Live data from Hacker News

Hot or Not?

creon.substack.com

91–100 of 179 posts

Re: Hot or Not?

#91
post #77

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

    cher·ry-pick
    /ˈCHerēˌpik/
    verb
    choose and take only (the most beneficial or profitable items, opportunities, etc.) from what is available.
    "the company should buy the whole airline and not just cherry-pick its best assets"
the author did not cherry pick. in order to cherry pick, the author needs to have had a predetermined thesis such that cherry picking only certain data points would bolster said thesis. instead, the author was looking to see what the deal was with long-term observed weather in specific places relevant to the author, then later expanded to include a few other locations as well. therefore, unless you are accusing the author of being dishonest, the author did not cherry pick.

Re: Hot or Not?

#92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a little bit younger than OP (~10 years) - I grew up on an island in Croatia and I noticed no difference in beaches that I visited when I was a kid. The shallow rock peers are all in the same place, beaches are the same size. Only difference I see is a slew of tourists packing every cm2 where there were far fewer while I was growing up, a lot of them getting off on how they are participating in "sustainable touri…

If the beach gradient is extremely shallow it will show up, if it steep you won't see any change at all for a really long time.

Croatia is certainly not a paragon of flat beach terrain like the other side of the Adriatic, or the Atlantic coast in North America.

Re: Hot or Not?

#93
post #63

Given the massive lack of trust in media, and to a lesser degree the popular science community, we need a more formal system of information similar to the justice system. In america the justice system has the judge (representing the state) and the jury (representing citizens). other countries have similar tribunals , each member with a different allegiance. For science, we need a strong and formal amateur tier to rev…

Peer reviewing already exists.

People who 'distrust science community' will simply distrust the new Institution you are proposing.

Re: Hot or Not?

#94
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Outliers are likely to drag the averages down, not up. The only really substantial global outlier events are volcanic eruptions, which cause a net cooling. Everything else (hurricanes and the like) is just heat moving around

Re: Hot or Not?

#96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Additionally, since one is already doing that, check out what kind of funding Fossil Fuel companies have done in the past and present.

Re: Hot or Not?

#97
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Nobody is a scientist, it is all just people.

It may all be people, but some of those people have spent an inordinate amount of time learning the current state of the art in a particular field, and contributed new information to help advance the state of the art in (mostly microscopic) ways. We call those people “scientists.”

(People without that monomaniacal background and focus still write about science, but they’re prone to making basic errors. We call them “journalists.”)

Re: Hot or Not?

#98

Has anyone found credible research around mean, min, max, average vis-a-vis climate change? Quick search didn't surface anything beyond lots of average temperatures and median forecasts, but less about the distribution of climate. Edit: trying to understand the decomposition of average temperatures increasing (more hot days, hotter hot days, etc)

Have you checked https://interactive-atlas.ipcc.ch/

Re: Hot or Not?

#100
post #71
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 needi…

Can you give me a location so I can look at the historical snowfall record for that location?
Post reply on HN