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

What's Really Warming the World?

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 223 posts

Re: What's Really Warming the World?

#31

Post by Udik »

euyyn wrote: post #20
karl11 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sample size of our records is incredibly small when stacked against the history of the earth and all the records we're missing.

What makes you think so? There's plenty of ways to indirectly know past temperatures, even if there wasn't a human writing it down.

Not with the accuracy and resolution of the data we have since last century. When you compare the current time series with the reconstructed ones from the past, you're comparing a day by day thermometric reading with the assembled averages of multiple, very noisy and extremely low frequency samples. Very tricky to say from those what might have been the actual speed of change in the past.

Re: What's Really Warming the World?

#32

Post by gaius »

corradio wrote: post #6
ams6110 wrote: post #5

What is magical about 1880-1910 as the implied "normal" average baseline? Why not 1600? 1400? 2500 BC?

You shouldn't care about what reference is taken. The point is that compared to any reference, the curve is increasing .

The point is that compared to any reference, the curve is increasing

But that in and of itself doesn't mean anything - the Earth has warmed from two ice ages that we know of. The baseline absolutely determines what conclusions can be drawn from the data.

Re: What's Really Warming the World?

#33

Post by emodendroket »

joatmon-snoo wrote: post #28

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think the argument we need is that global warming is happening - yes, there are deniers - I think we need better proof that we're actually fucked if temperatures keep going this way. That's what I see people pushing back against now, not so much the reality that climate change is now happening.

It's like playing whack-a-mole. You'll never convince them.

Re: What's Really Warming the World?

#34

Post by twelfthnight »

vivekd wrote: post #4

What makes me mad about these kinds of data based climate change arguments is that they don't engage with the data in an honest way. The huge problem is 1880 was one of the coldest years in history. That cold period was caused by volcanism, several volcanos erupted causing a cold period that lasted from the 1600s to the late 1800s. This period is known as the little ice age. The worst of this period was in 1816 which…

Here is a look going back further in time (1). If you choose a time earlier than 1880, I think it actually strengthens the case for global warming. The concerning bit is not the record heat we see today, but the rate of change.

(1) https://xkcd.com/1732/

EDIT:

To explicitly address the argument here:

It's not disingenuous to compare to 1880 because if you were to choose any date earlier, you would come to the same conclusion. (It's nice to start with 1880 where we have actual records because then you can avoid arguments about the method you used to make projections about past temperatures).

Re: What's Really Warming the World?

#35

Post by uncle_d »

vivekd wrote: post #4

What makes me mad about these kinds of data based climate change arguments is that they don't engage with the data in an honest way. The huge problem is 1880 was one of the coldest years in history. That cold period was caused by volcanism, several volcanos erupted causing a cold period that lasted from the 1600s to the late 1800s. This period is known as the little ice age. The worst of this period was in 1816 which…

From NASA - volcanic vs solar activity: https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abs/st07500u.html

"volcanos erupted causing a cold period that lasted from the 1600s to the late 1800s"

Correlation vs causation - while the volcanic winter phenomenon is well-known, there are those that propose that solar activity is the primary driver of climate on Earth:

https://www.amazon.com/Neglected-Sun-Precludes-Catastrophe-I...

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/12/winter-is...

Not to say that the greenhouse effect is not real, or that anthropogenic CO2 does not cause warming - just that the magnitude of the effect may well be greatly over-hyped.

Re: What's Really Warming the World?

#36

Post by Shivetya »

ams6110 wrote: post #5

What is magical about 1880-1910 as the implied "normal" average baseline? Why not 1600? 1400? 2500 BC?

see another comment because it is a period that lends itself to showing a stronger increase than exist. the simple truth is that nearly every model still shows more warming than has occurred.

there were some wonderful events in the 1880s, including one of the most amazing snow storms the NY area ever saw, can you imagine fifty foot drifts?

still there is a lot of warming but when we focus on per capita it allows many of the true violators to escape notice (Read Asia (china/india/etc)). plus looking at many sources the impact of C02 ranges from 10 to 30% so how can you factor in somethings whose range is so great. I still think a lot of industrialized raising of livestock isn't fairly accounted for as methane is more dangerous than CO2

just for fun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_1886%E2%80%9387

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_1886_blizzard

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Blizzard_of_1888

though Buffalo would again see thirty to forty foot drifts in 1977

Re: What's Really Warming the World?

#37

Post by grzm »

Spooky23 wrote: post #3

I was actually at a political event yesterday where some derp derp conservative was going on about how this stuff is all hoax. Meanwhile, we are in upstate NY, in late February, sitting outside enjoying the 80 degree weather which is warmer than Los Angeles.

I understand where you're coming from. That said, including "some derp derp conservative" in your comment makes it easy for anyone who disagrees with you to dismiss anything else you say as partisan. Similarly, the issue is climate change. Looking at a single day, no matter how extreme, is an anecdote. The debate around the science supporting climate change is difficult enough without pointing to anecdotes in support of the theory.

Given you chose to comment on this, I believe climate change is something you care about. One of the ways to be more effective in getting something done is to not leave yourself open to easy dismissal by those who disagree with you.

Re: What's Really Warming the World?

#38

Post by lrenaud »

euyyn wrote: post #12
vivekd wrote: post #4

What makes me mad about these kinds of data based climate change arguments is that they don't engage with the data in an honest way. The huge problem is 1880 was one of the coldest years in history. That cold period was caused by volcanism, several volcanos erupted causing a cold period that lasted from the 1600s to the late 1800s. This period is known as the little ice age. The worst of this period was in 1816 which…

> proponents of global warming aren't engaging with the facts in an honest and forthright way. You want to read about global warming from climate scientists, as your questions are easily answered. Peer reviewers are as vicious as in any other science: the concerns you raise here would be the least of their ammunition.

That gives me even less faith in the quality of findings.

Having seen the pathetic state of literature review in the various engineering fields, I cannot expect it to be better in meteorological fields. No doubt there is a certain subset of effective and critical reviewers, but I expect dogma, exciting findings, and name recognition still rule the day.

The most the volume of politics in engineering where our work is not overtly political to those outside outfield is astounding. I don't buy that in a field with so many non-expert pressures applied the review process escapes unadulterated.

Re: What's Really Warming the World?

#39

Post by rpedela »

briandear wrote: post #24
vivekd wrote: post #4

What makes me mad about these kinds of data based climate change arguments is that they don't engage with the data in an honest way. The huge problem is 1880 was one of the coldest years in history. That cold period was caused by volcanism, several volcanos erupted causing a cold period that lasted from the 1600s to the late 1800s. This period is known as the little ice age. The worst of this period was in 1816 which…

It's because global warming politics has nothing to do with temperature. The incentive isn't to cool the planet, but alter the world economic model. Whether or not that's a worthy goal is irrelevant -- using the climate to advance that apparent agenda is fraudulent. Here's more on that theory -- with appropriate links to source material from the UN. https://www.reddit.com/r/climateskeptics/comments/441rl6/un_... This…

Maybe that is the UN's position but I think most people just want energy produced cleanly which helps the environment beyond just global warming which is important for long-term economic health. And it will likely reduce respiratory illness.

Re: What's Really Warming the World?

#40

Post by emodendroket »

lend000 wrote: post #7

Can someone explain why aerosols are decreasing in their graph? A definition of what they consider an aerosol would be a good start, which I didn't see on there. Apparently the term can cover a large number of natural and unnatural compositions of matter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerosol

Weren't they regulated after acid rain and ozone layer concerns in the 90s?
Post reply on HN