Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues



  • Okay, bear with me.....I think the last one got locked (partly) because I started it with an article about a scientist rinsing an Australian senator. While amusing, this was probably an unnecessarily confrontational angle that was never likely to foster any decent discussion. So am keen to try again:

    This XKCD comic is doing the rounds on social and mainstream media. Rather than getting into the mess of alarmism/denial etc, it simply presents the current sum of human knowledge about the average global temperature throughout history, and allows the reader to draw their own conclusions. It also does it in an entertaining and informative way, hence why it's getting such wide circulation.

    The biggest takeaway for me is that you often get people on both sides of the debate saying "temperature changes are natural and have happened all throughout the history of the earth". This is true, but context is VERY important. This illustrates the context beautifully. Also, I get a chance to try out embedding with the fancy new forum software 😃

    (Mods, re copyright etc, from the author: "This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 2.5 License. This means you're free to copy and share these comics (but not to sell them).")

    link text

    alt text



  • It's awesome to see this on my tablet and scroll through. Was shit on the phone via IFLS earlier today



  • Interesting stuff but I give this thread 12 hours before it's Wingered. He's currently busy explaining how fire can't melt steel on planet rugby at the moment.

    Promise I won't point out the thread to him this time.



  • That was great.

    XKCD is one of the best educational sites on the net. Its a bit surreal, but it is, same way that the TV show at the cutting edge of explaining the core cultural & social issues facing the US in particular & the west in general is South Park.

    We live in fucked up times.

    I think we are probably movingh on from "Global warming isn't happening" to "Ok it is, but its good!". In Australia they just need 20 more years to "nothing bad happening!" till they've sold all their coal. That'll be good too when the whole country is almost continuously either on fire or flooded.



  • @jegga said in Climate Change Thread #3:

    Interesting stuff but I give this thread 12 hours before it's Wingered. He's currently busy explaining how fire can't melt steel on planet rugby at the moment.

    Promise I won't point out the thread to him this time.

    I thought you were joking, but then I went over to PR and read the 9/11 thread, and you are actually not. Wow.



  • @TeWaio said in Climate Change Thread #3:

    @jegga said in Climate Change Thread #3:

    Interesting stuff but I give this thread 12 hours before it's Wingered. He's currently busy explaining how fire can't melt steel on planet rugby at the moment.

    Promise I won't point out the thread to him this time.

    I thought you were joking, but then I went over to PR and read the 9/11 thread, and you are actually not. Wow.

    I read it. Fire can't melt steel! But he doesn't know what happened, he's on the fence with this one...



  • I liked the effect of that but the only question i have is how do they know there wasn't any spikes like we are having now? It seems to be in 500 year lots rahter than 5 year lots showing our current spike



  • @Hooroo said in Climate Change Thread #3:

    I liked the effect of that but the only question i have is how do they know there wasn't any spikes like we are having now? It seems to be in 500 year lots rahter than 5 year lots showing our current spike

    And that is where the side against climate change pitch their tent - it is really difficult to get 100% accurate temperature records before thermometers were invented 🙂

    Same way they say "WHY DID NOAA / NASA ADJUST THAT DATA! MUST ALL BE FAKED!" and there are several articles covering why that is. Basically if you want consistent temperature readings, you need to create consistent conditions. If the conditions surrounding a given weather station change, you have to account for that and look to recalibrate or relocate the weather station (e.g. it is in a rural area that gets urbanised).

    Back to the historical data: They use various processes - tree rings, geological samples, historical events (where noted), and try to tie it all together. That's why you can't go year-to-year and need to put it down to millennia/centuries.

    As with climate science itself, it comes down to lots of scientists agreeing with each other, which doesn't often happen if the science is dodgy.



  • I'm not on that brigade and I understand that it has to be averages but there could have just as easily been an event like the last twenty years within any of those 500 year period lots but is lost within averages.



  • I've never really got involved in the other threads, but why did everything go wrong so they had to be shut down? It's basically a debate of scientists vs semi-scientists isn't it?

    Above graph is interesting, agree with @hooroo that it needs to be reduced in scope so can see intra-500 year movements.



  • > I'm not on that brigade and I understand that it has to be averages but there could have just as easily been an event like the last twenty years within any of those 500 year period lots but is lost within averages.
    

    The graphic notes that itself at 16000 BCE.



  • @MajorRage said in Climate Change Thread #3:

    I've never really got involved in the other threads, but why did everything go wrong so they had to be shut down? It's basically a debate of scientists vs semi-scientists isn't it?

    Well, it depends how you'd define "scientist". Or "semi" 😉

    But yes.



  • @Chris-B. said in Climate Change Thread #3:

    > I'm not on that brigade and I understand that it has to be averages but there could have just as easily been an event like the last twenty years within any of those 500 year period lots but is lost within averages.
    

    The graphic notes that itself at 16000 BCE.

    Nice! Was just fast scrolling to watch the line move 🙂



  • alt text



  • @TeWaio He's not even the most ludicrous poster on that thread. DAC has consistently set new standards for stupidity and lack of self awareness over the years he's been embarrassing himself there.



  • @MajorRage said in Climate Change Thread #3:

    I've never really got involved in the other threads, but why did everything go wrong so they had to be shut down? It's basically a debate of scientists vs semi-scientists isn't it?

    Not really. Climate change is a debate is typically (as on here) between literally every scientist on the planet who is remotely qualified saying its happening & we are the cause, and web mongs who have "read the data" saying its a lie. No one with any shred of credability is in the denial group. Literally no one. Post a denier (as Winger did repeatedly) and I can pull his credability apart with about 5 minutes on google.

    In the US the same guys who say its not happening are saying the earth is 6000 years old.

    Thats what happens here too. You get people posting researched articles & then a couple of posters posting a blog to refute.

    Same with any conspiarcy theory - moon landings, 9/11, elivis lives

    And then there is the idea that everyones ideas are equally valid. Even when they are wrong. I think its a bit of bleed from Sports. If I say Cane is far better than Savea, thats really just my (and Hansens) opinion. So saying "thats wrong! my opinion is equally valid! Ardie rules!" is indeed equally valid. But thats not the case on shit like this, but people think it is. Its an issue from society too, where we learn everyones opinion is equally valid, even when they are retards. Once again, thank you South Park for fighting that

    @Chris-B. said in Climate Change Thread #3:

    > I'm not on that brigade and I understand that it has to be averages but there could have just as easily been an event like the last twenty years within any of those 500 year period lots but is lost within averages.
    

    The graphic notes that itself at 16000 BCE.

    Yep - the key bit is "they get smootheed - but only if they are small enough or brief enough"



  • @Chris-B. said in Climate Change Thread #3:

    > I'm not on that brigade and I understand that it has to be averages but there could have just as easily been an event like the last twenty years within any of those 500 year period lots but is lost within averages.
    

    The graphic notes that itself at 16000 BCE.

    Yep, noted, with references, showing what is possible and what is unlikely. Decent scientific rigor for a web comic!

    0_1473845018311_upload-5cccdba1-f425-4794-bfb3-ceaa7243a882



  • @TeWaio XKCD are bloody good at staying pretty rigorous.

    For kids, check out the book 'thing explainer'. Uses only the 1000 most used words to explain complicated things for kids. Great fun



  • @nzzp said in Climate Change Thread #3:

    @TeWaio XKCD are bloody good at staying pretty rigorous.

    For kids, check out the book 'thing explainer'. Uses only the 1000 most used words to explain complicated things for kids. Great fun

    https://www.amazon.com/Thing-Explainer-Complicated-Stuff-Simple/dp/0544668251

    link ... it's also available in nZ