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

Hot or Not?

creon.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 179 posts

Re: Hot or Not?

#51

Post by ekianjo »

jacquesm wrote: post #24

The scientific consensus is more than clear, doing your own "research" isn't going to make a difference except to engage with the people that are already happy to ignore science. If anything you'd have to begin to wonder in what ways airports are going to be different from global averages and I can think of a whole pile of reasons why the two would diverge (such as the presence of a large chunk of asphalt or concrete…

> has a whole pile of claims to his name I would expect a far better researched piece of work.

they did much more work than the random person who believes evrything they see on TV. that should be saluted, not derided.

Re: Hot or Not?

#52

Post by reidjs »

starkd wrote: post #47
jacquesm wrote: post #24

The scientific consensus is more than clear, doing your own "research" isn't going to make a difference except to engage with the people that are already happy to ignore science. If anything you'd have to begin to wonder in what ways airports are going to be different from global averages and I can think of a whole pile of reasons why the two would diverge (such as the presence of a large chunk of asphalt or concrete…

It's comments like this that serve as a reminder of how we can't have valuable discussions about a topic of importance without it degenerating into name-calling and allegations of disloyalty to "science". Too many have become so fearful of climate change they are no long in the realm of a scientific discussion. They are worshipping a religion. The author of the article made a good faith effort to simply look at the d…

Michael Crichton isn’t a scientist, though, why should we care about or even acknowledge his opinion on global warming as if there is some scientific merit to it?

Re: Hot or Not?

#53

Post by golergka »

jacquesm wrote: post #24

The scientific consensus is more than clear, doing your own "research" isn't going to make a difference except to engage with the people that are already happy to ignore science. If anything you'd have to begin to wonder in what ways airports are going to be different from global averages and I can think of a whole pile of reasons why the two would diverge (such as the presence of a large chunk of asphalt or concrete…

You're not criticising any of the author's methods or findings, only the fact that she dared to do her own research. Therefore, your argument would be just as valid or invalid regardless of her research substance. Therefore, it's only valid if you make an assumption that no private person can do any relevant and good research on climate science whatsoever.

If it's not the case, and you allow for a possibility that a private person could do useful data analysis, you would have to prove why her analysis isn't that.

Re: Hot or Not?

#54

Post by sacrosancty »

lakomen wrote: post #6

All I can say as a 47 year old who lived most of his life in Germany is that the summers when I was a teen, so 30 years ago were considered hot when they were over 25°C. This year in May we had 32°C. Deny or criticize all you want cherries blossoming on Christmas in Berlin is NOT normal. And neither is the absence of snow in winter and mild temperatures. Those graphs don't impress me at all, because I remember what i…

The sea level has "dropped" where I grew up because they upgraded the beach. Are you sure you're not seeing the effects of artificial changes, natural erosion, or earthquakes? Those can easily completely dominate any climate change induced sea level rise in one area. Or perhaps when you went to the sea as a kid or adult, it was in some way connected with fishing or other activities that people timed to match the tides, which also completely dominate any lifelong changes in sea level.

Re: Hot or Not?

#55

Post by sharkjacobs »

truculent wrote: post #5

This is just a bunch of plots with no effort to engage with the existing literature and study. Frankly, it is a waste of time trying to draw conclusions about global warming from this.

but listen man, the only intellectually rigorous way to study a subject is to independently reproduce it from first principles.

It's too bad that humanity hasn't figured out a way to record and share and pool knowledge yet, but them's the breaks.

Re: Hot or Not?

#56

Post by YarickR2 »

jacquesm wrote: post #24

The scientific consensus is more than clear, doing your own "research" isn't going to make a difference except to engage with the people that are already happy to ignore science. If anything you'd have to begin to wonder in what ways airports are going to be different from global averages and I can think of a whole pile of reasons why the two would diverge (such as the presence of a large chunk of asphalt or concrete…

Wife caught cheating screams on the top of her lungs "Are you going to trust your lovely wife or your lying eyes ?"

Re: Hot or Not?

#57

Post by oezi »

correlator wrote: post #32

I enjoyed this and respect citizens who feel motivated enough to look at underlying data.. This type of discourse ("here is what I did and here is what I saw") leaves room to comment and make progress. People can discuss measurement methods, statistical analysis, and other objective things about a tightly scoped project like this. This is very clear reading the comments in the substack. A comment exchange that remind…

I honestly think he must have messed up in his data processing or understanding the data because his graphs don't match what official climate stats show:

For instance for his Palm Springs example consider

https://oehha.ca.gov/epic/changes-climate/annual-air-tempera...

Re: Hot or Not?

#58

Post by 300bps »

jacquesm wrote: post #27
robocat wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Local anecdotes are great if you are old enough to have seen changes, because they are simple and relatable examples. In Christchurch, New Zealand, a notable example for me is that the snow line has receded since I was a child. Low lying ski fields are struggling to stay open. My parents have noticed less snow on the ground during winter at their rural place (they have been there ~30 years). > remember where the sea…

I told my kids yesterday while cleaning up when we found their sled that they are probably the last generation of Dutch kids to have used one, they don't have skates because there never is a winter long enough to make the ice safe (when I was a kid you could skate on IJsselmeer, and the ice would be 20 cm thick at the end of the winter).

Your comment reminds me of the article written in 2000 that said that by 2010 kids won’t even know what snow is.

That article was online until about 2015 until it was so widely mocked it was finally deleted. Here’s a screenshot for you.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/snowf...

Re: Hot or Not?

#59

Post by ekianjo »

jacquesm wrote: post #33
correlator wrote: post #32

I enjoyed this and respect citizens who feel motivated enough to look at underlying data.. This type of discourse ("here is what I did and here is what I saw") leaves room to comment and make progress. People can discuss measurement methods, statistical analysis, and other objective things about a tightly scoped project like this. This is very clear reading the comments in the substack. A comment exchange that remind…

You can't really draw climate change conclusions from the input data though, that's the fallacy that breaks this whole article at the foundation. Let me rephrase that to make it even more clear: if climate change to date would be such that it would show up in datasets like these then we would not have needed any climate research to begin with. We're talking about 1 degree average change over a 60 year period across t…

Counterpoint. Most of the catastrophic predictions from al gore era have not come to pass so this should cause you to doubt the quality of models at hand. If you cant predict anything reliably then its not science.

Re: Hot or Not?

#60

Post by adamrezich »

reidjs wrote: post #52
starkd wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's comments like this that serve as a reminder of how we can't have valuable discussions about a topic of importance without it degenerating into name-calling and allegations of disloyalty to "science". Too many have become so fearful of climate change they are no long in the realm of a scientific discussion. They are worshipping a religion. The author of the article made a good faith effort to simply look at the d…

Michael Crichton isn’t a scientist, though, why should we care about or even acknowledge his opinion on global warming as if there is some scientific merit to it?

you completely missed the point of what the parent comment was saying. parent comment did not say "what Michael Crichton wrote about climate change in 'State of Fear' is the Truth." in fact, in a way your comment demonstrates the very phenomenon parent comment was referring to. it might be helpful to read it again a bit more carefully.
Post reply on HN