31–40 of 152 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Granted, but I can just picture the people posting this to Facebook citing it as definitive proof that the world is melting.
If your standard is worrying about what people will post on FB then paralysis is your only option.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If your standard is worrying about what people will post on FB then paralysis is your only option.
What? Facebook shapes public opinion, so does this site. Is public opinion not worth worrying about?
Anecdotal: Here in Toronto, it's been 16˚C this past week. In February. We've had about 2 or 3 real snowfalls that stuck around for a few days before melting. As somebody who loves ice skating outside, it's really frustrating. And I love the snow. Every year it seems like the winter gets a little milder...
yes it does.
Using events like this to illustrate that global warming is happening is about as scientifically significant as when Trump used the recent US cold snap to imply that global warming isn't happening. I'm not saying climate change doesn't exist--it certainly does--but outlying events like this aren't by themselves particularly unusual. "Normal", after all, is at the top of a bell curve, and deviations from normal should…
Using events like this to illustrate that global warming is happening is about as scientifically significant as when Trump used the recent US cold snap to imply that global warming isn't happening. I'm not saying climate change doesn't exist--it certainly does--but outlying events like this aren't by themselves particularly unusual. "Normal", after all, is at the top of a bell curve, and deviations from normal should…
At this point believing or not believing in climate change is analogous to religion. I have trouble believing any facts or data would swing a significant portion of either side of the debate. Denying climate change is easy. We're not going to see places like New York City move swiftly underwater and the problem is so abstract it's easy to call BS. Short of Trump changing his mind and using his super power of convinci…
Didn't the same happen last year, with arctic polar region being warmer than sub-arctic latitudes? Maybe it's the new normal climate or at least semi-persistent like El Niño?
It actually says so in the article, “This next batch of abnormally warm air is forecast to shoot the gap between Greenland and northern Europe through the Greenland and Barents seas. Similar circumstances occurred in December 2016, when the temperature at the North Pole last flirted with the melting point in the dark, dead of winter. Similarly large jumps in temperature were documented in November 2016 and December 2…
While we're quoting the article:
> These kinds of temperature anomalies in the Arctic have become commonplace in winter in the past few years.
Implying they haven't been in the past.
Warmer temperatures will mean we may need to change where we farm our food and move some cities but it's much better than things getting colder. It may even be better than the current climate, given it may actually increase the amount of land where food is arable.
Sure. Great idea. Brilliant. Why wouldn't we welcome it?
Anecdotal: Here in Toronto, it's been 16˚C this past week. In February. We've had about 2 or 3 real snowfalls that stuck around for a few days before melting. As somebody who loves ice skating outside, it's really frustrating. And I love the snow. Every year it seems like the winter gets a little milder...
Using events like this to illustrate that global warming is happening is about as scientifically significant as when Trump used the recent US cold snap to imply that global warming isn't happening. I'm not saying climate change doesn't exist--it certainly does--but outlying events like this aren't by themselves particularly unusual. "Normal", after all, is at the top of a bell curve, and deviations from normal should…