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

Animation shows the temperature change by country from year 1880 to 2019

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–79 of 79 posts

Re: Animation shows the temperature change by country from year 1880 to 2019

#71

Post by busymom0 »

thu2111 wrote: post #35
bsaul wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

are you familiar with the blog made by tony heller (also on youtube) ? He regularely points out those exact same remark. I am very careful to wait until other people confirms that there is indeed a methodological problem before jumping to conclusion, but it really sounds very interesting.

I read Heller's blog. I've also done a bit of double checking of his work because indeed, what he keeps uncovering is extremely interesting and should I feel really have been discussed in popular journalism about climate before now. I want to check more of his claims in future. But for now, I only checked how many data points in the NOAA US temperature dataset are now the output of model simulations and not actual me…

I actually confirmed the Arctic Sea ice one too. Got the data from:

ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02186/

Used masie_4km_allyears_extent_sqkm.csv to plot it.

It looks like this:

https://i.imgur.com/9kNtYbI.png

Another source which confirms this too:

June 22, 2008:

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/images/FullSize_CICE...

June 22, 2014:

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/images/FullSize_CICE...

June 22, 2018:

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/images/FullSize_CICE...

Re: Animation shows the temperature change by country from year 1880 to 2019

#72

Post by busymom0 »

zuminator wrote: post #41
busymom0 wrote: post #10

In 28 August 1981, the mean surface temperature is 288K = 15 degree C: http://climate-dynamics.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/hanse... ---------- In 1988, it was claimed that the global avg temperature was 59 deg F = 15 degree C Multiple sources: https://www.nytimes.com/1988/03/29/science/temperature-for-w... https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1915&dat=19880705&id=... ---------- IPCC's First Assessment Report in…

As you know, you're piggybacking talking points off of a minor conspiracy theory that has been floating around for a while. Here's a yahoo post from 7 years ago raising the same questions and citing much the same sources: https://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=201211281036... I won't pretend to know anything in detail about climate science but these alleged discrepancies don't seem to have raised enough alar…

I pointed out with raw data and sources. Simply calling it a conspiracy theory without pointing anything wrong with my actual point or data isn't worth debating in good faith.

Re: Animation shows the temperature change by country from year 1880 to 2019

#73

Post by _8j50 »

jmull wrote: post #58
_8j50 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a bit upset about all the downvotes,i know it's bad etiquette to complain about that but I just wanted to say how questions of curiosity shouldn't be looked down upon. This isn't my field but climate change is concerning, so I simply wanted to know why certain solutions (however naive) were not being pursued. Cheers.

Don't let it worry you. Downvoting is essentially a thoughtless act so you can pretty much ignore them. It just means some people dislike what you wrote without considering the substance of it. In reality it's a good question and it prompted some good answers.

Thank you, sorry for being so petty

Re: Animation shows the temperature change by country from year 1880 to 2019

#74

Post by bsaul »

busymom0 wrote: post #71
thu2111 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read Heller's blog. I've also done a bit of double checking of his work because indeed, what he keeps uncovering is extremely interesting and should I feel really have been discussed in popular journalism about climate before now. I want to check more of his claims in future. But for now, I only checked how many data points in the NOAA US temperature dataset are now the output of model simulations and not actual me…

I actually confirmed the Arctic Sea ice one too. Got the data from: ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02186/ Used masie_4km_allyears_extent_sqkm.csv to plot it. It looks like this: https://i.imgur.com/9kNtYbI.png Another source which confirms this too: June 22, 2008: http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/images/FullSize_CICE... June 22, 2014: http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icethickness/images/FullSize_CICE... Ju…

i think you and parent should create some kind of blog confirming all this. It makes a huge difference between having one guy ( tony heller ) blogging about this, and multiple independant people confirming the findings.

It also makes for different POV about the same issue ( data fixing methodology and code quality), and it’s always a good way to bring improved arguments in the debate.

Re: Animation shows the temperature change by country from year 1880 to 2019

#75

Post by SiempreViernes »

busymom0 wrote: post #67
SiempreViernes wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tony Heller is a well credentialed denier[1], been in the game since at least 2008, and is at least good friends with the deniers that get oil money to keep going [2]. I estimate his honesty as comparable to that of Giuliani post 2017. [1] https://www.desmogblog.com/steven-goddard [2] https://insideclimatenews.org/news/12032015/leaked-email-rev...

Simply coming up with a demonizing label for him (denier) and applying these label as a castigation to anyone who even tries to point out skepticism is not how you should make arguments. > good friends with the deniers What does that have to do with anything when he's pointing out with raw data which is provided by science and anybody has the ability to point out what he's doing wrong? If you don't have the ability t…

This isn’t a debate about science, this is a political debate about who to trust as you really ought to know if you paid any attention to the climate debate.

