51–60 of 130 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s supposed to be Congress’ job to do something, but unfortunately they appear to be useless.
Open your eyes to the possibility that maybe, just maybe, SCOTUS kicked it back to Congress purely because Congress is useless and won't do anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It should be news everywhere each and every day until we do enough about it so it isn't any more IMHO
That's a great way to make everyone ignore it. Calling it a "crisis" does the same thing, the first time you hear crisis you get worried, then you realize it's a very very slow moving thing and you start ignoring them. Being alarmist helps no one. Just be factual about it, it's not the news media's job to rile people up or get them to take some kind of action.
How does someone measure the average global temperature? And what does it means? The Wikipedia[0] has one interesting source[1] but what they show there isn't an average. My guess would be that somehow satellites can measure the surface temperature and use that to make an average? I would be very happy if someone could some point me to some explanations about this process. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_s…
Each organization creates their own models and often compare with each other but most methods start by defining a grid that divides the planet, then use a model to estimate the average temperature for each cell given available sensor data. Many cells, especially in the middle of the ocean, don't have any direct measurements so have to be filled in using satellite based estimates or kriging (interpolation). They average over all of the grid cells in each hemisphere separately then apply some sort of formula to account for the fact that the northern hemisphere has significantly better coverage.
It's not the most precise calculation and what most people are looking for is the rate of change over time using the same model and dataset (which are also versioned based on changes in methodology).
How does someone measure the average global temperature? And what does it means? The Wikipedia[0] has one interesting source[1] but what they show there isn't an average. My guess would be that somehow satellites can measure the surface temperature and use that to make an average? I would be very happy if someone could some point me to some explanations about this process. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_s…
Btw., I suspect you get that "I don't know what average temperature even means" from some nonsense Ivar Giaever spouted at a presentation that's on YouTube. The simple answer to that is that average temperature means the same thing as temperature, because temperature is always an average that we can only arrive at by sampling (since it represents the average kinetic energy of a volume of particles and you can't meassure each particle's energy individually). Ivar Giavever knows that, but he also knows that people will believe almost anything that comes from him because he has a Nobel Price. After all, his autobiography is titled "I'm the smartest man I know".
It bears repeating, the carbon dioxide/methane doesn't have any impact on global warming (troposphere warming?) until it reaches sufficient height. It takes 2-3 years for the methane to reach those heights, and 20+ for the carbon dioxide. The average increase in temperature we have now is caused by 2003's emissions. Other informations about how all this work (basic, incomplete, but better than what I usually hear): G…
How does someone measure the average global temperature? And what does it means? The Wikipedia[0] has one interesting source[1] but what they show there isn't an average. My guess would be that somehow satellites can measure the surface temperature and use that to make an average? I would be very happy if someone could some point me to some explanations about this process. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_s…
The source of the data is https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/t2_daily/ according to https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-04/world-rec... I wonder how a story like this gets picked up.
“ This page provides time series and map visualizations of daily mean 2-meter air temperature from the NCEP Climate Forecast System (CFS) version 2 (April 2011 – present) and CFS Reanalysis (January 1979 – March 2011). CFS/CFSR is a numerical climate/weather modeling framework that ingests surface, radiosonde, and satellite observations to estimate the state of the atmosphere at hourly time resolution onward from 1 January 1979. The horizontal gridcell resolution is 0.5°x0.5° (~ 55km at 45°N). Temperature anomalies are in reference to 1979–2000 climatology for each specific day of the year.”
It bears repeating, the carbon dioxide/methane doesn't have any impact on global warming (troposphere warming?) until it reaches sufficient height. It takes 2-3 years for the methane to reach those heights, and 20+ for the carbon dioxide. The average increase in temperature we have now is caused by 2003's emissions. Other informations about how all this work (basic, incomplete, but better than what I usually hear): G…
Very interesting. Please can you suggest a reference?
Article from a vulgarisation paper: https://www.futura-sciences.com/planete/dossiers/climatologi...
And a pdf from my previous university (way drier, lot of math and inference, nice graphs though): https://web.lmd.jussieu.fr/~jldufres/IUFM_Creteil/Dufresne_b...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s supposed to be Congress’ job to do something, but unfortunately they appear to be useless.
Funny how this claim can be made when they pull shit like this but not when they legislate from the bench for the right.
>The court voted unanimously to reverse the Ninth Circuit, but split 5–4 on the rationale. The majority opinion, by Alito, introduced a new test to define wetlands, which reversed five decades of EPA rule-making and limited the scope of the Clean Water Act's authority to regulate waters of the United States. Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the three liberal justices in agreeing that the CWA did not apply to the Sacketts' property, but argued that the majority's new definition was incorrect and will have significant effects on regulated waters.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sackett_v._Environmental_Prote...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It should be news everywhere each and every day until we do enough about it so it isn't any more IMHO
The effects of Global Warming should've been featured in sciency publications like Times Magazine at least three decades ago.