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

Mirroring US climate data

climatemirror.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 166 posts

Re: Mirroring US climate data

#91

Post by danbruc »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #87
danbruc wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me more like a technical detail whether you are no longer mentioning a topic because you removed it from the previous website or whether you replaced the whole website. In the end the topic is gone in both cases. You can admittedly draw somewhat different conclusions in both cases, in the former case they wanted to see the topic gone, in the later case they may just have forgotten to include the topic. An…

"In the end the topic is gone in both cases." No, it isn't. It went to the National Archives, where it is still available in its original form. The same thing happened and/or will happen with all the other records of the Obama presidency.

I didn't mean gone in that sense, I meant gone from the list of topics on the White House website, gone from the list of topics the government wants to be associated with if you want.

Re: Mirroring US climate data

#92

Post by petertodd »

rmc wrote: post #54
jl6 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And not just archive it, but sign it, time stamp it, verify it, etc.. I see little to prevent someone using ML to auto-generate archives worth of fake history. Imagine a purported DB dump of Reddit with billions of subtlely fraudulent comments scattered throughout.

Is there any good way to timestamp things like this?

See OpenTimestamps: https://petertodd.org/2016/opentimestamps-announcement

It timestamps to Bitcoin, and you don't need to own any Bitcoin for it to work.

Re: Mirroring US climate data

#93

Post by battlebot »

angry_octet wrote: post #75
fsttx wrote: post #38

Another useful tactic is to archive news and commentary (left and right) about current political events, both for accountability and perhaps, to prevent the rewriting of history in the era of "alternative facts".

It is not sufficient to have a record of facts when others have alternative facts. To your signed record of facts they would just introduce alternate facts with alternative signatures and claim you had made it up. Normal people don't have the tools or experience to differentiate, and the alternative facts support a story they want to believe, rather than hard truths. News media won't even mention your so-called 'real…

You talk about facts like you don't live in a post-positivist world! You have no idea what you are talking about. "Facts" and "truth" are part of philosophy, but bear very little value in the real world. Just get used to it.

Re: Mirroring US climate data

#94

Post by battlebot »

rhodysurf wrote: post #83
Tempest1981 wrote: post #45

I heard that Trump has given NOAA 100 days to justify their existence, or face heavy cuts. Does anyone know the details? Here is the closest article I could find: http://www.salon.com/2016/11/23/politicizing-climate-change-...

How about that almost every weather service in the US depends on their existence?

Exactly. The thing that everyone is shitting their pants over is a nothingburger. NOAA once had a verifiable mission. The problem with government agencies is mission creep--they all got on the "climate change" bandwagon because that's where the bucks were. That is now over.

Re: Mirroring US climate data

#95

Post by battlebot »

lawless123 wrote: post #69
esaym wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say the same thing. Do you think you will really convince a climate denier with this data that you copied off of the Internet that, was copied from a gov server, on to another server and then torrented and copied to another server and then downloaded onto you PC... doubt it.

>Do you think you will really convince a climate denier with this data These people where convinced a pizza restaurant was the center of a global pedo ring based on nothing but deliberately misconstrued sentences they claim are code. They'll believe whatever they want.

I still suspect something will come out about that. It may be that "honey pot" operation the FBI was running got misconstrued, but I still bet there is some grain of truth to what was uncovered because all the other issues brought up by "anonymous FBI" pretty much came true, so that means it was someone on the inside feeding basically rumors from that organization, most of which were corroborated.

Re: Mirroring US climate data

#96

Post by battlebot »

tracker1 wrote: post #55
esaym wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say the same thing. Do you think you will really convince a climate denier with this data that you copied off of the Internet that, was copied from a gov server, on to another server and then torrented and copied to another server and then downloaded onto you PC... doubt it.

It's worth noting that not everyone who rebuffs some of the proposed actions is a climate denier. There's still some question as to the extent of human involvement. That said, smog is enough for me to be in favor of working towards renewable, less polluting energy sources. In my lifetime I've gone from having allergy-like flare ups once every few years, to now 2-3 times a year, mostly seems to follow the pollution le…

This. Although I don't think your allergy flare-ups have a direct causation there--it could just be you're aging. There's ten million variables.

I'm tired of the whole "you're a denier" shibboleth--there very well may be very strong negative human impact on the climate. I'm sure there is. Whether it is global is another question and whether it is stoppable is yet another. But what I most disgusted by is how the issue is used as a political weapon to basically implement a far left, collectivist agenda worldwide. It's like the old-school soviets found a new angle on justifying their desire for total control over populations. It will not stand.

Re: Mirroring US climate data

#97

Post by battlebot »

nirav72 wrote: post #3
trothamel wrote: post #2

Can I be the first to claim that the people running the mirror are changing the data for their own nefarious purposes? Not that I believe this or anything, but come on - you know that accusation is going to go around. It might make sense to use a remote server to timestamp files as they're uploaded, or something like that.

When there is a broad consensus across the scientific community about climate change, does it even matter at this point if the data has been changed? The U.S isn't the only country that collects this data. So even if changed, it doesn't matter.

There was once "broad consensus" that the world was flat. I am not at all comfortable when there is so much consensus. There needs to be debate, disagreement, and healthy skepticism at all times.

Re: Mirroring US climate data

#98

Post by burkaman »

ams6110 wrote: post #76
Tempest1981 wrote: post #45

I heard that Trump has given NOAA 100 days to justify their existence, or face heavy cuts. Does anyone know the details? Here is the closest article I could find: http://www.salon.com/2016/11/23/politicizing-climate-change-...

Why shouldn't government agencies have to justify their budgets and operations periodically?

They should, so why not send out a blanket order for all agencies to do this? Why target only a few specific departments for justification and gag orders?

Re: Mirroring US climate data

#99

Post by kurthr »

battlebot wrote: post #94
rhodysurf wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about that almost every weather service in the US depends on their existence?

Exactly. The thing that everyone is shitting their pants over is a nothingburger. NOAA once had a verifiable mission. The problem with government agencies is mission creep--they all got on the "climate change" bandwagon because that's where the bucks were. That is now over.

I don't think that sentence means what you think it means.

When we get rid of NOAA you can forget about Hurricane warnings... and since they are probably "alternative facts" you can let people die... or alternatively they "go to heaven". How about, you can't have good predictive models of future events, if you don't know how to model or you don't use the "big data" of past events.

Oh, but the "big bucks" are in climate change? That must be what they do in Silicon Valley and Manhattan? /snark>

Re: Mirroring US climate data

#100

Post by ocschwar »

trothamel wrote: post #2

Can I be the first to claim that the people running the mirror are changing the data for their own nefarious purposes? Not that I believe this or anything, but come on - you know that accusation is going to go around. It might make sense to use a remote server to timestamp files as they're uploaded, or something like that.

No. The right wing troll community beat you to it months ago.
Post reply on HN