3 ms·
"Extremely hot" without predicated value is cannot be an accurate label in any context. It's a relative label, alone. In this case it's means "largest positive
by jack9 9y ago
"Extremely hot" without predicated value is cannot be an accurate label in any context. It's a relative label, alone. In this case it's means "largest positive normalized value". The proposition that it is accurate by existence on a graph, is dishonest. That isn't constructive.
- yk 9y agoAny label needs context, consider the label "3" or even "9 m/s^2," the first can refer to anything the second to an acceleration or to a gravitational field strength. In the case of weather, "extremely hot" is just what one would call a summer that is hotter above the usual variability. I would argue, that the label is rather good for the context of a NYT article in that the reader would refer to that category as "extremely hot."
- wlesieutre 9y agoYes, they are relative values. The whole point of the article is to make a relative comparison of temperatures now to what they used to be. It's not trying to present absolute measurements. The average reader gets no meaningful understanding from "Global average temperatures are up 0.5 degrees Celsius. But looking at a graph like what's presented here, you can realize that a person in 1950, if asked what the weather was like on one of those red days, would tell you "It's goddamn hot, I can't remember it ever being this hot here." and now we get those temperatures all the time. If you want raw data and absolute comparisons, there are plenty of places to get it. This is an NYT article written to help people understand in concrete terms that things have changed.