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

71–80 of 179 posts

Re: Hot or Not?

#71

Post by trhway »

300bps wrote: post #58
jacquesm wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

yes, in my hometown there is no more snow in winter while 40 years ago i was happily cross-country skiing there. On the positive side - the peaches, apricots, cherries, etc. - the stuff of my childhood dreams sold back then only at farmers markets at astronomical prices by the traders from South - is now easily growing there in people's backyards/gardens. Though not oranges/mandarins nor watermelons yet - seems needing a bit more warming which looks to be just a matter of [pretty short] time.

Re: Hot or Not?

#72

Post by mensetmanusman »

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…

The nice thing about airport thermometers is that they can be life-saving, so you would expect very good data.

Re: Hot or Not?

#73

Post by downut »

My wife is an expert gardener, able to do wonders in Arizona at 5500'. She's been working the same plot of land for 25 years. The advance in the last frost day has been quite noticeable. For our plot (up on a ridge, so lows are warmer by up to 10F than the valleys below), it's usually about two weeks earlier. She's still wary, though, as she's lost entire beds of seedlings to outlier cold snaps in late May.

Interestingly, there are animations of the changes in the hardiness zones over time:

https://www.arborday.org/media/mapchanges.cfm

Difficult to argue with that, I think.

Re: Hot or Not?

#75

Post by sharkjacobs »

adamrezich wrote: post #46
blueblob wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be a testable hypothesis that you have not tested. Anybody can do whataboutism but it isn't a meaningful argument. If it's your belief that the literature is biased by 'green' funding, prove it.

how would this be done, without being dismissed as being "just a bunch of plots with no effort to engage with the existing literature and study"?

Engaging with the existing literature would be a good start.

If you were interested in studying the relationship between bias and funding you might do a survey of published papers and articles on the subject.

If you can identify some measurable criteria that can be used to rate how "green" a paper's funding is then you can use that as an axis and compare the surveyed papers to reveal trends.

Re: Hot or Not?

#76

Post by misslibby »

uniqueuid wrote: post #31
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…

Excellent point, and to add a bit: Scientific consensus does not mean the average of all opinions (i.e. "scientists on average believe in 2 degrees warming"), nor does it mean the average of all possible values of opinions ("there are people that believe in 2 degrees, and there are people that believe in 0 degrees"). These heuristics are wrong. It's a summary that needs to include reputation, credibility, trajectory…

You are merely constructing an idealized authoritarian elite of scientists whom nobody can question because allegedly their craft is too complicated for mere mortals.

Sorry, but no.

A lot of people have an academic education, for example, and are capable of reading scientific papers. You have to be able to make a solid point that other people can verify. The last couple of years have already shown that institutions are also of little use.

Don't confuse science with scientific institutions.

Re: Hot or Not?

#77

Post by nqzero »

> I did not cherry pick. I just looked at each "interesting region" (interesting to me)

ok google, define "cherry pick"

Re: Hot or Not?

#78

Post by airza »

glitchc wrote: post #66
airza wrote: post #25

Why would the median temperature be a useful measurement here? Quick, what is the median of these numbers: -2,-1,0,1,2 And what is the median of these numbers: -7,-1,0,1,2 Of course the average and median are identical for a perfectly distributed normal distribution. But part of science is supposed to be reducing the noise from your signal. Why are you adding noise in your quest to investigate the average temperature…

In the presence of outliers the median is a better predictor of underlying long-teem trends. Subtracting the median gives the delta from zero-median. The delta would be non-zero if there is a long term effect. Here the delta is zero in a number of cases.

What is the concept of an outlier when you’re trying to measure if the earth is hotter than it used to be over a fixed length of time? If your hottest temperature 500 degrees, then sure, you may have an outlier that needs exclusion. But if all your coldest days are the same and your hottest days are 10 degrees warmer, your median might not move much. But that doesn’t make it look good for life on earth.

Re: Hot or Not?

#79

Post by CrazyStat »

glitchc wrote: post #66
airza wrote: post #25

Why would the median temperature be a useful measurement here? Quick, what is the median of these numbers: -2,-1,0,1,2 And what is the median of these numbers: -7,-1,0,1,2 Of course the average and median are identical for a perfectly distributed normal distribution. But part of science is supposed to be reducing the noise from your signal. Why are you adding noise in your quest to investigate the average temperature…

In the presence of outliers the median is a better predictor of underlying long-teem trends. Subtracting the median gives the delta from zero-median. The delta would be non-zero if there is a long term effect. Here the delta is zero in a number of cases.

> In the presence of outliers the median is a better predictor of underlying long-teem trends.

Not if outliers are REALLY FUCKING IMPORTANT, like, say, extreme weather events.

Re: Hot or Not?

#80

Post by misslibby »

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…

Don't you think it is weird that people who try to do their own research end up in the "happy to ignore science" camp, as you put it? I don't think they "ignore science", they just realize it is a lot more complicated and messy than the narrative of the scientific consensus wants us to believe.
Post reply on HN