Things that prove the world is warming.

[Darvince]

This is not exactly the best opener post, but it'll do, since it shows the warmed distribution of weather stations for 2016 in the US:

[atomic7732]

i really like this statistical visualization actually

the only problem is you can't really show this to people who don't really understand scientific methods or math

[vh]

i was outside today and it was like 80F and it's in the middle of winter. if this doesn't confirm gw i don't know what will

[DiamondMiner10]

in Alaska villages built on permafrost are sinking into the ground because the permafrost is melting

[Darvince]

that's not good enough

[DiamondMiner10]

i put an ice cube in my back yard and it melted

[Darvince]

perfect

[Darvince]

N̵̻ͫͧ̋̐ͩ́̄͝O̦͈͔͍̗̳̗͙̒ͤͩT͎̯̖̣̗̭̺̋̀ͤH͉͈̻ͤͥ̕ͅI̴͉̫͎̖̫͕̎̓͌͜N̉̿̓ͭͥͥ͋͏̛̪̝͍̘͕͓̯͟ͅG̢͇̹̩̦͖̣ͧ͛͘͞ ̹̭̣̰̜̳ͮͨͧ̽ͥ͟ͅIͤ̔̈́̀͏̡̥̝S͉͓͌ͨ̍̂̑̐͒͋͐͢͝ ̳̼̪̪̘ͫ͆ͣ̓ͫ́̕W̸̘͙̰͓̘͔̗͚̐̆̉ͫ̆̽Ṙ̨̹̟͔̌͌̌ͦ͋͑̍ͅͅOͨ̃̆̓ͪͬ̉̑͡҉̜̙̟̱͓Nͩ̽ͦ̊̽ͦ͏̯̯̩̻͈̜G͙͚̰͕͔̤̩͚ͪͦ̒́ ̸̭̣̳̥͍̖̟̤͂̄̓͊̐͞͝ ̡̛̰̼͙͗ͤ͛̂͒̋̆N̲͎̞͎̐ͦ̐̽͋̕͡Ơ̴̜̜̭͔̄̈́T̐͏̰̞̳͍H̗͎̰̲̬͇̬̄ͭ͑̉ͅḬ̟͙̬̿̆ͫ͆̇ͥ̆͆̍N̺͔̮̫̬̘͙ͦ̑ͣ̈Ģ͓̲̝̘̼͎̞̲ͩ̓̄ͯ̄ͨ̌ ̨̛̥̭͗ͭ̄ͬ̅̄͛̽̚I̴̛̥̱̫͙͎̬̔̄̑͢ͅS̸͓̙̺̤̖͒̉ͤ̽̀ ̷̙̙͇̍̔̄̃ͩ͗W̬͎͍̫̘͊͋̅ͩ͜ͅR̬̠̫̫̲͙̭̄̇̑̂̒O͑ͪ͊͘҉̥̜̩͚̥̠̞N͎̜͇̫̜̟̦̲͛̀ͮ̍G̶͍̦̼̑ ̛̫̯̲͙͍̤̿́ ̰̲͕̬̟ͯͪ̌̽ͅE͉͇̋̓͠V̡̬ͨ̓̉̉ͨE̢͌̉̏̀͌ͨͦ̿͡҉̖̦͇R̯͔̝̳̜̟͈̰̍̓ͣͬ͢Y̛͙̥ͧ͟T̸͕͙̟͉͂̄̕Hͮ̓̒ͦ̊̆ͧ̎҉̷̹͍̺̼͍̘͞ͅI̠̥̣͚̲̦ͪͪN̡͚̹̞̹̺̼͓̊͌G͖ͩͤͣ̔̽̕ ̮̮̮̞̲̣̼̟̪̓ͫ͋̇̈́͋͢Ì̴̫͇͓̗͈͎͐Ş̸̱͛͛͌̎̽ ̘̬̜͑̏̈́̆ͦ͟Ơ̼̤̼ͬͮͥ̿͂ͅK̖̹̠͇̙̯̥͍ͣ̎̐ͥ̑̏ͯ͌A̶͖͕͔̖̙̞̿̃̒ͭ͛̐̃̆Y̱̯̙͉̮̱̹̯͛ͤ̍͐̓̿̐̈́̚

[emarksmi]

Lets start with the fact that I am NOT a Climate Change Denier.  I have plenty of friends/acquaintances who are climate scientists and I agree with their consensus view that the climate is changing and a significant portion of that change is driven by human activity.

