the standpoint of predicting what will happen, my best guess is that people will use…

Were you aware that the last time the planet was estimated to have co2 levels over 420ppm the global temperature was 10 degrees Celsius warmer overall? This is the global equilvant of being locked in a car in a sunlit parking lot.

Were you aware that when CO2 was at 7000ppm the temperature was about the same as when it was 420ppm? What's your point?

Also temperatures in a parked car routinely go over 70C (160F) throughout the entire car.

Re: 2025 was the third hottest year on record

#232

Post by WaxProlix »

networkadmin wrote: post #216
WA wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please attempt steelmanning the global warming greenhouse effect and its consequences as an intellectual exercise.

[flagged]

He was asking you to try to 'steelman', or take seriously the strongest version of, the arguments of your counterparts, rather than being dismissive.

"Plants like CO2" is not a counterargument to "Increased atmoospheric CO2 will have a number of outcomes that are net negative for humanity", so I presume they're asking you to actually think about the argument being made and respond to it, not some other, made up one.

Re: 2025 was the third hottest year on record

#233

Post by 9rx »

tw04 wrote: post #19
networkadmin wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should I spend an hour explaining in detail, only to have my comment be auto-censored again just like the last one was?

It wasn’t auto censored. And you didn’t explain anything, you made a silly and provably false statement and were understandably downvoted almost immediately. Just like if you were to claim the moon landing was faked.

Suppose someone did post that the moon landing was faked. What purpose would downvoting it serve?

1. If posted in good faith, they lose an opportunity to learn. HN should not be joining the ranks of the growing anti-education establishment.

2. If it is trolling, the downvote offers a "read receipt" telling that the wanted attention was found, which only further encourages more trolling. Do not feed the trolls.

There is no situation where downvoting would be a positive contribution. Well, unless you find enjoyment in reading the "why did you downvote this?" comments that sometimes follow. But be careful with that as someday you'll start to see them as just being annoyingly repetitive.

Re: 2025 was the third hottest year on record

#234

Post by card_zero »

qcnguy wrote: post #220
card_zero wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I'll mull it over. I'd like to look at figures for atmospheric carbon in past extremely hot periods (or just annoyingly hot periods), and the modern rate of emissions. It seems lucky if industrialization has an effect that's perceptible yet harmless, that's a fairly narrow window.

Sure, but it's not that lucky. You can't set your house on fire by adding more and more roof insulation, it's the same here. The greenhouse effect saturates, it's not linear https://www.scirp.org/pdf/acs2024144_44701276.pdf There's also lots of feedback loops. CO2 levels were much higher in the past but life thrived, it wasn't waterworld, it was just a lot greener. So it only sounds lucky because climatologists have…

There was the Permian–Triassic extinction event, the "great dying", where apparently the only large land animals to survive were the therocephalians and their prey lystrosaurus, and for both their survival seems to be due to burrowing. CO2 had hit 0.25%.

Re: 2025 was the third hottest year on record

#235

Post by NicuCalcea »

tonymet wrote: post #229
NicuCalcea wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They would know by reading beyond the headline. I am not aware of the colloquialism as you describe it.

This is disingenuous given your training in journalism , writing & linguistics.

You need to stop being intentionally obtuse, nobody's buying it.

Re: 2025 was the third hottest year on record

#236

Post by networkadmin »

9rx wrote: post #233
tw04 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn’t auto censored. And you didn’t explain anything, you made a silly and provably false statement and were understandably downvoted almost immediately. Just like if you were to claim the moon landing was faked.

Suppose someone did post that the moon landing was faked. What purpose would downvoting it serve? 1. If posted in good faith, they lose an opportunity to learn. HN should not be joining the ranks of the growing anti-education establishment. 2. If it is trolling, the downvote offers a "read receipt" telling that the wanted attention was found, which only further encourages more trolling. Do not feed the trolls. There…

[dead]

Re: 2025 was the third hottest year on record

#237

Post by networkadmin »

WaxProlix wrote: post #232
networkadmin wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

He was asking you to try to 'steelman', or take seriously the strongest version of, the arguments of your counterparts, rather than being dismissive. "Plants like CO2" is not a counterargument to "Increased atmoospheric CO2 will have a number of outcomes that are net negative for humanity", so I presume they're asking you to actually think about the argument being made and respond to it, not some other, made up one.

[dead]

Re: 2025 was the third hottest year on record

#238

Post by theshrike79 »

hasley wrote: post #29
cryptoegorophy wrote: post #23

Is there a real practical solution to this? It seems like all proposed solutions in last 40 years are a drop in the ocean, or just a money grab scams. Only thing that really worked for such global scale is the ozone layer repair. Global warming/climate change I guess we should just accept it and adapt?

What about poor people that live in areas in the world that will become completely uninhabitable?

Everyone who is worried about immigration should be worried about climate change.

If nothing changes large parts of India will become completely uninhabitable due to wet-bulb temperatures being lethal without artificial cooling.

Those people will start moving and it won't be a 1000 or 100k people, it'll be millions looking for a place they can live in without, you know, dying.

Re: 2025 was the third hottest year on record

#239

Post by [deleted] »

foltik wrote: post #145
genewitch wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you're right this is much to complicated and important for anyone to understand. just take our word for it that we have to make things more expensive, raise taxes, and restrict freedoms to fix it.

Right, if only scientists who understood it would publish some sort of document explaining their methods and citing the raw sources. > we have to make things more expensive, raise taxes, and restrict freedoms to fix it Aha, right on cue the mask slips off. Desperately trying to justify your own selfishness in the name of "freedom".

[deleted]

Re: 2025 was the third hottest year on record

#240

Post by genewitch »

yongjik wrote: post #139
genewitch wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nevermind satellites, just diff the temp records from say, 1950-2000 and the ones reporting that data today and there's a lot of jank. urbanization around the thermometers also makes it appear as though global temperatures are rising, but all the data really says is that cities are heat islands. first order: verify satellite data. Secondly, move all sensors to locations where they are unaffected by heat islanding and…

I know I sound like a broken radio, but: Google "urban heat island effect site:realclimate.org" Scientists have been aware of the effect and correcting for it since before you heard about it. In general, if you can think of something in five minutes, scientists (whose lifetime job is to consider these problems) have considered that.

top post is from 13 years ago. there are more recent meta studies and research done. ( i know of at least 3, that were 'rebutted' by realclimate.org but not satisfactorily.) it's fine to handwave on a forum "oh of course they've contemplated this you simpleton!" I've kept up with the literature; i've read the IPCC reports, for years. there is contention about this, about the heat record (like, prehistoric).

GISS and GHCN use, among other things, models to homogenize temperatures across UHI and "rural" areas, and these are two i found with a cursory search. there are others. they only agree that it is, for sure, getting warmer. they arrive at different values.

Different.

Values.

The satellite date we've been using since 1978? well, every 10-15 years they get replaced, and the satellites report different TSI values. (i can link a picture of the satellite TSI data as a single graph if you'd like!)

Different.

Values.

> "Instead, most groups (including NASA GISS), were relying on automated computer programs that tried to guess when station changes might have introduced a bias. These programs used statistical algorithms that compared each station record to those of neighboring stations and applying “homogenization adjustments” to the data.

Post reply on HN