Re: Animation shows the temperature change by country from year 1880 to 2019

#76

Post by bsaul »

SiempreViernes wrote: post #75
busymom0 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simply coming up with a demonizing label for him (denier) and applying these label as a castigation to anyone who even tries to point out skepticism is not how you should make arguments. > good friends with the deniers What does that have to do with anything when he's pointing out with raw data which is provided by science and anybody has the ability to point out what he's doing wrong? If you don't have the ability t…

This isn’t a debate about science, this is a political debate about who to trust as you really ought to know if you paid any attention to the climate debate.

It's ironical you think about Heller's work as "political", as one of the arguments he makes is that the climate science field became completely crippled once politicians started to put their nose in it.

It's also a huge problem that once a scientific theory (man-made climate change due to CO2) becomes "mainstream" and labelled as "official", you can't oppose it without immediately having all kinds of people with various interests supporting you for sometimes bad reasons. It's unfortunately inevitable.

Re: Animation shows the temperature change by country from year 1880 to 2019

#77

Post by busymom0 »

busymom0 wrote: post #66
pjc50 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The MWP was a local phenomenon; per wikipedia > The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) also known as the Medieval Climate Optimum, or Medieval Climatic Anomaly was a time of warm climate in the North Atlantic region lasting from c. 950 to c. 1250.[1] It was likely[2] related to warming elsewhere[3][4][5] while some other regions were colder, such as the tropical Pacific .. which implies that Japan may have been slightly cold…

Wikipedia contradicts IPCC's reports from the past. Even the thing about Japan contradicts the IPCC report. Until 2000, it was claimed that the MWP was global. IPCC's 1990s report Page 8 of 44 (PDF page number, not the one on the text) https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ipcc_far_wg_... Look at the bottom graph and the text. > Schematic diagrams of global temperature variations since the Pleistocene on th…

Reading the wikipedia, every single citation they used contradicts what the wikipedia says:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period#cite_note...

http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/EnviroPhilo/Glacial....

> The first phase of the LIA began around the thirteenth century in all the regions for which there is evidence. The glacial phase preceding the MWP seems to have begun between the seventh and ninth centuries A.D. but is generally less securely dated and not dated at all in Canada. There are at least some indications of fluctuations in ice position in the course of the MWP in Norway, Alaska, and perhaps in extratropical South America and New Zealand, indicating that recession may have been interrupted by advances, perhaps of limited extent, as in the European Alps. The available evidence suggests that the MWP was global in extent and not uniform climatically. The glacial data needs to be considered in relation to that from other sources, but is of value in obtaining a more complete understanding of both the environment in the later medieval period and the possible causes of climatic change on the century time scale.

> The available evidence suggests that the MWP was global in extent and not uniform climatically.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01092411

> Dating of organic material closely associated with moraines in many montane regions has reached the point where it is possible to survey available information concerning the timing of the medieval warm period. The results suggest that it was a global event occurring between about 900 and 1250 A.D., possibly interrupted by a minor readvance of ice between about 1050 and 1150 A.D.

The other citation they used is:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period#cite_note...

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/342/6158/617

> The findings support the view that the Holocene Thermal Maximum, the Medieval Warm Period, and the Little Ice Age were global events, and they provide a long-term perspective for evaluating the role of ocean heat content in various warming scenarios for the future.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period#cite_ref-...

https://books.google.ca/books?id=z-BWE4iCrfYC&pg=PA134&redir...

> "They conclude that the Medieval Warm Period was a global event"

Re: Animation shows the temperature change by country from year 1880 to 2019

#78

Post by busymom0 »

bsaul wrote: post #76
SiempreViernes wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn’t a debate about science, this is a political debate about who to trust as you really ought to know if you paid any attention to the climate debate.

It's ironical you think about Heller's work as "political", as one of the arguments he makes is that the climate science field became completely crippled once politicians started to put their nose in it. It's also a huge problem that once a scientific theory (man-made climate change due to CO2) becomes "mainstream" and labelled as "official", you can't oppose it without immediately having all kinds of people with var…

Worth reading how Dr James Hansen and senator Timothy Wirth (who's the president of UN for many years now) sabotaged the air conditioner back in 1988 and opened the windows to make things appear worse for the cameras:

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hotpolitics/intervi...

Re: Animation shows the temperature change by country from year 1880 to 2019

#79

Post by busymom0 »

SiempreViernes wrote: post #75
busymom0 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simply coming up with a demonizing label for him (denier) and applying these label as a castigation to anyone who even tries to point out skepticism is not how you should make arguments. > good friends with the deniers What does that have to do with anything when he's pointing out with raw data which is provided by science and anybody has the ability to point out what he's doing wrong? If you don't have the ability t…

This isn’t a debate about science, this is a political debate about who to trust as you really ought to know if you paid any attention to the climate debate.

I didn't bring in politics, I simply states sources from scientific sources and old newspapers. If anyone can point out what's wrong with it, then I am okay for a debate. The problem is that people have made this into a political debate because there's a lot of money involved in climate change policy making.
Post reply on HN