That being said, I really dislike charts like this.  IMO, they don't say anything useful.  Everybody knows that there are individual years that are warmer or cooler, especially regionally, than others.  We listen to the weather man all the time saying that it is unseasonably warm/cold/wet/dry/cloudy/humid/etc.  When we talk climate change, the conversation needs to be in LONG TERM trends and data, not individual years that are above or below average.  Heck.  I could take time slices equivalent to what these graphs present at various places around the Maunder Minimum to prove both that we were entering a new ice age and that the Earth was going to burn up.

Another thing that bugs me is the fact that the conversation seems to revolve around fossil fuels.  Alternative fuel sources don't come without their own consequences.  Hydro-electric involves damming rivers.  Solar panel production is very toxic and the large solar farms create strong heat islands.  Wind farms are killing off birds at a rapid rate.  Nuclear creates waste that we haven't figured out what to do with (but is VERY energy dense).  What is needed is energy conservation and a portfolio of different energy sources that spread the undesirable effects.

But we also need to look at the other parts of the equation.  One of the big reasons why the climate is changing is that we have crippled the feedback mechanisms of the climate.  Deforestation, over fishing, etc., have crippled the system's ability to react to the increased carbon.  People don't plant lawns, they put in artificial turf.  We build new housing developments, malls, and parking lots but don't mitigate the destroyed vegetation with reforestation elsewhere.

Just cutting carbon production doesn't do any good without repairing the mechanisms that cleanse the atmosphere.  The US and China cutting fossil fuels doesn't help without reforestation in Brazil and Indonesia.  To change it to engineering terms, reducing the forcing function won't help without increasing system damping.

My opinion.  Done ranting.

[Darvince]

Wind farms are killing off birds at a rapid rate.

no not really

[emarksmi]

Wind farms are killing off birds at a rapid rate.

no not really

OK, poorly worded.  Wind Farms are killing of top level predator birds at a rapid rate.  The statistics I've seen are for hawks, owls, eagles, falcons, osprey, etc, not finches, jays, crows, and the like.  There are a few cases where we've placed wind farms right smack in the middle of migratory paths where we are killing off migratory birds as well.

Let me also say that I don't really understand this.  The birds should be able to see the turbines.  Why don't they just avoid them?  I can understand why large solar plants like Ivanpah kill off birds (they can't see the infrared beam and get cooked when they fly through them), but why can't they avoid an 80' turbine blade?

[Darvince]

«2016 is Third Consecutive Hottest Year on Record…»
«The probability of this happening by chance is 1 in 2.46 million»

[blotz]

how did you calculate that probabilitys

[emarksmi]

Again, I DO NOT disagree that the planet is warming and I DO NOT disagree that human activity is a significant contribution. 

However, I hate bad use of statistics in dynamic systems.  I agree that in a random population of say 500 data points (I don't know how far back the analysis went so I just picked 500) that hitting the three high points on consecutive pulls is very unlikely.  But this IS NOT a random system.  What happens in one year has an influence on the next.  For example, if you started your record keeping during an the low part of a major cycle that lasts 20,000 years with overlaying minor cycles that last say 2000 and 200 years, it is highly likely that you WILL get several places over the 20,000 year major cycle where you will have consecutive years that are the hottest on record.

Now, this is NOT what I'm saying is happening.  I do believe that the planet is warming.  I also believe that this is bad statistics.

[Darvince]

it is simply 134*135*136, or 136!/(136-3)!

the actual chance is probably slightly higher than that if you took detrended statistics of the temperature record and measured variability between years and fancier statistical stuffs

[Darvince]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PUaUR8yCMAjzJyBnFGZMwu0V1QXv_5WG40KmtYhwcEQ/edit#gid=0

here is a random test of the idea

If you want to reroll the randomness, simply add a random letter somewhere in the sheet outside the used cells

The lowest I could reasonably see that chance being is somewhere in the tens of thousands.

[atomic7732]

i do agree with the bad statistics

i mean you literally could get the same result from a super niño in a naturally warming world too like PETM or something

if it's warm the previous year it's really likely that, hey there's something to that, and it'll be warm the next year(s)

so no it's not really random dice rolls

[emarksmi]

Again, this is not a random system.  Using a purely random probability dramatically overstates the likelihood. 

[Darvince]

if you noticed I made it so that each year took 40% (I think) of the previous year's temperature

(also wouldn't it be understating the likelihood?)

[emarksmi]

I missed that.  I'm not really sure that really solves the problem, but it is better than nothing.

I think we can all agree that climate is incredibly complicated.  For example, just choosing the temperature units to use can make a difference (Kelvin vs Rankin vs Fahrenheit vs Celsius) when you start adding standard deviations, percentages, etc.

I don't disagree with your base conclusion, just the magnitude of the probability.

[Darvince]

pls stop shitposting in this topic